Unpeeling the Fluff - Layer by Layer - Part 4a
£30 Million to Accenture Ltd for “Digital Test Service Phase 3”
We have received answers from DHSC to the fourth of our inquiries.
We asked:
Dear Department of Health and Social Care, in July 2022 you awarded a contract called Digital Test Service Phase 3 to Accenture LTD. The contract was for Core Services (Core):
. Core exposes the core services that store subject (citizens) and test data, such as when and where a test was conducted. Providing this data to downstream systems to match test results for further distribution to GPs, PHE, and subsequent Authority systems.
• External Data Services (EDS): Integrates various external systems to facilitate the flow of data out of and into the core testing platform. It also provides a messaging services interface and Management Information feeds.
• Digital Programme Tools (DPT): A set of applications used in testing sites to manage the testing process and the handling of samples to/from labs. It also provides functionality to tag and track samples through the test-to-result journey.
Could you please summarise for me the deliverables accrued and the benefits to taxpayers of such a significant expenditure? For ease of reference, the Procurement Reference is CF-1047600D0O000000rwimUAA.
The value was 30,000,000 GBP. I am writing to you as NHS Digital officially merged with your organisation on 1 February 2023. According to your website, you have now assumed responsibility for all functions previously held by NHS Digital.
The answer we got was as follows:
“The Supplier delivered the following service elements of the Covid Test Programme:
Core Services (Core): Core exposes the core services that stores subject (citizens) and test data such as when and where a test was conducted. Providing this data to downstream systems to match test results for further distribution to GPs and subsequent Authority systems.
External Data Services (EDS): Integrates various external systems to facilitate the flow of data out of and into the core testing platform. It also provides a messaging services interface and Management Information feeds.
Digital Programme Tools (DPT): A set of web and mobile applications used in testing sites to manage the testing process and the handling of samples to/from labs. It also provides functional to tag and track samples through the test to result journey.
Mobile Apps: A set of Apple iOS device-based enterprise (i.e. not for public use) mobile applications used in relation to the DPT described above as part of the testing process by test site and lab employees.
In order to deliver the above services, the supplier undertook the following work streams:
· Take over the existing services ‘as-is’ and run/maintain them using the existing code base (the “Transition Services”);
· Provide ongoing support of the existing platform, alongside any design, implementation and support of any new features and functionality of the product, whilst maintaining its operational non-functional requirements (the “Support~Run Services”); and
· Design, build, test and deploy updated and newly developed or updated products and services into the DHSC “Halo” AWS environments (the “Embedded Change Services”).
As well as delivering the above services, the supplier was also required to deliver the following artefacts:
As part of the Support/Run service requirements, the supplier was required to deliver the following:
Additionally, the Supplier established an Embedded Change team, which delivered the following artefacts:
END OF QUOTE
Our question was simple: how did we (taxpayers) benefit from a bunch of management consultants coming in to support the programme?
The DHSC's answer is a non-answer, as it focuses on processes, mobile apps, architecture diagrams (whatever they are), and other technical details.
It's increasingly clear that the people employed in the DHSC have no understanding of what it is they do. More worrying is that they don’t seem to care.
A proper answer would have involved quantifying the marginal benefit of involving accountants in saving lives, pain, grief, and suffering, as well as hospitalisations, thanks to diminished viral transmission due to architecture diagrams and all that.
The government's solution to problems is to throw more taxpayer cash at the issue. Never mind whether it makes a difference; what matters is that they are seen to be doing something, anything. All the while, the suppliers’ hierarchies are doing backflips, thinking about their bonuses.
As far as TTE is concerned, the DHSC has wasted (and much more) another £30 million, highlighting that it isn’t fit for purpose when it comes to the pandemic response and procurement.
The worrying concern is with the demise of NHS England; the DHSC will have more power to waste vast amounts of cash on our behalf.
TOGS
Vast sums were allocated to an evidence-free testing programme, which achieved panic and little else through the misuse of testing by politicians and their allies. The contract ended a year ago.
This post was written by two old geezers who like authentic architecture.
Wow, this is... informative... (not!)
My attitude reading the reply was not exactly improved by the "answer" starting off by _exactly repeating_ the question you posed to them - which suggests a tone of "Oh, FFS, why are _asking_? We _already told you_....". The only addition there was the "Mobile Services" bit.
The rest is beyond me. This is not technical IT jargon: it's ProjectManagementSpeak, a language I don't understand, and never wish to learn (and I say that as someone who's learned Hungarian - because that's a _real_ language spoken by _real people_). I don't feel my life would be improved by knowing what a "Process Interface Manual" is; rather the opposite. Perhaps there are readers who can navigate through this stuff better than I can.
Behind all the verbiage, a rough summary might be: "support, manage, bug-fix and possibly enhance an existing system". This is the one glimmer of light I saw:
"Take over the existing services ‘as-is’ and run/maintain them using the existing code base (the “Transition Services”)"
That suggests that this Consultancy was brought in when a system was already running. Possibly by the good graces of Deloitte. (I'd have to check the contract dates to know). One obvious question, if that is the case, would be: why was _another_ Consultancy brought on at that point, when £ms had already been spent on a Consultant already?
"A proper answer would have involved quantifying the marginal benefit of involving accountants in saving lives, pain, grief, and suffering, as well as hospitalisations..."
This is the fundamental (possibly deliberate, or - worse - unconscious!) misunderstanding going on. By asking these questions, you are hoping to locate a brain-cell in the client of these contracts which would _evaluate_ what they'd got for their £XXm: an answer of the form "yeah, they delivered this system, and it was Fabuloso, worked right out of the box!" would be inadequate, but would at least be in the terms you're expecting.
Instead, you and we are being told that £XXm bought 6 Interoperability Cascade GmingleSchmingles, 12 Project Interface Document Matrix Interfaceability Matrix Shalamazooblies, 18 Clouds BrrpKnongles and so on. You're supposed to be awed by this, because GmingleSchmingles, Shalamzooblies and BrrpKnongles are bloody expensive, awesome things, cheap at the price.
Instead, you're asking: "what did all of this actually achieve, in the real world"? And that doesn't seem to even be a valid question, whose answer might have occurred to your correspondents.
Off topic if I may, but very much Covid related.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NUQGPqWyiM&t=20s
Danish research showing low birth rate after vaccination using Czech data, the only country to release data. Circa 30% reduction cf vaccinated to unvaccinated subject to replication when other data available. If correct, and the source is credible, this has serious personal and societal implications.
My understanding is that the ovaries was one of the organs that collected the most spike proteins in rats. Inflammation leading to menstrual disturbance leading to lower successful conceptions, I wonder.
Are we in Nuremberg territory?