ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Date:
Wednesday, 26th March 2008
Location: Conference Room G/M, Eland House
Time:
11:00 – 15:00
Attendees
CLG Project Team
Nigel Williams
Programme Manager, EU Policy & Programmes
Chris Crow
MIS Analyst, EU Policy & Programmes
Mark Swan
MCIS Implementation Co-ordinator
Anne Smith
MCIS Implementation Co-ordinator
Paul Cooper
MCIS Testing Team
Richard Goodwin
CLG – Deputy Director, EU Policy & Programmes
Regional Representatives
Claudia Marescu
EEDA Deputy Local Working Group Team Leader
Stephen Hayler
EMDA Local Working Group Team Leader
Chris Heath
EMDA Project Manager
John Joyce
LDA ERDF Compliance & Irregularities Mgr
David Hampson
LDA Local Working Group Team Leader
Kenroy Reid
LDA Link to Finance & JESSICA
Norman Williams
NWDA Local Working Group Team Leader
Andy Land
NWDA Knowledge Manager
Jemma Cornish
ONE Local Working Group Team Leader
James Ruel
SEEDA European Director
Gemma Sheldon
SEEDA Local Working Group Team Leader
Richard Dodsworth
SWRDA Local Working Group Team Leader
Apologies
Glyn Darbyshire Evans
AWM Local Working Group Team Leader
Jeff Owen
SWRDA Information Systems Architect
Rocco Volpe
YF IT, Local Working Group Team Leader
John Underwood
Alan Hazell
YF Finance / MI Reporting
Technical Architect, EU Policy & Programmes
Alex McIntosh
Business Analyst, EU Policy & Programmes
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 1 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Meeting Documents (click icon, or right click and open hyperlink)
MI SUG Minutes
MI SUG Presentation 2008-03-26
2008-02- 28
http://www.mcisproject.co.uk
/Files/MCIS%20SUG%20Minut
es%202008-02-28%20v1.0.doc
PART 1:
All Users
Release 2 Requirements Workshop
13th March 2008-03-26
(NB: set for A3 printing)
G:\ ESAD\ MCIS
Project File\ 01 Programme Management\ 08 Presentations\ SUGs\ MCIS SUG Meeting 2008-03-26 v0.2.p
G:\ ESAD\ MCIS
Project File\ 04 Business Requirements\ 08 Requirements W
MCIS news, Processes & Requirements update, MI,
Data Dictionary Issues, UAT update, Implementation
round-up.
Meeting Notes / Actions
Item
Item & Commentary
1
INTRODUCTIONS & PREVIOUS MINUTES
1.1
STATUS OF ACTIONS FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS
Who
(1) Process for agreeing Changes and/or deviances from User Manual
Close here – see separate agenda item below.
(2) Ask EC/BERR to extend “option B” to the 2007-2013 programme,
such that interim claims will not be capped at the intervention rate for
the priority axis for each month’s claim, and advise RDAs.
Close here – see separate agenda item below.
(3) Carry forward the following (partially complete):
ACTION POINT 1: Pre-populate Sharepoint with ideas for changes
to MCIS where these have been put into the TESA site.
AS
(4) Change Control process – Carry forward. Part of the shared governance
regime, to be defined.
ACTION POINT 2: Define Change Control process
NW
(5) Explore with ONE and SEEDA the options for generating funding
letters.
Closed – covered at Full System Requirements Workshop of 13th March.
(6) Previous SUG raised concerns about drafts of the User Manual being
available on the web-site. RG asked those expressing concern to write
to him explaining what the issue is.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 2 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
Close here – see agenda item 2.2 below.
(7) RDAs to provide updates ASAP if implementation dates change.
Close here – ongoing, and being reviewed regularly with implementation coordinators.
(8) Key milestones of RDAs’ own IT / Systems / Processes development
– RDAs please relay to MS or AS ASAP so that the Workstream
Activity checklists can be updated with dependencies.
Close here – ongoing, and being reviewed regularly with implementation coordinators.
(9) Carry forward the following:
ACTION POINT 3: All RDAs to send E-mail requests to AH for
access rights to Sharepoint.
RDAs
…add a further related action:
ACTION POINT 4: Where logins have been requested but are
outstanding, please notify your implementation co-ordinator (AS or
MS)
RDAs
(10) Complete core processes by 05/03/08
Closed – User Manual Chapter 1 was issued before AMcI’s holiday.
(11) Complete Functional Spec for core system and publish on website, by
05/03/08.
Closed – Functional Spec for Core was issued before AMcI’s holiday.
(12) RDAs to review MI reporting processes, by 14/03/08
Closed – feedback received, sufficient for current purposes.
(13) AH to issue Data Dictionary v1.3
Closed – has been issued.
(14) AH to investigate/prototype completion of the aggregate claim from
the XML file, and perhaps integrating all the required data into one
XML file to be used for the aggregate claims for all Priority Axes.
Closed – both concepts have been proven and will be in the version of Core
MCIS functionality that is submitted to UAT.
(15) RDAs were asked to return comments on the Support Agreement to
Nigel Williams by Friday 7th March.
Closed – comments have been received from most regions.
(16) Carry forward the following (in progress – not complete):
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 3 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
ACTION POINT 5: RG to set up MCIS Project Board
Who
RG
(17) Request Sharepoint access for full system users from AH
Closed - re-iterates (9) above.
(18) Set up User requirements workshop to walk through potential
changes and plan when they can be delivered
Closed – workshop was held 13th March; see agenda item under Part 2 below.
(19) Demo contingency solution at the meeting in NWDA on the 6th
March.
Closed – demo was given
2
PROJECT COMMUNICATIONS
(refer to slide pack)
2.1
NEWS
Full System is ready for initial demonstration - scheduled for after lunch.
EEDA have decided to adopt Full MCIS.
We have received news that Alan Hazell is unwell and has gone into
hospital. This may affect development progress (impact to be assessed in
conjunction with Alan’s team). In Alan’s absence, Nigel Williams will be the
contact for technical / development issues.
2.2
USER MANUAL
All key chapters are nearly complete and will be posted on the MCIS Project
Website once they have been approved.
However, SWRDA flagged that approved chapter 4 is being revised and a
Change Control process – to agree changes – does not seem to be in place.
ACTION POINT 6: take forward (via User Manual Sub-Group) Change
Control arrangements for User Manual chapters that have been approved, as
part of the wider discussion of Governance arrangements.
ACTION POINT 7: LDA (DH) to propose an approach to how RDAs may
operate local variations on User Manual (e.g. may be more rigorous in some
areas) – owners of User Manual need to agree (a) this approach, and (b) how
the web page that holds User Manual chapters can reflect that this may quite
legitimately happen.
2.3
RG
DH
RG VISITS
RG has visited EMDA, EEDA, and AWM, and has met the Executive
Director of resources from NWDA, and is due to visit LDA.
ACTION POINT 8: advise RG if they would like him to come in and meet
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 4 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
any of their senior management, or if there are any internal meetings that it
would be useful for RG to attend.
2.4
Who
RDAs
IT STANDARDS & AUDITS
For RDAs using own systems, audit regimes are in place – SWRDA queried
whether more is needed. RG advised there is a degree of auditing needed to
fulfil the Audit Authority (AA) role requirements – AA are looking into
extent to which EC will accept them re-using findings of other existing audit
regimes.
For Full System RDAs, there is no existing audit of their system that can be
referenced.
ACTION POINT 9: Feed-in to RG any ideas that may help avoid
duplication of audit activities.
ACTION POINT 10: Ensure RDAs’ existing audit regimes are described in
the Annex XII Statements of Mgt & Control, including how these will each
contribute to overall assurance of the “system” (people + processes +
technology) that is implemented for ERDF.
RDAs
RDAs
AA will be attending the SUG in future.
The initial compliance assessment will not review IT systems; but there will
be a more detailed set of audits next year that will look at the systems. EC
will sign off the Audit Strategy this summer & this will be the basis for those
more detailed audits.
RG in discussion with AA regarding how they will approach IT system
auditing and what will be done this year, and when, including auditing of
Full MCIS. AA are consulting with the specialist IT Systems Audit section
within IAS.
ACTION POINT 11: Provide to RG a description of what systems auditing
approach is in place in RDAs – supplement the information returned at
action point 2 above.
3
RDAs
IMPLEMENTATION ROUND-UP
(refer to slide pack)
3.1
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
MS presented the up to date view of the RDAs’ consolidated plans for
implementation.
Implementations are currently well spaced.
AS & MS will need to work with Full system RDAs to establish whether they
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
require the Payment Interface for go live, and if so, to factor this into
implementation plans.
ACTION POINT 12: Issue Finalised Payment Interface specification today
3.2
NW
ANTICIPATED TIMESCALES & IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH
NW reprised the implementation approach and typical outline timescale
included in each RDA’s Implementation Plan document. NW talked
through the Outline Implementation Timescale, and emphasised that Model
Office simulation must take place on the approved version of the system, i.e.
after UAT.
User Testing will concurrently involve Core system (YF) and Full system
(ONE) RDAs, and the CLG roles of CA & MA; they must collectively sign-off
the system before other RDAs start Model Office. Target date for sign-off of
MCIS is late May.
3.3
ACTION POINT 13: Circulate the Testing materials shared with YF to all
RDAs taking Core MCIS
MS/AS
ACTION POINT 14: Review the business scenarios in these Testing
materials, and advise what should be added.
RDAs
(Core)
NON-MCIS IMPLMENTATION ACTIONS FOR ERDF
ERDF implementation is a business change – of which full or core MCIS
implementation is one part – and it is the RDA that owns the business
change, including Annex XII Management Control Systems (MCS)
Statements and Publicity Plans. The Model Office simulation is an
opportunity for an RDA to demonstrate and trial its systems, and will help
inform the subsequent review of the MCS by the AA.
EC have highlighted it may take them several months to review Annex XII
Statements.
Annex XII will need to be re-approved if changed; a sound principle is to
refer to procedure documents rather than put the (potentially volatile) work
instructions in the Annex XII. However, the referenced documents must be
in place or the compliance audit will fail.
NB: MA has requested Annex XII Statements by end March, not end April.
3.4
AOB: APPROACH TO TRAINING MATERIALS
NW asked RDAs for opinions on the approach to providing reference
materials for users and for training. Options include:
 Context – sensitive help text (which can be maintained alongside the
screen itself);
 A collaborative, Wiki-based approach;
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 6 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
 Approach used in TESA - role-based User Guides for each (~17) user
roles (hard to maintain).
EMDA preferred the help text approach. ONE would like a manual – partly
for back-up, partly to show auditors – NW suggested it might be possible to
generate one from the help texts.
NWDA would like training to follow a hands-on workshop approach. LDA
said that in TESA the separate login for the e-learning package had caused
confusion; NW proposed MCIS will not have e-learning. LDA said the
classroom sessions were more valuable.
ONE flagged that there was some useful material in the TESA User Guides
which might be re-usable (e.g. as a starting point for some of the help texts).
Conclusion:
 The primary user reference material for MCIS will be contextsensitive help text.
 The project team will generate a User Manual document from this.
 Core users will also need a description of how to upload XML.
 The MCIS team may also look at implementing a Wiki product. This
would be based around contributions from the RDAs within this
group – success would require a commitment from all parties to
contribute and to keep the Wiki up to date.
 MCIS will not follow the roles-based User Guides approach
developed for TESA.
NW flagged that finalised help text / user manuals will require a finalised
system – this means that the help text may need to be updated after the point
where hands-on training is given.
ACTION POINT 15: Ensure useful information from TESA User Guides is
recycled where appropriate.
4
BUSINESS PROCESSES, KEY MESSAGES
4.1
User Manual Chapter 1 - this is now pending approval.
ACTION POINT 16: re-instate User Manual Chapter 1 on MCIS project
website, once approved.
4.2
UPDATE FOLLOWING EC CONFERENCE, 10TH MARCH
(refer to slides)
4.3
Rules for reimbursement of interim aggregate claims: CLG has an
outstanding action to write back to the RDA network confirming these rules
MCIS
Project
Team
NW
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 7 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
in line with the advice from the EC given at the conference. The amount
reimbursed will be [eligible spend x priority axis intervention rate]. This will
sometimes be more, and sometimes less, than the ERDF element that an
RDA has paid out in claims to projects, because the consolidated IR from the
project-level claims may be higher, or lower, than the priority axis IR.
ACTION POINT 17: Ensure CLG writes to the RDAs confirming the rules
for reimbursement of interim aggregate claims.
NW/RG
“Del neutrality” issue: NW flagged that this rule creates an accountancy
issue: CLG will be paying out to RDAs an amount that may differ from
what RDAs have spent; historically Treasury have always required such
amounts to be equal. NW has an action to organise a meeting with CLG
Finance and Treasury to agree how this will be handled in reporting to
treasury by RDAs and CLG, which treasury will seek to reconcile.
ACTION POINT 18: Feedback to the SUG on the outcome of discussions
with CLG Finance and Treasury regarding the del neutrality issue.
NW
Other implications:
 MCIS team are not aware of any impact on XML Schemae / Data
Dictionary.
 SH flagged that there may be implications for achieving N+2. If an
RDA’s spend is front-loaded, the reimbursement rule may mean that
the early claims are not fully reimbursed. It is possible that the RDA
may have spent enough ERDF to meet N+2, but the amount
reimbursed by the EC may be lower than the N+2 target. Clearly as
the project progresses the tendency will be to balance out.
 Also SH raised that there will no longer be a clear relationship
between ERDF reimbursement receipts and specific claims: how
would any shortfall / excess of reimbursement over spend be
apportioned across the project-level claims?
 To meet Treasury cash forecasting requirements, RDAs will have to
provide a cash forecast for each month of the current year. CLG will
be penalised if the monthly forecast is inaccurate – the more
inaccurate, the higher the penalty.
ACTION POINT 19: circulate Kim Humberstone’s email regarding
monthly cash forecasting to RDA representatives and to Ginny
NW
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 8 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
Walker, and to share the formula for the penalty calculations.
ACTION POINT 20: clarify whether it is actual ERDF spend, or the
aggregated claim values that should be used to monitor progress
towards N+2
4.4
NW
Projects with Income
The rules in this area were complex and are becoming more so. It was, and
will be, easy to make mistakes and to suffer consequentially when audited
by EC.
5
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
5.1
DATA DICTIONARY UPDATE
V1.4 Data Dictionary is due for release shortly, accompanied by a release
note and a consistent release of Reference Data and XML Schemae. Timing
depends on AH’s input; he is currently unwell. V1.4 will be a minor release
– CC summarised the key changes (see slides). The data dictionary key
changes are all around removal / reduction of information previously
required.
5.2
SHAREPOINT ISSUES – TURN AROUND TIME
For Issues that are Queries or Defects, these will normally be answered in 2
working days. For more difficult queries, an initial response will be given in
that timescale, and will include a timescale for a full response. NB: Issues that
are “Requirements” will be captured and included on the agenda for a group
discussion with relevant (Full or Core system user) RDAs at a later date.
Also for more involved queries, MCIS team will consider whether phone
calls and /or visits may be appropriate, in addition to updating SharePoint.
This is to mitigate situations where answers prompt further questions,
leading overall to a protracted, iterative process before the RDA has received
a full resolution.
ACTION POINT 21: put out a 1-page communication about Cost
Categories (a number of RDAs have raised queries about this topic).
CC
ACTION POINT 22: follow up request for Cost Category Definitions – Arni
Narain is progressing – and get back to Jemma Cornish.
AS
ACTION POINT 23: provide access to the Cognos database used for the
exercises practiced on the training course (in addition to the TESA Cognos
sandpit access already provided).
CC
6
USER ACCEPTANCE
6.1
Testing update – refer to slides.
6.2
SUPPORT AGREEMENT
6.3
This will be updated and shared with the RDAs. It will become part of the
procurement documentation pack, and the basis for a back-to-back SLA with
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
the service provider.
6.4
Procurement. The OJEU advertisement is due to go out shortly.
LUNCH
7
FULL MCIS SYSTEM DEMO
MS demonstrated the processes of setting up, approval, acceptance and
making live a project; also raising and processing an applicant’s project-level
claim. Aspects of MCIS’s core design, e.g. workflow, search capability, task
list, step box, navigation rules, audit trails and versioning of projects and
claims were discussed.
PART 2: Release 2 Users only
(NWDA, ONE, LDA, SEEDA, EEDA)
Development update, interfaces
update, Full MCIS Functional
Specification issues.
Meeting Notes / Actions
Item
Item & Commentary
8
REQUIREMENTS
8.1
A Requirements Workshop was held for Full MCIS users on 13th March.
ONE, LDA and SEEDA attended. NWDA were unable to attend. EEDA had
not yet elected to take the Full system.
Who
AS provided copies of the workshop outputs.
ACTION POINT 24: RDAs taking Full MCIS, please review Requirements
Workshop outputs and respond to AS by Friday 4th April:
RDAs (Full
system)
 Part 1 – items discussed at 13th March Workshop
- any comments on the proposed solution write-up?
This write-up (incorporating comments received) will become the
basis for initial design work and estimation, and of a proposal for
incorporation into the build schedule.
 Part 2 – items not covered at the workshop, but subsequently
reviewed by JC (who contributed the majority of the items) and PC
- please feedback, in order of priority, the Sharepoint Issue Ref. no.s
of the items you would like to discuss at the follow-up workshop on
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 10 of 11
ERDF 2007-13 Transition Programme
MI Senior User Group Meeting – 26th March 2008
Item
Item & Commentary
Who
10th April,
- for the remaining items, where you are content these do not need to
be discussed in a workshop setting, please feedback any comments
on the existing draft response.
ACTION POINT 25: Arrange follow-up workshop for Thursday 10th April,
Eland House, 10:30– 14:30.
AS
NEXT MEETING DATES:
Thursday 24th April, CLG, Eland House, conference room G/J & G/K 11:00 – 15:00
Wednesday 21st May, CLG, Eland House, conference room G/L & G/M 11:00 – 15:00
Wednesday 25th June, CLG, Eland House, conference room G/J & G/K 11:00 – 15:00
Wednesday 23rd July, CLG, Eland House, conference room G/J & G/K 11:00 – 15:00
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 11 of 11