addressing federal it challenges

1

Addressing Federal IT ChallengesAddressing Federal IT ChallengesMike Locatis, State Chief Information Officer

Governor’s Office of Information Technology

December 1st, 2008

2

Michael Locatis - Background• State of Colorado

– State CIO - serves Governor Bill Ritter, Jr.

– Statewide IT Consolidation Architect

– Chair Governor’s Health IT Commission

• City & County of Denver

– City & County CIO - served Mayor Hickenlooper

– Developed Denver311 & award winning IT consolidation

• 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee

– National Technology Advisory Council member

– Host Technology Committee member

• National Assoc. of State Chief Information Officers

– 2009 Director

– 2008 - 2009 Security & Privacy Committee Chair

• 22 yrs private sector

3

Colorado Leads Nation in State-Level IT Reform

4

Contents

� Executive Overview………………………. 4

� The First 100 Days………………………..12

� Fed IT operations issues in review………..23

� Fed IT organizational issues in review……31

� Fed IT state program delivery continuum...38

5

• Federal leadership on enterprise architecture and systems is critical during this difficult fiscal time for state and local governments.

• The Federal government is currently not realizing the full potential in leveraging enterprise architecture and solutions – more than $300 Billion annually ($600 with Medicaid) in State program grants could benefit.

• A focus on a “coordinated enterprise approach” will help the next President in critical strategic objectives, including:

• Improving healthcare quality & efficiency • Sustaining national security • Providing world class education • Public safety next gen communications • Citizen access to services & transparent government• Citizen involvement in democracy• Modernizing aging legacy systems and infrastructure

Federal IT Executive Summary

This approach is currently yielding positive results within

State and Local governments.

6

Our Future: Realizing Strategic Vision

• Employ science and

technology to solve our

nation's most pressing

problems.

• Create a transparent and

connected democracy.

• Encourage a modern

communications

infrastructure.

• Prepare all of our children

for a 21st century

economy.

• Improve America's

competitiveness.

Vision for America Enabling The Vision

Chief

Technology

Officer

Realizing the Vision

• Champion for the Vision

• Prioritizes the Agenda

• Developing industry and

association partnership

• Foster state/local

partnerships

• Extending Federal

Enterprise Architecture

standards and Models

Enterprise

Program

Management

Office

• Leverage, expand, and

champion effective

programs & technology

• Build Better State and

Local Enterprise Solutions

• Eliminate Ineffective Silo

Solutions

• Enforce FEA Standards

• Develop Center of

Excellence for Enterprise

Solutions

• Develop Incentives for

Technical Innovation.

7

Our Future: Key Next Steps

• Appoint Chief Technology

Officer (CTO)

• Build a transition team of

seasoned IT professionals

and visionaries

• Include proven leadership

in enterprise architecture

and consolidation

• Assemble a governance

council to help set the

priorities and evaluate

existing programs,

standards, enterprise

solutions & cost allocation

Appoint Leadership Scan and Assess Execute

• Assess Federal Agencies

• Establish enterprise

performance models and

score agencies

• Determine opportunities

for enterprise

collaboration with State

and Local entities

• Identify high-performing

technological solutions

• Prioritize a portfolio of

programs for the CTO.

• Assign an Enterprise

Program Management

Office and Staff

• Produce the plan for

execution of the program

portfolio

• Determine success

measurements

• Establish intra-agency

governance boards

• Establish private sector

and association advisory

council

8

• The following process would be used to evaluate the program portfolio

Scan and Assess

Program Evaluation Methodology

Initiate Evaluate Score Act

• Setup program evaluation steering committee

• Contract independent assessment entity

• Assemble data for federal programs including:

• Budgetary information • Program sponsorship • Program key contacts• Protocol for evaluation• Agency prioritization

• Finalize program schedule and expectations

• Establish evaluation criteria – approval from program evaluation steering committee

• Understand national strategic priorities

• Conduct evaluation by agency by priority

• Research and understand new legislative agenda

• Conduct stakeholder analysis

• Score programs on agreed upon criteria

• Identify:

• High priority national programs

• High priority programs that need additional investment

• Programs which should be terminated

• Produce federal agency report and review with program evaluation steering committee

• Develop action plans for all programs, including:

• Legislative agenda

• Public relations

• Termination of failing programs

• Investment into effective programs

• Creation / combination of programs

• Leadership assignments for high priority / strategic programs

9

• The complexity of evaluating a multi-billion dollar program portfolio will depend upon setting agreed upon evaluation criteria. The following highlights criteria as a starting point.

This process will be difficult and nearly impossible if these

criteria are not agreed upon by the Cabinet before evaluation.

Relevance to

Strategic Platform

Enterprise

Performance

Program

Sponsorship

Definition

Critical

Program

Metrics

How does the program enable the Administration’s strategic vision for the nation?

Is the program performing and producing the desired results and impacts?

Who are key sponsors for the program and how do they impact strategy?

• Alignment to strategy and political platform

• National priority

• Campaign promise

• Critical dependency for other strategic objectives

• Financial performance / return on investment

• Schedule / Efficiency

• Constituency impact

• Program objectives

• Delivery methods

• Overall effectiveness –key measure

• Stakeholder analysis

• Alliances

• Bipartisan opportunities

• High risk stakeholders

• Program leadership capabilities

Evaluating Federal ProgramsEvaluate

10

Z Level• Strategically opposed to the national platform• Ineffective delivery• Sponsored by higher risk stakeholders • High political erosion factor• Focus: How to Terminate

Scoring the Portfolio

Higher Priority

VA

LU

E

High Value

Lower Value and Lower Priority

High Priority

O

Strategic Priority

O Level• Highly aligned to Obama Administration national

platform and strategy• Effective programs – overall effectiveness• Sponsored by friendly stakeholders / or have

strong bi-partisan opportunities• Focus: How to Optimize Y

X Level• Higher priority program but lower impact to national

platform.• Dependency for other strategic programs• Overall high to moderate program effectiveness • Sponsorship is wide ranging • Focus: How to Improve Value

Y Level• High value program and highly effective• Not aligned to national platform• Sponsorship is wide ranging • Focus: Value over Strategic Value

XZ

Score

11

Director OMB

Possible Organization Structure for Federal IT

Department Secretary(s)

NEW-Cabinet Level CTO

Office of E-Government& Information Technology

President of the United States

Assistant Secretary

Cabinet Level Positions

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Agency CIO)

Deputy DirectorDeputy CTO

Special Assistants

Technology Strategy

Policy Alignment

Vision

Project Budget

Enterprise Procurement

Project Oversight PMO

FEA & LOB Standards

Status Reporting

Goals & Objectives

Execution

Accountability

Extend Architectureto state & local partners

PMO ComplianceExecutive Oversight

12

Contents


� The First 100 Days………………………..12




13

Perform Assessment

� Deep Environmental Scan/Assessment– Project portfolio

– Standards and architecture

– Department level CMM

– Staff skills

– Legislative review

– Governance review

– Gap analysis

– Federal/State/Local program delivery

– Recommendations

– Roadmap

– Deliver “State of Federal IT Report” to President, Cabinet, Congress & Citizens

14

Form Enterprise Program Management Office

• Appoint top notch leader for

OMB Office of E-Gov &

Information Technology

• Exercise full authority of the

E-Government Act of 2002.

• Perform top to bottom

assessment of Federal IT &

cyber security.

• Synchronize with new Federal

CTO policy objectives

• Form enterprise Program

Management Office (ePMO)

• Implement project and portfolio

management (PPM) to achieve

highest possible return on IT

investments while mitigating risk.

• Drive agency level accountability

• Develop remediation strategies for

existing failing projects

• Engage agencies in solution

15

Accelerate Standards Adoption

• Federal – Data Reference Model (DRM)

• Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA)

• National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST)

• Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)

• National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI)

• National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)

• National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC)

• United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT)

16

Strengthen State Coordination

• Review IT performance of Federally mandated, state administered projects and from “lessons learned”…

• explore a Federal enterprise approach to IT delivery

• reform Federal funding model to encourage shared services & state IT consolidation efforts

• standardize federal agency interpretation of OMB Circular A-87 shared cost allocation guidelines to encourage state IT consolidation, shared services and flexible comingling practices

17

Coordinate Cyber Security Programs

CIPAC - Critical Infrastructure

Partnership Advisory Council

18

Leverage Geospatial Technology Assets

� Geographic Information Systems (GIS) greatly improve information management capabilities

� Leverage state efforts in developing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure

� Promote geospatial enabled line of business applications

� Coordinate silo GIS modernization efforts among federal agencies

– FEMA flood plain mapping

– Census map modernization

– BLM wildfire management

� Imagery for the Nation

19

Fast Track Citizen Access

� Deploy Web/CRM 2.0 technology across federal agencies

� Promote & lead national broadband availability policy

� Promote citizen access & government transparency

20

Promote Public Sector Collaboration

� Planning for future initiatives

requires communication of

vision and…

� alignment of priorities for the

success of partnerships across

branches at local, state &

federal level

� Most have appetite for

leadership and roadmap from

the federal government.

21

Engage Private Sector

� Engage private sector industry partners in dialog and partnership to architect best practice solutions to government issues

� Adoption of standards & enterprise architecture

� Innovation council approach

22

Pursue Innovation

• Leverage Federal IT to showcase technology R&D

• Contribute to maintaining U.S. leadership position in innovation of networking and information technology

• Drive national broadband coverage initiatives with a goal of high speed internet access availability for all U.S. citizens

23

Contents


� The First 100 Days………………………..12




24

GAO Report Cards Identify Serious Fed IT Issues

25

Many Fed IT Projects Suffer Multi-year Shortfalls

2007 20062008

2008

26

Federal Enterprise Architecture Slow to Mature

� Federal Enterprise Architecture and federal standards initiatives face resistance and slow adoption rates among federal agencies

� Lack of promotion with state/local government

� Economies of standards based computing should transcend government boundaries

27

July 2008 - Growing Legislative Concern

28

Senator Carper’s Report Card

29

Legislative Action

30

Federal IT In the Press: Billions Wasted

31

Contents


� The First 100 Days………………………..12




32

How Federal IT is Organized (1)• The Cabinet includes the Vice President and the heads of 15

executive departments - the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, and the Attorney General.

• Each federal department is required to have an agency CIO by law under the Information Technology Management Reform Act (Clinger-Cohen Act) of 1996.

• Varied results have been achieved as departments continue to struggle with IT delivery as well as interagency collaboration and data sharing.

33

• Under the current President, Cabinet-level rank also has been

accorded to the Administrator, Environmental Protection

Agency; Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB);

the Director, National Drug Control Policy; and the U.S.

Trade Representative.23• The 2002 E-Government Act

established a Federal Chief Information Officer in OMB and created the Office of Electronic Government & Information Technology, which is headed by a Presidentially appointed Administrator/CIO.

How Federal IT is Organized (2)

34

6

Legislative Background of E-Gov

1966 19961974 19951993 2002

Freedom of Information

Act

Privacy Act

Government

Performance Results Act

Paperwork

Reduction Act

Clinger-

Cohen Act

E-Gov Act

FISMA Act

Federal IT Legislative Background

35

OMB Office of E-Government

• Overseeing the E-Government Fund to support interagency partnerships and innovation in using E-Government;

• Directing the activities of the CIO Council, which consists of Federal agency CIOs, advising on the appointments of agency CIOs, and monitoring and consulting on agency technology efforts;

• Advising the Director of OMB on the performance of IT investments, as well as identifying opportunities for joint agency and government-wide IT projects;

• Overseeing the development of enterprise architectures within and across agencies, which is being fulfilled through the Federal Enterprise Architecture, the framework for describing the relationship between business functions and the technologies and information that support them;

• Overseeing specific IT reform initiatives, activities, and areas of shared responsibility relating to:– Capital planning and investment control for IT;

– The development of enterprise architectures;

– Information security and privacy;

– Access to, dissemination of,

and preservation of government information;

– Accessibility of IT for persons with disabilities; and

– Other areas of electronic government.

Pursuant to the EPursuant to the E--Government Act of 2002 the Administrator should provide Government Act of 2002 the Administrator should provide

overall leadership and direction to the executive branch on elecoverall leadership and direction to the executive branch on electronic government tronic government

and oversees implementation of IT throughout the Federal governmand oversees implementation of IT throughout the Federal government, including:ent, including:

36

Line of Business InitiativeIn 2004 and 2005 the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

initiated a government-wide line of business analysis with a goal of identifying opportunities to reduce the cost of government and improve

services to citizens through business performance improvements:

Case Management (CM)

Financial Management (FM)

Grants Management (GM)

Human Resources Management (HR)

Federal Health Architecture (FHA)

Information Systems Security (ISS)

Budget Formulation and Execution (BFE)

Geospatial LoB

IT Infrastructure (ITI)

37

Director OMBDepartment Secretary(s)

NEW-Cabinet Level CTO

Office of E-Government& Information Technology

President of the United States

Assistant Secretary

Cabinet Level Positions

Deputy Assistant Secretary (Agency CIO)

Deputy DirectorDeputy CTO

Special Assistants

Technology Strategy

Policy Alignment

Vision

Project Budget

Enterprise Procurement

Project Oversight PMO

FEA & LOB Standards

Status Reporting

Goals & Objectives

Execution

Accountability

Extend Architectureto state & local partners

OMB PMO ComplianceExecutive Oversight

Possible Organization Structure for Federal IT

38

Contents


� The First 100 Days………………………..12




39

Project Seed

Grants

Matched Program Grants

State Agency Model

One System Federated

Deployment

One System Enterprise

Deployment

IT Delivery EnterprisePoint Solution

� Federal/State IT delivery models vary from program to program with wide ranging results

� Success often correlates to the level of enterprise leadership and direction from the initiating federal agency or program

� The following slides describe the IT delivery continuum with examples of real program outcomes

Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum

40

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment


Deployment



• Emergency Comm.

• Geospatial

• Health IT HIE/RHIO

• Broadband

• Credentialing

• Mitigation

• Preparedness

Programs OutcomeAgencies

• State is a pass through or

bypassed all together

• Results in point solutions at

local level

• Limits state, regional or

national compatibility &

interoperability

• Sustainability issues

UASIHHS ONCPSIC

41

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment


Deployment




• State is a pass through or

bypassed all together

• Results in point solutions at

local level

• Limits state, regional or

national compatibility &

interoperability

• Sustainability issues

UASIHHS ONCPSIC

• Emergency Comm.

• Geospatial

• Health IT HIE/RHIO

• Broadband

• Credentialing

• Mitigation

• Preparedness

42

Source: The Commonwealth Fund and National Governors Association E-Health Survey, conducted by Health Management Associates, 2007.

State Health IT Priorities

43

ONCHIT

State Level HIE Consensus Project

(AHIMA-FORE)Steering Committee

CA, CO, FL, IN, LA,ME, MA, NY, RI,TN, UT

State Alliancefor e-Health

(NGA)State Governments

HISPC(RTI)

Privacy and Security

AHRQ

AHIC

SRDState/regional demonstrations

NHIN I, IIDemonstrations

NCSL State legislators

HIT

HIMSSIndustry

Use CasesCMS

State Medicaid AgenciesMedicaid Transformation

Grants

HRSA

Community Health Clinics

CDC

State Bio-surveillance

HITSPStandards

CCHITProduct/Network

Certification

eHealthInitiative

Federal Health IT – Inconsistent Outcomes

44

Astute Policy Response

45

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment


Deployment

• HHS multi-program

eligibility

• CMS Medicaid

• CMS MITA

• HAVA Voting

• Real ID• Program interpretations differ

by Federal region

• Complex, monolithic,

expensive state one-offs

• State general fund match

impact up to 25%

• Many underperforming or

failed IT projects

• Require significant operating $

to sustain




46

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment


Deployment

• Complex, monolithic,

expensive state one-offs

• State general fund match

impact up to 25%

• Many underperforming or

failed IT projects

• Require significant operating $

to sustain




• HHS multi-program

eligibility

• CMS Medicaid

• CMS MITA

• HAVA Voting

• Real ID• Program interpretations differ

by Federal region

47

The following illustrates how Federal programs are funded and how this

impacts state-level IT spending as well as the risks associated with this model. CRITICAL ISSUES/RISKS

• Departments are not leveraging a shared services architecture.

• Multiple programs result in a proliferation of IT environments, services and staffing.

• This model does not allow efficiency savings or a pooling of technology staff and assets to better meet the program needs.

• Individually, the programs are not able to provide the best of class enterprise services, key risks include:

• Security

• Disaster Recovery

• Customer Services and Service Level Agreements

• Enterprise Architectural

• Standards

• Configuration Management

Federal Program #2

Federal Program #2

Federal Program #3

Federal Program #3

Direct Funds From the Federal GovernmentDirect Funds From the Federal Government

Dep

art

men

t #1

Dep

art

men

t #2Program Funding Costs

• Program Personnel

• Facilities

• Operational Expenses

• Technology

• IT Staff• Hardware• Software• Facilities• Other IT Costs

Specific Technology Funding

Program Funding Costs• Program Personnel

• Facilities


• Technology



Program Funding Costs• Program Personnel

• Facilities


• Technology



Federal Program #1

Federal Program #1

Federal Program Funding Approach Promotes

Costly State-Level IT Stovepipes

48

� Each program makes a purchase of IT assets such as servers which could be more effectively leveraged across the enterprise.

� The resulting stovepipe IT environment creates unnecessary complexity, is harder to secure and maintain and more costly to support.

� More IT staff with different skills and capabilities are required to support scattered environments, creating greater risks with IT resource management and succession planning.

� Critical functions such as security, disaster recovery, and customer support are simply not supported due to the limited individual program funding.

� Bottom line: The current model does not effectively leverage ITinvestments and personnel while increasing both risks and costs.

Federal Program Funding Approach Promotes

Costly State-Level IT Stovepipes

49

Departments are responsible for meeting the needs of the program and have limited technology budgets. The future

model below illustrates the benefits for a shared services approach to managing the IT needs for Federal programs

Current (Distributed) Future (Shared Services)

Federal Program 1

Hardware

Software

IT Staff

Architecture

Disaster Recovery Security

Customer Service Enterprise Architecture

Facilities

Federal Program 1

Hardware

Software

IT Staff

ArchitectureFacilities

Federal Program 3

Hardware

Software

IT Staff


Federal Program 4

Hardware

Software

IT Staff


Major Risks

Federal ProgramsFederal Programs

Enterprise ArchitectureEnterprise Architecture

Shared Data CentersShared Data Centers

Enterprise Application Servers

Enterprise Application Servers

Business ApplicationsBusiness Applications

Data ArchitectureData Architecture

Enterprise Disaster Recovery

Enterprise Disaster Recovery

Enterprise Cyber

Security

Enterprise Cyber

Security

Enterprise SLA / Customer

Support

Enterprise SLA / Customer

Support

Enterprise IT Resource ManagementEnterprise IT Resource Management

Fed/State Need Move Toward Enterprise

50

Future Benefits� There are long term reductions in the financial costs as the

enterprise is leveraged to support Federal programs. For example, new programs should not have to provide & maintain a unique data center for their program.

� Critical support functions, disaster recovery, and security services are provided consistently across the programs.

� IT personnel are more adequately positioned and aligned to support the programs. Customers receive better support and service level agreements can be realized.

� Enterprise architectural standards can be implemented and this standardization can reduce procurement and support costs, reduce program implementation time, improve integration, and help build a more stable environment.

� Network and system monitoring are more effective and thus reduce operational risks.

51

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment


Deployment

• 5-year initiative to plan,

develop and deploy

model information

systems in WIC State

agencies using a multi-

state consortia model.

Work in progress.

• 3 consortiums funded

• 3 different designs

• 3 different development efforts

– none deployed

• Project issues & lack of

incremental deliverables

• Limited use of Federal

Enterprise Architecture




52

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment*


Deployment

• Public health & disease

control lab software

• DHS Constellation

Automated Critical Asset

Management System

• DHHS PECOS/PES

provider enrollment

system & fraud detection

• Successful deployment

• In use at state level

• Promotes common data model,

sharing, workflow

• Continuity in approach across

states nationally

• Limits state flexibility to

customize




* software developed for the Federal agency &

used by states

53

Project Seed

Grants


State Agency Model


Deployment


Deployment

• National Federal income

tax system with goal of

having 80 percent of tax

returns filed

electronically by 2012

• Successful deployment

• Build once use nationally

• 68 million returns filed

electronically in 2005

• Promotes commercial

innovation




Michael W. LocatisState Chief Information Officer

Governor Bill Ritter, Jr.State of Colorado

www.colorado.gov/[email protected](303) 866-6060 Office