Realising the benefits of e-government the CJS IT Programme experience

(1)

Realising the benefits of e-Government

– the CJS IT Programme experience

Presentation to Forum P.A, RSO seminar Rome, 9

th

_{May 2006}

(2)

(3)

Context: Justifying the investment – appraisal &

evaluation in the UK

“The fundamental reason for beginning a programme is to

realise the benefits through change

.”

Source: Managing Successful Programmes

(MSP) from the Office for Government Commerce

“It is only possible to be sure that change has worked if we

can

measure the delivery of the benefits

it is supposed to

bring.”

Source: UK Cabinet Office, Successful IT:

Modernising Government in Action

(4)

But by the start of the 2004 Spending Review we faced…

A negative cost-benefit position for the

Programme as a whole

(5)

But we were in good company

• “for more than two decades, implementing IT systems successfully has

proved difficult…implementation of IT systems has resulted in delay,

confusion and inconvenience to the citizen and, in many cases, poor value

for money to the taxpayer.” (Public Accounts Committee of the House of

Commons ‘Improving the Delivery of Government IT projects’ 1999)

• “78% of Information Systems projects failed to realise even 50% of the

originally identified benefits.” (Management Today, 2001)

• “30-40% of systems to support business change deliver no benefits

whatsoever.” (OGC Successful Delivery Toolkit, 2005)

(6)

So action was needed in terms of establishing repeatable

processes and evidence-based Tools & Techniques in the

areas of:

• Investment Appraisal & Portfolio Prioritisation

(7)

Managing the Portfolio 1 - Investment Principles…

Funding is dependent upon adherence to the CJS IT governance

arrangements

Projects funded must deliver benefits to more than one agency

Complete what is started subject to performance

Projects must provide

positive rates of return

agreed with the

recipients

Options selected should provide VFM and be achievable quickly

Consume your own smoke i.e. departments are expected to fund

overspends

Continued funding depends on performance including benefits

realisation

Critical issues need to be addressed before funding is confirmed

Projects must meet industry best practice criteria for

attractiveness &

(8)

‘3 A’ Analysis - Attractiveness

A

TTRACTIVENESS

A

NALYSIS

E

CONOMIC

A

NALYSIS

*

NPV IRR P

AY

B

ACK

P

ERIOD

(

DISCOUNTED

)

* NOTE THAT THESE INDICATORS HAVE BEEN ALTERED TO REFLECT THE PRINCIPLES OF THE BENEFITS ELIGIBILITY FRAMEW ORK.

B

ENEFITS

A

NALYSIS OVER

10 Y

EAR

P

ROJECT

L

IFE

C

YCLE

R

ECIPIENT

E

FFICIENCY

–

C

ASHABLE

(£

M

)

E

FFICIENCY

–

O

PPORTUNITY

V

ALUE

(£

M

)

E

FFECTIVENESS

(£

M

)

CJO: None

C

ROSS

CJS:

B

EYOND THE

CJS(S

PECIFY

):

T

OTALS

:

C

ONFIRMED

S

OURCE OF

C

ONFIRMATION

SR2004

B

ENEFITS INCLUDED IN

BRP

S OR AGREED BY THE

BRL

Select

B

ENEFITS INCLUDED FOR

NPV

HAVE

BEEN ADJUSTED FOR

O

PTIMISM

B

IAS

Select

S

TRATEGIC

A

LIGNMENT

&

C

ONTRIBUTION

A

SSESSED

C

ONFIRMED

?

S

TRAND

1:

C

ONFIDENCE

N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

S

TRAND

2:

V

ICTIMS

&

W

ITNESSES

N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

S

TRAND

3:

O

FFENCES

B

ROUGHT

T

O

J

USTICE

N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

S

TRAND

4:

E

NFORCEMENT

N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

S

TRAND

5:

J

OINED UP

IT N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

D

EPARTMENTAL

E

FFICIENCY

P

LANS

N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

R

EDUCING

R

E

-

OFFENDING

N/A

N

O

Y

ES

BY

P

ROVING

M

ODEL

A

SSESSMENT

Date:

Attractiveness

Score:

Progress

since

assessment:

(9)

‘3 A’ Analysis - Achievability

A

C H I E V A B I L I T Y

A

N A L Y S I S

A

S S E S S M E N T O F D E G R E E O F

B

U S I N E S S

C

H A N G E R E Q U I R E D T O R E A L I S E B E N E F I T S

R

E C I P I E N T

B R L

A

S S E S S M E N T

C

O M M E N T S

O t h e r

S e l e c t

O

P T I M I S M

B

I A S A D J U S T E D A N D S U F F I C I E N T C O N T I N G E N C I E S I N C L U D E D

P

R O J E C T

S

P O N S O R

’

S

E L F

A

S S E S S M E N T

J

U D G E M E N T

O

V E R A L L

R

A T I N G

R

A T I O N A L E

S

U M M A R Y

D

E G R E E O F

C

O M P L E X I T Y

S e l e c t

Q

U A L I T Y O F

P

L A N N I N G

,

I

M P L E M E N T A T I O N

&

P

E R F O R M A N C E

M

A N A G E M E N T

S e l e c t

C

A P A C I T Y T O D R I V E

P

R O G R E S S

S e l e c t

L

I K E L I H O O D O F

B

E N E F I T S

R

E A L I S A T I O N

S e l e c t

P

R O V I N G

M

O D E L

A

S S E S S M E N T

D a t e :

A c h i e v a b i l i t y S c o r e :

P r o g r e s s s i n c e a s s e s s m e n t :

R

E D

R

E D

/ A

M B E R

A

M B E R

A

M B E R

/ G

R E E N

G

R E E N

H

I G H L Y P R O B L E M A T I C

–

R E Q U I R E S U R G E N T A N D

D E C I S I V E A C T I O N

P

R O B L E M A T I C

–

R E Q U I R E S E S U B S T A N T I A L

A T T E N T I O N

,

S O M E A S P E C T S

N E E D U R G E N T A C T I O N

M I X E D

–

A S P E C T

(

S

)

R E Q U I R E S U B S T A N T I A L

A T T E N T I O N

,

S O M E G O O D

G

O O D

–

R E Q U I R E S S O M E

R E F I N E M E N T A N D

S Y S T E M A T I C

I M P L E M E N T A T I O N

G

O O D

–

N O A T T E N T I O N

N E E D E D

.

P

R O J E C T W I L L

P R O G R E S S A C C O R D I N G

T O P L A N

(10)

‘3 A’ Analysis - Affordability

AFFORDABILITY ANALYSIS

O

THER

F

UNDING

S

OURCES

B

UDGET

(£

M

) A

VAILABILITY

C

ONFIRMED

?

O

THER

S

OURCES

:

Select

F

UNDING

A

VAILABLE TO

R

EALISE BUSINESS

C

HANGE

? Select

C

ONFIRMATION THAT OVERSPENDS WILL BE MET BY

DEPARTMENTAL BASELINES

Select

D

OCUMENTS USED TO ASSESS THIS PROJECT

V

ERSION

D

ATE

Business Case

Proving Model Assessment

Q1 2005/06 Benefits Evidence & Revised Forecast Report

R

ESOURCE

/C

APITAL

REQUIRED

R

ESOURCE

/C

APITAL

AVAILABLE

R

ESOURCE

(£

M

)

C

APITAL

(£

M

)

T

OTAL

(£

M

)

R

ESOURCE

(£

M

)

C

APITAL

(£

M

)

T

OTAL

(£

M

)

2005/6

2006/7

2007/8

SR2004

A

VAILABILITY CONFIRMED BY

:

R

ESOURCE

/C

APITAL

GAP

R

ESOURCE

(£

M

)

C

APITAL

(£

M

)

T

OTAL

(£

M

)

2005/6

2006/7

S

2007/8

SR2004

(11)

(12)

Active Benefits Management 1 – ‘Contributor’ Project Benefits Reporting

Recipient

Cost Avoidance

Self Assessment Cashable Opportunity Cashable Opportunity £ %

Crown

Courts 12.700 35.620 0.000 25.920 0.000 74.240 6.7% Quality of Benefits Forecast Other CJOs 0.000 117.820 0.000 52.760 0.000 170.580 15.3% Scale of Benefits Forecast Cross CJS 0.000 0.000 0.000 173.710 0.000 173.710 15.6% Quality of Realisation Planning Outside CJS 0.000 0.000 0.000 694.860 0.000 694.860 62.4% Likelihood of Realisation Total £ 12.700 153.440 0.000 947.250 0.000 1113.390 100.0%

Benefits Realised this financial year £m Last report Now Monetary Value of Benefits Realised YTD 0.01 NPV £m* 154.301 -

4.1

0.0% Variance -4.09

Performance £ M

From 1 month after Go-live at each court centre

Reduced waiting time claim values

Benefit not yet due for realisation

10 Reduction in solicitor waiting - 12.7 Efficiency cashable

PSA Targets 2, 3 and 5

Crown Court

Following rollout to all prisons in a CJA

9 NOMS Benefits - 36.9 Effectiveness opportunity

PSA Target 5 NOMS Benefit ahead of or in line with plan 10 Benefit ahead of or in line with plan

No of bail forms sent and time taken

9

3 months after go live in a CJ Area

No of enquiries made to CC

Benefit ahead of or in line with plan

No of daily/warned lists sent and time taken 8 Police Benefits - 115.52 Efficiency opportunity

PSA Target 5

Police

3 months after go live in a CJ Area

Number of enquiries made to CC

No of daily lists faxed/time taken. 7 CPS Benefits - 2.3 Efficiency opportunity

PSA Target 5

CPS

From 1 month after Go-live at each court centre Backlog count Benefit ahead of or in line with plan Number of disposals 6 Crown Court Efficiency benefits - 35.61 Efficiency opportunity

Crown Court

From 3 months after Go-live at each court centre

Number of disposals

5 Court time saving (Same day delays) - 5.98 Effectiveness opportunity

Crown Court

From 6 months after Go-live at each court centre

Percentage of ineffective hearings

4 Court time saving ( Ineffective Hearings) Assumption of improvement

of 1-10% 31.78 Effectiveness opportunity

PSA Targets 1, 2, 3 and 5 Crown Court, Police, CPS, Probation

From Go-live at each court centre

No. of adjournments as a result of no PSR

3 Court time saving (PSR adjournments) Improvement from 15% to

3.4% 4.06 Effectiveness opportunity

Crown Court

To start 6 months after completion in a CJ Area

Time from CC result to PNC update

2 Reduction in the cost of crime

PNC update down to 3

days 694.86 Effectiveness opportunity

PSA Targets 1 and 3

UK economy

To start 6 months after completion in a CJ Area

Time from CC result to PNC update

Benefit realisation behind Plan

Realisation Ramp Up Key Measures/Indicators of Benefit

Benefits Realisation

Status

1 Reduction in the cost of crime

PNC update down to 3

days 173.71 Effectiveness opportunity

PSA Target 5

CJS

94.2 *NPV discounted at 3.5%

Project Life Cycle Benefits Profile (Top 5-10 benefits over 10 years)

Benefit Description

Impact

Benefit Category Strategic Alignment Main Recipient Name(s) of recipient agreed with Q4 Assessment Q4 forecast for Q1

Forecast in latest published Delivery Plan

YTD IRR %

Approved by SRO:

CJS IT BENEFITS PROGRESS REPORT - QUARTER 4 2004-05 FOR CJS EXCHANGE XHIBIT PORTAL

10 Year Analysis

Efficiency £ M Effectiveness Total

Q3 Assessment

Q3 Forecast for Q4

Cumulative Cost and Benefit Forecast 2003-2013

-200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 2003-0 4 2004-0 5 2005-0 6 2006-0 7 2007-0 8 2008-0 9 2009-1 0 2010-1 1 2011-1 2 2012-1 3 Year £' m

(13)

But – Optimism Bias is a reality

“

There is a demonstrated, systemic, tendency for project

appraisers to be overly optimistic. This is a worldwide

phenomenon that affects both the private and public

sectors…appraisers tend to overstate benefits, and

underestimate timings and costs”

(14)

The Benefits Integrity Check

…

Sponsor

Organisation

Benefits

Organisation

Recipient

Programme C

Programme B

Programme A

Realisation

Plan

Benefits Integrity

Check

Agency A

Realisation

Plan

Realisation

Plan

Agency B

Agency C

(15)

Active Benefits Management 2 – Recipient

Organisation

Benefits Realisation Planning

Accountability

Named benefit owner for each

benefit

Progress by

Quarter

Current RAG

Status

Accountability

(16)

Active Benefits Management 3 - Strategic Alignment via

Benefits Realisation Plans for each strategic target

No.

Source

Project

(1)

Source

(1)

(2) (4)

Benefit

(1)

Benefit

Owner

(1)

Hypotheses

(2) (3)

Current RAG

Status

(1) (2)

1 ETMP/CPT

BRP: CPS

-13

Efficiency

opportunity

Steve

Przybylski/

Chris

YULE

ETMP/CPT: reduces the time taken by CPS for the

following case progression processes in the crown court

1) Pre-PDH 2) Post-PDH 3) Check compliance with

directions 4) Check readiness for Trial and 5) Applications

together with some fax, phone, post savings.

ETMP/CPT: reduces the time taken by CPS for the

f ll

i

i th

i t t

Benefit realisation

behind plan

3 OASys

BRP:

NOMS - 5

Efficiency

Opportunit

y

John Powls

(on behalf

of Christine

Knott)

OASys: enables HMPS and NPS to adopt common

techniques and exchange offender assessment

information efficiently and effectively so that offenders are

better managed across service boundaries, i.e. when they

Benefit realised

ahead or in line with

plan

7 SeM

OASys

NSPIS

NOMIS

BRP:

NOMS - 19

Effectivene

ss

Opportunit

y

John Powls

(on behalf

of Christine

Knott)

OASys: ensures that offenders are assessed consistently

and thoroughly and that risk assessments are regularly

reviewed

OASys and SeM: facilitates the exchange of assessment

information

OASys: provides prompts for risk of harm screening

NOMIS: facilitates improved offender information

idi

i

l

d

th NPS

d HMPS

NOMS - GREEN

Benefit realised

ahead or in line with

plan

CJIT Difficulties with

benefits

measurement/evide

nce means

8 SeM

OASys

NSPIS

LIBRA

NOMIS

CJIT CEI

Effectivene

ss

Opportunit

y

OASys: prevents multiple assessments therefore assisting

end to end offender management

NOMIS and SeM: enables connectivity to external

agencies - authorised agencies (e.g. drug treatment

providers) facilitating better information sharing

OASys and NOMIS: provides information about

i t

ti

/

d

it

t

CJIT Difficulties with

benefits

measurement/evide

nce means

realisation is

uncertain

RAG Status

Red:

Benefit realisation behind plan

Amber :

Difficulties with benefits measurement/evidence means realisation is uncertain

Green:

Benefit realised ahead or in line with plan

White:

Benefits not yet due for realisation

(3) Source: Appropriate business case

(4) Note: Number refers to the row in the named BRP

CEI CONSEQUENCE 12

Reduce the rate of reoffending

Reconviction rates

(1) Source: CJA Benefits Realisation Plans Q1 05/06 (BRP)

(2) Source: CJIT Combined Effectiveness Impact (CEI) Model vA1.0 July 05

CEI CONSEQUENCE 10

Reduce incidents of offender self

harm and harm to others

SIDs and self harm volumes Safe

Custody Group

Creation of the central O-D+C5EAT

database enables the provision of

aggregate offender data across

NOMS.

2005/6 indicators: O-DEAT database to

have at least 800,000 completed

offender assessment records; 624

O-DEAT reports.

SR2004 CJS IT CONTRIBUTION TO CJS 2008 VISION - CJS PSA Standard Settlement Condition - Reduce Re-offending

Benefit Description

(1) (2)

Key Measures/Indicators of Benefit

(1)

(2)

Casework Enabled by ETMP/CPT

resulting in time savings in CPS for

case progression processes

IT will support will reduce manual

process times for some case

progression activities.

(17)

CJS IT Benefits Management Process

Business Case

Development

Measuring &

Tracking: Initial

Baselining

Project Live Service

Benefits

Recipients

Strand

Boards

Efficiency

Planners

Benefits

Contributor

CJIT

Benefits Eligibility

Framework

1-Page Summary

Benefits Report

CPS Efficiency Plan

DCA Efficiency Plan

HO Efficiency Plan

Measuring & Tracking:

Benefits Realisation

OBTJs

Reduced Re-offending

Confidence

V&W

Enforcement

Check alignment with BEF e.g.

double counting, cost avoidance

If funding

approved

Project View of

Benefits

Project Benefits Lead

and Benefits Realisation

Lead agree Efficiency &

Effectiveness benefits

Benefit Realisation Leads

and Efficiency Planners

agree Efficiency Benefits

that contribute to

Departmental Efficiency

Plans

Strand Boards agree

Efficiency &

Effectiveness Benefits

that contribute to Strand

Benefits Realisation Plans

Benefit Realisation Plan:

Police

Benefit Realisation Plan:

CPS

Benefit Realisation Plan:

Courts

Benefits Evidence &

Realisation Forecast

Benefit Realisation Plan:

Corrections

(18)

CEI framework : Consequence 8 – Cases Cracked Late

RCM Consequence 8

LIBRA

NSPIS C&P

Provides accurate information

earlier

Ensures quicker resulting cases &

conformance to CJS standards

Facilitates better case preparation

Speeds up communications with

CPS

Delivers consistent charge wording

Supports a more effective timely

prosecutional review

08.1 Prosecution

discontinue case /

withdraw

08.2 Defendant

pleas to alternative

offence

08.3 Defendant

changes to a guilt

plea

08.11 Witness

does not give

evidence

08.12 Ruling

against

Prosecution on

evidence

admissability

08.13 Inappropriate

charging

08.14 Insufficient

evidence

08.15 Ineffective

review

08.16 Not in public

interest

08.21 Inappropriate

charging

08.22 Ineffective

review

C08.Cases

cracked late

SR02(PSA 01) To reduce crime and

the fear of crime

SR02(PSA 02) Narrowing the justice

gap by increasing the number of

crimes where the offender is brought

to justice (NJG)

SR02(PSA 03) Increase level of public

confidence

Supports work of WCU (NWNJ)

which prevents witness not giving

evidence

COMPASS

(19)

CJSIT Social Value – Different stages of benefits

Time

Savings

Prevented

Victimisation

Public Satisfaction

Consequence

(20)

And the results to date…

• Spending Review baseline rolled forward for another 2

years

• The Programme can now demonstrate a (robust) positive

return on investment

(21)

Some encouraging feedback…

Cabinet Office report to the OECD

- “CJSIT…a best practice case in the UK”

Gartner

-

“ the facilitating role of the IT portfolio unit represent good practices.

Government organizations that are seeking successful approaches to program

and project portfolio management should study CJIT's actions”.

CISCO report to the US NECCC

-

“

your CJIT Portfolio Management initiative is

considered a strong and proven approach to measuring the benefits of IT

investments

“

Booz Allen Hamilton international e-gov benchmarking study

-

“sound investment

practices...CJIT has adopted many best-practice investment tools…recognised by