Programme Delivery Model
Broadband Delivery Programme
A local body should seek to validate any understanding it may have of the national supplier market and engage with some local / niche suppliers to best understand their position in the competitive landscape. It is not safe to assume that because one local project enjoys strong competition for their procurement that this will be the same for all projects. Similarly, the scale and scope of one project will vary to others and may attract additional regional and local suppliers, either as sub or prime contractors. Though such suppliers may be more likely to sub-contract this should be explored to ensure the local procurement strategy encourages competition rather than accidentally excluding it. Market engagement is about understanding market capability, capacity, maturity and interest. Unless there are highly specific local issues, it may be appropriate to undertake detailed market engagement after the Local Broadband Plan is completed.
Local bodies are expected to lead in the procurement or sourcing of local broadband solutions, taking into account where sourcing arrangements such as frameworks are available. Together with ensuring economies of scale, and synergies of solutions, reducing project team and procurement costs is a valid reason for local bodies collaborating in the development and delivery of Local Broadband Plans.
Local bodies are responsible for ensuring that projects meet rules on State Aid. BDUK are intending to facilitate activities in this area as much as possible. This is discussed further in section 13.
Local bodies are responsible for identifying and applying for EU funding. BDUK will be able to assist in providing input to the initial application process to confirm the potential availability of funding that it may be able to contribute to a project. European funding is discussed further in section 14.6.
The local body will own and be responsible for the implementation phase of the project. The local body will need to retain a project team post procurement, albeit with some differing skill sets, to assure the implementation and operation phase, collecting the necessary data to monitor and support delivery. It is likely that the local body will need to undertake this activity for some time post procurement, as one of the conditions of EU funding is that there is a claw back mechanism in place to recover public subsidy under certain circumstances.
The role of the local body‟s project team during the implementation of the broadband solution is often defined in detail during the mobilisation phase when detailed plans are finalised and approved. Thereafter, the project is likely to focus on preparing for the supplier‟s works in terms of readying communities (business and residential), speeding planning and wayleave applications and governing and assuring delivery processes and performance. This will include confirming funding payments at completed milestones and reporting on expenditure for all funding parties.
Local bodies should consider appointing a senior lead responsible for pro-actively ensuring that costs and barriers to deployment are minimised that would occur as a result of local bodies, or organisations that they control or influence. This has the potential to make a noticeable difference in the speed of deployment once a project commences implementation. This could cover areas including planning and compliance with regulations and will principally involve exhorting other individuals and organisations to recognise the local importance of broadband implementations.
The award of a contract to a supplier is only a means to an end; it is not in itself an indication of success. BDUK expect to make available lessons learned from earlier projects to ensure the effective management of common issues.