Request for Certification and Release of Funds Form

Phase Zero / Initial / Implementation / Closeout

Project Name

/ Deficit Reduction Act Project
Project Number / CR 702 / Date / 8/6/07
Lead Agency / Human Services Department / Agency Code / 630
Other Agencies

Executive Sponsor

/ Daryl Schwebach, Deputy Cabinet Secretary, HSD
Project Manager / Jan Christine, Deputy Bureau Chief, Project Management Bureau
Agency Head / Pamela S. Hyde, JD
Agency CIO/IT LEAD / Daryl Schwebach, Acting HSD CIO
Project Description (Provide a brief description and purpose for this project)
Comments:
The federal Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA of 2005), sometimes referred to as DEFRA, contains requirements for systems changes to Child Support Enforcement System (CSES) for SFY 2007/2008/2009 and changes to the Income Support Division’s computer system (ISD2) for SFY 2008. For Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED) the changes due October 1, 2008 were optional. However, the State of New Mexico decided to make the optional changes in HB 342 Section 5.E. HB 2 Chapter 28, Section 5, Item #59 provided funds allocation for the system changes legislated by HB 342.
HB 342 changes the amount of funds passed through from a Child Support collection to a custodial parent (CP) who is also a current client of the Income Support Division receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). Presently when a collection is made on a TANF case, up to $50 is provided from the General Fund to the CP and is disregarded as income for eligibility determination by the Income Support Division. As of the DRA of 2005 and the subsequent HB 342, the amount changes. When the case has one child the amount passed through to the CP will be up to $100, when there are two or more children the amount disbursed will be up to $200. The present project (referenced as CR 702 by CSED) includes Detailed Design, Coding and testing for these changes. The current Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) that exists for the project is 9200 hours. This cannot be accommodated by the current in-house team along with other work that needs to be completed. Therefore, the intention is to obtain external resources with CA Gen (development tool used by CSES) experience. ISD2 also requires some relatively minor changes to disregard this additional pass through for income calculations for the TANF program.
In order to accomplish the CSES coding and testing, revisions are required to the CA Gen development and test environment and an upgrade of the development tool version needs to be upgraded.
Planned Start Date / August 22, 2007 / Planned End Date / November 5, 2008

Justification for Certification (Include Appropriations Laws (i.e., Laws 200X, Chapter, Section, Subsection) or budgeted adjustment request; Business Value and/or program Results)

The revisions are required to comply with the federal DRA of 2005 and supported by
New Mexico legislation HB 342 Section 5,E. Appropriation is through HB2 Chapter 28, Section 5 Item # 59.
If the system changes are not complete as scheduled by the federal legislation, sanctions will be assessed to the CSED program.
Total Appropriated Amount for Current Fiscal Year / $993,704.00 (CSES)
$137,696.00 (ISD2) / Amount Previously Certified / $ .00
Requested Amount this Certification / $ 993,704.00
FF: $ 655,844.64
GF: $ 337,859.36 / Remaining Appropriation not Certified / $ 137,696.00
NOTE: All figures inclusive of tax @8%

Certification History (Include any previous project or phase certifications)

Date
/ Amount / Funding Source(s)
NONE

NOTE: All figures are inclusive of tax

Proposed Certification Schedule for Current Fiscal Year (agency to complete for all phases)
Phases / Amount Requested /

Major Deliverable(s)

/

Due Dates

Phase Zero
Initial:
Requirements &
Prep Environment / .00 / CSES Project Plan for DRA 2008 design and implementation (HSD Resources) / 08/29/07
Requirements &
Prep Environment / $160,000.00 / Preparation of the development environment to accommodate external resources and implement system changes, including version updgrade of the development software (CA Gen 6.5 to 7.6) and clean-up of CA Gen models. Train HSD resources.
(Contractor) / 10/30/07
Requirements &
Prep Environment / $ 40,000.00 / IV&V Plan for all project phases
(Contractor) / 09/15/07
Requirements &
Prep Environment / .00 / Requirements Definition (CSED Resources) / 08/31/07
Implementation:
Project Phase(s)
Design / .00 / Conceptual Design (HSD Resources)
Detailed Design (HSD Resources) / 10/15/07
Code / $ 793,704.00 / Coding, Unit and String Test documents and results. Coding will start using external resources 10/1/07.
(Contractor) / 06/15/08
Test / .00 / System Test documents and results and CSED program signoff
(HSD Resources) / 09/15/08
Implement / .00 / Production Migration Signoff and pre and post migration checklist completion and signoff
(HSD Resources) / 09/26/08
Code/Test/
Implement / $137,696.00 / Design, code, test and implement ISD2 changes to meet HB 342. / 11/05/08
Closeout: / 11/05/08

Appropriation History (Include all Funding source such as Federal, State, County, Municipality)

Fiscal Year
/ Amount / Funding Source(s)
SFY 2008 / $ 993,704.00
/ CSED
FF: $ 655,844.64; GF: $ 337,859.36PP
HB2 Chapter 28, Section 5 Item # 59.
SFY 2008 / $ 137,696.00 / HB2 Chapter 28, Section 5 Item # 59.
Budget
Comments:
The budget below reflects hours by both HSD resources for the implementation phase and external consulting services. HSD resources during this project phase are for system and UAT testing and the migration to production.
This project entails only application changes and does not require any new hardware or software.
Description
/

FY05

/ FY06 / FY07 / FY08 / FY09
Staff - Internal
Consulting Services (CSES) / $ 993,704.00
Consulting Services (ISD2) / $ 137,696.00
Hardware / N/A
Software / N/A
Total / $1,131,400.00

Independent Verification & Validation Approach (Include summary of the latest IV V report)

The project will follow the Department of Information Technology guidelines. IV&V is an important part of the project. Below is a preliminary outline of the IV&V services.
An external vendor will conduct the IV&V services for this project (CSES CR702 and ISD CR) . IV&V service will be conducted based on standard methodologies and IV&V guidelines derived from PMI Best Practices and IEEE standards for system verification and validation and the IEEE guide for system verification and validation plans. Additionally, IV&V will be required according to the criteria established by the State of New Mexico Department of Information Technology.
The IV&V contractor will:
1.  Review the appropriate project requirements/specification so that objective verification and validation is possible to achieve
2.  Document all assessments and reports in the project plan in accordance with the State Program Management Offices’ (PMO) best practices and standards
3.  Review all project deliverables and methodology
4.  Structure an IV&V plan to oversee the project efforts and outcomes in accordance with the State PMO for this project
5.  Participate in project meetings at for both portions of the project and review project activities.
The IV&V Project Manager will use standard project management disciplines and IV&V methodologies to develop and document an IV&V plan that will monitor activities, progress and issues. The IV&V vendor will provide:
1.  Provide a Project Status report within the first 30 business days
2.  Prepare periodic reports reviewing the project progress.
3.  Submit a copy of each IV&V assessment report to lead agency management and the PMO within seven (7) days of each IV&V assessment.
4.  Provide a post-implementation assessment

Significant Risks and Mitigation Strategy

There are three risks associated with the proposed approach:
1)  At the present time, Federal requirements have not been finalized. Should the draft action transmittal change considerably, we may be may not have time to change our design and recode in order to make the January 1, 2009 state specified deadline. However, it is simply impossible to wait. Similarly, for the requirements this year (calendar year 2007), CSES will probably finish the coding before the final regulation is available.
2)  If for any reason we are held up in the procurement process and the develop staff augmentation is not complete by 10/1/2007. There are several implications due to exceeding the staff augmentation procurement deadline of 10/1/2007:
a.  CSES will be unable to finish the work in time for the federal and state deadlines
b.  Funding for this project ends June 30, 2008 and the staff augmentation will end with that deadline
c.  Immediately behind the current project deadline are two other federally mandated changes, one for the DRA of 2005 and one required for the OCSE-157 federal report. At the present time the combined estimate for these two federal mandates is 10,000 hours. Should the completion of the current DRA project overrun into the subsequent timeframe required for the subsequent two federal implementations, delivery these two subsequent federal mandates are seriously jeopardized.
d.  . For every month the $100/200 pass through is not implemented, the client base served by this change will be short-changed approximately $339,500 per month or approximately an annual total of $4,000,000.
3)  Department of Information Technology must upgrade of the MVS1 zOS form 1.4 to 1.7 or higher by 10/15/07.

Security Strategy (Summarize Plan for Security, Backup and Disaster Recovery)

Security
Security policies for CSES, and access to the CA Gen development tool are set by HSD DoIT and will not be revised for this project. New users of the CSES system, or the development software, submit a security form, signed by their Bureau Chief, to HSD Production Control.
Backup
None of the current backup procedures and policies will change as a result of the implementation of the current project.
Backup of production data is setup in the production schedule by HSD DoIT Data Management Bureau personnel. Responsibility for the actual backup of the data as per the scheduled events is the responsibility of the Department of Information Technology.
Daily backup of source and object code libraries is also the responsibility of the Department of Information Technology.
Configuration Management of source and object code is the responsibility of HSD DoIT. The documented procedure for configuration management is audited at regular intervals by HSD DoIT Quality Control Bureau.
Disaster Recovery
None of the disaster recovery procedures will change as a result of the implementation of the system revisions outlined in this project.
The CSES cross-bureau development, test and operations team with two sets of Disaster Recovery procedures: HSD DoIT Disaster Recovery and the Department of Information Technology Disaster Recovery procedures.

Consolidation Strategy (Summarize Collaboration Efforts and Plans with Other Agencies)

Both of the divisions involved are within the same agency (HSD). Both divisions have to make independent changes to their systems. The only collaboration necessary is some testing of the new data, not structure or process, being provided in the interface between the two systems.
As noted above, the Backup and Disaster Recovery are coordinated with DoIT (formerly GSD).

Record Retention Policy (Describe the Agency’s records retention requirements for this project)

There are no changes to data retention for the CSES or ISD2 systems as a result of this project.

Maintenance Strategy (Describe how the agency plans to maintain this project after deployment)

Maintenance processes and procedures for the CSES and ISD2 systems will not change as a result of this project.
Current Process
The following is the current process:
1.  Changes are identified by the program or the information technology support
2.  The proposed change is either accepted or rejected by a committee led by the program (CSED or ISD) and if accepted a priority is proposed in reference to the existing changes.
3.  If accepted, the proposed change is submitted to the Change Management and Prioritization board at Human Services Department
4.  The program then creates formal requirements via a Requirements Definition.
5.  The information technology group, supporting the specific system, then produces a Conceptual Design that is approved by a cross-functional team that includes the program
6.  A technical or detailed design is then completed.
7.  The changes are coded and progress through various testing processes.
8.  A pre-release meeting is held
9.  The change is release to production
10. The original Change Request is closed
Throughout the process the HSD DoIT project manager for the specific system is responsible for tracking and reporting project and budget status.

Interoperability (Describe how this project interfaces with existing systems/Applications within the agency)

An interface already exists between ISD2 and CSES. The process between the two systems will continue as per its present design. The amounts sent via the CSES financial file will change to reflect the $100 or $200, but the file format and all other aspects of the interface remain the same. However, a small amount of joint regression testing will be required.
Cost Benefit Analysis (Forecast the tangible and intangible life-cycle costs for five years, quantify the return on Investment (roi) and provide assumptions used in calculations)
This project is mandated by state legislation HB 342 Section 5E. Approximately an additional $4,000,000/year will be disbursed to custodial parents (CPs) as a result of the system changes. There is no Return on Investment to HSD as a result of the system revisions.
Benefits /
Cost
/

ROI (Y1)

/

ROI (Y2)

/

ROI (Y3)

/

ROI (Y4)

/

ROI (Y5)

Completion of State Mandate
/ $1,131,400
Total / $1,131,400
Business Performance Measures for Project Life-Cycle (Complete for all phases)
Phases / Date /

Goals/Objectives/Outcomes

Phase Zero
/ N/A / This project is going to use concurrent engineering and development for the environment and system changes in order to compress delivery time.
Initial
/ IV&V Contract, Plan and Initial Review (HSD and Contractor)
Procure all external Resources (HSD)
Preparation of development environment (Contractor)
Project Plan (HSD)
Design of CSES DRA changes (HSD)
Implementation / Coding of CSES DRA changes (Contractor)
Testing of CSES DRA changes (Contractor and HSD)
Design, Code, and test ISD2 changes (Existing ISD2 Contractor)
Implementation of CSES & ISD2 DRA changes (HSD)
Closeout / Standard close-out activities
POCD Certification Committee Recommendation
Certification Request: The POCD recommends approval of the HSD project contingent on an IV&V contract.
DOIT Certification Committee Recommendation
Comments:
State Chief Information Officer Approval
NOTE: All Certified Projects Must Follow The State Policies and Procurement Codes

This is a controlled document, refer to the document control index for the latest revision

Revision: 2.7 Page 9