5:00pm to 5:25pm
Minutes:
The Transformation Programme Manager and the Customers, Commissioning and Change Manager attended to provide Members with an update on the Programme Management Office (PMO).
The Transformation Programme Manager explained that the PMO had been developed as a mechanism to track projects through improved transparency of project management. The PMO provided visibility of all live projects which would aid decision making and resource allocation. This would be achieved through the Gateway process, monthly progress reports and dashboard summaries of portfolio progress.
The stages of the Gateway process were explained to Members.
· Gateway zero – the project justification stage where ideas would be presented to the Gateway board.
· Gateway one – the stage where a full business case would be developed and then taken to Cabinet for approval.
· Gateway two – the project implementation stage which would assess outcomes of live projects.
· Gateway three – the formal project closure stage which would involve assessment of benefits and whether these had been realised. The review process would also be set.
The Gateway board enabled proposed projects to be assessed before resource commitment, a review of ICT project days provision and an understanding of the budget sources available to fund project development. The board consisted of officers from various departments which included: finance, human resources, business transformation, client, Arvato and Kier.
There were eight programmes currently in place in the PMO:-
· Great Place Great Service;
· Housing;
· Commercialisation;
· Capital programme;
· Devolution;
· Regeneration;
· Budget savings;
· Service specific projects.
The status of each project would be monitored through a RAG rated system on a monthly basis.
A summary was reported to the Corporate Management Team and the Finance and Performance Board each month. The monthly PMO reporting process provided an overview of key elements for all live projects. These elements included: budgets, risk, objects, resources and timescales. Members were informed that the monthly position statement had been designed to draw attention to key areas of need and enabled senior management to make strategic decisions on where to focus resources to ensure corporate priorities were met.
The Transformation Programme Manager outlined the challenges of the introduction of the PMO process. Members were advised that it could take up to three years to embed a PMO process as the embedding of the process required discipline from managers to comply with monthly reporting. Officers needed to be reassured that these reports were reviewed and utilised in strategic planning. Where monthly reports were not provided the reasons why needed to be understood and addressed.
Members enquired who held overall responsibility for reviewing projects and it was explained that this was the Customers, Commissioning and Change Manager. It was also asked how information regarding project progress was to be shared with Members. This information was shared with the Leader and Deputy Leader via the Finance and Performance Board along with the Cabinet Member for Business Transformation who was reported to on a regular basis. Members enquired whether this information could be shared more widely to Members. Members enquired about action plans for struggling projects and were advised that projects’ managers often provided an action plan with the report which revealed issues. If this action plan was insufficient and re-prioritisation was required then this would be handled at the Finance and Performance Board.
Members thanked the Transformation Programme Manager and the Customers, Commissioning and Change Manager for providing the update and answering their questions.
RESOLVED-
1. That the update be noted.
2. That an update on the Programme Management Office be brought to the meeting of the Forum on 13 March, 2018.