Non Housing Capital Programme PROJECT Outline Business Case Originating Service: Continuous Improvement. 1. Part A: Basic Proposal Details A.1 Description of proposal: (Please include details of any premises that would be affected by the proposals, inc. any to be vacated/partly vacated) Part 1 - Replacement Fleet Management System. The procurement of a replacement Fleet management system is part of a Fleet Shared Services strategy which has identified 6 key areas where savings could be made from partnership working: - Procurement - Information Technology - Property - Administration Support - Technical Staffing - Operations A common system between Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire is a key element of the strategy. Part 2 - Internal Audit Management System The intent of this project is to create efficiency in the processes and reporting that Internal Audit undertakes to fulfil their remit and responsibilities to and for the Council. Page 1 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
A.2 To which priority does the proposal primarily relate (health & safety, spend to save, saving to revenue budget)? Part 1 - The sharing of services is a driver and the Resources Management Committee of 10 th March 2009 agreed to introduce a closer working relationship with Aberdeenshire Council on a number of topics relating to shared fleet service. Both the Resources Management Committee and the Continuous Improvement Committee have previously been advised that there was a need to replace the current SAVE computer software system with one that produced performance information for managers and could be more easily supported by ICT. Part 2 - Efficiency in the processes and reporting that Internal Audit undertakes to fulfil their remit and responsibilities to and for the Council. A.3 To which one of the Council s key challenges within Vibrant, Dynamic & Forward Looking (VDFL) and the Single Outcome Agreement (SOA) does the proposal primarily relate? Part 1 - Transport Part 2 - Efficient Council A.4 In identifying this proposal, have any alternative service options been considered? (Tick one box) Yes No X a. (Please answer question B.2) A.5 In identifying this proposal, have any potential risks to its delivery been identified? (Tick one box) Yes X c. (Please answer question B.3) No Page 2 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
A.6 What service improvements/outputs would the proposal be expected to deliver? Part 1 - The replacement of the existing fleet system will provide the benefit of having performance information in a format that will allow local benchmarking etc. This will in turn facilitate a closer working relationship with Aberdeenshire Council as part of the overall shared fleet strategy. The use of a common system will result in efficiency savings in terms of system administration, training, report generation and staff resources. Part 2 - Efficiency in the processes and reporting that Internal Audit undertakes. Benefits are estimated as being: audit plan prep/risk analysis (senior * 2 days) quarterly plan (senior *2 * 4 quarters * 1 day) monthly plan (senior * 2 * 12 months * 0.25 days) audit form completion (auditor * 55 audits * 1 day) travel time (senior * 6 * 50 weeks * 0.5 days) audit report (senior & auditor *55 audits * 0.25 days) time scheduling/recording (auditor * 50weeks * 0.25 days) follow up analysis (auditor * 6 follow ups * 0.5 days) follow up reporting (manager/senior * 6 follow ups * 1 day) monthly statistics (senior * 12 months * 0.5days) Total (days) 137 A.7 Would these improvements be dependent on Ye other (non-premises) investment/service No X A.8 Required Budget: Part 1-60K Part 2-30K Basis/source: 346 IT Hardware and Software Development A.9 Please give details of any operational timescales (if known) associated with the proposal: Part 1 A tendering exercise will be required. Timescales to be advised by CPU. Part 2 - Following the completion of the options appraisal the required procurement work will be undertaken in accordance with Standing Orders and Financial Regulations. Page 3 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
A.10 Has the proposal been the subject of/resulted directly from stakeholder consultation? Yes No X A.11 Please list any partners (other ACC services or third parties) jointly promoting the proposal: Part 1 - The procurement of a replacement Fleet management system is part of a Fleet Shared Services strategy which will allow closer working with Aberdeenshire Council. Part 2 - N/A 2. Part B: Additional Proposal Details B.1 What is the priority of this proposal in comparison with existing previously approved projects? Page 4 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
B.2 In confirming this as your preferred solution, what other service options have been considered? Part 1 - CPU has been consulted to establish any collaborative opportunities open for use. The advice given was to go to tender. Part 2 - There are a number of IT software solutions that can be used to manage the overall audit process from the identification of risks, audit planning, documenting audit work, time recording, reporting and performance analysis. Option 1: APACE This product has three environments to manage the audit process: Planning records every possible audit area, evaluates the risks of each area and an annual plan preparation and reporting tool. Control the allocation of jobs to auditors, recording of staff time on allocated audit jobs, reporting staff performance and recommendations progress. Working Papers include the management control documents of control record, checklist and review sheet, the auditor working papers of risk & control matrix, audit programme and test working papers, customer satisfaction surveys. Option 2: TeamMate This is an integrated solution that comprises of 5 components: TeamRisk This is a risk assessment tool that allows the audit team to generate audit plans on the basis of the identified organisation risks. TeamSchedule This displays the activity of the audit team member or the audit project. TeamMateTEC This is a time recording and reporting tool. TeamMateEWP This is a documentation tool to record the test working papers, including scanning and reporting. TeamCentral A database of every audit finding that can be used for follow up work, tend analysis and pre-audit reviews. Option 3: Magique & Galileo This is an integrated solution that provides the following: Magique This is used by management to record, evaluate and manage risks Galileo This allows the audit team to plan conduct and report their work and provide assurance to management on the risk management framework. Magique includes a risk register and risk evaluation system. There are options for a loss register and a questionnaire module for the completion of control self assessments. It also includes an action tracking system that allows for actions generated in relation to the risks identified to be followed up. Page 5 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
Galileo allows for the preparation of the strategic and annual audit plans using a risk assessment model that can be independent from Magique. It can report upon progress v plan and year end summary reports. Allows scheduling for both audit and admin functions, charting the availability of audit staff and includes timesheet recording as well as reports comparing performance by team, auditor etc. There is a library facility for all standard working papers, which can automatically be allocated to staff. Automatic cross referencing of working papers, electronic review of working papers, up load of evidence and generation of recommendations and final report in WORD/EXCEL. Includes post-audit questionnaires. Option 4: MK Insight This is an audit management system that includes: audit planning, audit scheduling, audit management, performance reporting, electronic working papers, recommendation tracking, reporting, time recording, risk register and assessment, questionnaires and library. This is a.net application that uses web-based technology but can be used when there is no internet connection. Option 5: PAWS (Pentana) This product has elements covering the setting up of audits and entities, prioritisation and scheduling, risks and controls register, plan and perform tests, manage audit process, audit finalisation and reporting, action tracking, questionnaires and reporting features. Option 6: Methodware This comprises of two tools that can be used to plan audits and record audit work: Planning Advisor Pro Audit Advisor Planning Advisor allows audits to be identified through an automated evaluation process using audit criteria, but this criteria can be tailored to reflect the issues that matter most to the Council. Audit files are then generated and progress is tracked and monitored. This has a scheduling option and non-audit scheduling so audit resources can be matched to the plan requirements. Pro Audit Advisor allows audit findings and recommendations to be managed in a single database. It also allows audit reports to be designed and obtain better from customers. It states that it is the ultimate electronic working paper tool and allows for a paperless audit process. It can create business unit self assessments using WORD and HTML and its integrated e-mail. Page 6 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
CONCLUSIONS Option 1 (APACS) does not provide a solution that meets the requirements of a single audit management solution and should be discounted. Options 2 (TeamMate), 3, (Galileo) and 4 (MK Insight) provide solutions that meet the requirements of the Internal Audit function and are being used by other local authorities within Britain. However, not all of the TeamMate modules have been implemented by the current users and for the MK Insight product there is evidence to suggest that the implementation may be problematic. Less is known about Options 4 (PAWS) and 5 (Methodware). Although each appears to meet the audit management requirements there are few if any other local authorities that have had practical use of these products and the product websites do not indicate use in the public sector. Feedback from the users of Galileo is positive but the costs of implementing and maintaining this solution are the most expensive, or perhaps the most accurate. This solution is used by other Scottish local authorities (Highland & Stirling) so local knowledge of the product could be obtained. Further enquiries should be made of the TeamMate, Galileo and MK Insight products through direct discussions with other local authority users and obtaining a demonstration from the product suppliers. This would require input from the Internal Audit Section so that they can measure the effectiveness of the product for their daily use. Following the completion of the options appraisal the required procurement work will be undertaken in accordance with Standing Orders and Financial Regulations. B.3 Please confirm that a project risk assessment has been carried out and outline any potential risks to the delivery of this proposal that have been identified: Part 1 The main risk is that the desire to purchase the same product as Aberdeenshire (Tranman) may not be achievable within the tender framework. CPU will therefore be heavily involved in the preparation of the tender documentation to take account of this risk. Part 2 - The implementation will be straightforward and so any risks will be managed to ensure they do not disrupt the implementation. The greater risk is the continuing inefficiency of the Internal Audit section if the solution being sought is not procured and implemented. Page 7 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
B.4 Please specify any other investment/changes needed, and indicate how these are to be resourced: Part 1 - None Part 2 All resources required are internal to the Council and the teams involved in this project, so internal Audit, SDD and CPU. Any requirements for input from the vendor will be included in the contract resulting from the procurement exercise. 3. Part C: Financial Background C.1 Please give details of any capital funding (eg. grant, lottery) that would be available if the proposal were to proceed: Costs covered Amount available Fixed sum or proportion? ( or %) Source of funding Certainty ( C if certain, P if potential) Premisesrelated works Staffing implications/iss ues Other (Please specify) Page 8 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
C.2 Please give details of any revenue funding that would be required if the proposal were to proceed: Costs covered Annual premisesrelated costs Annual staffing costs Other (Please specify) Licence Costs Amount available Fixed sum or proportion? ( or %) Source of funding Certainty ( C if certain, P if potential) Part 1 - As this is a replacement system, the revenue expenditure required for the existing system will be available to fund the replacement system. Part 2 - Licence cost will be up to 3.6k per annum for up to 10 users. C.3 Please give details of the required funding from the Non Housing Capital Programme for each of the years shown in the table below: Part 1 Financial Year 2009/10 Gross Capital Cost 60 Less External Funding Net Contribution form the 60 Council 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Total Part 2 Financial Year 2009/10 Gross Capital Cost 30 Less External Funding Net Contribution form the 30 Council 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Total Page 9 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
C4. Please provide details of the revenue implications of this project proceeding and indicate if you have identified a funding mechanism for the project: Part 1 Financial Year 2009/10 Annual Revenue Costs Interest Capital Charges Loss of Investment Income Annual Income Generation TOTAL IMPACT ON REVENUE 2010/11 2011/12 Total Part 2 Financial Year 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 Annual Revenue Costs Up to 3.6 Up to 3.6 Up to Interest Capital Charges Loss of Investment Income Annual Income Generation TOTAL IMPACT ON REVENUE 3.6 Total Up to 10.8 Authorising Officer: Deirdre Robertson -... (Corporate Director) Nominated representative (if known): Ann Irvine 01224 523247... (Please include telephone number) Date: 01/06/09... Please ensure a copy of the business case is provided to Steven Whyte for information purposes. Page 10 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
NON HOUSING CAPITAL PROGRAMME BUSINESS CASE PROJECT DETAILS: Project Title: Service Area: Corporate Director: Project Manager: Contact Details: Project Board Members/Project Sponsor Details: Project Team Members Details: 346 IT Hardware and Software Development Continuous Improvement, Service Design & Development Deirdre Robertson Ann Irvine airvine@aberdeencity.gov.uk tel: 523427 Set for each project funded from this capital allocation. Set for each project funded from this capital allocation. Author of Document: Ann Irvine PROJECT DESCRIPTION Previously this allocation of capital is used to address small hardware or software purchases that have urgency for completion but did not have a capital allocation agreed when the NHCP was approved. As efforts are being made to improve the planning of work so that such a contingency will not be required in the future, the funding sought this year is to complete the two remaining projects that had been marshalled through the system by means of this allocation and it custom and practise. It is anticipates that in future years this allocation should not be required. The two remaining projects seeking funding are: Fleet Management Internal Audit management of overall audit process Withdrawn from the original bid for 2009/10 is an allocation to address citizen authentication because at this time the business case has not been fully developed. This does remain a requirement and if not funded from this project code will seek capital funding in its own right when the business case has been completed. This explains the difference between the spend profile noted below and the detail provided in the two business cases included for the project code. Page 11 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
REVISED PROJECT SPEND PROFILE 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 201/13 2013/14 272,000 Business case for Fleet Management Project Manager: Contact Details: Project Board Members/Project Sponsor Details: Richard Blair Tel: Ext 3409 Email: richardb@aberdeencity.gov.uk Project Executive: Hugh Murdoch Head of Service (Shelter and Environment) Neighbourhood Services (North Area) Senior User: Nigel Buchan Acting Fleet Manager Neighbourhood Services (North Area) Project Team Members Details: Senior Supplier: Elaine Hourston Account Manager SDD, Continuous Improvement Richard Blair Project Leader SDD, Continuous Improvement Nigel Buchan Acting Fleet Manager Neighbourhood Services (North Area) Author of Document: Service representative To be appointed by Acting Fleet Manager. Richard Blair, Chris Copner Page 12 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
STRATEGIC FIT: Strategic Fit of Project: (including fit with the Corporate Plan) The procurement of a replacement Fleet management system is part of a Fleet Shared Services strategy which has identified 6 key areas where savings could be made from partnership working: - Procurement - Information Technology - Property - Administration Support - Technical Staffing - Operations A common system between Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire is a key element of the strategy. The sharing of services is a driver and the Resources Management Committee of 10 th March 2009 agreed to introduce a closer working relationship with Aberdeenshire Council on a number of topics relating to shared fleet service. Benefits Expected: Both the Resources Management Committee and the Continuous Improvement Committee have previously been advised that there was a need to replace the current SAVE computer software system with one that produced performance information for managers and could be more easily supported by ICT. The replacement of the existing fleet system will provide the benefit of having performance information in a format that will allow local benchmarking etc This will in turn facilitate a closer working relationship with Aberdeenshire Council as part of the overall shared fleet strategy. The use of a common system will result in efficiency savings in terms of system administration, training, report generation and staff resources. Page 13 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
PROJECT MILESTONES: Key Milestone: Start Date: End Date: Agreement will be sought with CPU as to the timescale required for the issue, receipt and evaluation of the ITT and the negotiation of the contract with the preferred bidder. In general, a tendering exercise will normally take approximately 8-9 months to complete. This includes the following elements: Tender preparation - Draft T&C from Legal 17/06/2009 17/07/2009 Issue of tender documents by CPU 17/07/2009 14/08/2009 Receipt & Evaluation of responses / Demonstrations 18/08/2009 18/09/2009 Committee report / approval 21/09/2009 16/10/2009 Standstill period 19/10/2009 30/10/2009 Contract negotiation 02/11/2009 11/12/2009 Implementation 11/01/2010 12/02/2010 Achievability: Continued use of the current SAVE system which uses old technology and is based on an out of date platform. This would result in continuing to lack adequate reporting capabilities as well as the inability to provide performance information As the sharing of a common system is a key driver of the shared fleet strategy, the continued use of SAVE would undermine the ability of Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire to deliver the strategy. OPTION APPRAISAL: Summary of Options considered for the project. A high level review has been undertaken of the scope of the systems available in terms of the recent procurement undertaken by Aberdeenshire. In principle, adoption of a shared implementation of the system acquired by Aberdeenshire Council would allow implementation within a shorter timescale due to Aberdeen City being able to benefit from a system which is already up and running. It would also achieve a degree of shared Page 14 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
services by making use of an existing system. However, procurement rules, and the method by which the system in Aberdeenshire Council was originally procured, has resulted in a decision by the CPU that Aberdeen City Council will need to go out to tender for its replacement system. RESOURCING THE PROJECT: What resources are needed to complete the project? The procurement will be carried out in-house making use of staff resources already in place both within SDD and the Fleet Service. The installation exercise will need to be scheduled to accommodate the availability of SDD technical staff. Server space will need to be addressed and it is probable that the quantity 10 PCs already in place within the Fleet Service will need to be replaced to facilitate the new system. As this is a tendering exercise the actual costs will not be known until the tender responses are received. However, it is known that the system purchased recently by Aberdeenshire cost 60k and it is expected that the costs involved would be similar. FUNDING: Funding requested for 2009/10 60,000 Will this project generate any income through grants / funding / 3 rd party charges/fees etc Will this project generate any efficiency gains? None Page 15 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
PROCUREMENT ARRANGEMENTS: Will there be a requirement for external procurement? The CPU has advised that an open tender should be carried out. The commercial arrangements will be subject to negotiation / agreement between the successful supplier and ACCs Legal service. RISKS: What are the key risks within the project (if implemented)? Also highlight the risks of not implementing the project. The desire to purchase the same product as Aberdeenshire (Tranman) may not be achievable within the tender framework. The inability of Aberdeen City and Aberdeenshire to deliver the shared fleet strategy. Outline plan for addressing these Risks The inability to provide performance information. The involvement of CPU in the preparation of the ITT to advise on the best way to ensure the priority of the requirement to work closely with Aberdeenshire. Page 16 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
Business case for Internal Audit Management Solution Project Manager: Contact Details: Project Board Members/Project Sponsor Details: Project Team Members Details: Author of Document: Chris Copner Tel: Ext: x2600 Email: ccopner@aberdeencity.gov.uk Project Executive: Ann Irvine, Chief Administration Officer Senior User: Paul Hankinson, Investigations Manager Senior Supplier: Elaine Smith, Account Manager, SD&D A Project Team will be appointed and will consist of staff from SD&D. Chris Copner, Rhona Atkinson, Paul Hankinson Page 17 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
STRATEGIC FIT: Strategic Fit of Project: (including fit with the Corporate Plan) Benefits Expected: The intent of this project is to create efficiency in the processes and reporting that internal Audit undertakes to fulfil their remit and responsibilities to and for the Council. Estimated as being: audit plan prep/risk analysis (senior * 2 days) quarterly plan (senior *2 * 4 quarters * 1 day) monthly plan (senior * 2 * 12 months * 0.25 days) audit form completion (auditor * 55 audits * 1 day) travel time (senior * 6 * 50 weeks * 0.5 days) audit report (senior & auditor *55 audits * 0.25 days) time scheduling/recording (auditor * 50weeks * 0.25 days) follow up analysis (auditor * 6 follow ups * 0.5 days) follow up reporting (manager/senior * 6 follow ups * 1 day) monthly statistics (senior * 12 months * 0.5days) Total (days) 137 PROJECT MILESTONES: Key Milestone: Start Date: End Date: Milestones have still to be determined for this project. Achievability: The proposed procurement process will identify the best solution for the Internal Audit section. The procurement will be undertaken with input from the Central Procurement Unit to ensure full compliance with the regulated procurement processes. The involvement of SDD staff in the specification and selection of the solution will mean that all technical aspects of the solution are fully considered. The project team will consider training and support issues as required. OPTION APPRAISAL: Summary of Options considered for the project. There are a number of IT software solutions that can be used to manage the overall audit process from the identification of risks, audit planning, documenting audit work, time recording, reporting and performance analysis. Option 1: APACE Page 18 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
This product has three environments to manage the audit process: Planning records every possible audit area, evaluates the risks of each area and an annual plan preparation and reporting tool. Control the allocation of jobs to auditors, recording of staff time on allocated audit jobs, reporting staff performance and recommendations progress. Working Papers include the management control documents of control record, checklist and review sheet, the auditor working papers of risk & control matrix, audit programme and test working papers, customer satisfaction surveys. Option 2: TeamMate This is an integrated solution that comprises of 5 components: TeamRisk This is a risk assessment tool that allows the audit team to generate audit plans on the basis of the identified organisation risks. TeamSchedule This displays the activity of the audit team member or the audit project. TeamMateTEC This is a time recording and reporting tool. TeamMateEWP This is a documentation tool to record the test working papers, including scanning and reporting. TeamCentral A database of every audit finding that can be used for follow up work, tend analysis and pre-audit reviews. Option 3: Magique & Galileo This is an integrated solution that provides the following: Magique This is used by management to record, evaluate and manage risks Galileo This allows the audit team to plan conduct and report their work and provide assurance to management on the risk management framework. Magique includes a risk register and risk evaluation system. There are options for a loss register and a questionnaire module for the completion of control self assessments. It also includes an action tracking system that allows for actions generated in relation Page 19 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
to the risks identified to be followed up. Galileo allows for the preparation of the strategic and annual audit plans using a risk assessment model that can be independent from Magique. It can report upon progress v plan and year end summary reports. Allows scheduling for both audit and admin functions, charting the availability of audit staff and includes timesheet recording as well as reports comparing performance by team, auditor etc. There is a library facility for all standard working papers, which can automatically be allocated to staff. Automatic cross referencing of working papers, electronic review of working papers, up load of evidence and generation of recommendations and final report in WORD/EXCEL. Includes post-audit questionnaires. Option 4: MK Insight This is an audit management system that includes: audit planning, audit scheduling, audit management, performance reporting, electronic working papers, recommendation tracking, reporting, time recording, risk register and assessment, questionnaires and library. This is a.net application that uses webbased technology but can be used when there is no internet connection. Option 5: PAWS (Pentana) This product has elements covering the setting up of audits and entities, prioritisation and scheduling, risks and controls register, plan and perform tests, manage audit process, audit finalisation and reporting, action tracking, questionnaires and reporting features. Option 6: Methodware This comprises of two tools that can be used to plan audits and record audit work: Planning Advisor Pro Audit Advisor Planning Advisor allows audits to be identified through an automated evaluation process using audit criteria, but this criteria can be tailored to reflect the issues that matter most to the Council. Audit files are then generated and progress is tracked and monitored. This has a scheduling Page 20 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
option and non-audit scheduling so audit resources can be matched to the plan requirements. Pro Audit Advisor allows audit findings and recommendations to be managed in a single database. It also allows audit reports to be designed and obtain better from customers. It states that it is the ultimate electronic working paper tool and allows for a paperless audit process. It can create business unit self assessments using WORD and HTML and its integrated e-mail. CONCLUSIONS Option 1 (APACS) does not provide a solution that meets the requirements of a single audit management solution and should be discounted. Options 2 (TeamMate), 3, (Galileo) and 4 (MK Insight) provide solutions that meet the requirements of the Internal Audit function and are being used by other local authorities within Britain. However, not all of the TeamMate modules have been implemented by the current users and for the MK Insight product there is evidence to suggest that the implementation may be problematic. Less is known about Options 4 (PAWS) and 5 (Methodware). Although each appears to meet the audit management requirements there are few if any other local authorities that have had practical use of these products and the product websites do not indicate use in the public sector. Feedback from the users of Galileo is positive but the costs of implementing and maintaining this solution are the most expensive, or perhaps the most accurate. This solution is used by other Scottish local authorities (Highland & Stirling) so local knowledge of the product could be obtained. Further enquiries should be made of the TeamMate, Galileo and MK Insight products through direct discussions with other local authority users and obtaining a demonstration from the product suppliers. This would require input from the Internal Audit Section so that they can measure the effectiveness of the product for their daily use. Page 21 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
Following the completion of the options appraisal the required procurement work will be undertaken in accordance with Standing Orders and Financial Regulations. RESOURCING THE PROJECT: What resources are needed to complete the project? All resources required are internal to the Council and the teams involved in this project, so internal Audit, SDD and CPU. Any requirements for input from the vendor will be included in the contract resulting from the procurement exercise. FUNDING: Funding requested for 2009/10 30,000 Estimate Will this project generate any income through grants / None funding / 3 rd party charges/fees etc Will this project generate any efficiency gains? Yes, in respect of the productivity of the Internal Audit section. PROCUREMENT ARRANGEMENTS: Will there be a requirement for external procurement? There will be a requirement to undertake a procurement exercise that complies with Standing Orders and Financial Regulations. RISKS: What are the key risks within the project (if implemented)? Also highlight the risks of not implementing the The implementation will be straightforward and so any risks will be managed to ensure they do not disrupt the implementation. The greater risk is the continuing inefficiency of the Page 22 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09
project. Outline plan for addressing these Risks Internal Audit section if the solution being sought is not procured and implemented. The involvement of CPU in the procurement and of SDD in the specification and implementation will provide the means for addressing the identified risks. Page 23 of 23 Date issued: 28/5/09