Annexes
1. DISCOUNTED
CASH FLOW
14 November 2005
Detailed cost spreadsheet deleted on grounds of
commercial confidentiality.
2. DISCOUNTED
CASH FLOW—SUNK
COSTS
14 November 2005
Detailed cost spreadsheet deleted on grounds of
commercial confidentiality.
3. DISCOUNTED
CASH FLOW—AMENDED
14 November 2005
Detailed cost spreadsheet deleted on grounds of
commercial confidentiality.
3.1 ISCS/JSA STRATEGIC
SOLUTIONS IMPLEMENTATION
IN 2006-07 WITH
SAVINGS ARISING
IN 2007/08
14 November 2005
Detailed cost spreadsheet deleted on grounds of
commercial confidentiality
4. SCOPE OF
RELEASES
4.1 The scope of the releases, indicatively,
is:
|
| Release 1.0 | Collection and viewing of IS, JSA, and IB new and repeat claim information;
Collection and viewing of claim information for secondary and associated benefits;
Pull of personal details data from PDCS/DCI and of claim details from ISCS, JSAPS and PSCS;
Printed output of benefit information to enable re-keying of claim information into legacy systems;
One-way interface with LMS to enable appointment booking;
Development of an interface between Cram and the DWP telephony solution;
Provision of local print facility for Customer Management System outputs;
Printed output of HB/CTB information;
Provision of relevant Audit, Security and Financial control mechanisms;
Relevant MI extracts.
National Risk Profiling.
|
| Release 2.03[3]
| Collection and viewing of NTC claim information;
Collection and viewing of NTC change of circumstance information;
Push of information for new and repeat claims to ISCS and JSAPS
Two-way interface with LMS;
Data transmission of HB and CTB information to Local Authorities;
Further integration of Cram with DWP Telephony solution;
Support for Euro implementation;
Provision of relevant Audit, Security and Financial control mechanisms;
Additional MI extracts.
|
|
5. SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
5.1 This annex considers the sensitivity of the main
cost and savings drivers. These are replicated in the table below.
The conclusion drawn from the analysis is that should the sensitivities
fall on the side of worst case then this business case still returns
a positive net present value.
|
| Driver/Assumption | Risk/Sensitivity
| Mitigation | Impact 10 years
| Pa |
|
| The Contract will be a service contract with some additional risk transfer, over 10 years.
| Supplier viability comes into question. |
The Department carries out a continual watching brief over their IT suppliers as it is heavily reliant upon them to maintain all our IT systems.
| | |
| The business process, timings for inbound and outbound calls are accurate.
| Should the actual timings vary from the estimates by one minute there is a financial change of about £1 million nationally.
| The business process has been subject to rigorous review and testing (eg in Pathfinders) and quality assurance. The model is deemed to be robust and therefore not subject to sensitivity. This line has also been agreed with HMT. Initial testing took place shortly after go live of R1.0 which confirmed the incoming call timings but showed outgoing calls to take longer than expected due to a higher than expected take up of jobseeking activity. A more detailed study is about to be undertaken to establish the additional costs but offsetting benefits of placing clients into work at an earlier stage.
| TBA | TBA
|
| All related people costs have been identified—training, backfill, and call charges, clerical processes.
| That all people costs, excluding the process, have not been included.
| Robust discussions with the business and project have taken place. However, the costs are subject to a degree of challenge. HMT have asked to see the effect of such costs varying by +/- 10% (although we feel that such risk is low).
| £9.20 million | £0.92 million
|
| The savings, and particularly MVFE are correct.
| The system and process may not deliver the AME savings, official error, or may introduce additional errors into the system.
| The current savings have been rigorously reviewed and analysed. It is possible that the system may give rise to new errors, although the savings are predicated on the 20 most common official errors only. These savings could be reduced due to new system errors or increased due to other errors being captured, therefore we have considered +/- 5%
| £12.15 million | £1.21 million
|
| Delays in implementation. | The system may not be delivered as planned.
| For each month delay in release 1.0 and 1.1 the savings lost are approximately £0.7 million, and for release 2.0 the lost savings are approximately £2.0 million
| N/A | £0.7 million per month £2.0 million
|
|
3
Provision of relevant audit, security and financial control mechanisms
are seen as integral part of the benefit realisation plan for
CMS, and therefore, the delivery of these components is seen as
an integral element of delivering CMS in the future. Back
|
