InSite Asset Register - Beta

Description

Summary of the work Design, build and operate a cloud-based cross-government property information solution that: Provides 3 data entry mechanisms including automated data collection. Drives_Data_Quality. Secure_user_management. Enables OGP to use this data to create BI/Geospatial reports. It is not a property management system. It is for strategic portfolio management, not day-to-day property operations. Expected Contract Length 2 years Latest start date Monday 20 March 2023 Budget Range Budget to include: Core delivery team e.g. project management, scrum lead, solution architect and developers. Solution architectural and data design Solution build, configuration and customisation Service cloud hosting and support Database development & technical validation Data migration from legacy solution Phased on-boarding support of organisations (~1,800_users) Handover material and aftercare e.g. user guides/video tutorials System and Data Integration (including API development, implementation and support). All required software Post go-live system management and maintenance Optional: 1st line user support helpdesk. The Design and Build phase is expected to be no longer than 6-8 months. Why the Work is Being Done The Authority is the only body in the central government with existing access to estate data across multiple public sector bodies with plans to extend this access further. Its target is that nearly all UK strategic property asset information (e.g. land, building and associated data-sets) for government bodies will be available to the Cabinet Office, offering a single and trusted perspective across a significant portfolio. InSite will be a cloud-based system to collect, manage and report this data to provide insight on the public estate to organisations, cross-public sector programmes, Parliament and the public, leading to greater public transparency. Additional analytical capability will also support better decision making for strategic real estate. Problem to Be Solved OGP’s electronic property information mapping service (e-PIMS) is used extensively across Government with the vast majority of data manually updated directly in the system. e-PIMS is 20 years old and the upgrade to InSite provides potential for greater reporting, data flow automation and analytics. Through InSite, the Authority requires the ability to: · Streamline the import of data from Government Departments (such as those with large portfolios) and other 3rd party sources · Provide other public sector bodies with improved data update mechanisms and tools · Manage the quality of this data · Enable OGP data and analysis team to be able to create dashboards, reports and geo-spatial outputs for better analytics/ visualisation. · Provide the public with a subset of this data · Manage system and data security to maintain user access to the data and system outputs in line with government regulations and guidelines. The Authority requires a cloud-based solution for the tasks above, based on off the shelf components which are, or can be, integrated to deliver a coherent single sign on, user-led experience that is intuitive. Who Are the Users As a member of the OGP data and analysis team, I have to create reports, such as the State of the Estate Report, with ease and confidence in the source data. I need to create reports and map by myself in a private space using this property data, combined with socioeconomic information. I want to look at trends of civil service job locations over time to understand the progress made by departments on relocating roles. As a departmental Property Manager, I need specific data to transfer from my property management system (or other data sources) to OGP at periodic intervals, preferably, automatically using integrations or through user forms (non automated) . I also want to view reports and data authorised for me to view by OGP. As a member of the public, I wish to access data on the government estate and property for sale/lease in my area and have confidence in the accuracy of the data. As a department data analyst, I need to view my asset information and data-sets authorised for my use in the system by the OGP data and analysis team through search, map locator so that I can inform business decisions, such as relocation options. Early Market Engagement An RFI was issued in 2018 (CCS-Ref-00343874) to conduct a soft market test for the functional and non-functional requirements of the predecessor of the InSite asset register, called the Digital National Asset Register or the d-NAR. Following this, an alpha phase delivered two PoCs and a partial private beta phase was undertaken. A second RFI was undertaken in Dec 2022 to reassess delivery options and seek responses against a rationalised set of high level requirements for InSite. Both RFIs exercises demonstrated that: · There was sufficient market interest from system integrators, specialist Business Intelligence and Geospatial service providers. · From a technical perspective, the business requirements could be met by existing, or combinations of existing products. The main Authority requirements of data aggregation from multiple sources, central data management and development of analytics through reporting/geospatial views have been delivered for other clients. These case studies provided confidence the market has sufficient experience to meet OGP’s specifications in the required budget and timeframe. Work Already Done The two RFIs contain the use cases, functional/non-functional requirements for the full system, together with an explanation of the existing system and data landscape. An Alpha phase successfully delivered two POCs on a subset of the functional requirements. This reinforced the soft market test conclusion, that InSite is deliverable through existing market products and services. A Government Property Data Standard has been agreed. This is the focus of Insite data collection and departments readiness to report against this has been assessed in preparation for Insite on boarding. Discussions with government departments on automated data integration through API’s are ongoing. Existing Team The programme comprises of three main work areas Technology, Analytics and Property Data Standards and Governance. The programme manager coordinates the workstreams and reports to the Programme Director who reports to the SRO. The technology lead will be Cabinet Office Digital and Data/ Governance and Analytics will be coordinated by the Programme Manager. Cabinet Office Digital will provide day-to-day engagement to the supplier and be the main point of contact. The supplier will be accountable to the Programme Board and will also provide weekly reports to the Programme Director. The supplier will work with members of the project delivery team. Current Phase Beta Skills & Experience • Potential Bidders must confirm they are already or will sign up to the CCS e-Sourcing Suite for the Evaluation Stage before the Shortlisting Stage submission deadline (Y/N) • Potential Bidders must agree to abide by Crown Commercial Service’s Process for the Evaluation Stage (Y/N) • Bidder has successfully implemented secure production-level asset information collection and reporting systems at a government or corporate international level. (Minimum of 2 named projects within 3 years) (15%) • Bidder has successfully implemented production-level spatial data capture projects at a government or corporate international level. (Minimum of 2 named projects within 3 years) (15%) • Bidder has recent (within 3yrs) experience delivering requirements similar to those set out at https://e-pims.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/insite/InsiteRFP.html. Provide examples/commentary on whether fully bespoke or off-the-shelf solution and outline key_areas_where_they_differ_to_our_requirements. (20%) • Bidder has successfully integrated and managed multiple data sources (>15), driving data quality and automated data flows on an ongoing dynamic basis, on a single production-level platform. (Minimum_of_2_named_projects_within_3years) (15%) • Detail the individuals who have experience within the projects listed above who would be available for this project. Please state which projects listed above they worked on. (15%) Nice to Haves • Bidder has experience of delivering projects in a cross public sector context with wide stakeholder network of users (10%) • Bidder has experience of delivering projects using a mix of agile methodology and waterfall project management from requirements to operation (10%) Work Location We expect a hybrid approach, with a combination of remote working and on site at the Cabinet Office location at 10 South Colonnade, London. Working Arrangments OGP promotes smarter working practices and green travel plans. Therefore, activities requiring location based meetings/workshops should be planned and kept to a minimum. The Authority uses Google Hangouts and Slack for collaboration with Google Docs/Sheets/Slides used for collaborative documents. System design, configuration and testing should be carried out virtually or at the Supplier’s own premises unless a specific operational advantage in co-location is identified. Any travel and living expenses should form part of the supplier’s price. Critical review sessions and regular show and tells and other rituals (e.g. retros) should be scheduled in advance to ensure attendance can be secured. Security Clearance All supplier staff should be Baseline Personnel Security Standard cleared. CTC cleared is desirable. Additional T&Cs Potential Bidders must sign up to the CCS e-Sourcing Suite for the Proposal Stage before the Shortlisting Stage submission deadline. More detailed requirements building on the technical proposals will be shared with those successful. In line with Clause 32 of the terms and conditions of the framework, the Authority reserves the right to terminate the Contract without cause following the minimum notice period. This is a call-off contract therefore the Authority cannot guarantee spend under this Contract. No. of Suppliers to Evaluate 8 Proposal Criteria • Technical competence and solution (including, but not limited to, approach and methodology, meeting user need]s, organisation’s goals etc) • Timeframes • Project, risk and dependency management • Team • Value for money, including cost • Social and Environmental and other Cultural Fit Criteria • Describe the training you will provide new users of InSite and how this will incorporate feedback from current users • Describe the levels of support you will provide to users of InSite (e.g. response timeframes) • Describe your approach to remediation and rectification of errors • Describe your stakeholder strategy and stakeholder governance arrangements • Describe how you will apprise current users of system and process updates • Social Value Payment Approach Capped time and materials Evaluation Weighting Technical competence 65% Cultural fit 15% Price 20% Questions from Suppliers 1. What stage is the data modelling at for the project? For example, ‘data design’ is listed as something the budget includes, however, there is reference to a Government Property Data Standard being agreed, Do you already have your property data models agreed at conceptual and logical levels, or are these in scope? A draft conceptual data model has been produced which we expect the supplier to take forward and develop the logical data model around it. The authority recognises that the logical data model may be influenced by the design of the technology itself. 2. An RFI was issued in 2018 (CCS-Ref-00343874) to conduct a soft market test for the functional and non-functional requirements of the predecessor of the InSite asset register”. We did not receive this RFI in 2018, and cannot source it. We’ve spoken with CCS directly, they cannot find it on their various systems, and so have raised a case internally. Are you able to provide this 2018 RFI please? We are happy to share the RFI documents, it is important to note that the requirements have been refined and are superseded with the requirements shared as part of this procurement. If you would like a copy then please email insite.service@cabinetoffice.gov.uk 3. 6-8 months seems an optimistic timeframe for delivering this beta, what is the rationale and confidence behind this timeframe? We are looking to suppliers to advise on their timetable for delivering the required outcomes. The recent RFI responses suggested that 6-8 months was a reasonable timeframe. We are however keen to understand where this might not be the case and to explore options for breaking the work into milestone activities. 4. If the design and build is expected to be 6-8 months, what does the Authority envisage during the remainder of the 2 year contract? The remainder of the contract will include the data migration and on boarding of users. This will then be followed by a period focused on system delivery and continuous improvement. 5. We would still like to understand if the BPSS requirement excludes remote working outside the UK. Does the OGP intend to prohibit a supplier’s offshore delivery team from supporting the supplier’s onsite team with the delivery of this project? Any supplier staff who will have access to internal OGP data should be Baseline Personnel Security Standard cleared. It is expected that a limited number of the team should have CTC clearance to allow access to more secure data. Supplier’s delivery teams cannot be based offshore. 6. You have requested that bidders name the individuals who will be available to work on your project. Are you aware that the framework you are procuring through is designed to procure ‘Outcomes’, not individuals, and that this question is therefore inappropriate? The suppliers’ resources available and their capabilities and experience are key to delivering the necessary outcomes. It is therefore important to assess the capability and experience of suppliers' proposed delivery teams. We accept that at this stage, suppliers may not have identified their delivery team and it may be subject to change. 7. Can you please confirm if you hold an ESRI Enterprise Licence and that any licence costs associated with third party software are outwith of the scope of this ITT? We would expect all third party licensing costs to be included in the bid pricing. 8. Is there any existing ETL tools used for data management that it would be helpful to know about? No 9. Does the new system need to integrate with OGP Active Directory/Identity Management and are there any other internal or external systems where a dynamic integration is needed? We would expect login and user management to be managed by the solution independently. At this stage, it is not anticipated that there would be a dynamic integration necessary with other systems to verify log in identity. InSite will require API connectivity to external databases to verify credentials in multi-factor authentication which may change this. 10. With ref to Q1 (CCS eSourcing Suite) and Q2 (CCS process for evaluation), you have indicated you are seeking a yes/no response. How do you propose to mark this using the usual 1 to 3 scoring mechanism (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-to-shortlist-digital-outcomes-and-specialists-suppliers#how-to-shortlist-interested-suppliers)? We expect users to commit to signing up to CCS’ esourcing suite and to abide by Crown Commercial Service’s Process for the Evaluation Stage. This is non negotiable and if suppliers are not able to commit to this they will not achieve a met on these questions. 11. With ref to Q3 (secure production-level asset information collection and reporting systems), Q4 (production-level spatial data capture projects) and Q5 (experience delivering requirements similar to those set out at […]) will bidders receive higher scores for more than two examples? Do you have an ideal number of examples bidders should evidence? There is a minimum number of examples set and there is no ideal number. There will not necessarily be a benefit for extra examples. Suppliers should seek to demonstrate their suitability through the examples and find the right balance to do so between the number of examples and detail they wish to provide. 12. With ref to Q3 (secure production-level asset information collection and reporting systems), can you please clarify what is meant by ‘assets’? What asset information may bidders’ examples collect and report on, in order to qualify as a relevant example? Asset in this context primarily encompasses land, buildings and property. However, examples from other tangible or intangible assets that have monetary value will be acceptable. 13. With ref to questions 3, 4 and 6 – when you say ‘last three years’, may bidders use contract examples where we are currently maintaining and improving a platform that we deployed more than three years ago? Yes. 14. Could you please confirm that the weightings attached to questions are not intended to apply at Stage 1? That is correct 15. Are you intending to inform shortlisted applicants about specialist organisations, of whom you are aware, for example, as a result of RFI responses, that may be able to make a valuable contribution to the solution? No 16. We note that Question [Bidder has recent (within 3yrs) experience delivering requirements similar to those set out at https://e-pims.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/insite/InsiteRFP.html. Provide examples/commentary on whether fully bespoke or off-the-shelf solution and outline key_areas_where_they_differ_to_our_requirements. (20%)] is very open and hence based upon our current interpretation it is relatively challenging to answer within the 100 word limit. Please can you provide further guidance and associated criteria regarding the information to be provide? The question can be answered in a succinct manner with key/ most significant points. 17. With ref to Q7 (individuals who have experience within the projects listed above), can you please clarify what information you are seeking? E.g., names, job titles, years’ experience? How many people should bidders ideally detail, and what information should we provide, in order to achieve a 3 (exceeds)? The suppliers’ resources available and their capabilities and experience are key to delivering the necessary outcomes. It is therefore important to assess the capability and experience of suppliers' proposed delivery teams. We are looking for information that helps assess that. Names are not necessarily required however job titles/ function, experience and role in delivery, and other information that will demonstrate capability and experience can be included. We would seek details of the personnel in the next stage. 18. With ref to questions 8 and 9, could you please confirm that you are seeking one example only, and will be marking using the conventional 1 to 3 scoring mechanism? There is no ideal number and suppliers should seek to demonstrate their suitability. The authority will be using the conventional 0 to 3 scoring mechanism. 19. With ref to Q4 (production-level spatial data capture projects), can you please clarify what ‘counts’ as spatial data? Is there a minimum degree of data complexity that bidders must evidence in order to qualify? The functional and non-functional requirements contain details on the spatial data dimensions and complexity planned for the InSite solution. In the authority's view, these are low complexity spatial requirements. We would expect suppliers to be able to respond against those. 20. The contract length states 2 years. Would there be any provision to extend this? Yes. An option to extend the contract for a further year will be included, subject to approvals such as budget approval.