Service Management Design for HMPPS Electronic Monitoring Programme

Tender description

Summary of the work Production of design artefacts (organisation models, functional processes, governance processes, service management tools specifications, performance management system) and validation of IT Service Management designs proposed by underlying suppliers, ensuring they are fit for purpose and create a coherent solution suitable for supporting the end to end aims of the MoJ. Expected Contract Length Initial term up to December 2018, with Contract allowing for extension up to a full 24 months. Latest start date Monday 25 September 2017 Why the Work is Being Done The Authority is working with 4 suppliers to deliver an integrated solution for the provision of Electronic Monitoring of offenders in England and Wales. As well as transitioning from legacy RF devices the programme will deliver new GPS devices for location monitoring. Responsibility for IT Service Management is distributed between the different suppliers with additional oversight and end to end governance owned by the Authority. IT Service Management Design resource is being mobilised to define the end to end service management model and manage the production of service management designs, processes and other artefacts. Problem to Be Solved For IT Service Management, the Design team needs to; - Ensure that there is a cohesive and optimised model for IT Service Management, - Assure the service management functions being established by the suppliers, - Assure the plans for establishing a central service desk, - Define the processes to be managed by the Authority, and - Aid the Authority's operations team in mobilising a managed IT Service Management function for managing the ongoing live IT systems. Who Are the Users The goal of the programme is to : - Replace the existing curfew tag provision with current technology which can support equivalent services at reduced costs. - Introduce new GPS monitoring capability to improve range of subject monitoring and drive greater efficiency and effectiveness. - Introduce a new case management system and portal that is accessible to business users. - Build a robust and scalable operational service that is able to accommodate other tags and types of electronic monitoring in the future. - Optimise benefits to be derived from the four selected suppliers as well as from the collective whole. Work Already Done The project is already at a stage where the EM operating model and business requirements have been defined and the infrastructure and applications are partly delivered. An amount of change is being managed to accommodate recent changes to the suppliers and some new business requirements. Extensive testing will be initiated and in the meantime the service management functions will be set up. Existing Team Service Management Design will reside within the Design Function - a small team comprising of technical, business and security architects and analysts performing both a design and design assurance function - whose responsibility it is to define technology and business architecture, assure deliverables from Lot suppliers, govern design activities across the programme, and ensure the combined offerings form a high quality, integrated solution which meets needs and expectations of the MoJ. The Design team will also work closely with other functions such as standards and assurance, implementation management, commercial, business change and PMO. Current Phase Not applicable Skills & Experience • Have demonstratable experience providing both IT Service Architecture and Service Design services. • Have the ability to provide personnel with extensive experience in IT Service Design. • Have excellent knowledge of and experience in adopting industry best practice ITIL processes. • Have strong, practical experience of IT Service Management tool suites (such as Service Now and Remedy) • Have demonstrable experience of designing Service Management systems and processes in large Government departments or other large organisations. • Have the ability to provide personnel with operational IT Service Management experience. • Have demonstrable experience of providing or managing outsourced Service Management services in a multi-supplier environment. • Have experience in developing, implementing and testing BCDR plans. • Have experience of developing and negotiating SLAs and OLAs. • Have familiarity with relevant national and international legislation pertaining to the Government/Public Sector IT – e.g. Data Protection Act, Information Assurance policy. • Have experience in the development and maintenance of mapping of complex business processes • Have proven ability to manage and lead 3rd party suppliers. • Have proven ability in building and maintaining strong positive relationships with Stakeholders to understand short, medium and long term needs. • Be skilled and experienced in the creation of high-level Solution Designs and Business Impact Assessments • Have a broad IT background, with exposure to applications, infrastructure, and call centre environments. Work Location 102 Petty France, London Working Arrangments We require personnel reside within the MoJ offices, with flexibility for remote working, whether that be on the suppliers' premises or elsewhere. Security Clearance SC Clearance No. of Suppliers to Evaluate 3 Proposal Criteria • Complete and send, by 9am 6th September, the following document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10h-UOvoasPYBih24ql15DsHBhmnCY1k_QPfrwG0bd_E/edit?usp=sharing • The suggested immediate solution, and how it meets the Programme's needs. • The ability to efficiently respond to flexes in the Programme's needs. • Value for Money. • The ability to maintain quality and speed of delivery. • The suggested approach for ensuring knowledge transfer is conducted. Cultural Fit Criteria • Rapidly learn and adapt to changing technologies, policies and business drivers. • Work within challenging time frames and levels of uncertainty to deliver fit for purpose solutions. • Able to work in a multi-supplier environment. • Strong interpersonal, written and verbal communication skills. • Ability to interact effectively with business and technical staff. • Skilled in dealing with challenging stakeholders. • Ability to establish close working relationships with other MoJ teams and the EM suppliers. Payment Approach Capped time and materials Evaluation Weighting Technical competence 60% Cultural fit 20% Price 20% Questions from Suppliers 1. Are you looking for a single Service Architect for this role or a team to deliver services? We expect we'll require 2 Service Designers/Architects initially, with the likely need to expand the team size as we progress through the Contract. 2. Sift & Evaluation guideline document https://docs.google.com/document/d/192wYCVGhK33PgZT7chVvQ9szZkjn6dQSXeD_p7n_UUE/edit?usp=sharing 3. Will the requirement be deemed inside or outside IR35? We will make this assessment during the evaluation stage. 4. Good morning, Thank you for providing the proposal document that needs to be completed and returned on 6th September. The evaluation guidelines you have provided include criteria relating to the initial team and to price; please can you advise how we submit that information as it is not explicitly requested in the proposal document? Many thanks (1 of 2) The proposal document provided (https://docs.google.com/document/d/10h-UOvoasPYBih24ql15DsHBhmnCY1k_QPfrwG0bd_E/edit) is intended as the first step of evaluation, and focuses mainly on expanding the responses provided in the skills & evidence stage. We have chosen to refine the Shortlist, at this stage, by technical competence only. This refined Shortlist will then be invited to present their full proposal, in the form of a presentation session, which should include both price and cultural fit elements not previously evaluated. (1 of 2) 5. Good morning, Thank you for providing the proposal document that needs to be completed and returned on 6th September. The evaluation guidelines you have provided include criteria relating to the initial team and to price; please can you advise how we submit that information as it is not explicitly requested in the proposal document? Many thanks (2 of 2) We will not be specifying the format of your full proposal, but are happy to suggest that previously, a slide deck presentation with a supporting document with further detail have worked well. As outlined in the guideline document (https://docs.google.com/document/d/192wYCVGhK33PgZT7chVvQ9szZkjn6dQSXeD_p7n_UUE/edit) we will be scoring the price element over four criteria; Service Designer day rate, wider rate card, Supplier mark up, and Supplier mark up for customer referrals, and scoring the 'initial team' based on availability, structure, and experience and capability. (2 of 2) 6. Please confirm the project start date. The DOS web site states 25th September, but the sift guidelines document states 25th November. Many thanks. Apologies, the sift guideline document was incorrect. It's now been updated. We have published a guideline start date of 25th of September as we require work to begin as soon as possible, but are happy to discuss flexibility of start date during evaluation. 7. What are the expectations on managing the transition to the new service? The transition plans are currently being developed and whoever takes on the role would be expected to contribute in the production of the plans. Naturally there will be challenges but of the sort you would expect rather than there being any particular complications. 8. Are there elements of the current service that are required to be retained? Some of the processes will be retained but there will be new CRM, new data centre, new electronic monitoring devices and IT infrastructure, new organisational responsibilities and suppliers. 9. Will managing the Exit of the current suppliers be required as part of this service? A transition will be required, but the old and the new will be run in parallel for a while until a stepwise transfer is complete. Once complete, the final decommissioning and exit is out of scope. 10. In the proposal document, question 3 refers to "Service Management Systems". Please can you clarify is this means a Service management tooling suite e.g. Remedy, service-now etc, or the wider encompassing Service Management System (Planning, Strategies, Policies, people, process)? Yes we are just talking about the service management tooling suite (e.g. ServiceNow) and event management tools. 11. Do we know what the application will be and when is it due to be available? If the question is related to the ITSM application, it will be ServiceNow or Remedy, and will be available before the end of the year. 12. Hello. We assume that you will have a team of people who will evaluate responses. Please advise - will that team evaluate all of the responses to all of the questions? Or will you be assigning certain responses to certain team members for evaluation and other responses to others? This may seem to be an irrelevant question. But it is important because there are certain points that we would like to make which we would like all of your evaluators to know. Your answer will affect how we structure our replies. Thanks We have a panel of three members of the business who will be reviewing all elements of all supplier responses in regards to the technical and cultural fit. We have two separate evaluators who will review and score the commercial aspect. 13. Can you elaborate on how you will evaluate the pricing information, specifically the 'supplier markup' and 'markup for referrals made by the Customer' referenced in the Sift Evaluation Guidelines? It's our understanding that suppliers are bound by the DOS rate cards submitted during the framework application process so the rates are fixed irrespective of markups. How will the Authority evaluate and score suppliers on this information? (1 of 2) It's our understanding that when applying to the framework, suppliers provided a rate card that caps the day rate of each type of specialist/role they can provide. When submitting candidates, their day rates may differ, but not exceed the cap. We are also of the understanding there is no fixed mark up percentage, or any mark up control within the framework. Please also be aware that the rate cards you've submitted are not available to us as a Customer. (1 of 2) 14. Can you elaborate on how you will evaluate the pricing information, specifically the 'supplier markup' and 'markup for referrals made by the Customer' referenced in the Sift Evaluation Guidelines? It's our understanding that suppliers are bound by the DOS rate cards submitted during the framework application process so the rates are fixed irrespective of markups. How will the Authority evaluate and score suppliers on this information? (2 of 2) Therefore, although you must adhere to the rate card submitted during the application process, there is an allowance for more flexibility in terms of rates within DOS than other frameworks, eg G Cloud. Given this, that we do not have access to your capped rate card, and that there is no clear control around mark ups, we would like visibility of both. We have also differentiated between standard mark up and referral mark up, as we feel this is an area of potential saving. I've contacted CCS for clarification/guidance on this topic and will share their response. (2 of 2)