mcisProject News Richard GoodwinNigel Williams

20th May 2008

mcisIssues identified Some RDA concerns / perceptions

e.g. missed dates, constant change to Data Dictionary

Testing of core Status with YF Need for stability

Expectation of Target go-live build Dates Content, expectation of full system?

Need to focus on the target go live build Too many commitments - team spread thin Not sure we have identified everything that needs to be in place to achieve sign-off of

MCIS

Need more visibility across all teams as a whole, re.: Compliance checks, plans for live use Impacts on changes on local teams Local team plans, MCIS team plans

mcisShift Focus to getting a signed-off system Postpone implementation preparation activities in RDAs except ONE & YF

(NB: does not mean stopping work on payment interfaces, web service, or AWM’s SQL to XML conversion solution)

Create detailed Release Plan, including external milestones relevant to sign-off (e.g. PIG meetings), and manage against it

Mark Swan to focus on UAT; Anne Smith to focus on Release Plan & Release Management

Be clear what’s in scope and what’s a change to the plan

Manage changes: assess functional, technical & stakeholder impact – where possible before change happens, so we have choices

Establish go-live criteria for RDAs, CA, MA & AA

Establish criteria for, & evidence needed to obtain, S.R.O.’s sign-off

mcisKey actions: Design & Build Definition of target go-live release

What’s in it What’s not in it, and why / how RDAs can go live without those

functions (e.g. what’s the workaround?) Agree that definition with ONE, YF, CA, MA, other RDAs, MCIS

S.R.O. Build only the inclusions plus fixes sufficient to achieve sign-

off

Clear process & responsibilities for incorporating requirements, or other changes

mcisKey actions: Testing Script coverage matrix

(what scripts have been run for each release)

Use matrix (gaps) & knowledge of what’s changed in a build, to prioritise script execution

Track defect levels: no. open & no. fixed, by severity, trend in volume being raised (tailing off?)

Brief, regular meetings of development & testing – for system test & for UAT– to align fixing activity & build timings to tester need

Ensure evidence capture arrangements are sufficient

mcisStakeholder Management Improve communication with RDAs

Greater transparency around our progress – should give increased confidence

Explain why we have to change things that affect them – in terms their (business & IT) staff can understand– explain what impact assessment has been done, and involve them in process

Quantify changes so their understanding of the impact will be realistic

Keep them posted. Explain delays

Copy FDs on the weekly report, and pick out key messages in the covering email

Identify who in the team will assess & manage the stakeholder impact of changes in plan, scope etc.

mcisSteering and Sign-off Confirm the following group will sign-off UAT and ask them to act as a

Release Board: Richard Goodwin, MCIS S.R.O. (Chair) Giles Southwell/Naomi Charlton, Head of Organisational Performance,

One NorthEast (who will sign-off ONE’s Go-Live decision) (to be confirmed) Adrian Green, European Funding Manager, Yorkshire

Forward (who will sign-off YF’s Go-Live decision) Margaret Lees, CLG EPP, Head of Managing Authority Kim Humberstone, CLG Finance, Head of Certifying Authority Karan Price, CLG Internal Audit Service, Head of Audit Authority Nigel Williams, CLG EPP Programme Manager

Ensure this group’s acceptance criteria are understood Create Acceptance Report as a vehicle for their sign-off

Instigate high-level monthly report to the PIG Consider OGC Gateway 4 Review (Readiness for Service) – how would timing

relate to MCIS roll-out across RDAs?