1. Timetables for the development and implementation of new services should provide for sufficient in-depth consultation directly with potential users of the service, and for the outcome of consultation to be reflected in service design. The Agency's problems stemmed from an over ambitious timetable, with inadequate time dedicated to identifying and taking action on the preferences of potential users of the service at an early stage of the project causing significant changes to be made in planned business processes late in the development process.
2. In developing services to promote electronic government departments should first establish that potential users will wish to use, or be equipped to use, the planned service in this way. Departments may need to consider incentives, such as a discounted price for the service, to encourage use of electronic methods if more efficient and effective. The Agency assumed a largely telephone based service with some online access. Users' preference, however, was for paper based applications, and for applications submitted in bulk by potential employers rather than by individuals.
3. Adequate time for piloting new services is fundamental to successful introduction. In the Bureau's case only a limited pilot was planned initially, and that was squeezed as significant changes to planned business processes became necessary. Launching a service which does not work may be more inconvenient for users than delaying service introduction to get the system right.
4. Rejected bids should be scrutinised carefully for signs of possible weaknesses in the tender specification, and the successful contractor's bid. Other bidders for the Bureau's contract had questioned both the realism of the timetable, and the assumption that 85% of Disclosure applications would be made by phone. The Agency took action to obtain independent assurance on the successful candidate's bid, but did not adequately heed the warnings signs within other contractors' bids.
5. If business assumptions change fundamentally during service development, Departments should consider whether to continue with their current contractor or test the market again, balancing the potential delay to service introduction with the risks to value for money of a single tender in such circumstances. Capita, the successful bidder, quoted a price of £250 million, around £100 million less than the other bidders, but the changes to business processes and the timetable needed to accommodate users' preferences means that the contract value is now £395 million over ten years, and hence more expensive than prices quoted by other bidders.
6. The Agency and Capita were slow to establish an effective working partnership to address the emerging difficulties. They did not do so fully until the problems reached crisis level.