H.M. TREASURY

Project 12: Self-Service Kiosks Pilot Project

Description

1.                     This project is led by the Training & Employment Agency (T&EA) in partnership with the Social Security Agency (SSA). The T&EA has responsibility for delivering mainstream training and employment programmes, for the administration of New Deal in Northern Ireland and for the provision of vacancy information and job-search service similar to that of the Employment Service in Great Britain. The Social Security Agency assesses and pays social security benefits and provides advice and information about the range of benefit schemes in operation. In Northern Ireland the SSA has responsibility for the administration of the Jobseekers Allowance.

2.                     The project aims to pilot the provision of self-service kiosk technology at selected locations which will allow T&EA and SSA customers to access labour market and benefit related government services directly by electronic means, including via the Internet. If successful, it will enable both partners to provide a more efficient information service, give clients access to up to date and more accurate vacancy information, enable searches for, and client matches against, suitable vacancies, and provide user-friendly information on benefit schemes and eligibility criteria.

3.                     The objectives of the project are shown in the box below, along with the key risks identified by the partners at the bidding stage. The objectives relate to the testing of the technology, different kiosk locations, information provision and business models, as well as the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this new delivery channel. In essence the pilot needs to test a range of issues before a business case can be developed for any wider roll-out. The risks identified were related primarily to the IT infrastructure and user-interface software, but these were not considered to be major at the time of the bid.

Project objectives

n Test the technical aspects of deploying kiosk technology as part of T&EA’s new IT infrastructure

n Develop “front-end” software which will enable clients to search and navigate the system’s vacancy and opportunity database easily

n Identify which information should be made available through kiosks

n Test different locations for the siting of the kiosks

n Test the provision of vacancy information directly via the Internet

n Test different business models for kiosk technology

n Gauge the reaction of clients and employers to each of the business models proposed

n Assess whether T&EA could increase its share and quality of employers’ vacancies, enabling it to offer a better service to both employers and jobseekers

n Assess the potential for increased efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of services to clients, and hence to inform a business case for any extension of the pilot throughout Northern Ireland.

Key risks

n Instability of T&EA’s IT system in terms of its ability to feed information on a continuous basis to kiosks

n Inability of software developers to devise an effective user interface

n Inability to provide an effective IT infrastructure for the kiosks.

Project initiation, design and specification

4.                     Prior to the launch of ISB, T&EA and SSA contributed to the Central IT Unit (Northern Ireland)’s pilot project with NTL (a cable TV company) to allow households in parts of Belfast to access government-related information through their set-top boxes. Both organisations had come to the view that when more sophisticated internet technology became available, they could do something which would allow more flexibility in the location of information access points and provide a higher quality, and more searchable, range of information. T&EA and SSA were well aware, from working together on social exclusion initiatives that jobs and benefits information needed to be presented together to aid the decision-making process of unemployed clients seeking work. T&EA was already aware of some similar Employment Service pilots in Great Britain which were piloting the use of touch screens. However, T&EA and SSA were both of the view that the appropriate solution for Northern Ireland needed to be tested there first, because of the different range of services they provided (and thus the potential to extend beyond vacancy and benefits information in the future) and the different IT systems which the kiosks would rely on. The argument was that ES pilot technology could not simply be assumed to work if copied from one situation to another – hence the reason for a separate NI pilot, where the initiative would be tested at 8-9 sites.

5.                     Information about ISB “filtered down” to T&EA and SSA separately from HMT via the Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP). T&EA and SSA were both involved in the bid and a team of two (one from each organisation) was assembled to develop the submission to HM Treasury. Because of the very limited timescale to prepare the bid there was no internal consultation, other than clearing the document with line management in each organisation, and no external consultation. DFP provided some feedback on the bid and arranged for the partners to present their proposals to HMT prior to formal submission, a process which was judged to have been very helpful and constructive.

6.                     The bid was accepted by HMT subject only to the standard ISB terms and conditions. The anticipated costs of the project at the bid stage are set out in Table 1.

Table 1: Project costs and ISB funding (all revenue costs)
	Total bid cost (£k)
TOTAL COSTS, (all current/revenue) including: - Software development - Identification of appropriate information provision - Purchase of IT infrastructure - Purchase of kiosk hardware - Evaluation	£270,000
ISB contribution (% of total costs)	£200,000 (74%)
T&EA contribution (% of total costs)	£50,000 (19%)
SSA contribution (% of total costs)	£20,000 (7%)

7. The anticipated benefits of the project are set out in the box below.

Potential benefits of the Self-Service Kiosks Pilot project

To T&EA staff

n Reduces the need to continually replace and update vacancy cards on display

n May eventually remove the need for specialist job card printers, or job card stationery

n Staff intervention on routine job brokering activity could be reduced

n Staff time saved could be used more productively in dealing with clients requiring more intensive support

Individual clients

n Vacancy information will be updated immediately and, consequently, will be more accurate (presently no guarantee that vacancy cards are removed once vacancies are closed)

n Searches for, and client matches, against suitable vacancies should be enhanced

n Potential to site kiosks in more accessible locations, particularly in rural areas, and providing government services “out of hours”, thereby reducing the number of visits to JobCentres

n General improvement to service delivery

n Easier access to benefits information for clients

Employers

n More suitable applicants identified for employers’ vacancies

n Speed of meeting employers’ recruitment requirements could be increased

n Perception of a more professional service could encourage more employers to use JobCentres

Other benefits

n Improves perception of T&EA and SSA amongst individual clients and employers

n Provides a platform for delivery of future welfare reforms (e.g. introduction of ONE)

n Increase overall levels of access to government services by electronic means

n Efficiency savings

Management of the project

8. The project has been managed according to PRINCE 2 guidelines by a Project Board drawn from T&EA (chair), SSA and T&EA’s PFI IT provider ICL. This meets as and when the specific milestones of the project dictate and has agenda items according to the particular point in the project development cycle. A separate Project Team is responsible for the day to day implementation of the pilot, and includes two staff from T&EA, one from SSA and ICL. It reports to the project manager within T&EA. An extended project team is responsible for prototyping workshops and monitoring quality assurance. Both partners feel that the project steering and management arrangements are working well, but this was expected to be the case because the individuals involved have worked together on previous projects.

Project outcomes, including contingency and monitoring

9. The original and latest timescales for the project are set out in Table 2. The project has slipped by almost a year due to problems encountered in other IT initiatives in the T&EA (the Agency was grappling with Phase 2 of its Client Management System (CMS) at the same time). The T&EA Project Team members were diverted to tasks associated with CMS Phase 2 implementation and this led to the kiosks project being given a lower priority, leading to slippage.

Table 2: Original and revised milestones for Self-Service Kiosks Project
	Planned timescale at bid	Revised timescales (as at February 2000)
Project initiation	February 1999	February 1999
Pilot sites identified	April 1999	February 2000
Software interface designed	August 1999	May 2000
Kiosks installed	September 1999	Sept 2000
Pilot commences	October 1999	Sept 2000
Pilot evaluated	March 2000	Feb 2001

10.                  The use of the PRINCE methodology highlighted these problems early on, but it took some time to get the project back on track. It is worth noting, though, that the specific risk of the project being squeezed by other priorities was not identified in the bid. There is probably a lesson here for other small IT projects being undertaken alongside major initiatives.

11.                  When we undertook the round of consultations in February these blockages seemed to have been overcome, albeit at some financial cost. However, the project has been able to increase the “coverage” achieved by its investment in two main ways. Firstly, by developing a much stronger focus on publishing vacancies directly on the Internet and, secondly, by taking advantage of the opportunity presented by a separate private sector initiative being taken forward by a company called “Town Pages”. It is hoped that these developments will help to achieve better than anticipated value for money. Town Pages is seeking to put internet kiosks in 40-50 locations across Northern Ireland, in sites ranging from libraries to shopping centres. As it is based on the same PC/Internet technology as the ISB project, T&EA and SSA have examined the potential for T&EA to piggy-back onto Town Pages’ kiosks with a separate user-interface which will still meet the aims and objectives of the ISB project.

12.                  When we met with T&EA and SSA in February negotiations were underway with Town Pages to link their project with the Internet aspect of the ISB project. Although the Town Pages’ kiosks are likely to be in more accessible locations, they will still cover a broad range of sites and T&EA/SSA will be able to fill any gaps in kiosk distribution to ensure that the pilot tests an appropriate range of locations. Part of this wider strategy has been negotiations with a range of organisations including libraries, training organisations, and community groups to encourage them to allow unemployed people to use their existing Internet facilities free of charge to access the Agency’s vacancy Internet site. Overall, the forecast out-turn on project costs is still as set out in the bid, namely £270,000.

13.                  So far T&EA has been monitoring progress against milestones and budget, but the two partners will be drawing up a monitoring and evaluation plan and doing baselining work ahead of the pilot’s implementation. An evaluation of the pilot will be carried out later this year.

14.                  Both partners felt that HMT’s monitoring procedures for the project should be more frequent and that there should be more rigorous external scrutiny of costs and benefits, even for small projects. T&EA has a good reputation in Northern Ireland for its approach to monitoring and evaluation, which helps to explain its expectation that HMT’s monitoring might have been more rigorous.

Additionality, longer term effects and value for money

15.                  In the bid document, T&EA claimed that the project could be implemented on a smaller scale with fewer kiosks, although it pointed out that this could reduce the ability of the pilot to thoroughly test all of the issues it was designed to do. SSA could not have undertaken the project at all without ISB and T&EA support. The most likely scenario, given the difficulties which T&EA has experienced with its other IT projects, is that ISB funding accelerated the pilot by about 18 months.

16.                  Subject to the T&EA/SSA kiosk software working successfully – and being sufficiently well promoted, visible and accessible on Town Pages’ kiosks – the longer-term prospects for this project look extremely good. The ability to test the information provision and user-interface at such a large number and wide range of locations means that the pilot should be able to thoroughly test whether this is an appropriate delivery channel for vacancy and benefits information in the future. Both organisations can already see further, longer-term, benefits beyond the immediate focus of the kiosks. For example, the SSA expects that internet technology could be used to screen and accept benefit applications in the future, and T&EA feels there is considerable potential to add further information (for example training opportunities and careers guidance) to the information provided through the kiosks and the Internet.

17.                  Both partners felt it was too early to say whether the project was economical, effective or efficient, but with the imminent launch of the initiative on Town Pages’ kiosks as well as some of its own dedicated sites, cost-effectiveness is likely to be better than it would otherwise have been. An End Project Report (formerly known as a project management evaluation (PME) will be undertaken once the pilot is implemented to review the implementation process and a full project benefit evaluation (PBE) is planned for October 2000. The latter will include a technical evaluation of the hardware and software, the range of different business models which could be pursued, customer reaction (staff, individual clients and businesses), partnership impacts and efficiency and effectiveness. The PBE was originally intended to inform the development of a business case for wider roll-out, but we suspect, given the much larger pilot, that the business case might focus more on the refinements which need to be made to the existing software and information provision, the potential to add further to the information and search facilities and the most appropriate business model for a public-private partnership.

Administrative and accountability issues

18. T&EA has been the lead organisation throughout the project. Its relationship with the SSA seems to be working well, even though T&EA is clearly the dominant partner in financial terms as well as being in direct control of the IT developments through its PFI contractor. Strong project management meant that some minor teething problems in the relationship between T&EA’s PFI contractor and SSA were overcome early on.

19. As the lead organisation with financial and management accountability for the project, T&EA has the ISB funding ringfenced within its budgets. ICL will invoice T&EA and SSA separately (for £250k and £20k respectively) to draw down the funding for the project.

Conclusions

20.                  This project is a good example of what the ISB was designed to support. It involves two public sector organisations which have good potential for synergy but do not work together on delivery as a matter of course; it involves the development of an innovative delivery channel for government services; and the ISB provided funding which significantly accelerated and enhanced a pilot to test whether the project was worthy of wider roll-out.

21.                  The partners are working well together, but the project timetable has suffered because of slippage on other major IT projects within T&EA. As we noted above, this potential risk factor should be reviewed in similar projects and a high-level commitment secured to ensure that appropriate action is taken (and resources provided, if necessary) to avoid the smaller, but innovative, IT projects being squeezed out or parked while other, unrelated, problems are sorted out.

22.                  The project also highlights the importance of lateral thinking and awareness of wider initiatives, especially those being undertaken by the private sector. Had T&EA and SSA not been aware of Town Pages’ activities, or seen the potential for the two to be integrated, it could easily have spent considerable sums on hardware in some of the same locations where Town Pages was already planning to site its own kiosks. Clearly such integration (in site, promotion and software terms) needs to be considered carefully so as not to jeopardise the objectives of the ISB project, but it was encouraging to see an enthusiastic exploration of the opportunities for more cost-effective implementation of the project.