Integrated Technology Solution (ITS) use of consultants (FOI)

Request 

With the Integrated Technology Solution (ITS) currently scheduled to go live in January 2023 (with significant cost increase £27 million to ~£70 million as reported in the press), the relative success of this impending project is still yet to be realized as a result of delays.  It is of interest in advance to establish who had relevant roles in the lead up to go-live, to date, and where they were sourced from if externally provided.

A

Who is the Senior Responsible (or accountable) Officer for the ITS Project with overall Accountability for successful delivery of the project (on time, on budget and to agreed specification)?

B

What is the total forecast expenditure for this programme and when is it scheduled to be completed

C

What is the total anticipated tangible saving that the ITS will deliver (broken down by year of delivery)

D

Which role sits beneath this Senior Responsible Officer for actual delivery \ execution of the programme?  In rough terms it is estimated to be something like a Project or Programme Director for the ITS Project?   

E

Please provide a Job Description for this role

F

If a Job description does not exist mentioned above, please confirm why not and provide a list of responsibilities of that role which one would expect to be documented in the terms of reference or other governance document

G

For the role in Question D, From 2019 until the scheduled "go live",  from which Directorates or Departments inside the States of Jersey has this post  been fulfilled?  If indeed it has been fulfilled by a full time (FTE) member of staff. The answer broken down as:   Period of time - Supplying Department

H

For the role in Question D, if periods of time between 2019 until the scheduled "go live" were filled by, Contractors, Consultants, or forms of labour other than a Full Time States of Jersey Employee (FTE).   Please can the type of relationship for each corresponding period be identified along with the supplier's name.   The answer broken down as:  Period of time - Method of Engagement - Supplying Company - Local or UK or other(specified) jurisdiction.

I

Please provide which of these companies / suppliers were NOT subject to a competitive tender process or part of an existing framework at the time of engagement and which role signed off the engagement

J

What measures are in place for non-performance by those mentioned in D, for example, overspend, missed timescales, off specification, de-scope, etc which they are responsible for? For clarity, are there financial or other types of penalties that will be incurred attached to the deliverables of the programme. The concern here is that a delay simply results in more day rate being paid (so extended timescales would appear to be in their commercial interest) whereas SoJ staff being used would potentially be subject to disciplinary (gross misconduct with public finance) / performance review measures etc. Assurance is sought that public finances are effectively being managed on ITS and evidence is requested to demonstrate that. 

K

Provide a list of the day rates for each of the entities mentioned in question D.  Banded rate is fine (e.g., £500 to £600, £600 to £700, etc., to preserve commercial interest. 

L

Provide the actual highest and lowest day rate 

M

Provide the total cost of supplier / contractor (question D) used to manage the ITS programme broken down by year and by company

N

Please confirm if the programme director has budget responsibility and influence on budget spend?

O

Please confirm which of these programme directors or equivalent have other staff or contractors associate with the company they work for working with them on this project / programme? 

P

Please confirm if the programme directors are involved in the decision to sub contract work, and if sub-contracting goes through a competitive tender process?

Q

Please provide a list of subcontracted companies / suppliers as part of the ITS programme and which role signed off each engagement and when this occurred

The management of public finance and the outcome of change programmes is of significant public interest and as such programmes need to be conducted in an open and transparent way and ensure the delivery of value for money and successful outcomes.

Response

A

 The Chief Operating Officer. 

B

The Programme is due to complete December 2023 with iterative releases during this time. £64.3 million has been approved. 

C

The total anticipated direct savings up to 2026 as set out in the 2021 business case were £4.42 million. A breakdown of these savings is outlined in the table below where all figures are stated in millions.  

D

 Programme Director. 

E

Please see attached Job Description. 

F

Not applicable. 

G

The Chief Operating Office.  

 H

A one-month period during October 2021 where Simply Change were under an existing Government of Jersey Contract for Services supporting the programme.   

There was no additional charge to the Government of Jersey for the work conducted when performing this role.  

All other periods were filled by GoJ Employees.   

I

Information is publicly available on www.gov.je in response to a previous Freedom of Information request. Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. Please see response to F, relating to the contract award process. 

Simply Change engagement (FOI (gov.je)  

J

Non-performance of Government of Jersey Employees is governed by the Government of Jersey Capability Policy.

In respect of the contractor, this only relates to one month and was governed by the existing contract for services with the contractor and was not extended. 

K

With the exception of October 2021, the post was occupied by a salaried employee, not on a day rate.  

Information in relation to the contracted service is publicly available on www.gov.je in response to a previous Freedom of Information request. Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. Please see response to B, relating to the engagements with Simply Change. The contract is structured for service provision rather than day rates of specified resources. Please see Response B, relating to the engagements with Simply Change. The contract is structured for service provision rather than day rates of specified resources. 

Simply Change engagement (FOI (gov.je)  

L

As detailed above. The contract with Simply Change is not structured on 'day rates' or single engagements and to break down the costs per day would require manual manipulation to create the information.  Therefore, Article 3 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 applies.  

A Scheduled Public Authority (SPA) is not required to manipulate and create new data sets, but to provide the requester with information the SPA holds which has been specifically requested. 

M

It is not possible to provide an accurate response to this question as the work conducted was supplied under an existing Government of Jersey contract for services to which there was no additional charge while performing the role.  

Details of this work is publicly available in the Proposition 59 report on use of consultants via the States Assembly website. Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. Please refer to page 18 'ITS Programme Management Services' 

Proposition 59 Report on Consultants (statesassembly.gov.je)  

N

The ITS Programme has a defined Governance Framework and Programme Boards. All decisions are made in accordance with the Terms of Reference and delegated authority levels of these Boards upon which the Programme Director is a member. 

O

None 

 P

Not directly involved. Any third-party contracts and therefore sub-contract resource is procured in accordance with the Public Finance Manual. 

Q

Please refer to response P in that all engagements are in accordance with the Public Finance Manual.  

Information is publicly available in the Proposition 59 report on use of consultants via the States Assembly website for the period January – June 2021. Article 23 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 has been applied. Please refer to table 2.2 and 4.3 outline the details of subcontracted suppliers and individuals as part of the ITS Programme. 

Proposition 59 Report on Consultants (statesassembly.gov.je) 

Information in relation to expenditure for the period July – December 2021 is exempt from release under Article 36 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 as a report detailing such expenditure is intended for future publication. This report will be made available on the www.statesassembly.gov.je website within 12 weeks of the date of the request. 

For the period covering January 2022 – present, to collate this data would exceed the cost limit provisions allowed under Article 16 of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011 and the 12.5 hours limit allowed under regulation 2 (1) of the Freedom of Information (Costs) (Jersey) Regulations 2014. This information will be released during the first half of 2023. 

Articles applied 

Article 3 - Meaning of "information held by a public authority"

For the purposes of this Law, information is held by a public authority if –

(a) it is held by the authority, otherwise than on behalf of another person; or

(b) it is held by another person on behalf of the authority. 

Article 16 - A scheduled public authority may refuse to supply information if cost excessive 

(1) A scheduled public authority that has been requested to supply information may refuse to supply the information if it estimates that the cost of doing so would exceed an amount determined in the manner prescribed by Regulations.

(2) Despite paragraph (1), a scheduled public authority may still supply the information requested on payment to it of a fee determined by the authority in the manner prescribed by Regulations for the purposes of this Article.

(3) Regulations may provide that, in such circumstances as the Regulations prescribe, if two or more requests for information are made to a scheduled public authority –

(a) by one person; or

(b) by different persons who appear to the scheduled public authority to be acting in concert or in pursuance of a campaign, the estimated cost of complying with any of the requests is to be taken to be the estimated total cost of complying with all of them.

Article 23 - Information accessible to applicant by other means

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it is reasonably available to the applicant, otherwise than under this Law, whether or not free of charge.

(2) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant where the applicant may obtain the information.

Article 36 - Information intended for future publication

(1) Information is qualified exempt information if, at the time when the request for the information is made, the information is being held by a public authority with a view to its being published within 12 weeks of the date of the request.

(2) A scheduled public authority that refuses an application for information on this ground must make reasonable efforts to inform the applicant –

(a) of the date when the information will be published;

(b) of the manner in which it will be published; and

(c) by whom it will be published.

(3) In this Article, "published" means published –

(a) by a public authority; or

(b) by any other person.

Public Interest Test 

Article 36 is a qualified exemption, which means that a public interest test has to be undertaken to examine the circumstances of the case and decide whether, on balance, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information. 

• Public interest considerations favouring disclosure of the information would support transparency and promote accountability to the general public.
• Public interest considerations favouring withholding the information 

It is intended to publish the report within 12 weeks of the receipt of this request on www.gov.je. In it is reasonable for government to publish reports in an orderly manner, following completion of appropriate internal processes, and publishing in advance, and in such close proximity to expected publication date, would potentially undermine the orderly publication and conduct of government work (when the public benefit of earlier publication under the Law would derive limited benefit).