Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
STATEMENT OF WORK
Records Management Project
1. Background
The International Atomic Energy Agency (hereinafter referred to as the “IAEA”) operates its records management services through the Archives and Records Management Section (ARMS). Both, internal and external audits conducted in 2016, have noted significant inefficiencies inherent to the paper workflows, and pointed to the challenges encountered by ARMS to meet new and ever-growing requirements for the proper handling of digital information and its carriers. Both audit reports pointed to the necessity of revising the current Records Management Programme which consists of the Record Keeping Policy, the Records Retention Schedule, the IAEA File Plan, the ARM Handbook, and other guidelines.
The IAEA’S Record Keeping Policy defines the ARMS mandate as “to guarantee the management and preservation of authentic and reliable records”. However, this policy lacks detail and consistency and ignores the existence of hybrid documentation such as hard copies, digital documents, databases or datasets which are functionally linked in and to business processes.
The current policy framework and its implementation bear the signs of the 1990s when digital information was considered to be an exception, or a simple set of copies of the records’ paper version.
The IAEA operates six (6) departments with over 2.500 staff members who generate and distribute documents and records as part of their daily routine.
Page 1 of 7
Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
2. Scope
This Request for Proposal (RFP) describes the requirements for the Agency wide Records Management Project to revise the IAEA Records Management Programme. The Contractor cooperates with the Records Advisory Team of ARMS and the Unit Head of the Records Unit and works under the overall guidance and direct supervision of the Section Head of MTGS-ARMS.
The service requirements are summarised as the following Phases:
a) Phase 1: Creation and delivery of a project plan including identification of tools and methodologies to execute an Agency wide records and data survey project; b) Phase 2: Executing a records and data survey, including personal interviews across the Agency; c) Phase 3: Drafting the divisional Records and Data Retention Schedules; and d) Phase 4: Revising the Agency File Plan and Taxonomy, including supporting procedures and guidelines.
The Phases are comprised of Contractor’s Work Tasks which are listed in section 4. of this document.
MTGS-ARMS therefore seek consultancy services from a Records and Archives Management firm to carry out the above indicated tasks and fulfil the listed requirements. The overall project duration may not exceed 12 months plus the indicated tolerance. Requirements and deliverable items as outlined in section 4. of this SoW shall be met and submitted in accordance with the “Period of Performance” table provided in section 5. The desired start date of the project is 01 February 2018.
3. Acronyms and Abbreviations
The following acronyms and abbreviations shall apply throughout this SoW unless defined otherwise hereinafter:
AoA Accuracy of Analysis (KPI) AM Administrative Manual ARM Archives and Records Management ARMS Archives and Records Management Section DI Delivered Items (KPI) IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency referred to as the Agency MT Department of Management MTGS Division of General Services, Department of Management MTIT Division of Information Technology, Department of Management
Page 2 of 7
Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
NA Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications NE Department of Nuclear Energy NS Department of Nuclear Safety and Security OIOS Office of Internal Oversight Services PoD Precision of Documentation (KPI) RFP Request for Proposals RKSC Record Keeping Steering Committee RM Records Management ROAD Repository of Online Agency Documents RSS Records Retention Schedule SG Department of Safeguards SoW Statement of Work TC Department of Technical Cooperation VAPD Viability of Advice for Program Development (KPI)
4. Contractor’s Work Tasks
The Contractor shall carry out the Activities (Tasks) listed below and provide the deliverables specified. The term “Expected Production Items” refers to documentation required during the project duration to evaluate the progress and compliance of the ongoing activities as outlined in paragraph 4.3. “Deliverable Items” as listed in paragraph 4.4. describe the project products. The Contractor shall ensure that all interviews and staff engagement activities necessary to meet the listed requirements with IAEA staff are coordinated through ARMS.
4.1. Creation and delivery of a project plan including identification of tools and methodologies to execute an Agency wide records and data survey project. The Contractor shall analyse the current Records Management practices, including applications, policies, and implementation, identify solutions to the present shortcomings and transfer these findings to the Check Point Report Phase 1, by explicitly focusing on the following aspects: 4.1.1. Business processes which carry potential for streamlining; 4.1.2. Excessive and misguided records retention; 4.1.3. Identifying current practices for managing vital records; 4.1.4. Gap Analysis of the Records Management Programmes of the Agency and its compliance with pertinent industry standards ISO 15489-1:2016, ISO 16175-1: 2010, ISO 16175-2:2011, ISO 16175-3:2010, ISO 30300:2011, ISO 30301:2011, and ISO 30302:2015, and advise on addressing its findings;
Page 3 of 7
Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
4.1.5. The collection and preparation of necessary information to draft a revised Records Retention Schedule; 4.1.6. Collection and preparation of necessary information to update the Agency`s File Plan, Taxonomy and File Codes; and 4.1.7. Preparation of analytical findings to produce a revised version of the applicable parts of the ARM Handbook.
4.2. Executing a records and data survey, including personal interviews across the Agency. The Contractor shall perform an Agency wide records and data survey and, based on its findings and by the means of the Checkpoint Report Phase 2, review and advise on the state-of-the-art development and updating of records management programmes in a hybrid environment for international organization with respect to: 4.2.1. Policy framework for record keeping and information governance in the context of extraterritoriality and international law; 4.2.2. Information Security Management Systems and Policies; 4.2.3. Procedures and guidelines on disposition scheduling, file code management, taxonomies electronic records and data in ERP and other information systems; and 4.2.4. Vital-records protection and disaster recovery planning.
4.3. Expected Production Items 4.3.1. Project documentation in accordance with current project management standards, including a Business Case (including an assessment of major risks) and a Risk Management Strategy, 4.3.2. A first draft of the divisional records retention schedules for TC, NE, NA, NS, SG and all offices, 4.3.3. A draft of an Agency File Plan and Taxonomy and implementation guidelines for the electronic recordkeeping system.
4.4. Deliverable Items 4.4.1. The Contractor shall deliver a soft copy of the Project Plan and a Gap Analysis after the review of existing RM policies and procedures (ref. 4.1.); 4.4.2. The Check Point Report Phase 1 shall contain the review of the pilot records survey projects which will be supplied by ARMS. It shall identify required changes to methodologies, tools, communication materials; 4.4.3. The Contractor shall collect the survey data in an information system to be accessible by ARMS staff and shall provide Check Point Reports at the end of each Phase; and
Page 4 of 7
Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
4.4.4. The Contractor shall design a new policy framework including a draft retention policy per division, revised procedures in ARM Handbook, and the revised concept of the Agency’s Taxonomy and File Plan.
5. Period of Performance
The overall maximum project duration of 12 months plus tolerances is fragmented into four (4) phases in which the requirements and deliverable items must be met and submitted, according to the below milestones. Each phase carries a time tolerance which is allocated uniquely and shall not be carried over to any subsequent phase. Delivery of a Check Point Report at the end of each stage as defined in paragraph 4.4.3. mark the end of each phase. Desired start date of the Contractor engagement is 01 February 2018.
Project Phase Phase to be completed Tolerance Location* within a timeframe of 1. Creation of the 2 months 2 weeks 30% on-site Project Plan and 70% off-site identifying tools and methodologies to execute the records and data survey project 2. Executing a records 6 months 4 weeks 70% on-site and data survey across 30% off-site the Agency 3. Drafting the 2 months 2 weeks 10% on-site divisional Records and 90% off-site Data Retention Schedules 4. Revising the Agency 2 months 2 weeks 10% on-site File Plan, including 90% off-site supporting procedures and guidelines Final project wrap-up 1 day None On-site meeting** * The indicated percentage value is an approximation and can deviate to meet the needs and requirements to complete the project phase. ** The final project wrap-up meeting shall be held on the last day of the assignment to summarize the project execution.
Page 5 of 7
Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
6. Key Performance Indicators (KPI)
The effectiveness and the degree of compliance of the delivered services with the requirements listed in section 4. of this SoW shall be measured by the following KPIs:
6.1. Accuracy of Analysis (AoA): 6.1.1. Definition: The AoA measures the quality of the analysis by scoring the relevance and accuracy of the assessment based on their applicability, scope, and practicability; 6.1.2. Measurement: The AoA is measured by evaluating the validity of the reference made in the Check Point Report 1 to each aspect defined in sub-paragraphs 4.1.1. to 4.1.7. (Tasks) and their relevance to the overall scope of the project, considering the base-line categories as defined in paragraph 4.1. (i.e. applications, policies and implementation, shortcomings, and solutions). Each Task is equally weighted and scored on a scale of 1 to 4 (1= exceeds requirement; 2= meets requirement; 3= does not meet requirement; 4=no relevance to the project). Each base-line category score is measured by identifying the median of all individual Task scores. The overall final score for the AoA is then determined by adding all base-line categories and calculating the median. The evaluation matrix for the AoA mirrors this methodology: Base-line Categories Policies and Current applications Shortcomings Solutions Implementation Tasks 4.1.1. 4.1.2. 4.1.3. 4.1.4. 4.1.5. 4.1.6. 4.1.7. Median Overall Score Median :
6.1.3. Target: The Contractor shall warrant an AoA score of 2.
6.2. Viability of Advice for Program Development (VAPD): ≤ 6.2.1. Definition: The VAPD measures the practical applicability and validity of the provided advice in respect to development endeavours for new records management programs; 6.2.2. Measurement: The VAPD is calculated by a simple median, aggregated from the scores per task by evaluation the Check Point Report Phase 2 (i.e. items as listed in sub- paragraphs 4.2.1. to 4.2.4.), based on a scale of 1 to 4 (1= exceeds requirement; 2= meets requirement; 3= does not meet requirement; 4=no relevance to the project). The evaluation matrix for the VAPD mirrors this methodology:
Page 6 of 7
Records Management IAEA Statement of Work Project RFP 46268-SIS Dated 2017-11-24
Task Score 4.2.1. 4.2.2. 4.2.3. 4.2.4. Median = final score:
6.2.3. Target: The Contractor shall warrant a VAPD score of ≤ 2.
6.3. Precision of Documentation (PoD): 6.3.1. Definition: The PoD measures the precision of the provided documentation and their overall applicability. 6.3.2. Measurement: The PoD is calculated by a simple median, aggregated from the scores per variable (i.e. items as listed in sub-paragraphs 4.3.1. to 4.3.3.), based on a scale of 1 to 4 (1= exceeds requirement; 2= meets requirement; 3= does not meet requirement; 4=no relevance to the project). The provided documentation will be evaluated on its merit, accuracy and overall compatibility. The evaluation matrix for the PoD mirrors this methodology: Task Score 4.3.1. 4.3.2. 4.3.3. Median = final score:
6.3.3. Target: The contractor shall warrant a PoD score of ≤ 2.
6.4. Delivered Items (DI): The DI refers to all items listed in paragraph 4.4. of this SoW. It is a simple verification of delivered goods. 6.4.1. Measurement: Each of the listed items must be provided and will be scored on a simple binary scale (0=requirement not met; 1= requirement met). The score of each item will be aggregated to measure the overall compliance: Task Score 4.4.1. 4.4.2. 4.4.3. 4.4.4. Total:
6.4.2. Target: Delivery of all Items shall be mandatory. Therefore, the Contractor shall warrant a DI score of 4. ------End of document------
Page 7 of 7