Completion Report
Project Summary:
Were the project goals met? Yes -The scope of this project was to migrate the redeveloped booking systems for PG Open Day and Tours and their administration interface to the LAMP server provided by IS.
Were the project deliverables fully or partially accomplished? Fully
The agreed objectives/deliverables were all met:
| Ref | Objectives | Priority |
| O1 | Install infrastructure for running the service and allow the development to be migrated, tested and changed if required | Mandatory |
| D1 | Create new environments Dev, Test, Live | |
| D2 | Migrate the two applications (PG Open Day and Tours) | |
| D3 | Migrate its data | |
| D4 | Secure data | |
| O2 | Documents | Mandatory |
| D5 | Technical Architect Document TAD | |
| D6 | System Description Document SDD | |
| O3 | Load Test applications | Highly Desirable |
| D7 | Capacity and Performance document |
Did the project deliver a solution to the problems being addressed? Yes
That includes not requiring code changes for routine administration such as editing the open days/tours available to students, so that the Apps Management team can support the application. It also ensures it meets web browser compatibility and database design standards. It was then left at a standstill waiting for funding to deploy/test it.
Does the Project Sponsor agree that this project can be closed at this time? Yes | ||||||||||||||
| Cost Summary | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| Review Contributors |
Ross Nicoll, 1/11/13: initial review of the project completion
Riky Harris, 30/10/13: initial review of the project completion
Suran Perera/Brian Denholm initial review of the project completion and 19/5/14 after post go live fixes
Niall Bradley initial review of the project completion Nov 13
Jane Johnston (on behalf of sponsor) initial review of the project completion Nov 13, and 7/5/14 after post go live fixes
Franck Bergeret: May 2014
Analysis of Resource Usage:
Staff Usage Estimate: 29 days
Staff Usage Actual: 44.5 days
Staff Usage Variance: 53%
Other Resource Estimate: 0 days
Other Resource Actual: 0 days
Other Resource Variance: 0%
Explanation for variance:
.Project Manager's Commentary on Reasons For Variance From Plans
Delivered all deliverables. Budget exceeded due to :
- increased effort to complete the load test. A new staff was assigned to the test and required extra effort and support from peer.
- increased time spent on addressing data issues and making minor improvements to the initial build done in March 13. This was a consequence of the initial build, which had not been tested by users, and functionality changes in order for it to pass UAT.
- increased effort to adress post live issues as part of this project (9.5d)
Delay in actual Go Live due to production resource effort priority during and after freshers' week.
-Post go live issues: delay due to
- funding agreementsbetween sponsor (Miall Bradley left in Jan 14) and budget holder,
- resource priority in IS and
- availability of SRA staff to test/sign off as per issues raised: https://www.projects.ed.ac.uk/project/stu233/issues/7 and https://www.projects.ed.ac.uk/project/stu233/issues/8
Key Learning Points:
.Consider in particular:
1. What went well?
All objectives were addressed. Extensive user testing completed (including load test) and further improvements to both Tours and PG Open Day sapplications were made to the initial development done earlier in the year, as requested by users.
2. What didn't go so well?
Unplanned enhancements/issues raised by users after post go live.
-Two UniDesk calls have now been raised, which have been addressed by support with the developer's help.
-Another post live issue was highlighted on 22/11 on PGOD and recorded as I131122-0095. It affected users making a booking the same day. A temporary fix was done trhe same morning and a permanent fix deployed 25/11/13.
-Agreed further funding to do post the go live issues mentioned below: 3 bugs and 3 enhancements as per issue https://www.projects.ed.ac.uk/project/stu233/issues/8-Signed off by users and deployed to Live on 14/5/14
Estimate to complete work: 9.5d
3. If you had a project like this again, what would you improve?
- Factor extra effort for testing and supporting the enhancements/addressing queries from UAT.
- Prioritise deployment in relation to other work taking place, especially so close after freshers' week.
Outstanding issues:
.None, all post live issues have been addressed and deployed to Live on 14/5/14, tested and signed off by users on 21/5/14