Paper 6

Report to: SERVICE TRANSFORMATION COMMITTEE

Date: 19 MAY 2016

Report By: DCO CLARK

Subject: SERVICE TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME CLOSING REPORTS

1 PURPOSE

1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide the Service Transformation Committee (STC)

with an overview of the projects that are applying for closure from the reporting

period 18th January to 9th April 2016 with a view to determining whether this is the

appropriate course of action.

2 RECOMMENDATIONS

2.1 The STC is asked to consider the four projects that were approved for closure with a

focus on the following areas:

The STC are content that the projects have sufficiently delivered to allow

them to close.

The project benefits have been effectively measured and assessed by the

programme board.

3 KEY POINTS

3.1 The closing reports (appendix A) are attached with a brief summary of their

performance. Evidence has been gathered to support the assessment and is

available at:

https://firescotland.sharepoint.com/sites/PB/Closing%20Reports/Forms/AllItems.aspx?Root

Folder=%2Fsites%2FPB%2FClosing%20Reports%2FDRAFT%20Closing%20folders&FolderCTID

=0x0120004198BF02B602514CA045B8C7508D3ABA&View=%7BB2BFC94F%2D460B%2D4524

%2DB83C%2D59670BC99645%7D

3.2 SA1.1.5 Prevention and Protection Strategic Assessment was focused on

supporting delivery against the strategic aim of reducing the risk to our staff and

communities. The project was required to produce against ten areas and has

provided evidence of delivery against all ten. The project delivered to time and had

no transitional funding associated with it. The project has also supported through its

outputs the SA4.3.1.2 Strategic Approach to National Risk Reduction project.

3.3 SA2.1.8 New Watch Duty System has completed phase one, which required the

research and analysis of potential whole-time duty systems that could be deployed

on a pan Scotland basis. This work has now been completed and principles for a new

duty system have been developed. A paper was approved by the Strategic

Leadership Team in March. Phase two, implementation will now commence with a

view to going live in April 2017. The dossier for this is in development and will be

included in the new SFRS programme office.

3.4 SA4.1.1 HR Policies project was originally planned to close in March 2014 and is

therefore 2 years late in coming forward for closure. However, the benefits delivered

from these policies are being incrementally realised as they are issued. The project’s

reason for being delayed is primarily due to three factors:

Underestimation of the work required.

Additional policies being added to the scope.

The requirement for extensive consultation.

3.5 The project was required to deliver 26 key polices. 22 of these are live and the

remaining four will be completed by June. Tracking of the remaining four policies to

ensure full project delivery will be undertaken by the programme office.

3.6 SA4.2.5 Operational Training and Safe Working Practices project was originally

due to be completed in September 2014. The delay has been through two factors:

loss of project manager to another fire and rescue service and enhancement of the

project scope to include specialist skills. The project was required to deliver a suite of

harmonised core and specialist skills training standards. The list of these can be seen

in the closing report.

4 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

4.1 The financial implications identified within the production of this report are set out

within each attached closing project report.

5 EMPLOYEE IMPLICATIONS

5.1 There are no employee implications directly identified with this report.

Prepared by Frank Clayton Service Transformation Programme Manager 9 May 2016

Appendix A

Service Transformation Programme

Closing Project Report

Project: SA 1.1.5 Prevention and Protection (P&P) Strategic

Assessment Support

Project Start Date: 21 August 2014

Project End Date: 31 March 2016

Project Manager AM Martin Millar

Project Manager

contact number

07770 823912

Date 25/ March 2016

Please detail to what extent has the project delivered to Time, Cost and Quality

Deliver to time

All outputs for the project have been completed within the timescales outlined in the

Project Dossier.

Deliver to cost

All project’s outputs were met from existing P&P Directorate budgets.

The cashable element, supported by transitional funding to the P&P Management

Information System (MIS) (Project SA1.1.4), is complete.

Deliver to quality

The P&P Directorate Management Team meetings and the Directorate Action Plan

monitored quality of and delivery timescales of productions (outputs) specified within

this project. In addition the various Policies/Procedures and Framework materials

have been subject to scrutiny by Senior Management and SFRS Board as required.

Please detail the project benefits and the performance measure that will be utilised to confirm to what extent they have been delivered.

Benefit

Cashable None

Non cashable Consistent means, via CSE (CSET) and FSE (PPED), to facilitate

accurate recording, reporting and analysis of P&P activities for

SFRS. Current KPI performance measures drawn from CSET and

PPED for FRS Framework reporting.

Consistent “frameworks” for engagement with particular vulnerable

demographics e.g. Older Persons, Young People and those

currently being identified as at risk by BSCP research. Qualitative

information provided on a regular basis to inform Quarterly

Performance Reports and Thematic Action Plan reports in support

of quantitative data trends provided.

UFAS policy and procedure implementation to support future

service demand reductions. Recommendations emanating from the

BRE, HMI and SFRS (internal) reports will inform future UFAS

targets (in development) which will be monitored within future Fire

Framework KPI’s.

Please detail any realised disbenefits or unintended negative consequences.

Disbenefit

Cashable None

Non cashable None

Interdependencies with other projects

Project Interdependency Impact

SFRS Road safety

Framework

Comprehensively linked to

the Mid Term Review of

Scotland’s Road Safety

Framework to 2020,

Completed March 2016.

All partner agencies

involved in providing

improved road safety

measures will work to a

consistent set of priority

areas, agreed outcomes

and performance

indicators.

SFRS Water Safety

Framework

Water Safety Scotland Group

(SFRS partner in this forum)

and future strategy to

appreciate all water safety

resources, future disposition

and deployment.

All partner agencies

involved in providing

improved water safety

measures currently

developing a Water

Safety Strategy for

Scotland.

Building Safer

Communities (BSCP) –

Phase 2

Strategic Assessment of

those at risk of harm

completed, identifying major

causes of “unintentional

harm”. Currently being

refined to provide guidance

and direction for national

priorities.

Future engagement of

SFRS via BSCP 2 with

public, private and third

sector bodies on a

holistic approach to

improved wellbeing of

vulnerable individuals.

Lessons identified

Lesson

Potential duplication of effort avoided by appreciating wider national “Community

Safety” agenda’s around Unintentional Harm, Road and Water Safety and SFRS

contributing as an effective partner within national projects.

Outstanding Project Risks (please highlight the position with any outstanding risks associated with your project

Concern Mitigation Probability Impact

None

Future projects (please highlight any potential future projects which need to be considered by the Service Transformation Programme Manager)

Title Intended product/benefit

Performance Measure (please confirm the performance indicators and method of data gathering to be used to measure the success of the project)

Performance indicator Method

APPENDIX

1. Completion of the Prevention and Protection Management Information System, so that

it captures Fire Investigation (FC evidenced) as well as Community Safety Engagement

and Fire Safety Enforcement intelligence;

2. Review of Local Senior Officer Guidance, thereby ensuring that it captures all

relevant Prevention and Protection aspects of the role;

This has been completed and there is now a central area containing guidance documents

to provide LSO’s with relevant P+P subject matters. http://sfrs.verseone.com/cse-

guidance-notes

3. The development of improved business intelligence feeds that will inform the

SANRR and the production of an SFRS Older Persons Framework;

Paper to SLT in Jan, Board Engagement Committee (Dec 2015)

Draft received

Ageing-Safely-Living-Well-Framework-2016.pdf

due on Intranet near future.

4. The development of improved business intelligence feeds that will inform the

SANRR and the production of an SFRS Youth Engagement Framework;

Paper to SLT in Jan, Board Engagement Committee (Dec 2015)

Draft received

Youth-Engagement-Framework-2016-19.pdf

due on Intranet near future.

5. The development of improved business intelligence feeds that will inform the

SANRR and the production of an SFRS Road Safety Framework;

http://www.transport.gov.scot/system/files/TS-%20Road%20Safety%20Framework%20-

%20mid%20term%20review%20-%20March%202016.pdf

6. The development of improved business intelligence feeds that will inform the

SANRR and the production of an SFRS Water Safety Framework;

WSS Terms of Reference.doc

7. Coordination of the Building Safer Communities Programme, Phase 2: Reducing

Unintentional Harm;

DRAFT (Private & Confidential) – PSCP Strategic Assessment

8. The development of improved business intelligence feeds that will inform the

SANRR and the production of SFRS public safety campaigns;

Briefing Paper - Public Campaigns 2015 16 v1 MINISTER.docx

9. The development of a means to report in a timely manner on emerging risk

information to help shape national, regional and local initiatives and interventions;

MoU-between-SFRS-and-LABSS.pdf

MoU-between-SFRS-and-LABSS 2.pdf

10. Support the implementation of the SFRS Unwanted Fire Alarm Signal Policy and

Procedure.

Service Transformation Programme

Closing Project Report

Project: SA2.1.8 New Watch Duty System- Design Phase.

Project Start Date: 4th June 2015

Project End Date: March 2016

Project Manager Area Manager Jim McNeil

Project Manager

contact number

07890 265 377

Date 1st April 2016

Please detail to what extent has the project delivered to Time, Cost and Quality

Deliver to time

The project has completed its design phase in line with the milestones originally

agreed with DACO Miller and established with the initial STC Project Dossier.

Deliver to cost

The Duty System will now move onto an implementation phase. This will see a

significant number of interdependency work-streams that need to fully align to ensure

the duty system is fully in place for 2017

Deliver to quality

The design phase of this project will allow the SLT to have a common flexible

workforce that can be scaled up and down to meet future demands and fiscal

challenges. Paper agreed in principle at SLT 16th March

Please detail the project benefits and the performance measure that will be utilised to confirm to what extent they have been delivered.

Benefit

Cashable The duty system will allow future crewing models to be fully applied

realising significant salary costs.

Non cashable The SFRS will have a modern common duty system that will allow

staff movement across the SDA’s while maintaining appliance

availability.

Please detail any realised disbenefits or unintended negative consequences.

Dis-benefit

Cashable

The design phase of the project has no negative

outcomes at this stage.

Non cashable

Interdependencies with other projects Project Interdependency Impact

Emergency Cover

Review

Crewing and Station profiling The duty project will be able to

flex around any outcomes from

this project.

Lessons identified

Lesson

Having early engagement with the FBU at User Group Level was of benefit.

Ensuring the user group was made up of key stakeholder that work and manage the

duty systems in place across the SFRS.

Outstanding Project Risks (please highlight the position with any outstanding risks

associated with your project

Concern Mitigation Probability Impact

Recruitment and Retention-

Workforce Planning

Discussions with POD

Colleagues that will be

ongoing to support the 3

new Resource Based

Crewing Models.

Low level

Low

level

Future projects (please highlight any potential future projects which need to be considered by the Service Transformation Programme Manager)

Title Intended product/benefit

Implementation Plan for the

new duty system to go live

in 2017.

A small team of dedicated managers will work towards

the full implementation of the duty system across the 3

SDAs’. This will ensure the consultation and

engagement with Rep bodies and users are fully

embedded within the roll out of the new duty system.

Performance Measure (please confirm the performance indicators and method of data gathering to be used to measure the success of the project)

Performance indictor Method

Service Transformation Programme

Closing Project Report

Project: SA 4.2.5 Operational Training and Safe Working Practices

Project

Project Start Date: 1 August 2013

Project End Date: 14 March 2016

Project Manager D. Lockhart

Project Manager

contact number

07768556211

Date 18 March 2016

Please detail to what extent has the project delivered to Time, Cost and Quality

Deliver to time

Original project closing date was September 2104. This was changed due to

resources not being available to deliver (original project manager left the SFRS)with

a revised delivery date of 31/3/16.

Deliver to cost

No transitional funding allocated to this project. All costs associated with this project

were managed within existing directorate budgets.

Deliver to quality

Delivered a suite of harmonised core and specialist skills training standards for:

Driver and Emergency Response Training,

Breathing Apparatus (inc Tac Vent & Compartment Fire Behaviour Training),

Water Rescue and Flood Response,

Rope Rescue and Safe Working at Height,

Extrication – RTC,

Command and Control,

Hazardous Material Response (incl DIM and Mass Decontamination),

Trauma Care,

Marine Firefighting,

Large Animal Rescue,

Urban Search and Rescue and

Heavy Rescue.

Implementation of Core skills competency framework in April 16 following completion

of train the trainer sessions in March16.

Produced common training policies and documents

Please detail the project benefits and the performance measure that will be utilised to confirm to what extent they have been delivered.

Benefit

Cashable No direct cashable benefits come from this project.

Non cashable Harmonised standard for safety critical core and specialist skills

training across the Service maintaining operational competence to a

determined standard.

Equitable and proportionate training across all duty systems with

reduced duplication and standardised frequency and delivery of

core and specialist skills training

Please detail any realised disbenefits or unintended negative consequences.

Disbenefit

Cashable None

Non cashable None

Interdependencies with other projects

Project Interdependency Impact

Specialist Resources

Ph2

Establishment of skill

requirements and distribution

across SFRS

Determine service training &

TED resource requirements

and implications

Lessons identified

Lesson

Planning of resource requirements to delivery project deliverable would benefit from

earlier identification and acquisition of appropriate staff.

Outstanding Project Risks (please highlight the position with any outstanding risks

associated with your project

Concern Mitigation Probability Impact

Staff resources to finalise

development of element strands

within Driving, Flood and water

rescue, Rope rescue / SWAH,

Command & Control, Marine

Firefighting and USAR training

standards

Prioritise work streams

with a timetable of

work. Set realistic

timescales

3 2

Staff resources to ensure

development and delivery of

training packages

Prioritise work streams

with a timetable of

work. Set realistic

timescales

3 2

Future projects (please highlight any potential future projects which need to be considered by the Service Transformation Programme Manager)

Title Intended product/benefit

Full implementation of standards TED to resource requirements of both

standards and the SFRS

Performance Measure (please confirm the performance indicators and method of data gathering to be used to measure the success of the project)

Performance indictor Method

Creation of SFRS Training Standards for

all core and specialist skills, which

incorporate the Outputs of this project

Delivery as detailed in Quality section

Following the identification of

percentages of skills required across the

Service, by the Response and Resilience

directorate, meeting these percentages

and maintaining competence

To be assessed June 2017 by R&R and

TED as detailed in Specialist Equipment

Review Training Requirements

Service Transformation Programme

Closing Project Report

Project: SA4.1.1 Title: POD Policies and Procedures (HROD)

Project Start Date: 01/04/2013

Project End Date: 31/03/2016

Project Manager Fiona McOmish

Project Manager

contact number

01698 402408/07785 317863

Date 31/03/2016

Please detail to what extent has the project delivered to Time, Cost and Quality

Deliver to time

Project timescales have been revised at various stages of the project, latterly

including a 12-month extension to March 2016. The project has exceeded the

planned number of harmonised policies - 26 core HROD policies have been

harmonised and implemented (see attached Appendix which outlines each policy that

has been harmonised).

There are still 5 policies in the final stages of delivery. These are listed below and will

be followed up by the programme office to confirm delivery: All should be completed

by end of June.

1. Capability policy 2. Maternity, paternity, adoption and parental leave (delivered May 16) 3. Special leave 4. Travel and subsistence 5. Pay protection

Deliver to cost

There was no cost attached to the project at the outset. Where there have been cost

implications, these have been explicit in each policy where relevant and applicable.

Deliver to quality

Each policy took on average 6 months from initial draft to implementation stage and

was borne out of legacy arrangements, benchmarking, legal obligations, and best

practice. The consultation and governance arrangements were consistent for each

policy and the level of scrutiny that each policy underwent was intense. The high

level of quality has been demonstrated by the fact that all policies have been created

and implemented in partnership with trade unions and stakeholders within the SFRS

with no 'failures to agree', impasse reached or policies imposed. In addition, the

SFRS has clearly established consistent policies to deal with key issues relating to

the employment of all staff.

The number of requests for changes to policies as a result of the 24-month policy

review cycle have been almost negligible - this demonstrates a high level of quality

for each policy at the outset. Equality Impact Assessments support each policy, and

a suite of handbooks, FAQs, procedures, guidance materials have also been

generated to accompany certain policies. Familiarisation periods have also been

factored in for certain policies that have large training implications.

Please detail the project benefits and the performance measure that will be utilised to confirm to what extent they have been delivered.

Benefit

Cashable - Full cost analyses were carried out where the policy had a

financial impact. E.g. Travel and subsistence policy; Maternity,

paternity, adoption and parental leave policy; pay protection for

displaced staff. SLT/Staff Governance Committee/Board reports

provide further detail in this regard. It is difficult to say whether

these harmonised policies will produce any cashable savings in the

short to medium term (1-3 years) as they will be dependent on

numbers and the future uptake of each policy which is unplanned.

HROD Performance Reporting may enable HROD to determine

cashable benefits in terms of future savings (e.g. reductions in

absence will impact on the cost of absence).

- It is proposed that HROD establish a Total Quality Management

system in order to demonstrate efficiencies and decrease errors

through the harmonised policies being in place.

Non cashable The rationalisation of eight versions into one set of simplified POD policies and procedures which are robust, compliant and fair. Policies with legal obligations follow ACAS guidelines as a minimum requirement where applicable.

POD policies and procedures which are easy to access, sensible and practicable. All policies are located on the intranet.

POD policies and procedures, guidance documents, document libraries and administration processes that are being applied consistently, yet flexibly, across the SFRS.

Consistency of employment practice across the new SFRS

Strengthened partnership working - positive employee relations in place throughout the harmonisation of all policies. All policies were created in partnership with trade unions and internal stakeholders.

Better performance reporting opportunities, which allow HROD to monitor and ultimately demonstrate reductions in absence, grievance and disciplines, and to what extent the policies have impacted on this.

Please detail any realised disbenefits or unintended negative consequences.

Disbenefit

Cashable None identified

Non cashable Constantly evolving employment legislation and case law has

resulted in changes being required, sometimes at short notice,

to policies before their review date. However, consensus has

always been reached with trade unions given the productive

employee relations environment.

Interdependencies with other projects

Project Interdependency Impact

Pay and Reward Some HROD Policies have

been borne out of pay and

reward issues.

None - HROD policies

will feature on a new

forward plan and become

'business as usual'

Lessons identified

Lesson

The original approach to bring 'principles' papers to SLT prior to first draft policies

being created caused unnecessary delay and was a protracted process prior to

consultation. Latterly, the process was streamlined to omit principles papers and

proceed straight to first draft.

Whilst the SLT's input at the initial stage was important in terms of them setting the

direction for each core HROD policy, it sometimes encouraged debate on detail

before consultation had even started. Papers became clearer over time about the

requirements. In addition, more items were being passed to the SMT instead of being

considered by the SLT.

If consultation feedback drew out any issues that needed to be escalated, it was

sometimes difficult to bring it back to the required group in a timeous manner (ie. the

governance arrangements follow rigid dates and did not allow for much flexibility in

progressing matters outwith the set forums). The availability of diary plans for all

groups and committees has assisted this process.

The level of interest for some policies from the Scottish Government wasn't

particularly well established early in the project, however the sponsorship unit is now

well established and this process is more streamlined.

Outstanding Project Risks (please highlight the position with any outstanding risks associated with your project

Concern Mitigation Probability Impact

Policy compliance due to constantly

evolving employment legislation

and case law surrounding POD

policies and terms and conditions of

employment.

Project Manager will

continue to ensure this

is built into forward

planning in order to

mitigate the risk.

3 2

Future projects (please highlight any potential future projects which need to be considered by the Service Transformation Programme Manager)

Title Intended product/benefit

n/a n/a

Performance Measure (please confirm the performance indicators and method of data gathering to be used to measure the success of the project)

Performance indictor Method

Number of policies completed Quarterly POD Performance Report

APPENDIX A

Deliverables Delivery date Comment

Voluntary Severance/Early Retirement

Policy and Procedure

October 2013 In place (and since revised)

Relocation August 2013 In place

Consultation and Negotiation Procedure April 2013 In place

Redeployment due to Organisational

Change Policy & Procedure

December 2013 In place (Since revised to

Redeployment policy March 2016)

Transfer and Matching Scheme December 2012 In place

Flexible working policy June 2014 In place

Secondments policy January 2014 In place

Employment & criminal conviction policy January 2014 In place

Attendance during adverse weather and

disruptive conditions policy

January 2014 In place

Reservist policy January 2014 In place

Death in Service July 2014 In place

Recruitment and Selection & Handbook February 2015 In place

Whistleblowing policy February 2015 In place

Dignity and Integrity at Work Handbook April 2015 In place

Time off for Trade Union Duties March 2015 In place

Capability Policy

SLT paper only at this time

April 2016 SGC noted March, SLT approval

due April for 1 June implementation

Managing Attendance August 2015 In place

Maternity, paternity, adoption and parental

leave

March 2015 In place

Travel and subsistence April 2016 SGC noted March, SLT approval

due April for 1 June implementation

Special Leave policy

(Annual Leave being dealt with in line with

the Pay and Rewards Project)

SLT paper only at this time

Now just special

leave Expected

May 2016

Draft to SLT 20/1/16. Out for

consultation during April

Pay Protection for displaced staff Policy

SLT paper only at this time

April 2016 SGC noted March, SLT approval

due April for 1 May implementation

Code of Conduct March 2015 In place

Appraisal Policy and Procedure March 2016 In place

Discretionary Pensions Policy (LGPS) August 2015 In place

Equal Pay Report In place (published every 2 years)

Working Together Framework

In place