FOI request (FOIR-678814386)

ITSM Software Expenditure

Requested Wed 15 January 2025
Responded Tue 21 January 2025

I am writing to request information under the Freedom of Information Act regarding the running costs of your IT Service Management system (ITSM) at your organisation.

Specifically, I am requesting information on the following:

1. Running costs: Please provide the past 3 years costs (for clarity, these refer to your financial year whatever that may be).

a. Implementation

b. Subscription/Licensing

c. Support

d. Professional Services (project work, and so on)

e. Managed Services (where applicable)

f. Approximate Staff Costs (associated with running the platform)

g. Number of FTE associated to platform operations (if unable to answer f)

2. Implementation: If your system was implemented in the last 3 years, please provide the start and finish date or duration of this implementation project.

3. Service Management System Vendor: Which vendor provided the service management system software (for example, ServiceNow, Jira Service Management, Halo, Freshservice, Ivanti, Xurrent, ManageEngine, and so on)?

4. Scope: Please provide the business scope of your system, does it include business functions outside of IT (for example, HR Case Management, Facilities, Finance, and so on)?

5. Users: How many agent (fulfillers/users) licences do you have?

I understand that you may be required to redact some information in accordance with data protection laws or commercial confidentiality. I request that any information not released be clearly identified and the reasons for not releasing it be provided.

Response

Notice of Refusal

Disclosure of information relating to ICT systems, infrastructure and security constitutes a security risk as it would leave the Council's computer assets more vulnerable to a malicious hacking attack. This means that disclosure would:

• Make the Council more vulnerable to crime (Section 31)

• Risk harming the systems on which the day-to-day business of the Council relies (Section 43)

Section 31 (Law Enforcement)

Section 31(1)(a) states that information is exempt if its disclosure is likely to prejudice the prevention or detection of crime. ICO guidance states that this can be used to protect information on a public authority's systems which would make it more vulnerable to crime. This exemption can be used by a public authority that has no law enforcement function:

• To protect the work of one that does

• To withhold information that would make anyone, including the public authority itself, more vulnerable to crime

The crime in question would be a malicious attack on the Council's computer systems. Since the disclosure of the withheld information would make the Council's systems more vulnerable to such crime, the exemption is engaged.

The exemption is subject to the public interest test. There is an overwhelming public interest in keeping the Council's computer systems secure which would be served by non-disclosure. This outweighs the public interest in accountability and transparency that would be served by disclosure.

Section 43 (Commercial Interests)

Section 43(2) states that information is exempt if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including the public authority holding it).

Disclosure of information relating to ICT systems, infrastructure and security puts the council at risk of a malicious hacking attack.

This would compromise the Council's ability to provide its services and carry out 'business-as-usual' should our systems be compromised. Were our systems to be compromise, the cost of a system recovery would be detrimental to the Council's commercial interests.

The exemption is subject to the public interest test. There is an overwhelming public interest in keeping the Council's computer systems secure which would be served by non-disclosure. This outweighs the public interest in accountability and transparency that would be served by disclosure.