deficit reduction act project - nm web view · 2012-09-13cses itpm: project manager...

DEFICIT REDUCTION ACT PROJECTDEFICIT REDUCTION ACT PROJECT

PPROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER

EXECUTIVE SPONSOR – DARYL SCHWEBACH, ACTING HSD CIO

BUSINESS OWNER – JASON ROMERO, CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT DIVISION D CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT D IVISION BUSINESS MANAGER

PROJECT MANAGER – JAN CHRISTINE

ORIGINAL PLAN DATE: JULY 18,2007

REVISION DATE: 08/08 06 /07

REVISION: VERSION 1

PPRODUCTRODUCT C CODEODE: : OCIO-PMO-TEM-010OCIO-PMO-TEM-010

TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... II

REVISION HISTORYREVISION HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ IIII

GLOSSARYGLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ IIII1.0 SCOPE OF WORK1.0 SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11 2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 55 2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 2.4 QUALITY METRICS2.4 QUALITY METRICS ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 66 3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 66 5.0 5.0 SSTAKEHOLDERSTAKEHOLDERS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 88 6.0 C6.0 CONSTRAINTSONSTRAINTS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 99 7.0 D7.0 DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 99 8.0 A8.0 ASSUMPTIONSSSUMPTIONS ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 1010 9.0 R9.0 RISKISK ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1010 10.0 10.0 PROJECT GOVERNANCE PLANPROJECT GOVERNANCE PLAN ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1010 11.0 11.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTINGCOMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTING .................................................................................... 1010 12.0 12.0 INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&VINDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&V ................................................................................ 1111 13.0 P13.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER A AGENCYGENCY A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE ........................................................................................................................ 1212 14.0 P14.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER C CERTIFICATIONERTIFICATION A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE ................................................................................................ 1212

.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................. IIREVISION HISTORYREVISION HISTORY ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... IIII

1.0 SCOPE OF WORK1.0 SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 11 2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 66 5.0 5.0 SSTAKEHOLDERSTAKEHOLDERS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 88 7.0 D7.0 DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 99 9.0 R9.0 RISKISK ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1010 NN .............................................................................. 1010 11.0 11.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTINGCOMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTING .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1010 INDEP11INDEP11 13.0 P13.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER A AGENCYGENCY A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE ........................................................................................ 1212

TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................

REVISION HISTORYREVISION HISTORY ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

GLOSSARYGLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................1.0 SCOPE OF WORK1.0 SCOPE OF WORK ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2121 2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2525 2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2626 2.4 QUALITY METRICS2.4 QUALITY METRICS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2626 3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2626 4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2626 5.0 5.0 SSTAKEHOLDERSTAKEHOLDERS .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2828 6.0 C6.0 CONSTRAINTSONSTRAINTS ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 2929 7.0 D7.0 DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2929 8.0 A8.0 ASSUMPTIONSSSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 210210 9.0 R9.0 RISKISK .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 210210 10.0 10.0 PROJECT GOVERNANCE PLANPROJECT GOVERNANCE PLAN ............................................................................................................................................................................ 210210

THIS IS A CONTROLLED DOCUMENT, REFER TO THE DOCUMENT CONTROL INDEX FOR THE LATEST REVISION

REVISION: 2.2 CIO-PMO-FOR-010 I

11.0 11.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTINGCOMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTING ................................................................................ 210210 12.0 12.0 INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&VINDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&V ............................................................................ 211211 13.0 P13.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER A AGENCYGENCY A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE .................................................................................................................... 212212 14.0 P14.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER C CERTIFICATIONERTIFICATION A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE ............................................................................................ 212212

TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... II

REVISION HISTORYREVISION HISTORY ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................ IIII

GLOSSARYGLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ IIII1.0 SCOPE OF WORK1.0 SCOPE OF WORK ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................... 22 2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 2.4 QUALITY METRICS2.4 QUALITY METRICS ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 5.0 5.0 SSTAKEHOLDERSTAKEHOLDERS ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 6.0 C6.0 CONSTRAINTSONSTRAINTS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 7.0 D7.0 DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 8.0 A8.0 ASSUMPTIONSSSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 9.0 R9.0 RISKISK .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 22 10.0 10.0 PROJECT GOVERNANCE PLANPROJECT GOVERNANCE PLAN .................................................................................................................................................................................. 22 11.0 11.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTINGCOMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTING ........................................................................................ 22 12.0 12.0 INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&VINDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&V .................................................................................... 22 13.0 P13.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER A AGENCYGENCY A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE ............................................................................................................................ 22 14.0 P14.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER C CERTIFICATIONERTIFICATION A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE .................................................................................................... 22


REVISION: 2.2 CIO-PMO-FOR-010 II

REVISION HISTORYREVISION HISTORY

RREVISIONEVISION N NUMBERUMBER DDATEATE CCOMMENTOMMENT

1.0 July 27,2007 Original Scope1 and Initial Baseline

GLOSSARYGLOSSARY

ASB: Application Services Bureau within Human Services Department, Division of Information Technology

ASD: Administrative Services Division of Human Services Department

CD: Conceptual Design: an English description of the changes to be made in the system in order to meet the Requirements Definition specified by the program.

CSED: Child Support Enforcement Division of Human Services Department.

CSED DBM: Child Support Enforcement Division, Division Business Manager. Individual is responsible for the interface between the program and the IT development group.

CSES: Child Support Enforcement System. The legacy computer system that provides electronic data entry and processing for the CSED program

CSES ITPM: Project Manager within the HSD DoIT Project Management Bureau, responsible for CSES. Title: Information Technology Project Manager

DD: Detailed Design: a detailed description in language similar to the actual computer code (pseudo-code) of the system that describes exactly what is to be changed in the existing system and how it is to be changed.

DRA: The federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, passed in February of 2006.

HSD DoIT: Human Services Department Division of Information Technology

ISD: Income Support Division of the Human Services Department

ISD DBM: Income Support Division, Division Business Manager. Individual is responsible for the interface between the program and the IT development group.

ISD2 ITPM: Project Manager within the HSD DoIT Project Management Bureau, responsible for CSES. Title: Information Technology Project Manager

1 This document is a reference from the Office of the CIO (OCIO) Program Management Office (PMO) created as part of the strategic continuous process improvement initiative. Questions or recommendations for improvement to this document may be forwarded to any OCIO PMO member.


REVISION: 2.2 CIO-PMO-FOR-010 III

ISD2: Income Support Division legacy computer system that provides electronic data entry and processing for the ISD program.

RD: Requirements Definition: an English description of the program requirements that need to be met by the system or system changes.

UAT: User Acceptance Test: the last step performed before migration of changes or new code to production. During this phase the program performs scripted and ad hoc testing to determine whether the developers have delivered what they requested in the Requirements Definition.


REVISION: 2.2 CIO-PMO-FOR-010 IV

PROJECT CHARTER 1

1.0 SCOPE OF WORK1.0 SCOPE OF WORK

Currently CSED passes on a maximum of $50 to their clients who are current Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) recipients through the Income Support Division (ISD). Due to various federal distribution rules from the federal Administration of Children and Families and embedded into CSES, events can occur that would result in a collection from the non-custodial parent (NCP) Child Support Enforcement Division resulting in no funds being distributed to the custodial parent (CP). In those cases, a maximum of $50 is currently disbursed to the CP. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) provides for a higher amount i.e. a maximum of $100 for one child, and a maximum of $200; to be disbursed to the CP. New Mexico House Bill 342 mandated that increase to be provide by January 1, 2009.

The scope of work is the sum of the products and services to be provided as a project. Describe the current state and the future state. The difference (gap) between the current state and future state is the business need and scope of the project.

1.0 D1.0 DELIVERABLESELIVERABLES

1.1.1 PROJECT DELIVERABLES

All of the project deliverables under 1.1.1 will be provided by the Child Support Enforcement System Information Technology Project Manager (CSES ITPM).

Project Plan High-level description of the work to be accomplished and the assignments for that work.

There will be two separate plans, one each for the environment revisions and the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) system development.

Weekly Status In the absence of a software tool to accumulate all of this data, Excel status reports are manually entered into an Access data base and summarized.

Monthly Status Either the existing format as published on the OCIO site or a replacement format that is issued by the Department of Information Technology.


REVISION: 2.2 OCIO-PMO-FOR-010 1 OF 4

PROJECT CHARTER 2

1.1.2 PRODUCT DELIVERABLES

All of the product deliverables reflect CSES standard development methodologies, processes and documents. Any modification necessary for the Income Support system, ISD2, will be incorporated as needed at a later date.

Requirements Definition Description –The document describes the business requirements for a Change Request (CR).

Creator – Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED) or the Administrative Services Division (ASD), depending upon the content and focus of the revisions.

Standards for Content and Format – As per the published content, format and process outlined in hsd\\ditvscsv004\DoIT Proj\DoITCSES\ 150 – All Dev Documents

Deliverable Acceptance – Signoff by CSED or ASD representatives knowledgeable in the specific program area, the CSED or ASD Division Business Manager (DBM), the CSES system analyst knowledgeable in the specific program area, and the CSES ITPM.

Conceptual Design –

CSES System Revisions

Description – Graphical representation and written description of the revised development and test environments.

Creator – CSES Analyst in the appropriate functional area


Deliverable Acceptance – Signoff by the CSED Division Business Manager (DBM), the CSED Help Desk Functional Lead in the functional area specified by the specific CR, Child Support Enforcement System (CSES), System analyst in the specific functional areas, the CSES Information Technology Project Manager (CSES ITPM), and the Bureau Chief of the HSD DoIT Quality Control Bureau (DoIT QA).



PROJECT CHARTER 3

Conceptual Design –

Environment and tool upgrade

Description -- Graphical representation and written description of the revised development and test environments.

Creator – Contractor

Standards for Content and Format – To be determined by the Statement of Work in the ensuing contract. At a minimum, the following will be included: Graphical diagram of the models and libraries changed as a result of the environment changes, written and graphical description of the change in workflow for developers and testers as a result of the environment changes, written and graphical description of the changes in migration processes as a result of the environment changes, and written and graphical description of the change in workflow for developers and testers as a result of the environment changes.

Deliverable Acceptance – HSD DoIT Data Management Bureau, CSED DBM, and CSES ITPM.

Detailed Design –

System Revisions (only)

Description: Specific instructions at the pseudo-code level of what is to be changed to meet the requirements. The document includes a cross-reference trace matrix back to the Conceptual Design.

Creator – CSES Analyst or CSES Senior Programmer depending upon complexity.


Deliverable Acceptance – Appropriate CSES analyst, senior programmer, and programmer.

Unit & String Tests and Results

Description – Test plans and scripts for both the unit and string tests along with electronic and hard copies of the test results.

Creator – CSES Programmer


Deliverable Acceptance – CSES Peer review



PROJECT CHARTER 4

Regression and UAT Testing and Results – Environment and Tool upgrade

Deliverable -- Comprehensive regression test scripts and results to be used after the environment revisions and before converting the mainframe production environment.

Creator – HSD DoIT CSES QA


Deliverable Acceptance – HSD DoIT CSES QA Peer review

System and UAT tests and results –

System Revisions

Deliverable – Test scripts and results for both the system and user acceptance tests.

Creator – HSD DoIT CSES QA


Deliverable Acceptance – Review and signoff by HSD DoIT Quality Control Bureau, CSED Division Business Manager (DBM), and the CSED Help Desk Functional Lead in the functional area specified by the specific CR.

Migration Documentation

Deliverable -- Both electronic and hardcopy migration pack with Pre and Post migration checklists. The packet includes a list of all objects to be changed and affected as a result of the proposed system change.

Creator -- CSES Senior Programmer or Programmer


Deliverable Acceptance – Review and signoff by CSES analyst, HSD DoIT Quality Control Bureau, the CSED Help Desk Functional Lead in the functional area responsible for User Acceptance Testing, CSES ITPM, DoIT Application Services Bureau (ASB) Bureau Chief.



PROJECT CHARTER 5

Training Documentation Deliverable – Detailed Training documentation and accompanying training for the CSES ASB development staff and the HSD DoIT Data Management Bureau staff.

Creator – Contractor

Standards for Content and Format – Will be finally established in the Statement of Work for the contractor. However, cContents will not be less than the standard format used for all CSED training (reference network address: Ditabksv001) including introduction, Chapters by function, step-by-step diagram of procedure to be followed, step-by-step written procedure with example screen shots for each step in the process, exercises for all procedures, and tests where appropriate.

Deliverable Acceptance – CSES ITPM, HSD DoIT QA Bureau Chief, HSD DoIT ASB Bureau Chief.

2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES2.0 JUSTIFICATION AND OBJECTIVES

2.1 J2.1 JUSTIFICATIONUSTIFICATION

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) or sometimes referred to as DEFRA contains options and requirements for systems changes to Child Support Enforcement System (CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM) for SFY 2007/2008/2009 and changes to the Income Support Division’s computer system (ISD2) for SFY 2008.

The present project is to include federally optional changes later legislated by State of New Mexico legislation HB 342 Section 5,E, and appropriated through HB 2 Chapter 28 Section 5 Item #59. The changes for SFY 2008 provide for an increase in the amount paid to Child Support Enforcement Custodial Parents (CPs), who are also current clients of the Income Support Division’s Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Currently the amount passed through to the custodial parent is $50. In the future the CPs will get $100 for a case with one child on the case and $200 for two or more children. This pass through will be ignored as income by the Income Support Division.

2.2 B2.2 BUSINESSUSINESS O OBJECTIVESBJECTIVES

Use the following table to list measurable business objectives

1. Implement pass Through

Implement the pass through as per the stipulations in HB 342, providing increased funds to Child Support Enforcement Division clients who are current TANF clients. This needs to be accomplished without affecting the Temporary Assistance for Needy Family (TANF) benefits of the ISD client, who is also a CSED Custodial Parent.



Author, 01/03/-1,

Yellow statement doesn’t make sense.

Author, 01/03/-1,

We’re submitting for the entire project, including ISD work, because the appropriation under HB2 is for the entire amount. The breakdown under 4.1 is clear.

Author, 01/03/-1,

Be sure that you are clear. My understanding is that the 900K that you were asking for was to be used by ONLY CSES, not ISD. ISD needs to come back and request that the remaining funds be released. This is an important point, because it will be a question that is raised.

Author, 01/03/-1,

We are only asking for certification for the CSES piece correct? If so, then we need to indicate as such. My assumpotion would be that ISD would need to come back with their own certification request when necessary. Double-check with Anna on how we need to handle this. Tell her it’s a time-sensitive issue, as we need to submit docs by noon tomorrow.

PROJECT CHARTER 6

2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES2.3 TECHNICAL OBJECTIVES

2. Technical Objective Implement the CSES and ISD2 system changes to provide the $100 and $200 pass through amount, while ignoring those amounts for income in the TANF/ISD program.

2.4 QUALITY METRICS2.4 QUALITY METRICS

NUMBERNUMBER DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION

3. Quality Metrics 1 HSD-DoIT’s typical quality metrics include actual vs. estimate, actual vs. planned delivery date, and a series of tests. The tests include unit, string, system, and user acceptance. Each level of test requires test scripts, documented test results, and signoff by those appropriate for the level of testing.

3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE3.0 SCHEDULE ESTIMATE

The DRA stated that the optional changes were to be completed by September 30, 2008. Because the changes were listed as optional in the DRA bill, the State of New Mexico, under HB 342 requires that the system changes be completed by January 1, 2009. Due to other scheduling considerations, CSES revisions are expected to be implemented by September 30, 2008, and ISD2 modifications need to be implemented by November 5, 2008.

4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE4.0 BUDGET ESTIMATE

4.1 B4.1 BYY M MAJORAJOR D DELIVERABLEELIVERABLE

ITEMITEM COST ESTIMATECOST ESTIMATE COST CENTERCOST CENTER DIRECTORDIRECTOR

IV&V CONTRACT $40,000 300 CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT

DIVISION DIRECTORHSD

CIO

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT

$160,000 300 HSD CIOCHILD SUPPORT



PROJECT CHARTER 7

ITEMITEM COST ESTIMATECOST ESTIMATE COST CENTERCOST CENTER DIRECTORDIRECTOR

SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AND TEST ENVIRONMENT AND TOOL UPGRADE

ENFORCEMENT DIVISION

DIRECTOR

CODE & TEST CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM CHANGE REQUEST

$793,704 300 HSD CIOCHILD SUPPORT

ENFORCEMENT DIVISION

DIRECTOR

DESIGN, CODE AND TEST ISD2 CHANGE REQUEST

$137,696 300 HSD CIOISD DIRECTOR

4.2 B4.2 BYY P PHASEHASE

Phase / Activity Associated Deliverables Estimated Budget

Umbrella Tasks NONE

Phase 1

Initiation

Project plan

IV&V Plan

Environment Revision Conceptual Design (CD)

CSES System revisions CD

CSES System Revisions Detailed Design (DD)

$200,000

Phase 2

CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT SYSTEM Implementation

Coding

Test Scripts

Test Results

Training Documents

Training Sessions

$ 793,704.00

Phase 3

ISD2 Revisions

Design, Code, Test, and Implement ISD2 required revisions $ 137,696.00

Phase 4

Project Closing



PROJECT CHARTER 8

TOTALS $1,131,400.00



PROJECT CHARTER 9

5.0 STAKEHOLDERS5.0 STAKEHOLDERS

NAMENAME STAKE IN PROJECTSTAKE IN PROJECT ORGANIZATIONORGANIZATION TITLETITLE

Jason Romero Customer CSED CSED Division Business Manager

Debra Garcia

(When requirements are published from ISD)

Customer ISD ISD Division Business Manager

5.1 PROJECT TEAM ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES5.1 PROJECT TEAM ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

RROLEOLE RRESPONSIBILITYESPONSIBILITY

HSD DoITCSES ITPM

Oversee all work and provide weekly progress status for all work performed on CSES and ISD2 systems, and development and test environment. CSES ITPM

OAll other CSES Team Roles

System Analysts: Provides Conceptual Designs and manages the developer team for their specific area

Developers: Senior programmers and programmers who provide the coding, unit and string tests for system additions and revisions

Data Management Bureau: Provides a batch specialist who performs all batch language changes and sets up the batch schedule for CSES. Also provides a Database Administrator responsible for maintenance of the DB2 database and all of the object and source code objects and their configuration management.

Web Developers: Provide analysis and design for all changes affecting the self-serve web portion of the application

Quality Control Bureau: provides individuals responsible for system and User Acceptance Testing and the separate computer environments for that testing.

Contract Professional Services -- 1

Code and test the CSES system DRA changes

Contract Professional Services – 2

Design and implement CA Gen development and test environment changes and CA Gen version upgrade.

ISD2 Team Will be identified when the ISD2 portion is initiated.



PROJECT CHARTER 10

6.0 C6.0 CONSTRAINTSONSTRAINTS


CON – 001 The external resources for coding Child Support Enforcement System changes need to be experienced in CA Gen development and need to be in-house by October 1, 2007.

Availability of these resources is limited. These individuals must have 3-5 years experience coding and testing in AFG 6.5 or higher. A preferable profile would also include experience coding with CA Gen version 7.5 or 7.6 and knowledge of the logic required for Child Support Enforcement systems.

7.0 D7.0 DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES

7.1 M7.1 MANDATORYANDATORY D DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES


DEP – 001 Availability of staff to upgrade the mainframe environment including upgrading from the current operating system (zOS 1.4) to the version required for CA Gen 7.6, which is version 1.7.

DEP – 002 ISD2 has a dependency on some operation process that requires them to implement their portion of the revisions by November 5, 2007. CSES and ISD2 Project Managers will need to coordinate the final intersystem testing and implementation dates with the programs (CSED, ISD).

7.2 D7.2 DISCRETIONARYISCRETIONARY D DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES


NONE

7.3 E7.3 EXTERNALXTERNAL D DEPENDENCIESEPENDENCIES


NONE



PROJECT CHARTER 11

8.0 A8.0 ASSUMPTIONSSSUMPTIONS


A-001 External Professional Services Resources, with sufficient expertise, are available when required by the project schedule.

A-002 Department of Information Technology will have the mainframe operating system upgraded by SeptemberOctober1, 1, 2007

9.0 R9.0 RISKISK

RISKRISK PROBABILITY PROBABILITY IMPACTIMPACT RESPONSE TYPERESPONSE TYPE

SEE ABOVE RISKS AND ASSUMPTIONS

10.0 10.0 PROJECT GOVERNANCE PLANPROJECT GOVERNANCE PLAN

The current CSES Information Technology Project Manager (CSES ITPM) and ISD ITPM will continue to provide managementoversight to of all these activities and cooperate with each other on schedule and interface testing.

In addition, a Steering Committee will be created with a minimum of the following representation: Human Services Department CIO, The Director of ISD, the Director of CSED, and a Rrepresentative from the Department of Information Technology, the CSES ITPM, the ISD ITPM, and CSED and ISD program representation..

11.0 11.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTINGCOMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTING

The project will follow the monthly reporting protocol currently required by the OCIO or a replacement process as specified. Monthly Steering Committee meetings will be held. Currently, on all other Change Requests, the CSES ITPM and the ISD ITPM hold a weekly status meeting with the counterpart DBM in the program. This practice will continue.

The current methodology for HSD DoIT provides for a pre-release meeting before the release of new functionality into production. Changes to the business process in ISD and CSED field offices are not expected as a result of the DRA implementation. Even if changes do occur in business process, the pre-release meeting will provide time for the program to properly advise and train their personnel. During the pre-release meeting the following is provided: notice to the program regarding the contents of the upcoming release, timing of the release, and identification of any pre-release or post-release actions and accompanying responsibilities.



Author, 01/03/-1,

OCIO no longer exists.

Author, 01/03/-1,

Steering Committee is only directors.So, it should be HSD CIO, CSED Director, ISD Director and the Dept. of IT rep. We should include a diagram of the governance.

Author, 01/03/-1,

Diagram in Project Plan and will not be repeated here.

Author, 01/03/-1,

Need to be careful with this language. The role of the SC is really more oversight.

PROJECT CHARTER 12

12.0 12.0 INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&VINDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&V

The IV&V is currently being addressed. The contract will include all phases of the project. Items that are included in the Statement of Work include, but are not limited to:

o Initial IV&V Plan

o Periodic IV&V reviews over the life of the project,

o Cooperation of vendors in IV&V process

o Evaluation of project progress

o Evaluation of training

o Project management plan is created and followed

o Evaluation of project reporting plan and ongoing reporting



PROJECT CHARTER 13

13.0 P13.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER A AGENCYGENCY A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE

SIGNATURESIGNATURE DATEDATE

EEXECUTIVEXECUTIVE S SPONSORPONSOR

BUSINESS OWNERBUSINESS OWNER

PROJECT MANAGERPROJECT MANAGER

14.0 P14.0 PROJECTROJECT C CHARTERHARTER C CERTIFICATIONERTIFICATION A APPROVALPPROVAL S SIGNATUREIGNATURE

SIGNATURESIGNATURE DATEDATE

OCIO / POC APPROVALOCIO / POC APPROVAL

