1. Support Infrastructure ‘ Creating an agile & empowered, service oriented support infrastructure’ Draft Blueprint Design v0.5 Project Manager: Debbie Greenfield Project Champion: Andrew Taylor Project Board: Project Champion - Andrew Taylor Board Members - Paul Hartley, Roger Eccleston, Neil Geddes

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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.

5. Support Infrastructure Part 1: Draft Blueprint for IT Project Team: Project Manager – Debbie Greenfield Team Members – Mark Enderby, CICT and Nick Fielden, FBU IT

6. 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

7. 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.

8. Guiding principles behind proposed Governance Structure Organisation: 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. How other bits fit in CICT CICT 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

12. 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 Blueprint During 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)

13. Issues to be resolved (IT) Organisation Structure The 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 bodies Integrating STFC’s IT relationships with other bodies to which we provide IT services (e.g. DLS, Campus tenants etc.) requires careful consideration. UKATC It 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 Structure Need to consult on and finalise the reporting lines and other relationships in the committee structure.

14. 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 TODAY IT Forums Agreed Committee Structure Draft committee structure Proposed roles & responsibilities Agreed roles & responsibilities Common agreement on issues IT Champion on Ops Board Past What we had Present What we have Future ‘To be’

15. Support Infrastructure ‘ Creating an agile & empowered, service oriented support infrastructure’ Estates - Conceptual Design Draft version 0.4

16. 6 th 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 TODAY Key people consulted with A new Estates Governance Structure A new Asset Management Plan Database of bids and Inventory of space and Equipment Infrastructure Estates Past What we had Present What we have Future ‘To be’

17. Workshop 6 th March 2009 The following key messages came from the workshop held on 6 th 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

18. 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

19. Responsibility, Accountability, Consulting and Informing The 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

20. 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

21. Anticipated Benefits Clearly 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 Realisation Implementing 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

22. Proposed Decision Making and Governance Structure Operations Board Director of Estates New Oversight Committee 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 RALDaresburySwindonEdinburgh Overview of Recommendations

23. 1.A new Oversight Committee The 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 Estates This 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

24. 3.Estates’ Manager Reconfigure 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 Plan It 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

25. 5.Database of science bids A 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.Inventory An 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.Administrator A new administrator post is needed to develop the new inventory and database. Recommendations

26. 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

27. 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 policie s 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

28. 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: