Efficiency and effectiveness review programme

Report: 14
Date: 19 June 2001
By: Treasurer & Commissioner

Summary

This paper brings forward proposals for Tranche 1 reviews following the Accenture report to the April meeting of this Committee. Members are asked to agree the programme as the basis for competitive tendering.

A. Recommendations

That the Committee agree:

1. the proposed Tranche 1 Programme;
2. that delegated authority be given to the Project Board to let contracts identified in Tranche 1 (Appendix 1), individually or on a collective basis, up to existing budgetary provision using the MPS Framework Arrangement for consultancy services;
3. to instruct the Project Board to prepare commentaries on Tranche 2 and 3 reviews for presentation to its October meeting;
4. the facilitator role in paragraph 10;
5. to endorse the use of the emerging Corporate Strategy to inform the consultants' reviews;
6. that any underspend of the 2001-02 E & E consultancy budget be transferred to balance sheet reserves to fund the continuing programme in future years;
7. that any minor drafting changes needed for contract documentation be delegated to the Project Board;
8. that quarterly reports on the progress of the Tranche 1 Programme be brought back to this committee, the first report being submitted to its October meeting; and
9. that the Committee nominate one Member to the selection panel (paragraph 13).

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. At its meeting on 17 April 2001 the Committee received a report by the consultants Accenture and noted the proposed efficiency and effectiveness programme. However, before any review was agreed, the Committee specified that the terms of reference for each review should clarify its relationship to (a) any relevant existing or recent reviews by the MPS, and (b) a subsequent Best Value review. The Project Board (comprising Treasurer MPA (Chair), Clerk MPA, Director of Resources MPS, Assistant Commissioner (PRS), Director of Finance and Performance GLA and Mayor's advisor(s)) was asked to report back to the Committee on a process for determining the relevance of existing reviews and criteria for new reviews, excluding Best Value reviews. The Project Board was also asked to bring forward proposals for an initial tranche of reviews with terms of reference for approval by the Committee.

Establishing terms of reference

2. The Project Board met on 3 May 2001 and agreed that:

• there was a need to ensure that the project is supported to allow it to move forward as quickly as possible; and
• the Efficiency and Effectiveness programme should be a clearly distinguishable programme of reviews.

3. The Project Board established a review team of three officers (one each from the MPA, MPS and GLA) to examine in detail the Accenture list of reviews. The objective was to develop a short list for the initial tranche of reviews. Reports were provided back to the Project Board on 1 June 2001 to enable agreement of the review team's work and onward submission to the Steering Group (Chair of MPA, the Mayor and the Commissioner) on 5 June 2001.

4. A summary programme of three tranches of reviews as agreed by the Project Board and the Steering Group see Appendix 1.

5. Appendix 2 provides a trail which shows how the proposed programme now presented to Members relates to the programme set out in the Accenture report. There are some new reviews added, a review moved forward from year 2, amalgamations and deletions. A summary of the reasons is also provided. Major changes include bringing forward Overtime from year 2 and deferring Personnel to year 2. The issue relating to National/International Functions included in the Accenture review list will now be covered by the review of the Special Payment to be led by the Treasurer (an item on Grant Negotiations is contained elsewhere on this agenda).

6. Appendix 3 shows an analysis of the estimated cost implications. The overall cost for the tranche 1 programme has been maintained at the budgetary provision of £1 million. The anticipated cash flow of the payments is not yet known and it is proposed that any underspend on this budget at the end of the financial year is transferred to a balance sheet reserve to fund the continuing programme in 2002/03. In some cases the programme has been supplemented from existing MPS budget provision for consultancy work or by internal MPS work. Two of the reviews incorporate existing consultancy work already underway or just about to commence (income generation and property) and two reviews have or will have internal work completed (preparation for financial devolution and transport). Their inclusion is felt appropriate because of their synergy with the Accenture reviews, and it is felt more effective to tie them together under this process.

7. Appendix 4 shows the terms of reference for the 2001/02 reviews, with the commentaries particularly addressing:

• existing and recent reviews by the MPS and how further work could build on and develop this;
• the links with Best Value and how a review would feed into that process;
• suggested resourcing;
• how the proposed review can complement and add value to existing MPS work; and
• possible outcomes/financial implications.

8. The proposed programme will now seek to address a number of outstanding issues on the MPA's agenda. For example the Property review will provide the means of responding to the need to align the Estates Strategy with the MPA's overall corporate strategy. The review entitled Preparation for Financial Devolution will help to take forward the implementation of a scheme of devolved budget management and appropriate financial instructions. Subject to Members' decisions on the Tranche 1 review programme, the Project Board will continue its work to complete commentaries on the remaining review headings in Tranches 2 and 3 for submission to the October meeting of this committee.

Tender specification and letting of contracts

9. It was agreed on 17 April 2001 meeting that the Project Board manage the procurement process with necessary approvals by this committee. There was a presumption that external resources will be used in order to ensure independence. The Project Board considers this premise should extend to any initial scoping required for the Tranche 1 programme. While the use of MPS staff for this initial scoping within the terms of reference could have benefits it is felt on balance that the fresh view afforded by consultants may lend a useful insight.

10. The Project Board also concluded that full project management should also be placed with the consultants. Each of the reviews would have a named lead MPS Project Officer and the whole Tranche 1 review programme should have an MPS facilitator, with support from MPA and GLA officers as is considered appropriate by the Project Board. This would establish a focal point of access for the consultants to ensure the smooth running of the project. The post would be identified from the AC(PRS's) staff.

11. Each of the reviews would have a separate specification prepared which will include the terms of reference see Appendix 4, a detailed write-up up of the requirement (still to be undertaken), task specific outcomes and deliverables required (still to be prepared) and overall timescales for completion. The tenders would be on a fixed price basis. The MPS's Framework Arrangement for the Provision of Financial, Legal, Technical (Building and IT) and Human Resource Consultancy Services would be used. The existing Accenture work already undertaken would also be provided as part of the data pack.

12. The Project Board saw advantages in having a unified approach, but the specialism required for the Property review makes it advisable to seek tenders on an inclusive basis for all nine reviews and also exclusive of the property review, with a separate approach to firms on the Framework Agreement with property specialisms. This may produce a cost effective approach without unduly complicating the process. This approach would not however preclude consultants sub-contracting the Property element within their overall bid.

13. It is proposed that initial expressions of interest be obtained and that these guide the eventual Invitation to Tender. Following receipt of tenders a short list of firms will be prepared. It is proposed that the selection panel will comprise members of the Project Board ensuring that all stakeholders are represented together with an MPA member nominated by the Committee.

Corporate strategy

14. The MPA and MPS are currently working on an emerging corporate strategy. It is suggested that while not yet endorsed by the Authority and Management Board, that it would be an advantage if the consultants were mindful of this in their future work.

C. Financial implications

Budget provision of £1 million has been included in the 2001/02 budget to fund the efficiency and effectiveness programme. The Lead Project Officer and the Project Facilitator role will be contained within existing estimates.

D. Background papers

None.

E. Contact details

The author of this report is Ken Hunt, Deputy Treasurer, MPA.

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback