The withholding of £515,442 from payment of Southwest One unitary charge invoices?

The request was partially successful.

Dear Avon and Somerset Constabulary,

2012/13 Accounts: "37 Contingent Liabilities

We have reviewed the position in respect of contingent liabilities as at 31 March 2013.

We are withholding £515,442 from our payment of Southwest One unitary charge invoices.

This relates to services no longer provided and performance failures. These amounts have not yet been contractually agreed with Southwest One."

Q1a. Does the approx. £0.5m with-held payment to South West One (SW1) relate to SAP and a lack of workforce planning (shift rotas etc)? If not, what does it relate to - Please detail?

Q1b. Please detail the service failures involved with description, value, service impact and all other relevant service detail?

Q1c. Please list "services no longer provided" with service description, unitary charge value, number of staff, staff employment status and all other relevant service detail.

Q2. How much in total has been with-held from SW1 since contract signing with IBM in 2008?

Q3. Is any dispute or legal resolution being considered against IBM/SW1? If so, please disclose all relevant document(s) including minutes, emails, reports etc.

Yours faithfully,

Dave Orr

Dear Avon and Somerset Constabulary,

This FOI is overdue.

Yours faithfully,

Dave Orr

Dear Avon and Somerset Constabulary,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Avon and Somerset Constabulary's handling of my FOI request 'The withholding of £515,442 from payment of Southwest One unitary charge invoices?'.

Please consider this article in your Internal Review as it summaries the issues of principle and public interest I have:

http://ukcampaign4change.com/2013/10/24/...

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/t...

Yours faithfully,

Dave Orr

#Freedom of Information Requests, Avon and Somerset Constabulary

1 Attachment

Corporate Information Management Department

Force Headquarters, PO Box 37, Valley Road,

Portishead, Bristol, BS20 8QJ

Facsimile 01275 814667

Email foirequests@avonandsomerset.police.uk    

 

Private Our Reference 777/13

Mr David Orr Your reference  

[1][email address] Date 06 November
2013
 

 

Dear Mr Orr

 

I write in connection with your request for information dated 11^th
September concerning Southwest One. Whilst you have submitted your
requests separately, each is concerning the same/similar subject matter
and can therefore be aggregated together for cost purposes under Section
12 of the Act.

 

Your request for information has now been considered and some of the
information asked for is below following your questions.

 

Part 1

 

In this HMIC/NAO report from July
2013:[2]http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads...

 

the following claims are made:

"5.5 Avon and Somerset Constabulary achieved their forecasted levels of
procurement savings earlier than expected and the partnership anticipates
it will achieve further procurement savings over the contracted levels."

 

Q1a. What level of actual cashable procurement savings from South West One
have been made as at end of March 2013? Please disclose total cashable
savings since contract signing with IBM for South West One (SW1) in 2008
and the annual savings for 2012/13.

 

This information was published with Police authority papers until their
demise in November 2012. Total cashable savings achieved up to the end of
March 2013 were £7.670million, already implemented which will deliver
£12.697million by the end of the Contract term. In year delivered savings
for 2012/3 were £2.162million.

 

Q1b1. What forecast target does 5.5. above refer to and when was that
forecast originally made e.g. £15m of procurement savings forecast made on
contract signing in 2008?

 

Yes. The forecast does indeed refer to the £15m procurement savings
anticipated to be delivered over the 10 year term of the SWO contract.
Given that savings of £12.697m have been signed off at the half way point
ASP is well on track to achieve significantly higher procurement savings
over the 10 year term. The current forecast is for savings of £19.668m to
be achieved by the end of the contract term.

 

Q1b2. When is the contract signing claim of £15m of procurement savings
forecast to be made?

 

See above.

 

Please also disclose the latest copy of the benefits tracking
document/spreadsheet with regard to SW1 forecast cashable procurement
savings.

 

The exemption applicable to this exemption is section 43 – Commercial
Interests. The notification of the extension to your deadline incorrectly
quoted law enforcement. This was an error and I apologise for any
misunderstanding.

Section 43 is a qualified and class based exemption which means that there
is no requirement to identify and evidence the harm that would be caused
by disclosure; however there is a requirement to consider the public
interest.

 

Considerations favouring disclosure

Disclosure would provide a better understanding of how public funds are
spent and the decision making process

 

Considerations favouring non-disclosure

The Benefits Tracking Slips contain detail on savings and contract values,
which is deemed commercially sensitive information, in that current
suppliers may be disadvantaged on future contracts/tenders by other
potential bidders knowing how they have bid and the constabulary may not
achieve the most competitive tenders. Contract values over a certain
threshold are already published on the PCC’s website.

 

Balance test

Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of the expenditure
of public funds, the ability for the force to achieve the most competitive
tenders is of paramount importance. It is our opinion that for this reason
the balancing test for disclosure is not made out. In accordance with the
Act, this represents a Refusal Notice for this part of your request.

 

Q1c Does the target in 5.5 above include all contract setup/legal,
investment & borrowing(e.g. SAP) and contract management overhead costs
etc to achieve contract true cost break even (break even previously
estimated at £21m-£24m)?

 

No

 

Q2a. Who in the Constabulary (job title) reported the information to the
HMIC/NAO, that was then used by the HMIC in section 5.5 of the above
report?

 

HMIC interviewed numerous people and were supplied with extensive
documentation. It is therefore not possible to answer this question.

 

Q2b. Did the Constabulary seek PCC and/or the Police & Crime Panel
oversight and approval BEFORE the self-assessment reporting of the
information relating to SW1 in 5.5 above to the HMIC? If so, when & please
pass a link to the meeting minutes or disclose relevant document(s).

 

No

 

Part 2

 

The contract with IBM for SW1 was originally between the old Police
Authority and IBM.

 

Q1. Has the contract with IBM for SW1 been novated from the old Police
Authority? If so, is the contract now between IBM and the Office of the
Police and Crime Commissioner or is it now between IBM and the
Constabulary?

 

The contract has been transferred from the former police authority under
the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 Statutory transfer in
favour of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Avon & Somerset.

 

Part 3

 

An adverse audit report on the South West One SAP-based Workforce
Management (due for implementation in 2009) was produced in Nov'2012:

[3]http://www.aspola.org.uk/cache/PDF/Docum...

 

"South West One was unable to create a two way interface, therefore DMS
has never been informed by information from SAP. Instead the Constabulary
has been forced to maintain HR data in NSPIS, the Force’s previous HR
system, to feed into DMS to correctly populate rosters resulting in double
keying of information, duplicating work and doubling the time it takes to
enter or amend personnel records; this also increases the likelihood of
error;

 

Through this process the Constabulary has been advised that a number of
issues it experiences with time recording in SAP, including challenges
with the layout of the time recording module, could be fixed with the
application of SAP Enhancement Pack 4. This has been applied to the
background elements of SAP but has not been applied to the user accessed
elements of the system. SAP Enhancement Pack 6 has now been released, but
the Constabulary has not yet seen the improvements offered by Enhancement
Pack 4."

 

Q1. When will the much overdue and new Workforce Management solution be
implemented and fully integrated with SAP by South West One, to avoid
manual processes and double-keying etc?

 

Approximately 12 months.

 

Q2. Have the new Enhancement Pack 4 or later SAP modules now been
implemented by South West One? If not, then when is that due please?

 

Yes, the Enhancement Pack 4 has been installed.

 

Q3. Were the above outstanding SAP problems reported to HMIC when the
Constabulary self-assessed their submission to HMIC for the July 2013
"Public Sector Partnering" report (link below)?

 

Yes

 

[4]http://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads...

 

Part 4

 

2012/13 Accounts: "37 Contingent Liabilities

We have reviewed the position in respect of contingent liabilities as at
31 March 2013.

We are withholding £515,442 from our payment of Southwest One unitary
charge invoices.

This relates to services no longer provided and performance failures.
These amounts have not yet been contractually agreed with Southwest One."

 

Q1a. Does the approx. £0.5m with-held payment to South West One (SW1)
relate to SAP and a lack of workforce planning (shift rotas etc)? If not,
what does it relate to - Please detail?

 

No, as stated it relates to services no longer provided and service
failures. However, both matters have now been resolved. The moneys have
been withheld by the Constabulary and are no longer in dispute.

 

Q1b. Please detail the service failures involved with description, value,
service impact and all other relevant service detail?

 

Service credits were due under the penalty regime for failures to maintain
police station enquiry office opening hours as published in 2009-10. Since
2011 the enquiry office service has significantly improved.

 

Q1c. Please list "services no longer provided" with service description,
unitary charge value, number of staff, staff employment status and all
other relevant service detail.

 

This relates to the Force Internet Team of five members of staff, seconded
to Southwest One in 2008 and returned to the constabulary by mutual
agreement within six months.

 

Q2. How much in total has been with-held from SW1 since contract signing
with IBM in 2008?

 

As above, plus the final instalment payment for SAP which is £371,750.
This continues to be withheld until the system is fully delivered.

 

Q3. Is any dispute or legal resolution being considered against IBM/SW1?
If so, please disclose all relevant document(s) including minutes, emails,
reports etc.

 

No.

 

Part 5

 

[5]http://ukcampaign4change.com/2013/03/28/...

[6]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-som...

 

Q1a. Have the Constabulary undertaken an impact assessment for the impact
of the Somerset County Council (SCC) dispute with IBM for South West One
(SW1) and the repatriation back in-house of many SCC services and staff
previously in SW1? If so, please disclose all relevant documents, emails
and reports etc.

 

The situation has been kept under constant review throughout the period of
the dispute. There is no relevant documentation.

 

Q2. Please disclose the latest copy of the Risk Log/Register (or similar
assessment report[s]) for the South West One contract with IBM.

 

The risk register is held, maintained and managed by Southwest One,
therefore, No information is held by the Constabulary in relation to this
question.

 

Q3. Now that Somerset County Council have significantly reduced services
with IBM in SW1, then by unitary charge value or similar value measure, is
the Constabulary/OPCC the largest partner in SW1 partnership with IBM?

 

It depends how one defines the partnership.  – Cost of services, size of
the organisation – scope of services delivered, number of services
delivered. The answer varies depending on perspective.

 

Yours sincerely

 

C Quartey

 

Freedom of Information Officer

Corporate Information Management Department

 

 

Please note:

1.     Requests and responses may be published on Avon and Somerset
Constabulary’s website (within 24 hours), some of which may contain a link
to additional information, which may provide you with further
clarification.

2.     Whilst we may verbally discuss your request with you in order to
seek clarification, all other communication should be made in writing.

3.     Avon and Somerset Constabulary provides you with the right to
request a re-examination of your case under its review procedure (copy
attached).

 

 

 

show quoted sections

#Freedom of Information Requests, Avon and Somerset Constabulary

Corporate Information Management Department

PO Box 37, Valley Road, Portishead, Bristol BS20 8QJ

Telephone 01275 816305

                                                                                   
Office hours 9-5 Monday to Friday

 

 

14 November 2013

 

Mr David Orr

[email address]

 

Dear Mr Orr

Freedom of Information Request – 777/13

 

I write in response to your request for an internal review of Avon and
Somerset Constabulary’s handling of your FOI request in relation to the
withholding of £515,542 from payment of Southwest One unitary charge
invoices.

 

I have reviewed your initial request, your request for an internal review
and the response from the Constabulary. Although a mistake was made I am
satisfied that the response from the Constabulary met the requirements and
spirit of the Act.

 

The Constabulary have provided responses in relation to the questions in
part 4 of your request.

 

Your questions were aggregated. The costs of answering more than one
request can be aggregated for the purposes of estimating whether the
appropriate limit would be exceeded in any one of those requests if they
relate to the same or similar information.   You were advised of this in
the letter dated 8 October 2013 from the Freedom of Information Officer.

 

In the same letter the Freedom of Information Officer gave notice of an
amended date for a response to allow for consideration of the application
of a qualified exemption and wrongly cited law enforcement: it should have
been section 43 which relates to commercial interests. I believe this was
a genuine mistake for which the Freedom of Information Officer made a
prompt apology on the 25 October 2013.

 

If you feel that the constabulary has failed to meet its obligations under
the Freedom of Information Act, you have the right to refer the matter to
the Information Commissioner, who may agree to investigate the matter on
your behalf.

 

The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Wycliffe House, Water
Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF – helpline 0303 123 1113.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Jeff Hines

Information Access Manager

 

 

 

show quoted sections