Support Infrastructure‘Creating an agile & empowered, service

oriented support infrastructure’

Draft Blueprint Design v0.5

Project Manager: Debbie GreenfieldProject Champion: Andrew Taylor

Project Board:Project Champion - Andrew TaylorBoard Members - Paul Hartley, Roger Eccleston, Neil Geddes

Campuses•The support infrastructure needs to recognise and support the changes arising from the emergence of the Campuses on the RAL and DL sites.

Scope

This project will initially concentrate on the provision of Estates and IT services across the whole of STFC.

The principles and structures could be applied to other support functions eg. HR and Finance in the future (once the transition to SSC has bedded in.

IT scope includes:

•All corporate and centralised IT activity•All Departmental/Directorate internal IT (e.g. web/scientific computing) where there is a potential to affect other parts of the organisation.

The Support Infrastructure functions should:•support the organisation to provide excellent Science, Technology and Economic Impact• be managed in a safe and sustainable

way (with a view to the long term);•be funded on a common and fair basis (across all STFC sites and departments);•have managerial arrangements and practices designed to enable us to operate at a high level of efficiency and to ensure value for money

Principles and Scope

IT Forums•Resulted in a common view of the issues and problems and an agreement that we all share a common vision to improve IT provision.

•Specific agreement that there is a place for both central and devolved service and we can move forward on that basis.

Estates Forum•The Estates Forum was the first time that providers of Estates services and key customers from RAL, DL and Swindon had come together.

•There were a few surprising areas of complete agreement.

Significant achievements to date

What does it mean for you?

Are you concerned about the IT service?

Blueprint will put in place people, committees and process to provide you with a secure, harmonised and available IT service that is affordable to the organisation.

Do you feel that you are not consulted about IT and Estates decisions which affect you?

Blueprint will provide an open and well-defined decision making process for IT and Estates services. There will be an appropriate committee to listen to your suggestion and a person on that committee who is responsible for representing you.

Do you work in IT?

Blueprint will improve your prospects. Your work will be more targeted and valued. You will have more career development routes.

Would you like a better environment in which to work?

Blueprint will put in place a nominated Director and a cross-site committee to make decisions about Estates priorities.

There will be long-term development plans tied in to the Science drivers.

Support Infrastructure

Part 1: Draft Blueprint for IT

Project Team:Project Manager – Debbie GreenfieldTeam Members – Mark Enderby, CICT and Nick Fielden, FBU IT

Forums

Main Issues Identified:•Overall scope and purpose of governance structure needs to be stated•Terms of reference need refining•A delegation framework is required•CICT’s relationship to STFC and the governance structure needs clarifying•Membership of committees needs to be focussed on roles rather than individuals•Expectations of committee members needs explicit definition•IT project management needs to be integrated•Reporting lines and committee representation needs review to improve decision making capability and minimise lines of communication•Change management need to be formalised•An IT champion on Operations Board is required•A “Head of Profession” is required to ensure IT staff’s career development needs are met wherever they sit in the organisation

• Two IT Forums were held on 7/8 Oct 08 and 25/26 Feb 09

• Included reps from CICT, front-line IT support teams and key customers

Deliverables and Benefits

Anticipated Benefits•A well defined process for making IT decisions

•Effective, efficient and robust IT services well-matched to organisational needs

•Seamless integration of IT support across the organisation

•Efficient use of IT effort and resource

•Highly skilled and well-motivated IT staff

Main Deliverable:

A Governance Structure for IT across all of STFC including:•Committee structure

•Roles and responsibilities

•Requirements for change and project management

Benefits Realisation•The benefits will be realised by implementing the full proposed Governance Structure and applying it to the whole STFC IT provision as defined in the Scope.

•It is vital that buy-in is obtained from STFC senior management. They need to understand that the benefits will only be realised if the whole organisation participates in the process. Once agreement is obtained on the proposed Governance Structure, cabinet responsibility is required to bring all parts of the organisation together.

Guiding principles behind proposed Governance StructureOrganisation:•Don’t make big changes to structure.•Any changes targeted at making structure work effectively.•Not proposed to integrate devolved and central teams formally.•All corporate IT (and departmental IT which has potential to affect other parts of the organisation) must be considered by CICT and/or the governance structure.•The governance structure should encourage a good working relationships between all parties via common vision and goals.

Committees•Proposal should not take into account current post holders and committee members. •Roles should be defined and post holders expected to perform them.•Keep lines of communication short.•Keep committees as small as possible.•Delegate responsibility wherever possible.

Processes•Formal SLAs are not proposed – they are not relevant for a single organisation with common goals. •Change management process should be fit for purpose and add value.

CICT should be responsible for:•operating all corporate (and centralised) services,•development of new corporate services,•providing IT advice,•providing tools to maintain security and compliance

Operations Board (OB)

IT Operations Board (ITOB)

Network Technical Design Authority

(NetTDA)

IT Service Delivery Group (ITSDG)

RAL Network User Group (RALNUG)

Information Asset Owners

Information Security Group (ISG)

Information Management and

Technology Strategy and Oversight

(IMTSOC)

Information Management and Technology Strategymaintain

report

delegate

report

Notes1) IMSOC is responsible for creating and maintaining the Information Management Strategy2) All bodies are governed and informed by the Information Management Strategy3) There should be a free flow of information and advice between all bodies4) Note that the IM Strategy also governs how Information Asset Owners (i.e. the Directors) handle information

STFC Governance Structure for Information Management, Technology and Systems

reportreport report

report

Main changes:•Structure not so deep•New committee IT Operations Board (ITOB) replaces ITMG with different focus•IMTSOC concentrates on strategy•All IMT change requests flow through this structure

ITOB•ITOB is the key committee, responsible for overseeing the day-to-day operation and development of IT services•ITOB must carry out their remit within the IMT Strategy agreed by IMTSOC•This group defines and agrees the business IMT service•Chaired by a Director of Operations Board who acts as the ‘IT Champion’ on OB

Proposed Committee Structure

IMTSOC•Remit is to determine IMT strategy and provide oversight of the governance process•Check the IT governance structure is effective and fit for purpose and change as needed

Change Requests:•For the governance structure to operate effectively, a change management process will be put in place•Aim of the process is to ensure the efficient and prompt handling of all change requests for production IT services in order to minimise risk and impact•ITOB will be responsible for the operation of the change management process•The Governance document contains a description of this process and how it will work

General Principles for all Committees•The Governance document contains a list of general principles for all committees

Projects•All IT projects (with a budget of over £200k), wherever they are initiated, should be monitored by IMTSOC•IMTSOC will maintain a register of these projects and advise on appropriate project structure•All projects should be managed using the STFC recommended PM methodology•Routine maintenance and development work is excluded

Representation•ITOB and IMTSOC should include reps from Communications Group and Finance•Not possible for every department to have a rep on ITOB – will need to ‘pool’ representation similar to current BU level

Other aspects of Governance Structure

How other bits fit inCICTCICT is responsible for:•All corporate and centralised IT services•Providing IT advice•Maintaining corporate IT policies•Providing the tools and environment that allows STFC to comply with its IT security and regulatory requirements•The head of CICT will act as STFC’s “Head of Profession”

IT Operations•CICT has devolved responsibility to maintain the day-to-day operation and seek continuous improvement of corporate and centralised operational IT services. •These powers are delegated to small operational service groups

Departmental IT Service Delivery Teams•Primary role for Departmental teams is to provide front line IT services to their customers.•Departments are free to organise and resource this function as they see fit•It is expected that Departments will continue to pool resource by retaining the existing BU IT Support Teams – this will feed into ITOB representation•Their work needs to be guided by the corporate IT framework

Implementation Plan (IT)

Implement•Go Live on 1 September 2009•All committees to have their first meeting after this date•Bring into the structure all existing projects

Consult on BlueprintDuring April - June consult by email and meetings•First with Forum attendees•Then with other stakeholders.

Obtain Agreement to Final Blueprint•Amend draft Blueprint to take into account comments from consultation•Get signoff from Infrastructure Project Board•Issue Final Blueprint

Inform•During July and August inform all stakeholders and disseminate the Governance Structure•Request representatives for committees•Draft supporting processes (e.g. change request)

Issues to be resolved (IT)

Organisation StructureThe Service Delivery Teams are currently based around Business Units which have now been dissolved. Current proposal is to retain the BU IT Support Teams but this needs to be confirmed.

External bodiesIntegrating STFC’s IT relationships with other bodies to which we provide IT services (e.g. DLS, Campus tenants etc.) requires careful consideration.

UKATCIt is not clear where the UKATC should sit. They currently have an independent IT infrastructure and support organisation but they should be included and represented in the governance structure.

Committee StructureNeed to consult on and finalise the reporting lines and other relationships in the committee structure.

Infrastructure IT

Pre FFtF

• Tension between central IT and depts

• Inability to deliver

Post FFtF

• Devolution and governance gave significant improvement

Merger with PPARC

• Introduced new IT issues

• Highlighted problems with structure

• Clear process for making decisions

• Well-defined responsibilities and lines of communication

• Structure which can self-regulate and improve

• Effective processes for project and change management

• Integration of IT support across the organisation

TO

DA

Y

IT Forums

AgreedCommittee Structure

Draft committee structure

Proposedroles &

responsibilities

Agreedroles &

responsibilities

Common agreement on issues

IT Championon Ops Board

PastWhat we had

PresentWhat we have

Future‘To be’

Support Infrastructure‘Creating an agile & empowered, service

oriented support infrastructure’

Estates - Conceptual DesignDraft version 0.4

6th March workshop bringing people

together

Key issues

• Estates decisions made by the Departments because this is where the money is

• Decision making and governance is a key barrier

• Money for estates always ended up in science

• The 3 yr funding system for estates is not practical

• The existing Oversight Committee is not powerful enough

• Clear process for estates decision making through a new governance structure

• A well defined and consistent approach across all STFC sites

• Longer term planning

• Raised Estate profile

• Better use of Estate and resources

• Centralised electronic data

• Enhanced ability to prepare for successful scientific bids

TO

DA

Y

Key people consulted

with

A new Estates Governance

Structure

A new Asset Management

Plan

Database of bids and

Inventory of space and Equipment

Infrastructure EstatesPast

What we hadPresent

What we haveFuture‘To be’

Workshop 6th March 2009

The following key messages came from the workshop held on 6th March 2009:

Science is the priority

Strategic fit is the critical criterion

Decisions about the estate should not be made in Isolation

The estate needs to help STFC remain agile

Scientists do not want to be ‘estates people’

Cultural problem with trust between Departments and with Estates

Decision making and Governance is a key barrier

Other key issues and comments

Money:

Money always ends up in Science, not the Estate – ‘if we could do the science in a tent we would’

Issues over how the Estate is funded; current 3 yr system is not practical – need 10yr infrastructure plan

The Existing Oversight Committee:

Not powerful enough, needs to be given more power to enforce decisions once made

The wrong things are being discussed. The Committee needs to be involved in the governance structure.

Key Issues

Typical Decisions for Estates

The following decisions are ones that need to be addressed concerning the Estates:•Allocation of Space – who decides who gets what?•Is the estate ‘fit for purpose’ – across all the campuses? •Who decides if buildings need to be refurbished, repaired, replaced or removed?•Who holds decision making power over the development of the Campuses?•Who decides how space is used efficiently – i.e. open plan?•Can space be shared – i.e. generic offices, clean rooms and labs?•How do STFC ensure that regulations are being complied with?•Is home working / video conferencing pro-actively encouraged?•Who decides when the electricity supply is upgraded?•Who decides how much storage each department can have?•Who makes decisions over car parking and other common facilities?•Potential environmental impact of its sites – who would be in control of this?•Who decides how many tenants are on site, especially if there are major space shortages?

Challenges to be Addressed

Responsibility, Accountability, Consulting and InformingThe RACI analysis shows there is not an efficient governance structure in place to deal with key challenges and decisions that are essential for the long-term maintenance and development of the STFC estate. The RACI analysis identified the current issues.

Responsibility currently lies with the Departments because of budget control

Lack of central Accountability needed for some decisions to ensure strategic fit

Lack of Consulting and Informing between departments and with Estates

Therefore STFC needs to:

•Clearly define decision making roles and governance•Centralise Responsibility and Accountability•Improve Consulting and Informing processes

Therefore STFC needs to:

•Clearly define decision making roles and governance•Centralise Responsibility and Accountability•Improve Consulting and Informing processes

Analysis

A new Oversight Committee(with clear terms of reference and decision making powers)

Establish a new post - Director of Estates/Asset Management

Re-configure Head of RAL Operations post(to become responsible for all sites)

A new Asset Management Plan – linked to 10 year finance plan

Central database of large science bids(to identify potential impact on the estate)

Inventory of space and equipment(to encourage more sharing and more efficient bids)

A new administrator post to co-ordinate database and inventory

A new Oversight Committee(with clear terms of reference and decision making powers)

Establish a new post - Director of Estates/Asset Management

Re-configure Head of RAL Operations post(to become responsible for all sites)

A new Asset Management Plan – linked to 10 year finance plan

Central database of large science bids(to identify potential impact on the estate)

Inventory of space and equipment(to encourage more sharing and more efficient bids)

A new administrator post to co-ordinate database and inventory

Recommendations

Anticipated BenefitsClearly defined decision making and governance

A well defined and consistent approach across all sites

Raise profile and provide a clear focus on estate management and infrastructure

Longer-term planning, strategic fit and better link with finance

Better use of the estate and resources

Integrated approach and centralised electronic data

Maintain agility and enhance ability to prepare scientific bids

Benefits RealisationImplementing the full proposed decision making and governance structure and applying it to the whole of STFC

Having an agreed Asset Management Plan with clear financial commitments. Ring fenced money for agreed priorities

Transparency through agreed Policies which are then implemented consistently across the whole of STFC

Establish trust and buy-in from the departments by making decisions in the best interest of STFC

Taking a more medium to long-term perspective

Deliverables and Benefits

Proposed Decision Making and Governance Structure

Operations Board

Director of Estates

The proposed governance

structure places the Operations

Board, the Director of Estates and

the New Oversight Committee in

a 3 – way structure designed to

introduce joined up working,

whilst having responsibility and

accountability for decisions.Policies

Estates’ Manager

RAL Daresbury Swindon Edinburgh

Overview of Recommendations

1. A new Oversight CommitteeThe current committee needs re-energizing

and given clear terms of reference and ‘teeth’.

Membership should be a balance of Estates’ people and the Heads of Business Unit (or equivalent).

It will agree STFC wide policies and ensure they are applied consistently across the whole of STFC.

Agree the Asset Management Plan and monitor its implementation and review progress, update as required.

Ensure all decisions in relation to the estate are made for the long-term benefit of STFC and aligned to the overall strategy and objectives.

Make recommendations on strategic estate issues to the Operations Board.

2. Director of EstatesThis is a new post to ensure that the

overall management of the estate is undertaken by a dedicated asset management professional.

This needs to be at the Director level to ensure decisions are made for the long-term interest of STFC.

The Director will lead on the development of the campuses e.g. Gateway Centres.

They will need the right resources to be able to deliver agreed plans.

They will need to be consulted on all large scientific bids.

Recommendations

3. Estates’ ManagerReconfigure the Head of RAL Operations

post to provide overall management and co-ordination of estate activities and decisions at all STFC sites.

Co-ordinate the implementation of the Asset Management Plan and agreed policies.

Provide an intelligent client role for departments on all estates matters.

Identify emerging themes for consideration by the oversight committee.

Manage central database and inventory.

Ensure compliance with all regulations and statutory requirements.

4. Asset Management PlanIt needs to be in line with overall STFC

strategy.

Proactively address backlog issues and move towards planned preventative maintenance.

Backed up by financial commitments that are ring-fenced.

Take a medium to long-term perspective.

Have clear programmes of work.

Supported by key information such as usage and energy consumption.

Support strategic objectives and ability to win scientific bids.

Recommendations

5. Database of science bidsA database of large science bids to log

the potential impact on the estate.

Database would need to include the probability of each bid being successful in order to assess the potential need for work on the estate.

Simple information to ensure this is not onerous on the bid maker.

Needs a dedicated administrator.

6. InventoryAn inventory of space and equipment is

needed to help the sharing of key resources e.g. Labs and clean rooms.

The second phase would then collect information on key scientific equipment.

Needs a dedicated administrator.

7. AdministratorA new administrator post is needed to

develop the new inventory and database.

Recommendations

The following people who have been consulted on the estate issues and suggested recommendations:

Debbie Greenfield - Head of ISIS Instrumental Division

Paul Hartley - Director of Corporate Services

Roger Eccleston - Head of Technology

Richard Holdaway - Director of Space, Science and Technology

Andrew Taylor - Director of Facility Development and Operations and Director of ISIS

Sean Stewart - Head of RAL Operations

Graham Brookes - Director of Planning

Jane Tirard - Director of Finance

Consulted to Date

There is generally broad consensus to the recommendations. Below is a summary of feedback.

1. A new Oversight Committee• All agree that the current Oversight Committee is not

strong enough and needs more power• Will need to have control of the AMP and be able to

enforce decisions through strategic fit

• Will need to have control of policies

2. Director of Estates / Asset management• Need Director level representation

3. Re-configure Head of RAL Operations post• There is a need for overall co-ordination of all

sites • Need to have Estates people in control of the Estate

4. A New Asset Management Plan• Current one is only a document, needs to be re-

energized and longer-term• Needs to be in line with a financial strategy and

reflect money actually available with agreed programmes of work

• Spread some of the ‘good practice’ in place at Daresbury e.g. colour coded maps etc.

5. Central database of large science bids

• The Estate needs to be informed in the bids process at an early stage

6. Inventory of space and equipment• Needed to improve efficiencies in the use

of space• Potential benefits• Fits with current idea of ‘inventory

warehouse’

7. A new administrator post to co-ordinate database and inventory

• Database and inventory would be a long term goal and a coordinated approach would be essential

Consensus

Possible Issues to be Addressed

1. Oversight Committee• Issues over who would need to sit on the

new Committee

2. Director of Estates / Asset Management

• Not specifically discussed with all consultees

• This is a new post• Will need appropriate resources• Fundamental shift in responsibility away

from the Departments

3. Re-configure Head of RAL Operations post

• Not specifically discussed with all consultees

• Needs to be agreed with existing staff and HR

4. A new asset management plan• Currently do not have an estates 10yr finance

strategy which would be needed for this to be effective

• Need to address the backlog issues and compliance

5. Central database of large science bids• Recommending that the estate is consulted not

just informed• Some concern that this might affect the bids and

reduce the agility of STFC• Needs resources

6. Inventory of Space and Equipment• Potentially pragmatic issues at RAL• Need to agree which items to include

7. A new administrator post to co-ordinate database and inventory

• New post

The following issues may need to be addressed to ensure that the recommendations proposed are as effective as possible: