The Scottish Government

Project Name: CLYDE VALLEY LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Current Stage

SRO:Gill Bhatti South Lanarkshire Council (SLC), 01698 455604

Vision

PM: Gerry Farrell, SLC (seconded) 01698 454240

Project Commissioning

Project Initiation

DA Lead

Assets

Design

KM Lead

Construct

Implement

SE Lead Officer

Estimated Project Cost £560,000

Operate

Estimated Start / End: 2007-08 / 2008-9

What is the background to the project and the context in which it was established, what were the issues/drivers/opportunities which led to its inception- why?Background and context:

In the Clyde Valley these employees number 100,384, all requiring appropriate training and development.Local government employees in Scotland make up a significant proportion of the overall workforces (10.0%) delivering vital services to the community.

The Clyde Valley Learning and Development project is about establishing more efficient learning, training and development practices across the eight group members, South Lanarkshire Council, East Renfrewshire Council, Glasgow City Council, North Lanarkshire Council, Renfrewshire Council, East Dunbartonshire Council, Inverclyde Council and West Dunbartonshire Council.

Each of these examples demonstrates a different approach to achieving savings and developing best practice through a shared approach. The proof of concept focuses on the delivery of training and assessment relating to the delivery of SVQs, equality and diversity training and First Aid. The group has identified a proof of concept phase (phase one) followed by a further two phases.

Subsequent phases will look to expand the delivery models into other subject areas which will be identified through discussion, consultation and a high level training needs analysis exercise.

Having established the case for change, the design and delivery of phases two and three are now being developed using the same methodology.Funding is initially to establish the delivery of phase one, including quantifying benefits.

Emerging subject areas are continually being explored and developed, and the project now has eight distinct work streams being implemented or in development as at June 2008.

What are the aims/objectives/benefits & deliverables that the project is seeking to achieve, what improvements will there be as a result of this project - what?Objectives & Benefits -

To establish more efficient training and development practice across eight participating councils, creating a model for shared services which might be replicated on a national or regional basis.

In addition the project will seek to develop standards for delivery through benchmarking and the establishment of best practice.

The project will also provide guidance in successful methodologies for delivering shared services based on the experiences of the group and as a result of the project evaluation.

Phase one addressed the three areas for which business cases have been developed - First Aid, VQs, Diversity training and scoping of benefits for phases two and three.

The project is seeking to achieve the following savings

However the original projections based on the project running for four years suggest the project could potentially realise discounted savings of £867,742 NPV by year four. As grant funding has been awarded for the first year only, further projections of benefits will be dependent on a self sustaining model being developed and maintained. This remains a realistic target for the project to achieve by March 2009. The original projection for the project anticipated that benefits/savings of some £443k would be achieved in year one through the implementation of phase one together with the emerging developments and implementation of phase two.

Improvements / Benefits as a result of this project will be:

Improvements will be delivered through

more efficient and cost effective delivery of training and development common to all member Councils ·

benchmarking performance ·

the development of best practice and improved standards for delivery ·

maximising the opportunities for development and delivery through shared approaches ·

In addition the methodologies used to achieve these improvements will be collated and made available to colleagues throughout Scotland.

Which organisations are involved in delivering the project, what are their roles and responsibilities, who is accountable? Who are the key stakeholders to whom the project is relevant?- who?Stakeholders and governance-

What specific progress has been achieved to date ? -Milestones met/achievements?Progress and Issues-

Have any issues arisen causing delays in the work plan? Is project delivery still on schedule?

Outcome deliverables:

Establishment of First Aid training model, delivery method, monitoring and evaluation Achieved March 2008

Benchmarking of Administration VQ delivery model Achieved March 2008

Establishment of pilots for shared delivery of VQ Commencing August 2008

Development of model to extend e-portfolio use Scheduled for September 2008

Delivery and release of e-learning training for Diversity Achieved December 2007

Delivery of IT consultancy recommendations September 2008

Establishment of phase two work streams June 2008

(Equalities training; Accredited first line supervisor training (ILM); Accredited Management Development; Elected Member development; Social Care training)

Grant agreement issued 7 June (revised), further revised and reissued 11 July 2007 (amended para 12.1)

What is the overall budget for the project and how is this to be released? What is the spend to date, is this as forecast?- how much?Budget-

The overall budget for the project is £560,000. A claim was submitted to the Scottish Government for the full grant entitlement. The claim total was for £560,435.78 which is in line with the forecast budget. The claim itemised expenditure incurred to date of some £122,534.36 (as at 31st October 2007). The remainder of the claim itemised the anticipated uses for the remainder of the grant up to 31st March 2008. The project is now working to utilise the grant over the period to March 2009 in line with the project implementation plan.

What are the main risks in terms of project management, stakeholder engagement and communications, delivery approach and benefits realisation? What can be done to mitigate against these risks?- what if?Risks-

Risks

Impact/

Probability

Actions

Lack of agreement from one or more members of the group

L/H

Also member Councils may opt in/out to specific aspects of the project as defined by need.Protocols developed for decision making through Joint Committee.

Key individuals (influencers) not identified to implement shared services approach

H/L

Seek support from Chief Executives' Forum and through Implementation Group.

Difficulties with start and end times of existing training delivery contacts

L/H

Phased introduction to new models as required Plan start dates in relation to these. Identify all contract conclusion dates.

Conflict of priorities between group and individual Council's priorities

M/M

Seek resolution through Joint Committee, Implementation Group and key stakeholders in individual Councils

Negativity/reluctance to provide information from Council departments

L/H

Project Steering Group working in partnership, engaging with colleagues in relevant departments and setting up sub groups involving stakeholders in each subject area

Non interoperability issues with IT requirements and compatibility with existing software/hardware

H/H

Use funding to engage specialist advice and resolution

Resistance to Clyde Valley's approach from within Councils

M/M

Engage with relevant stakeholders to avert fears and to encourage ownership (e.g. Subject experts, TUs etc)

Comparison of data across Clyde Valley Councils not robust

H/M

Seek advice from key influencers e.g. Directors of Finance via Chief Executives' Forum

Data from councils in business case is inaccurate

H/M

Re-adjust projections on project benefits

Employees do not have appropriate skills to progress with proposed Clyde Valley solutions

M/M

Arrange training needs analysis and appropriate interventions from Implementation Group

Group requirements may change before 2010

L/M

No longer relevant

Poor understanding of case for change/ benefits to partnership

H/H

Development of business case for all aspects of project and publicise to stakeholders

Unforeseen changes in political landscape or structure of local government could have impact on Clyde Valley group

L/H

Monitor developments and respond accordingly

Difficulty in Integration of high volume areas of professional training into the bid

H/H

Engagements with appropriate stakeholders representing each group

Intellectual copyright and ownership of assets

L/H

Group members to agree through signing up to Minute of Agreement

Difficulty in calculating projected savings and benefits year on year

H/M

Governance of project by Joint Committee/Project Steering Group will monitor progress against projected savings targetsSet as key task for implementation sub groups.

Securing the appropriate cash investment /in-kind funding

H/L

The level of investment from each council will be addressed through the Minute of Agreement and will take on board in kind investment through secondment, staff time, use of premises etc.

Partners don't sign up to Minute of Agreement

H/L

Schedules address individual anomalies.Minute of Agreement being drafted and issues discussed with legal representatives.

Impact of staff displacement during implementation

M/H

Dealing with staff displacement is an integral part of the implementation plan and will be managed by the implementation steering group