DAPD Schedule Data Analytics

Description

To provide a Schedule Analytics tool across Ministry of Defence major programmes and projects to provide Senior Responsible Owners (SROs) and associated project professionals the capability to make data-driven, effective decisions at pace on their programmes before problems arise. The tool will provide predictive and prescriptive analytics capabilities to assess project performance against schedule, risk to schedule deliverables, schedule quality and propose courses of action. This procurement shall utilise the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Dynamic Purchasing System (DPS) RM6200 and this publication provides notice to suppliers that should they be interested in providing this capability they should seek to join that DPS. After a period of 30 days the Ministry of Defence shall conduct a capability assessment following a filtering exercise on the DPS. A Capability Assessment Questionnaire (CAQ) shall be released using the CCS eSourcing Portal. Potential suppliers should register on this for access to the CAQ. Successful suppliers will then be invited to tender for the opportunity. The documentation shall be made available once the Capability Assessment has taken place. This notice is to ensure that the market is aware and can join the DPS . Top level requirements can be found at II.2.4) Description of the procurement Lot 1: Over the initial two years it is anticipated that there will be up to 250 users requiring access to the winning tool 1.1 Descriptive & Predictive Analytics – Provide overview of project performance against schedule with predictive insights and indicate risk to schedule deliverables. 1.1.1 Provide overview of project performance (e.g. on a dashboard) that tracks planned progress, planned vs actual, against schedule, comparison to overarching approval or schedule contingency which may be held outside the schedule file, and impacts on key milestones and final delivery. 1.1.2 Provide detail such as estimated finish date, schedule adherence, total float, free float, changes to float levels month by month and trend data across all of these metrics for updates in the schedule across months. 1.1.3 Provide overview of impacts to schedule deliverables based on timeline, resources and other schedule metrics available from the schedule, an overall schedule risk level (not including wider project risks) and key causes. Highlight key impacts to schedule deliverables, impact on finish date, where high-impact tasks accumulate, and highlight upcoming tasks that will drive delay. 1.1.4 Be able to compare schedule with previous iterations and explain changes in the project schedule over time and their implications, for instance relationship changes of activities and the associated impacts (e.g. from adding new predecessors or successors). Track the current live schedule against multiple baselines. 1.2 Prescriptive Analytics – Propose key actions, areas of focus and highlight specific future delay-driving activities to focus on. 1.2.1 Propose specific courses of action, such as key tasks to prioritise in certain months or weeks because of being delay-drivers, critical path considerations or dependent activities. 1.2.2 Look ahead to the following or specified period (e.g. September) and recommend where focus of management efforts should be, indicate upcoming resource conflicts and delay drivers and total activities. 1.2.3 Indicate the productivity uplift required to return to schedule. 1.2.4 Ability to input project constraints like dockyard restrictions, resource levels or specialist resource which will enable proposals to filter out unrealistic courses of action which cannot be achieved. 1.3 Evaluate Schedule Quality enabling better project planning and schedule management. 1.3.1 Provide overall score of current schedule quality, assessing metrics including logic, critical path, tasks which have no successors or predecessors, float, using the DCMA 14-point check as a minimum with ability to adjust tolerance levels. 1.3.2 Examine underlying factors of schedule quality, such as un-resourced tasks and network health. 1.3.3 Highlight where schedule quality can be improved. 1.4 Miscellaneous requirements 1.4.1 Be able to analyse both Microsoft Project (including Project Online and Project for the Web) and Primavera P6 files exhibiting the same capability for both, and provide competitive offer for being able to interact with other enterprise and project tools. 1.4.2 Capability of analysing very large, complex programme schedules. 1.4.3 Capability of adapting to different project methodologies including waterfall, agile and spiral. 1.4.4 Provide any required training and/or support in implementing and helping Users and their programmes use the tool. 1.4.5 Be compatible with MODNET and MOD data and digital and security infrastructure. 1.4.6 User of tool must be able to extract management information in either a report or other appropriate format from the tool and share this with others. 1.4.7 Be able to analyse schedules with minimal or automated data cleansing. 1.4.8 Be able to differentiate between supplier and MOD activity. 1.4.9 Ease of use and accessibility considerations with Reasonable Adjustments and built-in user guide and explanations for metrics as appropriate.