Programme Management Services
Gyle Square
1 South Gyle Crescent
Edinburgh
EH12 9EB
Telephone [0131 275 6000]
Text Relay 18001 [0131 275 6000]
Email
/

NHS Fife eESS Implementation Options and Recommendations Paper

  1. Summary

Representatives from the NHS National Services Scotland (NSS) Electronic Employee Support System (eESS) Project Team met with the individuals implementing eESS in NHS Fife on 30 October 2014. The purpose of the meeting was to gather information about the current status of NHS Fife’simplementation of eESS and optionsto ensure successful delivery.

This paper outlines NHS Fife’s current status and four options that outline different approaches to complete the Project. Through analysis and comparison of the benefits, risks, issues, timescales, resources and approximate costs of each option, Option 4 has been identified to have the least impact and is therefore the recommended approach for continuing to implement eESS.

Option 4 is to establish a Project Infrastructure, identify dedicated resources and revise theProject Plan to include the bulk upload of data changes using the Continuous Update Spreadsheet (CUS). A full outline of requirements is provided in Section 3. The approach is dependent of NHS Fife liaising with the National Team to identify how the CUS can be used to migrate the most up to date data held on the ePayroll system to eESS. It is suggested that IT scripting processes are used to reduce the amount of manual entry required. NHS NSS can share information about the IT scripting processes they used during their data migration.

There is a risk that whilst liaising with the National Team and NHS NSS it isidentified that the CUS cannot be used as required. Based on NHS NSS’ experiences of using spreadsheetsthat are similar to the CUS during data migration, it is anticipated that this risk is unlikely to occur. Since 30 October 2014, NHS Fife has also completed work to identify a process to update organisation structure positions using the CUS; which support the view that this option is viable.

If the CUS cannot be used as required, it is recommended that NHS Fife implement Option 3; to establish aProject Infrastructure, identify dedicated resources and revise the Project Plan to include new data migration to eESS and management of data changes using the CUS.

  1. Background / Current Status

As a Phase 1 Board, NHS Fife began engaging with the National Team implementing eESS across NHS Scotland in 2011 and was involved in the design and procurement of the eESS system. Data migration began on 8 March 2012 and access to the live environment was provided in July 2012. During that time, business as usual (BAU) changes to data could not be entered into the eESS system and were saved for entry once access to the live environment was provided. To date, NHS Fife only utilise the ER module of eESS because employee data is not up to date. NHS Fife continue to manage employee data through BAU processes that ensure ePayroll information is kept up to date and extracted to an Access Database to run required reports.

A team of HR Assistants were allocated to manually update eESS with the data changes until September 2013 when they were re-allocated to other pieces of work. NHS Fife currently have a backlog of approximately 7,000 data changes with approximately 800 new changes being submitted to HR each month. Since March 2012, there has been some re-structuring in NHS Fife which will require additional changes to be made to the organisational structure in eESS; approximately 2,500 changes. The HR Assistants were re-allocated at this time because the National Team had been developing a Continuous Update Spreadsheet (CUS) that could be used to bulk upload the changes into the system. The spreadsheet was not provided on time and theNHS Fife team has been unable to use the spreadsheet for bulk uploads. As a result, the NHS Fife team has continued to enter data changes manually into the eESS system when possible; however, the backlog continues to grow due to resource constraints.

The governance structure for implementing eESS in NHS Fife has been disbanded. A Project Board was in place until April 2013 when the Board signed off as accepting the eESS system from the National Team. It was agreed at that time that since the system was signed off; the Project Board was no longer required.

There are currently five individuals involved in the implementation of eESSfocusing on management of data, the recruitment module, the training module and developing eESS systemtraining. These individuals have been allocated to implement eESS in addition to the HR roles that they fulfil. The team explained that it was difficult to progress work on implementing the system modules and training until timelines for updating the system with employee data are identified. It is often the case thatBusiness as Usual (BAU) activities to be delivered as part of HR roles are prioritised over eESS activities.

  1. Options

The group that met on 30 October 2014 identified the followingfour options for implementing eESS in NHS Fife.

Option 1: Do nothing and continue to implement eESS using current resources and Project Plan.

Option 2:Establish Project Infrastructure, identify dedicated resources and continue to implement eESS with the current Project Plan;

  • Re-establish a Project Boardincluding individuals with authority to make decisions about budget, resources, work allocation and business as usual activities,
  • Appoint a Senior Responsible Owner that is accountable for ensuring the objectives, deliverables and benefits of the Project are achieved,
  • Confirm escalation process to highlight risks and issues that may impact project delivery so solutions can be identified and put in place,
  • Identify a project budget,
  • Review resource allocation and identify dedicated resources for the Project and ensure any new staff are appropriately trained,
  • Track progress by keeping the Project Plan up to date and agreeing the frequency of reporting.

Option 3:Establish Project Infrastructure, identify dedicated resources and revise theProject Plan to include new data migration to eESS and management of data changes using CUS;

  • Establish Project Infrastructure as outlined in option 2,
  • Remove all data currently in the eESS system and perform a new data migration based on information held in the ePayroll system,
  • Explore the options to reduce the amount of time required to complete the data migration process,
  • Seek support from the National Team to complete a new data migration which will require National Team and Atos Origin Alliance (AOA) resources,
  • Gain better understanding of how to use the CUS to avoid manual entry of data changes and identify resources required; IT scripting processes should be considered. Liaise with NHS NSS to understand how IT scripting processes were used during their data migration,
  • Scope to identify tasks to be completed to ensure data in eESS is up to date and to implement eESS end to end to all staff, the timescales for tasks to be completed and resources required. Develop a Project Plan including all of this information.

Option 4:Establish Project Infrastructure, identify dedicated resources and revise theProject Plan to include bulk upload of data changes using the CUS;

  • Establish Project Infrastructure as outlined in option 2,
  • Liaise with the National Team and identify how the CUS can be used to migrate the most up to date data held on the ePayroll system to eESS; IT scripting processes should be considered. Liaise with NHS NSS to understand how IT scripting processes were used during their data migration,
  • Identify whether records held in SSTS are sufficient to provide a history of absence data,
  • Liaise with the National Team to identify the best way to migrate the most up to date absence data from SSTS interface. Liaise with NHS NSS to understand how they migrated data from SSTS,
  • Liaise with the National Team to identify how the organisational structure, including positions, can be updated quickly into eESS and ensure these changes are made before the bulk upload (e.g. explore whether organisational structure changes can be bulk uploaded first),
  • Bulk upload the most up to date information held in ePayroll into eESS,
  • Analyse backlog of data changes to identify critical changes that would not be included in the bulk upload and manually enter these into eESS (e.g. secondments, terminations),
  • Store records of all data changes in case the information needs to be accessed in the future,
  • Scope to identify tasks to be completed to ensure the data in eESS is up to date and to implement eESS end to end to all staff, the timescales for tasks to be completed and resources required. Develop a Project Plan including all of this information.
  1. Analysis of Options

The table on page 4 provides an analysis of the benefits, risks, issues, timescales, resources and approximate costs for each option. The impact of each option has been determined through the comparison of this information.

*Approximate costs for resources have been based on 2014/15 Agenda for Change Pay Bands, using the initial Pay Points for each Pay Band as a guide. Costs have been prorated where required. The relevant initial Pay Points for Pay Bands have been outlined below, further information is provided in Appendix 1: NHS Circular: PCS(AFC)2014/1.

AfC Pay Band / Initial Pay Point / Costs Rounded Up To
Band 3 / £16,660 / £16,700
Band 5 / £21,602 / £21,600
Band 7 / £31,072 / £31,100

The required Project Team resource has been estimated as 1 x Band 7 to manage the implementation of eESS and the workload of 3 x Band 5 staff. The team of 4 would be dedicated resources responsible for:

  • Managing data in eESS,
  • Providing local system administration for eESS,
  • Completing all required tasks to roll-out the system to all staff,
  • Revising NHS Fife business process to fit with eESS functionality,
  • Developing eESS system training,
  • Communicating with staff throughout the project.

Options 2, 3 and 4 recommend identifying dedicated resources for the Project Team. There is a risk of project delays if resources are not dedicated to the eESS Project and must manage competing work demands.

Version: v0.9 (3 December 2014)Page: 1 of 4

Author: Danielle Lohman & Claire Muldoon

Options / Benefits / Risks / Issues / Timescales / Resources / Approx Costs* / Impact
Opt 1:
Do Nothing / No benefits /
  • There is an issue that with current resources, uploading data changes to eESS is unmanageable and the backlog will continue to grow
  • There is a risk that the Scottish Government mandate to implement the eESS system will not be achieved
  • There is an issue that staff morale is low due to unmanageable workload
/
  • Undetermined because current resources are unable to complete the workload that continue to increase
= Undetermined / 24 months+ / No additional resources / No additional costs /
  • No identified timescale
  • No benefits, high risk
High Impact
Opt 2:
Project Infrastructure /
  • Improved visibility of project progress and management of budget and resources
  • Achievable timescale
/
  • There is a risk that NHS Fife’s reputation is damaged and staff disengage with the eESS due to lengthy timescales for project completion
  • There is a risk that knowledge is lost due to loss of staff
/
  • 12 months - data changes
  • 12 months - implement eESS to all staff
= 24 months / Data changes;
1 x Band 5, 12 months
4 x Band 3, 12 months
Project Team:
1 x Band 7, 24 months
3 x Band 5, 24 months / Data changes:
= £21,600
= £64,800
Recruit / backfill:= £62,200
= £129,600
Total £280k /
  • Longest timescales, highest costs
  • Moderate benefits, high risk
High Impact
Opt 3:
Project Infrastructure + New Data Migration /
  • Improved visibility of project progress and management of budget and resources
  • Achievable timescale
  • Reduced workload to update data in eESS
/
  • Risk that staff morale is negatively impacted due to work completed to date being removed from eESS to re-start data migration
  • There is a risk that knowledge is lost due to loss of staff
  • There is a risk that the NPT is not available to support this option due to conflicting priorities to implement eESS nationally
  • There is a risk that AOA is unavailable
/
  • 5 months - data migration
  • 1 month - upload CUS updates
  • 18 months - Project Team implement eESS to all staff
= 18 months / Management of data changes:
1 x Band 5, 6 months
2 x Band 3, 6 months
Project Team:
1 x Band 7, 18 months
3 x Band 5, 18 months / Pro rata data changes:
= £10,800
= £16,700
Recruit / backfill: = £46,650
= £97,200
AOA cost £43,000
Total £214k /
  • Shortest timescales, high cost
  • High benefits, high risk
High Impact
Opt 4:
Project Infrastructure + Bulk Upload with CUS /
  • Improved visibility of project progress and management of budget and resources
  • Achievable timescale
  • Reduced workload to update data in eESS
/
  • There is a risk that the CUS cannot be used as required
/
  • 6 months - data changes
  • 12 months - implement eESS to all staff
= 18 months / Management of data changes:
1 x Band 5, 6 months
1 x Band 3, 6 months
Project Team
1 x Band 7, 18 months
3 x Band 5, 18 months / Data change:
= £10,800
= £8,350
Recruit / backfill:
= £46,650
= £97,200
Total: £163k /
  • Shortest timescales, lowest cost
  • High benefits, moderate risk
Moderate Impact

Version: v0.9 (3 December 2014)Page: 1 of 4

Author: Danielle Lohman & Claire Muldoon