HM Revenue & CustoMs
ASPIRE – the re-competition of
outsourced IT services
REPORT BY THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL | HC 938 Session 2005-2006 | 19 July 2006
The National Audit Office scrutinises
public spending on behalf of
Parliament. The Comptroller and
Auditor General, Sir John Bourn, is
an Officer of the House of Commons.
He is the head of the National Audit
Office, which employs some 850 staff.
He, and the National Audit Office, are
totally independent of Government.
He certifies the accounts of all
Government departments and a wide
range of other public sector bodies;
and he has statutory authority to report
to Parliament on the economy,
efficiency and effectiveness with
which departments and other bodies
have used their resources. Our work
saves the taxpayer millions of pounds
every year. At least £8 for every
£1 spent running the Office.
HM Revenue & CustoMs
ASPIRE – the re-competition of
outsourced IT services
Ordered by the
LONDON: The Stationery Office
House of Commons
£11.25
to be printed on 17 July 2006
REPORT BY THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL | HC 938 Session 2005-2006 | 19 July 2006
contents
exeCutive suMMARy
1
PARt 1
This report has been prepared under
The procurement
12
Section 6 of the National Audit Act 1983
for presentation to the House of Commons
The need for new IT contracts
13
in accordance with Section 9 of the Act.
Preparing for a new contract
15
John Bourn
Contracting options
15
Comptroller and Auditor General
Encouraging competition
16
National Audit Office
26 June 2006
Bid evaluation
16
The ASPIRE contract
18
The National Audit Office
The Department’s management of the
20
study team consisted of:
procurement process
Leena Mathew, Stephen Callow and
Nick Lacy, under the direction of
PARt 2
Jane Wheeler
The transition
22
Managing the risks in changing supplier
23
This report can be found on the National
Audit Office web site at www.nao.org.uk
The transition timescale
24
Transition costs
25
For further information about the
National Audit Office please contact:
The transition’s impact on services
26
National Audit Office
The transition of NIRS2
27
Press Office
157-197 Buckingham Palace Road
Victoria
London
SW1W 9SP
Tel: 020 7798 7400
Email: [email address]
© National Audit Office 2006
PARt 3
APPendiCes
Management of the contract
28
1 Study scope and methodology
44
Initial performance
29
2 Recommendations from the Committee of
45
The delivery of business-critical projects
29
Public Accounts
Cost of ASPIRE
32
3 Office of Government Commerce guidance
47
for re-competitions
Acting as an intelligent customer
34
4 Lessons learnt from the EDS ‘Eagle’ contract
48
Evaluation of supplier and contract performance
35
and the Accenture NIRS2 contract
Renegotiating ASPIRE to take on the former
36
5 The risks of transition and the early stages
50
HM Customs and Excise’s PFI IT contract
of ASPIRE
PARt 4
6 Lessons from ASPIRE
52
Lessons from ASPIRE
38
7 Diagram of the interrelation of the main
54
parties in ASPIRE
1 Preparing for the end of existing contracts
40
8 The NIRS2 transition
55
2 Aligning the new contract to business needs
40
3 Creating competition
41
4 Managing the transition
42
5 Maintaining service delivery during
42
the transition
Photographs courtesy of Alamy.com and Getty Images
executive summary
exeCutive suMMARy
executive summary
1
In January 2004 the Inland Revenue, now
3
This report examines how well HM Revenue and
HM Revenue and Customs,1 entered into a contract
Customs handled the procurement and the subsequent
with Capgemini to provide IT services to support the
transition to a new contract and supplier. It covers:
Department’s business. The strategic outsourcing contract,
known as ASPIRE (Acquiring Strategic Partners for the
n
the procurement: whether the Department took
appropriate steps to choose the right option to meet
Inland Revenue), replaced the Department’s previous
its IT needs and get value for money (Part 1);
contracts with EDS for IT services and with Accenture for
the National Insurance Recording System (NIRS2). The
n
the transition: the Department’s management of the
ASPIRE contract, which came into operation in July 2004,
transition from one supplier to another (Part 2); and
is worth between £3 billion and £4 billion over a ten year
n
initial performance: the Department’s management
term, with an option to extend for up to eight more years.
of ASPIRE and how the contract is dealing with
The Department embarked on the competition, having
changing requirements (Part 3).
evaluated various options for providing its IT services
including whether to extend the existing contracts. It
4
Our study methodology is at Appendix 1. It
concluded that its requirements could best be met by
included interviews with the main project team, bidders
a strategic partnership with co-partnering with a single
and suppliers; review of the contract and procurement
supplier having overall accountability for IT delivery.
documents and of the process used to test the financial
model for the contract; comparisons of ASPIRE with
2
ASPIRE is crucial for the Department in meeting its
other contracts in the UK and overseas; benchmarking of
objectives. The Department serves 29.5 million taxpayers,
contract profit margins, and advisers’ and procurement
around two million employers and one million companies,
costs, and case examples of business-critical projects
as well as 70 million accounts in the national insurance
to examine the effects of changing supplier on projects
system. It employs 95,000 full time equivalent staff across
spanning the transition. With effect from 1 April 2006 the
around 600 offices and in 2005-06 collected almost
Department extended the ASPIRE contract to include the
£400 billion in receipts. The Department is responsible
services previously provided by Fujitsu under the former
for collecting the bulk of tax revenue as well as paying tax
HM Customs and Excise IT PFI contract together with
credits, policing the national minimum wage, collecting
other former ‘in-house’ IT services. While this report
student loan repayments as well as strengthening the
refers to the change in the contract it does not evaluate
UK’s frontiers. During 2005, the Department’s IT systems
the value for money of the revised contract.
issued 16.5 million income tax self assessment statements,
1.4 million corporation tax notices to file, six million
personal pension statements to employers and processed
9.7 million annual tax codings reviews.
1
Until April 2005, responsibility for ASPIRE was vested in the Inland Revenue. Under the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005 HM Revenue
and Customs assumed the functions previously vested in the Inland Revenue and HM Customs and Excise. In this report, references to HM Revenue and
Customs, or the Department, cover both the functions of the Inland Revenue up to 18 April 2005 and the new HM Revenue and Customs.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
1
executive summary
Main conclusions
8
Contributing to bidders’ costs and the costs of
transition to encourage and maintain sufficient competition
5
The Department was successful in completing
during the procurement was an essential step to achieving
the first major re-competition of a large public sector
value for money in this deal. Compared to the total
IT contract. As the Department’s IT services had been
value of the ASPIRE contract the costs of procurement
already outsourced there was no public sector comparator
and transition totalling £75 million were small – some
available. It was concerned that potential competitors
two per cent of the projected value of the contract. The
might perceive EDS to be a strong incumbent that could
Department estimated that transition costs would be
not be easily displaced. But the Department secured
in the range of £30 million to £50 million. The actual
competition for the £3 billion ASPIRE contract which
transition costs were £37.6 million paid to Capgemini
meets its IT needs, and completed the transfer from
and £5.7 million paid to EDS and Accenture as the
one supplier to another without a loss in service to the
incumbent suppliers. There remains a question whether
Department’s customers.
the Department needed to pay this much. Although the
Department was in new territory, it might have obtained
6
It is the usual practice when purchasing goods and
better value for money from this spending by maximising
services for the bidders to meet their own costs and to
the benefits from its contribution to the cost of bidders’
pay the costs involved in taking over the position from
design and implementation studies and from tighter control
the previous supplier. It is not usual practice for the
over the transition costs. The actual transition costs were
purchaser to create the competition by contributing to
negotiated after the contract was awarded and included
firms’ costs of bidding, paying the winner’s costs in taking
a profit margin of 15.5 per cent for Capgemini. One
over from the existing supplier, discounting the transition
lesson is to negotiate the terms on which transition costs
costs for the purposes of comparing bids and paying the
are to be paid while the procurement is still underway to
incumbent supplier to effect the transfer. The payment
benefit from the competitive tension. The Department also
of such costs is not unknown, and the Committee of
incurred an extra £2 million on the delayed transition of
Public Accounts outlined the circumstances in which
NIRS2 which did not run according to plan. Further lessons
this could be advantageous namely to avoid such costs
are to secure the intellectual property rights to use the IT
being incorporated, with a mark up, in higher charges,
system after the contract ends and require the incumbent
and to encourage bids.2 In the case of ASPIRE the
supplier to share information with bidders, and to ensure
premium paid by the Department to secure a competition
the contractor bears its own cost overruns.
was £8.6 million in contributions to bidding costs, and
£43.3 million in paying for contractors’ transition costs.
9
The new supplier has provided IT services from
day one of the contract, meeting or exceeding target
7
There was justification in this case for using
service levels. Since transition there have been some
incentives to encourage competition. The Department’s
delays on projects, attributable mainly to changes in
reasons for paying this premium and discounting it when
the Department’s requirements. For ongoing projects
evaluating the bids were to secure a competition to get the
the Department agreed cost, time and delivery outputs
best results. It ruled out the possibility of renegotiating the
which were more cautious than those agreed under the
existing contracts, after taking legal advice which indicated
previous contract, and for 18 months the new supplier
it would risk legal challenge from the incumbents’
was paid for ongoing projects on the delivery terms of the
competitors. The Department also considered that not
previous contract which stipulated payment on the basis of
to pay these costs would send out a wider signal to the
resources used but using the costs agreed under the new
market that the Department was effectively locked-in to the
contract. The payment terms of the new contract are linked
incumbent supplier because the costs of transition would
more closely to project delivery than under the previous
make the competition unwinnable for any supplier other
contract, and these are being applied to new projects.
than the incumbent.
2
Committee of Public Accounts Report,
London Underground Public Private Partnerships, HC446, March 2005.
2
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
executive summary
10 There have also been significant cost increases due
Wider lessons
to the Department’s increased demand for IT services
and projects which was higher than it anticipated at the
12 Across government there are around 540 Private
time the procurement was run. The actual profits made by
Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts with a total capital value of
the supplier have also been higher than expected when
almost £40 billion3 and other IT outsourcing contracts. As
the Department awarded the contract because of the
these contracts reach the end of their first-term, departments
higher volume of work and large number of IT projects
are likely to face similar competition and transition issues to
in development but the overall target profit margin has
those HM Revenue and Customs has encountered.
not been exceeded. The contract prices include profit
margins in line with industry margins, with lower margins
13 ASPIRE provides lessons on preparing for the end
for lower value-added service lines and higher margins in
of a contract and encouraging competition, and for
the riskier project area. The contract includes a provision
managing the transition from one supplier to another and
for prices to increase annually with the Retail Price Index
in providing sufficient flexibility within a contract to deal
and annual reductions for efficiency improvements. Prices
with likely changes in IT requirements. Good practice
can be varied for events outside the contractor’s control
to help departments in re-competing their IT contracts
and there are penalties for underperformance. Prices can
and managing transitions (Part 4 of this Report) should
and have been renegotiated up and down where volumes
result in financial savings from better contracts, and
change. If the overall target profit margin of 12.3 per cent
reduce transition costs and the risk of service disruption.
is exceeded, the Department can obtain an equal share of
Implementation of this including the good practice
the extra profits.
which the Department developed and adopted is likely
to save at least 10 per cent of the costs of procurement
11 The overall value for money of this contract, and
and transition and our recommendations are aimed at
the premium the Department paid to secure it, will
departments doing that in similar situations.
ultimately depend on how well it meets the Department’s
IT needs over the lifetime of the contract, including how
14 Now that the public sector has demonstrated it is not
well it deals with the degree of change in taxes and other
locked into retaining well established incumbent suppliers
services and the Department’s systems and organisation.
for contracts of this size, there is a need for the Office of
It will also depend on how well the Department controls
Government Commerce to provide guidance on:
costs and manages performance to ensure the benefits
n
the contract provisions needed to deal with the
of the contract are achieved. The Department does not
end of a contract and securing the best prospect of
have an estimate of the final costs of ASPIRE because
effective competition at that time;
it is difficult to predict the level of IT demand, price
changes and changes to the Department’s activities over
n
the use of incentives to stimulate competition; and
the lifetime of the contract. It has yet to evaluate the new
n
managing the transition to a new supplier.
supplier’s overall performance. The business change and
innovation aspects of the ASPIRE contract have assumed
15 The changes required for the merger of the Inland
greater importance with the creation of HM Revenue and
Revenue with HM Customs and Excise so early in the life
Customs in April 2005, and the increased levels of work
of the ASPIRE contract suggest the need for a mechanism
which have placed greater pressure on the Department
by which government IT contracts can be looked at as
and Capgemini’s capacity to deliver. The Department
a whole, as the decisions made by one department can
will need to continue to review resourcing priorities with
affect others. Such horizon-scanning would ensure that
Capgemini so as to maintain ongoing services as well as
IT contracts across government are managed effectively:
delivering change programmes, and ensure it has robust
examining overarching issues of competition, supplier
arrangements for managing the contract so that it delivers
capacity, exit arrangements and transition planning. This
the best performance from the contractor.
would enable departments to have meaningful discussions
about contract strategies and timings rather than pursuing
purely independent strategies. The lesson for government
departments is that even with that central oversight, they
need to build into their contracts a sufficient level of
flexibility to deal with machinery of government changes.
3
HM Treasury PFI signed project list.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
3
executive summary
Key facts, findings and conclusions
n
Consulted the market early, fostered competition by
persuading senior management in the IT industry to
16 The Department estimated extending the
bid for the contract and convinced bidders that it
existing contracts would cost £4.1 billion compared
intended to seek genuine competition.
with £3.8 billion for the chosen solution (a strategic
partnership with co-partnering with a single supplier
n
Encouraged competition by partially paying bid
having overall accountability for IT delivery). Once
costs (£7.7 million for work to allow bidders to
that option had been selected the Department went
demonstrate their IT capabilities), paying for the
out to competition and developed its IT requirements
‘unique’ costs of transition (£37.6 million)
which included further changes in requirements and
and excluding the costs of transition from the
changes in contractual volumes. The RPS bid (EDS/
bid evaluation.
Accenture) was within 1 percent of the Capgemini bid
n
Maintained competitive tension until the final
at £2.83 billion. The costs incurred by HM Revenue and
contract award by negotiating with two bidders
Customs during procurement (£27.5 million), transition
until the end of competition, aided by agreeing to
(£47.5 million) and in the first year of the ASPIRE
contribute towards the costs of the losing bidder
contract (£539.3 million) are set out in
Figure 1 opposite.
(£0.9 million).
Compared to the contract it replaced, the new supplier is
paid on the basis of performance achieved (outputs) rather
18 The Capgemini bid best met the Department’s
than resources used (inputs). ASPIRE also has incentives
IT needs. The eventual value for money of ASPIRE will
for improved efficiency over the lifetime of the contract
also depend on how far the Department can control
and greater flexibility for the Department to decide the
additional costs arising from changes to the contract. It
most desirable point for re-competition.
will also depend on how well investment in individual
projects and the programme as a whole supports its
change programme for integration, improving efficiency
The Procurement
and achieving its Public Service Agreement targets.6, 7
17 To secure competition and to choose an option to
The detailed results were:
meet its IT needs, the Department:
n
Capgemini’s bid (£2,830 million) was £32 million
higher than that (£2,798 million) of the other final
n
Followed Office of Government Commerce
guidance, drew on lessons from the previous
bidder, RPS (EDS in alliance with Accenture).
contracts which ASPIRE replaced and followed the
But Capgemini’s bid better met the Department’s
recommendations from the Committee of Public
IT needs to support its change programme
Accounts’ previous report on the Inland Revenue/
and implement business transformation. It was
EDS strategic partnership.4
around 21 per cent lower (£816 million) than the
Department’s Should Cost Model had indicated. That
n
Drew on the experience of the London Underground
Model included some efficiencies over the life of the
PPP that in some cases departments may not be
contract but both bidders were more aggressive in
able to develop sufficient competition without
their forecasts of efficiencies.
reimbursing bid costs.5
n
The Department assessed the value for money
n
Evaluated eight contracting options and selected
of the bids on the basis of a combination of
a strategic partnership with co-partnering, where
financial and qualitative analysis of potential
a single supplier has overall responsibility and
suppliers to provide the IT flexibility required to
accountability for IT integration and the Department
support ongoing IT applications and to implement
has access to a range of suppliers and new technology
business transformation.
so it is not locked into one or two large suppliers.
4
Inland Revenue/EDS Strategic Partnership:
The Award of New Work (28th Report 1999-2000).
5
C&AG’s report on London Underground
PPP: were they good deals, HC 645, June 2004.
6
Financing Britain’s Future – Review of the Revenue Departments, Gus O’Donnell, March 2004, HM Treasury Cm 6163.
7
Releasing resources to the front line – Independent Review of Public Sector Efficiency, Sir Peter Gershon July 2004.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
executive summary
1 ASPIRE costs
stage
Costs
Comment
(£ million)
Procurement
Procurement advisers and commercial lawyers
9.5
Contribution to Design and Implementation
7.7
The Department capped its contribution to the Design and
Studies and tender costs
Implementation Studies for each bidder.
Departmental staff and running costs
9.4
18,000 staff days were charged. Also includes £3.1 million for
IT support for Design and Implementation studies.
Due diligence
0.9
The Department capped these costs at £3.3 million for each
bidder. £0.9 million was paid to EDS, who as the incumbent
had less due diligence. Had Capgemini lost the competition it
would have charged £3.3 million.
total
27.5
transition
Unique Transition Costs
37.6
Paid to Capgemini. EDS estimated Unique Transition Costs
(UTCs) at £4.4 million if it had won the contract. (£3.4 million
of UTCs paid to Capgemini/Fujitsu for NIRS2 transition is
included in the £37.6 million).
Costs paid to the Incumbent suppliers for
5.7
£2.3 million to EDS (support during the transition) and
supporting the transition
£3.4 million to Accenture for support during transition
and the re-platforming of NIRS2.
Departmental staff and running costs
1.3
6,800 staff days were charged.
Consultants
2.4
Department of Work and Pensions staff and
0.5
IT support costs
total
47.5
Contract year 1
Service lines
298
Project lines
244
Service credits in respect of services
(2.67)
This related to 8 IT system failures in the first contract year.
There were 10 failures costing £3.25m in the first 15 months.
total
539.3
Source: National Audit Office analysis of the costs incurred by HM Revenue and Customs from the different stages of ASPIRE, up to the end of the first
contract year
NOTES
1 Costs in £ million including the VAT which is irrecoverable to the Department.
2 In preparing for the transfer, the Department also incurred £14 million for the rights to use NIRS2 after the termination of the contract although the
intellectual property rights remained with Accenture. This represented a closing payment as part of the 1995 PFI contract.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
5
executive summary
n
An Office of Government Commerce review
n
The Department reviewed Capgemini’s financial
concluded that the Department had run the
estimates for ‘unique’ transition costs. While the
competition to a high standard and had maintained
Department laid out the principles for qualification
an effective competition.
as a unique transition cost and controlled individual
transition costs within the budgets set, it had not
n
The Department managed the procurement at a
agreed in advance with Capgemini the detail of
cost of £27.5 million, including £6.3 million for
what would qualify as a ‘unique’ transition cost until
staff and running costs, £9.5 million for advisers
the transition had started. It considered it could not
and £7.7 million for bidders to assist them to
have anticipated all the elements to include at that
demonstrate their IT capabilities and £3.1 million to
stage. This resulted in both parties spending valuable
provide infrastructural support to that exercise. This
time during transition negotiating whether or not a
compares favourably with the procurement costs on
particular cost was unique. The Department also paid
PFI contracts.
Capgemini a profit margin on the staff costs involved.
n
The contract includes service line thresholds so
that if there is a significant change in demand for IT
Maintaining service during transition
services beyond the thresholds, the Department can
negotiate price changes.
21 During the transition there were no major
disruptions to services and the incumbent suppliers’
The transition
performance remained steady.
n
The main transition was completed according to
19 While the contract will only achieve value for
schedule in six months. Keeping ongoing projects on
money in the longer-term if the new supplier delivers a
track was a major part of the transition.
good service and progresses IT projects as planned, it
was important for the Department to manage the risks of
n
There were nearly 100 of these projects valued at
transition. These were that services would be disrupted,
£439 million in development, including several
individual project deadlines missed, the incoming supplier
‘mission-critical’ projects with tight deadlines such
(Capgemini) not ready to run the service and carry out
as the Modernising PAYE Processes for Customers,
business-critical projects and that the costs of transition
the introduction of the Child Trust Fund, Reform of
would be higher than expected.
the Construction Industry Scheme, and Modernising
Stamp Duty.
The costs of transition
n
The transition was helped by the professional
working relationship of EDS and Capgemini and
20 The transition cost the Department £7.5 million,
the collaborative partnership relationships that the
including £37.6 million paid to the incoming supplier
Department fostered. This was supported by the exit
for its ‘unique’ transition costs and £5.7 million to EDS
clauses the Department had negotiated in the previous
and Accenture over and above normal running costs to
contracts which bound EDS to levels of support,
facilitate the transition.
assistance and delivery during the transition. EDS also
n
The payment of transition costs was justified because
agreed to fund the £65 million pension shortfall of the
it encouraged and maintained competition. These
staff transferring from the previous contract.
costs would have been very much lower had the
n
By June 2004 Capgemini had taken over 97 per cent
existing suppliers continued to provide the IT service.
of third-party contracts used by EDS and around
96 per cent of EDS staff, including 80 per cent of
the key staff identified, and had filled many of the
vacancies of EDS staff leaving at the end of
the contract.
6
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
executive summary
National Insurance Recording System
n
The cost of completing the migration in the deferred
(NIRS2) transition
timescale was £9.9 million, of which Capgemini/
Fujitsu paid for £7.9 million and the Department
22 The NIRS2 transition was run as a separate
£2 million. The total costs to the Department to
project from the main transition with a budget of
complete re-platforming were £14.9 million. This
£16.2 million and involved the transfer of IT data
was within its original estimate of £16.2 million
systems from Accenture. This proved more difficult
so the Department decided that it was not
than expected, took longer than planned and cost the
worthwhile establishing all the causes of failure
Department £3. million paid to Accenture to support
and attribute them to any party, although it did not
the transition and £3. million paid to Capgemini for
accept liability for the costs of any consequential
transition costs. Accenture were retained by Capgemini
reworking. Although the delays did not affect service
as a sub-contractor.
delivery, the system was not fully operational until
November 2005 and since then the system has
n
Under ASPIRE, the Capgemini and Fujitsu
consortium took over responsibility for the running
performed at improved levels.
of NIRS2 from Accenture in January 2005 which
included the re-platforming of the IT system.
Management of the contract
n
Delays occurred in re-platforming NIRS2 because:
Capgemini’s transition plans proved to be ambitious
23 An initial view of how the contract is performing
given its level of expertise in the design and
was assessed from the performance of the supplier
operation of the system; the structure of the PFI
in delivering IT services and progressing the main IT
deal with Accenture meant that the degree of
projects supporting the Department’s business and change
collaboration between Accenture and the incoming
programme, the cost of ASPIRE and the degree to which
supplier was initially not as strong as in the main
the Department is acting as an intelligent customer of
transition, and Accenture’s workforce was less
IT services.
willing to transfer to the new supplier.
Provision of IT services and delivery of
n
The nature of the PFI contract with Accenture meant
that the Department had to agree with Accenture
IT projects
exit procedures to disclose key information during
24 The new supplier has provided IT services from day
due diligence to assist the incoming supplier and
one of the contract but since transition there have been
the Department had limited in-house knowledge
some delays and cost increases.
of the IT used in NIRS2. The Department for Work
and Pensions also incurred £0.5 million staff and
n
The performance of IT services is acceptable,
IT costs for the NIRS2 transition. Accenture met its
although there have been some isolated system
obligations under the agreed exit provisions.
failures for which the supplier has paid £2.67 million
in penalties in the first contract year.
n
Capgemini/Fujitsu encountered problems in its
first attempt at providing the new IT hardware,
n
Although the new supplier has delivered a number
operating system and database to support NIRS2. The
of IT system releases, there have been some delays
Department requested changes to Capgemini’s plans.
and cost increases to business-critical projects (for
Capgemini retained Accenture as a sub-contractor
example the Construction Industry Scheme, the
under ASPIRE and rescheduled the work in phases
Modernisation of PAYE Processes (MPPC), Better
which was completed in September 2005.
Data for corporation tax, on-line services and the
External Routing Interface Component for electronic
returns by employers). The delays and cost increases
are mainly due to the Department changing its
requirements and due to the inclusion in project costs
of overhead rates previously budgeted for centrally.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
7
executive summary
ASPIRE Costs
Acting as an intelligent customer
25 The ASPIRE contract has cost more in the first year
26 The increase in the cost of ASPIRE emphasises the
than the Department originally planned because the
importance of the Department being able to control
Department had increased the volume of work that it
costs and to ensure value for money from the additional
required from ASPIRE.
spending. This includes triggers to review the supplier’s
profit margins to ensure that the Department gets a
n
The Department estimated it would spend
share of any additional efficiency savings from increased
£383.8 million (excluding VAT) in the first year of
levels of work.
the contract. This was based on the demand for IT
services in 2002-03 which was used in the invitation
n
The Department’s higher than expected demand for IT
to tender. The expenditure in the first year from
has arisen mainly from the project work involved in
July 2004 to June 2005 was £539.3 million (and the
developing and enhancing IT systems and significant
Department forecasts expenditure in the second year
changes to the Departmental infrastructure.
to be around £800 million).
n
The higher than expected demand for IT has
n
The increase in spending on ASPIRE has been due
generated a higher profit for Capgemini in the
mainly to the 132 per cent rise in spending on
first year, likely to be £53.9 million8 (10 per cent
projects (an increase of £98 million) and consultancy
profit margin) compared to the projected profit of
(an increase of £27 million). The retention of
£38 million (also with a 10 percent profit margin).
Accenture to provide application development
The target profit margin was based on 2002-03
support for NIRS2 has cost £3.24 million in the
levels of IT demand and is around 12.3 per cent
first year of the contract and is estimated to cost
which is within the range of PFI deals of between
£8.04 million over three years.
10 to 17 per cent. As the projected profit margin is
lower than the target profit margin, it is unlikely that
n
The Department considered that bidders might be
any profit share will accrue to the Department for
deterred by the prospect of taking on nearly 100
the first year.
existing projects, valued at £439 million, with outputs
and timetables they had not planned, so it paid the
n
If this level of higher spending continues at the
new supplier for ongoing projects on the terms of the
same level over the lifetime of the contract, the final
old contract. While this may have helped maintain
cost of the ASPIRE contract could be in excess of
competition by persuading bidders that a new supplier
£6 billion rather than the originally projected
would not be bound by the existing project delivery
£3-4 billion. But the Department does not expect
plans, it meant for the initial period of the contract,
this level of internal demand for IT services to be
the Department could not benefit from the delivery
sustained. It considers its demand for IT services
benefits of the new contract which pays on the basis of
will decline because of its targets for reducing staff
performance achieved rather than resources used.
levels by 12,500, an increase in the use of electronic
services with a reduction in keyed input and
printed outputs, proposals to rationalise IT systems,
and its aim to reduce spending on IT to less than
20 per cent of the Department’s budget.
8
Based on provisional figures.
8
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
executive summary
n
The need to control costs is reinforced by the growth
n
is seeking to reduce the ratio of staff it uses to
in the Department’s demand for IT services under the
manage the contract compared to the supplier’s staff
previous contract which led to increased charges.
from 30:70 to 20:80; and
When the Department awarded the previous
contract in 1994 it was valued at £1 billion (which
n
is collecting information to evaluate the performance
of the supplier such as: monitoring progress made
excluded price indexation or growth). By 2000 the
on major projects, evaluating performance against a
Department estimated that it would cost £2 billion
range of targets and reviewing financial statements
taking account of price increases and demand for IT
showing the actual costs and the supplier’s profit
services and the final spending under the contract
margin. However it recognises that this needs to be
was £2.5 billion due to the increase in its demand
improved to reflect the new contract. The Department
for IT services.
has taken 18 months to get an overall view of how
n
As the Department’s volume of demand for
the contract is performing and to put into effect the
individual IT services increases beyond agreed
arrangements for managing the contract.
caps it will obtain discounts on unit price based on
economies of scale. However price increases are
Contract flexibility
also possible where the supplier has been unable
to avoid extra costs. Some of the thresholds have
28 With effect from 1 April 2006 the Department
been exceeded in the first year and the Department
brought those services previously provided to the
has negotiated price changes with Capgemini
former HM Customs and Excise by fujitsu under the
which resulted in a minor price increase and three
PfI contract into the ASPIRE contract. ASPIRE is now
significant price reductions.
the main contract for the provision of IT services to
HM Revenue and Customs.
27 The Department is changing the way it manages
n
When the former HM Customs and Excise
the new IT contract which is more focused towards
renegotiated its PFI contract with Fujitsu in 2003,
service delivery and productivity. The Department:
it considered that its IT infrastructure could be
n
is reviewing the number and kind of performance
connected to that of the Inland Revenue at no
measures it uses to monitor the contract to identify
significant additional cost.
gaps and improvements and to align measures to
n
The Department considers that in merging the PFI
business targets and outcomes. There are over 500
contract with Fujitsu into the ASPIRE contract the
performance measures, of which some 200 are key
changed contract should provide a lower cost of
performance indicators and carry service credits
delivery than having two separate contracts over the
for underperformance;
lifetime of the ASPIRE contract.
n
has recognised that its staff need a better
understanding of the new contract and has provided
training for staff on how the new contract operates;
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
9
ReCoMMendAtions
29 The specific recommendations for HM Revenue and
e
review the expected cost of ASPIRE over the
Customs which the Department is putting into action are
lifetime of the contract using sensitivity analysis
that it should:
to take account of trends in the demand for IT
services, price changes and the inclusion of the PfI
a
ensure it has effective governance and
contract with fujitsu and monitor the efficiency
performance management systems which provide
savings delivered.
a clear view of the contractor’s overall performance
and inform any negotiations on contract changes.
f
ensure the Department has in place robust
programme and project management
b
update and rationalise by early 2007 the ASPIRE
arrangements so that it can extract the best
contract Key Performance Indicators so that they
supplier performance from the ASPIRE contract.
are better aligned to the business of the new
Department, focus on the main areas of supplier
performance and are output-orientated.
Wider Recommendations
c
extend the education programme during 2006
g
Other government departments should learn
to ensure that all key staff in the Department’s
the lessons from ASPIRE outlined in Part of this
business areas are trained in how to carry out
report. To support this, the Office of Government
output-based contract management.
Commerce (OGC), will be working with the National
Audit Office and HM Revenue and Customs to
d
review the priority of its existing projects so
produce guidance on lessons learnt from the ASPIRE
that they match the capacity of its own staff and
exercise. Any guidance should cover:
IT suppliers to deliver them and make progress
payments on all projects on the basis of outputs/
n
the need for departments to review existing
outcomes achieved rather than resources used by
contracts to ensure that they have the
the supplier.
necessary provisions to deal with the end of the
contract and for managing a transition to a new
supplier if the incumbent is not retained;
n
the contract arrangements for initial
outsourcing deals that give the best prospect
of achieving effective competition when the
contract comes to an end;
10
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
executive summary
n
the use of incentives to encourage other
h
The Office of Government Commerce should take
suppliers to compete including the
the lead in coordinating a centralised process to
circumstances in which contributions to
review the number and timing of large government
bidding and transitions costs might be made,
IT contracts which are nearing the end of their
and alternatives where they provide better
term so that re-competitions can be scheduled in a
value for money, for example:
way that stimulates effective competition for each.
The process should involve representatives from
n
solely disregarding transition costs in the
departmental procurement and IT strategy teams
evaluations of bids;
across government.
n
disregarding transition costs in the
bid evaluation and paying a share of
transition costs; and
n
disregarding transition costs in the bid
evaluation and negotiating a capped
budget for transition costs.
n
If transition costs are paid they should be
negotiated as part of the deal to maintain
competitive tension and the contract
should include a trigger which requires
the supplier to repay some part of the
transition costs where first year profits are
higher than expected.
n
the options, use and cost-effectiveness of
methods to test bidders’ capabilities when
there is a well established incumbent supplier.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
11
part one
PARt one
The procurement
12
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part one
The need for new IT contracts
This part of the report examines the Department’s
replacement of its existing £2.5 billion contract with
1.1 In 2004-05 the Department needed to replace its
EDS and £200 million contract with Accenture for
IT contracts that support its business. It had two main
the provision of IT services, why a new contract was
IT suppliers – EDS providing technology services for tax
needed and how the Department prepared for the new
activities and the development of new systems under
contract. It covers the steps the Department took to
a £2.5 billion 10 year contract (‘Eagle’) due to end in
achieve effective competition, and whether in doing so
June 20049 and Accenture supporting National Insurance
it followed relevant Office of Government Commerce
operations through the National Insurance Recording System
guidance and drew on the lessons learned from the
(NIRS2) under a £200 million 10 year PFI contract due to
previous contracts which ASPIRE (Acquiring Strategic
end in March 200510
(Figure 2 overleaf). A new contract
Partners for the Inland Revenue) replaced. It also looks
would need to provide the IT flexibility for the Department
at the criteria the Department used to assess the value
to respond to recommendations from the O’Donnell
for money of the bids and the procurement costs.
Review of Revenue Departments11 and the Gershon
Efficiency Review12. The merger of the Inland Revenue and
HM Customs and Excise in 2005 increased the need for IT
to support the new Department’s change programme.
9
The spend under the Eagle contract was £2.517 billion.
10
The spend under the NIRS 2 contract since April 1999 when the former Contributions Agency merged with the former Inland Revenue was £250 million.
11
Financing Britain’s Future – Review of the Revenue Departments, Gus O’Donnell, March 2004.
12
Releasing Resources to the Front Line – Independent Review of Public Sector Efficiency, Sir Peter Gershon, July 2004.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
13
part one
2006
April 2006
Integration of
PFI contract with
Fujitsu into ASPIRE
tment
contract continues until
Final stage of CapGemini
2014, with the possibility
of extension until 2023
2005
ends
April 2005
New
Depar
of HMRC
March 2005
NIRS2 Contract
ts
y 2004
HMRC
2004
March 2004
July 2004
November 2003
preferred bidder
Januar
O’Donnell Review
recommends new
Contract signed
CapGemini chosen as
EDS contract ends,
Capgemini star
ts
2003
T
ransition
Three
August 2003
August 2003
Customs signs
renegotiated PFI
responses
received
preparation star
March 2003
contract with Fujitsu
July 2003
T
wo preferred
bidders announced
2002
mation
July 2003
Chancellor
announces
October 2001
Prior indicative
y 2002
notice to market
June 2002
tlisted bidders
O’Donnell Review
Shor
announced and draft
stage begins
Februar
invitation to tender issued
OJEC issued and
y
Request for infor
2001
y 2001
July 2001
Januar
ASPIRE begins
Planning phase on
PFI contract changes
2000
Customs begin preliminar
discussions with Fujitsu on
1999
Fujitsu
Customs signs
PFI contract with
September 1999
ew
ts
n
ASPIRE timeline
Planning for
Contract
Making a Market
Competition
e
valuation
t
ransition
Capgemini star
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
Wider events
Source: National Audit Office
1
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part one
Preparing for a new contract
market that the Department was effectively locked-in to
the incumbent supplier because the cost of transition
1.2 The Department’s lawyers advised that an extension
would make the competition unwinnable for any other
to the Eagle contract could be challenged by the
supplier than the incumbent.
incumbents’ competitors. The contract contained an
optional six month extension to provide contingency
against any re-competition overrunning but, aside from
Contracting options
this, the Department’s IT arrangements would end
abruptly. European Union competition rules required the
1.4 The Department considered eight options to replace
Department to undertake an open competition. It therefore
the existing contracts, taking account of the future needs
had to manage certain risks by:
of the business, ranging from separate contracts split
by service area to continuing with and developing the
n
Choosing an appropriate option to replace the EDS
strategic partnership approach it had pursued under the
and NIRS2 contracts – the Department appraised
Eagle contract
(Figure 3).
eight options and concluded it should let a single
contract (rather than, for example, a series of smaller
contracts). The contract is based around a single lead
3 The Department’s short-listed contracting options
partner, responsible for service provision through
permanent sub-contractors and co-partners.
option
Cost of option (saving)/extra
(10 year net
cost compared
n
Ensuring genuine competition – to avoid the
present value) to do-minimum
impression that EDS and Accenture had an unfair
(£m)
(£m)
advantage and encourage new suppliers to bid for
the contract the Department adopted a high-profile
1 Do-minimum (extension
4,134
n/a
campaign to encourage major IT suppliers to bid for
of current EDS and
the contract. The IT industry needed persuading that
NIRS2 contracts)
there would be a level playing field for new suppliers.
2 Strategic partnership
3,846
(288)
The Department addressed some of the perceived
with co-partnering
barriers to competition by funding transition costs,
3 Separate contracts split
4,194
60
partly funding the costs of due diligence, providing
by service areas
access to key business sites and allowing suppliers to
4 Separate contracts with
4,286
152
showcase innovation capabilities.
different suppliers
n
finalising a contract on time – the Department
Source: National Audit Office analysis of HM Revenue and Customs data
had built in contingency measures with the existing
contract requiring EDS to maintain services up to the
NOTES
point of expiry or termination, co-operate with the
The Department also considered other options which it did not
Department and any successor supplier to ensure
financial y assess:
smooth continuation of services. It also went through
option 5: strategic co-partnering and transfer of desktop assets – similar
to Option 2 but including desktop assets and – more significantly – in the
the Office of Government Commerce gateway
accounting treatment afforded to the ASPIRE assets as a whole.
review process.
option 6: Package by business stream – would result in one large
contract package covering the core tax systems, very much like Option
1.3 The main challenge for the Department was to
2, and a range of smaller packages covering business streams. It would
be sub-optimal to Option 2.
achieve an effective competition. It was concerned
option 7: including business process outsourcing – differs by including
that potential competitors might perceive EDS to be a
al Inland Revenue business processes. This would have required a more
strong incumbent that could not be easily displaced.
extensive appraisal as the options only examined the future provision of
IT services.
This could result in insufficient bidders to ensure that the
option 8: extend to wider government – differs by extending from the
new contract would fully provide for the Department’s
Department to other government departments. This option was kept open
IT needs.13 The Department also considered that not to
by referring to the possibility in the initial advertisement placed in the
Official Journal of the European Community; and including standard
pay transition costs would send out a wider signal to the
enabling clauses in the resulting contracts.
13
The risk of not getting sufficient competition with an incumbent supplier is also covered in the NAO Report on
Awarding the new licence to run the National
Lottery, HC 803, 2001-02, in May 2002.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
15
part one
1.5 In 2003, the Treasury decided against using PFI for
compensate for greater transition risk and their bids would
IT projects, one reason being that the fast pace of change
have to cover the costs of transition. The announcement
in the IT sector made it difficult to define requirements
that the costs of transition would not be included in the
over a long-term contract.14 The Office of Government
bid evaluation was an important factor in Capgemini’s
Commerce subsequently issued guidance that projects
decision to bid. The commitment to a change and
focused on innovation would have a better chance of
innovation programme was also important as it gave a
success using multiple contracts with the contract price
strong indication that ASPIRE was a new contract, not
based on the resources used by the supplier; projects
just a continuation of the previous contract. A formal
with more stable technology would be more suited to
notice was placed in the Official Journal of the European
longer-term contracts with the contract price based on
Union (OJEU) in February 2002 to which four bidders
the performance of the supplier in producing successful
responded. The Department short-listed three potential
IT projects.15 The Department decided that the range,
bidders for the next stage of procurement – RPS Alliance
scale and complexity of its IT requirement could best be
(EDS & Accenture – the incumbent suppliers), Capgemini
provided by a strategic partnership with co-partnering.
with Fujitsu, and Fusion Alliance (BT, Computer Sciences
This option built on its existing single-supplier partnership
Corporation, and Schlumberger Sema).
approach under the Eagle contract with EDS, providing a
single supplier with overall accountability for IT delivery.
It also brought the additional flexibility and access to a
Bid evaluation
wider range of suppliers - ‘multi-sourcing’ - so that the
1.8 The Department evaluated the three bids against
Department could use whichever co-partner would be
a range of criteria
(Figure 4) including costs, client site
best able to meet its IT requirement, recognising that no
visits, and qualitative assessments to see how well the
one supplier would have all the skills or the capacity to
bidders performed against Departmental objectives such
meet varying requirements.
as working in partnership and managing the transition.
Encouraging competition
1.9 The new bidders were concerned that the Department
was aware of EDS’s capabilities because it had worked
1.6 The Committee of Public Accounts reports on the
with them, while it had no way of assessing the capabilities
Inland Revenue/EDS Strategic Partnership16 and the NIRS2
of the other bidders. To help to level the playing field, the
Contract Extension17 concluded that it could be difficult
Department provided the bidders with an opportunity
to create effective competition for a large contract with
to demonstrate their capabilities, using Design and
a strong incumbent supplier. The Department began to
Implementation studies to test bidders’ capabilities. This also
develop its strategy for dealing with the end of the Eagle
helped its own business areas to get used to the new way of
contract with EDS in 1998, six years before the contract
working under the ASPIRE contract, with more emphasis on
was due to end. It initially found little interest from other
the Department getting the specifications right upfront. The
IT contractors in bidding as they saw limited chance of
studies cost the Department around £10.8 million, including
success against a well established incumbent supplier.
£3.1 million to support the work and a £7.7 million
The Department’s senior management engaged with the
contribution to the bidders’ costs. The output from these
IT supplier industry to promote interest in bidding for the
studies was incorporated into the qualitative evaluation of
contract with the commitment that the competition would
the bids, but HMRC also retained the intellectual property
be open and fair and that all bidders would be operating
rights from the studies in the proposals. Partial payment of
on a ‘level playing field’.
bid costs was also partly justified by the outputs which could
be used by the business. The Department has not formally
1.7 To demonstrate its commitment to and convince
evaluated these benefits and has not directly utilised the
bidders it was worth the investment in bidding, the
outputs from these studies but working on the studies did
Department offered to pay the transition costs that only a
provide the opportunity for key departmental staff to gain
new supplier would have to incur. Alternative suppliers
experience in new working methods and to build specialist
had expected that they would have to demonstrate
supplier relationships.
superior capability to the incumbents in order to
14
PFI: Meeting the investment challenge, HM Treasury, July 2003.
15
Decision map for project strategy and procurement, Office of Government Commerce.
16
Inland Revenue/EDS Strategic Partnership: The Award of New Work (28th report 1999-2000).
17
NIRS2 Contract Extension (38th report 2001-2002).
16
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part one
4 Evaluation criteria
evaluation Criteria
Qualitative Assessment
Commercial Appraisal
Financial Assessment
Service Delivery
Main features of each bid
Bidders’ financial and cost models
IT to support change and provide
Bidders’ responses to financially
Benefits and uncertainties
innovative solutions
sensitive Terms and Conditions
Charges, financial model and
Partnership
Risk
open-book accounting
Transition
Treatment of ASPIRE assets
Variability and robustness
Price comparison and affordability
Source: National Audit Office
1.10 The Department used financial models to evaluate
1.11 We commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers to
the bids. It created an estimate of the likely costs as a
examine the processes used to test bids against the Should
benchmark - the Should Cost model – to compare the
Cost model. This found that the Department’s financial
bids and assess productivity gains from the new contract
evaluation was robust and comprehensive, although the
and for the Department to challenge the bidder’s financial
Should Cost model could have been more flexible to
models. The Should Cost model represented ‘best in
enable improved value for money analysis. For example,
market’ costs of meeting the existing IT needs, not taking
by forecasting affordability over the whole ten year life
account of potential performance improvements open to
of the contract, rather than just the initial three years,
a new supplier. The Should Cost model included some
and to build in sensitivities, such as the ability to adjust
efficiencies over the life of the contract, such as some
for different discount, inflation or taxation rates over the
productivity improvement but the bidders were more
contract life. Sensitivity analysis could also look at the
aggressive in their forecast of efficiencies. As part of
effects of significant changes in the scale of work on
the evaluation it carried out sensitivity analyses on the
affordability and supplier’s profit margins. Given the size
most significant service lines in the short-listed bidders’
of the contract, changes to these variables during the term
financial models.
of the contract could have significant financial impact.
The Department also used a ‘Does Cost model’ to provide
an affordability benchmark for the three year Public
Expenditure cycle based on the costs for the contracted
out service levels at the prevailing EDS and NIRS2 rates.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
17
part one
1.12 The qualitative, financial and commercial
The ASPIRE contract
evaluations were combined to provide an assessment
of the most ‘economically advantageous’ tender. On
1.15 In January 2004 the Inland Revenue (now
15 July 2003, the Department announced it would be
HM Revenue and Customs) entered into a strategic
taking forward the bids of Capgemini and RPS Alliance. It
outsourcing contract with Capgemini Ernst & Young (now
then carried out further assurance and negotiation; testing
Capgemini). The contract known as ASPIRE (Acquiring
proposed solutions, carrying out due diligence work to
Strategic Partners for the Inland Revenue) came into
address the risk of price changes once the contract had
operation in July 2004, is estimated to be worth between
been signed, and analysis of the information provided in
£3 billion to £4 billion (excluding VAT and inflation)
the bidders’ financial models.
over its ten year term and has an option to extend for
up to eight more years. Changing suppliers sent out an
1.13 The Department agreed to contribute up to
important signal across government and the market that
£3.4 million towards the costs of due diligence for the
departments are not locked into incumbent suppliers,
losing bidder in recognition that the quality of the due
and should encourage competition for other second-
diligence conducted by the bidder was important to
generation IT outsourcing contracts.
the Department’s confidence in the bidder’s solution
and that this would be a more onerous process for the
1.16 Under the ASPIRE contract the supplier is paid on
non-incumbents. This was to counter any concern that
the basis of performance achieved (outputs) rather than
an alternative supplier was being retained simply as a
resources used (inputs). It also has incentives for improved
lever for the Department to use in negotiations with the
efficiency over the lifetime of the contract. The contract
incumbent. The Department paid £0.9 million to the
provides flexibility for the Department to decide the
losing bidder (RPS) who did not have to perform as much
most desirable point for re-competition. In the event of
due diligence work as a new supplier.
supplier failure, total claims are limited to the operational
charge for the previous year (around £300 million) and for
1.14 The final offer from Capgemini was £2,830 million
projects, liability is limited to the greater of £50 million or
and from RPS £2,798 million
(Figure 5). Although
150 per cent of the project costs at the point of failure. It
Capgemini’s bid was marginally higher, the Department
also includes exit clauses covering information provision
concluded that it was a considerably better technical
and staff transfer issues but these may need to be revisited
offer and more likely to achieve the business objectives
closer to the end of the contract to ensure they are up to
of the Department. The Should Cost Model and the
date with the Department’s needs.
bids changed during the negotiations due to changes in
the Department’s requirements, changes in contractual
1.17 The Committee of Public Accounts’ report on
volumes, additional third-party contracts and an increase
successful partnership in Public Finance Initiative
in the Department’s asset base. Capgemini’s bid had
projects18 recommended mechanisms to ensure continued
higher profit margins for project-related work than for
value for money over the lifetime of the contract such as
the operational services and project demand might grow
benchmarking, open-book accounting, contract flexibility,
given the Department’s programme of business change
appropriate change procedures to reduce the risk of
and innovation. The Department will update the Should
contractors increasing profit margins and appropriate risk
Cost Model annually to reflect the relevant contract
sharing. ASPIRE includes these features and, compared
changes and actual service volumes ordered in the year to
to the contract it replaced, pays the supplier on the basis
calculate the savings achieved.
of performance rather than resources used. ASPIRE has a
number of benefits
(Figure 6). Project trials, governance
arrangements, and open-book accounting should provide
the Department with the necessary cost information to
benchmark prices and identify cost variances and value
for money.
18
Committee of Public Accounts:
Managing the Relationship to secure a Successful Partnership in PFI Projects (42nd Report, 2001-02).
18
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part one
5 Financial evaluation of bids
Bidder
initial bid
Bid After negotiation
Percentage difference between
should Cost Model bid
(£3.595bn) and Bid After
£ billion
£ billion
negotiation from other bidders
Should Cost Model
2.87
3.595
n/a
RPS (EDS/Accenture)
2.4
2.798
22% lower
Capgemini and Fujitsu
2.78
2.83
21% lower
Fusion Alliance
2.77
Bid not taken forward
n/a
Source: National Audit Office analysis of HM Revenue and Customs data
NOTES
1 The Should Cost model (SCM) was used as a proxy Public Sector Comparator and constructed based on industry research into prices, margins and
productivities to create a 10-year target price for the contracted service volumes over the life of the ASPIRE contract.
2 The Should Cost model and the bids changed during the negotiations due to the introduction of new requirements, changes in the contractual volumes,
additional third party contracts and an increase in the Department’s asset base.
1.18 From July 2003, the Inland Revenue was aware
6 Expected benefits from the ASPIRE contract
of the possibility of a merger with HM Customs and
Excise and during the negotiations with the two preferred
n Al IT projects developed under the ASPIRE contract wil have
bidders selected in July 2003 included clauses to deal
individual business cases agreed between the Department
with machinery of government changes. The two former
and Capgemini that wil identify the potential savings and
departments had very different IT strategies and contracts.
benefits from implementation and milestones for successful
project implementation. Capgemini are paid on the basis of
During the ASPIRE procurement, the Inland Revenue
implementing the projects to agreed milestones.
instructed bidders to ignore the possible implications of the
O’Donnell review, while independently both departments
n Capgemini to provide technology-enabled change to the
Department to enable the expected benefits arising from the
sought to ensure that their contracts had sufficient
O’Donnell and Gershon reviews.
flexibility to deal with a possible merger. But throughout
n
the development of the ASPIRE procurement strategy and
The Department is able to obtain an equal share of profits
the suppliers make in excess of the contract target margin
the negotiation, the Departments did not discuss with each
through a ‘performance gain share’ mechanism.
other how their respective strategies and contracts could be
aligned or combined in the event of merger.
Source: National Audit Office analysis of HM Revenue & Customs data
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
19
part one
The Department’s management of
n
Used professional advisers to provide expertise in
the procurement process
particular areas, although the emphasis was on using
in-house expertise as much as possible so that there
1.19 In managing the procurement, the Department:
would be sufficient knowledge, skills and continuity
in the Department once the procurement and legal
n
Built relationships with potential suppliers
advisers were released. The total cost of advisers
and maintained relations with the incumbent
during the procurement process was just over
supplier. The Department’s team had experience
£9 million. The Department has drawn out lessons
in procurement and knowledge of the business. It
from its use of consultants, but has not evaluated the
completed the task on time to ensure that the new
consultants’ performance and quality of advice.
contract would be operational in time for the end of
the EDS contract.
1.20 Although it is difficult to get precise benchmarks
the procurement costs and timescale of ASPIRE compares
n
followed existing guidance and good practice
(Appendix 3). The Office of Government Commerce
favourably with other contracts. The Department’s
(OGC) Gateway 3 report on the stages up to
business case for the procurement estimated total costs of
the award of the contract concluded that the
procurement at around £30 million but actual costs were
ASPIRE project team had maintained an effective
just over £27 million.
Figure 7 shows the breakdown of
competition which had been run to the highest
ASPIRE procurement costs compared with budgeted costs
standards and resulted in a sound evaluation. The
and as a percentage of the total value of the deal.
OGC Gateway team also commented on how
recommendations from its earlier review had
1.21 In most PFI deals, industry benchmarks point
been addressed. This indicated a willingness to
towards a figure of around three per cent for procurement
acknowledge and implement advice, good practice
costs as a proportion of contract value. In comparison
and lessons learnt during the project lifecycle, not
procurement costs for ASPIRE represented less than one
just in retrospective assessment.
per cent of the expected value of ASPIRE which may in
part reflect the scale of the contract. Including transition
n
Drew on the lessons from the contracts which
costs the total is some two per cent of the contract
ASPIRE replaced (see Appendix 4), and took on
value. HM Treasury’s report on PFI projects21 found that
board recommendations from the Committee of
procurement and bid costs can be high in relation to the
Public Accounts’ reports on the IR/EDS strategic
project’s capital value for small PFI schemes.
partnership19 and the NIRS2 contract extension20
such as dealing with potential barriers to
competition and increasing contract flexibility.
19
Inland Revenue/EDS Strategic Partnership: The Award of New Work (28th report 1999-2000).
20
NIRS2 Contract extension (38th Report 2001-02).
21
HM Treasury ‘PFI: Meeting the Investment Challenge’ July 2003
20
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part one
7 Procurement costs
Procurement cost
Budget
Actual spend
Percentage overspend or
Actual spend as a
(£m)
(£m)
(underspend) against budget
percentage of the
value of AsPiRe (£4 billion)
Advisers
10.1
9.5
(6)
0.2
Design and implementation studies
3.3
3.1
(6)
0.08
running costs
Departmental staff costs
4.3
5.7
33
0.1
Due diligence
3.4
0.9
(74)
0.02
Contribution to bidders’ Design &
7.7
7.7
–
0.2
Implementation studies and Invitation
to Tender response costs
Other operating costs
0.8
0.6
(25)
0.02
total
29.6
27.5
(7)
0.7
Source: National Audit Office Analysis of Department’s procurement costs
1.22 The Committee of Public Accounts in its report on
1.23 Faster procurements have the advantage of reducing
the redevelopment of West Middlesex Hospital22 was
procurement costs. From publishing the OJEU notice to
concerned about costs exceeding budgets, recommending
signing the contract the ASPIRE procurement process
that departments learn from previous procurements and
took 21 months, compared with a typical procurement
ensure that sensible budgets are set and adhered to. The
timetable for IT systems within the NHS of about three
Committee also commented on the high cost of advisers
years, and 18 months to two years for a single major PFI
and encouraged departments to drive down advisers’ costs.
project. But recent procurements such as projects within
On health procurements, PFI advisers’ costs have averaged
the NHS National Programme for IT have been completed
3.7 per cent, ranging between one and eight per cent. In
within a year.
comparison, advisers’ costs on ASPIRE were less than half a
per cent of the original deal value.
22
The PFI contract for the redevelopment of West Middlesex University Hospital – 19th PAC Report 2002/03 HC155.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
21
part two
PARt tWo
The transition
22
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part two
2.2 During the main transfer period which ran from
This part of the report examines how the Department
January to July 2004:
managed the risks in changing supplier during
n
the incumbent (EDS) had to maintain the
the period up to the start of the new contract;
Department’s IT while assisting the incoming
and whether services were maintained during the
supplier (Capgemini);
transition period and IT projects progressed. It looks
at the timescale of the transition and how much
n
the incoming supplier had to learn the business
the transition cost. It also considers how well the
and get ready to run IT service from the start of the
transition of NIRS2 was managed.
new contract; and
n
the Department had to manage the relationships
Managing the risks in
between the suppliers
(Figure 8 overleaf), for
example, to ensure that there was sufficient
changing supplier
accommodation during the transition for Capgemini
to work alongside EDS.
2.1 The change from one supplier to another was
the first of this scale in the public sector23 and posed
2.3 The smooth transition was helped by the cooperation
significant risks to maintaining the Department’s services
of EDS and the positive working relationship between
(Appendix 5). During the procurement phase the
EDS and Capgemini. The Department carefully developed
Department concluded that there were no ‘critical’ risks in
working relationships with EDS and Accenture and built
retaining EDS, but if Capgemini were selected a number
similar partnerships with Capgemini and Fujitsu over
of risks would need to be managed. The Department’s
the course of the competition. It was supported by exit
evaluation of the Capgemini bid concluded that it had
clauses in the Eagle contract which the Department had
well developed plans to manage the risks.
negotiated in 2002, binding EDS to provide a certain level
of support and information to any incoming supplier and
formed the basis for sensible arrangements between the
parties. EDS also wanted to maintain its reputation and
exit on good terms.
23
The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency changed IT suppliers following open competition in 2002, but its new contract is on a much smaller scale than ASPIRE.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
23
part two
8 Roles of the incumbents, incoming suppliers and the Department during the transition
Party
Key roles
incumbent suppliers
n To deliver ongoing IT service and project development according to contractual service levels
(EDS and Accenture)
and agreed plans up to the end of 30 June 2004
n To fulfil all exit and termination responsibilities
incoming suppliers
n To plan and execute transition activities on time to provide contracted live service levels from the
(Capgemini/Fujitsu)
start of the new contract from 1 July 2004
n To transfer staff from the incumbents
n To transfer or replace 3rd party contracts used by the incumbents
n To minimise the costs of transition
department
n To facilitate relationships between the incumbents and incoming suppliers
n To provide necessary accommodation and facilities for the incoming suppliers
n To enforce exit clauses agreed with the incumbents
n To monitor agreed service levels and project development against agreed plans
n To identify key incumbent staff to ensure they were available to the new contract
n To manage the costs of transition
Source: National Audit Office
The transition timescale
n
securing the transfer of designated key staff. The
Department and Capgemini identified 280 key
2.4 The main transition from EDS to Capgemini was
staff, of which 224 (80 per cent) transferred. The
completed within the expected time frame of six months.
loss of key staff was a major risk, but its effect was
Key activities included:
reduced by the various exit clauses negotiated by
the Department. For example, there was provision
n
securing high levels of staff transfer from the
incumbents so that when the new supplier started
for some EDS staff that did not transfer to remain
to run live service it would be using staff with a
available to support Capgemini for a year after the
detailed knowledge and understanding of how the
end of the EDS contract, although the Department
IT supports the Department’s business activities.
only utilised this resource for three months.
Of the 2,928 EDS staff in post, around 96 per cent
Capgemini also filled potential vacancies of staff that
(2,811) transferred to Capgemini by June 2004,
would be leaving at the end of the EDS contract and
under Transfer of Undertaking and Protection
work-shadowed areas where key staff were likely
of Employment (TUPE) conditions. Capgemini
to leave. From the start of transition, staff were only
achieved this by running the staff transfer as a
permitted to leave EDS business with the Department
stand-alone project, putting on road shows, and
when Capgemini confirmed that they had adequate
offering incentives such as comparable employment
cover in place.
conditions and pensions. Also EDS helped by
n
the transfer of third-party contracts used by EDS
communicating with its staff about transfer issues
to deliver and support IT services. Under the
and agreeing to fund the £65 million pension
original contract, EDS had sub-contracted much
shortfall of staff transferring.
of its work to third-parties, so their loss could have
had a significant impact on service delivery. During
the transition, 226 such sub-contractors were being
used by EDS. Capgemini and EDS working with
third party suppliers successfully transferred 219
(97 per cent) of these, with the remainder either
replaced or no longer required.
2
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part two
Transition costs
2.6 The Committee of Public Accounts in its report
on “Delivering better value for money from the PFI”
2.5 EDS estimated its transition costs would be
(HC 764) in June 2003 recognised that imposing excessive
£4.4 million if it had won the new larger contract, mainly
costs on bidders is likely to result in higher charges in
comprising additional staff costs. By choosing Capgemini
the longer run and might deter firms from bidding. The
the Department incurred £37.6 million in Unique Transition
C&AG’s report on “London Underground PPP: were
Costs paid to Capgemini and around £5.3 million in exit
they good deals” (HC 645) in June 2004 recognised that
costs to EDS and Accenture
(Figure 9). Unique Transition
in some cases departments may not be able to develop
Costs were those costs identified by the supplier and
sufficient competition without reimbursing bid costs.
agreed with the Department which would not have been
It also concluded that, after conceding the principle of
incurred had the existing suppliers continued to provide all
reimbursing the losing bidders, departments should take
or part of the IT (they covered the need: to encourage the
care to control the extent of reimbursement.
EDS workforce to transfer to ensure continuity of service;
to relocate services from EDS web-hosting premises to
2.7 Capgemini’s first estimate of Unique Transition Costs
Fujitsu; to review work in progress to identify the cost to
of £75 million was provided whilst it was in contract
complete and the IT solution; and to replatform NIRS2 and
negotiations with the Department in October 2003. After
relocate from Accenture to Fujitsu sites). They included a
awarding the contract, the Department estimated that it
profit margin to the new supplier of 15.5 per cent (which
would have to pay transition costs of around £40 million
was a discount on the normal gross profit margin before
(Figure 10 overleaf). The estimate was set at around
overheads). The Department had agreed to fund such costs
10 to 15 per cent of the new contract’s first year value
as a way of stimulating competition during the early stages
and the Department achieved outturn at the lower end
of the procurement process.
of this range (Figure 10). As the details of the transition
became clearer from Capgemini’s plans, the Department
agreed to increase the budget to £52 million. However,
9 Transition costs
the Department and Capgemini did not agree the detail
of what would qualify as a unique transition cost until
Category
Amount
the transition had started. Although individual unique
(£ million)
transition cost payments were generally well controlled,
Unique Transition Costs to Capgemini/Fujitsu
37.6
valuable resources and time were taken up during
transition negotiating whether a cost was unique or not.
Transition support costs to EDS/Accenture
5.3
Capgemini submitted its financial estimates for unique
Departmental staff and running costs
1.3
transition costs, which were scrutinised by the Department
Consultancy advice and support
2.4
before it provided guidance on which items would
not qualify and which were likely to qualify, subject to
Department for Work and Pensions and IT
0.5
detailed examination of the elements of expenditure.
support costs for NIRS 2 transition
Retained staff costs for EDS
0.4
2.8 The actual first year profit for ASPIRE is likely to be
total costs of transition
47.5
£53.924 million, compared to a target margin expectation
of £38 million, both of which represent a 10 per cent
Source: National Audit Of ice analysis of HM Revenue and Customs data
profit margin. The absolute increase is due to an increase
in the Department’s demand for IT and the target margin
NOTES
percentage of 12.3 per cent is not likely to be achieved.
The £3.4 mil ion of UTCs paid to Capgemini/Fujitsu for NIRS2 transition is
If the target profit margin had been exceeded, the
included in the £37.6 mil ion.
Department would expect a 50 per cent share in the
The Accenture transition support costs of £3.4 mil ion are included in the
£5.3 mil ion.
excess profits.
24
Based on provisional figures.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
25
part two
January 2004, all the parties concentrated on negotiating a
10 Unique Transition Costs – outturn against estimates
contract, and very little time was left to plan the transition,
(£ millions)
especially as the same personnel were involved in
both. The transition plan from Capgemini was delivered
Category
estimated in
outturn
outturn as a
incrementally as monthly plans for each of the first three
business case
percentage of the
after award
estimated contract
months. The monthly activities included discovery tasks
of the contract
spend in the
that influenced and clarified the task list for the following
first year
month. The complete detailed plan taking the project
(£ million)
(£ million)
(£384 million)
through the live implementation date and beyond was
Capgemini
32.5
37.6
9.8
not available until March 2004. EDS as the incumbent
transition costs
supplier considers that the delay in producing a more
EDS/Accenture
12.0
5.7
1.5
detailed transition plan made it more difficult to plan its
transition and
likely resource allocation in advance. The Department
support costs
had used the period from the start of August 2003 to
total
44.52
43.3
11.3
the contract award in December 2003 to develop and
test transition plans. There were no major disruptions in
Source: National Audit Of ice analysis of HM Revenue and Customs data
services, and the incumbent’s performance remained steady
during the transition period. The Department paid EDS
NOTES
around £2.3 million over and above normal running costs
1 In preparing for the transfer, the Department also incurred £14 mil ion
for the rights to use NIRS2 after the termination of the contract although
to provide the necessary support for the transition.
the intel ectual property rights remained with Accenture. This represented a
closing payment as part of the 1995 PFI contract.
2.11 Changing suppliers also increased the risk
2 Subsequently increased to £52 mil ion by the Department to reflect
that ongoing projects and IT development would be
Capgemini’s transition plans.
delayed and project costs would increase. The Office of
Government Commerce advises that departments should
The transition’s impact on services
have a stable business environment during transition and
the early stages of a contract. An independent review
2.9 EDS were responsible for maintaining IT service
of the Department’s transition planning arrangements
delivery during the transition period. In this period,
recommended the implementation of a ‘safety zone’ around
the chances of disruptions were greater than normal
the transition to avoid high volumes of change and reduce
because additional demands were made on EDS to
the pressures on the outgoing and incoming suppliers.
support Capgemini and fulfil exit clauses. EDS had to
At the time of the transition the Department had nearly
maintain service levels for 250 IT systems to support
100 projects valued at £439 million in development,
the Department’s business, for upgrading systems and
including several ‘business-critical’ projects with tight
for progressing project development work according to
legislative deadlines. Additional demands for IT projects
agreed plans. For example, during the transition period the
associated with the creation of the new HM Revenue
Department’s IT systems issued 8 million income tax self
and Customs Department also emerged at this time.
assessment statements and 870,000 corporation tax notices
Because many of the ongoing projects were time-critical,
to file, processed 9.7 million annual tax codings reviews. It
the Department decided that development work should
was also necessary to complete around 80 IT upgrades.
continue during transition and scheduled IT releases
should be delivered according to plan. During transition,
2.10 Because of the perceived risks to service delivery, in
EDS delivered scheduled IT releases and worked with
October 2003 the Department commissioned Gartner, an
Capgemini to develop project plans. The ASPIRE contract
IT consultancy firm, to review its internal arrangements for
provides for an extension of up to eight years which
the transition. The report identified as a key risk the lack of
gives the Department some flexibility to time any
an agreed transition plan between the incumbent and new
re-competition when there is less ongoing project
suppliers. Until the contract with Capgemini was signed in
development work underway.
26
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part two
The transition of NIRS2
2.13 Capgemini/Fujitsu encountered problems with NIRS2
re-platforming and the Department requested changes.
2.12 Under ASPIRE, the Capgemini and Fujitsu
Capgemini retained Accenture as a sub-contractor under
consortium took over responsibility for the running of
ASPIRE and rescheduled the work in phases which
NIRS2 from Accenture in January 2005. The transfer of
were completed in September 2005 at a further cost of
NIRS2 was run as a separate project to the main transition
£2 million. The cost of completing the migration in the
with a budget of £16.2 million. The Department paid
deferred timescale was £9.9 million. Capgemini/Fujitsu has
Capgemini £3.4 million in unique transition costs and
paid £7.9 million and the Department £2 million. Although
Accenture £3.4 million for support during the transition
the delays did not affect service delivery, the system was
(Figure 11). However the transfer of NIRS2 IT data systems
implemented at the end of August 2005 but was not fully
from Accenture to Fujitsu proved to be more difficult
operational until November 2005. The NIRS2 service was
than expected and the previous contract with Accenture
maintained successfully throughout the transition process.
had to be extended (Appendix 8). The Committee of
Public Accounts’ report on “NIRS2 Contract extension”
2.14 The transfer of NIRS2 was more difficult than the main
(38th Report 2001-02) highlighted the challenge that
transition because:
the Revenue would face in 2004, especially in terms of
learning and set up costs for these large and complex
n
The nature of the terms of the existing PFI contract
systems in a deal likely to be worth over £4 billion.
with Accenture meant that the Department had to
The Committee considered that the methodologies the
agree a set of exit procedures with Accenture and
Department used to estimate and benchmark proposals
therefore was able to disclose key information about
would need to be rigorous.
the system to assist the incoming supplier during
due diligence.
n
Capgemini’s transition plans proved ambitious given
11 Total costs to the Department of re-platforming NIRS2
its level of expertise in the design and operation of
the system.
Actual costs
n
Initially the degree of collaboration between the
(£ million)
incumbent and the incoming supplier was not as
Capgemini transition costs
3.4
strong as in the main transition but Accenture did
Accenture support costs
3.4
meet its obligations under the agreed exit provisions.
Costs incurred by the Department for
n
The nature of the PFI agreement meant that the
Work and Pensions
0.5
Department had limited in-house knowledge of the
transition costs1
7.3
IT used in NIRS2.
Capgemini contract costs for NIRS2
7.6
n
Accenture’s workforce was less willing to transfer to
total2
14.9
the new supplier.
Source: National Audit Of ice
2.15 The Department has taken steps in ASPIRE to avoid
similar problems occurring in future re-competitions, for
NOTES
example by including measures that will allow for more
1 Includes the £2 million paid by the Department for the delay in
re-platforming NIRS2.
extensive sharing of information with bidders during
2 The Department’s forecast of the cost of transferring NIRS2 was
due diligence.
£16.2 mil ion. In preparing for the transfer, the Department also incurred
£14 mil ion for the rights to use NIRS2 after the termination of the contract
although the intel ectual property rights remained with Accenture. This
represented a closing payment as part of the 1995 PFI contract.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
27
part three
PARt tHRee
Management of the contract
28
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part three
(Figure 12 overleaf) but they did not relate to major
This part of the report considers the initial
business disruptions. The Department’s new governance
performance of the supplier from the start of the
arrangements to manage the partnership include:
contract and what the Department is doing to manage
operational meetings; a monthly commercial issues forum;
the contract. It examines the level of service the new
and a Joint Partnership meeting that considers contract
supplier has provided from day one of the contract,
changes, performance trends and relationship issues.
the delivery of the Department’s main IT projects
since transition and the cost and flexibility of the
ASPIRE contract to deal with change.
The delivery of business-critical
projects
Initial performance
3.3 It was important for the Department to establish
what work had been completed, the stage the project
3.1 The risks that need to be managed in embarking on
had reached and that it resolved any outstanding issues
a new contract with a new supplier (Appendix 5) include
regarding payment. The Department could then establish
ensuring that the new supplier will be able to deliver
what work the new supplier needs to do to complete
services from day one, maintaining ongoing project progress
the project and ensure that it only pays the new supplier
to time and cost, controlling costs for new work and
for new work. The Department, in conjunction with the
ensuring that the expected benefits of ASPIRE are realised.
new supplier, undertook a health-check at the start of the
contract to assess the risks to business-critical projects
3.2 The partnership between the Department and
and specify how ongoing projects would be delivered to
Capgemini has provided IT services from day one of the
agreed cost, time and delivery outputs. They found that
contract, maintaining service continuity in performance
different standards were being applied across different
during transition. There are over 500 performance
projects, for example eight different change processes
measures, of which some 200 are key performance
were in operation. Some projects had incomplete
indicators (KPIs) and carry service credits. Performance
information and they considered that there had been some
indicators cover different aspects of delivery ranging from
under-investment in IT under the previous contract. Some
running live service, to achieving productivity targets and
systems needed updating and some projects had been
delivering business-critical projects. Since the transition
held back by the Department until the end of transition.
ASPIRE’s performance on delivering IT services overall
As a result, in the post-transition period there was a need
has met or exceeded target levels. However there have
to revisit milestones and delivery timescales. All these
been eight IT system failures which led to £2.67 million
factors added risk to the early stages of the new contract.
in terms of service credits in the first contract year
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
29
part three
Capgemini’s performance against HM Revenue and Customs Performance Indicators
12
ASPIRE Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Number of measures
250
Total KPIs
200
150
100
50
KPIs failed
0
Q3 2004
Q4 2004
Q1 2005
Q2 2005
Q3 2005
Q4 2005
Q1 2006
Quarter
ASPIRE Performance Indicators (PIs)
Number of measures
600
Total fails
Total measures
500
400
300
200
100
0
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
Jun
Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
2004
2005
2006
Month
Source: National Audit Office analysis of HM Revenue and Customs ASPIRE performance data
3.4 Since ASPIRE began the supplier has successfully
changes. But there have been some delays and cost
delivered a number of major IT software releases
increases on business-critical projects, which have on
for business-critical projects aimed at introducing
the whole been caused by the Department changing its
efficiency improvement, better data, service quality and
requirements
(Figure 13).
management information and responding to legislative
30
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part three
13 Progress on business-critical projects under ASPIRE
Project
timescales
Project Budget as
spend to
Progress
at March 2006
March 2006
(£million)
(£million)
Construction
Implementation
123.4
72.9
Implementation delayed from April 2006
Industry Scheme
of release 3
to April 2007 to allow industry and IT
(first live release)
suppliers to prepare for changes and for
April 2007.
HM Revenue and Customs to build industry
Release 4 by
confidence in the system. HMRC and
31/10/07, Release
ASPIRE planning to complete majority of IT
5 by 05/04/08.
development by August 2006. Budget now
reflects cost of deferral and latest ASPIRE
cost estimates.
On-line services
2000/01
697.3
368
Some projects have been rescheduled due
– 2007/08
to specialist IT resource constraints.
The ‘On-line services’ programme has
ceased to exist since April 2006 as it has
been amalgamated into the Customer
Contact Transformation Programme.
External Routing
Phase 1 staged
205
170
Phase 1 implemented.
Interface Component
release from April
EOY06 – Releases 1 and 2 implemented.
(ERIC) and
2005 - Jan 2006.
Release 3 on schedule for delivery on
Modernisation of
EOY06 –
3 July 2006.
PAYE processes:
MPPC1, EOY06 and
April-July 2006
Phase 2 - Releases 0 and 1.0 implemented.
MPPC 2
MPPC2 –
Subsequent releases on schedule.
April 2007
Better data for CT
Various releases to
66.7
30.11
One release (2b) has been deferred for
April 2007
four months, two other releases have been
delivered on time and two others deferred
from November 2006 to April 2007 to
ease pressure on online service resources.
Modernising
Project closed
113
105.7
Delivery of IT could not be achieved
Stamp Duty
31 Dec 2005
by December 2003 timetable, so the
Department phased the release of the IT
between July 2004 and February 2005,
with contingency arrangements in the event
of potential IT problems. The full e-channel
element was deferred until July 2005 due to
a shortage of web solutions resources.
Child Trust Fund
Various releases to
163.2
69.52
Child Trust Fund delivered to time cost and
and Child Benefit
April 2006
quality. Development of the Child Benefit 2
system replacement
system at February 2006 was suspended
pending a business review of cost/benefit
analysis and alternative technical options.
Source: National Audit Office analysis of HMRC project costs
NOTES
1 Spend to date figure to May 2006.
2 Figures are provided up to November 2005 as the project stopped being classified as business-critical in December 2005.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
31
part three
Cost of ASPIRE
3.7 There was a risk that when the Department transferred
from one supplier to another it could affect planned
3.5 The cost of the contract in the first year has been
progress on projects. The new contractor’s team was likely
more than the Department originally planned. Shortly
to take time to get up to speed on projects in progress. It
after the contract was awarded in December 2003 the
might have been unrealistic to expect the new supplier
Department estimated a spend of £384 million (excluding
to sign up to the productivity regime that controls the
VAT) in the first year of the contract based on 2002-03
development projects when they had not been involved
volume of IT demand which was used in the invitation
fully from the start in initial estimates through design
to tender. Actual spend in the first year from July 2004 to
element and authorisation. The Department decided that
June 2005 was £539 million (excluding VAT). The Office
all the ASPIRE terms would be phased in incrementally
of Government Commerce Gateway 4 Review (readiness
for software projects underway. It considered that bidders
for service) in June 2004 expressed concerns over the
might be deterred by the prospect of taking on nearly 100
requirements and timescales of ‘work in progress’ projects.
existing projects, valued at £439 million, with outputs and
It noted that costs had risen due to increased volumes of
timetables they had not planned. It decided to pay the new
service requirements and recommended that these costs
supplier for ongoing projects on the terms of the old contract
be clarified and refined.
which stipulates payment on the basis of resources used but
using the costs agreed under the new contract. Capgemini’s
3.6 The main reason for the increase in the cost of
staff cost rates appear higher than those under the previous
the contract in the first year has been a 132 per cent
contract because they include overheads that were charged
rise in the Department’s spending on projects, covering
separately under the previous contract. While this may have
systems development and enhancement (an increase of
helped maintain competition by persuading bidders that a
£98 million) and a 117 per cent increase in consultancy
new supplier would not be bound by the existing project
(an increase of £27 million)
(Figure 14). This has been
delivery plans, it meant that the Department were delayed
due mainly to unexpected work involved in the New
in achieving some of the delivery assurance benefits of the
Tax Credits Programme, Modernising PAYE Processes
new contract, which stipulates payment on the basis of
for Customers, the introduction of the Child Trust
performance achieved rather than resources used.
Fund, Reform of the Construction Industry Scheme,
Modernising Stamp Duty and significant changes to the
3.8 The need to control costs is reinforced by the
Departmental infrastructure, which was not planned
increase in the costs of the previous contract due to an
when the Department awarded the contract. There has
increase in the Department’s demand for IT services. When
also been increased demand for some IT services, and the
the Department awarded the ‘Eagle’ contract in 1994 to
retention of Accenture to provide application development
EDS it was valued at £1 billion (which excluded price
support to NIRS2 will add an extra £8.04 million to
indexation or growth), by 2000 the Department estimated
costs in the first three years of the contract. This has
that it would cost £2 billion and the final spend under
generated a profit for Capgemini which is likely to be
the contract was £2.5 billion; on the whole this can be
£53.9 million25 compared to a target margin expectation
attributed to the Department’s increased demand for IT.
of £38 million; however both represent the same profit
This new contract has thresholds on the demand for IT
margin of 10 per cent. But Capgemini does not expect to
services to trigger some reappraisal of the supplier’s charge
achieve the target profit margin of around 12.3 per cent
rates. As the Department’s volume of work increases it
so it is unlikely that any profit share will accrue to the
expects to obtain discounts on unit price and consequently
Department for the first year.
a reduced price based on economies of scale. However
this can result in price increases where the supplier has
been unable to avoid extra costs. Some of the thresholds
have been exceeded in the first year and the Department
has negotiated some price changes with Capgemini which
resulted in a minor price increase and three significant
price reductions.
25
Based on provisional figures.
32
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part three
14 Cost increases on ASPIRE during the first year of the contract
service/Project
Forecast charges
Actual charges
increase (decrease)
Percentage
(£ million)
(£ million)
of actual compared
increase
to forecast
(decrease)
(£ million)
Service Lines
Operational Service Charges
266.3
298.0
31.7
12
Service Credits (penalties)
(1.3)
(2.7)
(1.4)
108
Project Lines
Business Applications Development
74.0
172.0
98.0
132
and enhancement projects
Integration
16.0
11.0
(5.0)
(31)
Desktop Applications
6.0
11.0
5.0
83
Rate based services (consultancy)
23.0
50.0
27.0
117
total
384.0
539.3
155.3
40
Source: National Audit Office analysis of HMRC forecast and actual spend of ASPIRE
3.9 The Department’s financial model for ASPIRE forecasts
3.10 Comparisons of the profit margin on ASPIRE with
spend to decrease slowly but remain broadly flat over the
other contracts are not straightforward. There are few
contract term. If the first year spending on the contract,
good up to date comparators to use, especially as the
particularly IT projects, continues at the same level over
approach to IT solutions changed in 2003 when the
the lifetime of the contract, the final cost of the ASPIRE
Treasury decided against using PFI for IT projects. But
contract could be in excess of £6 billion rather than the
the comparators below suggest that the percentage profit
originally projected £3 billion to £4 billion. This does not
margin in ASPIRE is within the range of other contracts.
take account of any impact of the merger of the PFI Fujitsu
Capgemini’s target profit margin ranges from 5.6 per cent
contract. This raises the question how the Department
to 27.2 per cent across the services it provides but its
will fund the additional spending on IT under the new
average profit margin under ASPIRE is 12.3 per cent
contract. The additional funding agreed on the project
(Figure 15 overleaf). The four project lines are higher
budgets is either funded by Treasury ring-fenced funds or
than the average and the main software development
additional allocations at the start of 2004-05 or in year.
line is 14 per cent. This compares to 16.9 per cent
Allocations are approved by the Department’s Executive
the Department used in the Should Cost Model and
or Operating Committees. The Department expects that
the actual margins on the previous contract with EDS
this level of demand for IT services will not be sustained
which ranged from 13.5 per cent to 26.5 per cent. A
because it considers the demand for IT services will
PricewaterhouseCoopers study on PFI rates of return since
decline because of its targets for reducing staff levels
199726 covered over 60 schemes and illustrated the range
by 12,500, an increase in the use of electronic services
of rates of return, depending on the size and complexity
replacing printing, and its aim to reduce spending on IT
of the project and the allocation of risk. The study showed
to less than 20 per cent of the Department’s budget. The
a decline in nominal rates of return from 13.5 per cent to
Department forecasts expenditure in the second year of
10 per cent by 2001, the projects covering areas such as
the contract to be around £800 million but it does not
health, education and transport but excluding IT projects.
have an estimate of the likely total cost of ASPIRE as it
The NHS National Programme for IT contains target profit
considers it is difficult to predict the level of IT demand,
margins between seven and 19 per cent, depending on
price changes and changes to the Department’s activities
negotiations with each individual contractor for particular
over the lifetime of the contract.
contracts. Other PFI deals tend to have higher margins.
26
HM Treasury
PFI: Meeting the Investment Challenge, July 2003 Annex C – PricewaterhouseCoopers Rate of Return Study.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
33
part three
Acting as an intelligent customer
15 Comparison of the profit margin on ASPIRE with
other contracts
3.11 Relations with the new supplier have been helped by
having a separate HM Revenue and Customs commercial
Profit margin
management team to oversee the commercial aspects
of the contract, leaving the Department’s service line
ASPIRE range of profit margins
5.6–27.2%
managers and supplier teams to concentrate on meeting
ASPIRE average profit margin
12.3%
business needs. Continuity has been helped by high
ASPIRE IT project development profit margin
14%
rates of staff transfer from EDS to Capgemini. The ASPIRE
Department’s Should Cost Model profit margin
16.9%
contract identified the key supplier people to remain
on ASPIRE for a period after the contract started. In
contrast to the fifteen Departmental staff involved in the
Project
Contractor
Profit Margin
procurement stage only one remained in post soon after
the award of the new contract as the Department set up
EAGLE (previous contract)
EDS
13.5–26.5%
a new contract management team. The Department has
PFI (ISA) contract with
Fujitsu
12.97%
some 1,950 information management staff including
former HM Customs
those working in the areas of technical solutions,
and Excise
project support, risk assurance and business solutions.
PFI hospitals1
Various
18-23% on
The Department is seeking to reduce the ratio of its own
initial projects,
information management staff compared to the supplier
12-17% on more
team from 30:70 to nearer 20:80, to over time reduce the
recent projects
Department’s total Information Management workforce
NHS National
Various
7-19% target
(including civil servants, contractors and supplier staff)
Programme for IT2
from 6.3 per cent to no greater than five per cent of the
PFI various schemes3
Various
10 -13.5%
Department’s total workforce and to reduce expenditure
from 24 per cent to less than 18 per cent of the
Source: National Audit Office analysis of contract profit margins
Department’s running costs. These targets can however be
NOTES
significantly affected by changes to the legislative agenda.
1 Department of Health released figures February 2005 – pre-tax
nominal projected rates of return for contractors on PFI Hospitals.
3.12 Capgemini has introduced mechanisms to
2 Pre-tax rates of return from the NHS National Programme for
support the successful delivery of the Department’s
IT contract.
IT needs including:
3 “PFI: Meeting the Investment Challenge” – PWC study on PFI rates
of return since 1997 which covered 64 PFI schemes and illustrated the
n
Bringing together managers from the Department
range of rates of return, depending on the size and complexity of the
and from the suppliers to collaborate and share
project and the allocation of risk. The projects covered areas such as
health, education and transport but excluded IT projects.
ideas on IT solutions known as Accelerated
4 The annual profit margin on the NIRS2 contract since it was amended
Solution Environments.
in 2000 ranged from 25.9% to 39.7%. This was a significantly smaller
contract than EAGLE or ISA.
n
Working with the Department to start to reduce
the number of IT data centres and identify process
efficiencies in creating business cases supporting
IT investments.
n
Developing a system to choose subcontractors that
match the Department’s needs
n
Involving the Department in discussions with third
party suppliers such as BT.
3
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part three
Evaluation of supplier and
Apart from the caps and collars on service lines
contract performance
which allow the Department to review the prices for
IT service demand volumes, the supplier can only
3.13 The Department is changing the way it manages the IT
change price in response to a change of requirement
contract with the new supplier as the new contract is more
and the Department can only change price if
focused towards service delivery and productivity. But the
benchmarking with other suppliers’ prices suggests
Department has taken 18 months to get an overall view of
the price no longer represents value for money. The
how the contract is performing and to put into effect the full
Department has translated contract changes in the
arrangements for managing the contract, which include:
first year of the contract to show the impact on the
original price (using the Should Cost Model) which
n
Service line managers working with Capgemini
shows the cost of the contract is £4.1 billion with
to forecast demand and review supplier service
provision for inflation based on 2002-03 volumes.
levels against the range of performance indicators
and targets. It has taken around nine months to get
n
Benchmarking. The Department is monitoring the
effective bottom-up forecasting from Capgemini staff
supplier’s margins on services and consultancy/
(previously EDS), more used to input-based pricing.
project related work. The Department has a
In the first year the Department’s estimated service
performance gain share mechanism which starts
activity limits in the contract have been breached.
with an open book audit. This audit was completed
in April 2006 but some work has continued to
n
Performance measurement. The previous targets
determine the profit for the first year of the contract.
under the Eagle contract have been adopted
This work is ongoing at end May 2006 and there is
and increased for actual performance achieved.
at that date no accrued profit share as Capgemini
Following the integration of the former Customs ISA
has not made its target profit margin. As part of
contract, the Department is reviewing the number of
the overall negotiations to integrate the PFI Fujitsu
performance measures it has to identify gaps as part
contract with the ASPIRE contract, the Department
of a wider service improvement programme with a
has agreed an initial benchmarking programme
view to implement them by April 2007. Until then
to begin in July 2006. The aim is to benchmark
the Department assesses the contractor’s performance
all of the services within the contract on a rolling
through progress on pilot trial projects, performance
basis throughout the remaining life of the contract.
against targets, live service running, financial
Outside that plan there is provision to benchmark
statements showing actual costs and profit margins
any new service or any element on an ad hoc basis.
and progress on major projects. The Department has
For example, it has contracted an independent
also agreed in principle with Capgemini and Fujitsu
company to benchmark server prices and has used
to establish baselines to support new measures
the results to challenge the supplier’s proposal. With
of performance on end-to-end live services to the
the change of supplier and contract (from input
desktops for incorporation from April 2007.
to output-based pricing) it has taken until January
n
Proposals for new work. For the period July 2004 to
2006, about 18 months into the new contract, for
March 2006, 188 new work proposals were presented
the performance of the new supplier to bed down.
by the Department’s business areas. The Department
The Department had originally intended to produce
defines its business requirements and the supplier
an annual value for money report in November 2005
provides a proposal to meet those requirements with
but now intends to produce a financial scorecard
trials and quality testing before becoming operational.
and a customer service assessment reporting
The supplier pays rebates/penalties where delivery
mechanism in late 2006 to assess the supplier’s
is delayed. The Department pays the supplier for
overall performance. The Department’s comparison
meeting success criteria for interim milestones and
of the first year’s costs with the Should Cost Model
only pays the final element of the supplier’s profit
(updated for contract changes), showed that ASPIRE
margin after six months of successful live running.
cost £71.8 million less than the Should Cost Model.
n
Procedures for dealing with change. The
n
Education and guidance for staff on how to obtain
Department is using a financial model to manage
IT services from the supplier, explaining roles,
changes in the contract which shows the effect on
responsibilities and timescales under the new contract.
price and therefore on payments to the supplier.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
35
part three
Renegotiating ASPIRE to take on the
3.16 The Department’s preferred option was to use the
former HM Customs and Excise’s
ASPIRE contract as the main contract for the provision of
IT services to HMRC rather than put the two contracts out
PFI IT contract
for re-competition. When the former HM Customs and
Excise renegotiated its PFI contract with Fujitsu in 2003,
3.14 The former HM Customs and Excise and the Inland
it considered that its IT infrastructure could be connected
Revenue had different IT strategies and their respective
to that of the Inland Revenue at no significant additional
IT contracts did not reflect the likelihood of merger in
cost.28 The Treasury required that any revised contract
2005. By then, the former Inland Revenue had the ASPIRE
provides a better price and a lower cost of delivery than
contract delivering its IT requirement and the former
having two separate contracts over the full contract-term.
HM Customs and Excise had signed a revised contract (ISA)
A ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ between the
with Fujitsu in 2003 to provide IT infrastructure services.
Department, Capgemini and Fujitsu in April 2005 set out a
The services delivered by the contracts are fundamentally
collaborative approach to merging the contracts, including
different – ASPIRE provides IT services including IT
the setting-up of a working group to develop a detailed
infrastructure and applications development whereas the
time and resource plan and contains a commitment from
PFI contract provides IT infrastructure - but HM Revenue
the two suppliers to ensure that value for money criteria
and Customs believes that the ASPIRE contract will
are met.
be flexible enough to deal with the merger of the two
Departments, and this now needs to be proved in practice.
3.17 The Office of Government and Commerce Gateway
Review 2 in April 2005 reviewed an early business
3.15 The O’Donnell review27 in March 2004 found that
case for merging the two contracts, to ensure that the
while there had been some communication between
procurement strategy was robust and appropriate and that
the departments, there had not been joint consideration
the project plan was realistic. It recommended clearer
of the best solution for the provision of IT. HM Revenue
lines of accountability, better contingency planning to
and Customs has new IT requirements which were not
deal with the possible delay in agreeing a new contract
envisaged when the separate ASPIRE and ISA contracts
from January 2006 and improved project management.
were entered into. HM Revenue and Customs needs to
It also recommended that the negotiations for the
integrate its operating environments to realise the benefits
new enlarged contract should include an assessment
of the merger. For example the desktop environments of
of supplier strengths and weaknesses to ensure the
the two former departments had significantly different
achievement of value for money. Gateway Review 3 took
software and applications. The Department’s Strategic
place in November 2005 and assessed the recommended
Integrated Desktop Environment (STRIDE) project aims
investment decision and the business case. Gateway
to provide this single operating environment enabling
Review 4 in February 2006 took place ahead of contract
all services, information and applications to be available
award and considered that the Department had achieved
across the Department. This project is driven by the
a good commercial deal in the circumstances. It found
need to move both former Departments’ operating
that the Department needed to complete the work to
environments off Microsoft NT4 platforms onto Microsoft
reset the service levels under the changed contract,
XP platforms as the former will no longer be supported
implement better contract management arrangements
by Microsoft from December 2006. STRIDE began in
and ensure that benefits of the contract integration are
December 2004 and has estimated development and
realised. In particular the Review considered that one
implementation costs of about £170 million.
27
Financing Britain’s Future
Review of the Revenue Departments, Gus O’Donnell March 2004.
28
C&AG’s report
Transforming the performance of HM Customs and Excise through electronic service delivery, HC 1267, 2002-03) November 2003 para 2.23.
36
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part three
weakness identified at the previous Gateway Review was
still present, that there was a lack of skills and a proven
approach to IT programme/project management and risk
management and that therefore the Department could
improve its management of its IT contracts. In response
the Department is reviewing its contract management
approach so that it is more proactive in extracting the best
supplier performance from the ASPIRE contract. The OGC
Gateway 5 review took place in May 2006 to evaluate
whether ASPIRE is delivering the benefits identified in
the original business case and how well the contract is
responding to changing circumstances.
3.18 Having merged the two contracts the Department
will need to manage certain risks:
n
that the merged contract delivers the benefits from
the earlier investment in the PFI contract, and that it
can track the benefits of the changed contract.29
n
ensuring effective competition when the new
combined contract comes to an end. The combined
contract will make the ASPIRE contract even
larger than originally envisaged which makes the
re-competition and the ASPIRE exit clauses in ten
years time even more important. The size of the
contract may be a barrier to effective competition.
n
Having reliable performance management data for
the changed ASPIRE contract.
n
Ensuring that the Department has in place robust
contract and IT project management arrangements.
This should address the areas for improvement
identified by successive Gateway Reviews to extract
the best value for money from the ASPIRE contract.
29
Committee of Public Accounts 24th Report 2003-04 ,June 2004,
Transforming the performance of HM Customs and Excise through electronic service delivery.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
37
part four
PARt FouR
Lessons from ASPIRE
38
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part four
4.2 Departments will need to establish and manage
This part of the report summarises the main lessons
good relationships between bidders, incumbent
from ASPIRE. It draws together the various strands
suppliers and the new supplier. This is important to
of good practice that the report has identified from
ensure effective competition, a smooth transfer of
the procurement, transition and early performance
knowledge and people from the incumbent to the new
of the contract.
supplier and that value for money is achieved. Adopting
this good practice should result in financial savings
from better contracts, reduced transition costs and
4.1 Across government there are a large number of
reduced risk of service disruption. The following five
major outsourcing contracts.30 As these contracts reach
sections seek to draw out the main issues from ASPIRE
the end of their first-term, departments are likely to
and identify best practice that has been largely used
face similar competition and transition issues to those
by the Department. These have been developed with
encountered by HM Revenue and Customs on ASPIRE.
the Department and will be further developed by NAO
We have identified good practice that has arisen out of
and the Office of Government Commerce to provide
the Department’s experience of ASPIRE that should help
guidance to departments facing a similar situation. The
other government departments in re-competing their
main lessons and good practice cover:
IT contracts and in managing any transition to a new
partner (Appendix 6).
1
Preparing for the end of existing contracts
2
Aligning the new contract to business needs
3
Creating competition
4
Managing the transition
5
Maintaining service delivery during the transition
30
HM Treasury’s PFI signed project list notes there are around 540 Private Finance Initiative (PFI) contracts with a total capital value of almost £40 billion.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
39
part four
1 Preparing for the end of
2 Aligning the new contract to
existing contracts
business needs
a
ASPIRE provides some important lessons about
a
Departments need to be aware of the possibility
making a market and deciding on the most
of likely future machinery of government changes
appropriate commercial strategies to provide
and include in the contracts sufficient flexibility
sufficient incentives to encourage suppliers to
to deal with change. This may involve some
bid when there appears to be a strong incumbent
horizon scanning.
supplier, on progressing on-going IT projects and the
b
Review existing contracts to draw lessons and
importance of maintaining good working relations
reflect these in the new contract together with
between incoming and outgoing suppliers.
latest guidance, for example on mechanisms to
b
Start the work early to lay the ground for any
assess value for money and incentives, continuous
transfer after competition, for example; train staff so
improvement and efficiency, and profit sharing and
that they are prepared to manage the new contract;
allowance for use of specialist subcontractors.
develop an appropriate set of indicators to measure
c
Contracts for the provision of major IT systems
the supplier’s performance; review the performance
should ensure that systems are kept up-to-date,
of the existing contracts including the provision for
which should be easier to transfer from one
the transfer of pensions obligations; undertake a
supplier to another. Deciding to change suppliers
stock take of existing systems to establish whether
and upgrade major IT systems at the same time
any major upgrades are needed; review existing
may appear to provide the Department with
contracts to ensure they have robust termination
a better value than renegotiating an upgrade
clauses and terms which allow disclosure of
with the existing supplier in a non-competitive
information, to enable any new incoming supplier
environment. However, it does increase the risk of
to undertake due diligence work. The contract terms
delay, additional costs or system failure as the new
should also be clear on intellectual property rights
supplier will not be in as strong a position as the
of existing systems.
existing supplier to achieve the upgrade. Therefore
c
Effective competition, professional procurement
it is important that the Department reviews plans of
and contract flexibility increase the chance that the
any incoming supplier to ensure they are feasible.
contract meets the Department’s IT requirements.
It must also ensure the contract has provisions to
d
recover any additional costs caused by the failure of
To avoid IT project delays it is also important not to
the new supplier to deliver.
have too many ongoing business-crucial IT projects
underway which a new supplier may have to take
d
When changing suppliers, it is crucial to secure
over. A new supplier’s capacity may be stretched
the co-operation between the incumbent and
if there is a significant amount of work to progress
the new supplier. An incumbent who has bid for
with deadlines for completion early in the life of the
the new contract unsuccessfully may not wish to
new contract.
assist the transfer to the new supplier, even where
departments have built up good relationships
with suppliers during the course of a partnership.
Therefore they must have effective exit clauses
which bind the incumbent to cooperate during the
transition period to mitigate the risks to
service delivery.
0
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part four
3 Creating competition
d
In these circumstances, to achieve an effective
competition, departments may need to consider
a
The best way to get value for money is to secure
offering incentives to encourage non-incumbent
and maintain competition during the procurement.
suppliers to bid or introduce other measures into
But in bidding for a major IT contract a supplier is
the procurement process which will help to level
likely to incur substantial costs and therefore will
the playing field. These incentives might include:
carefully weigh up the prospects of winning the
contract and the opportunity costs of bidding.
n
adjusting the evaluation of bids to allow non-
incumbents to display their IT capabilities;
b
It is the usual practice when purchasing goods
and services for the bidders to meet their own
n
disregarding transition costs in the evaluations
costs and to pay the costs involved in taking
of bids;
over the position from the previous supplier. It
n
disregarding transition costs in the bid
is not usual practice for the purchaser to create
evaluation and negotiating a fixed or capped
the competition by contributing to firms’ costs
budget for transition costs to maintain
of bidding, paying the winners’ costs in taking
competitive tension; and
over from the existing supplier, discounting the
transition costs for the purposes of comparing
n
disregarding transition costs in the bid
bids and paying the incumbent supplier to effect
evaluation and paying a share of these costs.
the transfer. The payment of such costs is not
e
All these measures will incur additional costs for
unknown, and the Committee of Public Accounts
departments. Departments must decide therefore
outlined the circumstances in which this could be
whether any, and if so which, of these will be
advantageous namely to avoid such costs being
sufficient to induce the market to bid. Departments
incorporated, with a mark up, in higher charges,
should test the market before committing themselves
and to encourage bids.31
to funding costs; suppliers may be willing to bid even
c
There needs to be a clear justification for using
without financial incentives. Any such incentives
incentives to encourage competition. The market
must have a strong link with improving value for
may consider that bidding against a strong
money and must be tightly controlled.
incumbent is not worthwhile as there would not
f
Having obtained bids, departments need to
be an equal starting position. The bid costs of new
undertake sensitivity analysis to forecast the likely
bidders may be higher than for an incumbent which
range of final contract costs. Such analysis should
has already developed a good understanding of
be used to assess the likely profit margins and profit
the Department’s business. In addition, for second
levels of potential suppliers over the lifetime of the
generation outsourcing, there will be additional
contract and whether the Department is getting
costs incurred by non-incumbents in taking over
value for money from the deal.
existing products and services. Therefore potential
bidders may be deterred from bidding against a
well-established incumbent. This emphasises the
importance of having a dialogue with the market
to establish the barriers to bidding and how these
might be overcome.
31
Committee of Public Accounts Report,
London Underground Public Private Partnerships, HC 446, March 2005.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
1
part four
4 Managing the transition
5 Maintaining service delivery
a
Now that the public sector has demonstrated it is
during the transition
not locked in to retaining incumbent suppliers for
a
There is a risk that ongoing projects will suffer
this size of contract, the amount of transition costs
delays and cost increases when changing supplier
departments pay should reduce and such payments
– particularly if the new supplier has to work
would not be appropriate in all future contracts
with plans agreed between the department and
involving an incumbent supplier. If departments
previous supplier. Departments and suppliers
decide to pay transition costs to incoming suppliers,
should therefore take the opportunity to undertake
it is important that departments retain control over
a health-check of ongoing projects and may need to
the amount they pay and maintain some degree
re-evaluate project plans. Departments should also
of competitive tension. They need to have a clear
get an early view of a new supplier’s performance
estimate of likely costs and transparent criteria for
(and changes in costs for existing projects), so that
assessing and paying them in a system that is not
any issues which would affect service delivery or
overly burdensome to administer. For example:
costs can be addressed.
n
Estimates of transition costs should include
b
Departments should develop and test contingency
those costs incurred by the incoming supplier
plans to ensure service delivery and project
in preparing to run the new contract; those
progress can be maintained in case part or all of the
of outgoing suppliers and the department’s
transfer is delayed. When considering the length of
staff costs. During the procurement stage,
the transfer, departments need to strike a balance
departments need to have a clear estimate
between incurring additional transfer costs and the
of transition costs. There should be no
risk that the transfer might not be fully completed.
presumption by a bidder that any extra
transition costs incurred by any incoming
c
A high level of staff transfer is important in
supplier will be fully or partially repaid.
maintaining project momentum. However changing
IT suppliers and contracts will involve new
n
Before any new contract is signed,
relationships and new ways of working. During
departments and suppliers must be clear
the transition period, departments will need to
about what will be payable under transition
make additional effort to manage the relationships
costs and there should be a transparent system
between the incoming and outgoing suppliers.
for assessing and paying them. To make the
Departments will also need to agree with the
system easier to administer, transition costs
incoming supplier revised project risks, costs,
should be linked to the achievement of
timescales and deliverables.
transition milestones.
n
Departments should also question whether it is
reasonable for incoming suppliers to receive a
profit margin on reimbursed transition costs but
realise that denying the margin can affect the
quality of the expertise applied to the account.
2
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
part four
d
While there are advantages in keeping existing
projects under the terms and conditions of the
previous contract, departments should closely
monitor costs charged by the new supplier to
ensure that value for money is not put at risk.
Departments should review cost implications
arising from changes or delays which are the
responsibility of the supplier to ensure additional
costs incurred are not transferred to other parts of
the contract.
e
To manage the risks of changing suppliers,
departments need strong governance arrangements
and good management information to keep the
supplier on course for delivery, or to enable them
to make an informed decision to move milestones
and plans. Departments should also require
suppliers to:
n
use software products and third party
suppliers that are tried and tested;
n
plan for an incremental phased delivery of
new IT projects or major changes to existing
systems rather than a big bang solution;
n
allow sufficient time for testing of new IT
systems before they are launched; and
n
provide a mechanism to enable the
incumbent and new suppliers to share plans
and information during transition.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
3
appendix one
APPendix one
Study scope and methodology
The study objective was to assess HM Revenue and
Analysis of the effects of ASPIRE
Customs performance in three stages of ASPIRE: the
procurement, the transition and the first year of the
on service delivery and
new contract and to draw wider lessons for government
business-critical projects
department and agencies facing similar situations. We
used an issue analysis approach to design the scope of the
5
We reviewed key HM Revenue and Customs IT
examination and the nature of the evidence required.
projects to explore the impact of ASPIRE on service
delivery and draw out the lessons learned from managing
IT projects when there is a change of supplier. The projects
Semi-structured interviews and
were selected because the change of supplier happened
fieldwork visits
during the course of the project and HM Revenue and
Customs consider them as ‘business-critical’. For each
1
We interviewed staff in HM Revenue and Customs
example we reviewed key documents and interviewed
with responsibility for the procurement, transition and
project managers and directors of the individual projects.
contract management stages of ASPIRE as well as other
stakeholders, including the Office of Government
Commerce and Partnerships UK.
Comparisons with other transitions
6
We commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers to
2
We also interviewed the private sector firms
draw out lessons from organisations that have faced
involved in ASPIRE including the original suppliers (EDS
major supplier transitions similar to ASPIRE. The
and Accenture), and the winning bidders (Capgemini
organisations covered included those from the public
and Fujitsu) to get their perspectives on the ASPIRE
and private sectors, both in the UK and overseas. The
procurement, transition and contract management stages.
examples highlighted some common features, such as the
importance of effective communication with staff who are
Documentary review
available for transfer to any new supplier, which we used
to assess the Department’s and suppliers’ approach to, and
3
We reviewed a range of documentary evidence
performance during, the transition.
from ASPIRE to analyse and establish the basis for key
decisions taken by HM Revenue and Customs. We
analysed the Department’s financial and management
Financial model review
information on the costs of procurement and the transition
7
We commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers
and the first year of the contract and the suppliers’
to undertake work on the financial model used by
performance against key performance indicators.
HM Revenue and Customs in ASPIRE to assess whether
the processes used by the Department to test the financial
Comparators
models during the procurement stage were robust and
whether the Department were using the models to manage
4
We compared procurement costs and profit margins
the contract changes effectively. This involved interviews
with other contracts. We also analysed the Office of
with key staff involved in financial evaluation, examination
Government Commerce Gateway Reviews undertaken on
and review of documentation from the model reviews and
ASPIRE and evaluated advice and documentation issued
the events and costs that triggered the changes.
by other government departments including HM Treasury
and the Office of Government Commerce.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
appendix two
APPendix tWo
Recommendations from the Committee of Public Accounts
The Committee of Public Accounts has in the past made a number of recommendations covering HM Revenue and
Customs IT contracts.
PAC Report
PAC Recommendations
Has this been applied in AsPiRe?
Inland Revenue/EDS
The Department should keep its IT strategy up to date The Department revised its IT strategy in April 2005.
Strategic Partnership: The
and ensure the supplier’s technical solutions conform The new strategy aims to rationalise current IT
award of New Work
to this wherever possible.
infrastructure and put in place industry standard
(28th report 1999-2000)
processes and solutions.
The Department should impose tighter control when There is an established process for new work
developing applications with the contractor to ensure involving setting requirements, the supplier’s
that objectivity is not lost in assessing proposals and proposal, the business case, approval and then pilot
controlling costs.
trials. The project must run successfully for 6 months
before payments are released.
The Department should apply the lessons from post
Since the start of the ASPIRE contract, major IT
implementation reviews of new IT developments
releases have been made in October 2004,
and projects.
April 2005, October 2005 and April 2006.
After each release, ASPIRE carried out a post
implementation review and the findings were
provided as input to the following release. A process
has been put in place to capture lessons learned and
to share them more widely.
The Department should ensure that it establishes
The Department has worked with the OGC to share
close links with the Office of Government Commerce good practice from ASPIRE. The OGC has included
(OGC) to share experiences.
ASPIRE as a case study in the latest version of its
procurement guidance.
The Department should extend benchmarking work
Ad-hoc benchmarking and market-testing is
to assess the competitiveness of supplier charges to
underway under ASPIRE. A comprehensive two-year
cover more of the contract costs on a regular basis. rolling benchmarking programme is expected to
begin in July 2006.
The Department should reconsider the value
Under ASPIRE, procurement discount sharing
for money it obtains through the equal split of
arrangements are in place. The contract states that
procurement discount savings made by EDS
any procurement by the supplier above £50,000 will
buying power.
be benchmarked against a third-party price. Using
this benchmark, the Department wil retain 80% of
the difference between the actual cost to the supplier
and the third-party comparator price where the
supplier has purchased items below the third-party
comparator price and 50% where the supplier has
purchased items above the third-party price.
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
5
appendix two
PAC Report
continued
PAC Recommendations
continued
Has this been applied in AsPiRe?
continued
The Department should monitor the delivery on other
As part of the evaluation, the Department
contracts held by the supplier, to identify potential
obtained references for each bidder from
risks which might affect services provided under
other organisations.
the partnership.
The Department should reassess the risk of
Of fifteen Departmental staf involved in the
unplanned departures from its contract
procurement stage, only one remained in
management team and sharpen succession planning
place for the contract management as the
for specialists.
Department suf ered key departures soon after
the award of the new contract, including that
of the Senior Responsible Owner.
In view of the importance of securing an open
The Department achieved competition by
competition, the Department will need to ensure that
encouraging the industry to bid for the
proposals for new systems do not unduly limit its
contract, through the use of incentives such as
future choice of strategic partner.
paying unique transition costs and excluding
these from the bidder evaluation.
NIRS2 Contract Extension
The barriers to competition when the Department’s
(38th Report 2001-02)
contracts come to an end may be too great. In the
absence of competition the Department will need to
ensure that the methodologies used to estimate and
benchmark bid proposals are rigorous.
The Department should explore how to build
HM Revenue and Customs believes that
additional flexibility into future contracts, for example
the ASPIRE contract is flexible enough to
to cope with legislative changes.
deal with major change, but this needs to
be proved in practice, particularly with the
merger of the PFI contract held by the former
HM Customs and Excise with ASPIRE.
Managing the Relationship
Staff continuity between the procurement and the
Of fifteen Departmental staff involved in the
to secure a Successful
subsequent management of the contract is desirable.
procurement stage, only one remained in
Partnership in PFI projects
Where this is not possible, there should be a gradual
place for the contract management as the
(42nd Report 2001-02)
hand-over between the staff who negotiated the deal
Department suffered key departures soon
and those who will be responsible for post-contract
after the award of the new contract, including
management to ensure continuity.
that of the Senior Responsible Owner.
Departments should ensure that mechanisms are in
The Department has some controls in place to
place to provide continued value for money over the
assess value for money of the contract and is
lifetime of a deal.
developing others.
Transforming the
The cost of the PFI contract with Fujitsu has
The Department will need to ensure that in
performance of
increased from £500 million to £929 million.
merging the PFI contract into ASPIRE, the
HM Customs and
Retendering the contract would have given
expected benefits from the investment of
Excise through electronic
better assurance on the value for money of the
£929 million in the PFI contract amended in
service delivery
revised contract, but would also have put at risk
2003 are fully realised.
the expected benefits of the e-programme. The
Department should complete a full business case for
the e-programme, supported by sensitivity analyses
of benefits and costs. It should specify the benefits,
and formulate plans for realising them.
6
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
appendix three
APPendix tHRee
Office of Government Commerce guidance for
re-competitions
When drafting the original contract
n TUPE (Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment)) clauses should be included in all contracts
for services.
n Provisions for full sharing of any information that might give the incumbent contractor an advantage.
Such information is to be provided in time to be included in any invitation to tender.
n The contractor should keep up to date the inventory of equipment passed to them at the outset of the contract,
and there should be an up front agreement on who wil own which pieces of equipment at contract termination.
n The level of servicing of any equipment should also be specified.
n Ownership and transfer of IT equipment and other tangible property, software and data should be
made clear.
eighteen months to four years before contract end
n Negotiate with the incumbent contractor to insert missing provisions, as listed above.
n Determine the strategy for the new contract, so it reflects future business needs. For example, consider
changing the scope; all outsourcing options; risk allocation; flexibility; and partnership.
only consider extending the existing contract when
n There was scope within the original advertisement in the OJEU for a possible extension.
n The existing supplier is performing well and is well placed to deliver business needs.
n The supplier is not over-dependant on the department.
n The market remains competitive. If there are few suppliers in a market place and an existing
large contract is extended, competitiveness may be reduced.
if it is decided to go to competition
n Actively publicise intentions and manage the market’s expectations to establish the conditions for a
robust competition.
n Try to secure the incumbent supplier’s interest in the re-competition to maximise competition and incentivise it
to maintain performance levels until the expiry of the contract.
Create a level playing field against a strong incumbent
n Encourage all potential suppliers to believe the contract is winnable and are incentivised to bid. This
may include senior staff actively promoting the openness of the competition; providing bidders with full
information on all aspects of the work; funding transition costs and disregarding the risk of transition in the
evaluation criteria; allowing payment for a de-risking as ‘proof of concept’ stage; providing access to all sites
and allowing bidders to comment on the requirement specification.
if the contract is being tendered in the middle of a major it project
n Negotiate an agreement for payment of additional sums to retain the incumbent’s key staff for a set period to
help with knowledge transfer.
n Avoid placing significant new demands on the incumbent just before the transition.
Source: Office of Government Commerce Successful Delivery Toolkit
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
7
appendix four
APPendix FouR
Lessons learnt from the EDS ‘Eagle’ contract and the
Accenture NIRS2 contract
The Department identified a number of lessons from
outsourcing its IT services to EDS and the PFI contract for
NIRS2 with Accenture.
Lesson
Has this been applied to Aspire?
Effective contract management should ensure that the contract
The Department has invested time to adapt its procedures to cope with
is operated properly and obligations are adhered to but must
the change from an input to an output based project. The Department
also provide a framework for handling issues which arise
has recognised that its staff need a better understanding of the new
outside the contract, or which require changes.
contract and has initiated an education process for all staff to learn
how to get the best out of ASPIRE. A separate Contract Management
Team provides a source of expertise for the business.
FuLLy APPLied
It is unlikely that a single supplier will hold all the skills to meet
The concept of a strategic partnership with co-partnering was
the Department’s requirements so contracts should encourage
identified early on as the best solution to meet the Department’s
and institutionalise co-partnering with the ‘lead supplier’.
requirements. It provides a single supplier with overall responsibility
and accountability for IT integration and gives the Department access
to a range of suppliers and new technology so it is not locked into one
or two large suppliers.
FuLLy APPLied
Effective performance measurement needs base lining of
A performance measurement system is in place, providing information
current service levels. Service levels need to refer to desired
on the supplier’s performance against targets and target margins.
business outcomes and should be based on outputs rather
However these measures were rolled over from the previous contract
than inputs.
and may not all be relevant under ASPIRE. A service improvement
programme is underway which aims to improve the performance
measures for monitoring the contract.
PARtiALLy APPLied
The contract term should be long enough to establish the
The ASPIRE contract is for ten years with the option for an additional
benefits of the relationship and should retain some flexibility
eight. This should help to avoid the cliff-edge scenario under the
beyond the minimum term of the contract to help manage the
previous contract as it provides flexibility for the Department to decide
timing of the following competition.
the most desirable point for re-competition.
FuLLy APPLied
Risks should be allocated to the partner best able to
The contract was designed to allocate risk on an appropriate basis
manage them, but given the pace of change in IT, flexibility
and provide flexibility to bring in specialist sub-contractors.
is also important.
FuLLy APPLied
Fixed price agreements should be made (where appropriate)
ASPIRE aims to incentivise the supplier by paying on the basis of
to incentivise supplier performance.
outputs rather than inputs and includes discounts for increased
volume but additional funding for lower volumes. The contract makes
payments on the successful completion of the milestones and contains
penalties for delayed delivery.
PARtiALLy APPLied
8
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
appendix four
Lesson
continued
Has this been applied to Aspire?
continued
The contract should ensure that there are incentives for the
The ASPIRE contract contains clauses whereby the savings obtained
supplier to get the best price when purchasing capital assets
by the supplier would be shared between the supplier and the
and that the Department should share any savings made.
Department. The contract states that any procurement by the supplier
above £50,000 will be benchmarked against a third-party price.
Using this benchmark, the Department will retain 80% of the difference
between the actual cost to the supplier and the third-party comparator
price where the supplier has purchased items below the third-party
comparator price and 50% where the supplier has purchased items
above the third-party price.
FuLLy APPLied
For contracts where outputs may be usefully applied across
The ownership of intellectual property rights was maintained by the
other Departments, the ownership of the intellectual property
Department as part of the ASPIRE contract. This is the same as for the
rights should be retained by the Department.
old contract with EDS, but different from the NIRS2 PFI contract with
Accenture, where the Department had to buy the rights to use from
Accenture at the end of the contract.
FuLLy APPLied
The end of the contracts should be planned at the outset to
The Department negotiated amendments with suppliers to the previous
ensure that if there is a change of supplier the incumbent
contracts before their end. Under ASPIRE exit arrangements are
supplier will be bound to provide appropriate levels of support
stronger, but may need re-negotiating over the course of the contract.
and assistance to any new supplier.
FuLLy APPLied
The Department needs to maintain its own pool of IT staff
The Department has enough IT expertise to check and evaluate the
to act as an ‘intelligent customer’; to be able to check and
supplier’s proposals. It is however seeking to reduce the ratio of its
evaluate supplier proposals and act as an intermediary
IT staff to the supplier team from 30:70 to nearer 20:80 to reduce
between the Department’s business groups and the supplier.
running costs.
FuLLy APPLied
Relationships between Department and supplier should be
The ability to act as a partner was a key criteria of the bid evaluation,
treated as a partnership. The principles of this rest on joint
and partly because of the high level of staff transfer from the old to
responsibility and understanding. For example, continuity
new supplier, sound relationships have been formed.
of staff across the procurement, transition and contract
management stages helps to build relationships and trust.
The contract itself stipulated the names of certain key supplier
management personnel to remain on ASPIRE for a length of the
time after the contract started. However continuity on both sides is
important. Of fifteen Departmental staff involved in the procurement
stage, only one remained in place for the contract management as the
Department suffered key departures soon after the award of the new
contract, including that of the Senior Responsible Owner.
PARtiALLy APPLied
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
9
appendix five
APPendix Five
The risks of transition and the early stages of ASPIRE
Main risks in the transition phase and the Department’s response
Main risks
the department’s response
Escalation of transition costs
n The Department set a budget of 10-15 per cent of the contract’s first year value
(around £50 million) for unique transition costs (those costs identified by the
supplier and agreed with the Department which would not have been incurred
had the existing suppliers continued to provide all or part of the IT).
n Costs were generally well controlled and came in around budget, although the
Department and the new supplier did not agree what would qualify as a unique
transition cost until the transition had started, so valuable resources were taken up
during transition negotiating whether a cost was unique or not.
Lack of or ineffective co-operation between
n The cooperation of the incumbent suppliers and the positive working relationship
exiting supplier, new supplier and Department
that was developed by the Department through day-to-day collaboration in the
during the changeover
existing Eagle and NIRS2 contracts and in running the procurement. Exit clauses
the Department negotiated with EDS in 2002 provided a certain level of support
and information to any incoming supplier. In addition the outgoing suppliers
wanted to exit on good terms.
Ongoing service delivery would be disrupted
n The transition was generally well managed by the Department, with no major
by the transition and key projects spanning the
disruptions to services.
transition would be disrupted or delayed
n During transition, the incumbent suppliers delivered scheduled IT releases and
worked with the incoming suppliers to develop project plans. The incoming
suppliers reviewed IT project progress to date and estimated the time and cost
needed to complete the projects.
n The high volume of change projects during transition put a strain on both
Departmental and supplier capacity during the early stages of the new contract.
Not successfully completing the transition on time n The transition period al owed the incoming supplier sufficient time to prepare to run
so the new supplier was not in a position to run
IT service from the start of the new contract. To achieve this, it acquired sufficient
the new contract from day one
knowledge and understanding of HM Revenue and Customs’ business and IT
environment, either through work-shadowing existing staff or through arranging
staff transfer, and ensured that most existing sub-contractors were retained.
50
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
appendix five
Risks at the beginning of a new contract with a new supplier
Main risks
the department’s response
Cost escalation without compensating increases
n The Department has mechanisms to control costs and deliver benefits. It intends to
in benefits
carry out an overall assessment of supplier performance in late 2006.
Not gaining a sufficient share of the benefits and n ASPIRE contains agreed governance processes to identify the Department’s share
profits the contractor obtains from the strategic
of benefits realised from innovation, identifying savings and benefits generated.
partnership over the course of the contract
n The contract transfers performance risk to the supplier for operational
services, and incremental payments for software development are based on
successful delivery.
The Supplier and Department not having
n Needs may change for new skills and technology. Effective management
the capacity, resource and skills to manage
of sub-contractors and co-partners can alleviate this risk. Under Capgemini
and deliver the IT requirements of a larger
plans, the Department will be involved in the monitoring and management of
single contract
sub-contractor performance.
Opportunities for innovation not realised
n Requirements may change over the term of the contract, particularly with
regards to the recent merger with HM Customs & Excise. The contract allows the
Department to require the supplier to engage particular ‘co-partners’ where new
skills or technologies are needed, benchmarking suggests the marketplace may
offer an economic advantage or where volume increases or peaks of resource
requirement cannot be supplied by the Supplier’s internal resources
n Technology-enabled change and innovation was a key part of the evaluation of
the bids.
Insufficient management of sub-contractor
n The Department has a copy of the sub-contract and the supplier has confirmed
performance
that there is a full flow down of terms and conditions.
Early break of contract
n The Department has built contingency measures into the contract, requiring the
supplier to deliver services up to the point of expiry or termination, co-operate
with the Department and any successor supplier to ensure smooth continuation of
services, and make provisions for the assignment of rights relating to the project.
n The contract also contains clauses on asset treatment and staff treatment.
Supplier failure
n The contract includes a guarantee that Capgemini’s parent company would
intervene in case of supplier failure. Total claims are limited and related to
operational and project charges.
The merger with Customs and its separate IT
n The two contracts have not yet been merged. Negotiations are ongoing. The
contract with Fujitsu may lead to cost escalation,
Department has selected a preferred option to bring together the two contracts.
delays to critical projects and delays in benefits
coming on stream
Source: National Audit Office
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
51
appendix six
APPendix six
Lessons from ASPIRE
Managing relationships throughout the process
Review the balance between in-house
Encourage collaboration between
Establish and build relationships with
and supplier IT support to ensure
the incumbent and new suppliers
potential and incumbent suppliers
business efficiency
during transition
Being prepared for the end of the
Aligning the contract to
Creating competition
existing contract
business needs
n Review performance of existing
n Review contract and supplier
n Listen and develop a strategy
contract/contractor
performance to draw lessons for
to respond to the market to
the new contact
foster competition
n Stocktake existing IT systems/
assets/contracts and prioritise
n Include up-to-date mechanisms to
n Demonstrate the 'Unique Selling
costs and benefits of upgrading
assess value for money
Point' of your competition
IT systems
n Allow for contract review at fixed
n Consider incentives to level playing
n Implement a safety zone to avoid
points and have flexibility around
field and encourage competition
having too many IT projects/
re-let date
business change programmes
n Minimise the burden on bidders
ongoing at the end of the contract
n Ensure the contract is flexible
and ensure timescales are
enough to deal with business and
adhered to
n Scan the horizon to identify
machinery of government changes
implications of potential machinery
n Evaluate using a range of
of government changes
n Ensure the contract allows for use
criteria that relect business and
of sub-contractors
financial needs
n Review existing contracts to
ensure they have robust
n Underpin productivity incentives
n Maintain competitive pressure
termination clauses
and profit sharing in line with open
during negotiations
book and use financial models for
n Fully evaluate contract
the competition that are baselined
replacement options
in the contract
n Clear commercial strategies with
n Consider the principles of risk and
external stakeholders
reward sharing
Source: National Audit Office
52
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
appendix six
Ensure a visible process so employees
Engage with business areas and
can decide if they want to transfer or
prepare staff for the transition
remain with the incumbent
and the new contract
Managing the transition
Maintaining service delivery
n Develop an integrated transition
n Compile an inventory of projects
plan specifying milestones,
and examine their status and
deliverables and responsibilities as
earned value
early as possible
n Careful y manage the risks to loss of
n Develop and test contingency plans
service when transferring IT systems
n Ensure that the length of transition
n Maintain staff continuity by
is fit for purpose
getting high levels of staff transfer
and backfill any vacancies
n Manage the transfer of third-party
during transition
contracts, including having a
strategy for those due for renewal
n Healthcheck ongoing projects with
during transition and replacing
the new supplier and re-evaluate
those that don't transfer
plans if necessary
n Estimate and control the costs
n Balance the needs of the
of transition
new supplier with those of the
incumbent and protect the
n Provide additional space for the
live service
incoming supplier during transition
n Ensure all new terms of reference
apply to transferred projects
n Get an early view of the new
suppliers performance
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
53
appendix seven
APPendix seven
Diagram of the interrelation of the main parties in ASPIRE
during AsPiRe procurement oct 2001 - Jan 2004
Capgemini and
Other Bidders
EDS and Accenture
EDS
Accenture
Fujitsu
IT Service Delivery
Bidding for the ASPIRE contract
(Under Eagle
NIRS2
Contract)
Inland Revenue
service delivery Phase of AsPiRe following the creation of HM Revenue and Customs in April 2005
Fujitsu
HM Customs
Customs IT Service Delivery (ISA)
and Excise
HM Revenue and
Customs
Inland Revenue
IR IT Service Delivery (ASPIRE)
Capgemini (supported by Fujitsu,
Accenture and other subcontractors)
5
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
appendix eight
APPendix eiGHt
The NIRS2 transition
Background
technology with a limited shelf-life and was running
out of support products. The Department considered
The Inland Revenue had a ten year PFI contract with
that there would be limited risk in deferring the re-
Accenture from 1995 for the provision of the National
platforming to enable it to get better value for money
Insurance Recording System (NIRS2). The NIRS2 system
and some creative proposals by including it in the
holds over 70 million National Insurance records,
ASPIRE competition. Each bidder had different plans
processes 50 million end-of-year employee returns,
to re-platform NIRS2. The Department was initially
feeds data to other tax systems, supports the accuracy of
surprised that Capgemini proposed a “big bang” approach
National Insurance data, and calculates rebates to the
(Accenture, the incumbent supplier, proposed a phased
pensions industry (around £3 billion a year).
approach). Changing contractor required the movement
of NIRS2 systems from equipment that was hosted by
The Committee of Public Accounts’ report on the
Accenture to Fujitsu to enable the new suppliers to take
“Contract to Develop and Update the Replacement
over the day-to-day operation of the system. The migration
National Insurance Recording System” (46th Report
of NIRS2 represented a significant challenge due to
1997-98) highlighted concerns about delays in
the system’s complexity and the need to update both
implementing the system, which was large and complex,
hardware and system software. The original timetable was
and that the low winning bid may have signalled that the
for the migration to take place over the Christmas 2004
bidder did not appreciate the complexity of the project.
period to minimise the impact on customers.
The Committee recommended that the Department should
ensure it fully understood the impact of any delay on
its business; have contingency plans including fallback
The re-platforming was delayed
positions in place; and contracts which provided adequate
compensation in the event of delays.
Capgemini and Fujitsu encountered major problems in the
system build which delayed the project’s progress and
The Committee of Public Accounts’ report on
testing programme. Because of these problems, the
“NIRS2 Contract extension” (38th Report 2001-02)
Department and suppliers made a joint decision in
highlighted that the contract extension the Inland
November 2004 to postpone the re-platforming. Following
Revenue had negotiated with Accenture was generous
negotiations with Accenture, the existing equipment used
for a non-competitive contract as the contractor had
by Accenture, which until then had been unavailable, was
outperformed its productivity target by a wide margin. This
used, allowing a phased approach to the re-platforming
raised questions about how rigorous the original estimates
during the May, July and August 2005 bank holiday
and benchmarking were. The Committee also considered
weekends. Accenture, the previous contractor since 1995,
that the Inland Revenue would face a challenge in 2004
has been retained as a subcontractor under ASPIRE for the
as the barriers to competition may be too great in terms
duration of the ASPIRE contract. The cost of completing
of learning and costs for such a large and complex
the migration in the deferred timescale was £9.9 million.
system. It also highlighted the benefits of incentivisation
Capgemini has paid £7.9 million and the Department
of performance, transparency, minimising the risk of
£2 million. The Department did not accept liability but
disputes, replicating lessons learnt on earlier projects and
considered it was not worthwhile to establish all the
sensible allocation of risks.
causes of failure and attribute them to any party, as the
additional costs were within its original estimate of
£16.2 million for re-platforming. Although the delays did
Upgrading NIRS2
not affect service delivery, the system was implemented at
the end of August 2005 but was not fully operational until
The NIRS2 system needed to be re-platformed (which
November 2005, and since then the system has performed
involved providing new hardware, operating system
at improved levels.
and database to support NIRS2) as it was based on old
ASPIRE – THE RE-COMPETITION Of OUTSOURCED IT SERvICES
55