Document Sample
					                 ASSESSMENT OF INFORMATION          SYSTEMS


                          IN THE U N I T E D STATES

                                                      by Frank A. Bayer

    Any assessment of Information Systems in the United                States

is an extremely large and complex undertaking            requiring     the

resources of a large staff, a directed methodology and a great

deal of time.    There have been estimates of about 20,000              local

governments in the US, many of whom h a v e computerized

information   systems.

    At best, with our limited resources, this p a p e r can only

provide is a limited look at the subject.             It will   fundamentally

b e limited to the experience of the authors and the small               amount

of research published on the matter.           For a recent study on the

subject, I would suggest reading         "The Dynamics of Computing" by

King and Kraemer recently published by the Columbia                 University


    Because of the size of this undertaking, the subject                 is

being covered by three different authors as             follows;

         1. Large local governments                   - Frank A.     Bayer

         2. Small/Medium local governments - Sam T r o t t e r

         3. Graphics                                  - Michael J.     Kevany.

      The basic information for this section on       Information

Systems in Large Local Governments in the US was gathered               from

MIX   (Association of Large IBM Users in Local Government).             Once

each year, this organization produces a survey of its members

listing the budgets, staff, hardware, software and            applications

of each of its members.        We have used their survey for the years

1976 and 1984 in arriving at many of our conclusions.             See

Appendix A for a listing of the governments        involved.


      The governmental structure in the United States basically

looks as follows:

      1)   The Federal   government.

      2)   State government.

      3)   County government    (in some states called       Parish).

      4)   Local government consisting of Cities,      villages,


      5)   Added entities within local governments such as school

           districts, authorities, commissions,       etc.

      This chart is basically in hierarchical order so that the

United States    (Federal) is broken down into States          (50).    The

states are subdivided       into counties.    (My state, Wisconsin,       is

subdivided    into 72 counties.)       Counties, then, are     subdivided

into local g o v e r n m e n t s   (although many cities h a v e now    sprawled

over into m o r e than 1 county).           Local government is then

fragmented      into smaller subdivisions such as school           boards,

sewerage commissions, housing authorities,                development

commissions,       etc.

       The reason for this fragmented structure is basically

geographic and historical.              Geographically,   the United States is

approximately         3500 m i l e s east to west and 2000 m i l e s north to

south.     During its formulation in the late 1700's and                early

1800's, rapid m a s s transportation or speedy c o m m u n i c a t i o n s did

not exist.       Governmental structure had to be largely              local.

T i m e and technology h a s changed but our government structure h a s


       Historically, the US h a s been populated by           emigrants

(largely European) w h o left their homelands to escape                 oppression

of any sort and to improve their economic and social status.                       As

such, the p e o p l e of the United States are fiercely            independent

and take p r i d e in controlling their destinies.             They    still

m i s t r u s t centralized government, opting for independent             local

governmental          institutions over which they feel they can exercise

g r e a t e r local    control.

       Local governmental data processing serves local                 government.

If g o v e r n m e n t is fragmented, so is the structure of data

processing and this condition has not changed greatly in the                       ,

last ten years.-    To give some feeling of this fragmentation,     the

following table shows the approximate number of computer

installations   (exclusive of micros) in the various levels of

government down the my city, Milwaukee.

    Governmental             # of governmental         # of computer
        Unit             organizations in the Unit     Installations

    Federal (US)                1                        over 2000
    State (Wisconsin)           1                       Approx. 20
    County (Milwaukee)         72                            8
    Local government           44 (see appendix B)           3
     (City of Milwaukee)

    There are literally thousands of computer installations        in

the US structure.     Although there have been a limited number of

attempts at consolidation,    such as cooperatives   (San Diego)   and

metro governments    (Denver, Dade County), there still is very

little exchange of data, programs, etc. among the various

units.    Sharing of expertise and, to some extent,   systems is

confined to professional groups along organizational      structural

lines such as the National Association of State      Information

Systems   (NASIS), the Association of Large IBM Users in Local

Government   (MIX), and an information system SIG of the National

Counties Organization    (NCO) and URISA.

    The basic problem of such a structure is obviously the high

development cost.     To date, this has been affordable in the

United States since this cost, in my opinion,    is largely   offset

by the benefits of the innovative systems developed.       So long as

we can continue to finance independent development, the results

of information processing in local governments has been and will

 continue to b e outstanding.        This innovative attitude, which is

 basically a result of our governmental structure, h a s made and

 will continue to m a k e the US a leader in information systems in

 local    government.

     In summary, information systems in the United State are

 highly fragmentized w i t h limited information exchange,              but

 highly    innovative.


 Organizational/Administrative        Structure of Local     Government

     Local Governments in the United States generally consist                   of

 an elective body       (Common Council, Board of Supervisors, etc.), a

 n u m b e r of elected officials,   and appointed department       heads.

 The functions of these bodies varies by individual             organization

 which is consistent with the fragmented approach to government

 discussed    above.

     For example, the supposed head of local government                 is an

• elected official such as a Mayor.          In some local    governments,

 this p o s i t i o n is a true Chief Executive O f f i c e r w h o runs the day

 to day operation of the government and to whom department h e a d s

 are directly responsible.        In other cases, the p o s i t i o n    is

 largely figurative       (and may even b e part time).      Still in other

 cases, the incumbent is not a true CEO but exercises              substantial

control through political persuasion, veto and                appointive


      The same is true for legislative bodies.              In some cases,

their p o w e r is limited to passing laws relative to governance               in

their jurisdictions and approving appointments of city

officials.        In other cases, they assume a much g r e a t e r role in

the day to day operation of their jurisdictions thru t h e i r

various c o m m i t t e e s .   In an extreme case, there is large A m e r i c a n

city where m e m b e r s of the elected legislative body actually             run

individual       departments.

      Finally, department heads are appointed by v a r i o u s         possible

means.      In some cases, the Chief Executive m a k e s the         appointment

with the approval of the elected legislative body and the                   length

of service is determined by that Chief Executive.                  In other

cases, the appointment is m a d e following stringent Civil                Service

rules and the length of the appointment is until that                 department

head resigns or is proven incompetent in carrying out the duties

as assigned.

      To summarize, organization structure of local US               government

is highly flexible and depends, to a great extent, u p o n h o w that

government       is organized.        The only commonality is an elected

legislative body, elected officials and appointed                 department


                                         -9 4-
R o l e s and Responsibilities of Local Government Function              on

  I.T. Configuration and       Capability.

  To adequately d i s c u s s this, it is important to analyze w h e r e

the I.T. function is located in the organizational                structure

of local government.        Is the I.T. function centralized          or

decentralized?      Is it a separate function reporting to the

Chief Executive, a board, a department head or some other

entity?   Table 1, below,      is a breakdown of the placement                of

this function w i t h i n the membership of MIX.          It shows very

little change over the 1976-1984 time period confirming                      an

axiom of local government?       structural change is always

exceedingly     slow.

                 R e c a p of the Organizational      Placement

                    of DP   (I.T.) in Local    Government

  Organizational Placement                     1976               1984

  Independent department reporting           to;

       Chief Executive                             16                14

       Legislative Body                               4                  6

       Independent Board                           _4     24             2        22

  Section of a larger department which is;

       Finance                                        8                  5

       Budget                                         2                  2

       Administration                                 5                  6

       Clerk of Courts                                    16         _0           13

  Table No. 1           Reference:   MIX Survey 1976 & 1984

                                     -S 5-
  The table does show one interesting aspect.             Most   larger

g o v e r n m e n t s still run with a centralized I.T.   department/

section.    This table is misleading because of the source of

sample, MIX, does not include Police Departments w h i c h h a v e a

tendency to have their own installations in the large                local


  62% of the survey respondents operate as           independent

departments reporting to the CEO or Legislative Body.                 We

believe this is the proper direction because when DP                 operates

as an independent department,        it probably has g r e a t e r    freedom

providing I.T. services to a larger range of users.                  Their

services can b e directed to a much m o r e generalized          outlook

than if they operated as a section of a specific             department.

This can b e assumed because the direction of I.T. will b e

strongly   influenced by w h o e v e r has direct control over         it.

Therefore,    if for example     I.T. reports to the       Finance

Director, I.T. in that organization will lean to             financial


   W e admit that this assumption is a generalization.                In many

cases, the controlling department head may h a v e a broad

 perspective which then reflects in broad I.T. coverage.                   This

 probably accounts for the high percentage,           42%, w h o operate as

 a section of another department.

                                     - y b -
I.T. Influence on Making M a j o r Changes to               Organizational/

  A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Structures of Local      Governments

  There is little or no evidence that I.T. is making                        any

changes in the structure of local government                      in the US.      The

direction w h i c h I.T. has taken in the US for the last 10 years

explains this.           It basically has been used to enhance

administrative functions which either lower cost or provide

better service, as a source of quick and accurate                      information

for decision making generally on a departmental level or,                          as

in recent years, a decision making tool using                      modeling

techniques,       etc.

  Since local government structure is slow to change and                          only

when a substantial trigger forces it to do so, none of the

above reasons proved sufficient to have any structural                           impact.

Summary of       Organizational/Administrative

  The Organization/Administrational                   structure of large         local

g o v e r n m e n t s in the US is very flexible and v a r i e s          from

organization to organization.                 The location of I.T. in these

organizations is either as an independent department                         reporting

to the high level executive or legislative body or as a

section of a n o t h e r governmental department such as Finance,

Budget, or A d m i n i s t r a t i o n .   Finally, I.T. seems to h a v e had

little influence in changing any organizational                      or

a d m i n i s t r a t i v e function of local       government.

       Hardware—Software       Configuration and      Capabilities

 An analysis of the MIX survey between 1976 and 1984                 clearly

shows the following    changes:

  1)   A substantial transition from batch processing               to


  2)   A great increase in the amount of on-line               storage.

  3)   A substantial   increase in computing power.

  4)   Little or no increase in staff size.

  5)   A strong movement toward office         automation.

  Table 2 shows that the average number of terminals in a M I X

installation increased almost 12 fold from 33.5 in 1976 to

396.8 in 1984.     This is exclusive of word processing or PC


                    N u m b e r of Terminals   Installed

                                               1976               1984

       Average                                 33.5               396.8

       High                                    92                 1200

       Low                                      0                   22

  Table No. 2     Reference:     MIX Surveys 1976 & 1984

  In 1976, two of the installations had no on-line                 facilities

at all w h i l e in 1984, all governments had terminals.                 It is-

interesting to n o t e that the largest installation had                 1400

terminals     installed.
  Table 3 shows the average amount of on-line              storage

increased from 3.7 gigabytes in 1976 to 11.4 g i g a b y t e s in

1984, a 308% increase.         This is only on-line storage that

attached to the mainframe.

            A m o u n t of Mainframe On-Line Storage     (Gigabytes)

                                                1976              1984

         Average                                3.7               11.4

         High                                   7*. 2              19.2

         Low                                      .6                 .6

         Table 3    Reference:     MIX Survey 1976 & 1984

  In 1976, the prevalent machine in the survey w a s a 370/145

and 57% of the respondents reported m o r e than one machine.

T h e r e w e r e also a n u m b e r of m a c h i n e s of the 370.15X class with

a single 370\168.         The prevalent operating system w a s DOS          for

the 370/145 machines while the 370/15X's w e r e running              OS/SVS

or O S / M V T .

   In 1984, the prevalent machine w a s the 4300 class.                There

were also a number of 303X and 308X class machines.                  75% of

the respondents had m o r e than one mainframe.             The prevalent

operating system for the 4300 class m a c h i n e s w a s       DOS/VS

running u n d e r V M .   The b u l k of the larger m a c h i n e s used MVS.
 A n o t h e r interesting observation w a s a large increase in

mini-computer usage.        In 1976, there w e r e almost no minis

shown in the survey.        In 1984, almost every installation                    had

installed one or m o r e mini-computer(s).

  W h i l e there w a s a great increase in computing power,                    there

w a s no parallel increase in staffing.               Table 4 actually            shows

a drop in staffing between 1976 and               1984.

               N u m b e r of E m p l o y e e s in Data   Processing

                                                   1976                  1984

      Average                                      102.4                  93

      High                                         280                   377

       Low                                           21                    18

       T a b l e No. 4   Reference:        MIX Survey      1976-1984

  All of t h e above statistics are consistent w i t h the

requirements of an on-line system.                A s m o r e t e r m i n a l s are

added, a larger engine          (CPU) is required to drive the system

 and a greater amount of on-line storage is necessary                        to

 satisfy random but instantaneous response.                   Also,     in an

 on-line environment, data entry is transferred to the user and

 less batch w o r k is required.          Both of these functions,                which

 require large DP staffing, are no longer needed.

  Although the MIX survey had no data to support            the

assumption that the on-line environment provided a better

delivery service to local government, my discussions with my

colleagues in DP indicate that this assumption is true. By

moving the information/computing service b a c k to the user via

terminals, m u c h of the bad service problems encountered               in the

1970*s h a v e b e e n greatly diminished and user satisfaction            has

been    enhanced.

  Along this same line of thought, a good indicator of

providing a user w i t h their own       information/computing

capability beyond just evidence of increased           on-line

capability would be the use of data base management               facilities

and retrieval packages.        In 1976, only 50% of the       respondents

had a database manager. By 1984, this number had increased                  to

74%.     it w a s also found that a n u m b e r of larger   government

installations had established        information centers for t h e i r


  A n o t h e r trend also has become evident from the       surveys.

Large local governments are quickly moving           into office

automation covering word processing, electronic             mail,

calendaring,     etc.   Obviously, the 1976 survey showed           no

evidence of this at that time since it w a s almost           non-existent

then.     The 1984 survey shows that over 80% of the          respondents

had office automation equipment.          There seems to b e a v a r i a n c e

as to how this should b e implemented; central or stand                  alone.

No clear cut picture emerges as to a trend although some            large

users which employ a central computer to control the           network

h a v e over 100 terminals on their     office automation   networks.

  The use of Personal Computing also seems to be quite

widespread.   PC's w e r e installed in 2/3 of the    respondents

with one government having installed 60 units.         T h e r e is a

local government   installation in the US      (not in the MIX

Survey) who h a s ordered 2,000 personal computers for         delivery

in the 1984/85   timeframe.

  In summary, the hardware/software configuration           capability

has changed greatly in the 1976-84 timeframe.         US    local

governments have converted     from a basic batch m o d e to on-line

requiring larger computers, more complex software and           greater

on-line storage.    This decentralization of computing

capability h a s been extended by the increased use of m i n i

computers, personal c o m p u t e r s and office automation.    T h i s all

seems to h a v e b e e n accomplished with no increase in staffing.


   T h e M I X S u r v e y t e n d s t o s h o w v e r y little i n c r e a s e            in t h e

n u m b e r and t y p e s of a p p l i c a t i o n s installed            in l a r g e     local

governments between              1976 and 1984.              .What it d o e s s h o w is t h a t

its m e m b e r s all seem t o b e d o i n g t h e m u c h of s a m e                 activities

as t h e i r    fellow members.

   It a l s o s h o w s t h a t t h e g r e a t c h a n g e s e e m s t o b e         providing

these services           in t h e o n - l i n e m o d e instead of b a t c h .               This     is

not m e a n t t o i m p l y t h a t t h e r e h a s b e e n l i t t l e a c t i v i t y        in t h e

time period under study since most                           installations          are     doing

many things.           A p p e n d i x C is a l i s t i n g of t h e a c t i v i t i e s of M I X

members        in 1984 w h i c h b e a r t h i s         out.

   T h e r e a r e t w o n e w a r e a s that l a r g e City g o v e r n m e n t s            are

becoming        increasingly         active?       g r a p h i c s and m o d e l i n g .     Graphics

is b e i n g c o v e r e d   in a n o t h e r    paper.

   M o d e l i n g and d e c i s i o n s u p p o r t     s y s t e m s are b e c o m i n g m o r e    and

more prevalent.              Generally,          l a r g e local g o v e r n m e n t s     in t h e U S

fall    into t w o c a t e g o r i e s each w i t h d i f f e r e n t p r o b l e m s .          They

can b e l o o s e l y c l a s s i f i e d as t h e S u n b e l t and          Rustbelt.

   Governments           in t h e S u n b e l t g e n e r a l l y    a r e in t h e      southern

p o r t i o n of t h e U S . and c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y one w o r d ,             expansion.

The population            and    i n d u s t r i a l bat      of t h e US is m o v i n g        to

these areas. Their major problem                           is c o n t r o l l i n g    this

expansion.          M a n y of t h e s e g o v e r n m e n t s h a v e      developed

p r e d i c t i v e m o d e l s t o t r y t o d e t e r m i n e t h e social,           economic       and

i n f r a s t r u c t u r e p r o b l e m s of e x p a n s i o n so that          it    is

p r e d i c t a b l e and c o n t r o l l a b l e and t h e r e f o r e ,     manageable.

   The governments              in t h e R u s t b e l t h a v e just t h e            opposite

problem,       contraction.             Their industries are either leaving                             or

g o i n g out of e x i s t e n c e .       Their populations are shrinking                           with

the a t t e n d a n t    loss of tax b a s e .             T h e i r social p r o b l e m s     are

because their growing populations                            are g e t t i n g p o o r e r .    Their

i n f r a s t r u c t u r e s a r e old and d e t e r i o r a t i n g .       Models similar            to

t h o s e of t h e S u n b e l t g o v e r n m e n t s are b e i n g         created by         these

governments          in an a t t e m p t t o h e l p r e s o l v e t h e i r           unique


    In s u m m a r y ,   local g o v e r n m e n t s h a v e n o t b e e n a d d i n g         new

a p p l i c a t i o n s t o any e x t e n t d u r i n g t h e s t u d y p e r i o d , b u t          rather

e n h a n c i n g m a n y of t h e p r e v i o u s s y s t e m s t o an          on-line

 environment.            T h e n e w a p p l i c a t i o n a r e a s w h i c h m a n y of       these

 c i t i e s a r e d i r e c t i n g t h e i r a t t e n t i o n a r e g r a p h i c s and      modeling

 t o h e l p m a n a g e t h e n e w p r o b l e m s of t h e 80's c a u s e d b y              either

 expansion or            contraction.

              I n f o r m i n g and L i s t e n i n g t o the P u b l i c V i a         I.T.

   This area        is s t i l l b a s i c a l l y u n t o u c h e d by l a r g e       local

government        a l t h o u g h a n u m b e r of them are b e c o m i n g m o r e             aware

of t h e p r o b l e m and a r e b e g i n n i n g to do s o m e t h i n g a b o u t            it.        In

t h e c a s e of M i l w a u k e e , w e h a v e a special g r o u p in t h e

Information          (DP) d e p a r t m e n t d o i n g    just t h a t .      During        1984,

they p r o c e s s e d   o v e r 200 r e q u e s t s      from i n d i v i d u a l s   and

community groups             for land d a t e .           This was made           possible

b e c a u s e of f e d e r a l   f u n d i n g t h r o u g h CDA.     We doubt         this

f u n c t i o n w o u l d e x i s t w i t h o u t t h i s funding b e c a u s e of t h e          high


   Another      factor, w h i c h        is a s t r o n g n e g a t i v e    in    providing

information         to the public,            is t h e fear of g o v e r n m e n t           officials

that the       i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d w i l l b e used t o      their

disadvantage.            T h i s is e s p e c i a l l y    t r u e of e l e c t e d    officials

w h o need t o b e r e - e l e c t e d      to   survive.

   We think that the trend                  in p r o v i d i n g d a t a w i l l       increase

d u e t o "open r e c o r d s " laws w h i c h m a n y s t a t e s h a v e n o w              passed.

M o s t of t h e s e laws r e q u i r e that d a t a            (with s o m e      exceptions)

m a i n t a i n e d b y local g o v e r n m e n t s m u s t , u n d e r p e n a l t y of        law

(fine and       imprisonment),            be made available to any                     requestor

w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e t i m e at n e x t t o n o c o s t .         In t h e c a s e       of

the laws governing the governments of our state    (Wisconsin),

the open records law states exactly that,    it provides a fine

up to §10,000 against the individual    (not the City) for non

compliance.   All that can be charged a requestor is basically

the copying and/or computer run cost.

  To summarize, large local governments have done little in

the two way exchange of information between themselves and the

public,   in fact, they seem to resist doing so.   There will

probably b e a change in this attitude in the near future   due

to the passage of open records laws requiring this    information


                                                                        Schedule A

   Local G o v e r n m e n t s R e s p o n d i n g   to t h e M I X   Survey

                                                     1976               1984

Albuquerque,            NM                            X

Alexandria County, VA                                                    X

Allegheny      County,             PA                                    X

A l l e n County,        IN                           X                  X

Anne Arundel County, MD                               x                  x

Arlington County, VA                                                     X

Arlington,         TX                                                    X

Atlanta, GA                                           X

Austin, TX                                            X

Broward County,               FL                      x                  x

Calgary, Alberta,                  Canada                                X

Chicago,      IL                                      X

Clark County, NV                                                         X

Cook County,            IL                            X

Corpus Christi,               TX                                         X

D a d e County,         FL                            X                  x

Dallas, TX

Dallas Count;/, TX

DeKalb County,          GA

Denver City/County,            CO

Des Moines,     IA

Douglas County,           OR

DuPage County,          IL

Fairfax County, V A

Fort Worth, TX

Fulton County, GA

Harris County,          TX

Hennepin County, MN

Honolulu,     HI

Indianapolis,        IN

J a c k s o n County, M D

Johnson County,           KS

Kane County,       IL

Kansas City, MO

King County, W A

Lake County,        IL

Lane County,        OR

Long Beach,        CA

Los Angeles,         CA

Los A n g e l e s County,      CA

Milwaukee,      WI

M i l w a u k e e County, WI

 Monroe   County,NY
Montgomery County, MD                                X        X

Nashville, TN                                        X

New Orleans,          LA                                      X

Oakland      County, MI                                       X

Orange County,             NY                                 X

Philadelphia,           PA                                    X

Portland       City/City,            OR              X

Prince Georges County, MD                            X

St. L o u i s , M O                                  X

Salt L a k e City, U T                               X

San A n t o n i o W a t e r Board, TX                X

San B e r n a d i n o C o u n t y ,       CA         X

San D i e g o C o u n t y ,     CA                   X

San F r a n c i s c o C i t y / C o u n t y ,   CA   X        X

Santa Clara County,                  CA              X

Tarrant County, TX                                   X

Southeastern Wis Reg Planning                                 X

Wichita       Falls, TX                                   X    X

Wyandotte County, TX                                 X         _

                     TOTAL                           40       35

                                                                Schedule B

                         Listing of Local   Governments

                             in Milwaukee   County

  There are 44 government agencies in M i l w a u k e e County w h i c h

are deemed independent agencies, either in t e r m s of t h e i r

authority to levy property taxes or having              autonomous

jurisdiction over a certain field           (housing,    redevelopment,

etc.)<     These agencies may be categorized as           follows:

         Municipalities—19                    School     Boards—18

         Bayside                              Brown Deer

         Brown    Deer                        Cudahy

         Cudahy                               Fox    Point-Bayside

         Fox Point                            Franklin

         Franklin                             Glendale-River     Hills

         Glendale                             Greendale

         Greendale                            Greenfield

         Greenfield                           Maple Dale-Indian       School

         Hales    Corners                     Milwaukee

         Milwaukee                            Nicolet High     School

         Oak Creek                            Oak    Creek-Franklin

         River Hills                           St.   Francis

         St.   Francis                         Shorewood

Shorewood                                   South M i l w a u k e e

South M i l w a u k e e                     Wauwatosa

Wauwatosa                                   West Allis-West           Milwaukee

West A l l i s                              Whitefish      Bay

West    Milwaukee                           Whitnall

Whitefish        Bay


       . M i l w a u k e e Area Technical    College

       . Milwaukee        (City) Housing     Authority

       . Milwaukee        (City) MECCA   (Convention)         Board

       . Milwaukee        (City) Redevelopment        Authority

       . M i l w a u k e e County Federated Library         System

       . M i l w a u k e e Metropolitan Sewerage        District

       . M i l w a u k e e Social Development      Commission

                                                     Schedule C

                    Applications            MIX M e m b e r s

                           p e r the 1984 Survey


    Appeals    Scheduling                       Value Change N o t i c e

    Assessment     Calculation                  Veteran         Exemption

    Assessment     Records                       Senior Citizen         Exemption

    Assessment     Roll                          Vacant Land        Evaluation

    Auto Assessment                              Pers. Prop. Tax         Billing

    Auto   Licenses                              Pers. Prop.        Collection

    Boat Master Record                           Appraisal        Scheduling

    Computer Reappraisal                         Mapping

    Homestead     Exemption                      Aircraft M a s t e r    Schedule

    Master Property        Record                Livestock

    Ownership     Index                          Businesses

    Parcel History        Index                  Mobile Homes

    Regression A n a l y s i s -                 Campers

    Sales Ratio                                  Board of Review

    Situs A d d r e s s   Index                  Farmland        Assessment

    Special Assessment            Bill           Real Property        Sales

    Special Assessment            Remit           Computer Assisted

                                                      Non Real      Estate


      Accounts       Payable                    Budget     Preparation

      Appropriation          Accounting         Business      Licenses

      Bank Accounting                           Check    Reconciliation

      Bond Coupon         Redemption            Evaluate Tax R a t e

      Budget      Accounting                    Excise Tax R a t e

      Financial        Report                   Purchase Order             Prep.

      General      Ledger                       Revenue      Accounting

      Jury Duty        Payroll                  Trust    Accounting

      Payroll                                   Warrants        Reconciliation

      Personal       Property                   Welfare      Reconciliation

      Property       Inventory                  Investment          Analysis

      Fund    Accounting                        Treasurer's          Investments

      Inventory        Management               Treasurer's Daily             Cash

      Fixed A s s e t     Accounting            Cash M a n a g e m e n t

      Debt    Management                        Pensions        Management

Tax   Collector

      Delinquent         Notices                Tax   Payments

      Motor Vehicle                             Tax R e c o r d s    Maintenance

      Parcel      Inquiry                       Tax R o l l s

      Tax A p p r o p r i a t i o n s           Tax S a l e s

      Tax    Bills                              Tax Sale R e d e m p t i o n s

      Tax    Distribution                       Tax Delinq.          Processing

      Tax E x e m p t i o n s                   Tax Delinq.          Inquiries


    Airline     Statistics                    Parking      Control

    Budget                                    Fixed A s s e t s

    Concession       Billing                  Security ID & Badging

    Labor    Distribution                     Project      Control

    Landing     Fees                          Inventory      Management

    Revenue/Expenses                          Payroll

    Water/Steam        Billing                Automated       Fuel

    Lease    Arrangements                     A i r Line    Schedules

    Parking     Revenue

Election    Commissioner

    Alphabetic       Index                    Voter    Registration

    Ballot     Preparation                    Street    Index

    Election Judges          Payroll          Poll    Lists

    Election Inspectors             Payroll   A b s e n t e e Ballot   Count

    Election      Returns                     Poll Worker         Selection

    Mailing      Labels                       Civic    Census

    Polling Place Rental                      Automated       Voting

    Purge N o t i f i c a t i o n             Registration         Notices


    Child    Support                         Dog    Licenses

    Court    Index                           Fictitious N a m e s

    Financial     Statements                 Lien    Index

    Grantor/Grantee          Index           Marriage     Licenses

    Misc. Instrument          Index          Maps

    Special    Assessments                   Official     Records

    IRS   Liens                              Judgment     Docket

    Births & Deaths                          State W a r r a n t s

    Estate Index       System                Mortgagor/Mortgagee      Index

    Unpaid Tax       Liens                   County Clerk Acc Rec

    Bartenders       Licenses                Various     Licenses

    Liquor    Licenses


    Court    Trustee                         Jail    Docketing

    Dockets                                  Jury    Lists

    Financial     Accounting                 Jury    Selection

    Parking    Tickets                       Scheduling

    Plaintiff/Defendant                      Statistics

    Probation Case History                   Traffic     Violations

    Subpoenas                                Officer     Notification

    Calendars                                Dismissal       List

    Garnishments                             State    Reporting

    Judicial      Management                 Small    Claims

   Probate Court        Index             Juvenile      History

   Civil     Cases                        Commitments

Geographic Base File

    Abandon Vehicles                      Land U s e

    Citizen    Survey                     Law Enforcement

    Computer Assisted       Assessment    Planning

    Economic Activity                     Precinct/District            Reval.

    Environmental       Protection        Roads & H i g h w a y s

    Fire Station       Location           W a t e r Utility

    Health                                Graphics

    Census                                Share-a-Fare

    Address    Verification               Traffic      Accidents

    Tree    Inventory                     Hydrant      Inventory

    Inspections/Code       Enforce.       Sign    Inventory

    Street    Inventory                   R e f u s e Bag     Collection

    Pupil    Placement                    Fingerprint         Matching

    Voter     Registration


    Capital     Improvements               Land U s e

    Census     Statistics                  Real E s t a t e    Development

    Housing     Survey                     Zoning Ord.         Notification

    V a c a n t Land   Development         A v a i l a b l e Indust.   Sites

    Traffic Analysis                       Water Use


    Aging                                     Air Quality

    Vital    Statistics                       Chest    X-ray

    Clinic Patient          Billing           Clinic    Scheduling

    C o m m u n i c a b l e Disease           Environmental      Health

    Facility      Licensing                   Food Handling      Permits

    Ground Drinking          Water            Health    Education

    Hypertension        Screening             Lead Poisoning       Stats

    Mental     Health                         Nursing    Stats

    Nursing     System                        Patient    Registry

    Sanitation       Inspection               Social    Services

    Vaccination        Stats                  Venereal    Disease

    Lab System                                Family    Planning

    Microfilm       Index                     Dental    Care


    Accounts      Payable                     Drug/Food    Inventory

    Admissions/Dismissals                     Labor C o s t s

    Aged Trial       Balance                  Lab System

    Billing/Billing          Inquiry          Medicaid    Billing

    Census Report                             Medical    Records
    Chart     Location                        Medicare    Billing
    Personnel       Payroll                   Pharmacy
    Personnel T r a n s f e r Report          Planned    Parenthood

   Property     Inventory                    Supplies     Inventory

   Radiology                                 Supplies     Requisitions

   Time & Attendance                         Accounts Rec

    Delinquent      Accounts                 Purchasing

    Physician's      Orders


    Book   Catalogue                         Circulation

    Book   Inventory                         Film    Catalogue

    Book Requisitions                        Newspaper Subject              Index

    Periodical      Catalogue                Phonograph        Records

    Statistics                               General Info           System

    Public Access


    Accounts       Payable                    Dependence       Checkwriting

    Aid Payment       History                 Domestic      Relations

    Aid Payment           Register            Eligibility           Lists

    Boarding M o t h e r s                    Food    Stamps

    C a s e Data                              V o u c h e r s and    Register

                                              Welfare I D
     Case R e c o r d s
                                              Overissue       Claims
     Client    Index
                                              Support      Checkwriting
     Low Income Energy Assist
                                              Work Order        System
     Accounts      Receivable

Law   Enforcement

      Accident    Statistics                   Field    Contacts

      Bicycle    Registration                  Fire Incident             Reporting

      Book/In    Custody                       Fire    Inspection

      Civil   Index                            Forensic      Lab

      Complaints                               I D Reports

      Computer Aided        Dispatch           Jail A r r e s t s

      Criminal    Abstracts
                                               Juvenile      Statistics
      Court Case Daily Reports
                                               Law Enforcement             Index
      Daily Activity        Reports
                                               Moving     Violations
      Dispatch Data R e p o r t s
                                               Parking      Violations
      Event/Incident        Reporting
      Police Info N e t w o r k
                                               Probation       Reports
      Police W o r k   Schedule
                                               Property       Reporting.
      U n i f o r m Crime Reporting
                                               Vehicle      Registration
      W a n t s ?Warrants
                                               Gun R e g i s t r a t i o n
      Civil     Processing
                                               Wanted      Vehicles
      A d u l t Detention     Center
                                               Fire Training
      Inmate     Accounting
                                               Automated        Fuel
      Vehicle     Maintenance
                                                Fingerprint          Matching
      Automated Worthless         Checks
                                                C o m m u n i c a t i o n s Gear Inv


      Criminal     Index                        Delinquent Child                Support

       Defendant      Index                     Case Load       Tracking

       Divorce    Index                         V e h i c l e Boot       List

    DWI Tracking                            Prisoner Jail        Booking

    Felony    Tracking                      PROMTS


    Civil Service       Status              Fringe    Benefits

    Equal Employment          Opportunity   Insurance

    Efficiency       Rating                 Manpower/CETA

    Employee       Profile                  Payroll

    Position       Allocation               Personnel       Records

    Retirement       Reports                Test    Analysis

    Salary    Survey                        Test     Scoring

    Vacation/Sick       Time                Position        Control

    Applicant       Tracking                Time Reporting

    Workman's       Compensation            Employee        Benefits

    R i s k Management

Public W o r k s

     Bid Estimate Averaging                  Flood    Control

     Budget    Reports                       Automated        Fuel

     Building      Permits                   Fuel U s a g e

     Car Pool                                Land Fill        Info.

     Contract       Estimates                Consumables        Inventory

     Job/Cost       Accounting               Pollution        Control

      Engineering      Design/Calc.          Road     Design

      Equipment      Reporting               Road     Log

    Sewer    Network                        Water/Sewer        Billing

    Sewer    Permits                        Water/Sewer        Collection

    Solid W a s t e     Analysis            Waste    Billing

   Traffic     Assignment                   Waste    Collection

   T r a f f i c Light    Control           Building      Inspections

   T r a f f i c Load    Stats.             Bldg. Inspect.           Violations

   Traffic Volume                           Sign    Inventory

   Vehicle Maintenance             System   Sanitation       Liens

    Sign    Inventory                       Street     Inventory

   Road M a r k e r     Inventory           Road Life Study

    Landfill     Billing                    Parking M e t e r        Inventory

    Sewer Flow A n a l y s i s              W a t e r Flow A n a l y s i s

    Street Light         Inventory          Street Light         Distribution


    Fleet    Management                     Hired     Trucks/Equip.

    Fleet    Maintenance                    A u t o m a t e d Fuel    Disp.

    Motor Vehicle         Parts             Equipment       Billing


Shared By: