1. SA&S-Fortnightly Status Report – Overview Period Ending 05 Oct 2017
Deliverables
this period
WSA : follow up analysis meetings for rotations, field trip, field work and placement
SCEC: proposed process agreed with sponsor/bus lead. Further validation planned., System workshop starting. 1st engagement with EUSA/students.
MyEd Portal: completed student journey workshops (20 students), prepared demo of 1st release to DT Board. Requirements reviewed.
Exam Timetabling: presentation to SAS Board, completing the data load for special arrangements
Comprehensive timetable : engagement with VLE teams, formalise draft report format and recommendations, presentation to SAS Board
Tier 4 :  development work on the Biometric card information capture functionality in progress and on track
Policy: Draft report completed, inclusive of Policy principles, evidence, definition of policy, and proposals for programme sponsor approval.
TOM: Preparing strawmen, Identify Subject Matter Experts, scoping
Current Status
Previous Status A A
Management and Control
Engagement
Delivery
Planning
Resource
RAID
Costs & Benefits
Stakeholders
Communications A G
-SCEC: process –to-be requires validation
-WSA: other options for system solutions being investigated
-Exam Timetabling: data integration being completed
-MyEd- API dependency
Timelines for Oct completed
-MyEd pilot; additional developer & UX resource being addressed
RAID log up-to-date for Risks and Issues, Assumptions and Dependencies.
Updated as projects progress.
Cost forecasts broken down per project.
Benefits log completed in PIDs: logged at programme level. Work required on baselining student (and staff) experience being progressed.
Planning additional user engagement at projects from Academics (SCEC), from students (SCEC, WSA and MyEd).
Being done through projects/workshops, programme lead 1:1 and SEP newsletter

2. SAS– Fortnightly Status Report – Programme Risks -Period Ending 05 Oct 2017
Consequences
Inherent Impact
Residual Impact
Residual Prob’ty/ Uncert’y
Risk Level
Risk Mvt since last mth
Current & Management Processes and Mitigating Activities and Future Developments
Senior Managerial Responsibility
For information, Programme risks
There is a risk that the current SA&S Board may not engage with the vision positively.
The TOM vision is not adopted by the Board and proposals are not approved. This also presents the risk that communications are inconsistent and confusing, damaging the credibility of the Programme. 5 3 9 q
Mitigation: The revised TOM vision has been discussed with the SEP Board who are supportive of the new vision/ ambition. Potential to reinvigorate membership of SA&S Board being investigated.
SAS Board away day being planned
Neil McGillivray
There is a risk that the Student Funding project delivered in SSP has not addressed or has conflict with the TOM principles
CSA is not the latest version -out of date 4
1. TOM detailed design must acknowledge and address issues with existing systems and new processes delivered as part of the SSP Funding project
Maggie Litwanska
There is a risk that the ISAS team (Intn Student Advisory Service) do not engage or actively obstruct with discussions in relation to new Student Immigration Service
Single Immigration Service is not achieved or moved to a compromise solution 12
1.engage with Alan McKay from Edinburgh Global 2. engage change manager (Taylor Clarke) at an early stage 3. Actively use the HR toolkit
Heather Tracey

3. SAS– Fortnightly Status Report – Programme Risks-Period Ending 05 Oct 2017 (cont…)
Consequences
Inherent Impact
Residual Impact
Residual Prob’ty/ Uncert’y
Risk Level
Risk Mvt since last mth
Current & Management Processes and Mitigating Activities and Future Developments
Senior Managerial Responsibility
For information, project risks
Special Circs . There is a risk that academic staff are not engaging with workshops
(was Users will not buy into the change)
Participation in the project may be limited which could impact the analysis and solution design as not wide enough cross section of the university is represented. 5 4 3 12 q
Reduce: 1. Raise awareness of project through effective communication strategy New actions: need to validate academic staff view through established college networks (CUGLAT, Senior Tutor Network, CLTC, staff training sessions) and nominated academic leads. The Project Sponsor (Stephen) will validate the project outcomes with academic leads in each of the Schools. We are also encouraged to use the academic members of the Project Board as critical friends. Neil to set this up with Stephen.
Jaffar Hamoudi
Working & Study Away. There is a risk the estimated effort to build the system solution is much more significant than the one articulated in the OBC
Delay to go live, user disengaged, too expensive to build in house
1-external benchmarking of  other software & comparative university use 2-internal audit of current Online Mobility System and SITS placement components 3-Reprioritise minimum requirements around student service (use TOM)
Exam Timetabling -There is a risk that there is limited business resource between Oct and Dec to do parallel integration testing as the team prepares for the exam timetabling peak period during the next Dec Diet
Delay to testing and training staff u
1. Bring in additional Timetabling BA resource/Sabrina to help testing 2. Scott to step in  to manage next Diet to free operational time from Alyson to do testing- James will lead on testing within Alyson's Exam Timetabling team 3. Alyson has been pro active in completing tasks 4- final option would be to reschedule go live with the Resits Diet in Aug-Decision point in Dec.
Jamie Thin

4. SAS– Fortnightly Status Report – Programme Issues Period Ending 05 Oct 2017
Green - Low
Not currently impacting the project A
Amber - Medium
Resolution in hand and is being managed within the Programme R
Red – High
Immediate escalation is required
Issue ID #
Issue Description. There is an issue that…
Severity
Score
(RAG)
Issue resolution
Senior Managerial Responsibility
For escalation to programme 1
Special Circs. There is an issue that the future process is not ambitious enough and not aligned to TOM vision. Its validation by Sponsor and Business Lead has not been completed yet., and is preventing it from sharing with academic leads.
Medium
 Meeting has been arranged to agree the proposed new process and ways of working. The next step would be to circulate the outputs to the participants and  validate the process with academic and professional services leads.
Neil McGillivray 2
Special Circs, Working Study Away-The impending departure of Karen Osterburg will result in increased workload if senior Business Analysts have to take on some of the management responsibilities/business queries currently undertaken by Karen.
Low
Put in place arrangements to ensure that the daily management activities are taken care of by someone other than the senior business analysts.
Communicate the plan to reduce uncertainty
Barry Neilson
For information 3
Working & Study Away- Consultation has highlighted the current Mobility systems is used to support visiting students application process, staff placements recording and Erasmus fund management. All of these elements are outside the scope of the project.
If the above processes are not covered, the Mobility system would not be decommissioned as intended and the system would have to be used in conjunction with the new study away solution.  This may negate some of the anticipated benefits stated in the OBC and may worsen end user experience.
Quantifying the impact in terms of development time and cost would require detailed analysis which could in turn have an impact on the project timeline.
Agreed to carry out analysis to identify changes to the business process, costs, impacts on current plan, and review benefits (Approved to cap analysis)
Jaffar Hamoudi 4
MyEd portal-There is a reliance on a single developer to build the pilot, creating a single point of failure and no cover during his scheduled annual leave.
Plan additional resources. Options are:
-Short term: secure developer from DTI011 Leigh Gordon. (DONE)
- Use third party software to provide resources from November onwards- Defeng progressing
Iain Fiddes
EUCLID API taking longer than anticipated to put to live.
MyContact Details delivery will be impacted
Engage with API PM (Chris Copner) to replan work around new API delivery schedule. Work with Programme Manager to progress with the implement of MyContactDetails to have it function tested, signed off and rolled over onto MyEd.
Richard Scott

5. RAG Guidance Criteria Red Amber Green
Delivery
Key deliverables at risk
Some risks around delivery
On track for delivery
Planning
No detailed plan
Detailed plan in place. Gaps around benefit/key deliverables. Not fully up to date. Covers less than 6 weeks.
Detailed, current plan in place covering the next 6 weeks.
Resource
Significant skills or resource gaps
Some gaps
All resource in place and trained.
RAID
No documented risks and issues.
Defined process and roles. Clearly defined escalation routes. Risks and issues log actively maintained and reviewed by project team.
Costs & benefits
Very limited benefit identification/ limited understanding of costs
Some gaps in information.
Costs fully broken down and information accessible. Benefits documented and logged in register.
Stakeholder engagement
Very limited identification. No documented plan.
Some ad hoc identification of stakeholders. Incomplete plan. Not approved by sponsor.
Stakeholder, interest and needs systematically identified. Plan for engaging in place and approved by sponsor.
Communications
Little current information on website; stakeholders not informed of status
Some ad hoc communication. Some information on website
Website updated for last completed stage. Stakeholders informed and aware of nest stage plans. Key messages available for last stage.
A programme will be assumed to be green initially.
It may be red/amber status if 2/8 elements are red or amber.
A project is likely to be red/amber if 3 or more elements are that colour.
A project is red/amber if 4 or more elements are that colour.