Public Health England

ARSAC Information System

Incomplete applications

3
Incomplete applications
2 SME, 1 large

Completed applications

8
Completed applications
5 SME, 3 large
Important dates
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Published Friday 29 September 2017
Deadline for asking questions Friday 6 October 2017 at 11:59pm GMT
Closing date for applications Friday 13 October 2017 at 11:59pm GMT

Overview

Overview
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Summary of the work Development of a license application, processing and approval system for the administration of radioactive substances to patients
Latest start date Monday 13 November 2017
Expected contract length 8 Months.
Location London
Organisation the work is for Public Health England
Budget range £120,000 to £240,000

About the work

About the work
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Why the work is being done New Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations will come into force on the 6th February 2018 and certification of clinicians will be replaced by a new dual licensing system for employers and practitioners. The regulations also include a requirement for approval of research involving radioactive substances by the Administration of Radioactive Substances Advisory Committee (ARSAC)

The current certification system is not designed for the new dual licensing system and cannot be upgraded. A new digital system to allow submission, assessment and issuing of licence applications and research approvals is required.
Problem to be solved A digital method for employers and practitioners to be licensed under the 2018 Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations that incorporates application, assessment and approval. It is anticipated that end date of each phase shall be: Discovery – 1 Jan 18, Alpha – 1 Feb 18, Beta - 1 Aug 18.

The transactional capabilities of GOV.UK and potentially stand-alone systems, such as those available on G-Cloud, are to be assessed for their suitability to provide the service. Based on the legacy system, we estimate around 15,000 users will use the new system.
Who the users are and what they need to do PHE staff
Medical Consultants
Medical Directors
Medical Physics Experts
Research Sponsor Companies
ARSAC Committee Members
CQC
Scottish Government
HIW
RQIA
Early market engagement None
Any work that’s already been done An internal discovery exercise has been completed that has given an initial view of users and needs. There is an existing MS Access based system that provides some functionality but is not sufficient to meet the requirements of the new regulations. The initial work under this project is to review this Discovery work so that the project is ready to transition to Alpha.
Existing team PHE have a specialist team and a digital team who the supplier will be working with.
Current phase Discovery

Work setup

Work setup
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
Address where the work will take place The work can be performed from any location, but is likely to be co-ordinated by staff in PHE’s Chilton, London, and possibly other offices.
Working arrangements Work may be carried out from multiple locations including the Supplier’s offices. Attendance at PHE Offices in London and in other locations around England will be required for meetings. Supplier staff are expected to be on-site at PHE locations sufficient to manage relationships with senior stakeholders; the exemplar project team and users; and, stakeholders and users in other organisations
Security clearance Not required.

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
  • E1) Recent and demonstrable experience of introducing Transactional services on GOV.UK.
  • E2) Recent and demonstrable experience of delivering digital projects to meet statutory requirements.
  • E3) Recent and demonstrable experience of digital systems that take input and subject this to both automated and manual validation.
  • E4) Recent and demonstrable experience of assessing the suitability of G-Cloud and other systems for public sector applications.
  • E5) Recent and demonstrable experience of designing systems to manage personally identifying information under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
  • E6) Recent and demonstrable experience of meeting the GDS Service Standard.
Nice-to-have skills and experience
  • N1) Experience of healthcare organisations
  • N2) Experience of working with public sector organisations such as central and / or local government

How suppliers will be evaluated

How suppliers will be evaluated
Opportunity attribute name Opportunity attribute value
How many suppliers to evaluate 5
Proposal criteria
  • P1) Supplier's approach to PHEs vision and requirements (35/100 points)
  • P2) Supplier's approach to assessing the suitability of GOV.UK’s transactional capabilities and constraints (35/100 points)
  • P3) Supplier's team structure / experience (30/100 points)
Cultural fit criteria
  • C1) Approach to understanding public sector and healthcare landscape
  • C2) Approach to senior stakeholder engagement and management
Payment approach Capped time and materials
Assessment methods
  • Written proposal
  • Case study
  • Presentation
Evaluation weighting

Technical competence

60%

Cultural fit

20%

Price

20%

Questions asked by suppliers

Questions asked by suppliers
Supplier question Buyer answer
1. Can you break down the types of users that makeup the user base? Public bodies (assumption 75% of users)
Doctors (including Consultant Physicians, Consultant Radiologists, Consultant Oncologists etc)
Superintendent Radiographers,
Clinical Technologists,
Radiopharmacists,
Physicists,
Medical Directors,
Chief Executives, 
Administrative team,
ARSAC team/PHE, 
Committee members,
Regulators 
Private bodies (assumption 25% of users)
Doctors (including Consultant Physicians, Consultant Radiologists, Consultant Oncologists etc),
Superintendent Radiographers,
Clinical Technologists, 
Physicists,
Radiopharmacists,
Medical Directors,
Chief Executives,
Academics (including Researchers, Study sponsors, Academic doctors and Medical doctors)
2. Are the 15,000 users of the system all required to have full access to the applications? Can you elaborate on the types of access required? No - less than 10 internal PHE users administering the system need full access, 20 committee members will require access to review applications, majority of users will have access to their own application process only.
3. It is stated that “The initial work under this project is to review this Discovery work so that the project is ready to transition to Alpha”. That work has been described as “an initial view of users”. Do you anticipate a further reasonably substantial Discovery including User Research will be need by the selected supplier? To get started, we completed some limited research with users (internal and external) and have learnt the following:
· We need to make the process more efficient by making it easier to do reporting, manage, and monitor payments (feedback from internal stakeholders).
· We need to allow users to complete a tailored application based on their responses to set queries, share applications and comments with other users, and send automatic notifications (feedback from external stakeholders).
· Feedback from stakeholders who made additional comments in the online survey on the ARSAC application process indicated a preference for a digital application process.
4. Will any future discovery cover the list of users provided as the budget appears to be very limited? The team have a good knowledge of who their users are - their user base is limited to users or radioactive materials - and an overview of their need, but they need to work with a professional user researcher to complete discovery.
5. You mention that you might want to run the new service vis GOV.UK . We have considerable experience of preparing services for that platform. The budget you have proposed is too light, unless perhaps restricted to the Alpha. Is it your absolute intention, or is it an absolute requirement to run the service on GOV.UK? The budget range is for the full project to Live. The service is likely to run as a PHE service outside the core GOV.UK platform but on the GOV.UK domain. It will need to follow the GDS service standard, use existing GOV.UK service tools such as Verify, Pay, Notify and similar and use GOV.UK design patterns. However, this will need to be tested throughout discovery and alpha.
6. Will this solution require a GDS assessment? This will require a departmental assessment at appropriate stages, likely by DH rather than a GDS assessment, due to the volume of transactions anticipated.
7. Could you please clarify what roles comprise your existing specialist team and digital team? What roles are you looking for? Required:
User researcher
UX/interaction designer
Technical team - e.g. developers, technical lead or architect
Delivery manager
The Digital team includes user researchers, service designers, agile & technical specialists. Due to resource constraints the digital team will be available in an advisory capacity but are not able to work directly on project delivery.
ARSAC specialist team - Project manager, Project support
8. Could you also clarify whether the budget covers completing/review Discovery and carrying on through Alpha and Beta? The budget range is for the full project to Live.
9. Can you please clarify what you are referring to for question E4 - G-cloud suitability? Is there a procurement element to this opportunity in which the supplier needs to assess/advise on the suitability of frameworks like G-Cloud? E4 Assessing G-Cloud suitability would typically include assessing factors such as the security, scalability and other technical factors of G-Cloud services, rather than a commercial G-Cloud as procurement route.
10. You mention that the transactional capabilities of GOV.UK and potentially stand-alone systems, such as those available on G-Cloud, are to be assessed for their suitability to provide the service. Is there any current preference regarding potential solution for example being Microsoft based, SharePoint etc.? There is no current preference regarding a potential solution. As per the GDS mandated development process, solutions will be tested during alpha and the best option to meet user need should be chosen.
11. You state that internal discovery work has already been undertaken and that the initial work under this project is to review this Discovery work so that the project is ready to transition to Alpha. Is it envisioned that further independent discover will be required or that this work will actually be translating current feedback into user cases to shape the build? It is assumed that the new supplier will review the pre-discovery work conducted by the ARSAC team and complete a discovery phase that will help them fully scope Alpha.
12. The stated budget range is £120,000 to £240,000. Does this exclude VAT and any licensing costs associated with the final solution? This includes VAT and licensing costs are TBC.
13. Is it the intention that the final solution, once build, will be managed and maintained internally by PHE going forward? This has not been determined.
14. Will the system be required to handle payments? The system will be required to handle payments.
15. Will the system need to authenticate users against other systems, or will ARSAC manage its own user database? This has not been determined. Based on the current, paper-based system ARSAC may manage their own user database. However, we will not rule out authenticating users against other systems.
16. Is a print-on-demand output required at any stage, e.g. for signature? This has not been determined.
17. Will PHE provide contacts for volunteers for users? ARSAC has a substantial user base and this will be available for user research.