OGC Gateway™ Process

Review 1: Business justification

OGC Best Practice – Gateway to success

5 1
0
4 2

3
 Contents

Introduction to the OGC Gateway™ Process 03

Why getting programmes and projects right matters 03
The OGC Gateway Process 03
Value of the OGC Gateway Process 03
Programme or project? 04
OGC Gateway Reviews as part of the assurance framework 04
Role of the Senior Responsible Owner 05
Tailoring the OGC Gateway Review 05
The wider context of the OGC Gateway Process 06

OGC Gateway Review 1: Overview 07

About this Workbook 07
Purposes of the OGC Gateway Review 1 07
Business justification 08

1: Policy and business context 09

2: Business case and stakeholders 11
3: Risk management 15
4: Readiness for next phase – delivery strategy 17
Project documents 20
Supporting guidance 21

The OGC logo is a registered trademark of the Office of Government Commerce

OGC Gateway is a trademark of the Office of Government Commerce
ITIL® is a registered trademark, and a registered community trademark of the Office of Government
Commerce, and is registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
IT Infrastructure Library® is a registered trademark of the Office of Government Commerce
PRINCE2™ is a trademark of the Office of Government Commerce
Version 2.0 © Crown Copyright 2007
This is a value-added product that falls outside the scope of the Office of Public Sector Information (OPSI)
Click-Use Licence.
Applications to reproduce/reuse material in this publication or contained on the OGC website should be sent to:
OPSI, Information Policy Team, St Clements House, 2 - 16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 732000;
email: [email protected] or complete the application form on the OPSI website:
www.opsi.gov.uk. OPSI, in consultation with the Office of Government Commerce, will prepare a licence on
standard terms tailored to your particular requirements, including payment terms.
Introduction to the OGC Gateway™ Process

Why getting programmes and projects right matters

Programmes and projects provide an important vehicle for the efficient and timely delivery of government
aims. Procurement expenditure through programmes and projects is therefore a significant, and increasing,
5 1
proportion of total government expenditure. Good and effective management and control of programmes
and projects is therefore essential to the successful delivery of government objectives. The OGC Gateway 0 2
Process is designed to provide independent guidance to Senior Responsible Owners (SROs), programme and
4
project teams and to the departments who commission their work, on how best to ensure that their
programmes and projects are successful.
3
The OGC Gateway Process
The OGC Gateway Process examines programmes and projects at key decision points in their lifecycle.
It looks ahead to provide assurance that they can progress successfully to the next stage; the Process
is best practice in central civil government, the health sector, local government and Defence.
OGC Gateway Reviews are applicable to a wide range of programmes and projects, including:
policy development and implementation
organisational change and other change initiatives
acquisition programmes and projects
property/construction developments
IT-enabled business change
procurements using or establishing framework arrangements.

The principles and process in this Workbook can also be applied to management of other areas of
expenditure in the organisation. The Process is mandatory for procurement, IT-enabled, and construction
programmes and projects.

Value of the OGC Gateway Process

OGC Gateway Reviews deliver a ‘peer review’, in which independent practitioners from outside the
programme/project use their experience and expertise to examine the progress and likelihood of
successful delivery of the programme or project. They are used to provide a valuable additional
perspective on the issues facing the internal team, and an external challenge to the robustness of plans
and processes.

The OGC Gateway Process provides support to SROs in the discharge of their responsibilities to achieve
their business aims, by helping the SRO to ensure:
the best available skills and experience are deployed on the programme or project
all the stakeholders covered by the programme/project fully understand the programme/project
status and the issues involved
there is assurance that the programme/project can progress to the next stage of development or
implementation and that any procurement is well managed in order to provide value for money on a
whole life basis
achievement of more realistic time and cost targets for programmes and projects
improvement of knowledge and skills among government staff through participation in Reviews
provision of advice and guidance to programme and project teams by fellow practitioners.

The effectiveness of the Gateway Process has recently been endorsed in the 2007 Treasury report on
“Transforming Government Procurement”.
4

Programme or project?
Programmes are about managing change, with a strategic vision and a routemap of how to get there;
they are able to deal with uncertainty about achieving the desired outcomes.

A programme approach should be flexible and capable of accommodating changing circumstances, such
as opportunities or risks materialising. It co-ordinates delivery of the range of work – including projects –
needed to achieve outcomes, and benefits, throughout the life of the programme.

A project has definite start and finish dates, a clearly defined output, a well defined development path,
and a defined set of financial and other resources allocated to it; benefits are achieved after the project
has finished, and the project plans should include activities to plan, measure and assess the benefits
achieved by the project.

Programme Reviews are carried out under OGC Gateway™ Review 0: Strategic assessment. A programme
will generally undergo three or more OGC Gateway Reviews 0: an early Review; one or more Reviews
at key decision points during the course of the programme, and a final Review at the conclusion of
the programme.

Project Reviews are carried out under OGC Gateway Reviews 1 - 5; typically a project will undergo all five
of these Reviews during its lifecycle – three before commitment to invest, and two looking at service
implementation and confirmation of the operational benefits. Project Reviews may be repeated as necessary
depending on the size, scope and complexity of the project. A Review of a project must take into account
the programme context within which the project is located, and possible inter-dependencies with other
projects in the programme. The review will also indicate how far procurements are in alignment with strategic
and policy objectives.

Each of these Reviews is described in the appropriate Workbook.

OGC Gateway Reviews as part of the assurance framework

Every public sector body will have its own structures and resources for carrying out internal reviews,
healthchecks and audits of its activities, including programmes and projects. The OGC Gateway Process
provides a snapshot view of progress, at a point in time and, therefore, should be seen as complementary
to these internal processes, and not a replacement for them.

Organisations should have in place an effective framework to provide a suitable level of assurance
for their portfolio of programmes and projects. This requires management to map their assurance needs
and identify the potential sources for providing them. Public sector bodies are encouraged to ensure
adequate and timely coordination and sharing of information, including plans, between the various
internal review functions.
 5

In addition, SROs should be aware of the extent and limitations of the various review processes – for
example, the fact that an OGC Gateway™ Review has taken place does not replace the need for a full
audit opinion on the effectiveness of risk management, control and governance in the audited area. 5 1
Further, none of these review processes is a substitute for a rigorous governance framework in the
organisation to manage key processes including business planning, investment appraisal and business 0 2
case management (including benefits management), programme and project portfolio management, 4
risk management, procurement/acquisition, and service and contract management.

The Transforming Government Procurement report recommends the creation of a major projects review
3
group to ensure that the most important and complex projects in central civil government are subject
to effective scrutiny at key stages. For these types of projects a stronger assessment of deliverability is
needed at early stages, with stronger support to deal with any concerns those assessments raise.

Role of the Senior Responsible Owner

An OGC Gateway Review is conducted on a confidential basis for the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO);
who has the prime responsibility for initiating the Review. The ownership of the Review Report rests
with the SRO, who is accountable for the implementation of the recommended remedial action and the
programme/project progression.

The SRO is the individual responsible for ensuring that a programme of change or a project meets its
objectives and delivers the projected benefits. The SRO should be the owner of the overall business
change that is being supported by the project and should ensure that the change maintains its business
focus, has clear authority and that the context, including risks, is actively managed. This individual must
be senior and must take personal responsibility for successful delivery of the project. They should be
recognised as the owner throughout the organisation.

Tailoring the OGC Gateway Review

The Workbooks published by OGC provide guidance on the structure of each OGC Gateway Review,
and the areas of investigation to be addressed by the Review Team, together with examples of the
evidence which would demonstrate to the Review Team the satisfactory nature of responses to the
various topics. These topics and the examples of evidence should be regarded as indicative and not
prescriptive; within the overall objectives of each Review stage. The Review Team should consider
whether additional or different topics need to be addressed, and the evidence to be sought. Approaches
may vary according to the context of the programme or project – for example, IT-enabled business
change, property/construction, or policy development/implementation.
6

The wider context of the OGC Gateway™ Process

Policy design Policy Policy Policy

& evaluation implementation operation review

PROGRAMME PROJECT(S)

START
PROGRAMME Develop
business
case
Develop
OGC Gateway
programme Key decision point Review 1:
mandate Business
justification
OGC Gateway Develop
Review 0: Key decision point
Strategic delivery
assessment Develop strategy
programme OGC Gateway
brief Key decision point Review 2:
OGC Gateway Delivery
Review 0: Key decision point strategy
Strategic Undertake
assessment
competitive
Early DELIVER procurement
Gateway 0
PROGRAMME OGC Gateway
Review 3:
Key decision point Investment
decision
Manage
delivery Design,
build, test
OGC Gateway
Review 0: Key decision point
OGC Gateway
Strategic Key decision point
assessment Review 4:
Manage Readiness
for service
delivery OPERATIONAL
OGC Gateway SERVICE
Review 0: Key decision point
Strategic Establish service OGC Gateway
assessment Review 5:
Operational review
Manage Key decision point and benefits
realisation
delivery Initial
Close project, Gateway 5
OGC Gateway
Review 0: Key decision point manage OGC Gateway
Strategic delivered Review 5:
assessment
solution Operational review
and benefits
Mid
Gateway 0 and Mid realisation
CLOSE Gateway 5
performance
PROGRAMME
OGC Gateway
OGC Gateway Key decision point
Review 5:
Review 0: Key decision point
Strategic Decommission Operational review
and benefits
assessment
solution/exit Final
realisation
Close
Final contract Gateway 5
Gateway 0

Feeds into subsequent programmes

OGC Gateway™ Review 1: Overview

About this Workbook

This Workbook supports OGC Gateway Review 1: Business justification. This is the first project Review,
which investigates the Strategic Business Case and proposed way forward to confirm that the project
5 1
is achievable and likely to deliver what is required. The Review checks that:
stakeholders approve the intended benefits from the project 0 2
linkage with programme and organisational objectives is clear 4
the optimum balance of cost, benefits and risk has been identified.
3
Purposes of the OGC Gateway Review 1
Confirm that the Business Case is robust – that is, in principle it meets business need, is affordable,
achievable, with appropriate options explored and likely to achieve value for money
Confirm that appropriate expert advice has been obtained as necessary to identify and/or analyse
potential options
Establish that the feasibility study has been completed satisfactorily and that there is a preferred way
forward, developed in dialogue with the market where appropriate
Confirm that the market’s likely interest has been considered
Ensure that there is internal and external authority, if required, and support for the project
Ensure that the major risks have been identified and outline risk management plans have
been developed
Establish that the project is likely to deliver its business goals and that it supports wider business
change, where applicable
Confirm that the scope and requirements specifications are realistic, clear and unambiguous
Ensure that the full scale, intended outcomes, timescales and impact of relevant external issues
have been considered
Ensure that the desired benefits have been clearly identified at a high level, together with measures
of success and a measurement approach
Ensure that there are plans for the next stage
Confirm planning assumptions and that the Project Team can deliver the next stage
Confirm that overarching and internal business and technical strategies have been taken into account
Establish that quality plans for the project and its deliverables are in place
Confirm that the project is still aligned with the objectives and deliverables of the programme
and/or the organisational business strategy to which it contributes, if appropriate
Evaluation of actions taken to implement recommendations made in any earlier assessment
of deliverability.
8

Business justification
The project initiation process produces a justification for the project based on business needs and an
assessment of the project’s likely costs and potential for success. This first OGC Gateway™ Review
comes after the Strategic Business Case has been prepared and before any development proposal goes
before a Project Board, executive authority or similar group for authority to proceed.

The Review focuses on the project’s business justification. It provides assurance to the Project Board that
the proposed approach to meeting the business requirement has been adequately researched and can be
delivered. It also confirms that the benefits to be delivered from the project have been identified at a
high level, and that their achievement will be tracked using a defined measurement approach.
1: Policy and business context

Areas to probe Evidence expected

1.1 Are all relevant government initiatives Evidence that the SRO or equivalent is
5 1
being addressed? undertaking their responsibilities as required
in relevant policy initiatives, such as 0 2
Achieving Excellence in Construction and
Transformational Government (including
4
Shared Services).
3
1.2 Does the preferred option meet wider Assessment against list of wider
government and organisational policies, government objectives, standards and
strategic objectives, standards and business change programmes (e.g. Achieving
business change programmes? Excellence in Construction and/or
Transformational Government)
Assessment against list of current
organisational strategy and business objectives
and policy initiatives; confirmation of the role
of this project in a wider programme or
policy initiative
Assessment of business justification as stated
in the Strategic Business Case
For IT-enabled projects, compliance with
e-government frameworks such as e-GIF;
consideration of information assurance
requirements in relation to business objectives;
compliance with IT security requirements;
compliance with Freedom of Information
and data privacy requirements
For construction projects, contribution to
property/workspace strategy; health and safety,
sustainability and design quality are considered
Account has been taken of relevant impact
assessment and appraisal issues such as
Regulatory Impact, Sustainable Development
and Environmental Appraisal
Procurement innovation and sustainability issues
have been considered.
10

Areas to probe Evidence expected

1.3 Have the government’s Public Consideration of the UK Government’s Approach

Service Reform initiatives been taken to Public Service Reform (Cabinet Office).
into account?

1.4 Have the internal and external factors Assessment of the objectives, timescales and
affecting the project been identified scale of the project
and assessed? Legislation, policy and regulatory issues taken
into account
Assessment of the stability of the current
business environment and strategic direction
Assessment of dependencies (e.g. other
programmes and projects) that could affect
current priorities
Assessments of impact on existing physical
and technical environment (e.g. brownfield site,
current infrastructure and legacy systems)
Assessment of the skills and knowledge required
by the project for successful implementation,
the availability of skills in the project team,
and access to external expertise; appropriate
allocation of key project roles between internal
staff and consultants or contractors.
2: Business case and stakeholders

11

Areas to probe Evidence expected

2.1 Is there a clear and agreed understanding Business objectives for the project clearly stated
5 1
of business goals and how the project and Specific, Measurable, Agreed, Realistic and
will deliver these? Timely (SMART), and meet the business needs 0 2
of the organisation
4
A strategy for achieving business benefits
defined and agreed with the stakeholders
3
Total scope, including timescales,
documented and agreed with stakeholders
(including end-users or their representatives)
and technical authorities
Scope and requirements specifications are
realistic, clear and unambiguous
Delivery approach and mechanisms defined
and agreed with stakeholders
For IT-enabled projects: IT developments
defined as component(s) of wider programme
of business change/new services to the citizen.
For a mission-critical and/or high risk project,
evidence that the Cabinet IT actions are
being addressed
Evidence of options reviewed and justification
for their selection.

2.2 What are the critical success factors? The critical success factors for each of the
These are the essential areas of activity main objectives.
that must be performed well if the
mission, objectives or goals of the
project are to be achieved.

2.3 Can the critical success factors be Explanation of how the factors will be
quantified or measured? measured; identification of baseline measures
where appropriate
Definition of effective systems for measuring
and tracking the realisation of benefits
For construction projects, Design
Quality Indicators.
12

Areas to probe Evidence expected

2.4 Have all the likely stakeholders Internal and external stakeholders identified
been identified and their needs and documented
clearly understood? Stakeholders’ roles and responsibilities, and
their potential influence on the project,
defined and agreed
End-users for the project identified
and documented
Evidence that the decision-making process is
inclusive of all the relevant stakeholders and is
both efficient and effective
Results of consultations documented as part
of project stakeholder engagement/
communications strategy
If the project traverses organisational boundaries,
there are clear governance arrangements to
ensure sustainable alignment with the business
objectives of all organisations involved.

2.5 Are the external stakeholder issues being Plans for each stakeholder produced showing
addressed? These may include: responsibilities and, if appropriate, role in
communications the project.
public relations
social inclusion (e.g. equality and
diversity issues)
environmental issues
personnel
statutory processes.

2.6 Do stakeholders support the preferred Consultation, involvement, support

option? This includes the potential and endorsement.
or recommended delivery approach
and mechanisms.
 13

Areas to probe Evidence expected

2.7 Has the feasibility study examined a wide Options explored for collaboration with
5 1
enough range of options that will meet other public sector organisations and
the business requirement? programmes/projects 0 2
Where applicable, options have been assessed in 4
accordance with Regulatory Impact Assessments
The advantages and disadvantages for each 3
option to determine its potential for meeting
the critical success factors
Market sounding indicates that suitable solutions
can be provided.

2.8 Is there a clear ‘best option’, or would Options appraised in accordance with
several options meet the business need? principles of the Treasury Green Book
and internal guidance
Options ranked. Examination of all options
that are acceptable in principle
Clear analysis of whole-life costs for
each option.

2.9 If there are several options, how was Sensitivity analysis of all appropriate options
their robustness tested? Major sensitivities included in the list of
identified risks.

2.10 Is the project likely to be attractive to Market sounding taken, including an examination
the market? of recent similar procurements by others, and
indication of suitable suppliers available to
deliver requirements
There is adequate capacity, capability and
competitive interest in the market to meet
the requirement
Early supply-side involvement to help determine
and validate what outputs and outcomes are
sought for the project, including proof of
concept exercises
Senior management are sufficiently engaged
with the industry to be able to assess
supply-side risks.
14

Areas to probe Evidence expected

2.11 Have contract management issues Requirements for ‘intelligent customer’

been considered? capability considered
Arrangements for managing single/multiple
suppliers considered
Where multiple suppliers are likely to be
appointed, high level plans for managing
the interfaces
Appropriate relationship determined and
hence optimum scale of contract(s)
appropriately considered.

2.12 Is the Strategic Business Case complete? Documentary evidence that the preferred
option has been selected from an appropriately
wide range, rigorously assessed and satisfies the
project objectives (including contribution to the
business strategy), is likely to offer value for
money, is affordable and achievable
Stakeholder views (including the general public,
if appropriate) are adequately represented
Objectives are clearly defined and expectations
are realistic
Evidence that appropriate sources of expert
advice have been consulted
Evidence that it is possible to align the delivery
strategy with the overall organisational goal.
3: Risk management

15

Areas to probe Evidence expected

3.1 Are there processes to identify, List of risks and key issues, categorised as
5 1
assess, allocate, manage and monitor strategic, political/reputational, legislative,
current, anticipated and emerging risks implementation and operational service risks 0 2
and issues? (including business, technical, financial and
commercial/contractual risks within these
4
categories as appropriate). In addition:
3
for IT-enabled projects, information security
risks; for e-government, risks relating to
poor take-up
for construction projects, risks relating to
health and safety
for policy projects, Regulatory Impact
Assessment carried out
Risk management strategy developed in
accordance with best practice
Individual with responsibility for managing risk
across the project, mitigation options and
contingency plans
Defined roles, responsibilities and processes
for managing issues and risk across the project,
with clearly defined routes for bringing issues
and risks to the attention of senior management.

3.2 Have the risks for each of the options Current, emerging and anticipated risks classified
been evaluated? by probability, impact, ownership, effect on the
project and counter-measure, contingency
and/or business continuity.

3.3 Have the risks for the preferred option Involvement of senior stakeholders in assessing
been fully assessed? strategic risks
Assessment of risk, costs and benefits to
demonstrate appropriate balance of risk and
reward in the preferred option, demonstrating
planned risk-taking and support for innovation
where appropriate
Plans for managing and allocating through
the contract(s) the risks associated with
the preferred option.
16

Areas to probe Evidence expected

3.4 Have the ‘worst case’ implications Risks financially assessed and risk
associated with these risks been assessed? allocation estimated.

3.5 Are the costs and time implications of Costs and time for managing risks
managing the risks included in the cost separately identified
and time estimate or treated as a separate Costs and time estimated for risk
risk allocation? countermeasures and, where appropriate,
contingency and business continuity plans
Where risks cannot be reduced, the costs of
managing these risks separately identified and
included as a risk allocation provision
Analysis undertaken of the effects of slippage
in time, cost, scope or quality
For construction projects, decisions on how
residual risks are being managed.

3.6 Has the project assessed whether it is Examination of leading-edge projects to assess
breaking new ground in any areas? this project’s impact on the business,
stakeholders and end-users
Evidence of similar projects or activities from
which lessons may be drawn
Innovative solutions assessed by professional
advisers
Consultation with the market to help refine
approach, identify risks and ways in which risks
might be mitigated
Defined approach to management of change in
the affected organisations; sufficient account has
been taken of the current organisational culture,
and leadership and organisational capability.

3.7 Should the project be broken down into Documentation of the chosen approach and
a series of small steps? (Note: this is justification for taking that decision
mandatory for IT-enabled projects and Business Case details any phased delivery or
recommended for complex projects.) expected improvements over time.
4: Readiness for next phase –
delivery strategy
17

Areas to probe Evidence expected

4.1 Is there an overall project structure for A definition of the project approach to
5 1
the Delivery strategy phase? be adopted
Assessment of its suitability. 0 2
4
4.2 Is there a realistic plan to reach OGC Objectives, planning assumptions, constraints,
Gateway™ Review 2: Delivery strategy? activities, quality plans, deliverables and 3
milestones defined and agreed for the next
phase as well as for the remaining phases
Assessment of the validity of
current assumptions
Evidence that the project addresses both short-
term and long-term business requirements
Evidence that suitable solutions are
available from the market and that it has
sufficient capacity
For projects with a design phase, such as
construction projects, evidence that the
project timescale allows enough time for the
development of the required design quality
For IT-enabled projects, evidence of
consideration of a proof of concept stage.

4.3 Have requirements for external specialist Requirements for specialist expertise
advice been determined? considered and resourced
External advice being used appropriately.

4.4 Are internal Project Team skills adequate? Resource Plan for internal staff. Identification
of skills required for next phase of the
project. Skills appraisal and plans for
addressing shortfalls
Training assessment and plans, training sources
Appropriate allocation of key project
roles between internal staff and consultants
or contractors
Project Team has requisite skills or access to
specialist expertise.
18

Areas to probe Evidence expected

4.5 Is the time plan for the next stage Time plan identifies statutory lead times
realistic? Does it take into account any and realistic assessment of time needed for
statutory lead times? pre-procurement activities, if appropriate
Senior management commitment to the
time plan
Time plan for delivery (including
procurement if appropriate) justified and
not longer than necessary.

4.6 Is there a clearly defined project Project organisation and methodology

organisation with agreed roles and Governance/reporting arrangements
responsibilities? Named individuals in key positions, with
appropriate skills, experience and status
(especially appropriate for SRO):
SRO
project manager
project sponsor and/or project director
stakeholder representation
Project Board or project steering group
for construction projects, there should also be
a design champion responsibility; a project
sponsor and independent client adviser/s to
support the SRO (Note: a project manager
may not necessarily be required)
for IT-enabled projects, chief information
officer or equivalent role, an IT/information
security manager/accreditor to support
the SRO
for collaborative projects, a single SRO
assigned and senior representatives from
each collaborating organisation
If the project traverses organisational
boundaries, clear governance arrangements
to ensure sustainable alignment of the business
objectives of all organisations involved, with
clear lines of accountability and ownership.
 19

Areas to probe Evidence expected

4.7 Are there the necessary funds to Budget provision, with costs included in the
5 1
reach an OGC Gateway™ Review 2: Public Spending Review
Delivery strategy? Financial controls for expenditure in place 0 2
on project. 4
4.8 How have re-competition issues been Arrangements in place to provide continuity 3
addressed with incumbent suppliers, of service up to transition to new supplier
if relevant? Agreements with current suppliers on how
they will support due diligence during
procurement phase
Clear separation of roles where incumbent
supplier is bidding for replacement contract
Consideration of workforce issues such as
TUPE, where applicable.
 Project documents

20

The areas of investigation together with examples of evidence should be available before the OGC
Gateway™ Review starts. The information is likely to be found in the documents suggested below, but
may be located in other programme or project documents or elsewhere in the organisation’s
documentation system:
Project Brief with the project’s scope and the need for change
project initiation document or equivalent
quality management strategy
the project approach, including how to deliver the intended outcome
a strategy outlining the approach to business change (including staff training, new facilities,
etc, as appropriate)
an initial assessment of current and proposed physical and technical environment (e.g. IT infrastructure,
workspace facilities)
cost report on the project to date against budget
draft high-level definition of the business requirements and total scope of change
definition of how to judge the project’s success
high-level benefits management plan
for policy projects: Regulatory Impact Assessment
the Strategic Business Case addressing business need, affordability, achievability, value for money and
range of options estimating the project’s cost and benefits; including some form of feasibility study,
sensitivity analysis and market sounding
a communications strategy to keep stakeholders informed of the project’s progress
a list of the major risks, with draft plans for managing them
a high-level activity, time and resource plan for the whole project
plans to move the project through the next stage on to OGC Gateway Review 2: Delivery strategy
funds to cover all work to OGC Gateway Review 2: Delivery strategy
the authority and approval to proceed
how performance is to be reported and monitored
project organisation – key roles and governance/reporting arrangements
for construction projects, Design Quality Indicators
for IT-enabled projects, business impacts identified.
Supporting guidance

21

The OGC Gateway™ Process: A manager’s checklist – provides a set of key questions that SROs should
consider to determine the progress of their programme or project and the potential for success
A Workbook for each OGC Gateway Review provides detailed questions to support each Review. 5 1
The Workbooks can be downloaded from the OGC website, which also includes guidance on
procurement, programme and project management: www.ogc.gov.uk 0
OGC: Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2™: www.ogc.gov.uk 2
4
OGC: Managing Successful Programmes: www.ogc.gov.uk
OGC: Management of Risk: www.ogc.gov.uk 3
OGC: Achieving Excellence in Construction: www.ogc.gov.uk
HM Treasury: Green Book – Appraisal and Evaluation in Central Government – and supporting
supplements: www.hm-treasury.gov.uk
HM Treasury: Orange Book – Management of Risk, Principles and Concepts:
www.hm-treasury.gov.uk
HM Treasury: The Private Finance Initiative (PFI): www.hm-treasury.gov.uk
IT Infrastructure Library® (ITIL®): www.itil.co.uk
Concept Viability: www.intellectuk.org
Cabinet Office Delivery and Transformation Group and CIO Council guidance:
www.cio.gov.uk
Cabinet Office: Professional Policy Making for the 21st Century: www.policyhub.gov.uk
Cabinet Office: Strategy Survival Guide: www.strategy.gov.uk
Cabinet Office: Transformational Government: www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk
Cabinet Office: The UK Government’s Approach to Public Service Reform: www.strategy.gov.uk
Cabinet Office: Professional Skills for Government: http://psg.civilservice.gov.uk
Policy Hub: Impact Assessment and Appraisal: www.policyhub.gov.uk
National Audit Office: Managing Risks to Improve Public Services: www.nao.org.uk
 CP0005/04/07
About OGC
OGC - the UK Office of
Government Commerce -
is an Office of HM Treasury.
The OGC logo is a registered trademark
of the Office of Government Commerce.
OGC Gateway is a trademark of the
Office of Government Commerce.
ITIL® is a registered trademark, and a
registered community trademark of
the Office of Government Commerce,
and is registered in the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office.
IT Infrastructure Library® is a
registered trademark of the Office
of Government Commerce.
PRINCE2™ is a trademark of the
Office of Government Commerce.
OGC Service Desk
OGC customers can contact the
central OGC Service Desk about
all aspects of OGC business.
The Service Desk will also channel
queries to the appropriate
second-line support. We look
forward to hearing from you.
You can contact the Service Desk
8am - 6pm Monday to Friday
T: 0845 000 4999
E: [email protected]
W: www.ogc.gov.uk
Press enquiries
T: 020 7271 1318
F: 020 7271 1345
This document is printed on material comprising 75
Office of Government Commerce, Trevelyan House, 26 - 30 Great Peter Street, London SW1P 2BY per cent post consumer waste and 25 per cent ECF pulp.

Service Desk: 0845 000 4999 E: [email protected] W: www.ogc.gov.uk Version 2.0 © Crown Copyright 2007