WCC launches review of “disproportionate” $600,000 spend on Library website

News from WCC
Colin MacDonald QSO has been appointed to conduct an independent, value for money review of procurement and spending on the website of the recently re-opened Te Matapihi ki ti Ao Nui | Central Library. Mr MacDonald is an experienced technology sector professional and previous Chief Executive of the Department of Internal Affairs and Government Chief Digital Officer.

Wellington City Council Chief Executive Matt Prosser says the review follows widespread concern about the spending of almost $600,000 on the website.

“There has been considerable public interest and concern about the cost for the concept design, creation and hosting of a standalone website for Te Matapihi ki ti Ao Nui | Wellington Central Library, which appears disproportionate to the final product.

“I have therefore commissioned an independent external review of the process to help understand better what happened and to identify lessons that can be applied,” Mr Prosser says.

The review will evaluate whether the website represented value for money, was defensible in terms of the outcomes sought, its procurement was in line with council policies, was delivered efficiently and effectively, and was governed appropriately.

The full Terms of Reference can be found at the end of this release.

As part of the review, Mr MacDonald may speak with current and former staff, contractors and any other interested parties, as well as review the Council’s procurement and approvals processes related to the website.

Mr MacDonald has been asked to present a findings report to Mr Prosser and the Council’s Audit and Risk Committee by mid-September. The report will be made public as soon as the findings have been received and appropriate responses to these considered.

Mr Prosser says Wellingtonians are entitled to know how the website project came in at the cost it did. “I am clear that a value for money lens must be placed over every decision and expenditure the council puts in place. This was a decision made in a different time, and we are already on the record as saying that such a project, if proposed today, would be unlikely to get approval.

“This review will look for ways to strengthen decision-making processes so that we can continue to improve how council serves the Wellington public.”

Mr MacDonald has volunteered to undertake the review for no fees. The Council will cover any reasonable expenses he incurs, as well as any technical advice and report writing support required.

“I am grateful for Mr MacDonald’s offer to conduct this review for no fees. For the avoidance of doubt, the council offered to pay Mr MacDonald for his time and efforts but he declined, having offered his time free-of-charge on the basis he wanted to give something back to our city,” says Mr Prosser.

About the independent reviewer

Colin MacDonald QSO is a Wellington resident who has over 35 years’ experience in both public and private sector roles, including as Chief Executive Officer of the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs and Government Chief Digital Officer. He was also previously Chief Operating Officer at ANZ Bank, and brings significant experience in the technology sector, as well as public and corporate governance.

Value for Money Review Terms of Reference

Background
Te Matapihi ki te Ao Nui is Wellington City Council’s redevelopment of the Central Library in Te Ngākau Civic Square, restoring and strengthening the building into a base-isolated, modern civic facility. The project retained and upgraded the existing building to deliver a resilient, future-proofed, multi-purpose community hub, integrating traditional library services with archives, creative spaces, and cultural facilities.

The project’s final budget envelope was $217 million.

Following the re-opening, concerns have been raised by Elected Members and members of the public about the cost of the Te Matapihi website, which has been reported as costing $600,000.

The concerns include:

Judgement of those approving the expenditure
The commercial arrangements of the procurement, particularly given the functionality of the website appears limited
That the website was only a brochure site and that most functionality including joining the library referenced to other sites
The lack of transparency about the cost.

Purpose and Objectives

2.1 Purpose
This review is being commissioned to evaluate whether the website:

was defensible in respect of the outcomes it was seeking (were the outcomes appropriate and appropriately approved),
procurement was in line with policies and procedures and represented value for money (in line with any established/approved criteria),
costs and scope were defined, tracked and understood,
was delivered in the most efficient and effective way (in line with established criteria),
delivered optimal value for money in achieving its intended outcomes against the established criteria, and was appropriately governed.

2.2 Objectives

The review will:

Assess whether costs are reasonable compared to outputs and outcomes delivered (for example there is criticism that the website diverts visitors to another website for more practical purposes of joining the library). In doing so, an assessment should be made on whether appropriate modern website development methods and products were applied.
Assess the extent to which regard to economy, efficiency and effectiveness was given (for example was this included in the planning for the procurement).
Determine whether governance, management, risk management (including cybersecurity), and accountability arrangements were in line with expectations and supported value for money.
Evaluate whether the website is contributing to intended outcomes and impacts.
Identify opportunities for improved performance, cost-effectiveness, and service delivery.
Benchmark performance against comparable organisations or best practice (for example was the design of the website over scoped compared to other Council bespoke websites)
Provide recommendations that support continuous improvement and public accountability.

2.3 Value for money — definition and basis of assessment

For this review, value for money is assessed using the framework the Office of the Auditor-General applies to public spending.

Value for money is the relationship between what was spent and what was achieved; it is not the same as lowest price. It has three dimensions:

Economy — acquiring the resources used at the right price (spending less);
Efficiency — the relationship between the resources used and the outputs produced (spending well); and
Effectiveness — the extent to which the spending achieved its intended outcomes (spending wisely).
The assessment will consider whole-of-life cost — the total cost of designing, building, hosting, maintaining and supporting the website over its expected life — rather than the initial build price alone. Where relevant to the website’s purpose, “value” includes non-monetary value such as public accessibility and reach.

The review will assess the decisions made against the information and options reasonably available to decision-makers at the time, not solely with hindsight. A finding that the website cost more than expected does not by itself establish poor value for money; equally, compliance with process does not by itself demonstrate that value for money was achieved.

Scope of the Review
The review will cover:

Financial performance (cost structures, unit costs, cost drivers)
Service delivery or programme outputs and outcomes
Governance, decision-making, risk management (including cybersecurity), and accountability arrangements
Procurement, contract management, and supplier selection and performance
Benchmarking against peers or standards
Ongoing hosting costs and importantly the cost of maintenance.
The review will focus on the entire period covered by the consideration of the website through to implementation.

The review will be undertaken independently. The reviewer will have full and unrestricted access to relevant information, systems, documentation, and personnel required to complete the review, and will be able to apply appropriate review techniques without restriction.

Reporting and Use of Findings
The findings from this review will be documented in a report to the CEO. The findings are intended to:

Support accountability to elected members and the public
Inform and drive continuous improvement

The report will be made public through the Audit and Risk Committee and made available on Council’s website.