AGENDA ITEM: B2
MEETING:
RSSB Board Meeting
DATE:
03 March 2016
SUBJECT:
Strategy for the Transformation of Rail Industry Supplier Assurance
Schemes
SPONSOR:
Chris Fenton
AUTHOR:
John Abbott/Pete Colley
1.
Purpose of paper
1.1.
To provide the board with an update on the project to modernise supplier assurance
arrangements in the rail industry and seek board clarification around some key assumptions
and approval of several decisions to allow the project to progress. This paper will be
supported by a short presentation.
2.
Current position
2.1.
The RSSB board is currently the custodian of two industry-level supplier assurance schemesthe Railway Industry Supplier Qualification Scheme (RISQS) and the Railway Industry Supplier
Approval Scheme (RISAS). Annex A shows the scope and relationship between the schemes.
2.2.
RISQS (formally known as Link –up) provides a supplier registration and qualification service
for over 4,100 suppliers and services 118 major buyers in rail. The scheme provides a
registration portal, desk-top verification and enhanced qualification by audit facility. The
scheme is used by buyers to:
 Comply with European procurement legislation
 Demonstrate supply chain risk control
 Source potential suppliers
 Meet requirements of the Sentinel, Interface Planning and Plant Operation schemes
The scheme is used by suppliers to understand buyer requirements and showcase their
capabilities.
2.3
The RISQS annual stewardship report is attached at Annex B and includes information on the
current performance and challenges facing the RISQS board.
2.4
RISAS was authorised by RSSB in May 2006 to undertake the assessment and certification of
suppliers of critical products and services, initially for rolling stock in response to the Cullen
Public Inquiry recommendation. The scheme is delivered through third party assessment
bodies appointed by RSSB who assess candidate suppliers’ capability to meet specification(s).
The scheme also includes formal arrangements for monitoring, feedback and continuous
improvement.
The scheme faces several challenges, in particular:




Active duty holder support
Sustainability of critical resources
Questions over the delivery model
Funding
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 6
AGENDA ITEM: B2
The RISAS board has recently engaged industry over these challenges and the chair has
communicated the outcome in a letter to the board attached at Annex C. The RISAS annual
stewardship report is attached at Annex D.
2.5
The aims of the transformation project are to:







2.6
Support the move to a "self-funding" set of arrangements
Deliver greater adaptability to industry changes
Improve supply chain and industry performance
Increase understanding by and compliance of suppliers with legal, regulatory and
industry requirements
Reduce the number of duplicate questionnaires and audits for industry suppliers
Reduce the direct cost of supplier assurance to suppliers (i.e. recognition of other audits;
reduced frequency for strong performers)
Offer a single point of entry into GB rail industry
This project will see RISQS wholly transformed. Although the long-term aim is to integrate
RISAS, the current proposal is to do this through a phased approach:



Phase 1: single IT portal for suppliers and buyers; single scheme management and
governance. (RISAS assessments still treated as if 3rd party).
Phase 2: assurance against Part A, i.e. corporate, requirements through remote
verification rather than RISAB assessment
Phase 3: (if appropriate) integration of RISAS assessment programme into new
arrangements.
2.7
There is a window of opportunity to transform the industry arrangements as the RISQS
concession agreement with Achilles is due to expire in April 2017. There is an option to extend
by 12 and/or 24 months.
2.8
This project is being undertaken as part of the broader Supplier Assurance Framework
Programme (SAFP), which includes:



RIS 2750 – a new standard for best practice in Supplier Assurance, replacing GM/RT 2450
Reviewing major buying organisations’ supplier assurance arrangements to identify and
share best practice and to identify needs for improvement, e.g. Supply Chain Risk
Assessment Methodology
Review of other industry/railway supplier assurance arrangements to identify best
practice to inform improvements in GB rail industry
3.
Project status
3.1.
RSSB has now recruited a Head of Supplier Assurance and a Project Manager to organise
delivery of the industry scheme transformation project. They, in turn, have set up a Project
Board of key industry stakeholders to support the sponsorship of the project.
3.2.
The project consists of two main work streams:


Design and implementation of a new Scheme Management Organisation
Procurement of specialist services and technology to support the new arrangements
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 2 of 6
AGENDA ITEM: B2
3.3.
4.
A high-level timeline for this project can be found below.
Project status: Procurement of services and technology
The project is currently on schedule. The project team has made substantial progress in engaging
potential providers to gain a better understanding of what the market is able to deliver, what
commercial models for service provision are appropriate and the feasibility of the new
arrangements going live in spring 2017. A copy of the Business Prospectus used to attract potential
providers can be found at this link.
4.1.
There were c.40 initial expressions of interest which converted into 14 active participants in
the supplier engagement process. The results of the engagement are currently being collated
to inform the detailed specification and contracting strategy.
4.2.
Three key risks have been identified which will need to be closely managed:



Ability of new service providers to build/transition in four months. The project is
currently engaging with potential service providers to understand the feasibility.
Relationship with the current RISQS service provider, especially with the regard to the
release of key information for communication and transition. The RISQS Chair and
Scheme Manager are working closely with the provider to manage this risk.
Stakeholders concerns around RSSB's ability to deliver, following some perceived issues
with recent projects.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 3 of 6
AGENDA ITEM: B2
4.3.
The project has commissioned an independent deliverability review to give stakeholders
assurance that these risks are being properly controlled.
5.
Project status: Scheme Management Organisation
5.1.
The project team have been developing and assessing options that deliver the following
outcomes:

Self-funding set of arrangements

Low risk integration of RISAS into new arrangements, ie phased approach

Industry control of the arrangements, supported by third-party providers

No increase in cost to industry while improving coverage and depth of assurance given

Establishment of a scheme management organisation (SMO) deliver the above
5.2.
There are several areas where the project team needs the board to agree the direction of
travel and some key assumptions to allow them to move into the detailed design phase.
5.3.
5.4.
We have identified five factors that require board direction:

Industry Leadership and Authority

Organisational Governance

Scheme Governance

Scheme Funding Model

Service Provision Commercial Options
Industry Leadership and Authority: the project is working under the assumption that the
RSSB Board will be the custodian of the new arrangements. The main reasons underpinning
this assumption are:




alignment with RSSB’s stated purpose
no other industry body is as representative as RSSB
access to organisational support (legal; procurement ; insurance; business services)
contracting entity
Can the Board confirm that this will be the case? Is there any requirement to seek
endorsement from any other industry bodies?
5.5.
Organisational Governance: there needs to be a clear distinction between the governance
of the SMO itself and the governance of the scheme(s) that the SMO manages.
5.6.
The project team, incl. key industry stakeholders, recommend that the SMO be set up as a
separate legal entity (“Newco”) within the RSSB Group of companies. The main factor
influencing the recommendation are that, although an industry supplier assurance scheme
aligns with RSSB’s stated purpose, there needs to be a separation of accountabilities to
protect the independence of the ‘core’ RSSB and the scheme and to ring-fence any liabilities,
commercial or otherwise, to protect both entities.
5.7.
Scheme Governance: the project team is minded to use similar governance arrangements as
are in place for the two current schemes, i.e. an Industry Stakeholder Scheme board. Having
undertaken a review of the two schemes’ arrangements, the project team have identified a
set of principles that will inform the board arrangements – see Annex E for details.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 4 of 6
AGENDA ITEM: B2
5.8.
The board are asked to comment on these principles to allow the new SMO to develop
detailed scheme principles and board arrangements documents for RSSB board approval in
May 2016.
5.9.
Scheme Funding Model: the project team have undertaken a review of current scheme
funding models. The details of how the industry currently fund both schemes can be found
in Annex F. The RISAS core funding model is under review; there are no immediate issues
with the RISQS funding model. The proposal is therefore not to change the funding model as
part of this project. The new scheme board will undertake a detailed review of the Funding
Model during the first year after ‘Go-Live’.
5.10.
Service Provision commercial options: One of the major discussions has been around how
funds will flow in the new arrangements. There are two options (see Annex G for illustrations
of both models):
1. the industry contracts with SMO, which procures services from providers; and
2. the industry contracts with service provider(s) who have been granted a concession by
the SMO.
5.11.
The project team have looked at other schemes and discussed options with potential service
providers during the Market Engagement work. It is clear that a “pure” concession is not the
answer as that would entail the provider taking on all operating risk. The market view is that
a ‘smart concession’, a concept which needs some clarification, should be the target
commercial model.
5.12.
However, the project team are recommending that a service agreement is the right answer
in the short-term, given:
 Need for a clearer SMO understanding of costs and fund flows
 Imperative to deliver and demonstrate fair pricing to industry
 Risks around volumes
 Relatively novel procurement route, governed by new Concessions Directive
 Changes to Supplier Assurance requirements from Infrastructure Managers, e.g.
Industry Common Induction, TfL adoption of Sentinel
 Changes to T&RS Supplier Assurance framework
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 5 of 6
AGENDA ITEM: B2
6.
Recommendations
6.1.
The RSSB board is invited to:
 NOTE the progress made to date on the project, especially on engaging potential service
providers, building the project team and collaborating with key industry stakeholders
 NOTE the key project risks identified, the controls that are in place and that an
independent deliverability review has been commissioned to provide assurance to RSSB,
its board and key industry stakeholders
 DISCUSS the challenges facing RISAS and letter from the Chair of the RISAS board.
 SUPPORT the proposal to transform RISQS wholly and to manage the integration of
RISAS in a phased approach
 CONFIRM that RSSB board intends to be custodian of new arrangements and clarify any
endorsements that are required
 APPROVE the creation of the Scheme Management Organisation
 NOTE the proposal is to use similar governance arrangements to current schemes, the
proposed set of principles and the intention to present detailed documents for approval
at May board
 NOTE the proposal not to change the scheme funding model as part of this project and
that a detailed review will be undertaken post go-live.
 APPROVE the proposal to procure on a service rather than concession basis.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 6 of 6
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex A:
Current industry scheme arrangements
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex B: RISQS Annual Stewardship Report
MEETING:
RSSB Board Meeting
DATE:
03 March 2016
SUBJECT:
RISQS Stewardship Report
SPONSOR:
Chris Fenton
AUTHORS:
John Green, Richard Sharp
1.
Purpose of paper
1.1
To inform the board of:



The management of the Rail Industry Supplier Qualification Scheme (RISQS) over the last
year.
The improvements to the scheme in order to improve assurance.
The continued support of the improvements in the wider industry arrangements for supplier
assurance.
2.
Scheme Manager Appointment
a.
Following RSSB board approval last year the RISQS board has appointed a scheme manager who
is now working to push forward with the improvements identified by the policy and strategy
working group. The scheme manager is fully funded through a levy agreed with the current
concession holder.
b.
The RISQS board have agreed to the scheme manager allocating some of his time to the wider
project for supplier assurance in order to assist the RSSB with the project delivery.
3.
Scheme Improvements
a.
The scheme has worked hard this year to improve assurance, this has been done in a number of
ways:

Since taking over control of the scheme and entering into contract with Achilles there has
been an increase of members in excess of 11%, from 3,719 to the current figure of 4,133.

The scheme has worked with the technical heads of welding from both Network Rail,
Transport for London (TfL) and also the Institute of Rail Welding (IORW) to develop a rail
specific technical audit to mandate that from April 2016 all companies managing welding of
rail must be assessed by the IORW to ISO 3834.

The scheme rules have been tightened to allow that companies that fail to provide evidence
that they comply with the legal duty to have employers and public liability insurance in place
to trade are archived after 30 days until such time as they upload new evidence.

RISQS identified an issue with companies being on Sentinel without being assessed on their
compliance to requirements, these organisations became known as “On Sentinel Not on
RISQS” (OSNOR).

The RISQS scheme manager has worked with Network Rail Safety Technical & Engineering
(STE) Department to develop a set of rules to identify organisations that are eligible to be on
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 2
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Sentinel while not undergoing a RISQS audit to assess the organisations compliance to
Sentinel Scheme Rules due to the special nature of the organisation (e.g. Office of Rail &
Road, British Transport Police, Train Operating Companies).

4.
This exercise has resulted in 124 companies being removed from Sentinel until such time as
they meet the requirements.
Relationship with Concession Holder
a.
The relationship with Achilles has been strained over the last year as the RISQS board has taken
more control of the scheme. There has been a protracted discussion on the provision of scheme
member contact information so that the scheme can communicate directly with members.
Achilles have been reluctant to provide this information which has given rise to a cause of
conflict. However, over the last few months the structure and leadership of Achilles has changed
and they appear to have become more customer focused. Following an initial meeting with the
new Achilles management, there is optimism that an amicable solution will be reached.
b.
The current contract with Achilles is due for renewal in 2017, with a provision to extend the by
one year, if required.
This extension may need to be considered depending upon the work currently being undertaken
by the “supplier assurance project” and the viability of introducing a new service by May 2017.
There is, however, a caveat to this option as the decision to extend the current contract has to
be in place by 6th June 2016.
Taking cognisance of the supplier assurance project to date, the RISQS board agreed that initial
discussions commence, with Achilles, to negotiate the extension so that should it be needed we
are in position to act.
5.
Objectives for the coming year
2016 Objectives
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
Take over the management and hosting the Rail Industry Common Commodities List
(RICCL) on RISQS website and complete integration
Continue to support TfL adoption of the scheme including recognition of the audits
Review and improvement of the special assessment process covering 3rd party
recognition to reduce duplication and improve assurance
Communicate with members including buyers and suppliers to improve their
understanding of the scheme and gain performance feedback
Provide support to the 2017 project for wider supplier assurance
Develop jointly with RISAS board risk based specification
Continue to ensure the scheme meets buyer and supplier requirements
To improve working relationship with Achilles and introduce performance upgrades to
current platform
Continue to review current questionnaire format with the intention of providing a
“free to entry” level and PAS91 compliance.
6.
Recommendations
a.
The board is asked to:



Note the progress made over the last year
Endorse the 2016 objectives
Support the RISQS Board in its ongoing oversight of the RISQS scheme
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex C: Letter from Chair, RISAS Board
RSSB Board
c/o Chris Fenton
CEO RSSB
The Helicon
1,South Place
London
EC2M 2RB
21st February 2016
RISAS Future Funding Arrangements
Dear Chris,
I write on behalf of the Risas Board members, to set out the initial conclusions reached
in considering the options for funding the RSSB resource costs of the scheme in the
future.
At the last Risas Board held on the 20th January, John Abbott set out the financial
challenges facing the RSSB going forward, and expressed the RSSB Board’s wish that all
“schemes” which currently operate under the ultimate governance of the RSSB Board,
should aim to be self-funding such that resources used from the RSSB cease to be paid
for by RSSB membership levy by April 2017 onwards.
For the avoidance of doubt, its worth just pointing out that there are three cost
elements to Risas ; (a) Costs paid by the Approval Bodies (Risabs) to the RSSB for
becoming Accredited to carry out Risas Assessments, (b) Costs paid by suppliers to the
Risabs as they embark upon assessment and eventual certification and (c) Costs
associated with using RSSB resources to maintain the Accreditation Agency, manage
the scheme and administer the website.
Cost (a) is partially self-funded, cost (b) is self-funded, and so the subject of the Risas
Board’s consideration and therefore this letter relates to cost (c) and which is broadly
£270k pa.
Having raised the item at the above mentioned Board, the Board members decided to
convene an extra-ordinary Board on the 9th February to dedicate quality time to this
important issue.
Whilst some member groups couldn’t attend this meeting, inputs were received
remotely and in advance to enable a thorough debate embracing thoughts of all
respective constituency members except Network Rail.
The options considered for future funding included; 1. Continue as we are; 2. Transfer
the cost of RSSB resources to suppliers at certification; 3. Increase RSSB levy on those
members that directly benefit from Risas i.e. buyers; 4. Buyer subscription to access the
scheme; 5. Mandatory Risas levy across all industry group members (like CIRAS); 6.
Close the scheme, and 7. Utilise some of the expected industry benefit of the RISQS
scheme being contracted out to fund Risas.
The following is a summary of the position agreed by Risas Board members;
 From various engagements between Risas Board members and their
constituents, it was clear that Tocs, Focs, Roscos and Suppliers value the Risas
scheme and that there is general support for it’s continuence and no appetite to
see it fall away by inadequate funding.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 2
AGENDA ITEM: B2






The Risas Board recognizes that, regardless of the outcome of the funding
debate, it has an obligation to do a root and branch review of Risas costs at the
RSSB so that the scheme is optimally efficient.
All the options were considered, including the possible outcomes on the
continuity of the scheme and possible stakeholder behaviours in responding to
funding changes. It was agreed that, with the exception of number 1., the first 6.
Options could result in some unintended adverse effects on the on-going
viability of the scheme and that there was no wish to jeopardise the existence
and development of the scheme.
Option 7. offered the best glimmer of possibility to generate some real savings to
the industry in managing assurance more efficiently, but that the scope would
not be clear until the RISQS outsourcing work was concluded to a point where a
contract is awarded to a supplier for the scheme, and which therefore would
probably only become clear in April 2018 at the earliest.
The Risas Board members felt that, given the importance and value placed by
stakeholders on the Risas scheme, that it should remain centrally funded
through the RSSB member levy as an industry scheme accessible to all, until
such time as the scheme is able to consider efficiencies in RSSB in administering
the scheme, and, option 7. is evaluated as the project progresses to contract
award. But, this would probably mean funding the scheme through RSSB
member levy until, at least, April 2018.
The suppliers made the point that a considerable amount of money is, and has
been invested in gaining Risas certification (typically £40k per site pa) and
hence there is little enthusiasm to add more cost. Given that there are 63
suppliers certificated, this represents a significant commitment already by
suppliers.
The Risas Board members have a general concern that the preservation of
response to the Cullen Report part 2 rec.24 will be threatened if the scheme falls
away, and the ORR may have a view about the implications of some of the
funding options.
Risas Board members are aware that this topic will be discussed at the forthcoming
RSSB Board meeting in March and hence Risas Board members will brief their own
RSSB Board members accordingly pending discussion at the RSSB Board.
Risas Board members have taken this challenge very seriously, and whilst the RSSB
bigger funding challenge is completely understood, the exercise has ratified the value of
the scheme to members and clarified that, should it fall away as an unintended
consequence of the funding challenge, that the alternative arrangements then needed
by individual members would be very cumbersome and much more costly overall.
We look forward to a constructive discussion at the RSSB Board.
Tim Dugher
Independent Chairman, on behalf of the Risas Board.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 2 of 2
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex D: RISAS Annual Stewardship Report
MEETING:
RSSB Board Meeting
DATE:
03 March 2016
SUBJECT:
Railway Industry Supplier Approval Scheme -Stewardship Report
SPONSOR:
Chris Fenton
AUTHOR:
John Abbott
1.
Purpose
This paper is the 2015/16 stewardship report for the Railway Industry Supplier
Approval Scheme (RISAS). The paper summarises the operational performance of
the scheme over the past 12 months and identifies issues and opportunities to be
addressed over the next year.
2.
Operational Status and Performance
2.1
Today there are 63 RISAS certified suppliers against 128 modules, representing over
75% of the rolling stock heavy maintenance market, whilst 91% of suppliers whose
certification was due to expire, have gone on to renew over this period. During the
year the scheme has notably delivered the following:
a) Creation of new modules, as requested by stakeholders, to undertake (i)
assessment of wheel re-profiling and wheel lathe maintenance facilities and
(ii) overhaul and maintenance of GSM-R;
b) The introduction of new arrangements to remove barriers to scheme entry
for suppliers of RISAS products and services who are new to GB rail and
without previous experience, whereas before this, having that experience
was a pre-requisite of being able to seek RISAS approval;
c) The introduction of new detailed intervention methodology to address outof-course incidents arising during the period of validity of a supplier’s current
certificate and occurring in-between planned interim RISAB assessments;
d) Working with UKAS, scheme arrangements deemed suitable to support ECM
(Entities in charge of maintenance) certification which can be carried out by
those RISABs accredited to do so by UKAS;
e) A new section to be added to the supplier assessment module to enable
human factors and competence management to become a mandatory
element of compliance;
f) Development of scheme metrics with a representative sample of RISAS
suppliers, designed to enable on-going assessment and improvement of the
supplier and the scheme’s performance, moving from a position of
compliance to Continuous Improvement;
g) Continuing engagement with TOCs through the Board, ATOC Engineering
Council, its Supply Chain Forum and the scheme’s User Group to promote
the benefits of the scheme;
h) Continuing engagement with TOCs through ATOC Engineering Council, to
progress the Wheelset Axle Bearing NIR Report recommendations.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 3
AGENDA ITEM: B2
2.2
RISAB (Assessment Bodies) operations
In October 2015, Ricardo Rail Limited (formerly Lloyds Register Rail) advised of its
decision not to seek re-accreditation as a RISAB from the 30th December, testing the
scheme’s ability to address this kind of challenge. This is not the first RISAB to
discontinue activity, hence the Board needs to understand more about the
commercial viability of RISAB operations.
2.3
Sustainability of Scheme Resources
Sustainability of resources is an increasingly significant challenge with the
resourcing profile in both the RISABs and the RSSB’s Accreditation Agency (AA) being
of particular concern. The resourcing profile of the experts in the RISABs accredited
to undertake assessments has been mapped against the scope of RISAS products
and services. Whilst this is satisfactory for now, even with the withdrawal of Ricardo
as a RISAB, as mentioned above, it is felt that a review is required into how this
profile can be sustained as a reduction of expert resources to support the scheme is
anticipated from 2017 onwards.
2.4
Summary of 2015/16 Performance
RISAS operational progress is broadly in line with the RISAS 2015/16 Business Plan
which sets out milestone targets for development of the scheme by supplier and
product module and the scheme has gone some way to meeting the intent of the
Cullen Public Inquiry recommendation that led to the scheme’s creation. Whilst it is
clear that much remains to be done, the industry is making progress with the
implementation of the proposed strategic direction as previously advised to the
Board and is doing so in conjunction with the Supplier Assurance Development
Group, comprising of both RISAS and RISQS Board members to create (i) a unified
risk based set of supplier assurance arrangements and (ii) the conditions to move to
single industry governance of them.
3.
Business Plan for 2016/17
3.1
The RISAS board has developed a new business plan commencing in January 2016
which is expected to address the following:
a) Maintenance of the effective operational delivery of the current scheme.
b) To review the scheme’s commercial model to support scheme delivery from
April 2017/April 2018.
c) To continue with stakeholder engagement to promote the scheme to potential
new suppliers.
d) To action the remaining recommendations of the wheelset axle bearing report.
e) To progress with continuous improvement initiatives to improve supplier
performance and to progress maturity of the scheme model in accordance with
the ORR’s RM3 model in this respect.
f) To continue to work with ORR and UKAS to efficiently meet ECM requirements.
g) To work with the RISQS board and industry to develop and implement aligned,
risk based supplier assurance arrangements for rail.
h) To arrange recognition agreements with other bodies delivering other relevant
assurance standards recognised in GB rail, in order to further reduce duplication.
i) To maintain the scheme’s risk register and mitigation actions, including resource
sustainability.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 2 of 3
AGENDA ITEM: B2
j) To pursue the progress of the Procurement and Logistics pilot with a key supplier
from April 2016.
4.
Recommendations
4.1
The board is asked to:
NOTE the significant developments over the last 12 months and the
intended direction of its new plan during 2016/17.
SUPPORT the RISAS board’s approach to continue to work with the ORR
and UKAS to explore the role of RISAS within the ECM regime.
ENCOURAGE greater use of RISAS by duty holders.
SUPPORT continued good engagement of duty holders with the RISAS
board to ensure that needs are met in support of SMS compliance.
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 3 of 3
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex E:









Scheme governance: principles for board arrangements
Any matters reserved for RSSB board will be endorsed by the Scheme board before submission
for approval
The Scheme board will approve the scheme objectives and strategy and manage scheme
performance
The Scheme board will have an independent Chair (paid?) who can devote time to governing the
scheme on RSSB board's behalf
The Scheme board will represent the entire industry, with the right balance between buyers and
suppliers
The Scheme board will consist of between 8 to 12 members
Scheme board members need to be clear what constituency they are representing and act in
accordance with their role
Scheme board membership competency pre-requisites should be reviewed and managed
RISQS model of industry working/consultation groups shall be incorporated into governance
model
RSSB board is the escalation point for issues between the Scheme board and the SMO
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex F:


Current funding models for RISQS and RISAS
RISQS
– funded through a Buyer and Supplier subscription model
– four-tiered buyer pricing: NR, TfL, Buyer, ‘Supplier Patron’
– Supplier Registration: price based on size and scope of activities to be assessed, using
number of product codes selected as proxy
– Supplier Audit: price based on agreed day rate and audit length, defined based on scope
of activities to be asessed
RISAS
– Scheme management and governance, IT platform and (part) accreditation agency costs
funded through RSSB core levy – under review
– RISABs pay RSSB to be accredited – partially funds accreditation agency costs
– Suppliers pay for assessment, ongoing monitoring and out of course events
– Supplier pricing set through competition between RISABs, again based on size and scope
of activities to be assessed
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 1
AGENDA ITEM: B2
Annex G:
Alternative models for scheme fund flow
Option 1: Service agreement
Option 2: Concession
RSSB Board Meeting Final: 03 March 2016
Page 1 of 1