Government response
No government response is recorded for this review.
About this review
Summary written by this siteReview and assurance of the revised NHS Business Services Authority recovery plan for the McCloud Remedy project, chaired by Lisa Tennant, Chair of the NHS Pension Board, for the Department of Health and Social Care and published on 2 September 2026.
Recommendations 89
R1.1Produce an agreed system-wide governance map
Within 8 weeks, produce a single governance map endorsed by all parties, setting out the role and accountability of each governance body, escalation routes, information flows, and the relationship between all internal and external forums. Build on the NHSBSA Pensions Portfolio Director’s framework and extend it to cover cross-system relationships. Board papers and minutes for all governance bodies should explicitly record assurance advice, decisions, and residual risks accepted.
The DHSC McCloud Programme Board should clearly define the information and documents it requires to fulfil its oversight role, the format, delivery timeline and reporting cycle for that information, with clear action owners.
R1.2Strengthen specialist expertise in governance forums
Consider additional specialist advisory capacity on the NHSBSA Board, DHSC McCloud Programme Board, and Pension Board with relevant complex change, operational delivery and pension administration experience. Several NHSBSA Non-Executive Director positions are due to rotate during this calendar year. The recruitment cycle should be used deliberately to address any identified skills gaps, with selection criteria explicitly weighted toward complex pensions administration, large-scale operational delivery, and digital transformation. The Pension Board governance review’s recommendations on pension scheme expertise should likewise inform succession planning for that board. The quality and design of pensions information reaching the NHSBSA Board should be changed. The Pensions Service Report, or an equivalent strategic summary, should be tabled at the full board. The paper distils the principal issues clearly and is well-suited to the board's strategic role.
A concise Pensions Dashboard should be provided to the NHSBSA Board as a standing item, covering the key strategic issues, risks, delivery confidence, supplier exposure, capacity position and digital dependencies. The same dashboard should be provided simultaneously to the Internal McCloud Programme Board, the DHSC McCloud Programme Board and the Pension Board. This aligns with the COO's view that all governance bodies should receive the same information at the same time (see F1.1) and operationalises R1.4 on simultaneous dashboards for pensions specifically.
The NHSBSA Board should agree a paper-design principle for pensions content of strategic summary plus dashboard, with operational detail held in appendices and/or a reading room accessible to board members on request rather than included in the board pack. The current direction of travel, towards more detail in response to repeated requests for more information, is producing the opposite of what the board needs. The Pensions Director and Company Secretary should jointly own enforcement of the principle and the operation of the reading room. This supports and operationalises R1.6 on governance proportionality.
R1.3Professionalise programme governance and manage PMO transition
Implement a clear PMO transition plan with milestones and risk mitigations. Complete the precursor steps in the Portfolio Director’s framework. Maintain minimum programme management standards including dependency mapping, critical-path analysis, Responsible/Accountable/Consulted/Informed ownership, and consolidated reporting.
R1.4Implement integrated performance framework
Progress the COO’s KPI proposals. Implement the simultaneous dashboard. Give the Pension Board a formal role in setting and reviewing KPIs. Dashboards should be concise and risk-based, reviewed monthly by the Executive and quarterly by the ARC.
R1.5Strengthen financial oversight
Require financial data to be reviewed at every external DHSC McCloud Programme Board meeting. Ensure financial data flows routinely to all governance bodies with a legitimate interest. The review recognises that the Pensions Comprehensive Spending Framework agreed between DHSC and NHSBSA, the introduction of pensions-specific finance reporting and quarterly pensions finance reporting represent material improvements. These should be embedded and matured.
R1.6Review governance proportionality
Review the aggregate reporting burden. Standardise board packs so operational detail is confined to appendices, and main papers focus on strategic risk, capacity, delivery confidence, and assurance status. Governance should enable delivery, not impede it.
R1.7Strengthen supplier governance
Standard supplier management framework with statements of work, KPIs, review cycles, and escalation protocols exist but vigilant commercial owner and business owner engagement are essential. Ensure that all the requirements of the Procurement Act 2023 are formally implemented
R1.8Commission independent assurance reviews
In future, NHSBSA should directly commission its own McCloud Programme Assurance. DHSC will also require its own robust McCloud Programme assurance, through a suitable mechanism. Future assurance arrangements, whether commissioned by NHSBSA or by DHSC, should include explicit access provisions sufficient to enable the assurance partner to discharge its responsibilities. Any future decision to restrict access to internal governance be made transparently and with the explicit agreement of the DHSC Programme Board and subsequent notification to the relevant external parties.
Regular gateway reviews should be commissioned at key milestones, starting summer 2026 as proposed by the DHSC SRO. A separate GIAA pensions audit stream should be maintained covering risk management and operational delivery.
R2.1Acknowledge that bad news travels slowly and address the technical over-delivery legacy
Senior NHSBSA leaders should make a sustained and visible acknowledgement, to staff, to the NHSBSA Board, to DHSC, and through internal communications, that bad news has historically travelled slowly within the organisation. In doing this, they should recognise and that the operational and delivery lens now being introduced represents a deliberate strategic shift that requires sustained reinforcement. The acknowledgement should be repeated, in different forums, over a sustained period of 12 to 18 months, not delivered once. This should not be framed as organisational failure or blame but as organisational maturation, from a primarily technical function to a high-volume operational delivery organisation, with the cultural shifts that transition requires. The acknowledgement matters because it gives staff explicit permission to escalate, names the legacy behaviour, and signals that operational throughput and delivery realism are now strategic priorities coequal with technical excellence.
R2.2Establish a "bad news first" discipline in all governance and leadership forums
A standing opening item should be introduced at all pensions related boards and committees covering: "What has gone wrong, what is at risk, and what are we worried about?", taken before any progress reporting. Chairs of these forums should make a visible practice of thanking the individual who raises an issue and recording the issue in minutes regardless of whether it is resolved in the meeting. This is a well-evidenced technique from high-reliability sectors (aviation, nuclear safety, NHS quality improvement) for normalising the surfacing of problems. The recommendation is consistent with both the external diagnosis (creating safe occasions for escalation) and the internal diagnosis (counteracting the "fix it myself" instinct by making proactive escalation the expected behaviour at senior forums). Effectiveness should be reviewed quarterly through the indicators in R2.11.
R2.3Pensions-specific cultural commitments, building on the wider NHSBSA cultural infrastructure
NHSBSA has well established organisational cultural infrastructure, including strong staff engagement evidenced through Best Companies and similar external recognition, a Freedom to Speak Up champion at board level, and sustained internal communications around organisational values. The review acknowledges this and does not recommend duplication. The specific gap is that this generic infrastructure has not yet shifted the behaviours that matter most for McCloud delivery. The review recommends that the CEO, COO and Pensions Director jointly and visibly own a clear expectation that, in McCloud delivery, delivery risk is escalated proactively, including to DHSC, supplier issues are surfaced early, slippage is reported transparently, and unrealistic external commitments are challenged rather than absorbed. The mechanism for embedding this (whether through a commitments document, briefings or other means) should be for leadership to determine, provided it is pursued through pensions-specific channels rather than generic organisation-wide communications.
R2.4Strengthen the reciprocal relationship with DHSC
NHSBSA and DHSC senior leadership should establish a shared understanding of the reciprocal information expectations appropriate to an arm's length body carrying operational accountability for delivery of a major statutory programme. The DHSC SRO has indicated openness to a more reciprocal pattern and the review supports building on that openness.
While there is no expectation that either organisation should be involved in, or have advance sight of, all internal discussions, advice or decision-making processes of the other, there is value in ensuring that relevant issues are flagged early where they could impact delivery of the programme or wider partnership issues. Strengthening a culture of proactive engagement and mutual awareness would help support effective joint working, reduce the potential for misunderstandings and enable both organisations to respond constructively to issues as they arise.
Improvement should be sustained through the change in departmental sponsorship currently in transition, and progress should be discussed as a standing item in regular NHSBSA Senior Leader/SRO engagements.
R2.5Confidential delivery-realism channel
A confidential route, hosted by the Freedom to Speak Up champion, internal auditors, or Human Resources (HR), should be established through which NHSBSA McCloud staff can flag issues they believe are being misrepresented in upward reporting, programme status assessments they consider unrealistic, or instances in which they have been discouraged from escalating. Reports should be aggregated quarterly to the ARC. The channel addresses both diagnoses. For staff who do feel reticent, it provides a safe route. For staff operating under the "fix it myself" instinct, it provides an explicit alternative to internal problem-solving that signals proactive escalation is welcomed. The volume of reports through this channel should be treated as a positive signal that the system is working, not a negative one, and this framing should be stated openly when the channel is launched. The channel is distinct from formal whistleblowing. It is a structured pressure release for delivery realism specifically and complements rather than replaces the existing Freedom to Speak Up arrangements.
R2.6Strengthen the appraisal model to reward honest escalation and proactive surfacing of risk
Senior leaders should collaborate with HR colleagues to strengthen the appraisal model so that performance objectives, recognition schemes, line manager 1:1 frameworks and end-of-year ratings explicitly reward early and honest escalation of risk, proactive surfacing of issues across functional boundaries, and willingness to challenge unrealistic commitments, not only smooth delivery. Where an individual surfaces a major risk early and contributes to averting or mitigating it, this should be career positive. Conversely, end-of-year reviews should consider whether managers created or allowed conditions in which staff felt unable to raise concerns, or in which problems remained within a functional silo when they should have been escalated cross-functionally. This is the structural counterweight to both diagnoses. It makes proactive escalation career-positive for staff who would otherwise be reticent, and it makes cross-functional surfacing of issues career-positive for staff who would otherwise default to "fix it myself".
R2.7Pre-mortems at key delivery gates
Before any major commitment to DHSC or to external stakeholders on dates, milestones or deliverables, a structured pre-mortem ("imagine this commitment fails, why?") should be run with deliberately mixed-level and cross-functional participation including operational staff closest to the work, DDAT, and Commercial. Risks raised should be documented along with the response taken. This builds the institutional habit of voicing risk without it feeling personally risky, creates an explicit decision point at which leadership can refuse to make a commitment the operational team believes is undeliverable, and serves the cross-functional integration aim by structurally requiring multiple functional perspectives at the same table before commitments are made.
R2.8Cross-functional working: break the silos identified by the CEO and COO
The CEO and COO have identified cross-functional working, particularly between Pensions, DDAT, Operations and Finance, as a specific developmental priority. A designated programme of cross-functional team working at working level should be supported. Deliberate physical co-location of cross-functional teams rather than online-only working, particularly during periods of critical delivery should be facilitated. Rotation or secondment of staff across functional boundaries to build relationships and shared understanding should be encouraged. Explicit cross-functional ownership of key deliverables, rather than handoffs between functions should be built in. Cross-functional working should be one of the indicators reported in R2.11. This recommendation extends and reinforces the existing organisational development work the CEO and COO have already commissioned.
R2.9Organisational development around trust and productive conflict
Organisational development work has already been commissioned and is centred on trust, drawing on the principle identified by the CEO that performance can only travel at the pace of trust. The review supports this and recommends 2 specific extensions in relation to the McCloud Programme. First, the organisational development work should explicitly address productive handling of misalignment and conflict between teams, particularly between project and operations perspectives where the review has observed tension in the testimony of multiple interviewees. The customer (the scheme member) should be the explicit reference point against which misalignments are resolved. Second, the organisational development work should explicitly encourage personal accountability. The shift to a stronger performance culture, with greater individual and team accountability for delivery, requires staff and managers to become comfortable explaining their decisions to a wider audience than has historically been expected. The CEO and COO have indicated awareness that this is not universally welcomed and that it requires careful change management. The review records this as a constructive and self-aware position and supports the work in train.
R2.10Formalise decision-making and written records
Require all prioritisation decisions, resource allocation, and governance decisions to be formally recorded through a central McCloud decisions log with structured fields for action owners, next steps, and follow-up, addressing the weakness identified by GIAA. Publish resource allocation rationale using explicit criteria. This is the structural complement to R2.9 on trust. Trust between functions and between organisations is harder to build when the basis on which decisions were made is not visible in the record. The 2 recommendations should be implemented together.
R2.11Measure cultural change with leading indicators
Define and report quarterly to the NHSBSA Board, ARC and DHSC on measurable leading indicators of cultural shift for the McCloud Programme. These should include:
• psychological safety pulse score ("is it safe to share bad news here?"), repeated every 90 days with results shared with staff, and disaggregated to test for the gap between NHSBSA-wide engagement scores and Pensions-specific psychological safety
• volume of issues proactively escalated to DHSC, compared with issues discovered by DHSC after the fact
• volume and pattern of submissions through the confidential channel in recommendation 5 under leadership and organisational culture
• indicators of cross-functional working under leadership and organisational culture recommendation 8 (cross-functional team formation, co-location patterns, secondments, joint ownership of deliverables)
• the DHSC SRO's qualitative assessment of transparency and of the reciprocal relationship under leadership and organisational culture recommendation 4
• reduction in governance forums discovering issues after the fact, cross-referenced to "bad news first" minutes in recommendation 2 under leadership and organisational culture
The first quarterly report should be produced within 4 months. The review records that the existing organisational culture review and the NHSBSA-wide cultural infrastructure (Best Companies, Freedom to Speak Up, organisational values communications) are welcome and substantial. The leading indicators above are what will demonstrate whether the pensions-specific shift is real.
R2.12Sustained leadership development, staff wellbeing, DHSC transition and independent monitoring
Introduce development for senior leaders overseeing McCloud Programme focused on large-scale transformation, risk literacy, and reflective leadership, drawing on best practice from other large public-sector programmes. Commission a formal assessment of workload, morale, and burnout risk. Ensure delivery plans do not assume sustained overtime or role-stretching. Address role clarity. Complete within 12 weeks and report to the NHSBSA Board and DHSC.
The DHSC SRO's engagement should transition to a sustainable model supported by a strengthened team, with succession and resilience to avoid single-point-of-failure risk and continuity of expertise maintained throughout. DHSC NHSBSA Sponsor should provide oversight of cultural and delivery change. This should be maintained for at least 12 months reflecting that cultural change at this depth typically takes 12 to 24 months of sustained leadership modelling. Quarterly updates should assess progress against the R2.11 indicators, the operation of the R2.2, R2.5 and R2.8 mechanisms, and the strengthening of the reciprocal relationship under R2.4.
R3.1Strengthen system-level planning
Develop an integrated framework providing visibility of capacity, demand, and interdependencies across all NHS Pensions workstreams. A shared evidence base should enable informed prioritisation.
R3.2Re-baseline financial model
Undertake a full financial re-baseline with validation of cost and interest-liability assumptions. Integrate with delivery data. Review at every Programme Board meeting.
R3.3Formal dependency and change-impact protocol
Develop a comprehensive dependency map across all pensions workstreams. Implement change-impact assessment before any change approval, building on the Portfolio Director’s change control framework.
R3.4Corporate performance dashboard
Implement quarterly dashboard reporting on capacity, financial exposure, supplier performance, and governance maturity. Review by the NHSBSA Board, DHSC, NHS Pension Board, and ARC.
R3.5Elevate automation as a strategic priority
Treat automation and digital transformation as a strategic programme with dedicated investment, potentially from the pension levy. Engage external delivery partners to avoid overburdening SMEs. Appoint a relevant NHSBSA Board member as Board Champion for digital transformation.
R3.6Post-review assurance transition
Agree successor arrangements before the review concludes. Adopt the gateway review schedule proposed by the DHSC SRO, targeting Amber in summer 2026 and Green 6 months later, with the scope and focus of these reviews agreed by the DHSC Programme Board. Complete the Portfolio Director’s precursor steps before the next gateway review.
R3.7Sustained DHSC oversight
Continue explicit departmental oversight of both the McCloud Programme and the NHS Pension Scheme more widely. Strengthen the DHSC team to enable transition from crisis-mode to sustainable strategic oversight, reducing single-individual reliance while maintaining continuity of expertise.
R3.8Cross-government co-ordination
Establish a systematic approach to cross-scheme learning, supplier intelligence, and co-ordinated engagement with central government on Remedy policy. Central government departments, namely HM Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions, should engage with pension schemes early when designing policy that will significantly affect them.
R3.9Remedy programme plan dates
Subject dates to formal review at every Programme Board meeting and regular review through the gateway mechanism. If delivery projects further into contingency, early and transparent communication and visibility are essential to mitigate risk and keep members informed.
R4.1.1Monitor the new governance process
Closely monitor the governance process introduced in March 2026 over the coming months to confirm it is embedded across the programme team and remains fit for purpose, with adjustments managed in a controlled manner.
R4.1.2Coaching and training support
Coaching and training should be offered to support new and existing team members whilst transitioning into new programme structure and associated way of working.
R4.1.3Complete a detailed replan and re-baseline
Undertake a comprehensive replan ensuring that all identified gaps are addressed including those relating to the train-the-trainer approach, the additional member groups (multiple-complexity and deceased), the core pension administration system and RSS automation solution delays, and the training pilot. Impact-assess each change, agree and document tasks, owners and timelines across the Programme Plan, Capacity Plan and Financial Cost Model, then re-baseline.
R4.1.4Complete predecessor and successor logic
Link all tasks through appropriate predecessor and successor relationships so the schedule is logic-driven and downstream dates update automatically when task durations change.
R4.1.5Introduce segregation of duties for planning and control
The Programme Delivery Lead should retain responsibility for creating and updating the programme plan, with independent oversight introduced through periodic review and challenge by an appropriate role outside McCloud (for example, a peer Project Manager). This will strengthen assurance without unnecessary process overhead.
R4.2.1Document Capacity Plan governance
Develop and independently review the procedural governance documentation for the Capacity Plan; record any gaps for incorporation; communicate updates to all stakeholders.
R4.2.2Appoint a single accountable owner
Appoint a single accountable owner for the end-to-end Capacity Plan, responsible for scrutinising and challenging the component plans and ensuring governance is followed.
R4.2.3Centralised resource view across NHSBSA
Establish a centralised data platform capturing supply and demand for resources across all NHSBSA workstreams. Work led by the interim Head of Planning and Operational Readiness to map workstream demand should feed this view.
R4.2.4Procedure for populating “confirmed capacity”
Establish and document a procedure that requires confirmed capacity to be populated against a named resource in the Support Roles Capacity Plan, completed at least 6 to 9 months ahead of the role commencing to allow time for recruitment if needed.
R4.2.5Resolve key person dependencies
Identify all key person dependencies across the programme. Add the dependency and associated risk to the RAID log with mitigating actions tracked to resolution.
R4.2.6Comprehensive SME assessment
Complete a service-wide assessment of SME resources with skill-set mapping. Identify Programme areas requiring SME augmentation. Where redeployment of the existing pool is not possible, prioritise upskilling and then recruitment.
R4.2.7Document and impact-assess all contract changes
All contract modifications should be documented and approved through programme and commercial governance. The impact assessment of the Contract 2 resource reallocation should be completed as a priority.
R4.2.8Extend the Frontline Capacity Plan to delivery completion
Update the Frontline Capacity Plan to reflect the staff required to complete the RSS Generation and Enactment projects beyond March 2028, so the resource requirement is properly factored into the Financial Cost Model. The Capacity Plan owner should be responsible for capturing this demand.
R4.3.1Formal governance process for Cost Model inputs
Implement a formal governance process for managing Cost Model inputs, covering update cycles, ownership of data, version control and confirmation that information has been reviewed before use. This will strengthen accountability and ensure the model consistently reflects the agreed latest version of source documentation.
R4.3.2Routine reconciliation of programme artefacts
Establish a routine to reconcile and align all programme artefacts feeding the Cost Model so that key dates, durations and resources are consistent. Every cost line should be traceable to a source artefact or decision and verified by the responsible owner when updated.
R4.3.3Redefine the costing approach
Redefine the costing approach so staff costs reflect actual time required rather than defaulting to a full-month assumption.
R4.3.4Cost Model to reflect underlying artefacts
No assumption of additional cost should be added to the Cost Model that is not captured in a source document. Capacity Plan owners should identify and capture resource demands.
R4.3.5Assign a financial controller
Assign a dedicated financial controller to oversee Cost Model inputs, capture actuals, and provide regular reporting to the Programme Manager and Director.
R4.5.1Strengthen oversight of the new RAID governance cycle
Closely monitor the new governance cycle over the coming months to identify and address any gaps. Conduct a focused review and update of all RAID items to provide a clean baseline against which the new process operates.
R4.5.2Document and share RAID escalation criteria
Develop, formally agree, document and disseminate explicit escalation criteria for Risks, Assumptions, Issues and Dependencies. Clear thresholds will support consistent flagging to programme level, timely decision-making and stronger governance.
R4.5.3Create a Centralised Project Governance Playbook
Produce a single, consistent reference covering project governance, change control, RAID management, escalation criteria and ways of working, accessible to the programme team and the wider organisation.
R4.5.4Resolve Verto functionality gaps
Continue to work with the Verto Product Owner to document and address gaps in the tool, particularly the absence of fields for impact, impact date and quality criteria, to reduce manual effort and data-quality risks.
R4.5.5Integrate change control with RAID management
Make a formal RAID impact assessment a mandatory part of the change control approval process. The assessment should identify whether a change introduces new risks, assumptions, issues or dependencies, or alters existing items, with ownership and mitigation documented at the point of approval and Verto and the programme plan updated accordingly.
R5.1Stabilise the Operating Model by separating BAU and McCloud
Decouple McCloud Remedy from BAU operations as far as practicable. The target Operating Model should have dedicated teams for McCloud projects with minimal day-to-day impact on BAU teams. Ring-fence a proportion of staff and resource for McCloud, identify and assign a core group of SMEs whose primary role is McCloud case processing, and backfill their BAU roles. Future reassignments should be approved through the revised governance process so trade-offs are transparent. The Pensions Priority List is an important first step and should be ratified as soon as possible; SMEs should be added to it to provide a consolidated view of capacity and capability.
R5.2Accelerate resource augmentation
Continue to use third-party specialists, ensuring additional resource is fully integrated, trained and subject to NHSBSA quality assurance. Once requirements are clear, contracts with existing and new suppliers can be confidently procured for both delivery and training capacity.
R5.3Formalise the Head of Planning and Operational Readiness role
Formalise the role as a priority, with sufficient budget to build a team capable of delivering centralised planning across the service.
R5.4Single dashboard covering BAU and McCloud
Continue to develop a unified dashboard showing both BAU and McCloud metrics together (cases processed per week, backlog volumes, staff hours and so on), so management can visualise the impact of resource moves in near-real time. BAU effort and McCloud outcomes are interdependent; a single view supports business cases for additional support and informs trade-offs.
R5.5Extend dashboards to supplier activity
Extend operational dashboarding to cover third-party supplier progress so contracted activity (cases on hold at a supplier, processing issues) can be tracked alongside internal volumetrics.
R5.6PCH recruitment analysis
Complete a comprehensive impact analysis of contact-centre resource needs as a priority, taking account of the historical draw on PCH from elsewhere in the service.
R6.1Complete and version-control procedure documents
Complete procedure documents for the processes and governance owned by Operational Readiness as a priority, so a process review and improvement cycle can begin. All documents should follow a standard procedure for version control and document management; this should be retrospectively applied for consistency.
R6.2Implement an Operational Readiness change management framework
Establish the function’s own change management framework, given its responsibility for supporting multiple workstreams across the service.
R6.3Evaluate each training module before progressing
On completion of each module, evaluate effectiveness in releasing cases for processing and gather feedback from supplier and NHSBSA. Findings should be presented to the NHSBSA Programme Board for a go/no-go decision before the next module is rolled out.
R6.4Operational Readiness impact assessment for RSS Generation
Complete an impact assessment as a priority to inform training and case processing timeline updates in the Support Roles Capacity Plan and programme plan.
R6.5Prioritise SME support during pilot training
Allocation of SME resource to the supplier should be prioritised during pilot training.
R6.6Document the training delivery plan
Map the required module delivery profile to unlock cases under each contract against available resource, with timelines aligned to procurement contract periods.
R6.7Programme glossary
Create a glossary for the programme to ensure consistent terminology across all artefacts; review and update existing artefacts accordingly.
R7.1Mature the volumetric capability
Continue to enhance and mature the dashboard, incorporating timing and operational data. Forecasting capacity should always reflect real onboarded and ramped processing experience rather than an idealised assumption that capacity can be massively stepped up.
R7.2Volumetric KPI governance
Establish, track and respond to permitted deviations from the volumetric forecast. Capture allowed tolerances in the dashboard, supported by a governance framework defining response actions for both negative and positive deviations.
R7.3Supplier accountability timelines
Establish clear supplier accountability and delivery timelines for software enhancements through robust supplier management.
R7.4Test digital solutions early to confirm timings and error rates
Until realistic timings are produced from new solutions (RSS automation solution, CoR implementation), forecasted timings cannot be held with high confidence. Early delivery and a robust method for refining plans as real-world performance emerges will allow assumptions to be proved or disproved.
R7.5Integrate data sources
Implement data pipelines or, at a minimum, bulk extracts between systems — for example, regularly pulling data required for McCloud Remedy into a consolidated database or core pension administration system fields. Ensure document production supplier archives are digitised or indexed.
R7.6Automate where practicable
Prioritise automation as the single most impactful lever for delivery speed and accuracy, balanced against the consistency of the underlying process. Where automation solutions can minimise SME dependency in the development cycle, they are less likely to encounter delays.
R7.7Use volumetrics for scenario planning
As volumetrics mature, use them for scenario modelling to inform planning and project management, particularly dispatch planning. They are not a substitute for full plans but support a more responsive approach.
R7.8Apply minimum viable scope to dependent changes
This is particularly relevant for CoR and CoB, which depend on external changes. If those dependencies slip, the temptation to expand scope must be resisted.
R7.9Bulk data clean-up
Initiate a data quality project to identify and address common issues at scale across the McCloud affected member population (for example, inconsistencies between payroll/HR and core pensions administration system, or inferable missing flags). Engaging data analysts for a short project to deliver this would reduce both the number of manual fixes and time per case.
R7.10Real-time monitoring of automated processes
Implement systems to monitor automated processes impacted by McCloud in real time: cases processed, errors encountered, throughput, to enable rapid identification of underperformance or malfunction and either remediation or fall-back.
R8.1Integrate Customer Experience into McCloud governance
Treat the Customer Experience team and frontline member services as core stakeholders. Engage Customer Experience representatives in all planning meetings, decision reviews and workshops, including the framing and presentation of any revised delivery dates.
R8.2Communicate early, often and openly
Develop a robust communications strategy delivering regular, proactive updates to all affected members, not only targeted letters to small cohorts. Even where exact dates are uncertain, share what is known and the reasons for delay in plain terms. Resume the broad-scope engagement campaigns used earlier in the Programme. Use multiple channels (post, email, SMS where possible, website, webinars or town-hall Q&As) to replace the current information vacuum. Continue to enforce the plain-language and design principles introduced in training.
R8.3Sustain and resource the communications process
Senior leaders should continue to oversee the communications process, supplemented by dedicated technical, data and customer communication support, to sustain recent improvements in approval controls, reduce dependence on scarce specialists and build resilience.
R8.4Strengthen resource planning for member contact channels
Provide PCH with advance notice of changes in McCloud delivery parameters so staffing and training demands can be managed. Including customer experience and customer-facing operations as part of the core McCloud team will help ensure decisions are made with the end user in mind and break down silos between communications, operations and policy design.
R8.5Tailor and expand member communications
Introduce more granular, personalised messaging through member segmentation: retirees versus active members, those with imminent choices versus those waiting longer. Reinstate broader awareness initiatives drawing on the successful approach used for past pension contribution changes. Consider newsletters, informational videos and public FAQs.
R8.6Enhanced employer engagement
Conduct a thorough consultation with employers, analyse current pain points and identify both immediate and longer-term improvements, including targeted training and communications.
R8.7McCloud-specific feedback and satisfaction tracking
Implement mechanisms to measure McCloud-specific customer experience: short surveys after key interactions (RSS receipt, helpline contact) on clarity and satisfaction; tracking of call volumes, complaints and common enquiry topics; and a dashboard of customer experience indicators reviewed in McCloud governance forums. Share aggregate data with the Programme Board to integrate customer experience into performance management.
R8.8Better self-service and online options
Launch a McCloud Remedy Support Page, kept current with explanatory videos and FAQs. If a full self-service choice submission portal is not feasible during McCloud, consider interim digital options such as an online callback request or contact-detail update form. Over the longer term, investment in member portals and interactive web tools is essential.
R8.9Carry McCloud lessons into future delivery
Develop a business case for technology and process investments prioritising customer experience: modernising core systems for communication flexibility, automating routine member updates and enabling online self-service. Establish an overarching business change methodology that embeds customer experience into project initiation: communications planning, user experience design, stakeholder mapping. Engage member representatives or user focus groups on a regular rather than one-off basis.
R9.1Active stakeholder management
Develop stakeholder maps to ensure all parties (DHSC, HM Treasury, Pension Board, staff, unions and others) receive an appropriate level of detail. Where further delay is likely, however minor, inform DHSC early with explanation and mitigation. Treat stakeholder engagement as an ongoing change management thread rather than a one-time activity.
R9.2Promote a culture of open communication
Encourage staff at all levels to raise concerns or suggest improvements; instances where staff flag issues early should be welcomed. Where frontline staff identify a problem with a new process they should have effective channels to escalate immediately with evidence, and leadership should respond with clear direction.
R9.3Support staff through change
Provide outlets for staff feedback. Hold regular town-halls where leadership update on progress and recognise effort. Ensure major changes such as new tools come with adequate training and a transition period. The workforce should feel equipped, not imposed upon.
R9.4Manage organisational change holistically
If further reorganisation or new roles are needed, build in sufficient lead time. The rationale should be clearly communicated, with time for questions and support through transition. Structure should follow strategy: align the organisation chart with the new governance and processes.
R9.5Document and learn from change
Document the McCloud journey and capture lessons learned to inform future large programmes. McCloud has stress-tested NHSBSA’s change capacity; institutional learning is part of developing change management maturity in the long run.
All text above is the review's.
No recommendations have this response.