SOCIAL SERVICES AND COMMUNITY COMMITTEE - 2018/19 Estimates Examination Vote Social Development Pre-Hearing Questionnaire Questions 1 - 153 June ...

 
SOCIAL SERVICES AND COMMUNITY
                 COMMITTEE

           2018/19 Estimates Examination

                  Vote Social Development

                 Pre-Hearing Questionnaire

                          Questions 1 - 153

                      June 2018
           Minister for Social Development

Vote Social Development                       Page 1 of 98
REPORTS, PLANNING, AND EVALUATION

1.   Please provide a list of all reports were prepared in relation to the baseline update,
     efficiency dividend, value for money or any other savings of the agencies funded under
     the Vote identified for 2018/19?
The Ministry of Social Development (MSD) prepared ministerial briefings for the 2018 Budget
process which included information on its baselines, efficiency dividends, value for money,
savings and cost pressures it is facing for 2018/19.
In addition to this, the 2017 October Baseline Update and the 2018 March Baseline Update were
used to signal additional information on MSD’s baselines where appropriate and relevant.

2.   Please provide a copy of the current work programme and list of projects and major policy
     initiatives to be progressed in 2018/19?
As part of its development of a new organisational strategic direction, MSD recently refreshed
the outcomes it aims to achieve. MSD will include these outcomes in its 2018-2022 Statement
of Intent, which will be published in July 2018.
The current 2017-2022 Statement of Intent is available on MSD’s website.
MSD is the Government’s principal provider of policy advice on social development. It works
with partner agencies in the social and economic sectors with an overall goal of improving social
and economic wellbeing. It provides strategic policy advice across a range of topics and issues,
including housing and accommodation support, income support and employment, the transition
of young people to adulthood, initiatives to support families, issues faced by people with a
disability, positive ageing and social sector initiatives.

3.   Please provide a copy of the purchase agreement/output plan for 2018/19 and identify the
     key changes from the previous financial year. Provide a copy of the reports against the
     performance agreement/output plan that have been provided to the Minister for the
     previous financial year. What are the primary areas of concern that will impact on the
     agencies’ performance in 2018/19?
MSD no longer produces an annual output plan, and has not identified any areas of concern that
will impact on its performance in 2018/19.
MSD will provide the committee with copies of performance reports as part of its Annual Review
for 2017/18.

4.   How many evaluations of policies or programmes are planned to be completed this year?
     What policies or programmes are planned to be evaluated this year or have evaluations
     completed this year? What is the indicative cost, who is conducting the evaluation (if
     known) and when is it due for completion and results reported?
Evaluations planned or to be completed in 2018/2019 are on the following page.

Vote Social Development                                                              Page 2 of 98
Title/Project     Description/Deliverable       Who is carrying      Indicative    Completion
                                                 out the evaluation      Cost         Date
Investment         Service evaluation of         MSD                        From          July 2018
Approach           Work to Wellness                                     baselines

Intensive Client   36 month Impact               MSD                        From          July 2018
Support (ICS)      Evaluation for the ICS                               baselines
                   trial, containing
                   quantitative components
Supporting         Case Study Report of          MSD                   $100,000     November 2018
Offenders into     Participants' experiences
Employment
Individual         Process evaluation and        MSD                     $52,000    December 2018
Placement and      feasibility study of IPS in
Support (IPS) -    a New Zealand context
Odyssey House
Christchurch
Individual         Process evaluation and        MSD                   $112,000     December 2018
Placement and      feasibility study of IPS in
Support -          a New Zealand context
Waitemata
District Health
Board (DHB)
Limited Service    Qualitative evaluation of     MSD                   $100,000     December 2018
Volunteers         the LSV programme
(LSV)
Expansion

Intensive Client   6 month process review        MSD                     $60,000     February 2019
Support            Evaluation for the ICS-X,
Extension (ICS-    Mana Taimahi, containing
X)                 qualitative and
                   quantitative components
Cost-              Annual evaluation of the      MSD                        From         June 2019
effectiveness of   cost-effectiveness o0f                               baselines
MSD                MSD's employment
Employment         assistance for the
Assistance         2017/2018 financial year
Youth Service      Outcome evaluation of the     MSD                        From         June 2019
                   Youth Service Youth                                  baselines
                   Payment and Young
                   Parent Payment
Youth Service      Outcome evaluation of the     MSD                        From         June 2019
                   Youth Service NEETs                                  baselines
                   programme

Ministerial        Qualitative study of the      Unknown (in           $100,000     To be confirmed
Social Sector      impact of the Social          collaboration with
Research Fund:     Workers in Schools            Oranga Tamariki)
Social Workers     service.
in Schools

Vote Social Development                                                                  Page 3 of 98
5.   What reviews of departmental contracting policies or practices are planned to be started
     and/or finished this year? When will/are they expected to be completed?
MSD’s procurement policy is reviewed and updated annually.
Commercial contracts with an all-of-life total value of $100,000 or more are required to be
reviewed by the MSD Procurement Board. For the nine months to March 2018, the Board
received 146 procurements for review.
MSD is currently reviewing its Treaty of Waitangi obligations and Sustainability principles for
inclusion into procurement policy. It estimates completion in December 2018.
The Procurement Capability Index review and the Significant Services Contracts Framework
report are reported to the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) annually
and include reviews of contracting policies and practices.

6.   What reviews of departmental “capability” are planned to be started or completed this
     year? What aspects of capability are being reviewed? Who will undertake these reviews
     and when will these be completed?
An improvement programme is under way to ensure that all of MSD’s corporate service
functions maximise the capability and capacity of existing teams to be more responsive to the
needs of MSD and Oranga Tamariki. Some changes could occur as a result of this programme to
support the provision of more effective corporate services.
As part of the programme MSD is looking at the capability needed in a number of corporate
areas including IT, HR, communications, and risk and assurance.
The improvement programme is being led internally by MSD, supported by external expert
resource in a number of key areas.
It is expected that the initial assessment phase will be completed by mid-2018 with planning
and implementation over 2018/19.

7.   Does the Department/Agency/Ministry prepare a weekly report on current or upcoming
     issues within or related to the Minister’s portfolio, and if so what is this report called, and
     what are the dates and titles of reports produced by the Department/Agency/Ministry
     since 1 November 2017?
Please refer to Appendix 1.

8.   Has the Department/Agency/Ministry prepared any other types of weekly or fortnightly
     reports on current or upcoming issues related to the Minister’s portfolio, and if so what are
     these reports called, and what are the dates and titles of reports produced by the
     Department/Agency/Ministry since 1 November 2017?
Please refer to Appendix 1.

Vote Social Development                                                                  Page 4 of 98
PERFORMANCE MONITORING

9.     What mechanisms do the agencies funded by the Vote have in place in 2018/19 for
       monitoring its achievement of goals against its stated objectives?
MSD reports its achievement of goals through a number of formal monitoring mechanisms
including:
     its Annual Report
     the Vote Social Development Non-departmental Appropriations Report
     quarterly reports to Ministers
     other Ministerial reports
     internal reporting to governance committees.

10.    Provide details of all monitoring, evaluation and auditing of programmes or initiatives that
       will be delivered by the agencies funded by the Vote (including details of all performance
       measures, targets and benchmarks and whether programmes contributed to desired
       outcomes in an efficient and effective manner) in the 2018/19 financial year.
MSD has a continuing programme of research and evaluation, with a stronger focus on
delivering real-time monitoring and evaluation information to decision-makers. This includes
ongoing reviews of indicators and performance measures to improve the impact services have
for people, and to improve the efficiency of those services.
Every year MSD, in consultation with the Treasury and Audit New Zealand, reviews its
performance measures for improvement and appropriateness. Through this process new
performance measures are added and measures that are no longer relevant are removed or
replaced. Performance measures for departmental appropriations are set out in the 2018/19
Estimates of Appropriations for Vote Social Development (the Estimates).
MSD will be tracking a number of performance measures that will be set out in its next
Statement of Intent, due to be published in mid-2018. MSD will continue work to develop its
performance framework in future years.
MSD is also currently redeveloping its annual modelling on the welfare and housing system. This
modelling will be moving away from the previous primary focus on fiscal outcomes and will
instead look at a wider set of outcomes and the ability to measure outcomes for those who
leave benefit. The first results from this new modelling are likely to be available early next year.
MSD’s Risk and Assurance team provides independent assurance and advice to the Chief
Executive and the Leadership Team on governance, risk management and control processes.
The team provides assurance that key systems and processes MSD relies on to support and
deliver services and safeguard its people are operating effectively and efficiently and are
centred on clients.
The projects and programmes, which meet the criteria defined by the Treasury, contribute to
the Treasury’s Government Project Portfolio data collection and Major Project Performance
Reporting. The significant investments follow the Gateway review process driven by the central
agencies.
Programmes are also regularly evaluated to confirm that they meet MSD’s objectives. Please
refer to Questions 4, 31, and 62 (public relations and campaigns only) for details of evaluations
carried out in 2017/18 and planned for 2018/19.

Vote Social Development                                                                 Page 5 of 98
11.   What is the expected timeframe for the provision of draft answers to written
      parliamentary questions to Ministers and what percentage of draft answers were provided
      within this timeframe in the 2017/18 financial year?
Standing Orders require Ministers to respond to written Parliamentary questions within seven
working days of receipt. MSD is expected to provide the Minister with a draft response within
five working days, in order to allow time for approving the response and transmitting it to the
Office of the Clerk. In the period 1 July 2017 to 31 March 2018, MSD achieved this on 95
percent of occasions (performance standard: 95 percent).
MSD will publish the full-year result for this measure in its 2017/2018 Annual Report in October
2018.

12.   What is the expected timeframe for the provision of draft answers to ministerial
      correspondence and what percentage of draft answers were provided within this
      timeframe in the 2017/18 financial year?
MSD is expected to provide draft responses to ministerial correspondence to the Minister within
20 working days of receipt by MSD. In the period 1 July 2017 to 31 March 2018, MSD achieved
this on 99 percent of occasions (performance standard: 95 percent).
MSD will publish the full-year result for this measure in its 2017/2018 Annual Report in October
2018.

Vote Social Development                                                               Page 6 of 98
CHANGES IN VOTES

13.   What work has been undertaken or completed relating to changes in Votes, or operational
      changes made in other agencies which impacts on your agencies funded by the Vote?
Due to the disestablishment of the Families Commission (operating as Superu), the funding
under the Non-departmental Output Expense Families Commission was transferred to the Vote
Social Development Departmental Output Expense Data, Analytics and Evidence Services, the
Vote Justice Departmental Output Expense Social Leadership and Support ,and the Vote
Internal Affairs Multi-Category Appropriation: Policy Advice - Community and Voluntary Sector,
from 1 November 2017.

For details, please refer to 2017/18 Supplementary Estimates of Appropriations for Vote Social
Development, Part 1.4 Reconciliation of Changes in Appropriation Structure.

14.   What amount or amounts, or what programmes, if any, were categorised as capital
      expenditure in prior years but have been categorised in this year or in out-year
      projections, as operating expenditure?
No amounts or programmes have been recategorised from capital expenditure to operating
expenditure.

Vote Social Development                                                             Page 7 of 98
RESTRUCTURING / REVIEWS

15.    Is any restructuring planned in the near future for agencies funded by the Vote; if so,
       what restructuring is planned in 2018/19 and when will this occur? How much is budgeted
       for restructuring costs and what are the estimated savings to be accrued as a result of
       restructuring in 2018/19?
An improvement programme is under way in MSD to ensure that all corporate service functions
maximise the capability and capacity of existing teams to be more responsive to the needs of
MSD and Oranga Tamariki. While there are no restructuring plans as a result of this
programme, some changes could occur to support the provision of more effective corporate
services. MSD has not budgeted for any restructuring costs for the 2018/19 year.
MSD has created a new role - Deputy Chief Executive (DCE) People, Culture and Strategy - to
support momentum around the development of its strategic direction and to make sure the
right organisational structure is in place. The new DCE will be accountable for, and will lead:
     the development of organisational strategies and initiatives
     governance
     workforce, culture and change
     corporate communications
     stakeholder relationships.
Andrea Lawton has been appointed to the new role from 17 September 2018.
Four existing business units within MSD will be realigned into a new group. This is not a formal
restructuring exercise, but only a change in reporting lines.

16.    What evaluations have been carried out prior to any proposed restructuring (provide these
       to the committee)? What restructuring occurred during the past five financial years:
       provide details of structural change, the objective of the restructuring, staffing increases
       or reductions as a result, and all costs associated with the change including costs of
       redundancy?
MSD undertakes reviews of its business group structures from time to time to ensure that the
way it is configured to deliver services is efficient and effective and achieves the best results for
New Zealanders. Each review is designed to be fit for purpose, depending on the size and
complexity of each proposal.
Formal change processes in MSD include a period of analysis of the business requirements and
the development of a proposal for consultation, a period for staff feedback, and consideration of
the feedback prior to release of the final decision document. Prior to any restructuring or
review, senior management approval is required to ensure a sound rationale and alignment to
strategic priorities.
To accelerate its change management maturity, in 2016 MSD implemented an organisation
change management framework. The purpose of the framework is to provide information, tools
and templates to help ensure best practice is applied to projects and programmes that involve
people change.
Details of restructuring in 2017/18 are shown in the table on the next page.

Vote Social Development                                                                  Page 8 of 98
Details                       Objectives                                     Redundancies1

           Service Delivery National     A strong voice of the client and a client                     13
           Office Review                 experience focus to drive service design
                                         and delivery.
           Community Partnerships                                                                        3
           and Programmes Review
           Information Analysis          Broader review beyond structure that                            0
           Platform (IAP) Review         focused on ensuring MSD is getting the
                                         maximum value out of the IAP to deliver
                                         a social investment approach.

MSD has previously provided the Committee with restructure details for 2013/14, 2014/15,
2015/16 and 2016/17. Information for earlier financial years has not been centrally collated.
Please refer to the response to Question 109 for the costs associated with all redundancies from
MSD over the last five financial years, including those noted above.

17.      Will any work be conducted around mergers of departments, ministries or other
         government funded agencies funded by the Vote in the 2018/19 year? If so, for each such
         project, what departments/ministries/entities or agencies are being considered for
         mergers?
Cabinet has agreed to establish a new Ministry of Housing and Urban Development to provide
strong leadership to achieve the Government's housing and urban development priorities.
The new Ministry will be established from 1 August 2018 and officially operating from 1 October.
It will consist of the following initial functions from existing agencies:
       MBIE’s housing and urban policy functions, the Kiwibuild Unit and the Community Housing
        Regulatory Authority
       MSD’s housing policy for emergency, transitional, and public housing
       the monitoring of Housing New Zealand and Tāmaki Redevelopment Company (currently in
        Treasury).

18.      Is any rebranding planned for agencies funded by the Vote in the next financial year? If
         so, how much has been budgeted for this? Was any re-branding done in the past five
         financial years? If so, how much was spent on it?
No rebranding is currently planned for MSD in the next financial year.
In respect of previous years:
       a minor brand update to the logo of Senior Services, at a cost of $2,030, was undertaken in
        2015/16
       in 2013/14, MSD undertook work to refine its logo. The design cost for this was $35,325
        and print material was updated as items came up for reprint.

    1
      Recorded redundancies associated with each review or restructure where the staff member has left MSD between 1
    July 2017 and 31 March 2018. There may be other staff who have been impacted by a change process and are
    working through agreed transition arrangements prior to leaving MSD. These cessations will not be recorded as a
    redundancy until the staff member has actually left.

Vote Social Development                                                                               Page 9 of 98
19.   Do the agencies funded by the Vote have any inquiries or investigations into their
      performance currently being undertaken into its actions by another Government
      Department/Ministry/entity or its associated agencies? If so, please provide the following
      details:
      -    The body conducting the inquiry/investigation
      -    The reason for the inquiry/investigation
      -    The expected completion date
      How does this compare to each of the previous five financial years?

The Office of the Ombudsmen, the Human Rights Commission, and the Office of the Privacy
Commissioner conduct investigations into decisions made by MSD on a regular basis as part of
business-as-usual activity.
MSD has previously provided the Committee with details of investigations carried out in
previous years and now completed.
There are no current inquiries or investigations into MSD.

Vote Social Development                                                             Page 10 of 98
COST PRESSURES AND SERVICE CHARGES

 20.   What services or functions does the Minster intend to cut, curtail, or reallocate funding
       from in the forthcoming financial year for agencies funded in the Vote? Describe the
       service or function concerned and estimate the cost saving.
 While MSD is not intending to cut or curtail any services or functions, it may have to reprioritise
 funding to meet increasing demand and cost pressures in the forthcoming financial year. Any
 such reprioritisation or reallocation of funding may result in changes in how some services are
 delivered. However, details of what services and associated impacts cannot be quantified at this
 stage.

 21.   What cost pressures in this Vote have been identified during the Budget process that have
       not been addressed in Budget 2018, and what were the reasons for not addressing that
       pressure? Please provide a description of each, and the estimate of the associated cost
       over the next four years.
 MSD identified cost pressures of $6.4 million each year for the digital workplace programme
 over the next four years through the Budget 2018 process. The total estimated shortfall over
 the four years is estimated to be around $25.6 million. The Chief Executives of MSD and Oranga
 Tamariki are working through funding options to support the implementation of the Digital
 Workplace programme.
Cost pressure         Description                            Estimated costs for   Reasons for not
                                                             2018/19 - 2020/21     addressing pressure
                                                                not funded ($m)
Digital Workplace     This proposal was to address the                     25.60   MSD is involved in
Programme Shortfall   shortfall between the anticipated                            ongoing discussions
                      reduction in MSD’s shared services                           with Oranga Tamariki
                      charge as a result of Oranga                                 and Treasury to
                      Tamariki’s digital workplace                                 determine where the
                      programme, and the actual                                    shortfall will be met.
                      variable component of MSD’s                                  MSD will continue to
                      shared services costs that relate to                         invoice Oranga
                      DWP.                                                         Tamariki in the
                                                                                   interim.

 22.   What programmes/projects, if any, will be delayed in the 2018/19 financial year and what
       is the reason for any delay in delivery or implementation?
 There are currently no programmes or projects which are planned to be delayed in the 2018/19
 financial year.

 Vote Social Development                                                                   Page 11 of 98
23.   How much funding for specific projects, policies or programmes has been carried forward
      from the previous financial year? For each, please provide the following details:
      -      Name
      -      Location
      -      Name of provider(s)
      -      Amount of funding being brought forward
      -      Amount of funding already spent
      -      Amount of funding originally budgeted for the project
      -      Estimation completion date.

The table below outlines funding for specific projects, policies or programmes that has been
carried forward from 2017/18. The amounts are in-principle transfers sought via the 2018
March Baseline update to carry funding forward from 2017/18 to 2018/19. The final amount
transferred will be determined once the 2017/18 year end result has been finalised.
Programme         Location   Provider             Funding      Funding       Funding     Estimation
                                                   carried      already    originally    completion
                                                  forward      spent in    budgeted      date
                                                   ($000)     2017/18         for the
                                                                ($000)     project in
                                                                            2017/18
                                                                              ($000)
Restructuring     National   Various               10,033            967      11,000       2018/19
costs             Office     contractors
associated                   /consultants
with
Simplification
Investment        National   Uniservices            1,500             0        1,500       2018/19
approach trials   Office
to reduce
long-term
welfare
dependence

Supporting        National   Various                3,000             0        3,000       2018/19
Offenders into    Office     contractors
Employment                   /consultants
trials
Security and      National   Software                  500            0          500       2018/19
Occupation        Office     providers
Health and
Safety
(SOSHI)
system
replacement
Inter-Agency      National   Staff & Various           136            0          136       2018/19
Accreditation     Office     contractors
programme                    /consultants
Earthquake        National   N/A                       152            68         220       2018/19
Business          Office
recovery
Grants

Vote Social Development                                                                 Page 12 of 98
24.   How many projects or contracts signed in 2017/18 that were due to be completed in
      2018/19 are now expected to be shelved, curtailed or pushed into out years and for each,
      what was the project name, what was the total budgeted cost, what is the actual cost to
      date, what was its purpose and why will it not be completed in 2018/19?
No programmes or projects approved in 2017/18 and due to be completed in 2018/19 are
currently planned to be shelved, curtailed or pushed into out years.

25.   What cuts or reprioritised savings in the Vote for 2018/19 were the result of an
      underspend in 2017/18 year and for each, what budgets were under spent and why were
      they under spent?
In July 2017, as part of a number of changes to social sector leadership arrangements, the
previous Government agreed to disestablish the Families Commission (operating as Superu). As
a result the 2017/18 baseline was reduced by $4.115 million and the 2018/19 baseline by
$4.164 million.
There were no other budgets that were underspent that resulted in cuts or reprioritised
spending in the Vote for 2018/19.

26.   How much funding will be carried over in the Vote from the 2017/18 year into the
      2018/19 year and what for what reason or reasons will these funds be carried over?
The table below shows the in-principle transfers sought via the 2018 March Baseline update to
carry funding forward from 2017/18 to 2018/19. The final amount transferred will be
determined once the 2017/18 year end result has been finalised.
Name of Appropriation          In-principle   Carry forward reason
                           expense transfer
                                request $m
Data, Analytics and                   1.120   Families Commission – The disestablishment of Superu and the
Evidence Services                             transfer of these research programmes to MSD resulted in
                                              delays in contract schedules and the development and
                                              contracting of new research as effective project government
                                              standards needed to be met.
                                      1.277   Analytics to the Frontline – The programme is proceeding and
                                              there have been no major changes to the overall direction.
                                              However, two aspects of the programme have changed relating
                                              to the platform delivery and the use cases, and this has caused
                                              delays in delivery and implementation. This has resulted in a
                                              delay of approximately six months in the project. Therefore
                                              there is a need to transfer funding forward to meet future costs
                                              of this programme.
Improved Employment and               0.037   Individual Placement Support (IPS) for Clients with Mental
Social Outcomes Support                       Health conditions – Due to contract delays with the trial and
MCA                                           commissioning of work, the evaluation of IPS has been delayed.
                                      2.100   DHB Trial Funding – Some of the trial implementations rely on
                                              medical centres and general practitioners (GPs) to engage with
                                              the service and this has taken longer than planned, which has
                                              impacted on achieving the expected employment outcomes from
                                              the trials. It has also taken considerable time to go through the
                                              external Health and Disability Ethics Committee for approval. To
                                              mitigate this, we have agreed with the respective DHB’s to
                                              extend the trial for a further eight months.

Vote Social Development                                                                        Page 13 of 98
Name of Appropriation           In-principle   Carry forward reason
                            expense transfer
                                 request $m
                                       4.100   Supporting Offenders into Employment Trial – Planning and
                                               implementing the trial initiative has taken longer than
                                               anticipated. The start of the Trial was delayed due to the
                                               difficulties associated with contracting the required providers
                                               and the establishment of the necessary systems and
                                               communications with the Department of Corrections. The delay
                                               resulted in a time-lag for recruiting participants into the trial.
                                               Agencies are working with a group of clients who often have
                                               high and complex needs and the innovative aspects of the
                                               service means that agencies have been learning during the
                                               implementation of the trial. This has contributed to a slower
                                               uptake by clients than expected.
                                       1.000   Health Research Council (HRC) initiative – This initiative was
                                               initially planned for the 2017/18 year and funding was
                                               reprioritised from within baselines for that year. However an RFP
                                               released in February 2018 has resulted in a change in the actual
                                               start date of the research contract to August 2018. This was to
                                               allow for the external assessment committee’s funding
                                               recommendations to be made available for the meeting with the
                                               HRC. This stage has taken longer than planned, resulting in the
                                               need for transfer.
                                       5.500   Intensive Client Support – Extension – The project team
                                               commenced their work in late June 2017 with a go-live date
                                               scheduled for October 2017. However, the recruitment phase
                                               required for this project has taken longer than planned. The new
                                               team have since been recruited and trained and the trial went
                                               live on 19 March 2018.
                                       7.183   Simplification Capability Reinvestment / Client Facing Role
                                               Review – This review work has been completed. with
                                               implementation to follow. Financial impacts will be met from the
                                               capability reinvestment fund and are likely to commence in the
                                               2018/19 year.
                                       3.700   Simplification Specific Targeted Change – Due to the uncertainty
                                               in the timing of staff reductions and targeted change initiatives a
                                               further request to transfer funding is now required. This funding
                                               will be used to meet future change costs in Service Delivery.
Community Support                      0.100   Kaupapa Māori Good Practice Guidelines – The tender for the
Services MCA                                   Guidelines was due to open on 9 February 2018. We were
                                               unable to go to tender until issues regarding ownership of
                                               intellectual property were resolved between MSD, ACC and Nga
                                               Kaitiaki Mauri. A delay in the opening of the tender process has
                                               set back key dates in the procurement process and the selection
                                               of an appropriate supplier. This has resulted in the need for an
                                               in-principle expense transfer of up to $100,000 to ensure that
                                               the above Guidelines are developed and successfully delivered in
                                               2018/19.
Independent advice on                  0.300   Overhaul of the Welfare System: Expert Welfare Advisory Group
Government Priority Areas                      – The expense transfer is to provide flexibility to the Group to
MCA                                            plan its spending over the course of the work.

27.   How much are the agencies funded by the Vote expecting to cut their overall budget by in
      2018/19 and each of the out years as a result of Budget 2018 and what options are being
      considered about how and where such cuts will be made?
No reduction in MSD’s departmental baseline is expected as a result of Budget 2018.

Vote Social Development                                                                           Page 14 of 98
28.   Have any cuts or reprioritised savings to the budgets of the agencies funded by the Vote
      for 2018/19 come from frontline services; if so, for each what is the name of the service,
      how much has been reprioritised and what was the reason for the reprioritisation?
No cuts or reprioritised savings in Budget 2018 have come from frontline services.

29.   What savings or cuts have been reprioritised in Budget 2018; for each please provide the
      name of the service, initiative or programme, how much has been reprioritised for each
      year and what was the reason for the reprioritisation?
MSD will cease funding Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptives (LARCs) for women with low
incomes, due to low uptake. Between October 2012 and December 2016, MSD only paid 819
grants to 699 people amounting to $140,000. This is significantly short of the target of 16,000
grants.
In Budget 2017 Vote Health received $17.5 million over four years to provide free access to
contraceptive consultations (including free insertion and removal of LARCs) for low-income
women; it will also fund improved contraceptive counselling and rates of prescribing through
the development of guidelines and training for primary care providers.
Support will now be provided for through the public health system. Approximately $30,000 per
year will be reprioritised.
The reduction in GP costs for low-income New Zealanders who have a Community Services Card
and receive a Disability Allowance will result in Disability Allowance payments being reduced.
This will generate savings of $39.5 million over four years.
Please also refer to the response to Question 25.

Vote Social Development                                                              Page 15 of 98
NEW INITIATIVES / BUDGET BIDS

30.      What new services, functions or outputs do the agencies funded by the Vote intend to
         introduce in the forthcoming financial year? Describe these and estimate their cost.
MSD has no new services, functions or outputs funded by Vote Social Development in Budget
2018. However the Winter Energy Payment, which was announced ahead of the Budget as part
of the wider Families Package, is estimated to cost $1.81 billion over five years.

31.      For each new spending initiative introduced over the past three Budgets (i.e. Budget 2015
         and Budget 2016 and Budget 2017), what evaluation has been undertaken of its
         effectiveness and what were the findings of that initiative? Please provide a copy of the
         evaluation report. Where no evaluation has been completed, what provision has been
         made for an evaluation to occur and what is the timeframe for that evaluation?
The table below provides a list of the initiatives introduced over the last three Budgets the
status of the evaluations that have been undertaken or are scheduled to occur and the
timeframes for these evaluations:
    Linked      Initiative                Timeframe for        Findings of evaluations of               Status of
      to                                  evaluation           effectiveness                            evaluation2
    Budget
     2017       Individual Placement      2018-2019            Evaluation not yet completed.            Evaluation
                Support (IPS)                                                                           activities are
                Evaluation -                                                                            under way.
                Waitemata DHB
                IPS - Odyssey House       2018-2019            Evaluation not yet completed.            Evaluation
                Christchurch                                                                            activities are
                                                                                                        under way.
     2016       Investment                2016-2017            Stroke Return to Work trial              In publication
                Approach trials                                mixed methods evaluation                 process
                                                               completed but not yet published.
                                          2018                 Oranga Mahi – Reach –                    Evaluation being
                                                               Evaluation planned for June 2018         scoped

                                          2018-2019            Oranga Mahi – Step Up –                  Evaluation being
                                                               Prototype being extended                 scoped

                                          2017-2018            Oranga Mahi – RESTORES –in               Evaluation being
                                                               prototype stage                          scoped

                                          2017-2018            Oranga Mahi – Rākau Rangatira            Evaluation
                                                               –in prototype stage                      contracted, not
                                                                                                        yet completed
     2015       Children living in        No provision         N/A                                      No work
                material hardship         made for future                                               commissioned
                                          evaluation
                Child, Youth and          No provision         N/A                                      No work
                Family one-to-one         made for future                                               commissioned
                placements3               evaluation

2
    At 30 April 2018.
3
    This initiative was transferred to Oranga Tamariki-Ministry for Children and Vote Oranga Tamariki in April 2017.
Vote Social Development                                                                                    Page 16 of 98
Linked    Initiative               Timeframe for     Findings of evaluations of            Status of
   to                               evaluation        effectiveness                         evaluation2
 Budget
           LSV Scheme               Annual            Cost-effectiveness of Work and        Evaluation
                                                      Income employment assistance          complete
                                                      Report being drafted for 2016/17
           Participation and        No provision      N/A                                   No work
           inclusion for disabled   made for future                                         commissioned
           people                   evaluation
           Security Response        2016              MSD commissioned Ernst and            Completed June
           Programme                                  Young (EY) to undertake two           2016.
                                                      independent reviews. The Final
                                                      EY Summary report is available
                                                      on MSD’s website.

           Enhanced use of          No provision      N/A                                   No work
           authoritative data       made for future                                         commissioned
                                    evaluation
           Flexible Childcare       2015              Evaluation of the Flexible            Evaluation
           Assistance                                 Childcare Assistance trial            completed 2015.

                                    2018              Trial extended to 26 weeks            Extension
                                                      assistance. Evaluation of this will   evaluation
                                                      commence in 2018                      planned for
                                                                                            2018/19
           Organisational           2014              No findings in relation to            Evaluation report
           Capability                                 effectiveness                         completed 2014
           Framework
           Family Centred           2015              N/A                                   Not presently able
           Services Fund                                                                    to be evaluated
                                                                                            for effectiveness

For evaluations that have been completed, copies of evaluation reports can be made available
on request or are available on the MSD website.

32.   For each new spending or savings initiative in Budget 2018, how have the estimated costs
      or savings been estimated? Please outline the formulae and assumptions used.
All costs or savings from new initiatives in Budget 2018 were calculated based on current
information on the price, standards and quantity of outputs that are produced or purchased by
MSD. Each initiative was calculated individually based on the policy proposal.

33.   What new spending or savings initiatives were considered for Budget 2018 but were not
      proceeded with? Please provide a description of each, with an estimate of the associated
      cost over the next four years, and the reason each initiative was not proceeded with.
Any Budget 2018 bids that were not proceeded with remain under active consideration.

Vote Social Development                                                                       Page 17 of 98
34.   In preparing bids for Budget 2018, what consultation took place with other political
      parties? Please specify:
      -    number of meetings
      -    when they took place
      -    who attended
      -    what items were discussed
      -    what changes, if any were made to Budget bids following this meeting
      -    the titles of any reports prepared for, or generated after the meeting.
      Please attach:
      -    Copies of any reports prepared for, or generated after the meeting
      -    Copies of agendas for any meetings

Cabinet Office circular CO (17) 10 requires consultation between Labour, New Zealand First and
the Green Party on all significant policy and legislative proposals, significant government
appointments, and other particularly sensitive or controversial issues.
Ministers ensure that the parties to the Coalition and Confidence and Supply agreements are
consulted and included as set out in the agreements, working through the parties’ respective
Chiefs of Staff.

35.   How many Budget bids were submitted for this Vote for Budget 2018 and of those how
      many were successful?
Eighteen bids were submitted for Budget 2018 for Vote Social Development, 13 of which were
successful.

36.   How many successful Budget bids received funding of less than 75% of that sought?
Four of the successful Vote Social Development bids received less than 75 percent of that
sought.

37.   How many Budget bids failed for this Vote in Budget 2018? Please provide the titles of all
      failed Budget bids. Are any of the failed Budget being considered for resubmission as part
      of Budget 2019; if so, which ones?
Five bids were unsuccessful and remain under active consideration.

Vote Social Development                                                              Page 18 of 98
USER CHARGES

38.      What user charges will be collected by the agencies funded by the Vote in the forthcoming
         year? Please break this down by existing user charges, extended user charges and new
         user charges.
MSD has no plans to introduce or collect user charges in 2018/19.

PROPERTY / CAPITAL WORKS

39.      How much funding has been allocated to capital works by the agencies funded by the Vote
         in the forthcoming financial year? How does this figure compare to that allocated and that
         spent in the past five financial years?
MSD’s capital intentions are outlined in the Estimates.
The table below sets out the funding allocated to capital works in the capital plan and the actual
expenditure, where available, for the past five years:
                                    Year                     Budget      Actual ($m)
                                                               ($m)
                                    2018/19                 121.7994     Not available
                                    2017/18                  107.040     Not available
                                    2016/17                  103.798           84.4065
                                    2015/16                  120.838           112.314
                                    2014/15                   91.000            90.935
                                    2013/14                   68.962            66.059

40.      What assets are planned to be sold by the agencies funded by the Vote in 2018/19, and
         how does that compare to the past five financial years?
In 2018/19 MSD plans to sell or trade in motor vehicles, photocopiers, computers and other
equipment as part of the normal replacement cycle for these assets.
The table below shows the amount collected from asset sales for the last five years and the
estimated amount for 2017/18:
                                   Year                      Amount collected ($m)
                                   2017/18 (estimated)                             2.000
                                   2016/17                                         1.511
                                   2015/16                                         1.863
                                   2014/15                                         1.750
                                   2013/14                                         1.844
                                   2012/13                                         2.275

4
    Increased expenditure due to new projects for Availability and Resilience and Future State Physical Environment.
5
 Reduced expenditure due to completion of the National Office relocation to the Terrace and work continued on the
Simplification projects.

Vote Social Development                                                                                    Page 19 of 98
41.    How much floor space do the agencies funded by the Vote lease, what is the annual cost
       per square metre in each specific building, and how does this compare with each of the
       past five financial years?
At 31 March 2018, MSD had 151 leased sites nationwide. The table below provides the total size
and gross average costs of leasing MSD’s commercial property portfolio, including National
Office, in the last five years. The data provided reflects an organisational change from 1 April
2017 when Oranga Tamariki was established.
                               Year to Date    Area (m²)      Gross $/m²
                               March 2018        144,657             244
                               June 2017         150,120             229
                               June 2016         210,695             206
                               June 2015         215,587             201
                               June 2014         216,512             202
                               June 2013         219,671             199

It is difficult to directly compare annual cost per square metre by building across a large
portfolio for the following reasons:
     the space occupied in each building can change
     rents in each building rise and fall as rent reviews occur.

42.    How much floor space do the agencies funded by the Vote lease for their head office in
       Wellington, what is the annual cost per square metre in each specific building, and how
       does this compare with each of the past five financial years?
MSD leased 20,698m2 of floor space for its head office in Wellington, at an average cost of $417
per square metre as at 31 March 2018. The table below provides the total size and gross
average costs of leasing for the last five years:
                         Year to Date            Area (m²)          Gross $/m²
                         March 2018                  20,698                417
                         June 2017                   28,575                439
                         June 2016                   29,391                250
                         June 2015                   30,194                251
                         June 2014                   29,391                250
                         June 2013                   29,391                250

The decrease in area of floor space let on and after 30 June 2017 is due to the separation of
Oranga Tamariki from MSD. Two additional National Office sites have been acquired since 1 July
2017 to accommodate various MSD projects and initiatives. This has resulted in an overall
increase in MSD National Office floor space and a decrease in rent per square metre, as the new
sites are leased at a lower rate.

Vote Social Development                                                               Page 20 of 98
43.   Have the agencies funded by the Vote cancelled any renovations, refurbishments or
      redecoration projects as a result of Budget 2018? If so, please provide the following
      details:
      -    Details of the project
      -    Location of the project
      -    Estimated cost of the project
      -    Estimation completion date

No renovations, refurbishments or redecoration projects will be cancelled as a result of Budget
2018.

44.   Have the agencies funded by the Vote cancelled any other capital projects as a result of
      Budget 2018? If so, please provide the following details:
      -    Details of the project
      -    Location of the project
      -    Estimated cost of the project
      -    Estimation completion date

No capital projects were cancelled as a result of Budget 2018.

45.   What is the budgeted amount for each renovation, refurbishment or redecoration project
      in offices or buildings of the agencies funded by the Vote that is expected to cost more
      than $5,000 in the 2018/19 financial year? For each, please provide the following details:
      -    Details of the project
      -    Location of the project
      -    Name of provider(s) or manufacturer(s)
      -    Type of product or service generally provided by the above
      -    Estimated cost of the project
      -    Estimated completion date
      -    Whether tenders were invited, if so, how many were received
      -    List separately any single item of furniture worth more than $5,000 and its cost.

MSD’s draft Capital Plan for 2018/19 is yet to be approved. This covers individual projects
where estimates have been prepared. The draft Capital Plan details 71 potential projects
ranging from $35,000 to $1,265,000.
Projects with costs greater than $5,000 that are yet to be identified are funded from the asset
replacement pooled funds, and are not approved individually as part of the draft Capital Plan.
Budget information for renovations, refurbishments or redecorations for 2018/19 cannot be
provided because MSD’s 2018/19 budget for these items is yet to be set.

Vote Social Development                                                              Page 21 of 98
46.    What offices of the agencies funded by the Vote are planned to be closed in the 2018/19
       financial year and for each what is the location of the office, how many staff are employed
       there and what is the annual budget of the office? If it is for a relocation please indicate
       where it will be relocated to.
MSD has no plans to close sites in the 2018/19 financial year. Its Kaitaia service centre will
relocate in August 2018 from 32-38 Commerce Street to new premises at 28 North Park Drive.
MSD is proactive in managing its property portfolio as opportunities arise to replace existing
offices with more appropriate and ‘right sized’ offices. Planning for this work is at various stages
and subject to negotiations with multiple property owners.

47.    What offices of the agencies funded by the Vote were closed in 2017/18 and how much is
       the closure of each office expected to save the Department/Ministry/entity in 2018/19
       financial year? If it was for a relocation please indicate where it was relocated to.
Four leases were terminated and the activities relocated into existing or new premises nearby:
     New Plymouth Work and Income and Regional Service Delivery offices relocated from 60
      Gill Street to new premises at the corner of Devon Street and Dawson Street.
     Huntly Work and Income relocated to existing sites in Ngaruawahia and Hamilton as well as
      temporary accommodation in Huntly. A new permanent replacement site will be established
      in 2018/19.
     Helensville Heartlands relocated into the Helensville Service Delivery site.
     Hamilton Central Service Centre relocated from 317 Victoria Street into temporary existing
      space at 468 Anglesea Street. A new permanent replacement site will be established in
      2018/19.
These relocations have not led to any overall savings.

48.    Do the agencies funded by the vote intend to reduce the opening hours of any of their
       regional offices or offices other than the head office the 2018/19? If so, for each, please
       provide the new and previous opening hours, date of change, and location.
MSD has no current plans to reduce the opening hours of any of its offices in 2018/19.
However, MSD manages a large network of regional sites, covering the length and breadth of
New Zealand, and f From time to time may have to change the opening hours of some sites
following certain events such as security threats or flooding, or while refurbishments are
completed. Client and staff safety, and client needs, are central to any decision to change site
opening hours.

Vote Social Development                                                                 Page 22 of 98
ICT

49.    What IT projects, if any, are expected to be shelved or curtailed in the 2018/19 year and
       how much will have been spent on each project before it is shelved or curtailed?
No ICT enabled projects or programmes are planned to be shelved or curtailed in the 2018/19
year.

50.    How much expenditure is planned in this vote for software licensing fees in the 2018/19
       financial year and how does this compare with spending in each of the past five financial
       years?
The budget for the 2018/19 financial year has yet to be finalised. The total expenditure planned
for software licencing fees based on the average spend over the last four years, is estimated to
be around $29.6 million. Microsoft licenses (for desktops) are excluded as they are included in
the price of the PC and we don’t differentiate when the PC’s are purchased.
       2014                2015                 2016                2017              2018/19
                                                                                     (estimated)
    $15,944,334         $16,959,470         $19,300,431          $23,992,778         $29,585,576

51.    How many websites do the agencies funded by the Vote plan to run in 2018/19 and for
       each, what is it called, what is its URL, when was it established, what is its purpose and
       what is the annual cost of operating it?
MSD plans to run 18 websites in 2018/19. Information on website name, URL, established year,
purpose and operating costs can be found in Appendix 2.

52.    What new ICT projects do the agencies funded by the Vote plan to work on in 2018/19?
       For each what is the budget for the project, the key milestones, the expected completion
       date, and the risks and benefits associated with it?
MSD’s draft Capital Plan for 2018/19 is yet to be approved. New programme items being
considered are the following:
     Annual IT Capital Asset Management Programme (software and hardware refreshment and
      upgrades)
     IT Security Programme (Information Systems Security Vulnerability Remediation)
     IT Security Programme (Identify and Access Management)
     Financial Management System (legacy replacement).
Budget information for ICT projects for 2018/19 cannot be provided because the budget for
these items is yet to be set. The final composition of the portfolio and further details of the
projects will be available once the detailed planning of MSD’s capital portfolio for 2018/19 has
been completed.

Vote Social Development                                                                Page 23 of 98
GIFTS AND EXTERNAL RELATIONSHIPS

53.   What policies do the agencies funded by the Vote have on accepting corporate gifts or
      hospitality? How does this compare to the past financial year? Please list all corporate gifts
      or hospitality accepted by staff in the previous financial year with the following details:
      -       Gift or hospitality accepted
      -       Position of staff member who accepted
      -       Estimated value
      -       Date received
      -       Name of the organisation or individual who paid for/gave the gift or hospitality.

MSD’s Donation and Gifts Policy does not generally allow the giving of gifts or donations to staff
members, nor are staff normally allowed to accept donations, gifts or hospitality, whether they
are in the form of goods, services or other benefits.
An exception would be when it is culturally appropriate to accept such gifts, such as koha, or
non-acceptance is deemed to be likely to cause offence. Anything over $50 becomes MSD
property and is recorded in gift registers maintained by each business group.
This policy has not changed in the last five years.
Details of gifts and hospitality received by MSD’s Chief Executive are available on the MSD
website.
The following other corporate gifts or hospitality with a value, or estimated value, of $50 or
over were received in 2017/18.
 Date            Description    Recipient        Donor             Value       Disposal
 received
 April 2018      Book –         Senior Manager   Menz Shed NZ      $60         Book
                 History of                                                    delivered to
                 New Zealand                                                   Chief
                 Women by                                                      Executive’s
                 Barbara L                                                     Office for
                 Brookes                                                       Ministerial
                                                                               use as
                                                                               decided
 December        Xmas gift      Staff member,    Kiwi Property     $50         Accepted
 2017            pack           Corporate
 September       Sporting       Staff member,    Deloitte          Estimated   Accepted
 2017            event ticket   Corporate                          to be
                                                                   more
                                                                   than $50

Vote Social Development                                                                   Page 24 of 98
54.       What policies do the agencies funded by the Vote have on giving gifts to external
          organisations or individuals? How does this compare to the past financial year? Please list
          all gifts given to external organisations or individuals in the previous financial year with
          the following details:
          -     Gift given
          -     Name of external organisation or individual
          -     Reason given
          -     Estimated value
          -     Date given.

MSD’s policy on the giving of gifts or donations is set out in its Financial Policies document. The
relevant section reads as follows:
No gifts or donations are to be given except for:
     koha
     other culturally appropriate gifts or contributions
     external guest speakers offering their services for no consideration
     where MSD is hosting, organising or attending international conferences and an exchange
      of gifts is deemed appropriate or there is a cultural expectation, the Chief Executive may
      approve a gift with an appropriate value
     MSD assets with the explicit approval of the Chief Executive
     Gifts received, which are then donated to the Social Club, in a situation where:
      o       gifts are offered and non-acceptance will offend the giver, the employee should accept
              in the name of MSD. These must be reported to the manager for appropriate action.
      o       gifts become MSD’s property, it will be converted to MSD’s use, donated to the social
              club or disposed of.
This policy has not changed in the last financial year.
The following gift valued at $100 or more was given to an external organisation in 2017/18.
      Date            Description    Recipient    Reason                                          Value
      March           Ornaments      Simply NZ    In partnership with the Japanese Cabinet           $114
      2018                                        Office, the Office for Disability Issues co-
                                                  ordinated the selection and preparation of
                                                  a delegation of young leaders on youth
                                                  issues, seniors, and disability to Japan.
                                                  The gifts were provided to the delegation
                                                  lead to take to Japan for occasions when a
                                                  formal expression of thanks was required.

Vote Social Development                                                                          Page 25 of 98
55.    What policies do the agencies funded by the Vote have on the organisation giving gifts to
       staff? How did this compare to the past financial year? Please list all gifts given to staff
       exceeding $100 in value in the previous financial year with the following details:
       -     Gift or hospitality accepted
       -     Position of staff member
       -     Reason given
       -     Estimated value
       -     Date given.

There are occasions when it is appropriate for MSD to acknowledge and recognise the
contributions of staff. As such, MSD may incur expenditure to recognise special achievements,
circumstances or events for staff.
Acceptable expenditure includes:
     the purchase of food (e.g. morning teas) to celebrate a specific achievement, effort or
      occasion
     Christmas functions
     flowers, chocolates or gift baskets for an employee who has experienced a specific event
      e.g. birth, wedding, hospitalisation, death of a close relative etc, or whose individual
      achievements have been officially recognised.
This expenditure is classified as a business expense, rather than a gift to staff.
No gifts exceeding $100 were given to staff in 2017/18.

56.    What potential conflicts of interest have been identified by the agencies funded by the
       Vote regarding the board, management or senior staff in 2018/19? For each, please
       provide the following details:
       -     Conflict identified.
       -     Whether or not any contract, policy, consent or other consideration has been
             entered into with any entity identified in any conflict in the past five financial years.
       -     Value of any contract, policy, consent or other consideration has been entered into
             with any entity identified in any conflict in each of the past five financial years.
       -     Steps taken to mitigate any possible conflict in granting any contract, policy, consent
             or other consideration which has been entered into with any entity identified in any
             conflict in each of the past five financial years.

MSD has clear expectations about managing conflicts of interest. These are outlined in its Code
of Conduct and relevant policies and procedures.
All staff, including senior management, are expected to identify and disclose any actual or
potential conflicts of interest on an ongoing basis, so that the conflicts can be appropriately
managed. Any conflict concerns when raised are dealt with individually and documented on the
employee’s personal file; conflicts of interest are not centrally maintained.
MSD maintains a conflicts of interest register for its Leadership Team and Governance
Committees, which is updated quarterly.
In May 2018, four conflicts were identified relating to organisations that could be contracted by
MSD. These relate to:
     a relative who is employed by a Ministry supplier
Vote Social Development                                                                   Page 26 of 98
      a relative who is a member of the board of a social services provider
      a member of a trust that has contracts with MSD
      a beneficiary of a number of tribal authorities that may have contracts with MSD.
Other identified conflicts relate to a relative working in another state sector organisation and a
relative being a local government official. A member of the Leadership Team also holds shares
in a supplier company.
Members of the Leadership Team and governance committees take care in any discussions
where there is or may be a conflict of interest, and do not take part in any related funding or
consent decisions.

57.      What non-government organisations, associations, or bodies, if any, do the agencies
         funded by the Vote intend to be a member of during 2018/19? For each, what is the cost
         for each of its memberships and how does this compare to each of the past five financial
         years?
MSD intends to continue its membership in the following non-government organisations
(NGOs), associations and professional bodies:
      the Hague Convention
      Institute of Public Administration NZ
      International Social Security Association
      Philanthropy NZ.
Membership costs for 2018/129 are not yet known.
The table below provides a comparison of MSD’s memberships of NGOs, associations and other
professional bodies for the last five years where the membership cost is over $5,000 per
annum. This excludes individual staff membership of professional bodies and organisations such
as the New Zealand Law Society, NZ Institute of Chartered Accountants, and other similar
bodies.
                                                    2013/14       2014/15        2015/16   2016/17     2017/18
Organisation name
                                                        ($)           ($)            ($)       ($)         ($)
Hague Convention6                                      14,723      12,299         15,157    14,922       15,0007

NZ Building Green Council                                     -           -            -         -              -

Institute of Public Administration NZ                   7,700       7,700          7,700     7,700         8,085

International Social Security Association              36,049      33,858         41,788    51,041        52,113

International Social Services                          14,282      14,797         15,979    14,887             -8

Philanthropy NZ                                               -    10,000         10,000         -

6
 Since 2013 MSD has paid a share of the New Zealand Government’s membership subscription for the Hague
Convention, by invoice from the Ministry of Justice.
7
    This is an approximate figure as MSD is yet to be invoiced.
8
    No membership since April 2017 after the establishment of Oranga Tamariki.

Vote Social Development                                                                              Page 27 of 98
58.   How many penalties for late payment of an invoice do the agencies funded by the Vote
      expect to incur in the 2018/19 year, and how does this compare to the past five financial
      years
MSD has not incurred any penalties for late payments in the last five financial years and does
not expect to incur any in the 2018/19 financial year.

59.   What is the total value of penalty interest payments incurred by the agencies funded by
      the Vote over each of the past five financial years due to late payment of invoices to small
      and medium sized businesses which the agencies funded by the Vote hold contracts with?
      What is it expected to be in the 2018/19 financial year?
MSD has not incurred any penalty interest payments over the last five financial years and does
not expect to incur any in the 2018/19 financial year.

60.   How many contracts are expected to be awarded by the agencies funded by the Vote with
      a value of $1 million or more in the 2018/19 financial year, where known listed by name
      of company contracted and total value of contract? How does that compare with each of
      the past five financial years?
The table below lists contracts likely to be awarded in the 2018/19 year that are likely to exceed
$1 million whole-of-life cost. MSD cannot forecast who the successful companies will be. It does
not include contracts with service providers under non-departmental appropriations or
extensions to an existing contracts, such as rights of renewal.

  Name of service to be contracted          Projected lifetime total cost
  Health Safety and Security Incident       $1.2m (term unknown – negotiations in progress; may
  Management System                         be awarded before the end of the 2017/18 year).
  Whiteware Goods and Services              $86.8m (7 years x $12.4m pa) Contract commencing
                                            September 2018.
  Manned Security Services                  Over $20m (term unknown – negotiations in
                                            progress;may be awarded before the end of the
                                            2017/18 year).
  Social Modelling Services                 $4.9m over 2 years (negotiations in progress; may be
                                            awarded before the end of the 2017/18 year).
  MSD Search Tool                           $3m (term unknown – tender in progress)
  Electronic Monitoring and Security        $2m (term unknown – tender in progress)
  Services (does not include facial
  recognition)
  Closed Loop Client Feedback               $2m (term unknown – tender in progress)
  Optical Goods and Services for MSD        $4.5m p/a (term unknown – tender not yet finalised)
  clients
  Financial Management and Information      Over $1m p/a (exact amount and term unknown,
  System                                    pending business case, tender not yet finalised)
  Employment Service: Supported             Over $1m p/a (exact amount and term unknown,
  employment services for people with a     tender not yet finalised)
  disability
  The Youth Service - intensive case        Over $10m p/a (exact amount and term unknown,
  management service                        tender not yet finalised)
  Youth Health & Wellbeing Survey RFP       Up to $3m over 24 months (tender not yet finalised)
  Intensive Client Support Services         $3.6m over three years to 2021 (tender not yet
  Extension                                 finalised)
Vote Social Development                                                                 Page 28 of 98
You can also read
Next slide ... Cancel