CSES CA Gen Upgrade
(Software upgrade)
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
(PMP)
Executive Sponsor – Sean Pearson
Business Owner – Andrew Vallejos
IT Project Manager – Teresa Henke
IT Business Analyst – Denise Estes
Original Plan Date: June 26, 2013
Revision Date: N/A
Revision: 2.0
Revision History 3
1.0 Project Overview 4
1.1 Executive Summary- rationale for the Project 4
1.2 funding and sources 5
1.3 constraints 5
1.4 dependencies 6
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS 6
1.6 Initial Project Risks Identified 6
2.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure 8
2.1 Stakeholders 8
2.2 Project Governance Structure 9
2.2.1 organizational structure – Org Chart 10
2.2.2 Describe the role and members of the project steering committee 10
2.2.3 Organizational Boundaries, interfaces and responsibilities 11
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 11
3.2 Project exclusions 11
3.3 Critical Success Factors 12
4.0 Project Deliverables and methodology 12
4.1 Project Management Life Cycle 12
4.1.1 Project Management Deliverables 13
4.1.2 Deliverable Approval Authority Designations 14
4.1.3 Deliverable Acceptance Procedure 14
4.2 PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE 14
4.2.1 Technical Strategy 14
4.2.2 Project and Product Deliverables 15
4.2.3 Deliverable Acceptance Procedure 16
5.0 Project Work 16
5.1 Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) 16
5.2 Schedule allocation -Project Timeline 16
5.3 Project Budget 16
5.4 Project Team 17
5.4.1 Project Team Organizational Structure 18
5.4.2 Project Team Roles and Responsibilities 18
5.5 STAFF PLANNING AND Resource ACQUISITION 19
5.5.1 Project Staff 20
5.5.2 Non-Personnel resources 21
5.6 PROJECT LOGISTICS 21
5.6.1 Project Team Training 21
6.0 Project Management and Controls 21
6.1 Risk and issue Management 21
6.1.1 Risk Management Strategy 21
6.1.2 Project Risk Identification 21
6.1.3 Project Risk Mitigation Approach 21
6.1.4 Risk Reporting and Escalation Strategy 22
6.1.5 Project Risk Tracking Approach 22
6.1.6 ISSUE MANAGEMENT 22
6.2 INDEPENDENT Verification And Validation - Iv&V 22
6.3 Scope Management Plan 22
6.3.1 Change Control 22
6.4 Project Budget Management 23
6.4.1 Budget Tracking 23
6.5 Communication Plan 23
6.5.1 Communication Matrix 23
6.5.2 Status Meetings 23
6.5.3 Project Status Reports 23
6.6 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT (PROJECT METRICS) 23
6.6.1 Baselines 24
6.6.2 Metrics Library 24
6.7 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND CONTROL 24
6.7.1 quality Standards 25
6.7.2 Project and Product Review AND ASSESSMENTS 25
6.7.3 Agency/Customer Satisfaction 26
6.7.4 PRODUCT DELIVERABLE ACCEPTANCE PROCESS 26
6.8 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT 27
6.8.1 Version Control 27
6.8.2 Project Repository (Project Library) 27
6.9 PROCUREMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN 27
7. 0 Project Close 28
7.1 Administrative Close 28
7.2 Contract Close 28
Acronyms 28
AttachmentS 28
Project Timeline
Project Schedule
Revision History
Revision Number / Date / Comment1.0 / June 26, 2013 / Initial version for PCC Certification
2.0 / August 28, 2013 / Update for Implementation Phase
2.1
1.0 Project Overview
This project plan will describe the Child Support Enforcement System (CSES) CA Gen Upgrade project.
As background for this project, CSES supports the Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED) Program. CSED is operated at a Federal level by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services providing funding to states through Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of Child Support (OCSE). The Family Support Act of 1988 required each state to have in place an automated statewide child support system in effect by October 1, 1995. In addition the OCSE mandated an increased level of automated processing Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) legislation and requirements.
The New Mexico Child Support Enforcement System (CSES) was fully implemented in 1998. Since that time the application developers have been using a computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tool, currently referred to as CA Gen. The tool is critical in reducing development time and costs by removing complexity, and allowing development of large scale enterprise transaction processing systems.
The current version of the CA Gen tool is v6.5 which was installed in March of 2005. CA Gen 6.5 version is no longer supported and requires a maintenance code upgrade to a fully supported standard, as well as supporting environmental configuration changes and software upgrades with associated Encyclopedia and environment maintained and hosted through New Mexico Department of Information Technology (DoIT).
In March 2011 an analysis and assessment was completed to provide The Human Services Department (HSD) and DoIT with a qualified assessment of potential issues, risks, remedial recommendations and plan for upgrading the currently unsupported CA Gen v6.5 to a newer supported version of CA Gen v.8.
Legislative Funding was approved through FY14 and HSD would like to begin project initiation activities with the contractor in July 2013. Analysis and Architecture Design activities will include a repeat assessment to validate any corruptions or issues for remediation prior to implementation of upgrade to begin in October 2013. The complete upgrade should be tested, deployed and complete by May 2014.
1.1 Executive Summary- rationale for the Project
HSD CSES currently uses an unsupported version of CA Gen software for Host Encyclopedia and workstation. The CA Gen 6.5 version is no longer supported and the risk of unsupported code in the environment is increasing.
Currently, the HSD Information Technology Division (ITD) supports the Child Support Enforcement System (CSES) legacy mainframe application which is hosted on the NM DoIT Enterprise mainframe MVS1 region. The application code and supporting processes are managed by HSD-ITD application developers using the CA Gen development tool. This tool is integral for current CSES application development and having an unsupported version poses a significant risk to the program, especially if the system were to encounter any production issues that require vendor assistance. Any amount of downtime could result in substantial Federal fines or sanctions.
HSD will contract with Jumar Solutions through Software House International (SHI) to upgrade the system. Jumar completed the CA Gen assessment in 2011 and has the expertise and experience to upgrade this software. The Human Services Department is requesting your consideration through approval of the Initiation and Planning phases of this project.
1.2 funding and sources
Funding for the CA Gen Upgrade is from legislative funds L2012, Chapter 19, Sec 7(15) and will expire on June 30, 2014. The completion date of the CA Gen Upgrade Contract is March 31, 2014.
Source / Amount / Associated restrictions / Approvers /state funds
L 2012, Chapter 19, Sec 7(15) / $187,000 / Funding must be expended by june 30, 2014 / State PCC
federal funds / $363,000 / ACF/ocse
state pcc
1.3 constraints
Number / Description /1 / To avoid any issue with the HSD Income Support Division Automated System Program and Eligibility Network (ASPEN) Pilot release in July 2013, the execution phase of the CA Gen Upgrade will begin the second week in August 2013.
2 / Resources and Change Management: HSD CSES Staff will be required to support the contractor during the CA Gen Upgrade. CSES Staff will be required to continue M&O operations of CSES and some CSES change requests. These changes will need to be managed during the deployment phase of the upgrade.
3 / Funding is awarded through June 30, 2014. The completion of the CA Gen Upgrade is planned to complete in March 2014.
1.4 dependencies
Number / Description / Type M,D,E /1 / OCSE approval of matching funds (complete) / E
2 / certification / e
3 / Availability of cses and nmdoit staff to conduct required activities / m
4 / availability of a development environment with trace functionality and a test environment dedicated to the upgrade / m
5 / model cleanup / m
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS
Number / Description /1 / There will be adequate CSES and NMDoIT resources to support the planning and execution of this project, including the project manager, application developers, DBAs and QA resources.
2. / Transition and change management plan acceptance for freezing production while CA Gen Upgrade is deployed to production (estimated for 1-2 weeks).
1.6 Initial Project Risks Identified -
Risk 1 - Loss of Key CSES Staff
Mitigation Strategy - Reprioritize CSES staff assignments to assure required activities are completed as necessary. Cross training so that other staff can fill in as necessary.
Contingency Plan: Cross training so that other staff can fill in as necessary or obtain additional resources to reduce the impact to the project.
[Risk 2 – Identify External Action Blocks that have missing source code]
Description – Missing Source Code for EABs (External Action Blocks) / Probability: Possible / Impact : MediumMitigation Strategy: Analyze any active critical EAB (COBOL programs external to Cool Gen) to identify missing source members. If critical, reverse engineer EABs from load libraries.
Contingency Plan: Evaluation of EAB’s has been completed as pre-upgrade activity and no critical EAB’s were found without source code.
[Risk 3 – Lack of Experience and Knowledge of Access Gen ]
Description – Staff lack knowledge of new version of Access Gen (previously CA Gen) / Probability: Medium / Impact : MediumMitigation Strategy: Propose Vendor walk HSD/DoIT through installation/download -- failure
Contingency Plan: Vendor support
[Risk 4 – Migration Path]
Description – Requires revised migration path and designated upgrade region / Probability: High / Impact : HighMitigation Strategy: Revise with model management
Contingency Plan: Workaround
[Risk 5 – Consistency/Clean up]
Description – Old Code and Code snippets exist in Dev and Test regions / Probability: High / Impact :HighMitigation Strategy:
Contingency Plan: stop project until ASPEN Pilot releases.
[Risk 6 – Configuration Management Issue]
Description – Compiling non-Gen source code – lack of good inventory / Probability: High / Impact : HighMitigation Strategy: cleanup work-configuration management
Contingency Plan: Differential Analysis and Report- EAB Generation Tools
[Risk 7 – DoIT Schedule Impacts]
Description – DoIT Mainframe Stabilization Project must be aligned with Project Plan or schedule may be impacted / Probability: Low / Impact : HighMitigation Strategy: Work with DoIT to ensure their upgrades don’t conflict with ours
Contingency Plan: vendor support
[Risk 8 – Budget risk]
Description – Additional dollars exist in the contingency funding bucket / Probability: High / Impact : HighMitigation Strategy: Ensure any additional dollars spent are within budget
Contingency Plan: Budgeted contingency funds expense not to exceed 95%; current level 44.0%
2.0 Project Authority and Organizational Structure
2.1 Stakeholders
name / Stake in Project / Organization / Title /Sean Pearson / Executive Sponsor / HSD/ITD / Chief Information Officer (CIO
Andrew Vallejos / Business Owner / CSED / Director
Patty Evans &
Sandra Ulibarri-Mays / NMDoIT Technical Sponsors / NMDoIT / IT Systems Manager
Database Administration
Ron Verhagen & Lisa Jaramillo / CSES Technical Sponsors / HSD/ITD/CSES / CSES Technical Supervisors
Carol Thomas-Gravel / ASB Bureau Chief and System Management Oversight / HSD/ASB/CSES / Bureau Chief
Teresa Henke / ASB Deputy Bureau Chief & QA Manager
CSES IT Project Manager / HSD/ITD/CSES / QA Manager
Denise Estes / CSES IT Business Analyst and Risk Manager / HSD/ITD / IT Business Analyst
2.2 Project Governance Structure
2.2.1 organizational structure – Org Chart
2.2.2 Describe the role and members of the project steering committee
There is no project steering committee related to this project because it is a CSES maintenance and operations upgrade for a CSES development tool.
2.2.3 Organizational Boundaries, interfaces and responsibilities
As the CSES Application is supported on the NM DoIT mainframe, DoIT systems and database staff will be involved through all activities of this upgrade to assure the upgrade plan is supported by current and future architecture plans for the operating system and database.
2.3 Executive Reporting
Project progress and issues will be reported through the chain of command to Executive Sponsors.
Monthly progress reporting to DoIT Project Oversight and Compliance Bureau as required.
3.0 Scope
3.1 Project Objectives
3.1.1 Business Objectives
Number / Description /Bus. Objective 1 / Eliminate the use of an unsupported tool for CSES development as this could place the Department at risk to support thousands of New Mexico constituents who rely on it for child support benefits.
3.1.2 Technical Objectives
Number / Description /Tech. Objective 1 / Eliminate the risk of using unsupported tools for the development and support of CSES and reducing system vulnerability to outages and failures.
Tech. Objective 2 / Upgrade the CA Gen tool to provide current development functions as well as vendor support for tool fixes, changes or patches. Some of the new features are Simplification of upgrades and migrations, Z/OS compatibility, Z/OS dynamic link of RI triggers, Larger models and subsets, and Multi-row fetch/block fetch.
3.2 Project exclusions
This project is specifically focused on the CA Gen upgrade from version 6.5 to 8.0 and the license for maintenance and operations for the CA Gen tool from July, 2013 through June 30, 2014. No other activities are included in this project.
3.3 Critical Success Factors
Number / Description /1 / Execution and deployment of the CA Gen tool based on manufacturer’s specifications for optimal function and performance.
2 / Completion of the CA Gen upgrade by March 31, 2014.
4.0 Project Deliverables and methodology
4.1 Project Management Life Cycle
Unless otherwise noted, deliverables are based on contract with SHI/Jumar.
Phase / Summary of Phase / Key DeliverablesInitiation / Identify models, third-party tools, environments and components. Complete Requirements and Project Initiation Documents / Requirements & Project Initiation Documents
PCC Approvals
Planning / Review and complete reassessment and model analysis to validate remediation and model upgrade. Complete design and implementation documents. / Project Management Plan
Design & Implementation Documentation
Updated Risk Assessment
PCC Approvals
Implementation / Model cleanup. Execute, test, and deploy CSES Code into all test and production environments using the v8 upgraded software. / Differential Analysis and Report
Test Plans and Results
Issue Logs
Test Acceptance Documentation
Training & Documentation
Close out / Post Implementation Review and Report, Administrative Close-Out. / Updated Technical Documentation
Lessons Learned
Project Closure Meeting and Documentation
4.1.1 Project Management Deliverables
4.1.1.1 Project Management Plan
Description:The Project Management Plan will be the guide used throughout the Project. This plan will identify the overall project scope, high level schedule, budget, risks, communications plan, change management, Roles/Responsibilities of team members. This plan is an evolving document as new information will be added and existing information will be revised during initiation and planning phase. / Deliverable Acceptance Criteria:
Document should indicate the major project steps and estimated milestones.
Standards for Content and Format:
DoIT Project Management Plan template
Quality Review: This document will be reviewed and approved by Executive Sponsor, Project Sponsors and Project Managers
4.1.1.2 Detailed Work Plan/Schedule