Email to CCS and NHS-Digital on 14th February 2018

As you are aware Innopsis has brought together a group of suppliers who are signed up to the RM3825 DPS.

Some of these suppliers have commented on the DPS in the past and others have not, but all share concerns with the overall supplier group, so we felt it would be appropriate given the level of concern that we meet as a group and collate the issues.

We have done this and have arrived at 7 main points which we would like to share with you prior to a face to face meeting with the 3825 Group, this is a course of action that they arrived at as a collective.

The points are as follows and some will intersect with the latest Change Control notices, but I am reporting these as they were decided.

Point 1

  • Visibility and acknowledgement of the amended terms agreed with one supplier on 15th December 2017.
  • Including the following points
  • A single master document suite in one place
  • All suppliers to be given review and comment
  • Advice to customers regarding the amended document suite

Point 2

Serious review of the advisory pricing schedule and publication of new guidelines and template pricing schedule.

Point 3

  • Point not addressed in the amended terms is the Termination Assistance – this requirement needs to be reviewed and hopefully changed.
  • “Clause (b) is in our opinion too broad, and that “any activity” presents an unqualifiable and potential unlimited set of requirements. We suggest that Suppliers should be able to set out the assistance options they shall offer – either as part of a service’s definition or as options that Customers may procure separately.
  • This is particularly important because clause 41.5.1 now makes exit management a mandatory part of every service contracted via this vehicle.”

Point 4

  • Service Levels – the incident fix formula does not add up. Needs to be amended.

The following formula relates to calculation of Incident Fix Time Achieved

Service Level achieved % = (TI-FI) x 100

                                                          TI

Where:

TI means the total number of Incidents raised by the Customer during the Service Period for the service instance; and

FI means the total number of Incidents raised by the Customer during the Service Period for the service instance that were not Fixed within the Incident Fix Time.

However this formula “rewards” greater number of incidents occurring that are fixed within time, if an incident has already failed to be fixed in time in that service period as opposed to an incident failing to be fixed in time and no other incidents occurring at all that period (For November Version: 1 failed fixed time and no other incidents is 0% achieved and full 15% service credit, 1 failed fixed time and 9 other incidents fixed within time is 90% achieved and no service penalty. I am sure customer would prefer situation 1 occurred and not situation 2, but calculation contradicts this behaviour)

Point 5

  • Clarity required around the Security levels required for compliance. Why was the CHECK qualification changed to CREST?

Point 6

  • Dropped requirement for VRF to internet, the Group would like clarity on this requirement.

Given the impact that these points have on the suppliers’ desire to bid on RM3825 procurements and the relative importance of this DPS in the overall HSCN project we would ask that the meeting is given high priority and we request some dates within the next two weeks that we can use to put the meeting firmly in the Group diary.

 

%d bloggers like this: