Executive Sponsor – Marguerite Salazar, Superintendent, RLD



Accela Replacement ProjectProject Charter For Certification Executive Sponsor – Marguerite Salazar, Superintendent, RLDRLD Business Owner - Marguerite Salazar, SuperintendentMHD Business Owner – Jesus Carrasco, MHD Bureau Chief LPG Business Owner – Clay Bailey, LPG Bureau Chief CMS Business Owner – Amanda Roybal, CMS Bureau Chief PRM Business Owner – Richard Lucero, PRM Bureau Chief IT Lead – Michelle Langehennig, Chief Information OfficerProject Manager – Eric Scott, Network Administrator SupervisorOriginal Plan Date: December 15, 2017Version: 2.0table of contents TOC \o "1-4" \h \z \u table of contents PAGEREF _Toc173745725 \h ii1. project background PAGEREF _Toc173745726 \h 11.1 Executive Summary -rationale for the project PAGEREF _Toc173745727 \h 11.2 Summary of the foundation planning and documentation for the project PAGEREF _Toc173745728 \h 11.3 Project Certification Requirements PAGEREF _Toc173745729 \h 12.0 Justification, Objectives and impacts PAGEREF _Toc173745730 \h 12.1 Agency Justification PAGEREF _Toc173745731 \h 12.2 Business Objectives PAGEREF _Toc173745732 \h 22.3 Technical Objectives PAGEREF _Toc173745733 \h 22.4 Impact on Organization PAGEREF _Toc173745734 \h 22.5 Transition to Operations PAGEREF _Toc173745735 \h 23.0 Project/Product Scope of Work PAGEREF _Toc173745736 \h 33.1 Deliverables PAGEREF _Toc173745737 \h 33.1.1 Project Deliverables PAGEREF _Toc173745738 \h 33.1.2 Product Deliverables PAGEREF _Toc173745739 \h 53.2 Success and QUALITY METRICS PAGEREF _Toc173745740 \h 64.0 Schedule Estimate PAGEREF _Toc173745741 \h 65.0 Budget Estimate PAGEREF _Toc173745742 \h 65.1 Funding Source(s) PAGEREF _Toc173745743 \h 65.2. Budget By Major Deliverable or Type of expense - PAGEREF _Toc173745744 \h 75.3 Budget By Project Phase or Certification Phase PAGEREF _Toc173745745 \h 76.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure PAGEREF _Toc173745746 \h 76.1 STAKEHOLDERS PAGEREF _Toc173745747 \h 76.2 PROJECT GOVERNANCE PLAN PAGEREF _Toc173745748 \h 76.3 PROJECT MANAGER PAGEREF _Toc173745749 \h 76.3.1 PROJECT MANAGER CONTACT INFORMATION PAGEREF _Toc173745750 \h 76.3.2 PROJECT MANAGER BACKGROUND PAGEREF _Toc173745751 \h 76.4 PROJECT TEAM ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES PAGEREF _Toc173745752 \h 76.5 Project management Methodology PAGEREF _Toc173745753 \h 87.0 Constraints PAGEREF _Toc173745754 \h 88.0 Dependencies PAGEREF _Toc173745755 \h 89.0 Assumptions PAGEREF _Toc173745756 \h 910.0 Significant Risks and Mitigation Strategy PAGEREF _Toc173745757 \h 911.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTING PAGEREF _Toc173745758 \h 912.0 INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&V PAGEREF _Toc173745759 \h 913.0 Project Charter Agency Approval Signatures PAGEREF _Toc173745760 \h 1114.0 Project Charter Certification Approval Signature PAGEREF _Toc173745761 \h 11Revision HistoryRevision NumberDateComment1.0December 15, 2017Original RLD Accela Replacement Document1.1January 10, 2018Submitted to Department of Information Technology (DoIT) Project Certification Committee (PCC)January 15, 2018Rejected by DoIT PCC1.2February 14, 2018Submitted to DoIT PCCFebruary 19, 2018Rejected by DoIT PCC1.3March 14, 2018Submitted to DoIT PCCMarch 19, 2018Rejected by DoIT PCC1.4April 11, 2018Submitted to DoIT PCCApril 17, 2018Rejected by DoIT PCC2.0May 15, 2019Project Changes1. project backgroundExecutive Summary -rationale for the projectThe Accela software suite (Citizen Portal, Automation, and Mobile Inspection) supports the functionality of the RLD Construction Industries Division (CID) to manage all permitting related to Construction Industries, Manufactured Housing and LP Gas as well as to manage field inspections by inspection staff using a mobile application. RLD is facing a critical moment of possibly not being able to fulfill its charge to the citizens to ensure that life and property is protected and conducted in compliance with our laws.Over the course of FY17 Accela went through 3 different account reps assigned to RLD and it became progressively more difficult to get high level technical support. Accela was then acquired by Berkshire Partners, LLC (a Boston-based investment firm) on September 29, 2017. Since the acquisition, Accela’s business support model has changed drastically. Accela has notified RLD that after June 30, 2018 they will no longer support the RLD’s current on premise implementation. After June 30, 2018 RLD will still be able to process CID permits, but will not have support and maintenance for Accela. The RLD legal department is currently working to recoup payments made for services that have not been rendered. Without Accela, the RLD will be in violation of the Construction Industries Licensing Act (60-13-1 NMSA 1978) and the Manufactured Housing Act (60-14-1 NMSA 1978). The purpose of the Construction Industries Licensing Act is in 60-13-1.1 NMSA 1978:The purpose of the Construction Industries Licensing Act [60-13-1 NMSA 1978] is to promote the general welfare of the people of New Mexico by providing for the protection of life and property by adopting and enforcing codes and standards for construction, alteration, installation, connection, demolition and repair work. Based on the purpose of the Construction Industries Licensing Act to protect life and property of New Mexico’s citizens and how that is accomplished, RLD would be in violation of the entire Act if we are unable to issue permits and make inspections of construction work in New Mexico. CID fields about 5500 to over 6000 calls and emails into its call center to set up inspections on a monthly basis. In order to determine that construction work is code compliant and therefore competent and protecting life and property in New Mexico CID is charged with issuing permits which thereafter result in inspections being conducted for general construction, mechanical, plumbing, electrical and LP Gas. If CID did not have the ability to issue the permits and therefore conduct inspections RLD would not be fulfilling its charge to the citizens and could not ensure that life and property is protected and conducted in compliance with New Mexico laws.The purpose of the Manufactured Housing Act is in 60-14-3 NMSA 1978:It is the intent of the legislature that the large and growing manufactured housing industry be supervised and regulated by a division of the commerce and industry department [regulation and licensing department]. The purpose of the Manufactured Housing Act [60-14-1 NMSA 1978] is to insure the purchasers and users of manufactured homes the essential conditions of health and safety which are their right and to provide that the business practices of the industry are fair and orderly among the members of the industry with due regard to the ultimate consumers in this important area of human shelter.Without the ability to issue permits and perform inspections, RLD’s Manufactured Housing Division would also not be able to meet its purpose of insuring the essential conditions of health and safety to the purchasers and users of manufactured houses. Hence, a lack of an Accela replacement will force RLD to be in violation of two Acts.The State of New Mexico Regulation and Licensing Department (RLD) - Construction Industries Division (CID) seeks to replace its current permitting and inspection software, Accela. The Accela suite (Citizen Portal, Automation, and Mobile Inspection) supports the functionality of all permitting related to Construction Industries Division (CID), Manufactured Housing Division (MHD), LP Gas and field inspections. CID permitting collects an estimated $4,000,000 in revenue for New Mexico’s State General Fund. The current Accela system poses continual problems for both CID staff and the Information Technology Division. Mobile Inspection, used by field staff, loses its settings and has to be reinstalled nearly 50% of the time and it recently experienced a two-month outage. Also posing a problem is Accela’s claim that they are PCI compliance. They are assessing their own compliance and have not completed a third party approval process. Since June 30, 2018, Accela no longer supports the current installation requiring that customers purchase their new cloud-based version. Attempts have been made to repair the Accela software relationship to mitigate the current situation and attempts have not been successful. Currently the RLD Information Technology team has been working with Accela to stabilize the current environment. Work arounds and training for users have been provided so that the current software can continue to be used. RLD has been assured by Accela that they will make shared java script files available, that serve as work arounds, until the system is replaced.In order to find an acceptable system, RLD obtained quotes for a customized permitting and inspection software solution.RLD contracted a project manager to complete a best in breed analysis for the replacement of the Accela software. This best in breed was completed in May and a copy of the report is available to PCC members at their request. More information is included in the next section. The contract for the deep dive requirements is being finalized. The contract objective is for requirements gathering and documentation for MHD and CID. The MHD portion is estimated for completion on July 15, 2019 and the CID portion is estimated for completion by September 15, 2019. Once the requirements are complete then the pilot will be constructed so that MHD can start testing the workflows in a test environment.The current scope for the Accela Replacement Project is to migrate every organizational unit within RLD to a new platform and away from Accela. RLD is requesting approval to change the scope. RLD would like to break the project up into sections and to complete individual modules for each division within RLD. This will allow for greater accuracy and provide a solution for each identified section. After completion, lessons learned can then be applied to the next section to ensure a greater customer experience.To begin, the project has been divided into two sections. Manufactured Housing Division (MHD) has been selected as the first division to be completed. The second is Construction Industries Division (CID). MHD is a smaller section that will allow for a quicker timeline of conversion to the new platform and software. It can be completed with the current funds for this project. Once completed and accepted, any lessons learned can be applied to the migration of CID.RLD has a contracted project manager that conducted a best in breed for the end solution. Many solutions were considered and six were closely analyzed. The Accela and Adoxio Regulates 365 are software solutions developed specifically for government permitting. They have limitations for configuration and the vendor estimates that the software application has an 80/20 implementation. This means that standardly only 20% of the application is configured to meet stakeholder needs and 80% of the standard features are implemented out-of-the-box with no changes.Sugar, BPM’Online and Freshworks 360 are all robust CRM software solutions that allow for greater configuration and some customization as needed to meet RLD stakeholder needs for a CID permitting system. Salesforce is a highly configurable and customizable SaaS that could deliver a complete software solution to meet the RLD stakeholder needs for a CID permitting system. The Information Technology Bureau has chosen to proceed with the Salesforce platform due to the many use cases of other states that are using it for permitting. The platform is highly configurable and customizable to RLD’s business requirements.RLD would like to request funding for the Salesforce platform to create a pilot for MHD. By approving a pilot at this time, the requirements will be gathered and a pilot can be developed while the state is waiting for the statewide price agreements to be finalized. The request is to certify $565,111.41 for the platform, and the creation of the pilot in the platform.Due to delays in the project timeline the project completion date has been estimated to be June 30, 2020. This will allow for enough time to gather all the requirements then proceed forward with a pilot. Then after the pilot is complete and tested the project will then move into the implementation phase to move all of MHD to a production environment for testing and finalization.With the migration to a new platform, RLD inspectors will have a live view of current inspections making for a faster response and providing greater value for the public. The inspectors will also have access to Global Positioning System (GPS) mapping that will allow for greater efficiency and will increase the number of inspections completed in a set time frame. One of the critical aspects of this project is that the new solution provides a compliance module. A good compliance module will equip the RLD to protect the public from contractors that are not licensed and contractors that take advantage of the public.With this new platform, RLD will be more efficient in the work it does, have more precise and accurate data of permitting and licensing, and provide greater visibility to protect the public from any wrong doing.1.2 Summary of the foundation planning and documentation for the projectAlternative #1: Replace current proprietary software code based Accela implementation - Migrate the current Accela environment functionality to nonproprietary current programming language based system architecture. Ensure the coding of the credit card acceptance page on the Permitting Payment Portal so that credit card transactions are submitted through a payment page hosted by the State's payment gateway provider, Wells Fargo/CyberSource.This alternative consists of four primary parts:Contracting with local NM based software vendors to take capture current Accela implementation and migrate it to a current widely accepted and used programming language. Redesign and recode the payment module in the Permitting and licensing Portal to use a Wells Fargo/CyberSource hosted page. Wells Fargo/CyberSource is already PCI DSS compliant.Change our service with Wells Fargo/CyberSource from an API-based payment-processing plan to their Secure Acceptance Web/Mobile, a fully hosted payment page.Contract with a provider to create procedures & policies appropriate to the new SAQ-A guidelines which the new Permitting and Licensing system architecture will allow us to use.Remove credit card acceptance from internal site based payment kiosks to prevent CD from flowing through RLD networks or equipment.This alternative will allow RLD to take full control over one of its Permitting software application process. It avoids the current situation of being held hostage by unscrupulous out of state vendors that are bought and sold and change their service offerings with the intent of charging more for new and so called improved services. It also allows for PCI DSS compliance by redirecting users to an externally hosted payment page so that all cardholder data flows through the network and systems of the already PCI compliant provider, Wells Fargo/CyberSource, rather than flowing through the RLD/State of New Mexico servers and systems. This dramatically reduces our compliance burden in terms of number of PCI compliance items and number of dedicated RLD IT staff hours required to maintain compliance. Pros:Will allow RLD to take full control and ownership of its mission critical software systems.Will allow the RLD to achieve full PCI DSS 3.2 compliance within 45 days of completion of the project and release to production. Saves over $200,000 over eight years compared with the status quo Reduces the number of required PCI security control compliance items from over 198 to 25.Prevents penalties due to non-compliance which are currently over $1,200/month for the RLD and could, conceivably, grow to $10,000/month for the RLD. If it is the only agency unable to achieve PCI compliance, this could amount to $120,000 / year for non-compliance. Simplifies application adaptation to new payment methods (such as Amex) and security technologies due to Wells Fargo/CyberSource’s strong relationships and integration with key financial institutions, credit card providers, and payment technology providers.Maintains a robust and easy-to-use online system for permittees to access vital business and financial services online and at their convenience. This convenience tends to increase compliance with existing business and contractor requirements and statutes while reducing the need for additional RLD staffing.Maintains or increases the variety of payment methods accepted for Permitting and portal transactions. Currently limited to Visa/MasterCard.Cons:Relies heavily on a single vendor to complete project in a timely manner.AlternativeMonthlyStaff Hours Required (Initial)Monthly Staff Hours Required (Ongoing)PCI Compliance Items (Type)Initial CostOngoing Cost (Annual)PCI Compliance Achieved (time course)#1. Replace current proprietary software code based Accela implementation (Recommended)25 (SAQ-A)Yes (within 6-8 months of funding receipt)Alternative #2: Maintain the Status Quo – This alternative is untenable. After June 30, 2018 RLD’s current Accela implementation will be unlicensed as RLDs contract with Accela (now Berkshire Partners, LLC) will end on the above stated date. The risk to RLD and the State of M to continue trying to use an unlicensed system is extremely high. If the unsupported system fails RLD will be unable to fulfill its mission critical function of permitting the construction activity and maintaining the safety of the general public through site based inspections of all permitted projects. Pros:The cost of migrating to Accela’s cloud based solution will be at least $177,000 / year in licensing costs. This is less that the cost of migrating the system to an RLD owned and controlled system. Accela has not to date provided the cost of migrating on premise installation to cloud based offering as of the date of this C-2.Cons:RLD will continue to be held hostage to an out of state sole source contract vendor that has proven unreliable and that has changed their service model without consulting customers. Changes to accepted payment methods may require recoding application and involve additional expenditure and vendor involvement.Changes & upgrades to security protocols, such as changes to encryption and hashing standards & algorithms, may require application alteration and involve additional expenditure and vendor involvement.Has the effect of delaying or negatively affecting other important planned ProjectsAlternativeMonthly Staff Hours Required (Initial)Monthly Staff Hours Required (Ongoing)PCI Compliance Items (Type)Initial CostOngoing Cost (Annual)PCI Compliance Achieved (time course)#2. Status Quo (Not Recommended)198 (SAQ-D Merchant)Likely Not (initial phase 12-18 months if achieved at all)Alternative #3: Stop accepting credit cards as an allowable payment method – The approach for this alternative would be to alter the current Permitting portal application to entirely prevent the acceptance of credit cards as an allowed payment method. Pros:Very low initial expenditure.Rapid achievement of PCI compliance.Cons:Required increase in RLD staff due to increased in-house processing of checks and money orders that per STO must all be processed within 24 hours of receipt. Payment by electronic check, the remaining online payment option, is error prone. This is because the validity of account numbers and the amount of account balances cannot be verified by the payment gateway provider or payment authorization services. We expect that the number of dishonored electronic check payments will increase dramatically, perhaps requiring an additional employee to track and collect payment on these transactions.Likely lowered business compliance with permitting requirements due to lowered convenience and additional required planning to file statutorily required permit applications, requests for inspection, etc.Increased help desk requests (RLD IT) and customer complaints due to the reduction in convenience of the system and the confusion that this will cause existing users and customers.Loss of positive image and goodwill. As the world moves more and more towards electronic payment methods, online transactions, customer-centered business, and rapid, automated request processing this could give the appearance that the RLD and the State of New Mexico are not responsive to their customer’s needs and to the times.1.3 Project Certification RequirementsCRITERIAYES/NOEXPLANATIONProject is mission critical to the agencyYESRequired by laws: Construction Industries Licensing Act (60-13-1 NMSA 1978) and the Manufactured Housing Act (60-14-1 NMSA 1978). Project cost is equal to or in excess of $100,000.00YESEstimated project cost $1,467,000Project impacts customer on-line accessNOLittle impact with the public. All user accounts/moneys will transfer over to the new systemProject is one deemed appropriate by the Secretary of the DoITYESWill an IT Architecture Review be required?NoAll software and server are hosted at the vendors location.2.0 Justification, Objectives and impacts2.1 Agency JustificationNumberDescriptionAgency MISSIONThe purpose of the construction industries and manufactured housing program is to provide code compliance oversight; issue licenses, permits and citations; perform inspections; administer exams; process complaints; and enforce laws, rules and regulations relating to general construction and manufactured housing standards to industry professionals.agency Justification 1rld is required by law to provide a reliable permitting system.agency Justification 2RLD current permitting system is failing and needs to be replace.2.2 Business ObjectivesNumberDescriptionimpactresult/OutcomeBusiness Objective 1Migrate current proprietary software code based Accela implementation to open source code based application that is fully owned and controlled by RLD. HighRLD will purchase a cloud based permitting system. Business Objective 2Maintain or increase by 10% the percentage of business services transactions that can be customer initiated and handled online and outside of regular business hours. LowUsing Accela permitting system transaction counts as a baseline. The new systems will increase the transaction counts by 10%Business Objective 3Maintain or increase the ease-of-use and ease-of-payment in the Permitting and Licensing portal application. LowComplaints about the current Accela permitting system will be used as baseline. The new system will have 10% less than baseline.2.3 Technical ObjectivesNumberDescriptionimpactresult/OutcomeTechnical Objective 1Create online permitting application using industry-standard coding and best practices standards. LowRLD will have a permitting system using industrial standard coding and best practice standardsTechnical Objective 2Create robust data repository for the permitting application program following best practices standards. LowRLD will have a permitting system using a robust data repository following best practices standards. Technical Objective 3Create a very user friendly public facing interface.LowRLD will have a permitting system with very user friendly public facing interface.Technical Objective 4Create an easy to use day to day operations interface.LowRLD will have a permitting system with an easy to use day to day operations interface.Technical Objective 5Create a comprehensive administration interface.LowRLD will have a permitting system will have a comprehensive administration interface.Technical Objective 6Create a mobile interface for the inspectors.LowRLD will have a permitting system will have a mobile interface for the inspectors.Technical Objective 7Create an easy way to create new permits or record types.LowRLD will have a permitting system will have easy way to create new permits or record types.Technical Objective 8Ensure the replacement programs has an unlimited upload document size.LowRLD will have a permitting system will have an unlimited upload document size.2.4 Impact on Organization AreaDescriptionEnd userThere will be no impact to the end users. All accounts and credits will be transferred to the new system. User interface will be similar to current system, little or no training will be required.Business ProcessesRLD staff will need training on the new system. Financial processes will need to be modified. It Operations and staffingThe new permitting application will be cloud based. Meaning RLD IT staff will not have to perform web server and database server maintenance. RLD IT staff will not have to perform backups.2.5 Transition to OperationsAreaDescriptionPreliminary Operations location and staffing plansThe new permitting system will be hosted at an offsite location.all maintenance and backups will be performed by hosting company. Data Security, Business ContinuityData security will be performed by hosting company. The hosting company will maintain a disaster recovery site. Maintenance StrategyAll maintenance will be performed by hosting company Interoperabilitythe new permitting system will interface with PSI and MylicenseRecord retentionrecords will be retained according to state requirements.3.0 Project/Product Scope of Work 3.1 Deliverables3.1.1 Project DeliverablesStage NAMEStage DescriptionDeliverablesInitiation Set up the project framework for a successful delivery PCC Certification DocumentsContractAnalysisProvide best practice consulting to define to-be configuration for AgencyTo-Be Analysis documentationBuildCreate the specifications and deliver technical components built to support the approved specifications.Business Automation Script specificationsInterface specificationsReport specificationsConfigured Business Automation ScriptsConfigured Interfacesthe selected vendor Mobile Office specificationsReadinessSupporting Agency’s User Acceptance Test period and providing requisite trainingUser Acceptance TestingTrainingDeployMove to Production and Transition to the Customer Resource Center (“CRC”)Move to Production ChecklistMove to ProductionPost Deployment SupportHandover to the CRCFinalizationProject closeout IV&V reportOCIO report.PCC closeout 3.1.2 Product DeliverablesMajor Project Deliverable BudgetDue DateProject Phase With external project manager complete best in breed report.$44,3106/30/19PlanningGather requirements and design workflows for MHD permit types. Acquire the software and licensing.Design integration interfaces and data migration strategy for the selected permit from Accela SQL Database to new application.Create a Pilot for MHD to test application.$770,80110/30/2019PlanningDevelop application and Contractors Portal with design information for MHS.Integrate PSI’s License Import text file, credit card transactions, Geolocation used by inspector’s and document management (plans for plan review and historical documents). Migration of permit records for MHD from Accela to new application. Configuration of Inspection Software and Mobile Application for MHD. Go Live with MHD.$651,8896/30/2020Implementation3.2 SUCCESS and QUALITY METRICSNumberDescriptionQuality Metrics 1Measured by percentage of transactions initiated and processed through the online Permitting and Licensing portal.Quality Metrics 2Measured by number of requests for assistance and complaints as a percentage of total transactions successfully processed.Quality Metrics 3The ability for inspectors to GPS map routes for daily inspectionsSchedule Estimate A baseline schedule has been developed with the vendor and will be maintained throughout the project as described in the Project Management Plan. The anticipated date to complete all deliverables in the contract and move to production is 15 months after implementation begins.5.0 Budget Estimate 5.1 Funding Source(s)SourceAmountAssociated restrictionsLaws of 2018, Chapter 11,Section 7, Item 16.$967,000The funds will only be used for Accela replacement projectLaws of 2019, Chapter 271, Section 7, Item 14$500,000The funds will only be used for Accela replacement project5.2. Budget By Major Deliverable or Type of expense Major DeliverableBudget Due DateProject Phase With external project manager complete best in breed report.$44,3106/30/19PlanningGather requirements and design workflows for MHD permit types. Acquire the software and licensing.Design integration interfaces and data migration strategy for the selected permit from Accela SQL Database to new application.Create a Pilot for MHD to test application.$770,80110/30/2019PlanningDevelop application and Contractors Portal with design information for MHS.Integrate PSI’s License Import text file, credit card transactions, Geolocation used by inspector’s and document management (plans for plan review and historical documents). Migration of permit records for MHD from Accela to new application. Configuration of Inspection Software and Mobile Application for MHD. Go Live with MHD.$651,8896/30/2020ImplementationTotal$1,467,0005.3 Budget By Project Phase or Certification PhaseItemCost Estimateinitiation$0planning$815,111implementation$651,889Total$1,467,0006.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure6.1 STAKEHOLDERSnameStake in ProjectOrganizationPermit ApplicantsAbility to APPLY FOR PERMITS AND Pay onlinegeneral public requiring permitsMarguerite SalazarSuperintendent of RLDRLD Jesus Carrascomanager of mhd RLDClay Baileymanager of lpgRLDAmanda Roybalmanager of cmsrldRichard Luceromanager of prmrld6.2 PROJECT GOVERNANCE PLANThe following is a diagram of the organization structure including steering committee members, project manager and technical/business teams.6.3 PROJECT MANAGER6.3.1 PROJECT MANAGER CONTACT INFORMATIONnameOrganizationPhone #EmailEric Scottnew mexico regulation and licensing department505-469-2427ERIC.SCOTT@state.nm.us6.3.2 PROJECT MANAGER BACKGROUND 6.4 PROJECT TEAM ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIESRoleResponsibilityExecutive SponsorEnsure project funding. Approve any changes to project plan or scope. Communicate with Project Manager the status of project.Business OwnersCo-chairs steering committee with project manager.Monitors project progress and works with the project manager to keep project on track. Works with the project manager and executive sponsor to resolve issues quickly. Reports to executive sponsor on the status of the project.Project ManagerManage the development of project deliverables and project plan. Ensure monthly project reporting and meeting IT project certification timelines and gates. Assemble project steering committee and ensure everyone is aware and agrees to roles and responsibilities. Co-chairs steering committee with business owner. Communicate project status to all interested parties. Keep project on schedule relative to milestones, timelines, deliverables, and resources.Steering CommitteeProvide direction for configuration of software. Review and provide a consolidated set of document markups. Act as User Acceptance team (UAT) for formal acceptance of project deliverables.ContractorAssist project manager in developing and providing a Project Management and Implementation Plan. Assist in establishing reporting, change management, and risk mitigation strategies. Conduct periodic project meetings and issue monthly status reports. Maintain a project schedule for contractor tasks, milestones, and invoicing.6.5 Project management Methodology The Project will be structured using a mixture of process-based and agile approaches. In addition, project reporting structures will be adjusted to meet timelines and phase gates defined by the Project Certification Committee.7.0 ConstraintsNumberDescriptionconstraint 1TimeMilestones completed on time. constraint 2Resourceneed to complete project in a very short timelineconstraint 3qualityHigh quality will be mantained throughout the projectconstraint 4Costcost of the project must stay within budget8.0 DependenciesNumberDescriptionType M,D,EDependency 1Project Certification Committee (PCC). The success of meeting the project deadlines depends on RLD’s ability to expeditiously go through the PCC gates.MDependency 2succefull contract creation and signage.M9.0 AssumptionsNumberDescriptionAssumption 1Contract will require Software Development Vendor will stay with project to completion.Assumption 2RLD and vendor staff will ensure multiple members of each organization are present during requirements gathering and design phases. 10.0 Significant Risks and Mitigation StrategyRisk 1Description - Vendor abandonment (software development): If the contracted vendor were to abandon the project then the project would be halted or seriously delayed.Probability UnlikelyImpact HighMitigation Strategy: Continue with reliable vendorContingency Plan: If the vendor were to abandon the project early in the process, before funds were used then another developer could be brought in. If the vendor were to abandon the project late in the development process it would be possible for existing RLD IT staff to finish the required software development work to finish the project. If neither of these were feasible we would need to turn to one of the other alternatives listed.Risk 2Description - Vendor abandonment (payment page provider): If CyberSource, our payment page provider, were to remove or significantly alter their hosted payment page service then additional development work may be required to adapt to new provider or to the page changes.Probability UnlikelyImpact MediumMitigation Strategy: Our financial service provider would likely have a new recommended payment page host.Contingency Plan: Payment gateway providers are numerous and our financial service provider would likely have a new recommended payment page host. RLD IT would likely be able to make the small required changes to the application to accommodate a different payment page host given that most of the initial integration has been completed.Risk 3Description - Inadequate or incomplete requirements gathering: If project requirements are not fully understood or updated early in the process the final product may not address the true needs of the project or additional time or funding would be required to remedy the situation. Probability UNLIKELYImpact HighMitigation Strategy: Proper Project ManagementContingency Plan: Project management would occur both inside the contracted organization, System Automation and Accela Replacement, and from RLD IT with cross-checking occurring between each organization throughout the requirements gathering and design phases. This has worked well in past endeavors.11.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN FOR EXECUTIVE REPORTINGThe Executive Sponsor will receive communications from the Business Owners on the overall status of the project. This will include major milestones that have been completed and any major issues that may prevent the project from achieving its goals.The Business Owners will receive communications from the Project Manager on the overall project plan and status. This will include communication when resource scheduling is to occur and when assignments are complete.The Project Steering Committee will receive its communications from the Project Manager on the status of their work and related tasks. This will include detailed status about completed work and work that is scheduled for them in the future.The Project Manager for the contractor will issue a weekly status reports. This status report will be reviewed by the RLD PM and the RLD PM will be responsible for communicating status up through the RLD project organization.All project reporting, including monthly DoIT project status reporting, will be shared electronically with Executive sponsors and project teams.12.0 INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION - IV&VProject/Product AreaInclude –Yes/NoProject ManagementYesQuality ManagementYesTrainingYesRequirements ManagementYesOperating EnvironmentYesDevelopment EnvironmentYesSoftware DevelopmentYesSystem and Acceptance TestingYesData ManagementYesOperations OversightYesBusiness Process ImpactYes13.0 Project Charter Agency Approval SignaturessignaturedateExecutive SponsorMHD Business OwnerLPG Business OwnerCMS Business OwnerPRM Business OwnerChief Information OfficerProject Manager14.0 Project Charter Certification Approval SignaturesignaturedateDoIT / PCC Approval ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download