Simply Change and Interim Group Director Modernisation and Digital (FOI)

Request

Simply Change and Interim Group Director Modernisation & Digital: 

With the recent immediate move of Modernisation & Digitals Head of Technology into the role of Interim Group Director of Modernisation Digital, and with reference to a previous FoI on the Head of Technology who is on a fixed term contract until 31/12/22, outlined in Response “D” of the following FoI request:  

Modernisation and Digital Head of Technology Post (FOI)

There are questions regarding whether an interim position who has moved inside the confines of a fixed term contract into another roles has the ability as an interim to offer “Direct Award” work.

As the engagement with Simply Change is also coming to an end (per Engagement 5 31/12/22), any re-engagement (if this is occurring), potentially would be in the hands of an “interim” that could be signing off against any further work. As per the FoI below, no information was released regarding Conflict of Interest outlined in Response “K”.   There may be a conflict of interest this time if work is directly awarded due to previous working relationships between the new Group Director of Modernisation & Digital and Simply Change.

Simply Change engagement (FOI)

It was noted that the “Interim” Head of Technology post was sanctioned by several parties including the Chief Operating Officer, per Response “B Part V” in the following FoI response, prior to moving into the “contracted” Head of Technology role, and now “Interim Group Director Role”:

Modernisation and Digital – Head of Technology Post (FOI)

Additionally, the Review, value and benefit delivery\performance of Simply Change outlined in the below FoI Responses “J” and “K” rests with the Governance & Compliance Manager (assumed to be either in M&D or COO) with ultimate accountability to the Chief Operating Officer.

Simply Change engagements (FOI) 

Whilst both Compliance Manager and “Consultant” have worked with the new “Interim Group Director” in the last few years as colleagues on a presumed Leadership Team level, and when the overseeing Accountable Officer “is” the Chief Operating Officer who sanctioned appointment of the now Interim Group Director when they were in previous roles, there is concern regarding a real lack of objectivity and political oversight. As such, it would place the Governance and Compliance Manager in that role with an impossible task to judge performance and desired outcomes of their hierarchy with the required transparency and independence which thus far appears to have been missing.

With this in mind:

A

In scenarios where multiple parties of a senior nature are reviewing performance and considering awarding of work, how is conflict such as above managed where interim or temporary staff are potentially awarding work to other temporary or consultancy staff?

B

What external validation is undertaken if a Governance and Compliance role is subject to bias when executing value\benefit\performance review due to prior working relationships with multiple parties on the same level and senior influence in the outcome from their direct hierarchy, who in this case could have been previously been on the same level as them?

C

Is there political oversight of these decisions and which political member of the States provides this?

D

What audits have taken place regarding M&D direct awards and what audits are planned in 2023 to review this perceived conflict and lack of transparency?

E

With the Simply Change contract expiring on 31/12/22, has a new “Direct Award” been issued for engagements after this?

F

If so, how long does this “Award” last for?

G

What is the contract value?

H

What day rate is the party on? (range is acceptable to protect Simply Change's Commercial interest)?

I

If the “Interim Group Director of Modernisation & Digital” or the “Chief Operating Officer” has made this award, have they made declarations of interest due the past 3 years of working with Simply Change?

J

Both the interim Group Director of Modernisation & Digital are not from Jersey and presumably do not have housing qualifications, so it is reasonable to assume they have been claiming accommodation expenses.  Please provide the details of the expenses claimed and nature of the accommodation - hotel, house, etc for both parties for the past 3 years broken down by year and venue.

K

If this is not a “Direct Award” is Simply Change part of the recent Professional Services Framework?

L

Has work been taken out to tender for other companies if this is the case in Question K?

M

Or If work has been issued under the Professional Services Framework to Simply Change what is the length\engagements to be?

N

Simply Change are a company, who have been brought in on several back-to-back direct awards as evidenced on previous FoIs above.  Whilst working on these engagements, have any of their staff, directors, associates, etc been provided to or worked on projects, programmes and change initiatives in departments outside of the COO which have then been charged or re-charged for time and expenses?

O

If yes, which departments and initiatives have also paid money to Simply Change?

There is concern here that other departments outside of the COO and beyond the accountability of Chief Operating Officer, John Quinn, where NOT made aware of the nature of the direct awards, and therefore, not aware that their accounting officers could inadvertently be in breach of the public finance manual, procurement rules and other codes of conduct.

P

Is there going to be clarity provided by M&D (or procurement Commercial Services) in future, when they source a Change, project or programme manager on the department’s behalf as to the details, controls and oversights of the procurement process and method of any award and provision of any contract, disclosures, etc?

Q

Have procurement / commercial services, noted to also be under the authority of John Quinn, made any changes to address the issue raised above in P to ensure all suppliers operate on a level playing field?

R

Same question as Q but for any of the points raised above or as part of the previous FoIs and if so, what assurance can be provided to taxpayers and other local companies that rules will be followed and leaders held to account when these are broken?

Response

A

Financial and commercial decisions are not taken by individuals who are not employed by the Government of Jersey and as such there are never instances where contractors award work to other contractors.

B

Governance and Compliance roles are subject to the same level of scrutiny and requirement to comply with organisational policies and procedures as other roles in the organisation. 

C

The Assistant Chief Minister responsible for Digital provides oversight.

D

As part of the annual governance statement process, Internal Audit are provided with details of exemptions and breaches to the Public Finances Manual.  

E

There has been no ‘Direct Award’ made for contracts after 31 December 2022.

F, G and H

Please see response to E.

I

There has been no award made.

J

The post of Group Director – Modernisation and Digital has been occupied by individuals who are entitled or entitled to work, or who have been awarded a licence when in post.  Accordingly, there have been no accommodation expenses claimed.  

K, L and M

There has been no award made.

N

There have been no charges or re-charges of time or expenses outside of COO for Simply Change resources.

O

Please see response to N above. 

P

All procurements are conducted in line with the Public Finances manual – for clarity please see the following link: 

Public Finances Manual (gov.je) 

Q

All procurements are conducted in line with the Public Finances manual – for clarity please see the following link: 

Public Finances Manual (gov.je)

Commercial Services are now part of Treasury and Exchequer.   

R

Please see the response for Q above.