RESTRICTED
Document
CCN050 Evaluation and Project
Name
Board Recommendations
IDT004-0101-CCN050 Project Board recommendations
File Name
080403 v1.0
Author
Biometric Operations and Implementation Manager
Authorisation
Signed
version held
by
© NPIA (National Policing Improvement Agency) 2008
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, modified, amended, stored in any
retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of
the National Policing Improvement Agency or its representative.
For additional copies, or to enquire about the content of the document, please contact Marketing and
Communications on 0208 200 3231
For copyright specific enquiries, please telephone the NPIA National Police Library on 01256 602650.
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
Table of Contents
1 Controlling documents................................................................ 3
2 Background ................................................................................ 4
3 Mobile Information force bids for £50M...................................... 4
4 Viability of CCN 050 .................................................................... 5
5 Observations / Issues ................................................................ 7
6 Conclusions ................................................................................ 8
7 Recommendations ...................................................................... 8
8 Control page ............................................................................... 9
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
1 Controlling documents
This section will contain reference to any source material used in the
preparation of the document. This should include reference to relevant
standards or guides.
Description
Document number
Revision
Northrop Grumman CCN
08.IDENT1.LGG-097 31st
1
050R1 proposal
March 08
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
2 Background
In November 2007, the Lantern project team were asked to consider the
feasibility of rolling out an interim solution of up to 3000 basic ‘lantern’
devices, as used in the pilot, to all forces in England and Wales.
This roll out was to be completed by no later than March 2009.
To meet that timeframe, it was agreed by the project board on 11th
December 2008 that this would be achieved using the change control
notice (CCN) method under the existing IDENT1 contract.
The suppliers of IDENT1, Northrop Grumman (NG) were initially asked to
provide details of costs via CCN 050, for 2500 devices.
This CCN was first received by the NPIA on 11th February 2008. The
content of that CCN was such that the NPIA needed clarification on
several points, especially more detailing to the costs, and engaged in a
series of meetings with NG to provide the clarification needed to provide
those costs. It was agreed in a teleconference on 28th February that costs
for a solution based on both 1500 and 2500 devices should be provided.
On the 1st April 2008, a revised CCN 050 was received by the NPIA, with
costs for 1500 and 2500 devices as requested.
3 Mobile Information force bids for £50M.
As a result of a governments announcement that £50m would be made
available to the police service for mobile data/information devices, a
bidding process was instigated by the Mobile Information project team.
There was some initial ambiguity as to whether ‘Lantern’ devices could or
could not be included in the bids. This situation persisted into the bidding
process period and clarification was not able to be obtained from the
home office until very late on. The result of this was that some forces
made bids for Lantern devices where others missed the section out not
knowing whether to bid or not.
The number of device requests returned from the MI bidding process
(425) was at great variance to the survey conducted by the Lantern
Project team in November 2007, where forces had indicated that between
3,000 and 19,000 devices would be required, the variance in numbers
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
being dependant on whether or not the equipment was seen to be able to
be carried as part of an officers day to day equipment.
Due to the difference in figures, the forces were re-surveyed having been
supplied with the information that the capital cost of the device (£2,100)
would be met by the project, but a revenue cost of £1,200 per device per
year, would have to be met by the forces with a commitment for 3 years
for each device.
This produced a requirement for approximately 600 devices, with the
Met Police and 3 other forces still to decide. (It is unlikely that once the
Met and remaining forces figures are known, that the numbers of devices
would exceed 1000.) That number is likely to reduce once forces are
asked to commit financially, and will reduce significantly if the costs rise
above the indicative figure already quoted to forces.
In summary therefore, the demand and support from forces for a single
function mobile device is much less than previously supposed.
4 Viability of CCN 050
The CCN sets out the total costs to provide the Lantern service and
devices until March 2012. This is:
• For 1500 devices, the cost of CCN50 is £23,771,243 (£23.8million)
• For 2500 devices, the cost of CCN50 is £30,827,592 (£30.9million)
NOTE: It should be understood that the CCN cost only covers those costs
incurred by Northrop Grumman. It does not include the additional 3rd
party costs, and project costs needed to deliver the package over the
duration of the contract.
These additional costs are estimated as being:-
• £425,000 for Cable and Wireless services, licences, and development
• £2,400,000 for project management costs
• £100,000 for service testing
• £117,450 for PNC warning flags (CCN 052)
A sub total of £3,042,450 minimum additional cost.
Therefore the total costs of implementing CCN050 will be not less
than:
• For 1500 devices £26,813,693 (£26.9million)
• For 2500 devices £33,870,042 (£33.9million)
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
Note: Although costs for 2500 devices have been provided, given the
reduced demand discussed above, it has been agreed that for the interim
expansion a maximum of 1500 would be considered.
The CCN costs can be broken down into various sections. In this case,
only the figures for 1500 have been used:-
Fixed Service expansion costs £3.055 M
Variable Expansion Costs £0.755 M
Fixed User Authentication costs £8.650 M
Variable User Auth Costs £1.546 M
MFR service increments £9.765 M
CCN Total £23.771 M
A large proportion of the costs of CCN 050 is attributable to the user
authentication requirement and as such, accounts for 43% (£10,196 M)
of the total costs over the life of the contract.
A security requirement of the IDENT1 system is that the individual user
must be known and identified to the system, before any transactions can
be processed. Thus it is mandatory that a user level authentication
solution is in place before any major deployment of lantern devices, or
lantern service capable devices, is undertaken.
Note: For the pilot, a dispensation was given by the security accreditor to
allow a PIN guarded, device level authentication, on the understanding
that the solution would not be suitable for a national roll out, and a more
robust system would have to be introduced.
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
5 Observations / Issues
Set out below are a number of observations and identified issues which
are considered in making the conclusions and recommendations
Forces are able to understand the benefits to be derived from
deploying a mobile fingerprint Live ID device and have a desire to
do so, if the costs are right.
The current device is single function.
The current device is too large to be carried on regular foot patrol
or non vehicle based duties.
Forces appear to want smaller, fingerprint capable devices, either
through the use of peripheral devices connecting to radios / PDA’s
/Blackberry’s etc, or having the functionality incorporated into the
PDA / Blackberry itself. CCN050 is based on prismatic optical
sensor technology which lends itself to larger, bulky equipment not
suitable for non vehicular supported activities.
The support and maintenance cost of £1200 PA per device for the
interim solution, for most forces, is too high to contemplate
widespread deployment.
There is a lack of ‘spare’ revenue money within forces, and what
spare money (both capital and revenue) there is, forces wish to
commit to mobile information devices, in preference to stand alone
fingerprint devices. This is because they appear to perceive that
wider benefits are likely to be derived from mobile information
devices than a single function device.
The increased cost of meeting mandatory user authentication
requirements will increase the cost to forces well above the
previous indicated cost. The result will be that there is an even less
appetite for forces to take the Lantern devices and service.
NPIA has currently been allocated insufficient revenue / running
cost money to sustain a national rollout of Lantern devices. These
costs would therefore have to be passed onto forces – something
in the current financial climate the forces are unwilling to accept
Value for money for the purchase cannot be demonstrated
There is a risk that the cost would be subject to VAT
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
6 Conclusions
1. Proceeding with CCN 050 is an extremely expensive option for
what is considered only to be an interim solution.
2. The CCN essentially ties the NPIA and the police service into an
interim phase until March 2012. This doesn’t take into
consideration the rapid advancement of the relevant technology. It
is more than probable that a technological solution, which is closer
to police force requirements, can be delivered long before that
timescale elapses.
3. Not proceeding with CCN 050 and concentrating on delivering the
‘final’ solution sooner, presents the opportunity to initiate a ‘step
change’ in the technology provided to forces, and to better meet
their needs.
4. It must be understood that some of the costs present in CCN 050
such as user authentication are going to be incurred regardless of
whatever ‘final’ solution is pursued.
7 Recommendations
1. It is recommended that CCN 050 is closed; it is an interim solution,
which represents poor value for money, limited benefits to police
forces, and is overly expensive.
2. It is further recommended that the time and effort of the project
team is directed at identifying and delivering an agreed ‘final’
solution in the shortest possible timescale.
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
8 Control page
Distribution list
Recipient
Title
Location
For draft versions
Project Manager
NKBH
Nick Deyes
Head of ICTS
NKBH
Chris Wheeler
Head of Fingerprint
NKBH
projects
For authorised versions, as above plus
ACC Peter
Project SRO
Derbyshire
Goodman
Lantern project
n/a
n/a
board members
Change control
Version
Date
Authority
Evidence of approval
Record of change
0.1
3rd April 08
First draft
0.2
9th April 08
Second Draft following review by
and
C Wheeler
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
RESTRICTED
