[foundation-board] Situation with data.gov.uk CKAN work

Sat Jul 31 11:15:56 UTC 2010

On 26 July 2010 09:57, Becky Hogge <becky.hogge at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Rufus
>
> Thanks for continuing to chase this. For the benefit of the Board,
> could you please give us your impression of any risk factors inherent
> in the below four step process that John outlines:
>
>> The process is:
>> 1.  TNA finalises it plans / proposals to CO for all elements of our
>> delivery for data.gov.uk
>> 2.  TNA - CO reach agreement on the budget for the financial year, on
>> all strands of data.gov.uk delivery by TNA.
>> 3.  POs raised to TSO, to cover OKF costs (and also, to cover TSO's
>> costs to date, which is more than we owe you)
>> 4.  Payment to OFK by TSO
>
> When I say risk factors, I mean ones that might conceivably leave OKF
> unpaid (despite John's assurances). I'm inclined to take your advice
> ("My advice to the board at this stage is that we should continue to
> work on the data.gov.uk project while continuing to push extremely
> hard for full and prompt payment of *all* outstanding monies.") but
> I'd like to know a little bit more about this process before I do.

Well it involves calling/writing to John Sheridan or people at Cabinet Office.

> Also, can you give us an idea of what "pushing extremely hard" for
> payment would entail at your end? And if this is burdensome work, is
> this something you would feel comfortable transferring onto your new
> administrative assistant to free you up to do something a little less
> depressing?

It is burdensome work and I would like to hand it off but hard to do
immediately (PA/AA starts this wed and first focus is getting
accounts/budgets sorted).

> This situation only serves to highlight how vital it is we have a
> working set of management accounts for the Board to scrutinise in good
> time ahead of the next Board meeting.

See prvious comment.

Rufus

> I would also like the Board to consider whether we need to take
> anything home from this experience, in terms of future arrangements
> OKF makes with public bodies.
>
> Thanks again, Rufus, and more strength to you!
>
> Becky
>
>
> On 26 July 2010 09:24, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org> wrote:
>> See email below for detailed statement of situation from gov end. Note
>> also explicit commitment to pay all outstanding amounts.
>>
>> I should also say we have just received payment of an additional £32k
>> which at least brings up to mid-February (and means, I believe, that
>> we are able to cover all existing obligations to contractors up to the
>> present). We are working to get paid for last 5 months asap but it is
>> partly held up on different parts of gov paying each other (BTW: this
>> money cannot be touched by things like the spending review since these
>> are monies agreed and committed 8 months ago -- just not transferred
>> between relevant parties as yet).
>>
>> My advice to the board at this stage is that we should continue to
>> work on the data.gov.uk project while continuing to push extremely
>> hard for full and prompt payment of *all* outstanding monies.
>>
>> Rufus
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Sheridan, John <John.Sheridan at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>
>> Date: 12 July 2010 10:38
>> Subject: RE: Summary of phone conversations [UNCLASSIFIED]
>> To: "rufus.pollock at okfn.org" <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
>> Cc: "Lait, Claire" <Claire.Lait at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>, John
>> Sheridan <johnlsheridan at yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> Rufus,
>>
>> I understand the situation - I can only apologise, you are at the
>> wrong end of a long chain. I am trying to make this work - it is not a
>> comfortable situation for you or me.
>>
>> Up to now, the arrangements have been informal - and everyone agrees
>> this can't continue. This email is confirming the arrangements for
>> paying OKF for work being undertaken on CKAN for data.gov.uk.
>>
>> To clarify the overall process, The National Archives is being paid by
>> the Cabinet Office for various strands of work on data.gov.uk, which
>> in turn is being funded by the Department of Innovation and Skills. We
>> have reached an agreement with our contractor, TSO, that they will pay
>> you as a sub-contractor to them for the work you have been doing. Like
>> everyone supplying government, they are nervous at the moment so they
>> will only pay you once they have received purchase orders from us.
>>
>> TNA is in the process of reaching a formal agreement with the Cabinet
>> Office (there is a meeting this week at Chief Executive level, so
>> that's my bosses boss!), to agree the total budget for the year, with
>> a memorandum of understanding between the two organisations (TNA and
>> CO) to cover the whole period through to end of 2010/11.
>>
>> Meanwhile I am working on reaching a more formal understanding with
>> TSO, on exactly what the scope is of the work they can deliver for us
>> under the terms of our existing contract with them (which covers an
>> Information Asset Register and a clause for development, thus bringing
>> CKAN development into scope of that contract - but there are other
>> elements and we are still in negotiation about some of that). That
>> situation is complicated in that we have not raised purchase orders to
>> TSO for the work they have been doing themselves for data.gov.uk.
>> Understandably, they expect their own bills to be covered before
>> paying anyone else.
>>
>> Finally, we have been told not to raise any purchase orders until all
>> the formal agreements are in place - hence the apparent impasse.
>>
>> The process is:
>> 1.  TNA finalises it plans / proposals to CO for all elements of our
>> delivery for data.gov.uk
>> 2.  TNA - CO reach agreement on the budget for the financial year, on
>> all strands of data.gov.uk delivery by TNA.
>> 3.  POs raised to TSO, to cover OKF costs (and also, to cover TSO's
>> costs to date, which is more than we owe you)
>> 4.  Payment to OFK by TSO
>>
>> You have shared with me a spreadsheet (on google groups),  outlining
>> your costs to date, that constitutes the amounts of money due to be
>> paid to OKF. We have discussed this spreadsheet and I can confirm our
>> intention to raise POs to our contractor for this work, and that it is
>> my understanding that you will be operating as a subcontractor to
>> them.
>>
>> Things are moving forwards - I know it is agonisingly slow and
>> difficult. I can only apologise again for the distress and concern
>> this must be causing you.
>>
>> We are nearly there though!
>>
>> John.
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: okfn.rufus.pollock at gmail.com
>> [mailto:okfn.rufus.pollock at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Rufus Pollock
>> Sent: 12 July 2010 10:04
>> To: Sheridan, John
>> Cc: Lait, Claire; John Sheridan
>> Subject: Summary of phone conversations
>>
>> Dear John,
>>
>> Really sorry to hassle like this but I *really* need an update on what
>> is happening. Last wednesday we spoke in the morning on the phone and
>> you told things would be sorted by end of last week (or very latest
>> today) and that you would send me an email to confirm this. I don't
>> think I've received any email as yet :)
>>
>> Back in June we agreed everything would be resolved by *end of June*
>> (I enclose summary email from that conversation below). As you can
>> imagine I am under a lot of pressure at my end from the Board to get
>> this resolved. Please, please let me know what is happening and who I
>> can invoice.
>>
>> As I just explained to Claire if I do not hear from you very soon I
>> think I shall need to invoice you/TSO right now with the outstanding
>> invoices just to make sure everyone is aware of the outstanding
>> payments due.
>>
>> Rufus
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
>> Date: 17 June 2010 13:55
>> Subject: Summary of conversation re invoice payment
>> To: "Sheridan, John" <John.Sheridan at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>
>> Cc: "Lait, Claire" <claire.lait at nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk>, John
>> Sheridan <johnlsheridan at yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>> 1. Here is an updated version of existing payments situation
>> spreadsheet (also just shared with you both now):
>>
>> <https://spreadsheets1.google.com/ccc?key=t_4tH0S6toPu_YYlIbiR_BA&hl=en#gid=0>
>>
>> 2. JS agreed that monies will be paid (no problem here other than
>> administrative).
>>  * ACTION: JS to response acknowledging this!
>>
>> 3. Existing raised invoices to be paid by end of June (35k being
>> 36.47k with VAT).
>>
>> 4. Remaining not yet invoiced money to be able to invoiced by end of June.
>>
>> 5. RP suggest we think about putting in place a new agreement between
>> OKF and TNA (or CO or whoever) for ongoing work.
>>
>> Rufus
>> --
>> Open Knowledge Foundation
>> Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age http://www.okfn.org/ -
>> http://blog.okfn.org/
>>
>> This email was received from the INTERNET and scanned by the
>> Government Secure Intranet anti-virus service supplied by
>> Cable&Wireless Worldwide in partnership with MessageLabs. (CCTM
>> Certificate Number 2009/09/0052.) In case of problems, please call
>> your organisation’s IT Helpdesk.
>> Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored
>> and/or recorded for legal purposes.
>>
>> Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> National Archives Disclaimer
>>
>> This email message (and attachments) may contain information that is
>> confidential to The National Archives. If you are not the intended
>> recipient you cannot use, distribute or copy the message
>> or attachments. In such a case, please notify the sender by return
>> email immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments.
>> Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message
>> and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The
>> National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Open Knowledge Foundation
>> Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age
>> http://www.okfn.org/ - http://blog.okfn.org/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-board mailing list
>> foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>>
>

-- 
Open Knowledge Foundation
Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age
http://www.okfn.org/ - http://blog.okfn.org/