YoHr Regs Project Initiation Document€¦ · Web view# Title Format Description Due Date...

YoHr Regs Project Initiation Document

RIEP Project Number 6001

Approved Date:Author: Robin Street

Owner: Ken Eastwood

Status: First Issue

Document Reference:Document Version: 0.1

Change History:0.1 09/11/09 Initial Draft

0.2 02/12/09 Second Draft

1.0 10/12/09 First Issue


CONTENTS LIST

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 PURPOSE.......................................................................................................................................... 41.2 PROGRAMME SUMMARY................................................................................................................... 4

2 BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1 OVERVIEW....................................................................................................................................... 62.2 EXISTING ARRANGEMENTS, BUSINESS NEEDS AND SERVICE GAPS.....................................................6

3 PROGRAMME DEFINITION..............................................................................................................8

3.1 PROGRAMME SCOPE.......................................................................................................................... 83.2 PROGRAMME OUTCOMES.................................................................................................................. 83.3 PROGRAMME BENEFITS..................................................................................................................... 83.4 PROGRAMME DELIVERABLES/OUTPUTS..............................................................................................93.5 EXCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................... 133.6 CONSTRAINTS................................................................................................................................. 133.7 INTERFACES.................................................................................................................................... 143.8 ASSUMPTIONS................................................................................................................................. 143.9 DEPENDENCIES............................................................................................................................... 14

4 PROGRAMME APPROACH.............................................................................................................. 15

4.1 GENERAL........................................................................................................................................ 154.2 MANAGEMENT................................................................................................................................ 15

5 PROGRAMME BUDGET................................................................................................................... 16

5.1 RIEP.............................................................................................................................................. 165.2 BARNSLEY MBC............................................................................................................................ 165.3 OTHER LOCAL AUTHORITIES........................................................................................................... 165.4 COMMERCIAL SUPPORT................................................................................................................... 165.5 OTHER PROGRAMMES...................................................................................................................... 165.6 LONG TERM FUNDING..................................................................................................................... 165.7 PLANNED QUARTERLY EXPENDITURE..............................................................................................16

6 PROGRAMME TOLERANCES......................................................................................................... 18

6.1 GENERAL........................................................................................................................................ 186.2 FINANCIAL..................................................................................................................................... 186.3 TIMESCALES................................................................................................................................... 186.4 OUTCOMES..................................................................................................................................... 18

7 PROGRAMME CONTROLS.............................................................................................................. 19

7.1 REPORTING..................................................................................................................................... 197.2 CHANGE CONTROL.......................................................................................................................... 197.3 RISKS AND ESCALATION................................................................................................................. 197.4 EXCEPTION PROCESS....................................................................................................................... 197.5 LESSONS LEARNED......................................................................................................................... 19

8 PROGRAMME ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES..............................................................................20

8.1 STEERING GROUP (PROGRAMME BOARD)........................................................................................208.2 PROGRAMME MANAGER.................................................................................................................. 208.3 WORK PACKAGE MANAGERS.......................................................................................................... 21

9 BUSINESS CASE................................................................................................................................. 22

9.1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT......................................................................................................... 229.2 ANTICIPATED BENEFITS................................................................................................................... 229.3 CURRENT POSITION......................................................................................................................... 23

10 INITIAL PROGRAMME PLAN.....................................................................................................24

document.doc of 41


10.2 TASK DESCRIPTIONS....................................................................................................................... 24

11 RISK AND ISSUE MANAGEMENT..............................................................................................29

11.1 RISK & ISSUE MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................................... 2911.2 INITIAL PROGRAMME RISKS............................................................................................................ 2911.3 RISK LEVEL ASSESSMENT............................................................................................................... 32

12 GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS.............................................................................................33

12.1 STEERING GROUP............................................................................................................................ 3312.2 PROGRAMME MANAGER.................................................................................................................. 33

13 PROGRAMME ORGANISATION.................................................................................................34

14 STAKEHOLDER REGISTER & COMMUNICATION PLAN.....................................................35

14.1 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................... 3514.2 COMMUNICATION CHANNELS.......................................................................................................... 3514.3 STAKEHOLDER REGISTER................................................................................................................ 3514.4 COMMUNICATION PLAN.................................................................................................................. 36

15 PROGRAMME QUALITY PLAN..................................................................................................37

15.1 RESPONSIBILITIES........................................................................................................................... 3715.2 PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT & ASSURANCE.....................................................................................3715.3 ACCESSIBILITY................................................................................................................................ 3715.4 DATA PROTECTION......................................................................................................................... 3815.5 SECURITY....................................................................................................................................... 3815.6 DOCUMENTATION........................................................................................................................... 3815.7 TESTING & ACCEPTANCE................................................................................................................ 38

16 PROGRAMME FILING................................................................................................................. 39

16.1 GENERAL........................................................................................................................................ 3916.2 YOHR REGS FILING........................................................................................................................ 3916.3 REGS PROJECT FILING..................................................................................................................... 39

17 Glossary............................................................................................................................................. 40

document.doc of 41


1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY1.1 PURPOSE1.1.1 This document defines the programme of work to be undertaken by the “Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme” within the Yorkshire & Humber Regional Improvement & Efficiencies Partnership. For management purposes it is classed by RIEP as a project within their programme of activity. The Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme is in itself a large scale and diverse programme of activity, and therefore throughout this PID, the term “Programme” will be used. The document defines the deliverables required for the successful completion of the programme, and the resources needed to achieve them

1.1.2 This document is intended to be the first point of reference for the programme. Several of the programme documents are maintained separately from this PID. These include the programme plan and risk register

1.2 PROGRAMME SUMMARY1.2.1 The programme aims to improve the delivery and quality of regulatory services across the Yorkshire & Humber Region. It will facilitate the realisation of financial and other benefits from Local Authorities working together on a regional basis and communications with Staff, Businesses and Citizens. The programme objectives are set out in more detail in Para. 3.2.1.

1.2.2 The programme was set up following funding approval in August 2008. Since then governance arrangements have been developed through the establishment of a steering group and a regional 2020 Visioning event held in York in April 2009. An interim programme manager has been appointed and from July the ReGS Project Manager joined the team.

1.2.3 The programme is made up of three main work strands that are broken down into a number of work packages:

Mobile and Flexible Working

Better Regulation & Business Advice

New Ways of Working and Organisational Development

1.2.4 The Better Regulation & Business Advice and New Ways of Working strands are described in detail in this document. The Mobile & Flexible Working strand has its own PID and is only described in outline with key milestones and outputs listed in the programme plan. Although largely separate pieces of work, all three strands are heavily interrelated and dependent on each other to get the best over all benefit.

1.2.5 Mobile and Flexible Working aims to promote a better understanding to the benefits & pitfalls of mobile working, leading to better systems implementation & reduced costs for LAs across the region. This will be achieved through:

The sharing of information based on the experience gained over more than 5 years at Barnsley;

Enabling and encouraging wider sharing of mobile working experience through hosting mobile working events;

The creation of an on-line library of supporting reference documentation;

The provision of peer to peer support to other Local Authorities

document.doc of 41


The continued development of mobile working in new areas of Regulatory Services.

1.2.6 The overall aim of the Better Regulation & Business Advice strand is to provide a vehicle for promoting regulation through collaborative working. Within this the Artemis element aims to provide an on-line community hub that will provide facilities for the sharing of expertise and experience, and access to a regulatory services knowledge base or library. This will in part be achieved through the use of social media & Web 2.0 tools to improve engagement between staff, business and citizens. The Artemis Community Hub will support the development of a regional community brand identity and is made up of a number of work packages listed in the table below:

Targeted Business News Letters

Citizen Engagement

Community Knowledge Hub

Business Start-up Tools

Linking Back Office Systems

On-line Forms and Payments

Staff Newsletter and Communications

1.2.7 The New Ways of Working strand addresses opportunities through improvements in regional organisation and joint working. Across the region there is a wide variation in the organisation and delivery of regulatory services and the tools to support them. This leads to confusion in business through different approaches and interpretations, difficulties in finding appropriate contact points and inefficiencies in procurement and duplication of effort. The strand will initially look at;

Surveying and documenting existing regulatory services organisation and groups

Surveying current IT systems, applications and licenses with a view to promoting best practise procurement and utilisation

Surveying current Social Media and Web 2.0 accessibility.

Developing and promoting common standards, policies and guidance for Social Media and Web 2.0

Cross Border Working

1.2.8 The programme is very much about collaboration and sharing, both within and outside the region. Where ever possible, the solution will be based on adaptation of existing tools or capabilities. The solutions will be scalable so that they can taken up by LAs over time as each is ready, without an undue burden of cost falling on the programme and early adopters.

document.doc of 41


2 BACKGROUND2.1 OVERVIEW2.1.1 YoHr Regs is a regional transformation programme funded through the Yorkshire & Humber’s Regional Improvement and Efficiency Partnership (RIEP). YoHr Regs presents an opportunity for all Yorkshire & Humber local authority Environmental Health, Trading Standards, Licensing and related regulatory services, including the region’s Port Authorities and Fire and Rescue services, to strengthen collaboration, seek to develop a new partnership identity and further drive modernisation and delivery of improved outcomes.

2.2 EXISTING ARRANGEMENTS, BUSINESS NEEDS AND SERVICE GAPS2.2.1 The Yorkshire and Humber region covers a large geographical area. It has a mixture of large urban conurbations and remote rural farm communities. Regulatory services are delivered across the region by a number of different levels and types of local government. The structure of regulatory services across the region at present looks like this: -

North Yorkshire North Yorkshire trading standards 7 environmental health teams York – Unitary authority with joint regulatory services

East Yorkshire and Lincs East Riding of Yorkshire – Unitary authority with joint regulatory services Hull CC – Separate EH and TS but moving to joint regulatory services North Lincs - Unitary authority with joint regulatory services North East Lincs - Unitary authority with separate EH and TS Hull and Goole Port Health

West Yorkshire - 5 unitary authorities West Yorkshire Joint Services covers TS for all West Yorkshire 5 environmental health teams, one for each unitary

South Yorkshire - 4 unitary authorities each with joint regulatory services teams

2.2.2 In addition to the above there are 4 fire service teams. This gives a total of 29 different teams, or authorities across the region, responsible for regulatory services. There is also a range of groupings of some teams on a sub regional basis.

2.2.3 This diverse regional structure and large number of teams each delivering differing aspects of regulation leads to duplication of effort and may lead to confusion for business in establishing what it needs to do in order to be compliant, and where to go for advice.

2.2.4 The delivery of regulatory services across the region is under pressure to change from a number of directions:

The Anderson Review – An independent 2008 Government Enterprise Strategy review of the best way to deliver its regulatory guidance.

o Simplicity, clarity & consistency of advice.

o Single initial point of contact.

o Improved accessibility of information & advice.

o A change in the nature of relationship between inspectors and business from a perception of “judgement” to one of “support”.

document.doc of 41


o Development of the skills of inspectors to better provide advice and guidance based on the needs of the business.

Financial pressure to deliver better outcomes for less cost, particularly as a result of the current recession.

o Reduced duplication of efforts across the region especially in the interpretation of legislation and provision of guidance, policies and procedures.

o Improve the ability of business to help it achieve compliance and so reduce unnecessary contact, and costs for both businesses and the LA’s

o Joint procurement and sharing of specialist resources across authority boundaries.

Central government encouragement to improve engagement with citizens and business through the use of social media.

o Helping citizens and business to help themselves.

o Providing dynamic content responsive to the needs of the individual.

o Provide communication channels and fora to enable or improve engagement.

o Providing encouragement for businesses to improve through promotion of the achievement of increased levels of compliance.

o Improved intelligence and understanding of local issues by regulatory services.

document.doc of 41


3 PROGRAMME DEFINITION3.1 PROGRAMME SCOPE3.1.1 The scope of the programme differs across the three main strands. See Section 3.4 for the Programme Deliverables.

3.1.2 ReGS Project - Mobile & Flexible Working - The continuation of development, the sharing of experience and peer to peer support.

3.1.3 Better Regulation & Business Advice - Documented initial development and demonstration or piloting of solutions for the Artemis Community Hub. It also covers the production of a cost/benefit model for long term funding of the service, Business road shows, support to LBRO business forums and business surveys and focus groups.

3.1.4 New Ways of Working & Organisational Development - The analysis of the present situation and the identification of opportunities for benefit and change through collaborative working.

3.2 PROGRAMME OUTCOMES 3.2.1 The objectives of this programme are: -

Improved partnership, collaboration and coordination across the region;

A shared regional vision for Regulatory Services;

Improved business advice and support;

New approaches to regulatory compliance;

Better customer service and accessibility;

An increased brand identity and profile for Regulatory Services;

Modernisation and new ways of working;

Increased Citizen engagement with business regulation and service quality;

Improving local outcomes and public protection.

3.3 PROGRAMME BENEFITS3.3.1 The development of a benefits plan is one of the outputs of the programme. Detailed and realistic financial and quality benefits will need to be identified to justify a long term commitment by LAs to funding the programme.

3.3.2 Financial savings are expected to be achieved through: -

Improved ways of working.

The use of mobile working techniques and equipment to reduce costs and improve service delivery.

Joint development of policies & procedures rather than each authority developing its own.

Shared sourcing of regulatory information and advice.

Improved procurement through joint action.

The sharing of best practice in areas such as the use of application licenses.

A reduction in “contact time” through businesses better serving themselves.

3.3.3 The value and opportunity for realisation of these savings will be documented in the benefits plan. Not all of these approaches will produce easily cashable savings.

document.doc of 41


3.3.4 In addition to financial benefits the programme is expected to lead to a number of other benefits: -

An improvement in the business perception of regulatory services NI 182.

Better communication of changes in regulatory legislation and practise to business.

Improved rates or levels of compliance by businesses.

More information about business compliance for citizens.

Intelligence information from citizens to support risk assessment of businesses.

Better sharing of experience between regulators across the region.

Improved sharing of intelligence between regulators and others such as the fire service.

Reduced carbon footprint through reduced mileage.

3.4 PROGRAMME DELIVERABLES/OUTPUTS3.4.1 The programme will create a large number of deliverable documents. They fall into four main groups:

Those documents needed to plan and manage the overall programme and to explain the task ahead to the LAs.

Documents relating to the Regs Mobile & Flexible Working Project

Documents relating to the development of the Better Regulation & Business Advice and in particular the Artemis Community Hub

Documents relating to New Ways of Working & Organisational Development

3.4.2 These documents are tabulated and described in outline in the table below with their due dates

# Title Format Description Due Date

Programme Management

1Programme Initiation Document

MS Word document

This document – defining the programme, produced & maintained by the programme manager Nov 09

2 Programme Plan MS Project Document

Produced in support of the PID and updated at regular intervals by the programme manager Nov 09

3 PID for Mobile & Flexible Working

MS Word document

This document – defining the project produced & maintained by the ReGS project manager Nov 09

4Project Plan Mobile & Flexible Working

MS Project Document

Produced in support of the PID and updated at regular intervals by the ReGS project manager Nov 09

5 Risk & Issues Register

MS Excel Spreadsheet

Tabulation of programme risks, impacts & management actions, maintained by the PM with contribution for LAs Oct 09

6 Benefits Realisation Plan

MS Word Document

Initial list of benefits both cashable and non-cashable to be realised by each thread, & how they will be measured, maintained by the PM with contribution for LAs

Feb 10

7 Programme Progress Reports

MS Word Document

Prepared by the PM at quarterly intervals for RIEP & approved by the Steering Group

Quarterly

document.doc of 41



8RIEP Performance Report

MS Word RIEP template

RIEP headline reporting covering risks and key progress/actions. A summary of the above. Quarterly

9 RIEP Learning Report


It is a condition of RIEP funding that projects share learning with 20% of funding being held back until the full project end report has been produced. This report sets out progress for the previous quarter in this element

Quarterly

10 Completed Claim Forms


These forms are completed on a quarterly basis by the PM from accounting information. Quarterly

11Long Term Sustainability Model

MS Word Document

This document defines the approach & benefits to the long term funding of the services demonstrated by the Artemis element

Mar 10

12 Programme Closure Report

MS Word Document

Provides a review of the overall programme & an assessment of how successfully it has met its objectives. This report will be presented at the final Steering Group meeting, & signed off as part of the process of formally closing the programme.

Mar 11

13 Stakeholder Register

MS Word Document

List of all stakeholders, contact details & relationship with the programme Dec 09

14 Communication Plan

MS Word Document

Sets out the tools or channels & timing of communication with the stakeholders. Dec 09

Mobile & Flexible Working

15 Mobile Working Reference Library Web Content

This is an initial collection of documents relating to the Regs Mobile Working Project. It will be added to in the course of the project & will become part of the wider Artemis knowledge base.

Oct 09

16Mobile Working Peer to Peer Support Proposal

MS Word Document

Generic outline of the Regs project peer to peer support offered to other local authorities across the region. It can be adapted in response to specific requests

Oct 09

17Mobile Working Workshops Reports

MS Word Document

Produced following a W/S to capture the outcomes & feedback from the session. For reference purposes it will also identify links to material used during the day.

As Required

1st report Jan 2010

18Peer to Peer Support Visit Reports

MS Word Document

Produced following a support session to capture issues or questions raised & feedback from the session.

As Required

Better Regulation & Business Advice

19Artemis Community Hub Capability Outline

MS Word Document

This is a communication & discussion document outlining possible functionality and design considerations for the Artemis community Hub.

Nov 09

20Business Newsflash Requirement

MS Word Document

Requirements definition of the functionality & processes for the targeted business newsflash service. It is used for development and testing

Dec 09

document.doc of 41



21 Business Type Structure


This document sets out & structures the business type classifications used in developing user preferences lists & information tags to create the newsflash. It is also used to manage information returned in the business start-up support process & to link to specific contact points. For the first pilot it will be set to the values used by NYTS

Dec 09

22Business TS Newsflash Pilot Plan

MS Word Document Test plan for the TS Newsflash Pilot Jan 10

23Newsflash Business Processes

MS Word Document

Draft business processes to allow a LA to use the news flash service & its centralised maintenance Jan 10

24TS Newsflash Lessons Learned Report

MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the TS newsflash pilot. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Apr 10

25 EH Newsflash Pilot Plan

MS Word Document

Test plan for the EH Newsflash Pilot, including business feedback Apr 10

26EH Newsflash Lessons Learned Report

MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the EH newsflash pilot. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Aug 10

27 Newsflash Cost Model


Analysis with options of the costs of providing the newsflash service to support long term funding Mar 10

28Regional Newsflash Deployment Plan

MS Word Document

Generic process and plan for the deployment of the newsflash service across the region. Actual take up will depend on individual LAs

Aug 10

29 Newsflash Review MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the newsflash service. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Dec 10

30Citizen Engagement Requirements

MS Word Document

Requirements definition of the functionality & processes for the Citizen Engagement pages, it is used for development and testing

Jan 10

31Citizen Engagement Pilot Plan

MS Word Document

Test plan for the Citizen Engagement Pilot, including Citizen feedback Jun 10

32Citizen Engagement Pilot Lessons Learned Report

MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the Citizen Engagement Pilot. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Dec 10

33Citizen Engagement Regional Deployment Plan

MS Word Document

Generic process and plan for the deployment of Citizen Engagement across the region. Actual take up will depend on individual LAs

Dec 10

34Citizen Engagement Cost Model


Analysis with options of the costs of providing the Citizen Engagement service to support long term funding Nov 10

35Community Hub Knowledgebase Requirement

MS Word Document

Requirements definition of the functionality & processes for the Community Hub Knowledgebase, it is used for development and testing

Jan 10

document.doc of 41



36Knowledgebase Cost/Benefits Model

MS Word Document

Outline of potential benefits from the creation and use of the Knowledgebase. Mar 10

37Business Start-Up Support Tools Requirement

MS Word Document

Requirements definition of the functionality & processes for the Business Start-up Support, it is used for development and testing

Jan 10

38Business Start-Up Service Cost Model


Analysis with options of the costs of providing the Business Start-up Service to support long term funding Jan10

39 Business Start-Up Tools Review

MS Word Document

Review of the outcomes of the Business Start-Up On-Line tools. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Dec 10

40Back Office Linking Opportunities Report

MS Word Document

Report outlining the potential benefits from linking information sources and back office systems Feb 10

41Requirement For Online Forms & Payments

MS Word Document

Requirements definition of the functionality & processes for the Online Forms & Payments, it is used for development and testing

Jan 10

42Online Forms & Payments Testing/Pilot Plan

MS Word Document

Test plan for the Online Forms & Payments Pilot, including business feedback Apr 10

43Online Forms & Payments Lessons Learned Report

MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the Online Forms & Payments pilot. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Sep 10

44Requirements For The Staff Newsletter & Communications

MS Word Document

Requirements definition of the functionality & processes for Staff” Newsletter & Communications, it is used for development and testing

Feb 10

45Pilot Plan For Staff Newsletter & Communications

MS Word Document

Test plan for the Staff” Newsletter & Communications Pilot, including business feedback Feb 10

46Staff Newsletter & Communications Lessons Learned Report

MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the Staff Newsletter & Communications pilot. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Jun 10

47Staff Newsletter & Communications Regional Deployment Plan

MS Word Document

Generic process and plan for the deployment of the Staff Newsletter & Communications across the region. Actual take up will depend on individual LAs

Jul 10

48Staff Newsletter & Communications Review

MS Word Document

Report on the outcomes of the review of the Staff Newsletter & Communications. Used to inform subsequent development & to confirm benefits

Dec 10

New Ways of Working and Organisational Development

49Mapping Of Current Organisation, Roles & Groups


These spreadsheets map the current distribution of regulatory service functions across the LAs that make up the region. They also map which sub regional groups individual teams currently belong to. This is a baseline set of data for a number of development activities

Jan 10

document.doc of 41



50Potential Joint Procurement Savings Report

MS Word Document

Work elsewhere has shown that by following best practice & by acting together it is possible to make significant savings in the procurement of services. This document will summarise the opportunities identified for the region

Jan 10

51Social Media & Web 2.0 Accessibility Report


This spreadsheet collates the regional position on accessibility to common social media tools. It is a baseline for the next deliverable

Jan 10

52Regional Standard For Social Media & Web 2.0 Accessibility

MS Word Document

Proposed set of common social media/web 2.0 tools/services that will work across the region. This is a key input to the development of the Artemis community hub

Jan 10

53Regional Social Media Content/Authoring Guidance

MS Word Document

This note will provide guidelines for authors and contributors to the community hub, so that potential contributors are comfortable about posting their views and experience.

Jan10

54Options For Cross-Border Working

MS Word Document

A report on the possibilities of officers of one authority working “cross border” in support of another authority and any associated benefits/issues

Mar 10

55

Benefits Analysis of using an external source for regulatory information

MS Word Document

Report on the potential benefits of using a centralised regulatory information source (EHMS) as applied to Barnsley

Jan 10

3.5 EXCLUSIONSSimilarly to the scope of the programme, the exclusions vary from thread to thread.

3.5.1 ReGS Project - Mobile Working

The ReGS Project freely provides documentation created by Barnsley MBC in support of the mobile applications (for example the list of standard paragraphs created by Barnsley for use within the Food Safety Inspection system). It does not provide equipment, training or process development for local authorities.

3.5.2 Better Regulation & Business Advice

The long term funding of the Artemis Community Hub and Newsletter services are dependent of the establishment of a suitable sustainability model, supported and signed up to by LAs. There is no provision in the RIEP beyond the initial proof of concept. Implementation of services within local authorities will be the responsibility of the local authority. LAs will also be responsible for providing appropriate links to back office systems and points of contact. “Local” content will be produced by the local authority. The costs of shared infrastructure, applications, service and hosting platforms through the programme period will be covered but any additional hardware, resources or services needed by local authorities is excluded.

3.5.3 New Ways of Working & Organisational Development

The scope of this thread is limited to the analysis of the present situation and the identification of opportunities for benefit and change. It does not cover the cost of implementation of change in individual local authorities.

document.doc of 41


3.6 CONSTRAINTS3.6.1 The capacity of the Local Authorities teams to provide resources for the research, development and testing of solutions will limit the rate of delivery of functionality

3.6.2 The capacity of the Local Authorities teams to introduce new tools and working practise is a limiting factor on the rate of take-up and utilisation. .

3.6.3 The amount and duration of financial support available will limit the level and range of development to demonstration and feasibility

3.7 INTERFACES3.7.1 There are interfaces between the various elements of the Artemis Community Hub and potential interfaces with a range of back office systems that may differ from authority to authority. The requirements documents will identify such requirements.

3.8 ASSUMPTIONS3.8.1 The funding currently approved by RIEP remains in place over the period to the end of March 2011.

3.8.2 Adequate resources will be made available by LAs to support planning development and testing.

3.8.3 The present regional LA organisation does not unduly hinder progress.

3.8.4 Any planned or future organisational change in LA regulatory services does not delay the programme.

3.8.5 There are no constraints due to political changes either in local or central government.

3.8.6 The requirements for the “Government Connect” programme does not prevent or significantly alter proposed plans.

3.8.7 The proposals for sharing and re-using data are compliant with data protection requirements and policies.

3.8.8 The availability and accessibility of Web 2.0 or social media tools to LA personnel will be sufficient to allow the development and use of the Artemis Community Hub.

3.9 DEPENDENCIES3.9.1 The timely delivery of the programme is highly dependent on support from local authorities in developing the various work packages.

3.9.2 The long term sustainability of the programme is dependent on LAs funding the services on the basis of clear cost and service benefits.

document.doc of 41


4 PROGRAMME APPROACH4.1 GENERAL4.1.1 The programme has three main strands. Each strand has different overall objectives and therefore slightly different approaches.

4.1.2 Mobile & Flexible Working – This strand is the extension of an existing project originally funded through the RCE. Further development and improvement work is being funded by Barnsley MBC and commissioned from Kirona and Civica, the software suppliers. The activities under RIEP funding are to support the sharing of expertise and experience gained through the initial activities and the further development, across the Yorkshire and Humber region. The sharing of experience is being led by the ReGS project management team.

4.1.3 Better Regulation & Business Advice – This is a development project aimed at demonstrating and testing ideas and functionality to prove the capability and benefits. The Artemis Hub will be developed by adapting existing software tools for the purpose in order to minimise new development. The services based on the adaptation of these tools will be tested and piloted to the stage at which they could be rolled out across the region. Each area of functionality will be supported by a requirements specification, a test plan and post trial report. Where appropriate new procedures will be developed and tested. The strand is split up into work packages. These will be supported by local authorities across the region, and coordinated by the programme manager.

4.1.4 New Ways of Working – This is a research strand based around information gathering and analysis. It will deliver a series of reports identifying opportunities for improved services and reduced costs. The studies will be conducted in-house with different aspects being supported by authorities across the region. It will also draw on information from other local authorities beyond the region. The task work packages will be coordinated by the programme manager.

4.2 MANAGEMENT4.2.1 The ‘Better Regulation & Business Advice’ and the ‘New Ways of Working’ stands will be managed and reported by the Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme Manager. The ReGS Mobile and Flexible Project will be managed by the ReGS Project Manager who will report progress through the Business Manager to the Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme Manager.

4.2.2 The programme and associated strands will be managed in accordance with the principles of Prince 2 appropriately applied to meet the needs of the programme.

document.doc of 41


5 PROGRAMME BUDGETThe programme of work is being funded by RIEP with support in terms of resources from a number of sources including other Local Authorities.

5.1 RIEP5.1.1 Funding of £330,000 was approved by RIEP in August 2008. This funding will be used to cover the programme management and functionality specification costs. It also provides funding for the development, demonstration, the hosting of the proposed functionality and the staging of sharing events.

5.2 BARNSLEY MBC5.2.1 Additional project leadership and administrative support to the programme is being provided by Barnsley MBC Regulatory Services from its resources.

5.2.2 Additional development of the ReGS Project for Mobile and Flexible Working is being funded by Barnsley MBC. The results of these developments will be shared with other Local Authorities under the RIEP funding above.

5.3 OTHER LOCAL AUTHORITIES5.3.1 A number of other regional local authorities have offered to take a lead on individual work packages and proved support from their own resources.

5.4 COMMERCIAL SUPPORT5.4.1 Support to the programme for mobile and flexible working open days and events is provided by It suppliers on an ad-hoc basis

5.5 OTHER PROGRAMMES5.5.1 Additional funding for further development of some aspects of the programme, especially around Citizen Engagement, are being sought. Should the programme be successful such funding will extend rather than replace the existing scope.

5.6 LONG TERM FUNDING5.6.1 The funding and support from RIEP and others will allow limited development and demonstration of concept. It will support the demonstration and establishment of the benefits of the proposal. It does not cover the long term sustainability or deployment of the tools.

5.6.2 In order to sustain the services in the long term funding will be needed from those authorities that take up the services. A funding and cost benefit model will be developed as part of the programme.

5.7 PLANNED QUARTERLY EXPENDITUREThe table below lists the planned quarterly expenditure to be claimed against the RIEP funding

SPEND EVIDENCE QURTER END £ CLAIM2020 Event, Interim PM, Stationary

Invoices for interim PM & Venue, Attendance lists, event feedback report , visit reports & SAP expenditure reports

June 2009 £12,500Interim PM, Mobile Working PM, Expenses

Invoices for interim PM & expenses , Payroll data, RIEP documentation, visit reports & SAP expenditure reports

document.doc of 41


September 2009 £44,250Mobile working & pest control events costs, Interim PM, Mobile Working PM, Expenses & Application development

Invoices for application development, interim PM & Event Venues. SAP expenditure reports for expenses and payroll costs & Attendance lists, event feedback report , visit reports

December 2009 £62,775Interim PM, Mobile Working Regs PM, Expenses, Application development, Web editor & hosting costs

Invoices for application development interim PM & Venue, Attendance lists, event feedback report , visit reports & SAP reports

March 2010 £67,775YoHr & Mobile Working PM, Expenses, Hub administrator & hosting cost

Invoices for application development, & SAP expenditure reports

June 2010 £34,300YoHr & Mobile Working PM, Expenses, Hub administrator & hosting cost


September 2010 £39300YoHr & Mobile Working PM, Expenses, Hub administrator & hosting cost


December 2010 £34,300YoHr & Mobile Working PM, Expenses, Hub administrator & hosting cost

Invoices for application development & Venue, Attendance lists, event feedback report , visit reports & SAP expenditure reports

March 2011 £34,400Total RIEP Grant £329,500

document.doc of 41


6 PROGRAMME TOLERANCES6.1 GENERAL6.1.1 Formal programme tolerances have not been set. The programme is very much one of discovery and piloting of ideas rather than tightly focused on specific deliverables. By its nature the programme will evolve during its course.

6.2 FINANCIAL6.2.1 Funding for the programme is provided in part by support from several of the regional local authorities. The level of this contribution is not yet clear and so the proportion of the RIEP funding needed to complete individual aspects of the programme is also not yet clear. There is a fixed contribution from RIEP that may not be exceeded, however the precise allocation of that funding is not fixed so long as the programme outcomes are being or likely to be met. (See below).

6.3 TIMESCALES6.3.1 There is a general object of maximising the RIEP spend before the end of FY 2009/2010. This is to mitigate the risk that the RIEP funding will be curtailed or cancelled. As such the timescales set are aggressive and may not be achievable in all areas. From an overall programme outcome perspective the timescales are relatively tolerant and slippages of as much as a quarter would not materially affect the outcome. Timescales may ultimately be limited by the availability of resources from Local Authorities and by pressures to save costs.

6.4 OUTCOMES6.4.1 The planned outcomes hoped for from the programme are defined elsewhere. Any significant change in the ability of the programme to deliver against those expected outcomes would result in a review and raising of an exception report. Such exceptions may arise through delays or funding limitations.

document.doc of 41


7 PROGRAMME CONTROLS7.1 REPORTING7.1.1 Quarterly progress reports will be produced by the Programme Manager with support from the Work Package Managers and the ReGS Project Manager. The progress reports will be presented to the Steering Group for agreement before forwarding to RIEP.

7.1.2 Quarterly Performance and Learning Reports will be prepared by the Programme Manager and submitted to RIEP along with the Financial Claim for the period.

7.1.3 Copies of the programme Risk Register and the Steering Group Progress Report will be submitted to RIEP.

7.1.4 The quarterly RIEP documentation and other documents delivered during the reporting period will be made available on-line.

7.2 CHANGE CONTROL7.2.1 The programme of work set out in this PID needs to have a degree of flexibility as it is aimed at developing ideas and possible solutions. Deviations from the programme plan and timescales will be considered by the Programme Manager and where significant, presented to the Steering Group for consideration and approval.

7.2.2 Changes that affect the outcome or costs of the programme in excess of the programme tolerances will be documented by the Programme Manager and an Exception Report raised – see below.

7.3 RISKS AND ESCALATION7.3.1 The Programme Manager for the Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme will manage and report risks using the risk register. The risk register will be developed from the initial risks presented in section 11. This will be done with support from the Work Package Leaders and the ReGS Mobile & Flexible Working Project Manager.

7.3.2 Risks or issues that cannot be resolved by the Programme Manager and Work Package Leaders will be escalated to the Programme Lead and the Steering Group

7.3.3 Risks and issues that cannot be resolved by the Programme Lead and/or the Steering Group will be escalated to RIEP

7.4 EXCEPTION PROCESS7.4.1 Exceptions, to the plan and programme tolerances agreed with RIEP, will be escalated to the Programme Steering Group and if they cannot be resolved escalated to the RIEP YoHr Space Coordinator (Karen Fletcher)

7.5 LESSONS LEARNED7.5.1 The whole basis of the programme is around sharing experience gained through the testing of the concepts set out in the programme plan. The delivery of the plan and the long term maintenance of the programme goals is dependant on collaboration and support by local authorities across the region.

7.5.2 Knowledge and experience gained at each stage of the programme will be made available on-line for use by not only the authorities within the Yorkshire and Humber Region but by any one who is interested. Where appropriate special events will be organised to encourage participation and share experiences. Two such events are planned for December 2009 and January 2010.

document.doc of 41


8 PROGRAMME ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES8.1 STEERING GROUP (PROGRAMME BOARD)8.1.1 The Steering Group has the following responsibilities:

Oversee development of Programme Initiation Document and Business Case.

Ensure coherent programme organisation structure and logical set of plans.

Monitor and control progress at a strategic level, continually reviewing achievement against the Programme Plan.

Ensure proposed changes of scope, cost or timescale are checked against their possible effects on the Business Case.

Ensure risks are being tracked and managed.

Ensure desired outcome of the programme is specified.

Ensure progress towards the outcome required by the users remains consistent.

Promote and maintain focus on the desired programme outcome.

Ensure that any user resources required for the programme are made available.

Resolve user requirements and priority conflicts.

Promote, the sharing of experience gained and lessons learned, across the region.

Approve the End Programme Report and Lessons Learned Reports and ensure that any outstanding issues are documented and passed on to the appropriate body.

Approve sending of the programme closure notification to the RIEP.

Ensure benefits have been realised by holding a post-programme review and forward the results to the RIEP, and all partners.

8.1.2 Steering Group (Programme Board) Meetings will be chaired by the Programme Lead and attended by the Programme Board members in order to provide a forum for:

Discussing and agreeing the deliverables of the Programme

Ensuring that Stakeholder interests in the Programme are satisfied

Communicating Programme progress

Ensuring those staff affected by the Programme are represented

Ensuring that the Change Management consequences of changing processes and structures are discussed and agreed.

Receiving progress, risk and exception reports.

8.2 PROGRAMME MANAGER8.2.1 The Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme Manager will run the programme day-to-day on behalf of the Programme Board within constraints laid down by board. The programme manager’s prime responsibility is to ensure the programme produces the required products, to the required standard and within the specified constraints of time and cost. The Programme Manager is also responsible for ensuring the programme delivers results that are capable of achieving the benefits defined in the Business Case.

8.2.2 The programme manager will be supported by the ReGS Mobile and Flexible Working Project Manager who will have similar specific responsibilities and who in addition

document.doc of 41


to reporting to the ReGS Project Board will report progress and expenditure through Barnsley MBC’s Business Manager to the Yorkshire and Humber Business Transformation Programme Manager

8.2.3 Specific Responsibilities:

Manage production of the required products.

Direct and motivate the programme team.

Plan and monitor the programme.

Produce and maintain the Programme Initiation Document.

Prepare Programme, Stage and Exception Plans in conjunction with Work Package Managers.

Manage the risks and issues, including the development of contingency plans.

Take responsibility for overall progress and use of resources and initiate corrective action.

Responsible for change control and any required configuration.

Prepare and report to the Steering Group through progress, risk and exception reports.

Liaise with the Programme Board to assure the overall direction and integrity of the programme.

Agree technical and quality strategy with appropriate members of the Programme Board.

Prepare the Lessons Learned Report.

Prepare any Follow-on Action Recommendations required.

Prepare the End Programme Report.

Identify and obtain support and advice required for management, planning and control.

Responsible for programme administration.

Liaise with any suppliers or account managers.

8.3 WORK PACKAGE MANAGERS8.3.1 Work Package Managers from Local Authorities from across the region will be responsible for managing and delivering one or more work packages. They will report progress through the Programme Manager.

document.doc of 41


9 BUSINESS CASE9.1 BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT9.1.1 Local Authority Regulatory services including Environmental Health and Trading Standards can be traced back to the very beginnings of local government and are absolutely essential in ensuring the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat and the places we visit, work and live are safe and do not cause harm to health.

9.1.2 Regulatory Services also make a considerable contribution to the local economy by giving support and advice and by protecting legitimate businesses from being adversely affected by the illicit and unregulated activity of rogue traders, ensuring fair trade. The role played here is often overlooked and regulatory services, driven by dwindling budgets and by crude inspection targets imposed by the Food Standards Agency and the Health and Safety Executive, have tended to increasingly focus activity on regulatory inspection at the expense of activity aimed at supporting business.

9.1.3 Government is pursuing a programme of activity to transform the way that regulators and businesses work together. As a part of this agenda government has sponsored several national reviews and studies, including the Anderson Review into SME’s views of regulation and government guidance, the Hampton Review into the administrative burdens of regulation, the Rogers Review identifying national priorities for local authority regulatory services and the Macrory Review of regulatory penalties. A national Local Better Regulation Office (LBRO) has been established to direct authorities to implement the key Hampton recommendations.

9.1.4 The resulting ‘better regulation agenda’ is intended to deliver important benefits; for businesses, who can expect a fairer and less burdensome approach from regulators; for local and central government, who can expect better joint working to deliver more targeted and effective work on enforcement, and for citizens, who will benefit from the existence of a more effective regulatory system.

9.2 ANTICIPATED BENEFITSThe programmes three work streams have a range of objectives and benefits. These benefits include financial, quality and increased capability/capacity.

9.2.1 Mobile and Flexible Working (ReGS Project)

Reduction in non-contact/non productive time.

Reduction in number of desks and associated office space and facilities.

Reduction in over all travel costs.

Reduction in carbon footprint.

Increased capacity for client inspections/visits.

Improved work/life balance for staff.

Increased flexibility in staff utilisation.

Less scope for data entry errors.

More professional and timely reporting.

Improved quality of service delivery and business advice.

9.2.2 The Better Regulation & Business Advice

Reduction in cost through joint development of policies & procedures rather than each authority developing its own.

document.doc of 41


Reduction in costs through shared sourcing of regulatory information and advice.

A reduction in “contact time” through businesses better serving themselves.

An improvement in the business perception of regulatory services NI 182.

Better communication of changes to regulatory legislation and practise to business and officers through targeted communications.

Reduction in costs to business through easier access to better regulatory information and self help tools.

Incentives for business to increase levels of compliance through publication of status on-line.

More information about business compliance for citizens.

Citizens able to comment on business service/compliance.

Reduction in costs through intelligence information from citizens to support risk assessment of businesses.

Better sharing of experience between regulators across the region.

Improved sharing of intelligence between regulators and others such as the fire service.

Improved communication and representation to central government through joint regional action.

9.2.3 The New Ways of Working

A reduction in Local Authority costs for equipment and applications through improved procurement and joint action.

Reduction in costs through sharing of best practice in areas such as the use of application licenses.

Establishment of common Web 2.0 access standards and user guidance.

Shared training development, co-ordination and provision.

9.3 CURRENT POSITION9.3.1 Submissions for RIEP funding were made in early 2008 and funding of £330,000 was approved in August 2008. See section 5 for further details of funding.

document.doc of 41


10 INITIAL PROGRAMME PLAN10.1.1 This PID covers two of the three strands or projects that make up the Yorkshire & Humber Business Transformation Programme. The Mobile and Flexible Working project has its own PID that will be made available as a separate document. As such the project plan for the mobile working element is limited to key milestones and high level task descriptions.

10.1.2 The programme Gantt will be in MS Project format and maintained separately from this PID. Delivery dates for key outputs are listed in the deliverables table in section 3.4

10.2 TASK DESCRIPTIONS10.2.1 Programme Management - The YoHr Regs Programme Manager supported by the Work Package Managers is responsible for delivery of the Yorkshire & Humber Business Transformation Programme.

Activity Outline DescriptionRIEP Performance Reporting

Submission of RIEP quarterly performance and learning reports

Steering Group Meetings

Arrange and host Quarterly Steering Group (Programme Board) meetings including the preparation of the agenda and minutes.

Programme Initiation Documents The development and maintenance of the PID

Programme Plan The development and maintenance of the programme plan

Risk Management The management and where needed escalation of risk. The maintenance of the risk register

Programme Finances & Claim forms

The management and reporting of the programme budget including submitting programme claim forms to RIEP for payment. Also the tracking of contributions to the programme from LAs and other sources.

RIEP Performance Reporting

RIEP headline reporting covering risks and key progress/actions. A summary of the above.

RIEP Learning Reporting

It is a condition of RIEP funding that projects share learning with 20% of funding being held back until the full project end report has been produced. This report sets out progress for the previous quarter in this element

Programme Quarterly Progress Reports

With support from the work package leaders the drafting and presentation of progress reports to the Steering Group for approval

Stakeholder Management

The development of a stakeholder register of interest and communication plan to promote engagement and take-up of the programme outputs

Long-term sustainability model for the Artemis Community Hub

The development of an equitable, scalable financial model to support the long term funding of the tools and services developed/demonstrated under the programme. The model will in part be based on the financial benefits to Local Authorities form introduction of the services.

LA signup for long-term funding/support of the Artemis Community Hub

To get Local Authorities to sign up to funding the on-going services through communication and promotion of the benefits and the long term sustainability model above

Programme Closure Report

The conduct of a programme closure review and subsequent report to the Steering Group and to REIP

10.2.2 ReGS Project - Mobile & Flexible Working - The project originally began some 5 years ago to provide mobile working capabilities for regulatory services in association with

document.doc of 41


the NOMAD Programme. In its latest stage, the project is being supported by RIEP with the objective of promoting a better understanding of the benefits and pitfalls of mobile working across the region. This should lead to better systems implementation and reduced costs for LAs.

10.2.3 As previously indicated the ReGS Project has its own PID and its activities will only be described in outline here. Some of the activities are already complete but are shown for context and completeness.

Activity Outline DescriptionPDA Acquisition & Roll Out

(Complete)

April-May 09. Over fifty PDA’s were acquired and provided for staff. There were numerous issues to surmount as this was the first such project within the authority which made full use of this type of device. These were overcome and training was provided as they were set up for officers. Support via local “champions” was very successful and staff took ownership of problems and queries that arose.

The learning from this has been disseminated as part of the contribution to the YoHr programme.

Food Hygiene & Health and Safety Script

August 09 - A new comprehensive Food Hygiene and Health and Safety Script was received from Kirona and is currently being evaluated in the field. It offers the ability to generate inspection reports on the spot and gives the inspector over 300 paragraphs of recommendations and requirements to select from, all of which can be amended to suit the precise requirements. There have been teething problems and the application is currently suspended, awaiting bug fixes by Kirona. A comprehensive test program will be carried out before it is finally rolled out to officers (December 09).

Regional demonstrations of the system have been provided

New Release of Worker Dashboard

June 09 - A new release of the Worker Dashboard software was rolled out. It has much more of the look and feel of the rest of the Kirona applications. Roll-out needed to be arranged at shorter notice than originally anticipated but a full training programme was carried out. Some bugs were identified and work-arounds implemented. The project is still in discussions with Kirona regarding the outstanding issues (November/December 09).

Regional demonstrations of the system have been provided

Vodafone Data Cards

New data cards were obtained, in May 09, with the twin aims of reducing costs and increasing coverage throughout the borough. There were some dead-spots in the Barnsley Area with the previous provider, Orange. Orange offered a revised rate lower than Vodafone but it was felt that the better coverage from Vodafone and the fact that they offer 3G rather than GPRS coverage in more areas would be an advantage. There are still problems with the connectivity of tablet PCs. The feeling now is that a realistic idea of what is achievable should be adopted rather than thinking that a change of provider would provide a dramatic increase in connectivity. This is being reviewed in November and December 09

Learning will be captured and disseminated.

document.doc of 41


Activity Outline DescriptionRetail Enforcement Project (REP)

Funding for the REP project has now finished. A feedback session with the team to write and present the final report was held in May. The pilot itself was felt to be a success as officers were able to carry out “eyes and ears” inspections alongside their primary inspection, thus highlighting problem areas for other teams (and the fire service), or informing other teams that scheduled inspections could be postponed if there were no obvious signs of non-compliance. The software was not judged to be as helpful as originally envisaged and officers had resorted to carrying out inspections using paper forms. However there is a will to redesign the software and Barnsley are investigating with Hampshire and Kirona what the next steps should be.

Learning will be captured and disseminated.

Offline Working for REP

The problems suffered by the REP project because of the design of the application software and erratic online connectivity meant that it was important for an off-line capability to be introduced. Kirona therefore developed their iClient software, initially aimed at the REP application. In test it has dramatically reduced the time taken to go through an inspection. There were numerous hoops to jump through to ensure that it complies with Government Connects guidelines, but these have all been successfully overcome.

The learning and experience from this has been shared at the regional Mobile Working Event (Nov 09)

Tailored Dashboard Reports

Identification of requirements for tailored reports from the Worker Dashboard database, and their subsequent development and testing is planned for January 2010.

Offline Working for Food Health and Safety

Implementation of the iClient software, initially for REP inspections (End October 09), but further ahead, for the Food Hygiene (End December 09) and Health and Safety Script (End January 2010). This is envisaged to be a major step in improving the usability of the software on client premises.

Review of Data Cards & Applications

Review Vodafone Data cards and PDA based applications for usability.

Visits and Support Provision of support days to other local authorities across the UK to share Barnsley’s experiences and lessons learned on the introduction and use of Mobile and Flexible working. Additionally to provide on-going support through email questions and answers.

Peer to Peer Support

Publication of a peer to peer support package to be made available for other authorities across the Yorkshire and Humber region to learn from the Barnsley experience.

Workshops Two events demonstrating and reviewing the capabilities of mobile and flexible working and setting out issues that need to be tackled.

10.2.4 ‘Better Regulation & Business Advice’ - The overall aim of this strand is to provide a community hub with facilities and services to promote better regulation through collaborative working and the sharing of expertise and information. This will in part be achieved through the use of social media & Web 2.0 tools to improve engagement between staff, business and citizens. It is made up of a number of work packages described in the table below:

Activity Outline DescriptionTargeted Business News Letters

The Business newsflash element addresses a key issue, raised in the Anderson review, around the provision of timely accurate information focused on the specific activities of the business. This will lead to better compliance by business and less work for regulatory teams. The approach will be to adapt email marketing tools to first replicate and then build upon limited existing

document.doc of 41


Activity Outline Descriptionmethods. The solution will be low cost, scalable and allow inclusion of non-IT using businesses. It will provide for communication to business about issues from a national perspective such as changes to regulation and on a local basis such as scam warnings or local business events.

Business Start-up Tools

In order to start up a new business and be compliant with regulation, a large amount of information is needed. The aim of this work package is to provide a comprehensive set of information, guidance and access to on-line forms for business. This will be achieved by them engaging in a simple question and answer process. The outcome of this process will be a tailored set of requirements related to the proposed business activity with appropriate contact points based on the business location. This information may be saved on-line and printed out for reference by the business. It can be used to keep the business informed of regulatory changes specific to their activities through the business news letter. Through linking to back office systems business records for regulatory services could be established and maintained. Information provided would be used to pre-populate on-line forms.

Community Knowledge Hub

The Knowledge Hub will provide a comprehensive on-line reference source of searchable information about regulation. This reference would be maintained centrally and save the cost of duplicated effort across the region. In addition to the basic reference information, the library will make available reports, studies etc, to avoid duplication of effort and promote collaboration. By ensuring that items in the library are properly indexed and through the provision of comprehensive search tools, users will be able to find relevant information using their own terms. By using a common source of policy and procedure, common approaches to regulation across the region will be encouraged, leading to improved quality of regulation and compliance at lower cost, with better informed & engaged staff, businesses & citizens

Linking Back Office Systems

By linking data gathered from the newsflash sign-up or from the business start-up tools to back office systems business records for regulatory services could be established and maintained. Regulatory Services would have earlier knowledge of business proposals and would be better able to provide appropriate and focused support. This should reduce workload, provide more accurate data, and improve customer perception of the services provided.

On-line Forms and Payments

On-line forms and payments will enable Businesses and Citizens to supply information, make applications for permits and licenses and to pay any charges on-line. This will lead to better engagement by customers through simplification of the process and increased availability of access.

This will also support compliance with the EU Services Directive for on-line access and payment facilities.

Staff Newsletter & Communications

Increasing numbers of staff are using mobile working. This means that they are out of the office for periods of time and not always able to attend briefings. The provision of a regulatory services staff news letter in a similar manner to the business newsflash will ensure staff are kept informed of changes regardless of location and have the ability to refer back to them later. The newsletter tools can have links to other documents for more comprehensive change and can track access to these documents. This will enable reminders to be automatically sent to those staff who have not yet read the changes. Provision of common information from a central source to all staff will promote common understanding and ways of working.

document.doc of 41


Activity Outline DescriptionCitizen Engagement

The YoHr Community Hub will promote the role of regulatory services or public protection to the region’s citizens through improved engagement by on-line access to details of business compliance and facilities to add their own (moderated) comments on inspection reports, or to provide their own reports on good or bad business service. Extended engagement by citizens will augment Regulatory Services risk assessment based regulation.

The publication of business compliance performance to citizens will provide further incentive for business to improve their levels of compliance beyond the minimum required by law.

The service will promote easier engagement between citizens & Regulatory Services through on-line contact and the use of a common region wide branding

10.2.5 New Ways of Working and Organisational Development - Across the region there is a wide variation in the organisation and delivery of regulatory services, and the tools to support them. This leads to confusion in business through different approaches and interpretations, difficulties in finding appropriate contact points and inefficiencies in procurement and duplication of effort. The ‘New Ways of Working’ work package aims to improve understanding of the current variations and to identify opportunities for saving through collaboration and improvements in working practise. It is made up of the work packages described in the table below:

Activity Outline DescriptionMapping current regional organisation and roles

This exercise will generate a map of the current organisation of regulatory services across the region. It will also identify key contact points for each type of service for each authority. This information will be used to help develop appropriate local information to support compliance by Businesses. It will also enable exploration of a number of possibilities for savings through collaborative working or procurement.

A regional analysis of current IT, applications & other equipment costs & utilisation

The analysis and follow-up discussion will provide the basis for the joint procurement opportunities report. There is evidence from another region that there is considerable potential for savings through improved utilisation of licenses and joint procurement with a view to joint procurement & sharing of best practise

Web 2.0 Accessibility

The YoHr Community Hub will make use of a range of social media and Web 2.0 tools to promote community identity and facilitate engagement. Many of these tools are currently barred from LA internet access to avoid misuse. Different tools are barred by different LAs. There is a need to agree a common set of applications that could be made available and policies and procedure for their use. Similarly the advent of the use of tools like blogging or twitter does not lie easily with traditional policies on public or external communication. Guidance is need here too to encourage appropriate content.

Cross Border Working

There may be some areas where benefit can be gained through allowing staff from one LA to work within the boundaries of a neighbouring LA. The aim of this task is to identify where areas for such working may exist and the benefits and barriers to achieving it

Analysis of potential benefits of using an external regulatory information source

Regulatory Officers and managers spend time in preparing revised documentation and procedures in response to government changes to regulation. This is repeated at each authority across the region. This task will look at the benefits of using an external source to provide revised procedures and standard forms, by comparing the external costs against the current Barnsley expenditure. The will then be used as an example for other authorities.

document.doc of 41


Activity Outline DescriptionOther initiatives around organisation and working practise

During the course of the programme other ideas for collaborative working will arise. They will be added to the programme where appropriate.

10.2.6 The work packages listed above will be in part delivered through active support from Local Authorities from across the Yorkshire and Humber region. These activities will be coordinated by the programme manager based at Barnsley MBC.

document.doc of 41


11 RISK AND ISSUE MANAGEMENT11.1 RISK & ISSUE MANAGEMENT11.1.1 The table below shows the set of risks and issues at the start of the programme. These risks are also contained in the risk register. The risk register will be managed and updated by the programme manager from information supplied by the work package managers and presented at the steering group meetings.

11.2 INITIAL PROGRAMME RISKS

RISK IMPACT(S) Likelihood Consequence

Risk Level RESPONSE

New & Mobile Ways of WorkingOffer of support not widely taken up

Reduced sharing of experienceReduced savings by LA’s 2 3 6

Effort will be put into promoting support sessions across the region to encourage greater take-up

Developments for “off line working” may be delayed

Use of mobile working will continue to be constrained in areas of poor or no connectivity leading to additional work.Benefit of mobile working is reduced

2 3 6

Development activity being managed and should be available early 2010

Government Connects requirements delay or hinder mobile working

Delays to the testing, installation or upgrade of applications on mobile devices. 1 4 4

In conjunction with third party suppliers we are challenging the interpretation of the “Government Connects” requirement by our IT Services partner. Outcomes will be shared across the region.

YoHr Regs Website & Knowledge BaseRestrictive policies by some LA’s on blogging and other Web 2.0/Social Media sites

Staff unable to engage with customers/citizens or each other using social mediaPoorer quality of serviceReduced potential savingsLack of common regional response

5 4 20

A region wide survey of existing Web 2.0 accessibility has been started. Once completed the results will be used to support the development and agreement of a common minimum policy, safeguards and guidance to enable appropriate use of blogs and information sharing tools.

Lack of take-up or commitment by some LA’s/teams

Poorer quality of serviceReduced potential savingsIncrease in costs to LA’s that do 3 3 9

Development of clear business benefits for proposed system and promotion across LA’s through the steering group and other approaches to

document.doc of 41



Risk Level RESPONSE

joinLack of common regional responseDelays to implementation

encourage take-up and support. Development of a scalable cost structure based as far as practical on the level of participation

Difficulty or unwillingness to link with back office systems

Increase risk of data entry errorIncreased cost and time for staff and businessesPoorer quality of serviceReduced potential savings

3 2 6

The system will be designed function without automated links. Progressive linking will bring progressive benefit. Cost benefit analysis will be conducted to establish the benefit of linking systems

Insufficient funding or resources to develop and demonstrate functionality

limited capability of system or delays to completion

2 3 6

Careful cost control and use/re-use of existing tools and data sources should minimise cost of development. Development will be staged to ensure completion and value from each stage. Support for individual work package development is being sort from LAs across the region. Additional funding being sought to address some of the supporting services

Lack of agreed approach to sustainability funding

long term viability of website/service threatened

2 3 6

The service will be designed such that the ongoing cost of delivery is scalable as far as possible, with the level of take-up. RIEP funding will allow clear demonstration of the approach & advantages

Partnership, Collaboration & Regional WorkingLack of willingness by LA’s to collaborate

The rate of progress and the level of benefit achieved will be reduced, costs may increase for those who do join in

2 3 6

Efforts are being made to encourage participation by all the regions LA’s through workshops and the steering group.The approach to the design of the systems will allow an incremental take-up

document.doc of 41



Risk Level RESPONSE

Lack of resources (people & funding) to support change in LA’s

The rate of progress and the level of benefit achieved will be reduced, costs may increase

3 3 9

To save cost the use of external resources has been minimised. There is some opportunity to utilise external resource to maintain progress if needed. Implementation support to other LAs will be provided though documentation and sharing of experience/lessons learned

Historical organisational boundaries between various element responsible for regulation

Quality of customer experience may be reduced, possible increase in costs or reduced savings, extended timescales

2 3 6

Efforts are being made to encourage participation by all the regions LA’s through workshops and the steering group. The approach to the design does not depend on cross functional collaboration

Inconsistencies between requirements at a government level

Full potential of benefits through joint working may not be realised customer perception of quality of service may be degraded

3 2 6

Conflicts or inefficiencies will be managed where ever possible by cooperation between organisations. Information on such issues will be collected and represented regionally to central government

General RisksRIEP funding may not be available post March 2010

Development & support may be curtailed

1 4 4

Major spend before March 2010, modular approach to development will allow stage breaks.Efforts to establish a long term sustainability model for aspect of the programme

document.doc of 41


11.3 RISK LEVEL ASSESSMENT11.3.1 The table below is used to set the values used in the risk table for the “Likelihood” and “Consequence” fields. These values are then multiplied together to give an overall risk level.

CONSEQUENCELIKELIHOOD INSIGNIFICANT MINOR MODERATE MAJOR CATASTROPHIC

1 2 3 4 5

ALMOST CERTAIN 5 10 15 20 255 (Green) (Amber) (Red) (Red) (Red)

LIKELY 4 8 12 16 204 (Green) (Amber) (Amber) (Red) (Red)

POSSIBLE 3 6 9 12 153 (Green) (Green) (Amber) (Amber) (Red)

UNLIKELY 2 4 6 8 102 (Green) (Green) (Green) (Amber) (Amber)

RARE 1 2 3 4 51 (Green) (Green) (Green) (Green) (Amber)

DESCRIPTOR 1 2 3 4 5Rare Unlikely Possible Likely Almost

Frequency Not expected to occur for years

Expected to occur at least

annually

Expected to occur at least

monthly

Expected to occur at least weekly

Expected to occur at least daily

Probability < 1% 1-5% 6-29% 21-50% > 50%

Will only occur exceptionally

Unlikely to occur

Reasonable chance of occurring

Likely to occur

More likely to occur than not

Overall Risk LevelLOW SIGNIFICANT HIGH(Green) (Amber) (Red)

document.doc of 41


12 GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS12.1 STEERING GROUP12.1.1 The Yorkshire & Humber Business Transformation Programme Steering Group performs the role of the Programme Board

12.1.2 The existing membership of the Steering Group consists of:

Chairman and Programme Lead – Ken Eastwood BMBC

Eleven regulatory services managers from local authorities across the Yorkshire and Humber region.

Representation from the regional Fire and Rescue services

LBRO

Business Manager BMBC Regulatory Services

12.1.3 The membership of the Steering Group will change to better represent the programme as the work evolves. Likely changes include representation on behalf of businesses and suppliers.

12.1.4 The Steering Group meets on a quarterly basis in a cycle timed to fit with the RIEP quarterly reporting.

12.1.5 The Steering Group receives progress reports and risk updates from the Yorkshire & Humber Business Transformation Programme Manager.

12.1.6 The Steering Group receives from the Programme Manager the draft quarterly RIEP Performance and Learning Reports for review and approval.

12.1.7 The Steering Group receives from the Programme Manager the draft quarterly RIEP financial Claim Form for review.

12.1.8 The Steering Group receives from the Programme Manager any Exception Reports for review and action.

12.1.9 The Steering Group receives from the BMBC Regulatory Services Business Manager an update report on the ReGS Mobile and Flexible Working project with particular reference to sharing and learning.

12.1.10 The Steering Group receives from the Programme Manager copies of other deliverable programme documentation for review and comment.

12.2 PROGRAMME MANAGER12.2.1 The Yorkshire & Humber Business Transformation Programme Programme Manager receives progress and risk reports from the Work Package Managers for review and agreement.

document.doc of 41


13 PROGRAMME ORGANISATION13.1.1 The initial structure for managing the programme is outlined in the diagram below. As the programme develops it is anticipated that the basic structure will remain as shown, but changes of individuals and responsibilities to reflect the programme demands may vary.

document.doc of 41


14 STAKEHOLDER REGISTER & COMMUNICATION PLAN14.1 SUMMARY14.1.1 The objective of the Communication Plan is to build an awareness and understanding of the Programme, and to gain support for its objectives by those involved or impacted by it.

14.1.2 The Stakeholder Register identifies all parties with an interest in the programme. The Communications Plan will set out the means and frequency of communication between the programme and its stakeholders as defined in the stakeholder register.

14.2 COMMUNICATION CHANNELS14.2.1 The delivery of communications to stakeholders will take a number of forms. The aim is to post communications to the programme and LAs on the Artemis Community Hub web site where ever possible. Not all stakeholders are able to access the site at this time due to LA access restrictions, so alternative means of communication will be used until this is possible.

14.2.2 Communication with businesses will primarily by email and the business part of the Community Hub web site. In order to collect business email address information, the web site and newsflashes will be promoted by regulatory staff and other means. Initially email addresses will be collected using paper forms and leaflets and entered manually.

14.2.3 Not all business users are able to access the internet or receive email. Where this is the case and the business postal address is available then Newsflashes and other information will be printed and sent by post. This will be an automated process. The aim will be to minimise the use of this channel whilst not excluding anyone.

14.2.4 Communication with the programme/project management, work package leaders and steering group members will be through the YoHr Blog with email as a fall back.

14.2.5 Documentation for RIEP will be emailed and posted to the YoHr blog where data protection and confidentiality allows

14.2.6 Other communication channels will include meetings, presentations, workshops and publications

14.3 STAKEHOLDER REGISTER14.3.1 The stakeholder register lists the programme stakeholders’ contact details, what they supply to the programme and/or their expectations of the programme.

14.3.2 The initial list of stakeholders includes:

Regional Improvement & Efficiencies Partnership (RIEP)

Programme Steering Group members

Programme Management team

Work Package Management teams

Local Authority and Port Authority Regulatory Services Managers

Local Authority and Port Authority Regulatory Services Staff

Regional Fire Services

Sub-regional EH and TS groups

Businesses across the Yorkshire and Humber region

The regions Citizens

document.doc of 41


Suppliers

LBRO, I&DEA and other government departments

14.4 COMMUNICATION PLAN14.4.1 The content and timing of many of the communications to businesses, citizens and staff will depend on the stage of development or regional deployment of a service. Each deployment for an individual or group of authority will need its own communication plan for the stakeholders impacted by the deployment.

14.4.2 For each communication the following is set out in the Stakeholder communication plan: -

Message/Purpose – the message that needs to be conveyed & the objective behind it

Content – the details contained in the message

Audience – for which Stakeholder(s) the message is intended

Channel – the vehicle through which the message is to be conveyed

Timing & Frequency – when and how often the message is to be conveyed

Sender – by whom the message is to be sent

Feedback Mechanism – the means by which stakeholders can provide feedback

14.4.3 Initial Plan - At this time only the routine programme management communications are planned. Once development and testing begins and the stakeholder register is completed a detailed plan will be developed.

document.doc of 41


15 PROGRAMME QUALITY PLAN15.1 RESPONSIBILITIES15.1.1 Over all responsibility for the programme quality compliance rests with the Steering group and Programme Lead.

15.1.2 The Project Manager is responsible for quality on a day to day basis and for the presentation of documents for approval by the Steering Group/Programme Lead

15.1.3 Where work packages are managed by other authorities, the Work Package Manager will ensure the quality standar5ds are followed.

15.2 PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT & ASSURANCE15.2.1 The programme will be managed by appropriate use of the Prince 2 methodology

15.2.2 Programme Assurance covers all interests of the Programme including business, user and supplier.

15.2.3 The following Programme Assurance responsibilities are the responsibility of the Programme Board:

Maintenance of thorough liaison throughout the Programme between all involved in its delivery

User needs and expectations are being met or managed

Risks are being identified and controlled

Adherence to the Business Case

Assessment and reassessment of value-for-money

Fit with the overall corporate strategy

The right people are being involved

An acceptable solution is being developed

The Programme remains viable

The scope of the Programme is not ‘creeping upwards’ unnoticed

Focus on the business need is maintained

Internal and external communications are working

Applicable standards are being use

Any legislative constraints are being observed

The needs of specialist interests (for example, Health and Safety) are being observed

Adherence to quality assurance standards

Any contractual arrangements have been properly entered into and are in accordance with Standing Orders and Financial Regulations

Robust arrangements exist to monitor and report on the costs of the Programme

15.3 ACCESSIBILITY15.3.1 Internal and External Web sites and tools shall comply with:

The eGIF standards

The AA and AAA accessibility standards

document.doc of 41


15.4 DATA PROTECTION15.4.1 The collection, storage and use of information relating to individuals or businesses shall comply with the requirements of The Data Protection Act 1998

15.5 SECURITY15.5.1 Interface between external systems and application shall comply with the Government Connects standards

15.5.2 Access to data and data management shall be through layered controlled access.

15.6 DOCUMENTATION15.6.1 Programme deliverable documentation shall be peer reviewed and authorised by the Steering Group (Programme Board) or Programme Lead as appropriate.

15.6.2 Documents must show a date and version number. The document file name shall include the update or creation date and version number and shall be part of the document footer.

15.7 TESTING & ACCEPTANCE15.7.1 Requirements documents will be drafted for each area of delivery. These documents will be peer reviewed and where appropriate authorised by the Programme Board.

15.7.2 The requirement documents will be used as the basis for acceptance testing of the deliverable. An acceptance test report shall be produced defining what tests were carried out and their results. It will also document any exceptions.

document.doc of 41


16 PROGRAMME FILING16.1 GENERAL16.1.1 All programme documents will have the authors name and contact detail along with a version date and number.

16.1.2 All project documents will have their file name in the footer of the document. The file name shall include a date and version number in the format filename YYMMDD.V.XXX where YY is the year, MM is the month, DD is the day and V is the version number for that day e.g. 091201.2.XXX for the second version created on the 1st of December 2009.

16.1.3 To enable searching for documents, all documents should have appropriate Meta data

16.2 YOHR REGS FILING16.2.1 The programme documentation will be initially filed at Barnsley on the council office network. Once its deployment is complete, records will be transferred to the Hyperwave document management system for archive and retrieval.

16.2.2 Programme output documents that do not contain confidential or personal information will additionally be filed on-line, initially on the YoHr Regs blog site and subsequently moved to the searchable Artemis community hub knowledge base. Documents with confidential or personal information may be made available on-line later with appropriate access controls.

16.3 REGS PROJECT FILING16.3.1 The project documentation will be initially filed at Barnsley on the council office network. Once it’s deployment is complete, records will be transferred to the Hyperwave document management system for archive and retrieval.

16.3.2 ReGS Project output documents that do not contain confidential or personal information will additionally be filled on-line in the ReGS Project library on the YoHr Regs blog site and subsequently moved to the searchable Artemis community hub knowledge base. Documents with confidential or personal information may be made available on-line later with appropriate access controls.

document.doc of 41


17 GLOSSARY

# Item Explanation

1 RIEP Regional Improvement & Efficiencies Partnership

2 LA (LAs) Local Authority (Local Authorities)

3 EH Environmental Health

4 TS Trading Standards

5 PID Programme Initiation Document

6 YoHr The Yorkshire & Humber Region also used as a brand identity

7 REP Retail Enforcement Pilot

8 SRO Senior Responsible Officer

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

document.doc of 41

YoHr Regs Project Initiation Document€¦ · Web view# Title Format Description Due Date...

Documents

Transcript of YoHr Regs Project Initiation Document€¦ · Web view# Title Format Description Due Date...