Meeting Title by dfgh4bnmu

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 4

									                               AWG Kickoff
MINUTES                       AUGUST 28, 2007          9:00 AM
                                                                                             DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
                                                                                                         AUDITORIUM


MEETING CALLED BY       Becky Thompson, MAGIC Project Manager

TYPE OF MEETING         MAGIC Advisory Work Group (AWG) Kickoff

FACILITATOR             Cille Litchfield, DFA/MMRS CSIO
                        David Pitcock, MAGIC Deputy Project Manager & Gayle Chittom, MMRS Director of Strategic
NOTE TAKER
                        Projects
TIMEKEEPER              N/A

ATTENDEES               See Sign-In Sheet for Complete List




Agenda topics
                              WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS                                                    CILLE LITCHFIELD

                 Cille Litchfield began the meeting at 9:00 AM by welcoming the attendees and reminding everyone to
DISCUSSION
                 make sure they signed in.
Cille proceeded to explain that she is the CSIO for DFA/MMRS. She then introduced Becky Thompson, MAGIC Project
Manager; David Pitcock, MAGIC Deputy Project Manager; and Sheila Kearney, ITS Technology Consultant. Cille also
provided a brief background of Becky’s, David’s, and Sheila’s experience and their respective roles in the MAGIC Project.

                              MAGIC: STATUS OF PROJECT                                                   CILLE LITCHFIELD

DISCUSSION       Cille proceed to give an overview of the MAGIC project and where we currently are in the project.
    Cille stated that MAGIC is currently just a concept, and we are taking a planned approach to see where we need to go
    in the future. There has not been any decision, beyond the Planning and Design Phase, for the direction of MAGIC.
    Cille continued by stating that SAAS is twenty (20) years old, while SPAHRS is ten (10) years old. SAAS, SPAHRS,
    MERLIN, and related sub-subsystems all tie together and perform the basic functionally of an ERP system. However,
    there are still “holes” in the State’s current infrastructure. Budget Preparation, Grant Management, and Vendor
    Management are just several of the areas where gaps exist.
    However, there are several areas of Governmental processing that work well: GAAP Processing, CAFR Processing,
    and HR/Payroll Processing. The goal is not “to throw out the baby with the bathwater”, but look at the “good”
    processes and not reinvent the wheel. We do not want to go backward.
    We will have to identify the systems/functions that are “good” and need to be kept.
    We will also have to identify the items that are “not good” and need to be tossed or replaced/enhanced.
    We will also have to look at the risk of moving/not moving forward.
          o    We could possibly do nothing, stay where we currently are, and continue to add pieces (i.e. PayMode and
               WebProcure).
          o    We could also possibly do a full-fledged ERP of a tier 1 system and implement whatever enhancements are
               required to keep us from losing present functionality.
          o    Or, we could possibly do something in the middle.
    Cille also stated that PeopleSoft, SAP, CGI/AMS are the three main tier 1 ERP vendors that are currently available.
          o    These are the systems that we will comprehensively review.
          o    We will look at what the systems do versus what we currently do not have functionality to handle.
    Throughout the process, we will be identifying risks of going forward, versus not going forward. We’ll ask, “Is it going
    to be worth it in terms of cost and in terms of people?”
          o    One of the main factors driving the process is that at lot of the institutional knowledge across state
               government is at retirement age. Now is the time to begin this process before that knowledge base is no
               longer available.
          o    Another key factor is that the “new” kids are not attracted to work on the old technology platforms. It is
               getting harder in state government to attract the next generation of workers.
    The goal of the next phase of MAGIC is to determine, based on gap analysis, risk analysis and cost planning, what
    we need to do next and how to push that recommendation to the next level – whatever that is: full-blown, building
    blocks, or continue the approach we are following now with the existing systems.
    No final decision about MAGIC has been made yet, but we are going to have to do something.
QUESTIONS       The floor was open for questions. None were asked.




                            NASACT BENCHMARK (NON-AGENDA ITEM)                                             CILLE LITCHFIELD

DISCUSSION      Cille also spoke on the NASACT Benchmarks that were completed in 2007.
    The benchmarks were done in Finance, Human Resource/Payrol,. Procurement, and Information Technology. The
    purpose of the benchmarks was to provide a baseline of the State’s costs and processes.
    Mississippi did extremely well in effectiveness on the Finance benchmark. Cille stated that in some ways, we are a
    victim of that success due to our low labor rates. Specifically in Finance, our efficiency ratios could improve by putting
    more bodies into the process rather than pursuing higher dollar options for improvement the efficiencies that are
    technology based. It will cost the State to take care of the deficiencies in functionality, no matter what we do. The
    question is, how much? That answer depends on the risk factors and the approach.
    The final benchmark presentations are available on the MMRS website at:
    https://www.mmrs.state.ms.us/mmrs/MMRSWeb.nsf/magic?OpenForm



QUESTIONS       The floor was open for questions. None were asked.




                              PROCUREMENT PROCESS (NON AGENDA ITEM)                                         SHEILA KEARNEY

DISCUSSION      Sheila Kearney provide an overview of the MAGIC Planning and Design Consultant Procurement Process
    The Request for Proposal (RFP) will be a two-phased approach.
         o     The first phase will consist of gathering a “snap shot” of the current State systems/processes. This will also
               include conducting both gap and impact analyses, and developing a financial plan.
         o     The second phase (if the State chooses) is that the chosen vendor will possibly serve as the IV&V
               (Independent Verification and Validation) consultants for the ERP implementation.
    Sheila also provide a projected timeline for the procurement activities:
         o     The RFP should be released between September 18 – 25, 2007.
         o     A mandatory vendor conference will be held September 28, 2007 at 10:00 AM in the Woolfolk Annex Room
               204.
         o     October 19, 2007, the RFP bids will be opened for evaluation.
         o     After evaluations are completed and approval is received from the ITS Board, MAGIC Task Force, and the
               MMRS Steering Committee, the vendor target start date is February 4, 2008.
    We will be looking for vendors that have done this type of activity before (both in terms of cost and size), that have a
    high skill level, and that have been involved in an implementation in all subject areas. In addition, the vendor must
    have an electronic means of capturing and reporting the business requirements.
    This consulting engagement does not obligate the State to move forward with an ERP implementation.
    The winning vendor will not be allowed to bid for the ERP implementation phase of MAGIC; however, the consulting
    engagement does not obligate the state to move forward with an ERP implementation.
    The second phase, if executed by the State, would be for the winning vendor to serve as the Independent Validation
    and Verification (IV&V) vendor as the project (whatever we do) moves forward.




QUESTIONS       The floor was open for questions. None were asked.




                              MAGIC ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE                                               BECKY THOMPSON

                Becky Thompson provided an overview of the MAGIC/Advisory Work Group (AWG) organizational
DISCUSSION
                structure.
Becky reviewed the organizational structure that was provided in the agenda packets.
         Becky Thompson is the MAGIC Project Manager
         David Pitcock is the MAGIC Deputy Project Manager
         Gayle Chittom will serve as the MAGIC Policy and Documentation Manager
         Sheila Kearney will be the MAGIC Procurement Analyst.
         There will also be a communications coordinator and personnel manager. These positions have not been filled to
         date.
         There will be five teams (Finance, HR/Payroll, Procurement, Enterprise Readiness, MAGIC+) each led by an
         MMRS lead.
              o    These teams will contain subject matter experts (SMEs) from a cross section of state agencies. The
                   State’s intellectual capital is a great asset.
              o    The teams will work with the chosen vendor and their respective MMRS lead to identify and document
                   all current business processes.
              o    The teams will also identify items that need to be considered in the possible ERP implementation.
              o    The role of the AWGs is critical for setting requirements and for filling in the gaps across functional and
                   technical areas.
         The AWG recommendations will then be presented to the MAGIC Task Force.
              o    The MAGIC Task Force (or MAGIC Steering Committee) is comprised of fifteen (15) agency directors,
                   deputy directors, or their designee.
              o    The MAGIC Task Force will review and determine which recommendations from the MAGIC Advisory
                   Work Groups need to be considered for implementation.
         The MAGIC Task Force recommendations will then roll up to the MMRS Steering Committee. The MMRS Steering
         Committee is comprised of: J.K. Stringer, Jr., Executive Director of the Department of Finance and
         Administration; Don Thompson, Executive Director of the State Personnel Board; and David Litchliter, Executive
         Director of the Department of Information Technology Services.




QUESTIONS       The floor was open for questions.

Asked by Jennifer Wentworth, State Tax Commission
Q: When do you expect the advisory work group meetings to begin?
A: We anticipate the meetings to begin in February 2008; however, the specific dates will be worked out once the Planning
and Design Consultant is chosen.

Asked by Leila Malatesta, Department of Finance and Administration / Office of Fiscal Management
Q: Do you know what the approach of gathering the requirements will be? Will we start from scratch with the requirement
gathering?
A: We will use the existing documentation as a starting point. The exact methods will be determined when the vendor
comes on board.

                            MAGIC AWG AGREEMENT FORM                                                      BECKY THOMPSON

DISCUSSION      Becky gave an overview of the MAGIC AWG Agreement Form
    Prior to the meeting, the decision was made to hold off on the submission of the Advisory Work Group Agreement
    Forms until we have a more firm idea of the level of commitment that will be involved. Becky further explained that
    we will wait until the chosen vendor is selected to determine how to structure the individual teams and how they will
    function.
    Once the complete structure is established, MMRS will revaluate the AWG Agreement Forms.



QUESTIONS       The floor was open for questions.

Asked by Unknown
Q: Will you let us know the deadline for completing the AWG Agreement Forms?
A: Yes, if we decide to execute the agreement forms, we will communicate the deadline to everyone.
Q: Will you email us to share more information?
A: Yes, communication is key in involving the agencies and we will be sure to give you information as we know it.




There were no other questions.

Cille stated that these minutes will be available on the MMRS website. Cille also informed everyone that they are welcome
to “sit in” on any open meeting regarding MAGIC, including the Task Force meetings or the MMRS Steering Committee
meetings. These meetings will be posted on DFA’s website in accordance with Mississippi’s Open Meetings law.


Becky thanked everyone for attending and adjourned the meeting.

								
To top