AGENDA ITEM 10
BOROUGH OF POOLE
CABINET
3rd JUNE 2008
APPROVAL TO PROCEED TO IMPLEMENTATION STAGE OF THE PLANNING &
LAND CHARGES SOFTWARE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
1.
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
1.1
To request that Cabinet delegate the decision to approve the preferred supplier
to the Project Board for the replacement of the Planning Software system subject
to the contract negotiations not resulting in a figure in excess of the provision
made within the estimated expenditure for the project, including the contingency
(See table 3 – section 6.6).
1.2
This approach is proposed due to the urgency to replace the software as early as
possible due to the de-support of the existing software which will leave both
Planning and Land Charges services at risk after 31st October 2008.
1.3
A request for this report was made by Cabinet following approval to proceed to
the Invitation to Tender stage of the project at the Cabinet meeting held on 12 th
December 2007.
2.
DECISIONS REQUIRED
2.1
Cabinet is requested to approve the following: (i)
That authority to approve the preferred supplier that has been identified
through the tender and procurement process for providing a new Planning
and Land Charges system be delegated to the Strategic Director in
consultation with the Portfolio Holder. This will be subject to the final
proposed costs of the new software not exceeding the total (Capital and
Revenue) expenditure detailed in table 3. (Section 6.6)
(ii)
That the funding strategy for meeting the total costs detailed in table 3 be
approved (Section 6.6).
1
3.
BACKGROUND
3.1
The Project Board set up for the replacement project comprises of:




Andrew Flockhart
Peter Watson
Katie Lacey
Tim Martin
Strategy Director
Head of Planning Design & Control Services
Head of ICT
Head of Legal and Democratic Services
3.2
The Project Board receive and consider the project progress with support from
the Project Team set up for the software replacement project.
3.3
On 12th December 2007, Cabinet received a report attached (Appendix 1),
seeking approval to proceed to tender stage for the Planning & Land Charges
software replacement project.
3.4
The following decisions were taken by Cabinet:

The issue of an invitation to tender for a replacement Planning and Land
Charges system with regard to Council Procurement Policy: and

That Council requests Officers to prepare a further report to be considered at
a later stage that will indicate the preferred supplier, along with detailed costs
of supplying a replacement system and proposals for meeting the cost.
3.5
On 19th December 2007 a letter was received from Northgate (supplier of
MVM2020) stating that they intended to withdraw support with effect from 31st
October 2008. The effect of the withdrawal of support notice is detailed further
below in section 5.
3.6
The timeframes for the implementation stage are too tight to achieve the
procurement of a new system by 31st October 2008
3.7
A full risk assessment has been carried out by the Service Units involved and
many of the risks have been mitigated, however there remains the risk of running
a key software system without supplier support in the event of a major
unrecoverable software breakdown and that has been entered onto the
Corporate risk register.
3.8
The implementation plan has taken this risk into consideration when planning
timeframes and milestones. However, the plan is always subject to unexpected
slippage such as protracted contract negotiations, key staff absence or data
migration difficulties.
2
4.
THE TENDER PROCESS
4.1
Detailed work has been carried out by the necessary Service Units in order to
prepare an Invitation to Tender for software suppliers and ensure that the
procurement process followed Council standing orders and policies.
4.2
The Service Units included






Financial Services (Procurement),
Legal Services,
ICT Project management,
Strategic Planning (GIS Team),
Planning Design & Control Services
Legal Services (Land Charges)
4.3
The Invitation to Tender was issued to leading Planning & Land Charge software
suppliers on 10th March 2008, with an agreed closing date of 7th April 2008
4.4
During the tender evaluation process two of the six tenderers were discounted,
as they did not meet the key essential functional requirements.
4.5
Two further suppliers were discounted after a pre determined detailed functional
requirements and costs review was carried out.
4.6
The two remaining suppliers were then subject to a scoring system to evaluate
their response.
4.7
To ensure that the tender process could be supported the following activities
were also taken by the Project Team



Visits to the supplier’s operational sites
Visits to Local Authority reference sites
Demonstrations of the supplier’s software
4.8
The preferred supplier will be recommended to the Project Board on a predetermined basis of 60% quality and 40% cost according to their tender return.
4.9
Contract negotiations can then be commenced with the Project Board’s preferred
supplier followed by the implementation stage of the project.
5.
DESUPPORT IMPLICATIONS
5.1
The desupport notice issued by Northgate on 19th December 2007 puts the
Planning and Land Charge services at risk from 31st October 2008.
3
5.2
A full risk assessment has been carried out by the project team to determine
actions that are required to mitigate the desupport notice.
5.3
The majority of the risks can be mitigated however the one over riding risk
remaining is the complete loss of the MVM 2020 server. This is a rare occurrence
however it is one risk that cannot be ignored.
5.4
The data part of the server would be backed up daily and can be recovered by
ICT, however the services of Northgate would be required to reload the software.
(This would normally be covered by support and annual maintenance, which will
be withdrawn from 31st October 2008)
5.5
Both Service Units rely fully on the MVM 2020 system for all of its administrative
functions including:





Registration of Planning Applications (including trees)
Notification of Planning Applications to Neighbours and Statutory Consultees
Deciding and Issuing of Decision notices
Appeal procedures
Land Charge Searches
5.6
All the above are legal requirements and would require unacceptable levels of
manual administration in the event of the loss of the server.
5.7
Additionally the loss of the server would mean that the Planning Website would
lose the ability to inform the public of new Planning Applications and the facility to
look at old planning applications. The website currently receives over 18000
visits from the public per month.
5.8
The loss of the ability to put the information on the website automatically would
put pressures onto Planning Administration staff and Customer Services through
additional phone calls and visits from the public to seek the information.
6.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
6.1
The requirement for the replacement software has been part of the business
plans for both Planning and Legal Services since April 2007. Accordingly the
resources to cover the costs of the new system have been built into the various
capital allocations and earmarked reserves available to the Service Units.
4
6.2
Table 1 - Supplier A - tender quote
SUPPLIER A – Estimated Cost
Software licenses
Project Management
Technical and data migration costs
Cadcorp mapping integration
Other services / connectors integration eg Idox / Planning Portal
Training services
Go live costs
Total Estimated Costs (Supplier A)
6.3
Total
Cost £k
46.8
12.0
22.7
5.0
1.0
21.3
3.5
112.3
Table 2 – Supplier B - tender quote
SUPPLIER B – Estimated Cost
Software licenses
Project Management
Technical and data migration costs
Cadcorp mapping integration + Crystal licenses
Other services / connectors integration eg Idox / Planning Portal
Training services
Go live costs
Total Estimated Costs (Supplier B)
Total
Cost £k
11.0
16.7
50.2
10.7
13.0
18.9
0
120.5
6.4 Tender award will be based on the whole-life cost of the tender. This will include
consideration of the annual maintenance costs over the 5 year assumed life of the
software.
6.5 Both suppliers have met the essential functional requirements listed in the tender:
 Development Control Module
 Planning Portal 1 App accreditation
 Land Charges Module
 Land Charges NLIS level 3 capability
 Local Land and Property Module (LLPG)
 LLPG Module accredited to BS7666: 2006 accreditation
 Seamless integration with the Corporate Document Management System
(IDOX)
5
6.6
Table 3 – Estimated Expenditure for Replacement Project:
Estimated Expenditure for replacement project
Capital Expenditure
Software and third party project costs
(Prudent estimate based on tender quotes – see section 6.2/6.3)
Total
Cost £k
120
Revenue Expenditure
Project Management Support
Software add-ons
Planning Staff backfill costs
Legal Services for supplier contract
47
5
6
10
Contingency (8% of project costs)
15
Total Expenditure (Capital & Revenue)
203
Funding Strategy
Total £k
Specific Capital Resources
Planning Delivery Grant – Capital Grant
(Planning Services unspent 2006/07 & 2007/08 allocations)
Planning Delivery Grant – Capital Grant
(Strategic Planning Services unspent 2006/07 allocation)
Revenue Resources
Application of Grant Related Earmarked Reserve
(Planning Services – Planning Delivery Grant)
Application of Service Unit Specific ICT Investment Plan
Earmarked Reserve (Strategic Planning Services)
Application of Service Unit Specific ICT Investment Plan
Earmarked Reserve (Legal & Democratic Services)
Application of Service Unit Specific ICT Investment Plan
Earmarked Reserve (Planning Services)
Total Funding (Capital & Revenue)
97
11
58
18
10
9
203
Note 1, £12,000 of the identified revenue resources will be used to fund the identified
capital resources by means of a revenue contribution to capital (RCCO).
6
Note 2, Annual maintenance costs have been removed from the expenditure table above
as maintenance is currently paid at similar levels for the existing system. The annual
maintenance costs for the next 5 years will though form part of the tender evaluation
process.
6.7
Owing to the time constraints and service implications in the implementation
stage of the project and in the absence of a clear preferred supplier, continuing
site visits and contract negotiations, it is vital not to lose any project time in view
of the risk to the Planning and Land Charge services due to the de-support notice
effective from 31st October 2008.
6.8
It is the wish of the Head of Planning Design & Control Services and Head of
Legal and Democratic Services to request approval to move the project forward
with constraints (if proposed total tender cost exceed provision, including
contingency, made) given the close proximity of tenders to each other and tender
estimates are lower than previously advised to Cabinet. This unusual step of
asking Cabinet to approve the conclusion of contract negotiations via the Project
Board with the eventual preferred supplier will allow the current momentum of the
project to be maintained.
7.0
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
7.1
A tender complying with European Regulations has been run by the project team
that will result in the objective selection of a preferred supplier.
Peter Watson
Head of Planning and Control Services
Tim Martin
Head of Legal Services
7
BOROUGH OF POOLE
CABINET
12TH DECEMBER 2007
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE HEADS OF LEGAL SERVICES AND
PLANNING DESIGN AND CONTROL SERVICES FOR THE APPROVAL TO
PROCEED TO TENDER STAGE OF THE PLANNING & LAND CHARGES
SOFTWARE REPLACEMENT PROJECT
1. PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1
To seek Member approval to proceed to the tender stage for a replacement
system to cover planning applications, local land charges and the Corporate GIS
Local Land & Planning Gazetteer (LLPG) handling systems.
2. RECOMMENDATION
2.1
Cabinet is asked to:
(i)
Approve the issue of an Invitation to Tender for a replacement Planning
and Land Charges system with regard to Council Procurement Policy
(ii)
Request Officers to prepare a further report to be considered at a later
date that will indicate the preferred supplier, along with detailed costs of
supplying a replacement system and proposals for meeting the cost.
.
3 BACKGROUND
3.1 3.1


The Council uses MVM (Northgate) 20/20 as an operating platform for its
planning applications and Local Land Charges. The system has been in place
since 1997. The system enables the 2 Service Units to:
Process Planning Applications and Decisions
Process Land Charge Searches
3.2
The supplier has not provided a “roadmap” for any further developments to the
software and has stated that it will soon announce the date when it will cease to
support the software. This date will not be less than 6 months after the
announcement.
3.3
In addition, Ordnance Survey have made decisions which mean that Ordnance
Survey maps cannot be accessed by users of software systems (eg MVM 2020.)
that the Council operate after 30th September 2008.
8
3.4
Land Charges generate some £800,000 of search fees, which has increased
over the past years as a result of a 24-hour turn around of searches. This is only
achievable with the use of reliable back office systems
3.5
Planning Design & Control Services produce almost 3,000 Planning and
Treework applications and decisions on an annual basis. Again, this is only
achievable with the use of reliable back office systems.
3.6
If the authority continues to use the current software, it will be forced to deliver
core services using unsupported software at sometime in the future. This will
prevent any further improvements to current service delivery and degrade the
quality of the existing service. It is therefore sensible to seek a value for money
alternative. The usual procurement and replacement process for this type of
software is approximately 15 months
3.7
The Head of Legal and Democratic Services says that providing land charges is
a statutory service. The Council must provide it by law. The Head of Service
adds that the Council will not be able to provide the service without this
supporting technology. Lack of appropriate software would lead to service failure
together with a large increase in demands for manually processed paperwork.
3.8
Both Service Units have identified the need to replace the current software
system. This is being driven the risks to the service delivery associated with the
current software system.
3.9
Officers have started to assess alternative solutions by performing an options
appraisal with help from ICT and Financial Services Unit. See paragraph 6.0
Options appraisal
3.10
The project is supported by an ICT Project Team, which has worked closely with
the Service Units to ensure that this project can be delivered, and also meet the
Borough’s procurement requirements. The Head of ICT has confirmed support
for this approach, it will not jeopardise the review of other systems as part of the
overall business transformation agenda. It is recognised that the Council needs
to act swiftly to ensure that service delivery is not exposed to unnecessary risk.
3.11
An Indicative Pricing exercise was carried out in April 2007 so that there was an
understanding of the likely costs of the project and software purchase. The
current supplier and 3 other leading software suppliers were invited to provide
demonstrations and indicative costs for their products. This was followed up by
visits to other Local Planning Authorities who use their software. The exercise
confirmed that Planning should consider going to tender for a replacement
system as opposed to an upgrade offered by the current supplier.
9
4
KEY RISKS
4.1
The key risks to the Council are that it will not be able to continue providing
Planning and Land Charge services to the Public without a replacement software
system that is fit for purpose. More details are presented here:
4.2
The Ordnance Survey’s announcement (in para 3.3) means that the Council
be unable:



will
To map and document changes to buildings and developments, information
that is used by other Service Units throughout the Council
To provide updated information to the public via the Planning website (over
14,000 visitors per month)
To deal with phone calls from the Public about Planning without up to date
information through Customer Services.
4.3
In addition the Land Charge service requires the information provided by
Planning’s software system (MVM 2020) to enable it to operate.
4.4
As a consequence both Service Units could:







Be unable to fulfil their legal requirements
Be unable to give accurate information leading to potential for litigation and high
costs as a result
Lose substantial income to Land Charges (as they operate in a competitive
market.)
Be involved in more manual work which would substantially increase operating
costs as additional staff would be required
Cause loss of reputation for the Council if performance suffers
Be unable to operate, as neither has a paper-based system to fall back on.
Have significant negative input on national and local performance targets.
5.
FUNDING
5.1
Planning and Land Charges, with the support of Financial Services have a
reserved fund of £97k to use as a contribution towards the overall project. The
original plan had been to use Planning Delivery Grant allocations to secure the
remainder required for the whole project. The procurement part of the project has
been estimated to cost approximately £58k (see Table 1 at 11.0)
5.2
Planning Legislation and funding streams are undergoing change that has been
publicised in Planning White Papers and consultations in recent months that
initially led to uncertainty over funding levels. Planning Delivery Grant will now be
replaced by Housing and Planning Delivery Grants, which will use totally different
formulas and requirements. Planning Fees are also being reviewed as part of the
changes.
10
5.3
In recent weeks there have been further Papers, which give more certainty to the
increase in Planning fees. The increase in fees will offset some of the losses to
budget incurred under the old Planning Delivery Grant mechanism and will
increase on April 6th 2008.
5.4
Forecast formulas have been provided for calculating the new Housing and
Planning Delivery Grant, which is still at the consultation stage. Early indications
are that there will be increased funding for both Strategic Planning and Planning
Design and Control Service Units.
5.5
Much of the increased Housing and Planning Delivery Grant funding will be
allocated towards the final stage of the overall project which will be to purchase
the Planning software and project costs, subject to the consideration and
approval from Cabinet at a later stage.
5.6
Confirmation of the funding allocations is expected to be announced by the
Government in Spring 2008, which will allow clarity to be given to of the full
project funding available..
6.
OPTIONS APPRAISAL
6.1
The following options have been considered:
6.2
Do nothing:




The current system is only maintained to satisfy legislative requirements
until support is withdrawn (the aim is to be able to make a full
announcement on the impacts of withdrawal within the next three months
with more clarity of the timeline).
Thereafter, legislative changes would not be carried out without injection
of funding by the remaining user group, currently a total of some 20
authorities. This will require additional funds to contribute toward every
change and involve the complexity of marshalling 20 authorities to work
together to deliver the change.
There is a high probability that the current system stability would be
undermined and system breakdowns would not be fixed in an appropriate
timeframe, jeopardising service delivery.
Fall-back position, if the system was not available, would require Service
Units to revert to paper based manual systems, requiring a minimum of 5
additional staff in both Planning and Land Charges (£200,000 per annum).
There is the additional risk of complaints and claims for compensation
arising from the loss of the current level of service without accounting for
the loss of reputation.
11
 No system enabled service improvements would be achieved to provide
productivity savings or allow for full delivery of an Internet self-service
solution.
6.3
Existing Software vendor offer to upgrade,



6.4
Procure a full replacement system





6.5
Northgate have offered an upgrade route of a like for like system with only the
costs of services and project implementation being incurred
However additional modules are required to enable the Service Units to make
process improvements and to interact with the Public. This includes direct
links to IDOX electronic document management and Lagan Customer
Corporate Services systems.
The upgrade has been discussed with ICT and Financial Services
(Audit)
who have advised that as the solution offered is substantially different to the
current system, further internal costs would be incurred in order to implement.
The total cost of the project requires a full OJEU tender
The market place for Planning and Land Charges systems has been
investigated via an indicative pricing exercise.
Four leading Planning and Land Charges software suppliers, including the
existing supplier, were invited to provide demonstrations, references and
indicative pricing.
The indicative pricing exercise included carrying out site reference visits to
other Local Planning Authorities
Functionality delivers improved public access channels and supports selfservice via Lagan Customer Services, Idox Electronic Document System and
the National Planning Portal.
The purchase of a new system incorporates a number of back office
efficiencies but, with continually growing workloads and demands from the
Government Planning Portal, these are not considered to be “cashable” but
will defer the need to increase staffing resources in the short to medium term.
Since 2004 Planning Applications have increased by 6%, Appeals by 40%
and Public comments by 72%. These figures are forecast to continue rising
as the public become more involved with the Planning process.
Options considered but not appraised.

Wait for the Corporate land and property data management project to begin.
o The project is likely to take 6 months before it can make recommendations
for process and systems and
o a further 12-18 months before a solution can be implemented;
o This would mean that the risks and impacts associated with taking no
action might materialise during this period.
12

Joint partnership with an adjoining Local Authority
o Other Local Authorities were approached but little interest was shown as
they all had differing local requirements for integration with other services
(GIS, CRM, Document Management systems) or are at different stages in
the lifespan of their existing Planning Systems.

In house development
o The ICT strategy and policy does not support in house development of
software for back office systems. Heavy costs would be incurred to
contract in the necessary skills to develop the package and there would
not be the guarantee of ongoing support and development at the required
level.
7.
THE PREFERRED OPTION
7.1
Officers recommend that the preferred option is to procure a full replacement
system as set out in paragraph 6.4
8.
THE NEXT STEPS
8.1
Approval to initiate the procurement process by requesting the Council :
(i)
Approve the issue of an Invitation to Tender for a replacement Planning
and Land Charges system with regard to Council procurement policy
(ii)
Consider at a later date a further report that will indicate the preferred
supplier and detailed costs of supplying a replacement system
9.
LEGAL SERVICES ADVICE
9.1
Legal Services have reviewed the maintenance and software-licensing contract
for MVM 2020. The advice is that the appropriate way forward for the Borough of
Poole is to negotiate a withdrawal from the current contract together with timely
procurement in respect of the replacement system for MVM 2020
10.
SUMMARY
10.1
Given that both the Planning and Land Charges service require a software
system to support their service delivery the Council has little option but to go
ahead with replacing the current system. To not do so risks the failure of both
services.
10.2
Approval to move to the tender stage will enable the overall project to proceed in
a timely manner during which the uncertainty about government proposals are
13
expected to be removed. This will then allow Officers to produce a further report
requesting that the overall Project moves to the purchase and installation stage.
11
Table 1.
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE FOR PROCUREMENT PROJECT
Total
Cost
£K
30
6
10
7
Estimated Capital Expenditure
Project Management Support
Planning Staff backfill costs
Legal Services for supplier contract
Business Process Analysis
5
Contingency
Total Capital Costs
58
Funding
Capital Funding
Planning Delivery Grant Capital Reserves for project (PDG)
14
58