Health Research Authority (HRA)

HRA Research Systems Programme

Incomplete applications

9
Incomplete applications
6 SME, 3 large

Completed applications

7
Completed applications
2 SME, 5 large
Important dates
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Published Sunday 8 December 2019
Deadline for asking questions Friday 13 December 2019 at 11:59pm GMT
Closing date for applications Sunday 22 December 2019 at 11:59pm GMT

Overview

Overview
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Summary of the work Applicants using existing systems can be directed to our new Pega system to upload post approval documents and book ethics committee slots and the appropriate messaging and document upload is facilitated in our existing systems. Close working with existing near shore supplier is essential.
Latest start date Monday 20 January 2020
Expected contract length Commence 20 January 2020 to be completed 31 March 2020
Location London
Organisation the work is for Health Research Authority (HRA)
Budget range Estimated contract value £1m

About the work

About the work
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Why the work is being done We are replacing our existing research systems which allow applicants to apply for and receive approval to undertake health research in the NHS across the UK. The platform on which we are building the replacement is Pega Systems. In Feb 2020 we will go live with the first module in the new system. During Jan – March 2020 we wish to build two additional modules which link to our existing systems (provided by a third party) that will support our operational teams in reducing workload ahead of planned but not confirmed work to take place beyond April 2020.
Further background detail can be found in Explanatory document (1) and a link to existing IRAS found at: https://www.myresearchproject.org.uk/
Problem to be solved Work to be done:
1. Develop a portal in the new Pega system through which applicants can upload post approval information to our existing system (HARP). There are a small number of studies that this does not apply to.
2. Develop a complex committee booking system (CBS) that integrates the new Pega platform with an existing 3rd party supplier system.

Close and collaborative working with our 3rd party supplier will be required to ensure that the development is of high quality.
The two modules should be developed and fully tested. Scheduling deployment will be a business decision but currently planned for late March 2020.
Who the users are and what they need to do As an applicant I want to
1. submit post-approval documents into an existing system and receive confirmation of receipt.
2. book a slot from a selection of ethics committee meetings which is suitable for my type of study

As a HARP user I want to
1. see an alert in my workspace in HARP showing that an applicant has made a post approval submission
2. see an alert which shows that a booking has been made and I want the system to revoke the booking if not submission is made within a set timeframe.
Early market engagement The HRA commissioned an independent review of these systems in late 2017 / early 2018 to assess their ability to meet future requirements of both the EU Clinical Trials Regulation (EU CTR) and further improvements needed to support the wider UK research governance systems. This resulted in approval to procure a technical platform (Pega Systems) and associated implementation and support services to deliver a technology platform to provide the basis for the HRA to comply the EU Clinical Trial Regulation (EU CTR), associated EU Clinical Trial (CT) Portal development and Brexit, which have introduced a need for changes to the HRA systems.
Any work that’s already been done 1.Procured Pega platform (8.1) on Pega Cloud and Pega services to support initial build.
2.First module (CWOW MVP) and interfaces with 2 other systems almost ready for live deployment SIT and UAT planned.
3. Discovery work and high level sizing for phases 2 (user stories not in place).
Existing team Programme Manager, Resources Manager. Scrum Master, Product Owner supported by 2 Product Managers and SMEs
2 x Lead SAs and 2 SAs (contracted/seconded)
1 x Lead BA (contracted) and 2.5 x BAs (one of which will be working on the user stories for this development
QA and Test Manager (contracted) + 5 x Test analysts (mix of contracted
Supporting development and business as usual in a mixed model
Also requirement to work with incumbent 3rd party supplier of current systems
Current phase Not applicable

Work setup

Work setup
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Address where the work will take place The HRA team is based at Skipton House, 80 London Road, SE1 6LH and it is expected that key members of the supplier team is co-located here. Any proposed near/off-shore resources need to be managed by the supplier and be available during UK normal working hours.
Working arrangements The programme is being led by the HRA and any supplier will need to work within an integrated delivery/management model. There will be a regular requirement to co-locate however there is flexibility to work remotely using appropriate technology. A key requirement of any supplier will be to ensure effective knowledge transfer during the period of engagement
Security clearance

Additional information

Additional information
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Additional terms and conditions

Skills and experience

Buyers will use the essential and nice-to-have skills and experience to help them evaluate suppliers’ technical competence.

Skills and experience
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Essential skills and experience
  • Delivering large scale IT Programmes to include aspects such as; assurance planning, technical design review & assurance, planning and project management, quality control activities and review.
  • Access to Pega Cloud, Software skills & Expertise Pega 8 / Pega Infinity, the ability to supply associated suitable experienced & accredited staff and there successful deployment in complex environments
  • Experience of successful Agile Development and Delivery over a number of years
  • Ability to evidence successful delivery of projects involving GDS assessments
  • Interface development and implementation using Pega software to internal and external systems end points and use of and implementation of API management and solution deployment
  • Integration Testing and support of testing strategy in particular automated testing and knowledge of automated test capabilities within Pega, and how they are supplemented using third party products.
  • Data Management to include configuration, dictionary management and control, migration and archiving
  • Able to demonstrate of successful knowledge sharing with customer
Nice-to-have skills and experience
  • Knowledge of and expertise in Accessibility standards and guidelines
  • Knowledge of and expertise in GDPR Compliance
  • Knowledge of and expertise in Amazon Web Services (AWS) –capabilities and opportunities and ability to utilise them.
  • Dev/Ops experience – build and support.
  • Archiving solutions
  • API management solutions selection and deployment
  • Working in the health sector
  • Working in the Public Sector
  • Knowledge of Identity management
  • Evidence of delivering at scale and under tight timescales.

How suppliers will be evaluated

All suppliers will be asked to provide a written proposal.

How suppliers will be evaluated
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
How many suppliers to evaluate 5
Proposal criteria
  • Previous experience of delivery success
  • Resources available and location (onshore / off shore)
  • Overall experience of delivering at scale and in compressed timeframes
  • Methodology and approach
  • Proposed team structure
  • Value added services available and Breadth of services
  • Attitude and approach to the tender
  • Risk mitigation and appetite
  • Clarity of purpose and how the partner offer meets the HRA business objectives
  • Breadth of expertise – management and technical
  • Pega skills and experience
  • Experience in Health and or public sector
  • How the partner identified risks and dependencies and offered approaches to manage them
  • Availability to start in January 2020
Cultural fit criteria
  • Can work as a team with our organisation, ALB’s and other suppliers
  • Is comfortable in adapting its delivery model to those of the host organisation
  • Be transparent and collaborative when making decisions
  • Have a no-blame culture and encourage people to learn from their mistakes
  • Takes responsibility for their work
  • Shares knowledge and experience with other team members
  • Challenge the status quo
  • Be comfortable standing up for their discipline
  • Can work with clients with low technical expertise
  • Ensures that all personnel supplied demonstrate appropriate values and behaviours that are not at odds with those of the HRA
Payment approach Capped time and materials
Additional assessment methods Presentation
Evaluation weighting

Technical competence

45%

Cultural fit

15%

Price

40%

Questions asked by suppliers

Questions asked by suppliers
Supplier question Buyer answer
1. Supplier Question:
When are you planning to answer the first questions please. We are keen to provide a strong response but without the answers from you it is difficult.
HRA Response:
Responses to the initial questions will be published today 12th December and the second set of questions will be responded to by COP tomorrow 13 December. We understand that suppliers are keen to obtain responses quickly, however, please note that questions are being submitted by a number of suppliers. We are aiming for as close to a 24 hour turnaround on responses to supplier questions, whilst the DOS guidance is to provide response to questions is within 2 to 3 working days.
2. Supplier Question:
If we are supposed to respond to each of the points under the Proposal criteria, how do we address points like ""Attitude and approach to the tender"" and ""Clarity of purpose and how the partner offer meets the HRA business objectives"" as these are very subjective aspects and difficult to articulate. Kindly clarify what is expected.
HRA Response:
The response needs to explain how you plan to engage with the HRA in terms of ways of working with a small public sector organisation to ensure that we can work together to deliver the required outcome. It is important that you understand what working with the public sector means. What would you need from us and how do you expect us to work with you? Being clear that you understand what the purpose of the HRA is and how it fits into the wider research landscape in the UK is helpful.
3. Supplier Question:
Under "How suppliers are evaluated" it says that all suppliers are required to provide a written response for the proposal criteria and cultural fit. Is this to be submitted along with the technical responses or is this only for the 5 shortlisted suppliers at the next stage?
HRA Response:
The written response for the proposal criteria and cultural fit should be submitted along with the technical responses.
4. Supplier Question:
Can you clarify this "Why is this work being done" part of your request: that will support our operational teams in reducing workload ahead of planned but not confirmed work to take place.
HRA Response:
The work being requested now is designed to automate activities that are currently undertaken by staff members. By doing this work now it reduces operational staff workload so that for the year 2020/21 subject matter experts can be released from the operational team to support planned but not confirmed IT development.
5. Supplier Question:
Can you please confirm that you want to develop everything stated in the work description in 3 months?

Also, in the team structure, are the profiles stated as contracted, the profiles that you expect from the supplier?
HRA Response:
We wish to complete the work by the end of March.

In the existing team section the “contracted” staff are already in place. It would be important that even through you are working on different “projects” that you work collaboratively with the existing team and dovetail smoothly into the existing development work.
6. Supplier Question:
The Authority responses have caused some confusion. Ordinarily, suppliers answer the Essential and Nice to have questions only, using the stipulated 100 word response criteria. Once scored, a number of suppliers are selected to the next stage to supply a proposal / meet in person / host a workshop as per the DOS notice requirement.
Please can the Authority confirm what is expected from Suppliers at this stage. Thank you.
HRA Response:
Suppliers ARE expected to answer the Essential and Nice to have questions using the stipulated 100 word response criteria as per the DOS process.

These supplier responses will then be scored accordingly and thereafter, a number of suppliers will be selected to supply a proposal as per the DOS notice requirement.
7. Supplier Question:
The location is listed as London, please can HRA confirm whether they will consider occasional support on site allowing for working remotely?
HRA Response:
Some remote working will be acceptable. The specifics around which days/ periods would be acceptable / suitable will be agreed with the HRA programme team post contract award.
8. Supplier Question:
How many suppliers will be selected as a part of this opportunity?
HRA Response:
One supplier will be selected to award to at the end of the opportunity.
9. Supplier Question:
The written response for the proposal criteria and cultural fit should be submitted along with the technical responses”
The DOS website permits suppliers to answer your Essential and Nice to Have questions only. Where can we provide you with a written response to Cultural Fit, etc?
HRA Response:
The supplier question 3 was not understood fully. Please find clarification as below.
Suppliers should respond on the DOS website to the HRA Essential and Nice to Have questions. Shortlisting will be based upon evaluation of the suppliers responses to Essential and Nice to Have questions.
Shortlisted suppliers will be requested to provide written responses to Cultural Fit, etc.
10. Supplier Question:
Can we get a demo on the HARP application to understand the functionality?

Our understanding on HRA expectation – New PEGA portal to be developed in which the user will upload the post approval information manually and the uploaded details will be loaded in HARP using an integration.
Work in HARP to complement development in Pega via 3rd party supplier. Requirement is, As an applicant I want to:For studies not already within Pega system, submit post-approval documents into existing system/receive confirmation of receipt. a Provide existing IRAS ID which identifies which study post approval information relates to b.Confirm type of post approval information I'm providing [limited/known number of options We may further limit possible selection) c Upload documents relating to post approval information
d Submit information/documents e.Receive confirmation post approval information received f.[Work to display further status relating to post approval information will be undertaken at later time]
11. Supplier Question (HRA Response is in 4Parts)
Can you please elaborate the functionalities to be covered in CBS and new pega platform, HARP. CBS and New Pega platform are 2 different applications?

How many integrations are expected in the new application.
HRA Response Part 1:
Requirement for Pega systems is:
As applicant I want to
1. book slot from selection of ethics committee meetings suitable for my type of study
A. If my study has been created (but not submitted) in Pega system
a. I wish to be taken to REC booking page
b. Be able to view list of possible committee dates suitable for my study list of possible dates presented drawn from existing system HARP and dependent on attributes of study]
c. Be able to select committee date
d. Get confirmation that booking received.
12. Supplier Question (HRA Response is in 4Parts)
Can you please elaborate the functionalities to be covered in CBS and new pega platform, HARP. CBS and New Pega platform are 2 different applications?

How many integrations are expected in the new application.
HRA Response Part 2:
e. Be directed to booking page/submit application same day submission process already in place
f. If application not made on day of booking, receive message saying booking has been cancelled and can start booking process again.
B. If my study has not been created in Pega system I want to
g. Log into new system
h. Provide existing IRAS ID which identifies study
i. Provide key attributes about study
j. Ability to view list of possible committee dates suitable for study [list of possible dates presented drawn from existing system HARP dependent on attributes of study]
13. Supplier Question (HRA Response is in 4Parts)
Can you please elaborate the functionalities to be covered in CBS and new pega platform, HARP. CBS and New Pega platform are 2 different applications?

How many integrations are expected in the new application.
HRA Response Part 3:
k. Be able to select a committee date
l. Get confirmation that the booking has been received.
m. View instructions on next steps
n. Click a link to direct me to existing IRAS in which I created my study and submit my study
o. If my application is not made on the day of booking, I receive a message to say that my booking has been cancelled and I can start the booking process again.

The complementing requirements in HARP will be developed by our 3rd party supplier.
14. Supplier Question (HRA Response is in 4Parts)
Can you please elaborate the functionalities to be covered in CBS and new pega platform, HARP. CBS and New Pega platform are 2 different applications?

How many integrations are expected in the new application.
HRA Response Part 4:
CBS is to be built on the new Pega platform and integrate with existing system HARP. The integration is likely to consist of
1. Call to HARP to retrieve the available slots based on the study attributes
2. Provide HARP with the selected slot
3. Receive confirmation from HARP that the selected slot has been booked
4. Receive cancelation of the booking from HARP
Full business analysis has not yet been undertaken.
15. Supplier Question:
Which system is used for booking?
How the functionality ""Revoke the booking"" is expected to happen and between which systems?
After new system implementation, does HRA has a plan to sunset the existing system?
HRA Response:
The Pega platform is going to be used for booking using information from HARP. Currently it is done by applicants telephoning staff who use HARP to manually make a booking.

HARP will cancel the booking and send a message to the Pega platform for display to the applicant.

This work will not take us to a point where we can “sunset” existing systems but it is a step on that journey
16. Supplier Question:
Do we expect the new PEGA system to be integrated with the existing one? If so, can you please elaborate
What are the functionalities handled in CWOW MVP? What is the significance of this system?"
The new PEGA system already has interface with our existing HARP system as part of CWOW MVP.

Functionality of CWOW MVP is already built and includes:
- Ability to create study in Pega
- Ability to provide information and upload associated documents
- Ability to have study authorised by study sponsor
- Ability for sponsor to submit study
- Ability to see status of study across approval process
- Ability to submit amendments
- Ability to see studies user is associated with
- Ability to see work basket of user tasks

For information regarding CWOW pilot see the HRA website
17. Supplier Question:
Does NHS expect Supplier PEGA team to develop APIs for external systems? Please clarify whether HARP API is exposed to perform the integration.
A restful API is already in place between our Pega system and HARP. It is anticipated that this development will use this API but that new data items will be needed.
18. Supplier Question - HRA Response in 2 parts:
How many records are supposed to be migrated to the new system?
How many concurrent users will be working on the application?
Dictionary management development is under scope?
Can you elaborate Archival requirement?
Do we have any content management tool licensed in HRA. How is document management expected to happen?
HRA Response Part 1:
Work doesn’t include migration between systems.
Indication how many concurrent users may
1. Currently average 25 telephone bookings to CBS made per day but very variable 54 being recent maximum. 2-3 phone lines dedicated to this. Uncertain how many concurrent users may be at any one time as not currently on-line system.
2. Approx. 75-80 post approval contacts on average per day. Currently received by email. Uncertain how many concurrent users may be at any one time as not currently an on-line system
19. Supplier Question - HRA Response in 2 Parts
How many records are supposed to be migrated to the new system?
How many concurrent users will be working on the application?
Dictionary management development is under scope?
Can you elaborate Archival requirement?
Do we have any content management tool licensed in HRA. How is document management expected to happen?
HRA Response Part 2:
Will need to add to current data dictionary but will be minimal.

Archival requirements will be limited to an audit trail.

Currently there is no content management tool licenced by the HRA. There is some document handling built into the Pega system already and it is assumed that this will be used.
20. Supplier Question:
Regarding your question 5
"Interface development and implementation using Pega software to internal and external systems end points and use of and implementation of API management and solution deployment"
Please can you rephrase to provide greater clarity, so to help answer this within 100 words.
HRA Response:
A restful API is already in place between our Pega system and HARP. It is anticipated that this development will use this API but that new data items will be needed.

The interface work is not large but crucial to making this work and the ability to work collaboratively with other suppliers is essential.
21. Supplier Question:
Can the Authority confirm whether Suppliers should only provide one example per response or if several examples can be cited? For example in Q2, re. complex environments is plural.
HRA Response:
You may cite more than one example but please ensure your reply gives sufficient information to demonstrate that you have skills in this area.
22. Supplier Question:
What technology will be the committee booking system built on? Is the assumption that it will be built in Pega correct ?
HRA Response:
Yes, it will be built on Pega.
23. Supplier Question:
How many suppliers will be selected as a part of this opportunity?
HRA Response:
One supplier will be selected to deliver at the end of the opportunity .
24. Supplier Question:
What are the current technologies used for Dev/test as a part of this opportunity? (E.g.: Pega cloud, Selenium for automation, etc. ).
HRA Response:
Our production environment is currently Pega 8.2.1 but will be upgrading to 8.3.1 as part of our go live in the coming months.

We do not yet have automated test tools.

We use Jira for sprint management.
25. Supplier Question:
What type of resources and how many do you expect from a supplier to deliver the work by end of March next year?
HRA Response:
We expect that the supplier will define and propose the type and quantity of resources that will be necessary to be able to deliver the outcomes we require.
26. Supplier Question:
How can we access Explanatory document 1 as mentioned in your requirement.
HRA Response:
The Explanatory Document can be accessed via the link below::

https://drive.google.com/drive/u/1/my-drive
27. 1. As mentioned is the section "Existing Team", there are several resources available. However, observed only one BA will be dedicated for working on user stories. Please confirm, if any other team members be utilized for Phase 2

2. What details are expected under knowledge of identity management system – are you expecting expertise in identity management systems or integration between Pega and identity management systems?

3. Is “The Ability to evidence successful delivery of projects involving GDS assessments” a mandatory requirement? Or are we able to evidence other vehicles around how the quality of our projects are assessed ?
1. Some of existing team will need to contribute to development in order to ensure alignment. This procurement is for resources to focus on this development specifically.
2. We have identify managements system. Expertise needed is around making sure users logging into system get to correct pathway. It's more about ensuring the right person gets the right screens to do what they need to do.
3. Our systems have to be GDS compliant, so we evidence this can be achieved. If you haven't undertaken a GDS project please show awareness of what this might mean and how you would address.