Michigan Bridges

Cli Mi ck ch ito g a and d t Brie dxt ges Bridge to the future with improved delivery of services

---

From Vision to Action Agenda  Business Drivers Technology Drivers Impact Project Goals Alternatives Considered Overal Strategy Bridges Project Phases Previous Lessons Learned Bridges Project Approach Bridges Project Organization Timelines – Planning & Implementation Bridges Lessons Learned 2 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 2

---

From Vision to Action Business Drivers  The DHS workforce had been significantly impacted by early retirement programs in 1997 and 2002 resulting in a loss of over 3,000 jobs, which have not been replaced, it also produced an even greater loss of institutional knowledge. Additionally, client demands for all services had increased due to the state of the Michigan economy.  DHS worker productivity could not keep pace with caseload increases making workers unable to meet the needs of the state’s neediest citizens. Caseworkers had decreased 18% while their workload had more than doubled. Workload 42% increase in total cases (’00-’04) 18% decrease in allocated field worker staff (27% decrease in total staff) (’00-’04) 68% increase in applications/worker – 44% increase in ongoing cases/worker (’02-’04) 48% of staff time spent on intake/re-determination activities (’02-’04) 3% of staff time spent on employment and prevention services (’02-’04) Penalties / Error Rates Medicaid error rate increase 2.57% (’02) to 4.23% (’03) Unable to lower current FAP error rate below acceptable levels Significant audit exceptions due to lack of documentation 3000+ additional workers required to meet optimal workload levels 3 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 3

---

From Vision to Action Technology Drivers  The technology had become a barrier to worker productivity and customer service. Workers had to use 3 separate systems to do eligibility determination and to assign benefits. Updates between systems were sometimes delayed by as much as 20 minutes causing disruption and forcing the worker to switch to other tasks before proceeding with a case. Workers had to manually access as many as 10 systems to verify information from other Michigan agencies.  Because of the age and complexity of the systems, MDIT was not able to provide adequate support to the business for program changes or enhancements. Systems •Diverse systems – (25+ platforms, 30+ applications) •Old technology – Critical applications designed with 1970’s technology •Unstable – 89% increase in break/fix requests (2000-2004) •Difficult and costly to maintain Technical Staff •42% of MDIT staff (experience) could be lost within 4 years (retirements) •Skill sets (70’s and 80’s technologies) virtually impossible to replace •Limited experience on large integrated systems Technology was a barrier to worker productivity / client satisfaction 4 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 4

---

From Vision to Action ImpactFinancial  $24M+ in penalties already assessed (through FY03) • Up to $6M in potential new penalties each Fiscal Year  $1,794,124 – 2002 audit exceptions due to lack of documentation Staffing / Productivity  Unable to keep pace with workload increase Workers’ focus NOT on delivery of service to client Michigan Clients  Inability to meet the needs of Michigan’s neediest citizens Delays in benefit and payment issuance Technical  Inability to provide productivity improvements Unstable systems causing delays in benefit and payment issuance Programs operating inefficiently, ineffectively, wasting critical $$$ 5 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 5

---

From Vision to Action Project Goals Business Goals  Standardized / simplified business processes statewide Simplified policy (fed / state law requirements – baseline) Solid improvements in worker efficiency / accuracy of eligibility determinations  Improved program accuracy (eligibility and determination) Eliminate / reduce FAP error rate (6% or less) Technology Goals Integrated service delivery system  Single updated and standardized platform  Updated and integrated database Single sign on / data entry / user interface  Automated eligibility and benefits determination Rapid response to changing business needs Well designed, open and scaleable 6 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 6

---

From Vision to Action Alternatives Considered Enhance Existing Technology Current 1970’s technology could not be modified or enhanced to support DHS business operations that had evolved from entitlement to client self sufficiency through welfare reform.  Existing technology was transactional based and automated manual tasks performed by field workers in the 80’s and 90’s – it did not support the integration of assistance programs with services.  Limited ability to provide automated workflows that would allow field staff to focus on the integrated delivery of assistance programs or preventative services to clients.  MDIT technical support staff skill sets would be lost over the next 3- 5 years while the technology itself continues to decrease in stability. Add Staff – no real impact for 2-3 years Staff augmentation would take several years to reach optimum levels (3000+).  2 year period for staff to become proficient with current technology  No impact on current technology stability Reduce Benefit Programs Administered A large number of programs would need to be reduced or modified and legislative changes made to have a significant impact on the field staff workload  No impact on current technology stability New technology was the only viable alternative. 7 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 7

---

From Vision to Action Overall Strategy  3 -5 year multiple phased project  Phased location, phased functionality deployments (no “big bang”)  Initial implementation focus:  Worker relief Improved accuracy in eligibility and benefits determination  Goals of subsequent phases:  Reduce MDIT operational expenses – eliminate / consolidate platforms Integrate / incorporate service delivery and payment systems Incorporate additional programs (WIC, CSHC, MOMS …….)  Multiple RFP’s  One RFP for design, development and implementation One RFP for Program Management / QA 8 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 8

---

From Vision to Action Project Phases  Phase I – Program Initiation and Planning  Planning APD (PAPD) Feasibility Study Funding  Phase 2 – Implementation APD / RFP Development  RFP for Project Management / QA / IV&V (i.e., PCO) Implementation APD (IAPD) RFP for design, development and implementation  Phase 3 – Development & Implementation  Design, development, testing and implementation 9 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 9

---

From Vision to Action Previous Lessons Learned  Leadership and Executive Commitment  Political decision making  Scope Creep  Trying to do everything and please everyone  Change (Transition) Management  Limited value and understanding of change management  Technology / Implementation  Delivering technology before it is ready  Purchasing Process  Lowest price more important than successful delivery Incorporate “lessons learned” into project plans. 10 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 10

---

From Vision to Action Project Approach  Create a Program Office  Individuals with large IT project experience and/or industry knowledge Base processes – management reporting, issue resolution, change management, etc.  Create Governance Model  Obtain appropriate sponsorship Involve all stakeholder groups  Identify Manageable Pieces  Build momentum – implementation of key beneficial functions Minimize risk – pilot implementation Release 1.0 ==> focus on worker relief  Robust Change (Transition) Management  Comprehensive training for all staff County office site support before and after conversion Identify, document, and train business process change Drive Ownership, Accountability, Focus 11 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 11

---

From Vision to Action Bridges Project Organization Program Office Executive Steering Committee Program Manager Project eam DHS DCH MDIT Control Support Roles & Responsibilities • Business Strategy • Business Strategy • System Strategy • Project strategy • Budget • Business • Business • Current system assessment • Project plans • Administration Requirements Requirements • Future system strategy • Project metrics • APD’s ridges Project T • Policy • Policy • B • Tools & methodology Future system development • RFP’s • Priorities • Priorities • Change request & issue • Legacy system plans resolution • Communication • Org Communications • Org Communications • Customer Relations Mgt processes s Field Council Policy Team eam Standardization & Simplification, Finance, Communications… DIT Agency, Technical, Desktop and Field Services Support T Other work groups… 12 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 12

---

From Vision to Action Bridges Timeline for Planning FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Tasks Notes Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Program Management/Oversight Identify Program Development and executive approval Leadership of project charter Program Initiation & Planning Establish Project Organization, Governance Program Model Structure Planning APD Federal approval in January 2005 RFI released in 11/04; demos in 2/05 RFI and follow-up in 3/05 Includes initial requirements, Feasibility Study alternatives analysis & CBA Includes development, fed review, Procure & Establish release, evaluation and award; RFP PCO sent for federal review 2/3/05. Implementation Planning Implementation Includes development and fed APD review/approval Includes development, fed Implementation review/approval, release, evaluation RFP & awardCross-functional teams refine Focus Groups policies, processes & system requirements prior to vendor start 13 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 13

---

From Vision to Action Bridges Timeline for Implementation FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Release 1 Vendor Startup Gap Analysis Design & Build Change Controls User Acceptance Test Pilot Statewide Rollout Release 2 Detailed Requirements Design & Build User Acceptance Test 14 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 14 Implement Maintenance & Operations (Ongoing Production Support) Imp Vendor responsibility State responsibility

---

From Vision to Action Bridges Lessons Learned Previous Lessons Learned Validated Staffing/Schedule Business – Tremendous effort  Requirement, Design, Review, Approval & Testing  Technical  Clarification of Roles, Skills, Training, Transition Stakeholder/Ownership Top Down Ownership Communication Leadership Across PartnersContract Management Hold the Line – Early Decisions have major impacts Quality of Deliverables – need to be detailed Code Reviews. QAT, System DocumentationTechnical Follow Industry Standards/Best Practices, not local standards Consider Legacy Integration Impacts Reduce Number of product suites used 15 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 15

---

From Vision to Action Stay Tuned Questions:Pat Willettwillettp@michigan.gov517-335-3837235 S. Grand AveSuite 206Lansing, Mi. 48909 16 State of Michigan • Department of Information Technology 16

---