WARNING - By their nature, text files cannot include scanned images and tables. 
The process of converting documents to text only, can cause formatting changes and 
misinterpretation of the contents can sometimes result. Wherever possible you 
should refer to the pdf version of this document.



CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 
FINANCE COMMITTEE


FOR DISCUSSION 

Title: EXPENDITURE PROPOSAL: PAN GOVERNMENT 
AGREEMENT FOR GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION 

Prepared by: David Cameron, Head of Corporate Services 


Purpose 

To request the Committee’s approval to proposed expenditure on the Authority’s 
purchase of Geographic Information data under the Pan Government Agreement 
(PGA). 


Recommendations 

The Committee is requested approval proposed expenditure on the Authority’s 
purchase of Geographic Information data under the Pan Government Agreement 
(PGA), as set out in the attached Expenditure Justification Form. 


Executive Summary 

The Pan-Government Agreement 1 (PGA1) was established to encourage central 
government’s use of Geographic Information (GI) in policy, decision making and 
delivering information services for citizens. 

Cairngorms National Park Authority (CNPA) joined the PGA1 after existing 
members’ contributions for a three year contract to 31 March 2006 had been agreed. 
As a result CNPA benefited from a “new member” status which required no 
financial commitment for our use of GI, licensed by Ordinance Survey. The PGA1 
contract and funding terminated in March 2006. CNPA are no longer considered as a 
non-contributor for the PGA1 extension period. 

A new funding model has allocated a cost of £43,770 plus VAT for to the Authority 
for continued membership. Given the complexity of the contract and risks to 
continued use of geographic information of not continuing with the PGA for the time 
being, there appears to be no viable alternate option for delivery in the short term. 
The Committee is therefore recommended to agree this sum. 

Options for future procurement of data to develop Geographic Information will be 
explored. 



CAIRNGORMS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 

EXPENDITURE JUSTIFICATION 

1. Title 

Pan Government Agreement 1 Extension 


2. Expenditure Category 

Core .. # 
Project 
Grant 
Consultancy 

3. Description 

.. Brief overview of project/activity 
.. Specific elements for which support is sought (if not whole project/activity) 

The Pan-Government Agreement 1 (PGA1) was established to encourage central 
government’s use of Geographic Information (GI) in policy, decision making and delivering 
information services for citizens. 

The key aims of the PGA1 are to: 

1. meet government’s requirements for core geographic information 

2. facilitate data sharing both within the PGA community and with others in order to 
effectively carry out government business; and 

3. deliver value for money. 

Cairngorms National Park Authority (CNPA) joined the PGA1 after existing members’ 
contributions for a three year contract to 31 March 2006 had been agreed. As a result CNPA 
benefited from a “new member” status which required no financial commitment for our use 
of GI, licensed by Ordinance Survey. The PGA1 contract and funding terminated in March 
2006. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) formerly the Office 
of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) have been working to secure a new contract (known 
as PGA2) to succeed PGA 1. Tendering to date has however been unsuccessful and as a 
result an extension to PGA1 has been put in place until March 2007. 

CNPA are no longer considered as a non-contributor for the PGA1 extension period. A new 
funding model has allocated a cost of £43,770 plus VAT for to the Authority for continued 
membership. This Expenditure Justification is for continued membership of the PGA1 
extension from March 2006 to March 2007. This justification is only now being presented 
as negotiations over the development of the funding model have been protracted, with 
the outcome to the Authority uncertain. 

4. Rationale and Strategic Fit 

.. Objectives/intended beneficiaries 
.. Evidence of need and demand 
.. Fit with National Park Plan/Corporate Plan/other relevant strategies 

..Linkages to other activities/projects 

a) Two key CNPA functions, as a Planning and Access Authority, are both statutory 
responsibilities and require a mapping element. For example Local Plan and Core 
Path Plan development are underpinned by map data. Without map data these 
projects would be unable to continue. 

b) Other groups such as Natural Heritage and Economic & Social Development also 
benefit from mapping, 


5. Option Analysis 

.. Are there other ways in which the above objectives could be achieved? 
.. If so, why is this the preferred option? 

CNPA have been using data gained under the Pan-Government Agreement (PGA) for 6 / 7 
months of the 2006 – 07 financial year, pending resolution of funding models and licensing 
issues. DCLG reserve the right to charge for map use during this period. It is unclear at this 
time how much DCLG would charge CNPA if it was to withdraw at this stage. 

The GI data used in the CNPA’s work is derived from Ordinance Survey licences gained 
through the PGA. There are a number of complex legal issues to be determined on the 
continued use of “derived data” from PGA licences were the Authority to withdraw from 
the current arrangements. Many other public bodies are also faced with similar 
considerations and the Authority must take some time to consider the consequences of 
different options for accessing Geographic Information. 

There does not, therefore, appear to be any other options for securing Geographic 
Information for the current year, other than to pay for use of data under the PGA1 extension. 

The following options are being considered for future years. 

Option 1 - Withdraw from PGA and secure an independent mapping contract 

A new mapping contract would need to go out for tender, which would result in a cost to 
CNPA. 

To produce a cost saving CNPA could reduce the portfolio of products in a new tender as 
well as the number of users who can use the data. Although this would significantly reduce 
the cost of Map Data it could have a negative impact on the use of geographic information 
within the organisation and its ability to share data with other government agencies. 


Option 2 – Seek to renegotiate the CNPA’s use of data products provided through 
PGA 

As with option 1, to produce a cost saving CNPA could reduce the portfolio of products as 
well as the number of users who can use the data in its future use of data under the new 
PGA procurement. Although this would significantly reduce the cost of Map Data it could 
have a negative impact on the use of geographic information within the organisation and its 
ability to share data with other government agencies. 


Option 3 – consider Joint procurement with other partners 

We are aware that a number of other users of data under the PGA are disappointed at the 
level of costs being proposed under the PGA1 extension. The Scottish Executive is taking an 
overview of the situation for NDPBs in Scotland. 

There may be a possibility of undertaking a joint procurement exercise with other partners 
to secure GI data. 


6. Risk Assessment 

.. Are there risks to the CNPA in funding this project/activity? 
.. Are there risks in the project/activity not being delivered to required timescale/quality? 
.. Comment on the likelihood of such risks occuring, their potential impact, and (where 
appropriate) any action that would be taken to mitigate the risks. 

There are no risks to CNPA in continuing to access GI data from the extended PGA contract. 

Key risks in this aspect of service delivery will arise around any options to move away from 
current supplier of data. Such a contractual change will pose a number of complex 
questions on the Authority’s right to continue to use any maps or other information derived 
from data under the PGA. These risks will be considered as part of evaluating options for 
future GI data procurement. 


7. Costs and Funding 

.. Detail the financial costs of the project/activity 
.. Detail the sources of funding 
.. Detail any non-monetary costs to the CNPA (such as Member or staff input) 

PGA Membership for March 06 – 07 -£43,770.00 
VAT £7,659.75 
Total £51,429.75 

There is a need to continue using the current PGA system in order to meet our functional 
requirements. No specific provision was made in the current financial year to meet this 
additional expenditure since it was not anticipated that this particular problem would have 
arisen. This additional cost will be met from existing budget provisions Corporate Services 
staff will seek to manage budgets appropriately over the remainder of the year to avoid this 
causing an over-spend. 


8. Deliverables/ Impact Assessment 

.. What end products/outputs will be delivered? 
.. How will success be measured? 
.. How will the project be monitored and what will be the feedback to the CNPA? 

Subscribing to the extension of the Agreement will allow CNPA to continue to deliver 
support across the organisation and to its partners and stakeholders. 


9. Value for Money 

.. In view of the costs, do the deliverables appear to offer value for money? (consider cost 
of comparable projects, where available). 

The purpose of the Pan Government Agreement was to secure overall savings for public 
bodies, as compared with each body having to separately procure these services. The 
decision of the ODPM to re-tender has highlighted some unforeseen difficulties in securing a 
comprehensive suite of products that suits business needs across a wide range of public 
bodies. The current extension to the existing Agreement reflects a compromise to ensure a 
level of continuity in services until such times as further contractual discussions are 
concluded. 

The cost to the Authority is clearly a significant one, although we have benefited from these 
services free of charge for the previous three years. As outlined above, there are also no 
immediate alternate solutions to this situation. As a consequence, the current cost to CNPA 
for its share of the extension of the Agreement is considered acceptable. 

We await the results of the procurement negotiations in order to assess our future 
requirements and the value for money of any new agreement. 


10. Exit or Continuation Arrangements (where applicable) 

.. If this is not a discrete, time-limited , project or piece of work, what are the 
exit/continuation arrangements for when CNPA support ceases? 

There is an ongoing need for mapping data and relevant provision will be made in the 
budgeting process to meet the cost of this work in the future 


11. Additionality 

.. Does this work/project substitute for or duplicate work being carried out or proposed by 
others? 
.. What would be the effects of the CNPA not supporting the project? Would it proceed 
without CNPA support? 

Not applicable in this case. 


12. Stakeholder Support 

.. Have the organisations and/or communities that would have an interest in this 
work/project been involved, and are they supportive? 

Not applicable in this case. 


13. Recommendation 

That the Finance Committee agrees to the Park Authority’s contribution to the extension of 
the Pan Government Agreement. 



Name: 			Signature: 		Date: 


14. Decision to Approve or Reject 

Head of Group 

Name: David Cameron 	Signature: 		Date: 


Finance Committee 

Name: 			Signature: 		Date: 


Board 

Name: 			Signature: 		Date: