Memorandum by the South West Regional
Management Board (FRS 18)
The South West Regional Management Board continues
to fully support the work of the Modernisation Agenda. The South
West will be one of the first regions to move into a Regional
Control Centre currently expected during 2008-09. This region
considers that FiReControl and Firelink are the most crucial elements
of this agenda, and therefore continues to prioritise as such.
The most significant area of concern to the
South West Regional Management Board is that the two projects
continue to be run separately at all levels. It is this area that
we would wish to bring to the attention of the ODPM Select Committee
inquiry into the Fire and Rescue Service. The attached report
outlines the concerns of the region and the practical difficulties
associated with this issue.
Whilst the governance arrangements surrounding
the two projects are currently under review by the ODPM, it is
the view of the South West Regional Management Board that only
full integration of the two projects would produce an environment
conducive to delivering the required project outcomes.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The successful implementation of the FiReControl
Project is totally dependent on the success of Firelink (the National
Radio Replacement Project). Currently the two projects are being
run separately, which causes conflict and inefficiency due to
the different management and governance structures in place. This
causes operational difficulties for the staff responsible for
the implementation of both projects. The South West Regional Management
Board (RMB) would wish to see Firelink and FiReControl run as
a single project. Seamlessly joining Firelink and FiReControl
together in this way would significantly increase the likelihood
of successful delivery for both projects.
BACKGROUND
The South West Region worked together to procure
a regional radio solution during 2000 & 2001. This work was
superseded in 2002, with a national project to procure a single
national radio scheme for the fire service. "Firelink"
was developed as the National Project, and has culminated in the
procurement of a single radio scheme for England Scotland and
Wales.
FiReControl was developed in 2004, following
the settlement of the firefighters pay dispute, and a review undertaken
by Mott McDonald. The FireControl programme seeks to replace the
46 individual County Control Rooms, with 9 Regional Control Centres,
which will deal with all the emergency call management for each
region whilst providing fallback cover for all other regions,
thus providing a truly resilient infrastructure.
Firelink is an essential pre-requisite of FiReControl.
The new ways of working proposed for the RCCs necessitate a single
radio scheme capable of an increased use of data transfer and
simultaneous reduction in voice communications.
THE ISSUE
Currently the two projects are being run separately
at National level. RCC Regional Projects Directors have, in some
cases, integrated the two projects at a regional level, but the
lack of a co-ordinated approach at national level makes even this
difficult. There are a number of key areas of concern for the
South West and these are highlighted below.
1. Recent history of delivering IT change
projects in the public sector has shown a less than 50% success
rate. If the two projects continue to be run independently, there
is a greater risk of project failure due to reduced coordination.
2. The FiReControl Outline Business Case
makes reference to an inextricable link with the Firelink project.
The projects' lack of full integration remains a significant barrier
to efficient operation of both projects.
3. Both projects require regional level
structures with Principal Officers and other technical personnel
needing to attend, depending on the level. The two projects involve
similar people but the misalignment of projects at a national
level sometimes requires two separate meetings at regional level,
particularly at project team level. This introduces inefficiencies
and duplication of effort, as well as, misinformation, and lost
opportunities caused by assumed knowledge that is not in fact
there. If the two projects were combined this would introduce
efficiencies and greater knowledge and appreciation of both projects.
Closed agenda items could be used if necessary for commercial
reasons.
4. Currently both projects employ significant
delivery and project management resource which could be rationalised
creating substantial savings if the two projects were merged.
5. The workloads that the two projects put
on Fire and Rescue services often compete for the same FRS resources
at the same time. This has the potential to cause conflict and
is inefficient if not managed in a coordinated manner. If the
two projects were combined or formally run as a programme, an
integrated plan could be developed identifying "clashes"
and pinch points. An early resolution could then be sought, to
prioritise the work according to the needs of the programme to
support the successful delivery of both projects.
6. FiReControl are providing software to
go onto Firelink hardware. An agreement to allow FiReControl contractors
access to Firelink hardware will be needed. At present, because
the two projects are operating separately, how this might be operated
at a practical level has not been considered and this will only
serve to introduce problems later. If the projects were integrated
such problems could resolved before contract award therefore reducing
the potential cost to both projects.
CONCLUSION
This is a risk critical project upon which,
the lives of the general public and firefighters will depend.
For the whole of the project to be successfully delivered there
needs to be an open and transparent information exchange. This
is certainly not occurring at present. The best way to achieve
this is complete integration of the two current projects. Successful
information exchange will reduce the chance of costly mistakes
and delays which have been prevalent in other major ICT projects.
Project structure charts are attached for both
Firelink and FiReControl to illustrate the lack of cohesion between
the two.
| 
