New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department
Motor Vehicle Division
CDLIS Modernization Project
Project Management Plan (PMP)
Executive Sponsor – Demesia Padilla, CPA
Business Owner – Keith Perry
Technical Owner – Greg Saunders
Project Manager – Loretta Silva
Original Plan Date: June 1, 2011
Revision Date: August 24, 2011
Revision: 2.0
MVD CDLIS Modernization (C-Mod) Project
Project Management PlanVersion: 2.0
Table of Contents
Revision History
1.0 Project Overview
1.1 Executive Summary- rationale for the Project
1.2 funding and sources
1.3 constraints
1.4 dependencies
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS
1.6 Initial Project Risks Identified
2.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure
2.1 Stakeholders
2.2.1 Describe the organizational structure – Org Chart
2.2.2 Describe the role and members of the project steering committee
2.2.3 Organizational Boundaries, interfaces and responsibilities
2.3 Executive Reporting
3.0 Scope
3.1 Project Objectives
3.1.1 Business Objectives
3.1.2 Technical Objectives
3.2 Project exclusions
3.3 Critical Success Factors
4.0 Project Deliverables and methodology
4.1 Methodology
4.1.1 Lessons Learned
4.1.2 Agile/Waterfall Hybrid Methodology
4.2 Project Management Life Cycle
4.1.1 Project Management Deliverables
4.1.2 Deliverable Approval Authority Designations
4.1.3 Deliverable Acceptance Procedure
4.2 PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE
4.2.1 Technical Strategy
4.2.2 Product and Product Development Deliverables
4.2.3 Deliverable Approval Authority Designations
4.2.4 Deliverable Acceptance Procedure
5.0 Project Work
5.1 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
5.2 Schedule allocation -Project Timeline
5.3 Project Budget
5.4 Project Team
5.4.1 Project Team Organizational Structure
5.4.2 Project Team Roles and Responsibilities
5.5 STAFF PLANNING AND Resource ACQUISITION
5.5.1 Project Staff
5.5.2 Non-Personnel resources
5.6 PROJECT LOGISTICS
5.6.1 Project Team Training
6.0 Project Management and Controls
6.1 Risk and issue Management
6.1.1 Risk Management Strategy
6.1.2 Project Risk Identification
6.1.3 Project Risk Mitigation Approach
6.1.4 Risk Reporting and Escalation Strategy
6.1.5 Project Risk Tracking Approach
6.1.6 ISSUE MANAGEMENT
6.2 INDEPENDENT Verification And Validation - Iv&V
6.3 Scope Management Plan
6.3.1 CHANGE CONTROL
6.4 Project Budget Management
6.4.1 Budget Tracking
6.5 Communication Plan
6.5.1 Communication Matrix
6.5.2 Status Meetings
6.5.3 Project Status Reports
6.6 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT (PROJECT METRICS)
6.6.1 Baselines
6.7 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CONTROL
6.7.1 quality Standards
6.7.2 Project and Product Review AND ASSESSMENTS
6.7.3 Customer Satisfaction
6.7.4 PRODUCT DELIVERABLE ACCEPTANCE PROCESS
6.8 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT
6.8.1 Version Control
6.8.2 Project Repository (Project Library)
6.9 PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN
7. 0 Project Close
7.1 Administrative Close
7.2 Contract Close
8. 0 Attachments
APPENDIX A – MVD C-MOD Project Definitions
APPENDIX B – MVD C-MOD Project Acronyms
APPENDIX C –Project Management Definitions
Revision History
Revision Number / Date / Comment1.0 / June 1, 2011 / First Draft
2.0 / August 24, 2011 / Revisions for PCC certification
1
MVD CDLIS Modernization (C-Mod) Project
Project Management PlanVersion: 2.0
1.0 Project Overview
1.1 Executive Summary- rationale for the Project
The Motor Vehicle Division (MVD) of the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department (NMTRD) is operating a series of hybrid mainframe/Web application systems that are outdated and difficult to maintain because the tools, operating systems, and languages date back to the 1970s and 1980s. A complicated process extracts data from all 90 individual field offices, performs required batch processing in the mainframe environment and relevant data is then replicated back to SQL Server for the next day’s processing. Connectivity issues and other events produce times when the data is out of synch causing errors and delaying customer transactions.
Business rules are often hard coded in the application code for the MVD systems. When business requirements change, it is often difficult to identify the specific code that must be modified because the code is scattered through multiple systems in multiple architectures. Qualified maintenance programmers with this expertise are scarce. Security is inadequate, and there are not appropriate audit trails to track user access.
In the fall of 2005, IBM completed a needs assessment of the business practices and the technical infrastructure utilized by MVD. They characterized the MVD system as among the worst in the country, and recommended (among other things) replacing the drivers’ services application. Also the current system is not in compliance with Federal, State, and AAMVA requirements.
Many states are moving to a customer-centric model for driver license, vehicle titling and registration systems, and financial Point-of-Sale (POS) systems. In this model, each person (e.g. person, company) has a customer record. Driver license, vehicle title and registration, and payment records all relate to the appropriate customer record. This linking of the various records provides significant benefits to our customers, to our employees, and to users such as the law enforcement community. This model is our vision for the state of New Mexico.
The MVD Reengineering project (Milagro) was started in 2010, awarding the RFP to Hewlett Packard. The Milagro project purchased a framework (COMET) and services for both Driver and Vehicle functions. The source code was to become the property of the State of New Mexico upon project completion. The Milagro project was discontinued in May 2011 due to a contract breech. A replacement for the current MVD multi-platform system is still urgently needed.
The goal of a reengineered Driver system will result in a more efficient, productive system that would improve service delivery to MVD customers while increasing reliability, security, and maintainability. This new system would be designed to meet current and future needs, including appropriate audit trails and security features. A significant amount of Specifications Requirements and Business Rule documentation from the Milagro project can be reused and employed for Milagro’s successor.
Driver services are not exclusively used by MVD, but data is shared with numerous other agencies. Data sharing helps improve public safety by allowing agencies like the Department of Public Safety (DPS), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to obtain information on a real-time basis. Data is used by Human Services – Child Support Enforcement, by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), by other States, and by the Courts – just to name some of the current interfaces with MVD systems.
A development environment has already been installed under the Milagro project. TRD prefers architecture very similar to that proposed for Milagro Test and Production for the new project. New servers for the production MVD Driver system will be located within the DoIT Data Center in TRD racks, and will be administered by TRD staff. Specific hardware requirements were included in the Systems Requirement Document submitted as part of our presentation to the Technical Architecture Review Committee (TARC). There should be no need for additional hardware in the field offices, as new computers and other hardware will be deployed as part of the MVD Point of Sale (POS) Project that will be completed prior to completion of the MVD Reengineering.
Network demand is expected to be consistent with the current MVD load since all MVD transactions are already using the web-based MVD 2.0 application and the POS application.
After terminating the HP/Saber contract in May 2011, TRD decided to proceed with a three-pronged interim solution for the reengineered MVD system:
- Continue MVD Reengineering with an internal project, CDLIS Modernization (C-Mod), in order to comply with the CDLIS 5.2 mandates by January 30, 2012.
- Identification and prioritization by MVD of issues requiring revision in the current MVD 2.0 system, followed by the repair of those outstanding issues by internal ITD staff.
- Commence an MVD initiative to issue a second RFI and RFP for a reengineered, customer-centric, driver and vehicle system.
This document will focus on item one, CDLIS Modernization.
1.2 funding and sources
The MVD C-Mod project is funded by the FY09 C2 Special Appropriation (Laws of 2008: Chapter 3, Section 7, Item 5).
1.3 constraints
Constraints are factors that restrict the project by scope, resource, or schedule.
Number / Description1. / CDLIS compliance functionality must be completed by January 30, 2012.
2. / Ability to hire sufficient State employees to fulfill the project plan
3. / Ability to hire sufficient experienced Contract employees to fulfill the project plan
4. / Ability to use appropriate funding source as per the previous project for the in-house project.
1.4 dependencies
Types include the following and should be associated with each dependency listed.
- Mandatory dependencies are dependencies that are inherent to the work being done.
- D- Discretionary dependencies are dependencies defined by the project management team. This may also encompass particular approaches because a specific sequence of activities is preferred, but not mandatory in the project life cycle.
- E-External dependencies are dependencies that involve a relationship between project activities and non-project activities such as purchasing/procurement
Number / Description / Type M,D,E
1. / Agency and Contract team members will need to coordinate staff to best meet project timelines and deliverable approvals / M
2. / Third Party Interfaces / E
3. / AAMVA availability to facilitate casual testing, structured testing, and certification / M
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS
Assumptions are planning factors that, for planning purposes, will be considered true, real, or certain.
Number / Description1. / The Agency plans to use existing workstations and printers, including both general use printers and specialty printers.
2. / Contractors will be co-located with the Agency Team members.
3. / Use Case/User Interface deliverables will be the methodology used for documenting requirements.
4. / A hybrid development approach will be used, such as Agile Modeling methodology, to ensure that the maintenance team has sufficient documentation at the end of implementation, but that the project proceeds at a rapid pace.
5. / The Agency will be providing a first level of Help Desk support, including receiving and logging incoming user calls and answering basic questions.
6. / Modifications will work with pertinent interfaces (external and internal).
7. / Adequate budget will be available.
1.6 Initial Project Risks Identified
In this section identify and describe how each risk will be managed. Include the steps that will be taken to maximize activity that will result in minimizing probability and impact of each risk.
ID / Risk / Description / Probability / Impact / Rating / Mitigation Plan / Contingency Plan1 / Funding not authorized. / Requires reallocation of MVD Reengineering funds to C-Mod project. / Unlikely / Very High / .1425 / Certification request will be presented at August PCC meeting. / Remove contract resources and extend timeline for a 100% in-house effort.
2 / Inadequate levels of internal and Contract staffing (technical). / We continue to experience additional demands placed on ITD staff. Project delays resulted from the additional demands. / Likely / High / .4125 / Create a detailed Resource Staffing Plan and gain approval of this plan early in the project from ITD to furnish resources. / Include contingency funds in the project plan that will allow ITD to backfill positions with temporary or contract personnel.
3 / Inadequate levels of internal and Contract staffing (business). / We continue to experience additional demands placed on MVD staff. Project delays resulted from the additional demands. / Likely / High / .4125 / Create a detailed Resource Staffing Plan and gain approval of this plan early in the project from MVD to furnish resources. / Include contingency funds in the project plan that will allow MVD to backfill positions with temporary or contract personnel.
4 / AAMVA not available for certification. / Dependent upon AAMVA availability for casual testing, structured testing in order to obtain certification. / Unlikely / Very High / .1425 / Contact AAMVA to inform them of C-Mod project and timelines. / Adjust schedule to match AAMVA availability.
5 / Demanding project schedule. / After HP contract was canceled, only eight months remain to complete C-Mod changes by federal deadline. / Likely / High / .4125 / Manage resources closely (people, tasks and timelines). Keep executive management posted on progress. / Seek additional resources to increase project staff to meet deadlines.
6 / PM experience and credentials / PM with sufficient credentials and experience cannot be found at an acceptable rate. / Unlikely / Very High / .1425 / Existing contract ITPM has been identified. Establish contract once C-Mod is certified. / Assign internal PM to C-Mod project and adjust workload accordingly.
LEGEND - Rating
Color
Minimum risk - Acceptable
Some risk - Monitor at PM/Team Level
High risk - Active monitoring with ongoing Contingency/Mitigation activity
Show stopper - Active participation with steering committee to mitigate
2.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure
The Project Organization describes the roles and responsibilities of the project team. It also identifies the other organizational groups that are part of the project and graphically depicts the hierarchical configuration of those groups. It exists to clarify interaction with the project team.
2.1 Stakeholders
List all of the major stakeholders in this project, and state why they have a stake. . Stakeholders are individuals and organizations that are actively involved in the project, or whose interests may be positively or negatively affected as a result of project execution or project completion. They may also exert influence over the project and its results.
name / Stake in Project / Organization / TitleDemesia Padilla / Project Sponsor/Program Financial Responsibility / Taxation and Revenue Department (TRD) / Cabinet Secretary
Keith Perry / Program Administration Responsibility / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / MVD Director
Greg Saunders / IT Infrastructure Project Director
Post-implementation Maintenance and Support / TRD, Information Technology Division / Chief Information Officer
Alicia Ortiz / Program Administration Responsibility / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / MVD Deputy Director
Paul Montoya / Program Administration Responsibility / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / MVD Deputy Director
Lee Baca / MVD Development Bureau / TRD, Information Technology Division / IT Manager
Vickie Evans / Project Manager, Lead SME – MVD / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Bureau Chief
Loretta Silva / Project Manager – ITD / CSW Enterprises, LLC / Contract PM
Sailam Vasudevan / Technical and Business Knowledge / TRD, Information Technology Division / IT Business
Analyst
Doug Torhan / AAMVA Technical Knowledge / DoIT, Information Systems Division / Contract Developer
Donna Intermont / Business Knowledge Input – CDLIS / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Subject Matter Expert
Darren Cordova / Business Knowledge Input - CDLIS / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Subject Matter Expert
Nichole Armijo / Business Knowledge Input – Medical Certificate / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Subject Matter Expert
Raul Alvarez / Business Knowledge Input / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Subject Matter Expert
Connie Torres / Business Knowledge Input / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Subject Matter Expert
Mac Lewis / Policies and Procedures / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Bureau Chief
Julia Belles / Legal Interpretation / TRD, Legal Services Bureau / Staff Attorney
TRD IT Technology and System Support / Technical Support of Systems / TRD, Information Technology Division / MVD Dev, Database Admin,Infrastructure Support, Operations
To Be Determined / MVD Training / TRD, Motor Vehicle Division / Training Manager
2.2 Project Governance Structure
2.2.1 Describe the organizational structure – Org Chart
2.2.2 Describe the role and members of the project steering committee
Role / ResponsibilityExecutive Level / The point person for the project is the Cabinet Secretary of the Taxation and Revenue Department.
Responsibilities include:
- Champion the project
- Consider potential changes facing the organization and assess the organizational impact
- Decide which changes will be instituted, communicate priorities and provide resources to ensure success
- Responsible for creating an environment that enables changes to be made on time and within budget
- Participate in planning sessions
- Ultimate project responsibility
Steering Committee Member / Is chartered to provide governance over the direction and support of the project.
Responsibilities include:
- Attend and participate in meetings
- Review and accept deliverables
- Review and provide comment on presented documentation
- Balance larger picture versus details of the project
- Review project funding and expenditures
- Champion the project
- Contribute to lessons learned
Project Managers (ITD, MVD) / Responsible for oversight and management of project teams.
Responsibilities include:
- Close coordination of all facets of the project
- Work jointly on management of project tasks
- Coordination of resources and responsibilities from respective areas
2.2.3 Organizational Boundaries, interfaces and responsibilities
Executive Governance is reserved for significant items beyond 2nd Level ability to resolve. Examples that may be escalated to this level could include:
•Monthly Status
•Program level issues that could not be resolved by the Program Level Governance
•Compliance/barrier that will jeopardize project ability to meet objectives and/or deliverables
•Inability to resolve contract or inter-Division issues
•Regional and Local Laws interpretations/issues/changes
•Legal issues
Program Governance is the first line of consideration for issues such as scope changes, quality, risks management and schedule, or those issues that cannot be resolved at the Project Management level or effect the overall budget.
Project Governance
•Provides a shared understanding and agreement among all participants as to what will be delivered, how it will be completed, and the commitment required.
Is differentiated from oversight alone in that it involves interactive participation with the project in assisting the project achieve its stated objectives.
Provides a clear and functional hierarchy for escalation to those empowered to intervene / help resolve items that cannot be resolved at the project level.
Includes client participation at project as key stakeholders for informational and resolution purposes.
Monitors progress of the integrated Project Schedule.
Provides leadership intervention as required to the execution of project plan, and appropriate escalation to higher levels of management.