Back-office Planning System (BoPS): Software Development and Product Operations

Description

Summary of work BOPS (back-office planning system) is a user-centred application handling and document management system for local authority planning teams. It centralises the key functions needed to assess and determine a planning application into one system. Additionally, it is designed around a best-practice workflow that planning officers from multiple councils have contributed to and tested over several years. It provides council planning departments with back-office management and transactional functions using an easily navigational database. BOPS is one of three digital planning products developed under the umbrella of Open Digital Planning (ODP), a community made up of council officers, content writers, developers, and research experts from over 70 local councils, digital agencies, and central government. ODP-affiliated councils are signatories of The Local Digital Declaration which is a shared ambition for the future of local public services initiated by DLUHC, the Government Digital Service (GDS), and local authority bodies from across the UK. It commits to design services that best meets the needs of citizens, challenges the technology market to offer the flexible tools and services we need, protects citizens’ privacy and security, demonstrate digital leadership in creating genuine organisational transformation, embed a culture of openness and collaboration, and aims to deliver better value for money. A high-level ambition of ODP products can be encapsulated in the ‘Planning for the future’ White Paper published by DLUHC in August 2020. It states - ‘For all types of planning applications regardless of the category of land, we want to see a much more streamlined and digitally enabled end to end process which is proportionate to the scale and nature of the development proposed, to ensure decisions are made faster. The well-established time limits of eight or 13 weeks for determining an application from validation to decision should be a firm deadline – not an aspiration which can be got around through extensions of time as routinely happens now. To achieve this, we propose: • the greater digitalisation of the application process to make it easier for applicants, especially those proposing smaller developments, to have certainty when they apply and engage with local planning authorities. In particular, the validation of applications should be integrated with the submission of the application so that the right information is provided at the start of the process. For Spending Review, the Government will prepare a specific, investable proposal for modernising planning systems in local government. • a new, more modular, software landscape to encourage digital innovation and provide access to underlying data. This will help automate routine processes, such as knowing whether new applications are within the rules, which will support faster and more certain decision-making. We will work with tech companies and local planning authorities to modernise the software used for -managing a planning application to improve the -experience for those applying and reduce the errors and costs currently experienced by planning authorities.’ BOPS receives applications as data from Open Digital Planning Application services built using Plan X (formerly known as RIPA - Reducing Invalid Planning Applications), also conceived in 2019. As of 2024, the Digital Site Notice and Planning Register project have been included in the ODP product list. Both BOPS and Plan X are funded by DLUHC Local Digital Fund. In March 2022 BC led the procurement process to appoint a supplier that has been tasked with the delivery of the service under a two-year contract with a 6-month extension that is due to expire at the end of September 2024, with £3m. of funding. In November 2023 the team consisting of BC, Southwark Council and Lambeth Council won a bid for BOPS top-up funding of further £2m to continue developing the product and bring it into the prop-tech market. This workflow would be split into product development, product operations and route-to-market. The product has so far been developed into Public Beta for processing Lawful Development Certificates, householder planning approvals, and full householder planning applications which makes up most of the volume of planning applications received by local authorities. Minor application functionality is currently in progress, and integrations with Planning Portal, Digital Site Notices and Planning Register are planned to be delivered in 2024. The detailed roadmap for the product can be found under the following link: https://trello.com/b/2oYAAId7/bops-roadmap While commercial options remain open, the direction of travel is towards the SaaS model. The overall approach to this project has been through agile and centred methodologies, cross-authority collaboration, and transparent communication. The service is to commence on September 30th 2024 with a 6 week mobilisation period. Where the supplied staff will work No specific location (for example they can work remotely) Who the organisation using the products or services is Current Open Digital Planning-affiliated councils that have expressed interest in adopting BoPS;Barnet Council, Gloucester Council, Lambeth Council, Southwark Council, Buckinghamshire Council, Medway Council, Newcastle City Council, North Lincolnshire Council, Gateshead Council, Great Yarmouth Borough Council. We expect more LPAs to show interest as they are on-boarded onto the ODP programme. The product is designed for use by UK-wide LPAs. Why the work is being done Many existing back-office systems that LPAs use were designed in the 1990s. They require add-ons to keep up with needs of a living planning system which inevitably: • slows the systems down, • makes them overly complex, not user friendly, • creates duplication in tasks within the system. As a result, back-office processes are inefficient, with many opportunities for errors. All of this increases the time and costs to both councils and the general taxpayer. For a single planning application, planning officers must use ten different software packages simply to carry out the assessment process. BOPS reduces much of that need to one system with intuitive design informed by its users – planning officers. Costs of processing most planning applications exceed the fee received. Assessing each case has become increasingly complicated over time, demanding more time per case and increasing chances of error and delay. Application backlogs place further strain on council resources as applicants can be refunded their fees where decisions are not made on time - regardless of the reason why. Having tools that address such issues is expected to reduce costs, free staff for other duties and simplify the applicant process. Since public beta in August 2022, Lambeth’s early results show an average 38% time reduction using BOPS to validate an application and Southwark Council’s spot test indicates a 30% time reduction to assess a Certificate of Lawfulness. These preliminary results show potential efficiency savings are better than anticipated at this stage of product development. Our ambition is for BOPS to become a self-sustaining product in the current prop-tech market by the end of 2025. The current product roadmap (https://trello.com/b/2oYAAId7/bops-roadmap) illustrates the milestones including features, integrations and council use needed to achieve this. The business problem Councils rely on fee income from the highest value major applications to subsidise their other duties - such as dealing with householder applications. However, fewer planning applications are being submitted year on year. Planning fees are set to be increased - but this alone will not address the twin pressures of declining fee income and a greater proportion of cases being cost-negative. Processing householder cases (which nationally account for over 50% of new cases) is cost-negative for councils on average. BOPS has set the following KPIs to tackle the issue above: Application processing time: hours spent by planning officers to process an application Target: At least 20% time savings when comparing applications processed in BOPS against existing systems.  Application lapsed time: the time from application receipt date to determination date Target: Declining trend in cases Assessed within one day of target date, for cases that are assessed and determined in BOPS.  Planning officer satisfaction Target: Noticeable increase in officer satisfaction and reporting of preference to use BOPS over existing systems.  Uptake by local authorities: the number of planning authorities testing and adopting the system into live use Target: Product is in use at 100 councils by 2030. Data access statistics: usage statistics for the application programming interface (API) Target: Increasing trend of use. Reduce delays associated with identifying consultees and neighbours: reduce the number of cases where faulty consultations require the consultation to be re-started or made longer. Target: 50% decrease in number of applications where an appropriate neighbour or consultee is not consulted ‘first time’. Applicants understand their next steps: where further information is required, applicants understand how to respond. Target: 50% decrease in applicants making contact to clarify a request with validation teams following invalid application. The people who will use the product or service User type: Planning support officers Definition: Planning support staff working within the planning department, receiving, validating and processing planning enquiries and applications. User type: Planning officers Definition: Planning professionals working within the planning department, receiving, and processing planning enquiries and applications. User type: Internal consultees Definition: Planning professionals working within the planning department with expertise in a particular area (e.g. heritage), who will input into the assessment of a planning application. User type: External consultees Definition: Professionals working outside of the planning department with expertise in a particular area (e.g. Natural England), who will input into the assessment of a planning application. Members of the public wishing to comment on a planning application User type: Managers Definition: Senior managers running planning departments. User type: Data register maintainers Definition: Teams maintaining and publishing national and local data registers such as GIS spatial policy maps, a National Planning Register, financial reporting systems, the Local Land ges Database and the Local Land and Property Gazetteer. User type: Government planning agencies Definition: Parts of central government with responsibility for oversight of planning and development control, such as the Planning Directorate and the Planning Advisory Service User type: ICT Team Definition: Team providing the infrastructure to use the software solutions and some level of support. User type: Information users Definition: Anyone not listed above who may have an interest in seeing or using data captured by the system, such as Parish Councils wanting to know which planning applications are relevant to their area. Any pre-market engagement done Pre-market engagement not undertaken. Work done so far Please refer to the following Notion page to access a high-level summary of work that has been done: https://www.notion.so/opendigitalplanning/Welcome-to-BOPS-ad6fd188399b48a4bdeaa16e326a06e5 Which phase the project is in Beta Existing team Current delivery Team Supplier: Unboxed Consulting (delivery manager, 3x designers, 4x developers) Product owner: Lambeth Council Technical Lead: Buckinghamshire Council Engagement Lead: Southwark Council Contract manager: Buckinghamshire Council Plan X supplier: Open Systems Lab Digital Site Notice / Register supplier: TPXimpact Address where the work will be done • Primarily online (via Google Meet) • Ad-hoc meetings may be held in-person if agreed by all parties (supplier's office) Working arrangements Regular meetings such as roadmap sessions will be hosted by the supplier (either in-person, online or hybrid). Cross-stakeholder agile ceremonies, such as stand-ups, retrospectives and show and tells are usually hosted online. Some ad-hoc workshops by ODP working groups may be held in-person. ODP holds in-person conference days every 3 months hosted by a local authority where all the stakeholders and product representatives can connect. Hosting expenses will be covered by the grant-managing authority. Security and vetting requirements No security clearance needed Latest start date 30 September 2024 Expected contract length Contract length: 1 years 0 months 1 days Optional extension: 0 years 6 months 0 days Special terms and conditions special term or condition: Clause 10.2.2 (Ending the Contract without a reason) as exists in Core Terms (v3.0.11) shall be deleted and replaced with: “10.2.2 Each Buyer has the right to terminate their Call-Off Contract or any Statement of Work at any time without reason by giving the Supplier not less than: (a) 15 days for a Statement of Work; or (b) 30 days for the Call-Off Contract, written notice and if it’s terminated Clause 10.6 shall apply. Without prejudice to Clause 10.2.3, the Buyer shall have no liability in respect of any costs incurred by the Supplier arising from such termination.” special term or condition: A new Clause 10.2.3 shall be inserted as follows: “10.2.3 The Parties acknowledge and agree that the: (a) Buyer’s right to terminate under Clause 10.2.2 is reasonable in view of the subject matter of the Call-Off Contract and the nature of the Deliverables being provided. (b) Call-Off Contract Charges paid during the notice period given by the Buyer in accordance with Clause 10.2.2 are a reasonable form of compensation and are deemed to fully cover any avoidable costs or losses incurred by the Supplier which may arise (directly or indirectly) as a result of the Buyer exercising the right to terminate under Clause 10.2.2.” special term or condition: Clauses 10.6.1 (What happens if the Contract ends), (a) and (e) as exist in Core Terms (v3.0.11) shall be deleted and replaced with: “10.6.1 Where the Party terminates a Contract or, where applicable, terminates any Statement of Work, under Clauses 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, 10.5 or 20.2 or a Contract expires all of the following apply: (a) the Buyer’s payment obligations under the terminated Contract or terminated Statement of Work stop immediately. (e) the Supplier must promptly return any of the CCS or the Buyer’s property (including Government Data) provided under the terminated Contract or terminated Statement of Work.” special term or condition: Clause 10.7.3 (Partially ending and suspending the contract) as exists in Core Terms (v3.0.11) shall be deleted and replaced with: “10.7.3 Where the Buyer has the right to terminate a Call-Off Contract or Statement of Work it can terminate or suspend (for any period), all or part of it. If the Buyer suspends a Contract or Statement of Work it can provide the Deliverables itself or buy them from a third party.” special term or condition: Clause 10.7.4 (Partially ending and suspending the contract) as exists in Core Terms (v3.0.11) shall be deleted and replaced with: “10.7.4 The Relevant Authority can only partially terminate or suspend a Contract or Statement of Work if the remaining parts of that Contract or Statement of Work can still be used to effectively deliver the intended purpose.” special term or condition: Clause 11.2 (How much you can be held responsible for) as exists in Core Terms (v3.0.11) shall be deleted and replaced with: “11.2 The: (a) Buyer’s total aggregate liability in each Contract Year under each Call-Off Contract (whether in tort, contract or otherwise) is no more than the lesser of; (b) Supplier’s total aggregate liability in each Contract Year under each Call-Off Contract (whether in tort, contract or otherwise) is no more that the greater of; £5 million or 150% of the Estimated Yearly Charges unless specified in the Call-Off Order Form.” special term or condition: Clause 14.4 (Data Protection) as exists in Core Terms (v3.0.11) shall be deleted and replaced with: “14.4 The Supplier must ensure that any Supplier system holding any Government Data, including back-up data, is a secure system that, where specified by the relevant Buyer in the Order Form, complies with the Security Policy and any applicable Security Management Plan.” special term or condition: New Clauses 23.7 and 23.8 shall be inserted as follows: “23.7 The Supplier will only Sub-Contract with the written approval of the Buyer. If the Supplier chooses to use Subcontractors, this will be outlined in any bid along with the percentage of delivery allocated to each Subcontractor. 23.8 The Supplier will take direct contractual responsibility and full accountability for delivering the Deliverables they provide using Subcontractors.” special term or condition: A new Clause 36 (Counterparts) shall be inserted as follows: “36 Counterparts 36.1 The Contract and each Statement of Work may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute a duplicate original, but all the counterparts shall together constitute the one agreement. 36.2 Transmission of an executed counterpart of the Contract or a Statement of Work (but for the avoidance of doubt not just a signature page) by (a) fax or (b) email (in PDF, JPEG or other agreed format) shall take effect as the transmission of an executed “wet-ink” counterpart of that Contract or Statement of Work. Budget Indicative maximum: £1100000 Indicative minimum: The contract value is not specified by the buyer Further information: The maximum budget has been set based on the assumptions set out in the funding bid and is a sum of product development and product operations workstreams. Contracted out service or supply of resource? Contracted out service: the off-payroll rules do not apply Terms and acronyms Term or acronym: BoPS Definition: Back-office Planning System Term or acronym: ODP Definition: Open Digital Planning Term or acronym: BC Definition: Buckinghamshire Council Term or acronym: LPA Definition: Local Planning Authority Term or acronym: DLUHC Definition: Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities Term or acronym: SaaS Definition: Software as a Service Questions and Clarifications 1. Can you please confirm who the customer is for this procurement? The contracting authority is Buckinghamshire Council. Last Updated : <strong>03/04/2024</strong> 2. Please confirm the framework and lot number. This is a further competition through the framework Digital Outcomes 6 (RM1043.8), Lot 1 Digital Outcomes. Last Updated : <strong>03/04/2024</strong>