EPICS Master project
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
(PMP)
Executive Sponsor – Monique Jacobson
Executive Sponsor (itd) – Helen Quintana (Acting)
Project Manager (itd) – Ellen Davis
Original Plan Date: august 25, 2010
Revision Date: June 24, 2015
Revision: 5.0
Revision History 3
1.0 Project Overview 4
1.1 Executive Summary- rationale for the Project 4
1.2 funding and sources 4
1.3 constraints 5
1.4 dependencies 5
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS 6
1.6 Initial Project Risks Identified 6
2.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure 9
2.1 Stakeholders 9
2.2 Project Governance Structure 10
2.2.1 Describe the organizational structure – Org Chart 10
2.2.2 Describe the role and members of the project steering committee 10
2.3 Executive Reporting 11
3.0 Scope 11
3.1 Project Objectives 11
3.1.1 Business Objectives 11
3.1.2 Technical Objectives 12
3.2 Project exclusions 12
3.3 Critical Success FACTORS 12
4.0 Project Deliverables and methodology 13
4.1 Project Management Life Cycle 13
4.1.2 Deliverable Approval Authority Designations 16
4.2 PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE 17
4.2.1 Technical Strategy 17
4.2.3 Deliverable Approval Authority Designations 20
4.2.4 Deliverable Acceptance Procedure 20
5.0 Project Work 20
5.1 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) 20
5.2 Schedule allocation -Project Timeline 21
5.3 Project Budget 23
5.4 Project Team 24
5.4.1 Project Team Organizational Structure 24
5.4.2 Project Team Roles and Responsibilities 25
5.5 STAFF PLANNING AND Resource ACQUISITION 25
5.5.1 Project Staff 25
5.5.2 Non-Personnel resources 26
5.6 PROJECT LOGISTICS 26
5.6.1 Project Team Training 26
6.0 Project Management and Controls 27
6.1 Risk and issue Management 27
6.1.1 Risk Management Strategy 27
6.1.2 Project Risk Identification 27
6.1.3 Project Risk Mitigation Approach 27
6.1.4 Risk Reporting and Escalation Strategy 27
6.1.5 Project Risk Tracking Approach 27
6.1.6 ISSUE MANAGEMENT 27
6.2 INDEPENDENT Verification And Validation - Iv&V 28
6.3 Scope Management Plan 28
6.4 Project Budget Management 28
6.4.1 Budget Tracking 28
6.5 Communication Plan 28
6.5.1 Communication Matrix 28
6.5.2 Status Meetings 29
6.5.3 Project Status Reports 29
6.6 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT (PROJECT METRICS) 29
6.6.1 Baselines 29
6.7 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CONTROL 29
6.7.1 Quality Standards 29
6.7.2 Project and Product Review AND ASSESSMENTS 29
6.7.3 Agency/Customer Satisfaction 29
6.7.4 Product Deliverable Acceptance Process 30
6.8 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT 30
6.8.1 Version Control 30
6.8.2 Project Repository (Project Library) 30
6.9 PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN 30
7.0 Project Close 30
7.1 Administrative Close 30
7.2 Contract Close 30
AttachmentS 30
Revision History
Revision Number / Date / Comment1.0 / August 25, 2010 / Initial Draft for Planning Phase
2.0 / June 20, 2012 / Updated to reflect EPICS Master Project
3.0 / June 26, 2013 / Updated for EPICS Phase 3
4.0 / October 31, 2014 / Updated project funding, risks, timeline and project team information
5.0 / June 24, 2015 / Updated for EPICS Phase 3 RTTT expansion, Phase 3 Summer Foods expansion, Phase 4 FACTS JJS, timeline and project team information
1.0 Project Overview
The Project Overview sets the stage for the details of the project and begins the “story” of the project and plan.
1.1 Executive Summary- rationale for the Project
CYFD's vision for an Enterprise Web Solution is the Enterprise Provider Information Constituent Services (EPICS) project. CYFD is requesting permission to proceed with Phase 4 of a multi-year project to consolidate multiple CYFD systems to a state-of-the-art enterprise web based system. CYFD will follow a multi-year, phased project tracked by "sub-projects" on a regular basis throughout the project. Sub-projects will be defined on a state fiscal year basis within allocated funding. The current available funding for EPICS is $14,475,363.
1.2 funding and sources
Source / Amount / Associated restrictionsEPICS Master Project – Phase 1 - provider Management (FY12 - FY13)
Federal United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) State Administrative Expense (SAE)Re-allocation / $450,000.00 / Restricted to CACFP related activities and administration
Federal Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) / $530,067.00 / Restricted to Child Care related activities and administration
ITD General Funds: 06700 State Fiscal Year 2015 General Fund / $172,500.00 / None
EPICS Master Project – Phase 2 - Client Management (FY13 - FY14)
50th Legislature, 2nd Session, Laws of 2012, Chapter 19, Section 7, Item 17 / $1,200,000.00 / None
EPICS Master Project – Phase 3 - service Management (FY14 - FY15)
51st Legislature, 1st Session, Laws of 2013, Chapter 227, Section 7, Item 18 / $3,454,200.00 / None
EPICS Master Project – Phase 3 - Race to tHe Top (FY14 - FY17)
Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge Grant
CFDA Number: 84.412A
Funded by the US Department of Education
Funding Authorized by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 / $4,800,000.00 / Restricted to Child Care related activities and administration
Federal Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) / $927,254.00 / Restricted to Child Care related activities and administration
EPICS Master Project – Phase 3 – Summer FOods (FY16 - FY17)
(This funding will fund the first year)
State Administrative Expense (SAE)
SAE funds are allocated in accordance with 7 CFR Part 235.4, for administrative costs incurred in the CACFP program. / $100,000.00 / Restricted to the Summer Foods Project.
ECS General Funds: 06700 State Fiscal Year 2015 General Fund / $132,842.00 / None
EPICS Master Project – Phase 4 – FACTS Juvenile justice (FY16 - FY17)
52nd Legislature, 1st Session, Laws of 2015, Chapter 101, Section 7, Item 21 / $2,708,500.00
This partial funding will fund the first year. / None
EPICS Master Project – Phase 5 – FACTS Protective services (FY17 - FY18)
Future C-2 Funding Request / TBD
1.3 constraints
Number / Description /constraint #1 / Funding Availability
constraint #2 / Priorities and existing support staff availability
constraint #3 / Support required by external federal and state agency entities is provided timely
1.4 dependencies
Number / Description / Type M,D,E /1 / SOFTWARE FRAMEWORKS SELECTED AND IN PLACE / M
2 / cyfd PROGRAM STAFF AVAILABLE TO TECHNICAL TEAM / M
3 / FEDERAL OVERSIGHT / e
4 / EXTERNAL ENTITIES PARTICIPATION / E
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS
Number / Description /1.0 / No delays or issues with funding
2.0 / Executive management will not change priorities
3.0 / Assigned staff will not leave during the project
4.0 / External federal and state agency support required by project is provided timely
1.6 Initial Project Risks Identified
Risk 1 – Organizational
Description – Completion of deliverables within time period / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)Mitigation Strategy – All project activities will be carefully managed by Project Manager(s) and project team using industry standard project management processes. Project scope will be clearly defined and requirements will be prioritized. Change Control will be monitored and managed by the project team using industry standard change control processes. All issues will be addressed immediately to minimize impact to project schedule.
Contingency Plan - Non-critical components of deliverables would be removed from critical path and implemented at a future date.
Risk 2 – Organizational
Description – Resources redirected or agency priorities changed / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)Mitigation Strategy - Executive management and project management will need to have a clear understanding of the project deliverables and commit to the project and the resources required.
Contingency Plan - Any change to resources or project priority will directly impact deliverables and timelines. Both of these would need to be renegotiated if either changed.
Risk 3 – External
Description – Funding for the project may not be received timely / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)Mitigation Strategy – CYFD will work closely with their federal partners to ensure project funds are made available to ITD in a timely manner.
Contingency Plan - Any change to funding availability will directly impact deliverables and timelines. Both of these would need to be renegotiated if either changed.
Risk 4 – Technical
Description – Requirements may not be fully defined impacting project schedule and project deliverables / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)Mitigation Strategy – Project teams will work closely with business in certifying requirements during each EPICS Master Project sub-project. The project team, which includes business partners, will remain intact during each EPICS Master Project sub-project. Change control will make sure that any changes to the requirements are managed and tracked correctly.
Contingency Plan - Non-critical requirements added would be removed from the critical path and implemented at a future date.
Risk 5 – Planning
Description –CYFD field staff and External Providers not trained to correctly utilize the system / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)
Mitigation Strategy –Program Area Data Unit(s) will partner in the training responsibilities of field staff and any external provider training.
Contingency Plan - Program Area Data Unit(s) would employ additional resources for training if necessary.
Risk 6 – External
Description –CYFD does not receive critical technical specifications required for EPICS development from federal and/or state external agency in a timely manner / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)
Mitigation Strategy – CYFD will work closely with their federal and state partners to ensure support is available to ITD in a timely manner.
Project team will escalate issues to CYFD Executive Staff.
Contingency Plan - Any change to technical requirements/support required by an external entity will directly impact deliverables and timelines. Both of these would need to be renegotiated if either changed.
Risk 7 – Technical
Description –HW/SW may reach End-of-life (EOL) and no longer supported impacting project schedule and project deliverables / Probability Medium / Impact 7.5 (med high)
Mitigation Strategy – Technical teams will monitor vendor End-of-Life (EOL) lifecycle for system and development software tools.
Project team will escalate issues to CYFD Executive Staff.
Contingency Plan - Any change to vendor product lifecycle support may directly impact deliverables and timelines. Project team would need to evaluate comparable infrastructure solutions for upgrade or replacement.
2.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure
2.1 Stakeholders
Stakeholders should be a mix of agency management and end users who are impacted positively or negatively by the project.
name / Stake in Project / Organization / Title /Monique Jacobson / CYFD compliance with federal and state mandates / cyfd / cabinet secretary
Jennifer padgett / CYFD compliance with federal and state mandates / cyfd / deputy cabinet secretary
Helen Quintana / CYFD compliance with DoIT and CYFD ITD standards / cyfd / cio (Acting)
Steve Hendrix / CYFD compliance with Early Childhood Services (ECS) Program area policy and federal and state mandates / cyfd / director
ECS
Jared Rounsville / CYFD compliance with Protective Services (PS) Program area policy and federal and state mandates / cyfd / director
PS
Tamara Mercantile / CYFD compliance with Juvenile Justice (JJS) Program area policy and federal and state mandates / CYFD / director
JJS
daphne rood-hopkins / CYFD compliance with Office of Community Outreach and Behavioral Health (OCOBH) Program area policy and federal and state mandates / CYFD / director
OCBHD
Subject Matter Experts (SME) - All Program areas (TBD) / CYFD compliance with Program area policy and federal and state mandates / CYFD / SME
2.2 Project Governance Structure
2.2.1 Describe the organizational structure – Org Chart
The Information Technology Change Control Committee (ITCCC) meets on a monthly basis to discuss the various on-going IT projects and their statuses. All Change Requests and Incident Reports are evaluated, prioritized, and coordinated by the ITCCC.
2.2.2 Describe the role and members of the project steering committee
steering committee member / role /Monique Jacobson / CYFD compliance with federal and state mandates /
Jennifer padgett / CYFD compliance with federal and state mandates /
Helen Quintana / CYFD compliance with DoIT and CYFD ITD standards /
steve hendrix / CYFD compliance with Early Childhood Services (ECS) Program area policy and federal and state mandates /
Jared Rounsville / CYFD compliance with Protective Services (PS) Program area policy and federal and state mandates /
Tamara Mercantile / CYFD compliance with Juvenile Justice (JS) Program area policy and federal and state mandates /
daphne rood-hopkins / CYFD compliance with Office of Community Outreach and Behavioral Health (OCOBH) Program area policy and federal and state mandates /
ELLEN DAVIS / ITD Applications Development Deputy Director, Project Manager for ITD /
2.3 Executive Reporting
Project managers for the project report to the Executive sponsors of the project. All project reporting, including monthly DoIT project status reporting, will be available to share with Executive sponsors and project teams. The status on this project, as well as the status on all EPICS project tasks, are shared and tracked at the monthly ITCCC meetings and weekly executive management meetings.
A communications plan is maintained and monitored by the project manager(s) and project team to ensure communications.
3.0 Scope
3.1 Project Objectives
3.1.1 Business Objectives
Number / Description /EPICS Master Project
Business objective 1 / Improve Program Performance and Efficiency
· Improved response to client needs
· Client access
· Alignment of services
· Increase agency responsiveness to federal and state legislation changes
Business Objective 2 / Enterprise web-based system
· Access anywhere, anytime to critical case management data
· Accelerate IT's ability to respond
Business Objective 3 / Reduce Agency Costs
· Improved staff productivity
· Reduce IT operational support and maintenance
Phase 1 – Provider Management
Business objectiveS / EPICS Phase 1 Provider Management will replace the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) homes and centers system and Background Check (BCS) system with a web based solution, Enterprise Provider Information and Constituent Services (EPICS). Replacement of these systems is part of an effort to consolidate multiple systems to state-of-the-art web based technology that utilizes Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) and an agile software development methodology.
Currently, the Early Childhood Services (ECS) Division has several “silo” databases that do not allow for automated sharing of data (which would help prevent errors and fraud), integration, streamlined and efficient payment processes, alignment and coordination between programs, efficiency in managing services to clients or for assuring the health and safety of children served.