Completion Report

Project Summary:

The stated objectives for this project were:




Objective Met? 


 Determine the number of servers to be replaced and the OS's and programs required



Build the set of replacement servers and establish the packages used by CSE on this


O3 Test the new infrastructure to ensure that it performs satisfactorily Yes
O4 Migrate current Live data to the new set of servers Yes
O5 Decommission any redundant elements of the previous Live service tbc


In the project brief, the following deliverables were identified:





Updated technical documentation detailing the S & E infrastructure



An 'order' for the requisite number of replacement servers



A new set of servers that hold the range of software used by Sport & Exercise staff Yes


Completed test documentation that shows testing results that are acceptable to the business users


D5 A replacement Live service that has been fully tested and signed off by the relevant stakeholders Yes
D6 The removal of redundant servers and related items from the UoE network tbc


All of the objectives and deliverables have been achieved. The two items that are recorded as 'tbc' are awaiting completion because the decommissioning of the VMs requires a waiting period of several weeks between the servers being switched off and their final removal from the UoE network. This grace period allows for any need to access the retired servers. The decommissioning is in a request to ITI Enterprise Windows and is being monitored. It has an expected completion date (dependent on team workloads, etc.) and can be seen under call number I170613-0921


Analysis of Resource Usage:

Staff Usage Estimate: 23 days

Staff Usage Actual:  24.3 days

Staff Usage Variance: 5.7%

Other Resource Estimate: 0 days

Other Resource Actual: 0.0 days

Other Resource Variance: 0%


Explanation for variance:


Extended duration

The go-live of the new infrastructure was pencilled in for mid-February at the Planning stage, with the caveat that this was likely to shift because the date was dependent on the completion of user testing and the subsequent availability of the appropriate staff at the vendors. The former was pushed back because of a short delay caused by issues with the configuration of the new database server (see issue 1) and the date for deployment was then planned for mid-April (see issue 2). This date was met but there has been a further delay in closing the project which has been caused by conflicts to the PM's time by higher priority work on other projects.


Analysis of effort

Stage/Task Estimate (days) Actual       Difference     
Project Management 6 7.5 1.5
Planning 2 1.7 (0.3)
Analysis 4.5 3.0 (1.5)
Build 6 5.6 (0.4)
Testing 2.5 2.3 (0.2)
Deploy 1.5 2.8 1.3
Closure 0.5 0.3 (0.2)
Unplanned   1.1 1.1
Total 23 24.3 1.3


The original estimate for the project was 23 days, and the actual effort from staff in IS Applications has been 24.3 days. It can be seen from the above table that the overall effort is quite close to the estimated figure, with an increase in project management time and some effort against unplanned activity. The former is attributable to the increased length of the project, and the latter increase was largely down to staff in IS Applications being involved in discussions around the issue of the FASIC server which was raised during the project (more detail on this below).

The effort across the other stages is fairly close to the original estimates overall, with small differences across the individual stages that more or less net out.

Scope Changes:

The original scope of the project was added to by issue 3, under which it was agreed that the issue of a new server for FASIC (Sports Injury Clinic) would be investigated. The need for this came about because of concerns that had been raised concerning patient data security. It was assumed, at first, that the supply of an additional VM to store this data would suffice, and could thus be added to this project. However, this proved not to be the case (because of security aspects around VMs) and so it was decided that CSG010 could not address this issue after all. CSG staff are continuing to establish the best solution to this.

Key Learning Points:

This problem had two sticking points that we can learn from. The first was the intricacy of the server configurations and accounts, combined with the length of time since work was carried out (by IS Applications staff) on this set-up. This led to the configuration taking longer than anticipated and a bit of 'to-ing and fro-ing' to get things set up exactly as required. The infrastructure that was being replaced had been in place for six years, with little work being required on it in that time. This meant that there is little involvement (and experience) in the Sport & Exercise environment. So, it may be helpful to have colleagues work with staff from the external companies at the analysis stage to pin down how things should be set up for them.

The other problem was that the original resource (in Development Technology) left the team just as the Build was completed. There was a handover to a colleague by the departing member of staff, but the supporting documentation was difficult to locate, so a lesson learned is that a full handover should record where any documentation is stored and that these documents should be quality checked.


Outstanding issues:

At the time of preparing this report, there are no outstanding issues.


Project Info

Sport & Exercise Replacement Servers
CSG Portfolio Projects (OTHCSG)
Management Office
Project Manager
David Watters
Project Sponsor
Jim Aitken
Current Stage
Start Date
Planning Date
Delivery Date
Close Date
Programme Priority
Overall Priority