Supplementary memorandum submitted by
Lord Sutherland
Thank you for inviting me to participate in
your inquiry into the National Curriculum tests by providing evidence
on 26 January 2009. I am writing to clarify two points from the
evidence which I gave.
In answer to question 270, I indicated that
the costs for increasing ETS staff capacity were incurred by the
QCA. In fact, it is generally the case that ETS incurred the costs
for its additional staff—this will have accounted for part
of its reported loss on the project (as described to your committee
on 10 September 2008 by Dr Philip Tabbiner, Senior Vice President,
ETS). In addition, QCA incurred a smaller proportion of costs
relating to an increase in the number of its own staff and temporary
staff assigned to the project. The QCA Chief Executive indicated
that the additional costs incurred by QCA were around £580,000
which is detailed on page 54 of my report.
In answer to questions 261, 272 and 275, I would
like to clarify that the parameters I referred to were set by
the QCA. They were not set by the Office of Government Commerce,
PricewaterhouseCoopers or another body. The parameters set were:
— the Pre-Qualification Questionnaire
(first stage of procurement) asked for details of previous contracts
worth more than £20 million a year (this is detailed on page
25 of my report); and
— the press review commissioned from
PwC as part of financial due diligence covered a period of 12
months (this is detailed on page 28 of my report).
My report recommends that more extensive and
additional checks are made in the future in relation to potential
suppliers' knowledge, capacity, experience and track record.
11 February 2009
| 
