Report into RCVS IT database

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

patrick murphy — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 10:30:29 GMT

remember I posted that the on line CPD was very good value for the money according to the person in charge of it at the RCVS, and for us it was free to use ? then who paid for it?

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Rajat — Sat, 23 Jun 2012 00:10:35 GMT

Haha good, I missed it in both! Well done Mr Davies. I am glad he apologized, it definitely makes a difference!

Thanks Mark.

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Mark Hedberg — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 22:18:47 GMT

Here you go, then!

http://www.rcvs.org.uk/news-and-events/news/rcvs-overspend-an-apology/

Cheers,
Mark

(was in the Vet times and Record, too!)

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Rajat — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 22:10:48 GMT

I probably missed it (read- I hope I missed it) - but did the RCVS president or person responsible apologise to its members for the massive overspend and wastage of our annual fees?

I thought the 'legal advice' which meant they couldn't reveal the people responsible was a farce. If one of us screws up, we can't exactly hide behind a lawyer and refuse to reveal our identity. Is there any personal responsibility for one's actions with election to council? Or for other employees?

Should we not hold the RCVS to the same high standards they expect from us, its members?

I for one, could accept the screw up, had there been a sincere apology in the RCVS newsletter, or a letter to all members explaining how this happened what they would do to correct it, and most importantly, a sincere, I am so sorry. Best to have come from the top.

Till then, I'm pretty cynical about the whole thing - but if I missed it would love to read it if someone has a link!

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Anthony Todd — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 20:48:35 GMT

[quote user="Chris Barker"][quote user="Bob Russell"]How many of us are interested in online logging of CPD?[/quote][/quote]

I do hope that sensible comments like this are considered by enough people who have a direst interest in the subject and it is not farmed out to consultants.

I hope someone who knows, will look critically at the number and necessity of bells and whistles and on-line logging of whatever before rather than after the new contract is signed.

I can't help remembering the times I ring an insurance company or big organisation and they say "sorry, I've just got to go into another system"

I wonder if there's not a lesson to be learned there?

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Chris Barker — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 16:38:23 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]How many of us are interested in online logging of CPD?[/quote]

Beware what you wish for.... The Code of Conduct now considers the declared amount of CPD hours to be compulsory The RCVS has an on-line logging system for which a significant amount of money has been paid You think its going to sit there unused....?

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:48:01 GMT

Hear hear Evelyn

Wynne

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 15:40:30 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]I've never viewed it like that. Its always been something I was a member of - I had to be if I wanted to practice - but I've never felt ownership, even though I was a member of the "club".[/quote]

Well, that's a great pity. Don't you want to be a professional? You should look into the history of the veterinary profession and our Royal College.

[quote user="Colin Thomson"] I still consider it has a role of supervision and public good which will not always be aligned with the wishes of its members.[/quote]

The council of any organisation will frequently be at odds with the wishes of some members. The majority of Members of the RCVS are (I think) in favour of professional behaviour, animal welfare and the public good. There's no conflict with the statutory regulatory role. We are a self-regulating profession.

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]Although the money came from us, it becomes the RCVS's money.[/quote]

Yes but we are the RCVS!

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Bob Russell — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 14:28:08 GMT

With this level of explanation I suspect the majority of the profession will be annoyed by the waste but accept it was an expensive cock-up, lessons should have been learned and things should move on.

All RCVS members are intelligent people and most live in the real world where this sort of thing happens. Once blame has been apportioned adequately (even if not punishment) then general acceptance of the situation should follow.

How many of us are interested in online logging of CPD?

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Chris Barker — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:59:29 GMT

As a soon to be Councillor let me offer you a comment before I disappear into the Collective. The IT report, though written in industry-speak, is direct and indicates firmly where blame lies. But the exclusion of any names (and hence of any risk of highlighting personal responsibility) has allowed publication of a report which otherwise might have been buried on legal advice.

The original tender was woefully lacking in detail. There was a mismatch of expectation on both sides – the Company provided a basic core database and expected the IT department at the RCVS to customise it for its own use, the RCVS thought it was getting a ready-out-of–the-box product. The report suggests that the backup from the supplier has been under-resourced, slow and relatively expensive.

While parts of the IMIS system work adequately (eg. Finance), others areas are so deficient that any attempt to adapt iMIS further would be wasteful of both time and effort. In essence IMIS must be written off and a new custom-built solution sought. The financial part of the RCVS machine will in the medium term continue to run under IMIS to secure that part of the RCVS business; in time this area will begin to draw its data from a new yet-to-be-created-database, eventually to be retired when the new complete all-singing all-dancing system is in place.

Financial wastage has been, and will be, considerable, with expenditure on the IMIS system so far ‘written off’ over 2-3 years. But until there is a new custom-designed all-embracing system in place there will be significant on-going costs. As far as I can tell all recently acquired IT software (eg IMIS, software for online logging of CPD/PDP) has been obtained on a rental basis rather than being purchased outright. Given that any new system will be custom-built this policy should be reviewed, for the annual rental paid for use of current software might well cover the cost of employing a dedicated full-time database programmer. While the TFX report does not go quite this far, it does highlight the need for the RCVS to have control of and access to any new database’s source code as protection should a future supplier cease trading.

Chris B

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:18:08 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"](And just because JW suggests I'm speaking with a pro RCVS hat on doesn't make it so[/quote]

You mean that JW isn't always right!!......

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Anthony Todd — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:23:35 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]I can't see anyone from RCVS Council on this thread[/quote]

Sorry, Colin, broke the cardinal rule of not checking my facts!

I'm sure someone on the Council will respond in your manner though??

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Colin Thomson — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:17:00 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]I am so relieved that the Council, or at least one member, is keeping such a good eye on our money and has the actuarial skills to work out that 4000 is ten times 400.[/quote]

I can't see anyone from RCVS Council on this thread. Are you under the misapprehension that I am on RCVS Council? I'm not - never have been and unlikely to ever be. I am however Treasurer of SPVS.

(And just because JW suggests I'm speaking with a pro RCVS hat on doesn't make it so).

Colin

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Hannah Wynne Richards — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:00:46 GMT

Colin I consider myself 1/22k (approx ) owner of RCVS In the same way I consider myself 1/30M (approx) (number of taxpayers ) owner of the country Looking at things in a mathematical fashion, I'm considerably more annoyed with the government than with RCVS as they have stolen and mis-spent far more than 2 bottles of wine from me

On the subject of computer glitches-I hope those of you banking with Nat West have plenty of cash in hand-else you may have a very frugal w/e

Wynne

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Anthony Todd — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:46:13 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]I was suggesting it was value for money at its current cost, not that it would still be good value at 10 times that amount.[/quote]

So goods or services are "good value for money" even if large sums of that "good value" have clearly been completely and utterly wasted?

Actually nothing is "good value" if there is a penny of the cost completely wasted.

But I, and other members, will be greatly heartened that once it gets to £4000 annually the Council will recognise that it isn't good value.

I am so relieved that the Council, or at least one member, is keeping such a good eye on our money and has the actuarial skills to work out that 4000 is ten times 400.

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Malcolm Ness — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 08:38:12 GMT

[quote user="Lorna McHardy"]

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]

But at £340 per year, RCVS registration DOES represent good value. Its a necessary cost, but an almost inconsequential one to my business.

[/quote]

Well, that would depend on the size of your business and your definition of "inconsequential". It's not inconsequential to mine.

[/quote]

Inconsequential or not, while it might be a relatively small sum to many, it emphatically will not represent "good value for money" if a portion, no matter how small a portion, is set aside to pay for earlier financial c*ck-ups.

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Lorna McHardy — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:38:01 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]

But at £340 per year, RCVS registration DOES represent good value. Its a necessary cost, but an almost inconsequential one to my business.

[/quote]

Well, that would depend on the size of your business and your definition of "inconsequential". It's not inconsequential to mine.

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

J G Wray — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:36:44 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]Ok, ok - I take your point, and my apologies for mentioning the "s" word. [/quote]

No apology required. You are using the language of those at RCVS, an essential compromise to generate empathy and understanding on their part. The TFX report is similarly full of jargon, but can be readily understood all the same, at least by those for whom it isn't quite so painful.

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]the RCVS needs some independence of action from its membership. It may be our RCVS, but we can only influence it marginally through the ballot box, and that's as it should be, IMO[/quote]

In the past perhaps. When electing Councillors they should be expected to act in the public interest in those areas demanded by the VSA, e.g. Disciplinary. However, and here's the new and in my view reasonable requirement of those who solicit our vote, they should act in the profession's interest when the profession's money and interests are involved. Furthermore, they should be conscientious and competent in those areas receiving a training if necessary. In amongst the overspend the lack of conscientiousness and competence of those on the oversight Committee is now clear. It's not difficult to see who they are/were, you just subtract Dr Johnson and Dr Ellis. Some were passive, but some, having spent a decade or more at RCVS, really should have seen what was happening.

The new structure with the A&RC reporting to Committee and advising is a sop, the members (of A&RC) emasculated, because there is no guarantee of competence or conscientiousness at the overarching Committee. The organisation and competences that TFX alludes to for the implementation of IT at RCVS doesn't exist and with the new structures at RCVS the financial control of a new IT project doesn't truly exist.

Without some degree of recognition of "No taxation without representation" the profession is in for it again and the RCVS will be nailing another pin in its own coffin. Offering up the IT project for clear scrutiny to the profession will show intent to work openly and frankly, honestly. In small ways like this a trust in RCVS will be regained.

JGW

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Colin Thomson — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:34:59 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

Wrong. Sorry, wrong wrong wrong. We are the RCVS. M stands for Member. Belgravia House is our headquarters organisation. RCVS Council are our council. Some of the occupants of Belgravia House (some no longer occupants!) find it hard to grasp these simple matters.

It is our money. And no, we do not have the option to stop paying.

[/quote]

I've never viewed it like that. Its always been something I was a member of - I had to be if I wanted to practice - but I've never felt ownership, even though I was a member of the "club". I still consider it has a role of supervision and public good which will not always be aligned with the wishes of its members. It needs enough independence from its members not to have to kow-tow to them.

Although the money came from us, it becomes the RCVS's money. I think the RCVS is something independent of the sum of its members.

Colin

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Colin Thomson — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:22:00 GMT

[quote user="Anthony Todd"]So if our membership was £4000 a year should we be thankful that we are still allowed to practice and it is still "good value for money"?[/quote]

I was suggesting it was value for money at its current cost, not that it would still be good value at 10 times that amount.

Colin

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Colin Thomson — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 07:15:50 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]What a very peculiar and twisted way of looking at things.[/quote]

Why thank you

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

The pointless £40 premises registration "gives you the ability to use medicines".

The £250 VMD inspection "gives you the ability to use medicines"

The Written Scheme of Examination "gives you the ability to run an autoclave"

Your Vehicle Excise Duty "gives you the abilty to drive your car"

Paying your protection money gave you the ability to keep your leg bones intact.

Doesn't follow that it's good value.

[/quote]

Indeed it doesn't. But at £340 per year, RCVS registration DOES represent good value. Its a necessary cost, but an almost inconsequential one to my business. Yes I'd rather not pay it or pay less, but its something I have to have, and at that price, for what it gives me, its not worth getting hot under the collar about.

Colin

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Mark Hedberg — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 20:24:26 GMT

I know a place in Somerset that does a nice mail order scrumpy! (5 liters through the post!) ;)

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:32:58 GMT

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"]Although the overspend was ginormous spread between practising members it's a couple of bottles of wine each which puts it into perspective[/quote]

Well, I don't particularly want to donate a couple of bottles of wine so that somebody in Belgravia House can accidentally pour it down the drain and not even say sorry.

I'd rather like my wine back, please. Although I would much prefer scrumpy, if that can be arranged.

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Anthony Todd — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:01:13 GMT

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]That's my point. Given that it give you an ability to earn an income, it represents good value for money. [/quote]

What a very peculiar and twisted way of looking at things.

The pointless £40 premises registration "gives you the ability to use medicines".

The £250 VMD inspection "gives you the ability to use medicines"

The Written Scheme of Examination "gives you the ability to run an autoclave"

Your Vehicle Excise Duty "gives you the abilty to drive your car"

Paying your protection money gave you the ability to keep your leg bones intact.

Doesn't follow that it's good value.

[/quote]

How very true!

So if our membership was £4000 a year should we be thankful that we are still allowed to practice and it is still "good value for money"?

I'd be even more thankful if it was £40!!

Re: Report into RCVS IT database

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 18:45:01 GMT

[quote user="Colin Thomson"]That's my point. Given that it give you an ability to earn an income, it represents good value for money. [/quote]

What a very peculiar and twisted way of looking at things.

The pointless £40 premises registration "gives you the ability to use medicines".

The £250 VMD inspection "gives you the ability to use medicines"

The Written Scheme of Examination "gives you the ability to run an autoclave"

Your Vehicle Excise Duty "gives you the abilty to drive your car"

Paying your protection money gave you the ability to keep your leg bones intact.

Doesn't follow that it's good value.