nplanned work in order to access AI services in the secure environment. The work required was the creation of custom skills/functions and was relatively complex technically and labour intensive. Cost optimisation work meant that later iterations of the product did not require custom skills/functions  Some budget allocation that would have been unused was repurposed and used to provide ‘hands on’ technical support from external data experts (Simpson Associates)  The Council have absorbed some costs for technical and legal/contracts work that was not identified at the outset  User testing was tailored to what was appropriate for the stage of development of the prototype, the pilot was smaller scale than initially planned. The tool was not available to CSC users to access freely over a period of time for their work, instead pilot workshops took place with social workers Were there enough resources?  There were enough resources, there were some challenges around availability due to unforeseen requests for technical work that needed to be undertaken to move forward Were there any unexpected or unintended issues in the delivery of the intervention?  See Section 4.1.2 (Technical Issues and Resolutions) To what extent has the intervention reached all the people that it was intended to?  Pilot was scaled back, despite this the entire workforce has been involved as planned (via locality events, workforce survey and user testing/pilot workshops)  Coram-i supported sector wide engagement (CSC and innovation/technology sectors) as planned 17 OFFICIAL - SENSITIVE  There has been more than expected engagement and interest in the project from a variety of other organisations and stakeholders. See Section 4.5.4 (Project Engagement) and Section 4.5.8 (Acceptability Summary). What