Get documents about "II. PROJECT MANAGEMENT WORK STREAM
Document Sample
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
II. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
WORK STREAM
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
II. Project Management Work Stream
II.A Project Plan and Implementation Schedule
II.A.1 Project Plan Overview
The project plan is structured at the highest level by phase, followed by work stream within the phase, and
finally by major activities within the work stream. As shown in Exhibit II-1, work streams align with the
project’s organizational structure to facilitate reporting and clearly define responsibilities.
Exhibit II-1
FLAIR/CMS Project Overview
Page II–1
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
To reach an understanding and agreement across all lead positions, BearingPoint, in conjunction with
State resources at all levels within the Project Management team, will review the overall plan early in the
Mobilization phase. During this review and planning phase, BearingPoint will work with the State to
create a detailed plan for the Requirements Confirmation phase. This phased, rolling-planning horizon
concept provides the level of detail needed to manage the near term and gives guidance and timelines for
the long term.
During each phase, the project administration function of the Project Management team will be
responsible for updating the project plan weekly to reflect the end-of-week status. With support from
team leaders, project administrators will gather and input data from status meetings and from the various
tracking tools used in the project. Weekly project plan updates allow all work streams to report at the
same time so that any deviations from the plan can be prepared before the next weekly status meeting.
Project administrators also will provide detailed tracking information for the status reports.
II.A.2 Project Plan Phases
The project plan is divided into six major phases: Mobilization, Requirements Confirmation,
Configuration, Implementation, Agency Rollout, and Post-Implementation Support. Activities within
each phase are described in more detail in the Activities by Phase section of each work stream.
Mobilization: September 2, 2003, to October 15, 2003
This phase focuses on establishing the project team, the team’s working environment, and the project
procedures. To accelerate the project and allow more time for the Configuration phase, BearingPoint
reduced the duration of this phase from 8 weeks to 6 weeks, in part by leveraging the information gained
from the Discovery period.
Requirements Confirmation: October 1, 2003, to January 30, 2004
The major tasks in this phase involve gathering and confirming detailed requirements through workshops,
leading ultimately to the creation of a To-Be design document that provides the framework for the
Configuration phase. Due to the number of interfaces and the information gathered in the Discovery
period, we have reduced the duration of this phase by about 4 weeks. In addition, activities that typically
would have been conducted in the Configuration phase will begin in this phase after we create the
specifications for certain development objects. Similar activities on data conversion will also begin during
this phase. (see Section V.D.b for more details on early data conversion activities)
Page II–2
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Configuration: January 1, 2004, to October 15, 2004
The majority of the configuration, development, and project team knowledge transfer will take place in
this phase. During this phase, configuration guides will be created, the Conference Room Pilots (CRP’s)
will be conducted where system will be configured. The customizations will be developed and cross-
functional integration tests will be conducted. The training plan and curriculum will be developed. We
also begin planning for system testing and acceptance testing, conducted as part of the Implementation
phase.
Implementation: October 18, 2004, to February 1, 2005
System and Acceptance testing are the major activity of this phase. This phase runs concurrent with the
early stages of the initial Agencies end user training and is distinguished by its focus on the overall
solution rather than on agency-specific activities.
Agency Rollout: December 1, 2004, to August 1, 2005
The Agency Rollout phase is divided into a three wave implementation. A wave encompasses all the
deployment, cutover, and support activities specific to that particular wave. Each wave within the Agency
Rollout phase begins with the start of end-user training, typically eight weeks prior to go-live and finishes
30 days after the go-live date.
Post Implementation Support: April 1, 2005, to September 30, 2006
Post-implementation support begins two months after each agency cutover, throughout the warranty
period including the FY 2006 financial close. At this point in time the agency has been through training,
cutover activities, and intensified post-cutover support (e.g. SWAT teams – see Section III for additional
details). Users will have achieved a base level of comfort with the system and most questions will be
capable of being addressed through normal support channels.
II.A.3 Work Streams
The project plan is structured within each phase by the following work streams (see detailed descriptions
of work streams in Section I.B. Description of Approach to Solution Definition):
Project Management
Application Software
Change Management
Technical
Page II–3
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
The activities within the project will be managed within one of the work streams (see Exhibit II-2). For
cross-functional activities involving multiple teams, one team will be assigned overall responsibility, and
resources from other teams will be assigned to support activities outside the responsible team’s work
stream. The following chart describes how Bearingpoint manages the tasks as defined in the project plan.
Exhibit II-2
Work Stream Breakdown by Project Team
Project Management
Group
Project Management
Functional Change Management
Technical Group
Implementation Group Group
Technical Application Software Change Management
Development Team Enterprise Team Communications and
Development Enterprise Processes User Support Team
Communications
Enterprise Integration Team Agency Team Help Desk and User
Enterprise Integration Non-Enterprise Processes Support
Enterprise-Wide Change
Technical Implementation Team Planning and Alignment
Technical
Agency Implementation
Support Team
Major workstream Agency Implementation
Support
Sub-workstream
Knowledge Transfer Team
GRAPHIC FL-FLAIR BAFO 5/03 Knowledge Transfer
II.A.4 Implementation Strategy Overview
BearingPoint has developed the following approach based upon discussions with the State during
Discovery. However, as with any complex implementation, there are trade-offs and nuances that need to
be calculated and understood before an implementation strategy can be finalized. Once the
implementation project is under-way, we recommend key members of the combined project team meet,
analyze these factors, and thereby either confirm this approach or refine it to reflect greater
understanding. We have built flexibility into our project plan – so long as the first agency cutover is
scheduled no sooner than February 1, 2004 and the final cutover is scheduled no later than July 1, 2005,
there are many options that could be evaluated. In addition, we have included an option in the appendix
section VI.D to defer the first Wave until July 1st, 2005.
Page II–4
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
New FLAIR will be implemented in three waves, starting with the first wave on February 1, 2005, and
finishing with the final wave by July 1, 2005. The second wave will be deployed three months after the
first wave with the final wave being deployed two months after the second wave.
The timing allows for:
Additional time for the users in wave 1 to become comfortable with the system
Additional functional training
Exhibit II-3 illustrates the high-level dates and milestones.
Exhibit II-3
High-Level Dates and Milestones
Waves 1 and 2 will be deployed using the new FLAIR system as the transaction system, allowing for
entry of online transactions, while interfacing the data back to the old FLAIR system. The old FLAIR
system will continue to feed all transaction data to the existing IW. The number of online transactions
performed in the Waves 1 and 2 in new FLAIR will therefore vary by agency depending on the agency’s
current online transaction processing capabilities. Existing batch transactions from the agencies will
continue to feed into the old FLAIR system until Wave 3 is deployed.
To support transmission of the transaction data from new FLAIR to old FLAIR mapping tables will be
created to translate the old FLAIR codes to the new FLAIR codes. The new FLAIR coding will also be
validated in new FLAIR, allowing only valid entries of new FLAIR coding.
Page II–5
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-4
FLAIR/CMS Replacement Approach for Waves 1 and 2
Online data entry
Agency
Batch
Batch processing
processing
New System FLAIR IW
Batch
Enter new coding Daily transactions processing Batch
converted to FLAIR processing
transactions GRAPHIC FL-FLAIR BAFO 5/03
FLAIR Payroll
Old FLAIR will remain the book of record for all financial reporting for agencies in Waves 1 and 2 until
the Wave 3 go-live, when all agencies will use new FLAIR for reporting. To avoid timely and costly
reconciliation of new FLAIR to old FLAIR, as part of Wave 3 cutover, the Functional team will assess
transactional data entered into the new FLAIR system as part of Waves 1 through 3 to determine whether
the data reconciles to old FLAIR. Working with the State, we will determine which transactions in new
FLAIR from previous waves should be maintained (such as Grants). The remaining transactions will be
deleted from new FLAIR. The objective is to prepare new FLAIR to be the book of record without the
system being impacted by inaccurate data entered while old FLAIR was still the book of record. A
technical unofficial year end will be conducted in new FLAIR July 2005, with the first full official year
end close on new FLAIR beginning July 2006. Wave 3 will also include the following new functionality:
A new Enterprise Warehouse (EPM)
Treasury and Year-End Processing
BearingPoint understands that the timing of the interfaces to MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP) and
BaselineSoftwareFirst might need to be moved into a later wave. We look forward to working with State
as part of the proposed implementation strategy meeting to determine the appropriate time to implement
these interfaces. By taking into account various factors such as staff, user impact, project plan impact, and
risk impact, as well as the status of those major projects, an appropriate decision on timing can be made.
If the implementation strategy is modified so that MFMP and BaselineSoftwareFirst interfaces are moved
into a later Wave this could have a ripple effect upon the staffing plan and deliverable timing.
BearingPoint will work with the State during the planning process early in the project to determine which
agencies participate in each wave. One of the key assumptions is one large agency will be included in
Page II–6
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
each wave. The determination of which agencies will be included in the waves also depends on other
factors such as impact upon interfaces, agency readiness and size of the agency.
II.B Roles, Responsibilities, and Resources
II.B.1 Project Organization Chart
Exhibit II-5 presents our proposed project organization from the perspective of project management and
integration with external oversight groups.
Exhibit II-5
Project Organization Chart: Management
Oversight
Board of Directors Technology Review Workgroup
and Special Project Monitor
Project Management Team
State Project Director BearingPoint
Project Advisory Team
BearingPoint
Subject Matter Experts
Project Management
Ad visory Group (PMAG)
Special Assistant to
GRAPHIC FL-FLAIR BAFO 5/03
Project Director
Project Management Office Interagency WorkGroup
Functional Implementation Organizational Change Management
Technical Group
Group Group
Exhibit II-6 presents from the perspective of Organizational Roles and Responsibilities.
Page II–7
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-6
Organizational Roles and Responsibilities
Project Management Office
Functional Implementation Change Management
Technical Group
Group Group
Development Team Functional Team Communications and User
Modifications—coding and Support Team
testing ERP software configuration Project communications
Reports development options campaigns
Data conversions—develop, Central and agency issues Ongoing project
test, implement Acceptance testing communications
Interfaces Central policy and procedures Project portal and web site
changes Help desk
Enterprise Integration Team Fit analysis
Network facilities Agency Implementation
Technical environments Enterprise Oversight Team Support Team
Software installation and Agency implementation
maintenance Finance/Budget/HR approach
Non-SAP systems software AR/Treasury/Cash Implementation guide and aids
Integration Management Agency readiness assessment
Reporting infrastructure Data Warehouse Guidance to agency
Disaster recovery implementation coordinators
Printing Agency implementation
Security Agency Oversight Team monitoring
Agency policy and procedure
Procurement/Accounts changes
Technical Implementation Payable
Team Fixed Assets / Controlling / Knowledge Transfer Team
Site survey Grants/ Projects Training needs assessment
Hardware/configuration Training delivery
management Training curriculum
Agency hardware upgrades Training delivery
Performance tuning
Production capacity
requirements
DBA
II.B.2 Project Organization Description
As illustrated in Exhibit II-5 and Exhibit II-6, our proposed project organization aligns our team as
closely as possible with the State’s requirements. This facilitates effective project management,
communications, and accountability. A second objective of our proposed structure is to incorporate
lessons learned and leading practices from our other successful enterprise-wide ERP implementations. In
the majority of cases we have matched a BearingPoint lead with a State lead as shown in Exhibit II-26
Page II–8
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Section II.C.3. As shown in the Exhibit II-6 the Enterprise Oversight Team and Agency Oversight Team
(both reporting into the Functional Implementation Group) facilitate an integrated process focus between
shared activities belonging primarily to the Enterprise and the Agencies respectively. This virtual
organization helps Agencies to participate actively in the design of the process.
BearingPoint has proposed a number of changes relating to the structure presented during Discovery.
Where we have changed responsibilities within a team, we are not intending to imply organizational
changes within the Department – these are just the recommended ways to structure the project work.
These changes and the rationale behind them are captured in Exhibit II-7.
Exhibit II-7
Summary of Changes From ITN/Discovery Documentation
Area Description of Change Rationale
Project Functional Implementation Group: The team members will focus on understanding the
Organizational Oversight Functions team and Agency functionality in a number of areas to provide subject
Team Structure Functions team are combined into one matter expertise. BearingPoint believes this is best
team. achieved by structuring the team by
functionality/process rather than by segregating it by
agency/central.
Project Functional Implementation Group: Typically, the Security team is an integral part of the
Organizational Security responsibilities moved to the Technical team. The Functional team, in conjunction
Team Structure Technical Implementation team. with the Change Management team identifies,
develops, and support the State in mapping the roles.
The Security team, as part of the Technical team,
inputs and maintains the security.
Project Technical Group—Development team: The skill sets required to install and maintain the
Organizational Software installation and software are closely aligned to the skill sets required
Team Structure maintenance moved to the for the functions covered under the Enterprise
Technical Implementation team Integration team.
Interfaces added Interfaces coding has been moved to the Development
team to align and focus the coding skills within a single
sub-team.
Project Technical Group—Enterprise The skill set required for software installation is closely
Organizational Integration team aligned with the skills performed by the members of
Team Structure Software installation and the Enterprise Integration team.
maintenance added See above for Security
Security added
Project Team Functional Implementation team: The The State-staffing levels on the Functional
Staffing number of Florida State resources in Implementation team have been increased beyond the
this area increases. initial 10 identified by the State in Discovery.
Knowledge transfer is a critical aspect of the project.
Given the number of State resources, the activities and
responsibilities, and the expectation of these
resources, having only 10 resources represented a
Page II–9
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Area Description of Change Rationale
significant risk to the project.
Rollout The schedule has been changed from a The timings of the rollouts have been changed to
Schedule wave rolling out every 3 months to a reflect the revised implementation strategy due to the
staggered 3-months, 2-months delay in the project start and allow adequate time for
approach. the application contractor and State to test the
solution.
Implementation The implementation strategy has been This approach was based upon our reading of the best
Strategy changed to reflect that New FLAIR is balance between cost, risk, and impact upon the
the book of record and that Treasury various groups (IT and users). However, we do
functionality is unavailable until the final believe that reviewing and refining this strategy, in
wave. conjunction with the State, will improve it.
II.B.3 Application Contractor
This section highlights the roles and responsibilities of key members of the BearingPoint team identified
in our project organization chart. Each of the leaders described in this section have significant, relevant
project experience and the skills necessary to lead a project of this magnitude. In addition, the
BearingPoint team can draw on hundreds of resources to fill positions at the staff level. The appropriate
resources will be available to make this project a success.
BearingPoint Roles and Responsibilities
Exhibit II-8 identifies our representatives in the project organization structure.
Exhibit II-8
BearingPoint Representation in the Management and Oversight Structure
Project
Organization BearingPoint Team
Structure BearingPoint’s Role Representation
Board of Directors An executive vice president will serve as BearingPoint’s No Formal Representation
Executive Sponsor for this project. He will communicate with
CFO regularly, and together they will provide executive
guidance and sponsorship for the project.
Page II–10
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Project
Organization BearingPoint Team
Structure BearingPoint’s Role Representation
Project Management The Project Management team will advise and support the Mark Breton and Rusty
Team State Project Director. In addition to the Project Manager, Greer
BearingPoint will have a key executive on this team. This
person will have overall responsibility for the success of the
project, working with the BearingPoint Project Management
team to coordinate resources and manage issues and risks in
a timely and effective manner.
BearingPoint Project The BearingPoint Project Advisory team will bring senior-level John DiRenzo, Rodger
Advisory Team resources from BearingPoint and our subcontractors to Ceritelli, Tami Perriello,
support the Board of Directors and the State’s Project Marty Goldberg, Robby
Management Office (PMO) in monitoring project progress Hansborough, and Tom
and to address functional, technical, resource, change Lynch
management, and risk issues.
BearingPoint Subject These resources will be leveraged at key decision points H.T. Vaught, John Gearhart,
Matter Experts during the project to provide leading practice guidance and and Dave Dennis
support from a State financial and audit perspective. The
identified resources have significant experience in multiple
State accounting systems and augment the team especially
during the process design activities.
Project Management The BearingPoint team proposes to have two of its members Rusty Greer and Vlad Soran
Office serve in the PMO. Two senior experienced project managers
facilitate effective communications at the leadership level of
the project, thereby reducing risk
The BearingPoint team’s Project Manager will be responsible
for overall management of the BearingPoint project team. He
will serve as the primary liaison between the State Project
Director, the independent Project Manager, and the
BearingPoint team. Internally he will focus his efforts on the
BearingPoint PMO and Change Management Teams
The BearingPoint Deputy Project Manager will be responsible
for the functional and technical integration of the project
team. He will work directly with the Independent Project
Manager and the State’s functional and technical group
managers to drive the successful process design,
configuration, and implementation of the solution.
Technical Group The Technical lead will work with his State counterpart to TBD
manage the Technical team. They will lead the Development,
Enterprise Integration, and Technical teams.
Functional The Functional Implementation lead will work with her State TBD
Implementation counterpart to manage the Functional Implementation team.
Group They will lead the team in the design, configuration, and
implementation of the solution.
Change The Change Management lead will work with the State Susan Foster
Management Group counterpart to manage the Change Management team. They
will be responsible for the Communications and User
Support, Agency Implementation Support, and Knowledge
Transfer teams.
Page II–11
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Designation of Key Personnel
Exhibit II-9 identifies BearingPoint’s designated key personnel.
Exhibit II-9
BearingPoint’s Key Personnel
Role Key Person % Commitment Organization
Managing Director Mark Breton 33% BearingPoint
Project Manager Rusty Greer 100% BearingPoint
Deputy Project Manager Vlad Soran 100% BearingPoint
Functional Implementation Group Lead TBD 100% TBD
Functional Team Lead TBD 100% TBD
Organizational Change Management Susan Foster 100% BearingPoint
Group Lead
Agency Implementation Support Team Richard Page 100% BearingPoint
Lead
Communications and User Support Team Mary Beth VeRost 100% BearingPoint
Lead
Knowledge Transfer Team Debbie Von Behren 100% VBA
Technical Group Lead TBD 100% TBD
Technical Team Lead Joe Keough 100% IBM
Enterprise Integration Team Lead
Development Team Lead Remard Colston 100% IBM
* Special Project Advisor will depart when Requirements Confirmation is complete.
All individuals identified in Exhibit II-9 have been confirmed for the project, and resumes and references
submitted in accordance with the State’s instructions.
Other Resource Commitments
Executive Sponsors
Ron Saluzzo, Executive Vice President for State and Local Government, will serve as BearingPoint’s
Executive Sponsor for this project. He will communicate with CFO Gallagher regularly, and support Mr.
Gallagher in providing executive guidance and sponsorship for the project.
Page II–12
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Subject Matter Experts
BearingPoint’s H.T. Vaught will be available part time to support the project, leveraging his extensive
knowledge of, and experience implementing, State financial leading practices. He has gained from direct
involvement in other similar financial business transformations, such as those in Michigan, California,
Maryland, and Hawaii.
KPMG LLP’s local partner Dave Dennis will also be part of this team, providing leading audit practices
essential in transforming policies and procedures for the State of Florida. These subject matter experts
will be consulted at key decision points during the project to provide guidance and support.
Project Management Office
Within the Project Management Office (PMO) is a separate quality assurance (QA) manager, reflecting
the critical role QA plays throughout the project. Claude Begin will serve in this position. By separating
QA (which includes testing oversight as a critical function), we emphasize the independent nature of this
role. The QA Manager will act as our internal oversight manager. Exhibit II-10 presents our staffing
resources.
Exhibit II-10
Bearing Point Staffing Resources
BearingPoint
Baseline BearingPoint
BearingPoint Software
Project Resource Full Time /
Resources Provider Part Time
Experience
Program Director 1 Yes Part Time
Project Manager 1 No Full Time
Deputy Project Manager 1 Yes Full Time
Testing/Integration Manager 1 No Full Time
Program Administrators/MS Project 2 No Full Time
Internal SME 1 No Part Time
External SME 1 No Part Time
Tools Technical Support 1 No Full Time
Central Implementation Team Manager 1 Yes Full Time
Core Financials Team Lead 1 Yes Full Time
Business Transformation (Baseline Yes Full Time
4
Software)
Page II–13
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
BearingPoint
Baseline BearingPoint
BearingPoint Software
Project Resource Full Time /
Resources Provider Part Time
Experience
GASB 34 SME 1 No Part Time
Finance/General Ledger/Special Purpose Yes Full Time
3
Ledger
Grants /Projects/Contracts 6 Yes Full Time
Accounts Payable/Procurement 3 Yes Full Time
Accounts Receivable /Billing 2 Yes Full Time
Treasury 2 Yes Full Time
Asset Management 2 Yes Full Time
Purchasing 3 Yes Full Time
Workflow 3 Yes Full Time
EPM 6 Yes Full Time
Testing Analysts 6 Yes Full Time
Organization Change Management/Training Yes Full Time
1
Manager
User Support and Change Management Yes Full Time
1
Lead
Business Transformation Resources 4 Yes Full Time
Help Desk Advisor 2 No Full Time
Communications Lead 1 No Full Time
Internal OCM SME 1 Yes Full Time
Lead Trainer 1 No Full Time
Training Deployment Logistics 1 No Full Time
Train the Trainer 1 Yes Full Time
Training Developer 10 Yes Full Time
Trainer (Baseline Software Provider Yes Full Time
8
experienced)
Baseline Software Provider Training Yes Full Time
2
Specialist
Agency Implementation Support Lead 1 No Full Time
Agency Outreach 14 Yes Full Time
Central Agency Outreach 1 Yes Full Time
Workforce Transition 2 No Full Time
Technical Team Manager 1 Yes Full Time
Enterprise Architect 1 Yes Full Time
Baseline Software Provider Architect 1 Yes Full Time
Page II–14
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
BearingPoint
Baseline BearingPoint
BearingPoint Software
Project Resource Full Time /
Resources Provider Part Time
Experience
Unix/Oracle 2 Yes Full Time
DBA 2 Yes Full Time
Security Administrator 1 Yes Full Time
EPM/Portal Admin 2 Yes Full Time
Application Development Lead 1 Yes Full Time
Conversion Lead 1 Yes Full Time
Interfaces Lead 1 Yes Full Time
Online Lead 1 Yes Full Time
Reports Lead 1 Yes Full Time
Developers 4 Yes Full Time
Onsite Developers 3 Yes Full Time
Offsite Developers (India) 18 Yes Full Time
The following tables provide information about both BearingPoint and State resources by month.
Page II–15
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-11 A
Nov-03
Nov-04
Nov-05
Sep-03
Sep-04
Sep-05
OCt-05
Dec-03
Dec-04
State FTEs
Feb-04
Mar-04
Jun-04
Feb-05
Mar-05
Jun-05
Jan-04
Apr-04
Jan-05
Apr-05
Oct-03
Oct-04
Jul-04
Jul-05
May-
Aug-
May-
Aug-
04
04
05
05
Project Management 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
Organizational Change 7.00 7.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 37.00 39.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00 44.00
Management
Functional Group 1.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 27.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00 22.00
Technical 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00 17.00
Total 32.00 53.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 78.00 83.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00
Nov-03
Nov-04
Nov-05
Sep-03
Sep-04
Sep-05
OCt-05
Dec-03
Dec-04
BearingPoint FTEs
Feb-04
Mar-04
Jun-04
Feb-05
Mar-05
Jun-05
Jan-04
Apr-04
Jan-05
Apr-05
Oct-03
Oct-04
Jul-04
Jul-05
May-
Aug-
May-
Aug-
04
04
05
05
Project Management 5.08 6.71 6.68 6.68 6.68 6.28 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 6.08 5.08 5.08 5.08 5.08 4.08 3.33 1.50 1.50 1.50
Organizational Change 4.63 6.88 14.75 17.45 17.05 12.88 26.50 37.75 38.00 38.00 40.00 41.00 45.00 48.00 46.00 46.00 43.00 35.50 29.00 26.00 26.00 19.00 14.50 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
Management
Functional Group 2.00 17.00 17.00 23.00 29.00 32.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 29.00 28.00 26.00 26.00 24.00 24.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 8.50 2.00 0.00 0.00
Technical 7.00 15.50 15.00 26.50 33.50 39.00 39.00 39.50 39.00 46.00 46.50 46.00 45.50 21.50 21.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 5.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
Total 18.71 46.08 53.43 73.63 86.23 90.16 101.58 113.33 113.08 120.08 122.58 122.08 124.58 101.58 99.08 91.08 88.08 79.58 71.08 68.08 68.08 61.08 55.58 20.83 3.50 1.50 1.50
Nov-03
Nov-04
Nov-05
Sep-03
Sep-04
Sep-05
OCt-05
Dec-03
Dec-04
Total FTEs
Feb-04
Mar-04
Jun-04
Feb-05
Mar-05
Jun-05
Jan-04
Apr-04
Jan-05
Apr-05
Oct-03
Oct-04
Jul-04
Jul-05
May-
Aug-
May-
Aug-
04
04
05
05
Project Management 12.08 13.71 13.68 13.68 13.68 13.28 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 12.08 12.08 12.08 12.08 11.08 10.33 8.50 8.50 8.50
Organizational Change 11.63 13.88 46.75 49.45 49.05 44.88 58.50 69.75 70.00 70.00 72.00 78.00 84.00 92.00 90.00 90.00 87.00 79.50 73.00 70.00 70.00 63.00 58.50 47.50 44.00 44.00 44.00
Management
Functional Group 3.00 39.00 39.00 45.00 51.00 54.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 52.00 51.00 55.00 48.00 48.00 46.00 46.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 30.50 24.00 22.00 22.00
Technical 24.00 32.50 32.00 43.50 50.50 56.00 56.00 56.50 56.00 63.00 63.50 63.00 62.50 38.50 38.00 32.00 32.00 32.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 31.00 22.50 17.00 17.00 17.00
Total 50.71 99.08 131.43 151.63 164.23 168.16 179.58 191.33 191.08 198.08 200.58 205.08 214.58 191.58 189.08 181.08 178.08 169.58 161.08 158.08 158.08 151.08 145.58 110.83 93.50 91.50 91.50
Page II–16
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
The Exhibit II-11A also shows the detailed ramp-up schedule for each of the resources.
Exhibit II-11 B
Both State and BearingPoint Resources by each Month.
Resources by Month
250.0
BearingP oint
STATE
200.0
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
Sep- Oct- Nov- D ec - Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- M ay- Jun- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- J un- Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov-
03 03 03 03 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 04 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05 05
The above resource histogram summarizes the data and provides a graphic view of resources by each
month.
II.B.4 State
The BearingPoint team reviewed the steady-state staffing estimates provided by the State and developed a
Project Staffing Plan. Exhibit II-12 presents the allocation of the available State of Florida resources
across key functional and technical disciplines over the course of the project. Some points to note, based
upon direction from the State include:
August 2004 – 5 team members move from the Functional to the Knowledge Transfer Team
July 2004 – 5 additional resources join the project
June 2004 – 5 Help desk resources join the project
September 2003 – AIT team members join the project
Page II–17
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
The following assignments will be reviewed and adjusted in consultation with the Department during
Mobilization. Overall State staffing levels will meet or exceed designated headcount.
Exhibit II-12
State Project Staffing Plan
Group Level September June 2004 July 2004 August
2003 2004
Project 3 3 3 3
Management
4 4 4 4
Total 7 7 7 7
Functional Group 1 1 1 1
Implementation Lead
Staff 21 21 26 21
Total 22 22 27 22
Organizational Group 1 1 1 1
Change Lead
Management
Lead 3 3 3 3
Staff 28 33 35 40
Total 32 37 39 44
Technical Group 1 1 1 1
Lead
Lead 3 3 3 3
Staff 13 13 13 13
Total 17 17 17 17
Overall Total 78 83 90 90
State Roles and Responsibilities
Exhibit II-13 identifies the State’s representatives in the project organization structure.
Page II–18
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-13
State Representation in the Management and Oversight Structure
Project Organization State Team
Structure State Roles Representation
Board of Directors The State’s representatives on the Board of Directors will Various
meet regularly to review the progress to date, work with State
and agency leadership teams to coordinate resources
assigned to the project, and manage issues and risks in a
timely and effective manner. They will also provide the State
Project Director with input on appropriate mitigation actions
and support the FFMIS Coordinating Council as needed.
State Project Director The State’s Project Director will be responsible for the overall Rebecca Sutton
success of the project. She will guide the project and work
closely with the BearingPoint project team to make certain
that the application software is implemented according to the
terms of the contract.
Technology Review Responsible for review and recommending funding. Act as Various
Workgroup the project monitor for the Florida Legislature.
Project Management The State’s representatives on the Project Management team Various
Team will meet regularly to review the progress to date, work with
State and agency leadership teams to coordinate resources
assigned to the project, and manage issues and risks in a
timely and effective manner. They will also provide the State
Project Director with input on appropriate mitigation actions
and support the FFMIS Coordinating Council as needed.
Project Management Advise the project management on ERP and enterprise-wide Various
Advisory Group (PMAG) projects
Special Assistant to Provide subject matter expertise in State of Florida Martin Young
Project Director accounting procedures and leads the State’s compliance
monitoring and quality assurance efforts.
Project Management The State’s Independent Project Manager will be responsible Various
Office for the functional and technical management of the project
team. He will work directly with the BearingPoint project
managers and the State’s functional and technical managers
to drive the successful process design, configuration, and
implementation of the solution.
Interagency Workgroup Liaison with the State Agencies Various
(Advisory)
Technical Group The Technical lead will work with the BearingPoint Charles Ghini
counterpart to manage the Technical team. They will lead the
Development, Enterprise Integration, and Technical teams.
Functional The Functional Implementation lead will work with the Molly Merry
Implementation Group BearingPoint counterpart to manage the Functional
Implementation team. They will lead the Functional team in
the design, configuration, and implementation of the solution.
Page II–19
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Project Organization State Team
Structure State Roles Representation
Organization Change The Change Management lead will work with the Marjorie Bertram
Management Group BearingPoint counterpart to manage the Change
Management team. They will be responsible for the
Communications and User Support, Agency Implementation,
and Knowledge Transfer teams.
Other Resource Commitments
No other resources are committed at this time. Other part-time and team resource requirements will be
discussed with State during Mobilization.
II.B.5 Permanent State Staffing Model
During implementation, BearingPoint team members will perform many of the tasks side-by-side with
State staff. A key objective of the project team will be to complete knowledge transfer and on-the-job
training, preparing State staff to perform post-implementation support activities independently. As a
component of the Knowledge Transfer Plan, BearingPoint will propose a permanent State-staffing model
for the post- implementation support team.
II.B.6 Facilities
To satisfy the State’s facilities requirements, the BearingPoint team has selected the Koger Center to
house and equip the FLAIR/CMS Replacement team. The BearingPoint team will provide a fully
functioning facility and will complete the following:
Negotiate and sign the lease agreement with the Koger Center. The terms of the lease will be 30
months.
Manage tenant improvements and any other build-out activities after the final approvals have
been obtained.
Support the completed facility meeting project team requirements.
Our decision is based on the key ITN requirements, which state that the facility must:
Be located in Tallahassee, Florida. The Koger Center is within a 5-mile radius of the State
complex on Capital Circle and surrounding restaurants and shopping.
Be accessible 24x7.
Page II–20
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Be fully ADA compliant.
Have an available build-out area over 40,000 square feet.
Provide adequate parking for all project team members and guests.
Even more importantly, this space meets the more pressing requirement of being nearly ready to be used.
The length of time from contract signing to space available is very short.
Key Success Factors
The BearingPoint team believes that the following key initiatives are critical to a successful facilities
implementation:
Meet with DFS key stakeholders to review and approve all facilities-related tasks.
Obtain a DFS resource who will act as a facilities manager and as a subject matter expert to the
BearingPoint team during the facilities implementation.
Complete an architectural review with DFS before beginning tenant improvements.
Act quickly so that project timelines are met. The estimated build-out time will be less than 15
days assuming the current configuration is unchanged.
Additional Requirements
The State’s requirement for additional interior amenities will be accommodated during the final build-out
of the Koger Center. These amenities will include but are not limited to:
Secure access to all project team areas using current DFS badge standards (Motorola ASP).
Reception area for incoming visitors.
Four conference/meeting rooms to be used for one-on-one coaching or team meetings. The
conference rooms will be wired for network connectivity.
Three testing/training room to accommodate large meetings, training, and testing. The
testing/training room will be equipped with 30 LAN access points.
Break rooms with vending machines.
One mail room.
Flex space for temporary team members.
Page II–21
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Network/Telephony Infrastructure
The facilities network and voice infrastructure will be completed by DFS technology team. The
BearingPoint team will meet with DFS technology stakeholders to assess the data center
requirements. The data center will be built to DFS specifications.
Equipment Procurement
The State will procure all necessary office and computer equipment through the State Term Contract.
Exhibit II-14 presents an itemized list of facilities requirements and costs that we believe will be needed
to conduct business at the Koger Center. Additions and/or changes to this list will be made during the
refinement period.
Exhibit II-14
Itemized Facilities Requirements and Costs
Estimated Number of Project Team Members Working in Facilities
220
Office Space (in Square Feet)
45,000
* Includes Security, Maintenance, Electric, Water and Janitorial Services.
Insurance requirements will be determined at lease signing, and cost will be
realized at that time
Office Furnishings Quantity
Supplies (stapler, wastebasket, etc.) 220
Office Equipment Stands 7
Break Room Table + 4 Chairs 8
Misc. Hardware (hand truck, cart, step stool, etc.) 1
Waste Baskets for Common Areas (Large) 8
Waste Baskets for Common Areas (Small) 16
Dry-erase Boards (48" x 72") for Conference Rooms 8
Dry-erase Boards (48" x 72") for Testing/Training Room 7
Communications Equipment and Services Quantity
Phone System 1
Handsets (for desks, conference rooms, and testing/training room) 240
Network Drops/Wiring/Wireless Infrastructure 280
Monthly Phone Service (incl. 1-800 lines for Help Desk and LD), Internet 30
Access, and Connectivity to FLAIR, Baseline Software Provider, and Project
Team Environments)
Office Equipment and Printing Capability Quantity
Page II–22
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Integrated Printer/Fax/Copier 3
Printer (Color) 1
Projection Screens (Conference Rooms) 2
Computer Video Projectors (Conference Rooms) 2
Projection Screens (Testing/Training Room) 2
Computer Video Projectors (Testing/Training Room) 2
II.C Activities by Phase
II.C.1 Description
An integral subset of standard project management roles and responsibilities will span the entire project
life cycle. In this section, we discuss overall project management and planning, and issue, risk, quality,
configuration, and document management. Process management, quality assurance, cutover, and testing
are discussed in Section I.D, Work Stream Integration. Those processes relative to the specific tools used
on the project will be detailed in the PMO Administration Procedures for FLAIR/CMS Replacement
Project, which will be completed during the Mobilization Phase. The PMO administration procedures will
cover the following areas:
Work planning guidelines
Financial management procedures
Issue management procedures
Change management guidelines
Risk management procedures
Requirements tracking
Configuration management plan
Quality assurance guidelines
Project Management and Planning
The State will directly benefit from BearingPoint’s established techniques and tools for project planning,
tracking, reporting, and management. We will leverage our experience gained in managing other state and
local government ERP implementations and integration efforts, as well as other government projects. Our
experience combined with the experience of the State project team members will provide additional value
in planning, tracking, and managing the large, complex, enterprise-wide FLAIR/CMS Replacement
Project.
Page II–23
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
BearingPoint’s Project Management Methodology (PMM) evolved over 35 years of serving government,
incorporating industry-standard project management methodologies, standards, and practices, such as:
Project Management Institute (PMI) Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)
Software Engineering Institute (SEI) Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI)
Fortune 500 Project Management Benchmarking Forum Leading Practices
In our large-scale systems development and systems integration efforts, we are guided by our PMM and
the use of PMOnline, a sophisticated, Internet-based project management monitoring and reporting tool.
Our PMM and the PMOnline tool were developed using the nine PMI project management categories.
These project management tools are complemented by our use of our teaming partners’ Methodologies
for systems implementation to create a FLAIR specific approach and methodology. We have successfully
used our methodologies on multiple ERP, e-government, and web-based system engagements.
Overview of PMM
PMM was developed over years of experience implementing successful technology projects. Based on
leading practices and PMI’s PMBOK, this methodology guides our project managers in meeting
schedules, producing deliverables, and satisfying project expectations, all while mitigating risks. PMM is
flexible enough to be integrated with other, more project-specific methodologies.
Components of PMM
The following sections detail the PMM processes that BearingPoint follows when managing a large-scale
IT initiative, including testing and knowledge transfer. PMOnline, our automated project management
tool, allows project managers and stakeholders to communicate and track project issues, changes, and
costs accurately. PMOnline also integrates with multiple methodologies and project management tools
(for example, Microsoft Project).
Our mission requires that we not only meet the current expectations of our clients, but also successfully
anticipate future needs. Our formalized PMM provides one vehicle for accomplishing this goal.
Comprehensive, yet flexible, PMM focuses on the following tasks associated with planning the activities,
milestones, and deliverables of system development projects:
Managing staff
Allocating resources
Performing quality assurance activities
Page II–24
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Controlling project scope
Producing meaningful project status reports
Minimizing project risks
Providing a structure for planning the sequencing and timing of tasks
Collecting relevant progress data
Managing changes to the workplan
Controlling project costs
Managing the deliverable review process
PMM was developed as a worldwide methodology by senior staff from several BearingPoint offices. The
concepts formalized in PMM are based on existing and proven BearingPoint practices that evolved in
response to the increasing complexity of IT projects. Exhibit II-15 provides a high-level illustration of
PMM activities. Most project management tasks are ongoing throughout the project life cycle.
Exhibit II-15
PMM Activities
Managing Project Staff
Human
Managing Subcontractors Resource
Activities
Managing the Change
Iterative
One-Time Activities Project One-Time
Organization
The
Project Detail Project Control Project
Management
Evaluation Workplanning and Reporting Completion
Plan
Estimating GRAPHIC Often Used 1/03 1/03
Risk Management
Change and Issue Management Continuous
Configuration Management Activity
Quality Management
Page II–25
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
PMM is designed to work with other BearingPoint IT methodologies and many externally developed
system integration and implementation methodologies. In working with the Department and Florida State
agencies, we propose to use PMM with a custom designed methodology to deliver the FLAIR solution.
PMM complements the other methodologies by providing a framework for planning the sequencing and
timing of tasks, allocating resources, collecting relevant progress and status data, managing project
workplan changes and project-related issues, producing meaningful project reports, managing the
deliverable review process, and minimizing project risks.
The most effective element of project management is maintaining control over activities at each point in
the project process. Efficient and effective project control involves tracking and comparing pertinent data
to an established plan. This concept is depicted in Exhibit II-16.
Exhibit II-16
Project Control and Reporting
Planning Track and Review Report and Redirect
Detail Review Deliverables Analyze Progress the Project
Workplan Objective Data and Effort
Reporting
Progress Task
Management Data Management Status
Plan Resource Trends
Analysis Corrective
Detail Completion Management
Resource Action
Workplan Data Other
Financial Proactive
Control
Change Management
Other Resolution Version Replan/
Issue Rebaseline
Quality
GRAPHIC Often Used 1/03
Project control and reporting is an iterative process for providing timely and meaningful information to
the project manager and the States management to monitor and control the project effectively. Various
levels of control are necessary to help the project meet stated objectives. The information presented at
each level will vary in detail but should be a consolidation of the information tracked and recorded at the
detail workplan level.
Valid and comprehensive information produced through the project planning process is a prerequisite to a
sound project control process. The following project control tools will be used during the project:
Time capture
Page II–26
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Internal team reviews
Project status meetings
Project redirection
Project change management process
Workplan maintenance
Task signoff
Progress reporting
Issue Management
The primary objective of a structured process for issue resolution is to establish a standard method to
document and analyze issues and approve and communicate issue resolutions. Our proposed issue
resolution approach provides a formalized process for addressing the management of issues through the
implementation of specific project control procedures. To manage issues, we will use the PMOnline tool.
Exhibit II-17 illustrates the activities associated with our issue resolution process. Each of the activities is
described in more detail in Exhibit II-18.
Page II–27
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-17
Issue Resolution Process
Comment Idea
Concern Suggestion
Responsibility
1. Identify the request Initiator
2. Log the request Initiator
3. Assign for analysis Group Lead
4. Identify options Team Member
5. Decide on action Group Lead/Team Member/Initiator
Project Manager (review team, steering
6. Obtain appropriate approvals
committee, if applicable)
7. Log action and communicate decision Group Lead/Team Member/Initiator
8. Update plans and budgets Project Manager/Group Lead Often Used 1/03
GRAPHIC
Page II–28
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-18
Steps in the Issue Resolution Process
1. Identify the request The initiator begins the issue resolution process by completing the issue
initiation form.
2. Log the request The request is logged and tracked throughout the resolution life cycle.
3. Assign for analysis Most issues will require research and analysis to evaluate impacts and
identify alternative solutions. In general, the group lead manager assigns
a project team member working in the area relevant to the issue. In some
cases, issues may be assigned to other individuals within the organization
or to an external entity.
Analysis work often involves additional discussion with the originator of
the issue to make certain that all salient points are considered. Research
may be required to identify the impact of the issue. In addition, a cost-
benefit analysis may be required.
At the conclusion of this step, a decision may be reached to consider the
issue resolved or closed. An issue may be resolved by the acquisition of
additional information during the analysis process.
4. Identify options After thorough analysis, the assigned project team member should
identify relevant options for resolving the issue. Options should include
both costs and benefits, and any impact on the project schedule or
resource assignments should be clearly identified.
5. Decide on action The group lead, the initiator of the request, and the assigned project team
member will often be able to decide on a course of action. Depending on
the size and impact of the issue resolution decision, additional
concurrence may be required.
At this point, some issues will be canceled or deferred on the basis of the
impact of the various options identified.
6. Obtain appropriate approvals Approval of the project manager, the steering committee, or both will be
required before closure of an issue. If separate review teams have been
established for the issue, additional approval from these specialized
teams is also required.
7. Log action and communicate After final decisions are approved, the issue resolution log will be
decision updated. The final decision will be communicated to the requester and
other interested parties.
8. Update plans and budgets Any affected project plans will be revised to show the additional work
effort. If a resolved issue has a material impact on the project workplan,
updates will be made and communicated.
PMOnline will support PMM in issue and risk management by:
Creation, logging, and tracking of issues and risks
Audit trail and version management
Summary and drill-down reports
Page II–29
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Workflow assignment and routing
Status tracking to resolution or mitigation
Alerts on issue status change
Exhibit II-19 shows a screen capture of PMOnline’s issue management tracking process.
Exhibit II-19
PMOnline—Issue Management
Risk Management
Risk management assists project leads in becoming proactive in identifying, planning for, and abating
risks. Using industry leading practices and SEI’s critical success factors, departmental project managers
can use the Continuous Risk Management (CRM) model outlined in Exhibit II-20.
Page II–30
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-20
Risk Management Process
Communicate
Identify Analyze Plan Track Control
GRAPHIC Often Used 1/03
Risk management begins with the initial identification and baselining of risks through continuous risk
identification activity. Specific risks are analyzed by evaluating an individual risk or groups of risks and
classifying them into logical and manageable groups. Risks are then planned, tracked and controlled
according to their priority, which is based on potential impact and probability of occurrence. Exhibit II-21
shows a screen capture of PMOnline’s risk management tracking process.
Exhibit II-21
PMOnline—Risk Management
Page II–31
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
As part of project preparation, project leads will develop a suitable process for the classifying, analyzing,
and mitigating project management risks.
Quality and Configuration Management
Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) are separate components in the overall process of
quality measurement. QA is a function that manages quality. QC is the process of measuring deliverables
against standards. QA uses the results of QC to evaluate and improve the processes that produce the
deliverables. For this reason, QA works with the processes, and QC works with the deliverables.
The BearingPoint team will follow the four key steps shown in Exhibit II-22 to facilitate the project’s
quality objectives.
Exhibit II-22
Key Steps to Help Ensure Quality
Establish
Perform Implement
Quality
Plan for Quality Quality-Control Corrective
Assurance
Activities Action
Framework
Cyclical
As Required
As Required GRAPHIC Often Used 1/03
Plan for Quality
The first step in managing quality for an IT project is to formulate a quality plan. The objective of this
step is to provide a mechanism so that the standards and guidelines required to plan, manage, staff,
control, and deliver the project effectively have been identified.
Establish Quality Assurance Framework
Managing quality is critical throughout each phase of the project. For example, on a systems development
project, specific objectives related to goals, methods, and performance are achieved through the quality
process in each project phase. Exhibit II-23 outlines the goals.
Page II–32
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-23
Quality Assurance Framework
Quality Area Goals Methods Performance
Inception User goals are realistic; Feasibility study is complete Proposed system is cost-
project goals are achievable and in compliance with project effective.
and compatible with the justification standards and
organization’s overall goals. procedures.
Elaboration Functional design Logical data model conforms Proposed design optimizes
specification will achieve to standards and guidelines. resource utilization (people
project goals. Prototypes are developed in a and technology).
Technical design is an manner consistent with Technical architecture
implementable translation of standards and guidelines. optimizes use of hardware
functional design. and software.
Construction Program specifications will Integration testing is adequate Systems meet performance
accomplish system design and performed in conformance objectives outlined in design
criteria. with standards and guidelines. Phases.
Transition Conversion can be achieved User acceptance process is Training process is
without loss of control over adequate and performed in economical and efficient.
data, processing, or both. conformance with standards
and guidelines.
Perform Quality Control Activities
Quality control activities identify and correct defects before deliverables are produced. BearingPoint will
monitor and control quality on the project through ongoing project work reviews conducted by members
of the project team. The project managers will assume responsibility for reviewing quality findings and
recommendations and taking timely action. The project managers must make certain that the detailed
workplans are updated to reflect implemented quality recommendations. These peer inspections will
prepare the team to conduct the more formal inspections (structured deliverable walkthroughs) required
by the project management team.
Implement Corrective Actions
Defects and non-conformities discovered at a QC checkpoint must be corrected, which requires
determining the root cause. The three broad sources of QC problems and suggested corrective actions are
described in Exhibit II-24. As noted in this document, we will use PMOnline to track issues and actions
throughout the life of the project.
Page II–33
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-24
Sources of Quality Control Problems and Potential Corrective Actions
Source of Problem Description Potential Corrective Actions
Individual or isolated case An individual team member Rework the deliverable
produces a deliverable with an error Review applicable standards and
in content, consistency, correctness, guidelines with the individual
or compliance.
Insufficient team-level Recurring defects and repeated Provide additional training for the
comprehension errors indicate project team project team
members do not understand Clarify tasks
standards, guidelines, or content of
deliverables. Clarify standards and/or guidelines
that are ambiguous
Inadequate standards Team members are unable to Revise portions of methodologies,
effectively apply a specific standard standards, and guidelines that prove
or guideline to the production of to be inappropriate for the work
deliverables. being performed
Managing quality is a continuous process. As data is analyzed, the results may require changes in
standards or guidelines. QC methods may also require revision if errors are being missed in early project
phases. The QA framework may need to be changed or updated as QC data is analyzed and corrective
actions are identified. Constant refining of the quality process is anticipated.
Managing quality is implemented throughout all disciplines, workflows, and phases. In general, managing
quality throughout the iterative life-cycle process means that we implement, measure, and assess both
process quality and product quality. We augment our quality practices by using the appropriate tools to
trace requirements and changes throughout the life of our projects.
Document Management
We will use PMOnline to manage project documentation and deliverables (see Exhibit II-25). PMOnline
has the following features specific to document management:
Add/change/delete capabilities
Classification of documentation for ease of retrieval and searching
Check-in/check-out to support documentation history
Version control
Access control
Traceability
Page II–34
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Discussion threads
Automatic change notification
Document sets and downloads
Exhibit II-25
PMOnline Document Management Tool
The PMOnline tool will be used for all deliverables, project procedures, and project templates. Further
details are contained in the PMO Administration Procedures for FLAIR/CMS Replacement Project,
Section VI.E.
II.C.2 Roles and Responsibilities
In this section, we outline the major responsibilities of the project management by phase. BearingPoint
and the State will play support roles in each other’s primary responsibility areas.
Page II–35
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Mobilization
During the Mobilization phase, the PMO will be responsible for refining the staffing plan, project master
plan, and project calendar created during the Discovery period, and for developing a detailed plan for the
Requirements Confirmation phase of the project. The PMO will also establish the project standards,
project tool guidelines, risk management plan, and deliverable formats. A Requirements traceability
matrix tracking process is a key deliverable during this phase. Given the work being performed, the PMO
will pay special attention to activities related to staffing during this phase.
BearingPoint assumes the State will want to take a lead role, working with BearingPoint, in establishing
the overall project charter, project governance, and project tracking mechanisms such as status,
Technology Review Workgroup (TRW), Special Project Monitor, and other governance reporting.
However, based upon our direct experience in managing large-scale projects for Florida government
agencies, we have PMO structure, guidelines, and reporting templates that have proven successful in
delivering projects on time and on budget while meeting the needs of TRW. We propose to deploy these
templates as a starting point for this project, and believe that they will provide significant value in
standing up the PMO quickly, effectively, and in a manner conducive to integrating with key external
stakeholders.
Jointly, the State and BearingPoint will be responsible for securing resources and managing issues and
risks.
Requirements Confirmation
During the Requirements Confirmation phase, the PMO, with support from the Technical, Functional
Implementation, and Change Management leads, will be responsible for developing the detailed work
plan for the Configuration Phase and for facilitating the development of the testing strategy document.
The PMO is responsible for facilitating this activity since it involves more than one work stream, the
assigned PMO staff will work with the individual work stream leads to provide overall co-ordination and
integration. Given the work being performed, the PMO will pay special attention to activities related to
process design and agency engagement during this phase.
Together, State and BearingPoint resources will complete weekly status, monthly project organization,
governance, TRW, and Special Project Monitor reporting.
Jointly, the BearingPoint and State members of the PMO will be responsible for managing and securing
resources and for managing issues and risks.
Page II–36
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Configuration
During the Configuration phase, the PMO will be responsible for developing the deployment / cutover
strategy and plan. The PMO, with support from the Technical, Functional Implementation, and Change
Management leads, will be responsible for creating the detailed work plan for the Implementation phase.
Given the work being performed, the PMO will pay special attention to activities related to scope control,
interface development, and agency activities such as role-mapping during this phase. The PMO is
responsible for facilitating this activity since it involves more than one work stream. PMO staff will work
with individual work stream leads to provide overall coordination and integration.
Together, State and BearingPoint resources will complete weekly status, monthly project organization,
governance, TRW, and Special Project Monitor reporting.
Jointly, the BearingPoint and State members of the PMO will be responsible for managing and securing
resources and for managing issues and risks.
Implementation
During the Implementation phase, the PMO, with support from the Technical, Functional
Implementation, and Change Management leads, will be responsible for developing the detailed work
plan for the Agency Rollout phase. Given the work being performed, the PMO will pay special attention
to activities related to end user training and User Acceptance Testing during this phase.
During the Implementation phase, the PMO will be responsible for weekly status, monthly project
organization, governance, TRW, and Special Project Monitor reporting.
Jointly, the BearingPoint and State members of the PMO will be responsible for managing and securing
resources and for managing issues and risks.
Agency Rollouts
For each agency rollout, or wave, the PMO will be responsible for weekly status, monthly project
organization, governance, TRW, and Special Project Monitor reporting. During these rollouts, the State,
with BearingPoint’s support, will also create the deployment awareness status and lessons-learned reports.
During each of the waves, the plan for the next wave will be finalized (for example, the rollout plan for
Wave 2 will be finalized in Wave 1). Given the work being performed, the PMO will pay special attention
to activities related to system use issues during this phase.
Jointly, the BearingPoint and State members of the PMO will be responsible for managing and securing
resources and for managing issues and risks.
Page II–37
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Post Implementation Support
During post-implementation support, the PMO will focus on confirming that knowledge transfer has
occurred and preparing for project closure. Regular status reports will continue to be issued. Given the
work being performed, the PMO will pay special attention to activities related to system use issues and
staff transitioning during this phase.
II.C.3 Application Contractor Process Integration With State
This section describes how BearingPoint we will integrate with the State Project Director, Independent
Project Manager, TRW, Board of Directors, and Interagency Workgroup (IWG).
Much of the interaction and integration will be daily within the PMO. Interaction with the TRW, Board of
Directors, and IWG will be regular (weekly or monthly) as well as support ad hoc requests. Exhibit II-26
summarizes the type of integration BearingPoint envision, based on the requirements of the State and
State-appointed groups for managing and overseeing the successful implementation with minimal
administrative effort.
Page II–38
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-26
Application Contractor Process Integration With State
BearingPoint Team
State Liaison Integration
State Project Director Mark Breton Mark will work directly with the State Project Director
(Rebecca Sutton) to drive the successful process design,
configuration, and implementation of the solution,
especially in the area of addressing stakeholder
concerns and overall financial and contractual
management.
Rusty Greer Rusty will work directly with the State Project
Director daily to manage the overall project and
highlight risks and issues.
From a detail management perspective, Rusty will
focus on the PMO and OCM teams.
Independent Project Vlad Soran Vlad will work closely with Scott day to day
Manager (Scott Brown) managing the activities of the Application Software
and Technical work streams.
A key activity for both Scott and Vlad will be leading
the overall Integration aspect of the project.
Rusty will work with Scott directly in his role of
managing the BearingPoint PMO.
TRW Claude Begin BearingPoint will attend the monthly meetings held
by TRW.
BearingPoint will take a proactive approach in
providing all the information required for Quarterly
meetings conducted by TRW through the State
Project Director as per her request. BearingPoint
management will participate in Quarterly meetings
conducted by TRW as required. All communications
with the TRW will be initiated and authorized through
the State Project Director.
Project Management Team Mark Breton Mark is a key member of the Project Management
Rusty Greer team and will communicate closely with the team to
provide timely recommendations and assistance with
issues and risks. Rusty, in his role as operational
manager of the BearingPoint team, will provide input
into overall project status, issues, and plans.
Interagency Workgroup Susan Foster Susan will work with the IWG and the agency
advocates to reconcile common agency issues.
In the majority of cases BearingPoint has matched the state lead positions in a one to one relationship
with a BearingPoint lead as depicted in exhibit II.27
Page II–39
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-27
Team Lead Integration With State
Project Management
Group
Project Management
Project Management
Technical Group Functional Organizational Change
Implementation Group Management Group
Technical Group Lead Organizational Change
Functional Group Lead
Management Lead
Technical Group Lead Functional Group Organizational Change
Management Lead
Development Team
Communications and
Development Lead User Support Team
Communications and
Development Lead User Support Team
Enterprise Integration Communications and
Team User Support Team
Enterprise Integration Lead
Agency Implementation
Enterprise Integration & Support Team
Technical Lead Agency Implementation
Technical Lead Support Team
Agency Implementation
Technical Lead Support Team
Knowledge Transfer Team
State Lead Knowledge Transfer
Team
BearingPoint Lead
Knowledge Transfer
Team
II.D Deliverables
Exhibit II-28 presents the deliverables within the Project Management work stream.
Page II–40
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-28
Deliverables Description By Creation Date
Please see Section VI.C. for Deliverables List.
Exhibit II-29
Draft Project Administration Procedure Outline
Section 1 - PMO Administration Procedures Overview
Section 2 - Work Planning Guidelines
Section 3 - Tracking Procedures
Section 4 - Financial Management Procedures
Section 5 - Issue Management Procedures
Section 6 - Change Management Guidelines
Section 7 - Risk Management Procedures
Section 8 - Requirements Tracking
Section 9 - Configuration Management Plan
Section 10 - Quality Assurance Guidelines
Section 11 - Time and Expense Guidelines
Section 12 - Decision and Analysis Guidelines and Events
Section 13 - Meeting Guidelines
Section 14 – Work Papers
II.E Tools
The BearingPoint team recommends the use of PMOnline as a project management tool to supplement
Microsoft Project.
II.E.1 PMOnline
To monitor changes throughout a project, BearingPoint developed PMOnline, an automated project
management tool. PMOnline is a secure, multi-functional tool to assist project teams in managing issues,
risks, scope, and change by assessing resource requirements, timelines, projected costs, priorities, and
contract or deliverable implications.
Page II–41
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
PMOnline allows members of the team, as well as stakeholders, to track deliverables, issues, changes, and
contract modifications throughout the life of the project. This comprehensive tool, coupled with our
process for maintaining a structured line of communication with State management, will reduce the risk
associated with change and will allow the State to be continuously aware of project status. BearingPoint
will provide the State with the appropriate access to and training on using this web-based tool as part of
our project communication plan.
The PMOnline tool provides the following features for the project tracking and change control process:
An enterprise-wide view of project activity supporting key project, change, and knowledge
management components necessary to establish and run an efficient project
Ability to integrate with program and project management tools (such as Microsoft Project),
methods, and training that support the key functions of the project
Facilitation of project integration by providing a vehicle for communicating, collaborating with,
and reporting to stakeholders and project teams
Capturing and storing project information and facilitating the development and execution of
project plans, while remaining flexible to accommodate project updates
Exhibit II-30 outlines BearingPoint’s PMOnline tool. With quality management as a foundation, the
PMOnline tool manages most of the tracking components necessary in large projects.
Exhibit II-30
PMOnline and BearingPoint Methodology
Project Management Change Management Knowledge Management
Plans Issues Methodology and
Scheduling Risks Processes
Costs/Benefits (EVM) Change Control Standards and Guidelines
Subcontractors Stakeholder Alignment Templates
Action Items Organizational Change Documents
Dependencies Workforce Transition Records
Resources Communication Requirements
Deliverables Collaboration Test Cases and Results
Contracts Training Program Communications
Quality Management GRAPHIC [ Often Used 1/03]
PMOnline is an automated, web-based tool (with embedded security) that allows stakeholders at different
levels to benefit from the information it organizes. PMOnline offers the following modules:
Page II–42
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Program/project management
Quality assurance
Document management
Requirements management (not being used this project)
Online communication
Project templates
Resource management (Microsoft Project 2002 is being used instead of the Resource
Management module)
Configuration management
Workflow automation
User services
As shown in Exhibit II-31, PMOnline links project documents, tasks, changes, issues, staff activities, and
much more.
Page II–43
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-31
PMOnline Functionality Overview
Issue & Risk Management My Home • Team member’s personalized Collaboration
• Issue, Risk, Defect and engagement work summary • Contacts
Change Order Tracking & • Discussion Forums
Routing • Threaded Discussions
• Audit Trail & Version Mgmt • Meeting Minutes
• Summary & Drilldown Reports
• Alerts on Issue Status
Reporting
• Portfolio Reporting
• Project Earned Value
Analysis
Document Management
• Open Items Summary &
• Pre-defined Solution Content
Drilldowns
• Check-In / Check-Out
• Threshold & Event
• Version Control & Activity
Based Alerts
Audit
• Timesheet Status
• Document Access Control
Reports
• Document Tracking & Routing
• Program/Project
Hierarchy
Test Management Financial Management
• Test Materials • Resource Cost Tracking
• Define Tests and CRP’s • Cost Variance Tracking
• Project Billing
User Services
Schedule Management Project Scheduling • Self-Service
• WBS Definition Program/Project Setup
• Task Assignment Support Products: • Work Calendar
• Resource Allocation APIs MS Project • Preference &
• Gantt Charts Notification
• Critical Path Analysis Customization
• Progress Tracking • Form, Workflow & View
Customization
PMOnline is integrated with the Microsoft suite of products (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Project, Outlook,
and Access) and Visio. Together, these will be the standard for all project management activities.
II.E.2 Requirements Traceability Matrix Tracking Tool
BearingPoint will create a requirements tracking tool (and associated process guidelines) early in the
project, leveraging the requirements matrix database created by the State. The tool will clearly define and
demonstrate that the requirements identified in the matrix are being built into the solution throughout the
various phases and will monitor the progress of the major processes that realize the requirements. (An
overview of the proposed tool is provided in Exhibit II-32.) The following description of functionality
will be delivered; however, there are some overlapping capabilities in the Mercury (see Section V)
toolsets that might be leveraged to deliver complete requirements tracking. The overall approach and
eventual feature and functionality will be finalized with the State during the first sixty days of the project.
Page II–44
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-32
Requirements Traceability Tool
Summarized
Change Control Progress Report
for Plan Updates
Requirements
Traceability Matrix
Business
Procedures
Test Scenario
Summarized
Creation Progress Report MS Project Plan
Tracking for Plan Updates Updates
Requirements Weekly Status
Detailed Report
Tracking Reporting Execution Tracking
Solution
Tracking
Defect Tracking
PMOnline
Object
Tracking
Summarized
Progress Report
for Plan Updates
The tool will comprise the following six sections:
Requirements Tracking
This section will allow the State to track the requirements from ITN through the project life cycle,
incorporating any changes made through the change control process. The existing requirements
matrix will be used as the foundation for this section.
Business Process Tracking
During To-Be design development, business processes are identified, and form a critical measure
of project progress for defining and configuring the solution. Each process is typically tracked
through the processes life cycle, from creation to testing, submission, and release and to training.
Typically four to five statuses are tracked, summarized, and fed to the Microsoft Project plan.
This section of the tool will track the detailed status and provide detailed statistics for the weekly
Page II–45
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
status reports during the Configuration phase. The detailed design of the overall process will be
defined in the early phases of the project.
Object Tracking
Development objects are a major part of the solution design and are tracked in detail through the
object’s life cycle; typically four to five development statuses are tracked and fed to Microsoft
Project and the weekly status reports. This section will also track the history and version of the
development object and the environment in which it resides (such as development and QA). The
development object will be linked either directly to requirements or to business processes.
Solution Tracking
Certain requirements will be part of the solution but will not be covered within a business process
or development object, this section will track the parts of the solution that fall outside the other
two sections. Examples include white papers, strategies and general capabilities of the software
that address general requirements
Test Scenario
This section of the tool will concentrate on creating and tracking test scenarios with particular
emphasis on the linkage back business processes and development objects and the coverage of the
test relative to requirements. BearingPoint is proposing the Mercury Test Director and Mercury
Quick Tester tools, which have similar capabilities for tracking and execution tracking and may
reduce the level of detail required in this section. The detailed design of the overall process will
be defined in the early phases of the project.
Detailed Reporting
For each section, specific reports will be created to feed progress into the Microsoft Project plan.
Elements from the project plan such as the work breakdown structure (WBS) number will be
incorporated into this tool to enable the output of all information and efficient updates to the
Microsoft Project plan. Detailed reports will also be generated for the weekly status reports.
This section will be used to confirm whether the solution is meeting the requirements. During the
cutover process and in preparation for go-live, this section will be used to establish the
compliance section of the QCC process.
The State’s initial requirements matrix is created in Microsoft Access. The following factors must be
finalized with the State early in project to determine whether the tool has the capability to support the
functionality described in this section:
Page II–46
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Number of people that need access to the tool
Extent to which Mercury Test Director and Quick Tester can be leveraged to track without
needing dual status entry
II.F Risks
Project management risks are differentiated from other work stream risks from two perspectives. They
tend to focus on:
The process of the project, rather than the product of the process
Integrative (crossing multiple work streams) rather than work-stream-specific areas
The BearingPoint team’s approach to risk management for this (and for all areas) incorporates the
following concepts:
Early identification
Formal creation of preemption and mitigation strategies
Regular review and re-assessment
Targeted contingency planning
Tracking of all risks and close monitoring of emerging risks
Rapid response
Team members will identify and document as appropriate, and team leaders will be responsible for
evaluating whether suggested risks meet the criteria for formal tracking. Once a month, each team leader
will review and, if necessary, revise his or her long-term risk plan (this forces a look beyond next week or
next month). As new risks are identified, they will be formally assessed for likelihood of occurrence as
well as potential impact, and a sliding scale of response will be determined. Our leading practice is to
identify and document risks and to vary the degree of planning and response according to severity,
likelihood, and timing.
Exhibit II-33
Level of Impact and Mitigation Strategy
Level of Impact Mitigation Strategy
Above-minimal level of impact Preemption and mitigation strategies will
be identified and incorporated into project
Page II–47
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Level of Impact Mitigation Strategy
plans and processes
Above-minimal impact and a medium or Contingency plan components will be
above likelihood of occurrence identified
Higher levels of impact and/or likelihood Formal plans will be developed
The BearingPoint team proposes to refine the scales and the measurement criteria with the State during
Mobilization.
The following Exhibit II-34 summarizes key risks in this project. It incorporates the risks from each of the
various work streams.
Page II–48
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Exhibit II-34
Key Risks
Risk Areas and Description Preemption Strategy Mitigation Strategy
Project Management
The State’s staffing levels on the Increase staffing for year one from 85 Obtain project team members with
Functional Implementation Group to 90. the right skill sets.
is low, resulting in the inability to Maintain this level in year two. Work directly with the Department
assume operational control of the to monitor knowledge transfer.
system. This will allow the Department to
evaluate whether a complete match
of skills has been accomplished.
Evaluate staff members who
cannot be coached into necessary
productivity levels.
Facilities lease cannot be signed BearingPoint, working with the
until the project contract is Department, has identified a
signed, resulting in a delay in location that is almost ready “as-is”
tenant improvements process. thereby significantly mitigating the
Team productivity could be risk.
compromised by this delay.
Training the State resources Identify the State project team
early in the project phases is immediately to enable the training
essential. Training sessions to begin as early as possible.
provided by the software vendors
are limited in frequency and
capacity.
Hardware needs to be in place to The Department’s recent purchase
support the project environment of hardware to support
and application software. The development is significant in
ordering process is subject to the mitigating this risk.
State’s internal procurement
procedures and is beyond the
control of the BearingPoint team.
Delays in hardware delivery will
impact the project schedule.
Page II–49
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Risk Areas and Description Preemption Strategy Mitigation Strategy
Motivating large groups of Integrate the preemption-strategies
individuals from various documents into a “new team
organizations to work together members” orientation kit.
seamlessly as quickly as Hold formal orientation sessions
possible is critical. The Project regularly for new team members.
Management team can either
assist or hamper this process. Deploy a mechanism to document
and apply resources for monitoring
and addressing startup problems.
Develop a regular forum for
feedback and adjust processes in
response to common issues.
Find a balance between getting
people on board quickly and
inundating them with rules and
procedures. Be prepared and
incorporate good change
management and training
techniques into the process.
Project management can Create a formalized governance Balance discipline with being overly
become a burden if rules and structure and process in the dogmatic.
procedures are over- Mobilization phase. Be flexible but understand the
emphasized, non-value-added Obtain mutual agreement on rules “cost” of change.
activities are enforced, and and procedures that will work most
comprehensive quality Develop trust – build and work as
effectively for the State of Florida. One Team.
assurance is lacking.
BearingPoint understands the Educate the project team during the
need to create rules and initial stages of the project on the
procedures for this project to be rules and procedures and why they
a success, but also the need to are mandatory.
make certain that project Establish comprehensive quality
management does not detract assurance to make certain adherence
from team effectiveness. to these strategies and monitor.
Organizational Change Management
Keeping FLAIR as the system of The BearingPoint Team will make During role mapping, as part of the
record through Wave 2, allowing assumptions about training impact. Agency Implementation Planning,
agencies to process transactions The team will conduct more detailed work with agencies to identify
in batch into FLAIR and online planning to validate that the current which employees need which roles
into new FLAIR may result in training model can handle this (and therefore, training) for Waves
each agency having transactions approach. 1 and 2, which roles will not be
processed on line (new FLAIR) used initially because of batch
and transactions processed via processing.
batch (old FLAIR). Providing Using the analysis of that data, the
just-in-time employees training Knowledge Transfer Team will
will be very difficult. validate whether the training
planning assumptions are valid and
then recommend a course of
action.
Page II–50
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Risk Areas and Description Preemption Strategy Mitigation Strategy
Inconsistent leadership Work with the Program Office to The Case for Change will be
alignment at all levels (central determine how to best engage articulated. This will be used as
executives and division heads as agency financial leadership so that part of the leadership workshop
well as agency heads and they take ownership of the project. and senior interviews to help build
agency financial leadership). Hold a leadership workshop with agreement on the benefits and the
State employees may not always these leaders. need to successfully complete this
feel a “shared ownership” with project.
executive offices. Lack of Subsequent ownership from this
stakeholder group will allow them to Readiness metrics will be managed
agency involvement can result in at various levels of the organization
missed business requirements communicate both up and down their
chains of command to help bring so that leadership at each level will
and considerable employee understand what is required of
resistance. alignment at multiple levels.
them and their internal
Conduct interviews with central organizations to implement the
executives and division heads to project in their agencies.
understand their perceptions of risks
and critical success factors.
Incorporate feedback into the OCM
plan.
Agencies unable to understand Work with the Program Office to Agency advocates will work closely
the magnitude of the change and determine how to best engage with the agency implementation
the corresponding impact and agency financial leadership so that coordinators and AIT’s so that the
attendant activities that will need they take ownership of the project. agency financial leadership
to be accomplished at the Depending on the strategy continues to be involved in the
agency level to make it work, or developed, a leadership workshop implementation effort.
to achieve a high degree of will be conducted to facilitate that Communications collateral will
effectiveness. process. explain that the FLAIR replacement
initiative is more than just a
systems or software
implementation.
Page II–51
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Risk Areas and Description Preemption Strategy Mitigation Strategy
Communications is perceived as Conduct management awareness Communications activities will
non-credible “advertising”. A sessions to gain input from central include proper coordination,
series of large-scale change and agency financial leadership to inclusion of stakeholders, accurate
projects within the State has not identify relevant benefits of the and timely messages, and
achieved a thorough approach to system for key stakeholders and an “personalizing” of key messages to
developing relevant and credible effective branding approach. individual agencies and
communications to support Integrity of communications will be a stakeholder groups, as appropriate.
success. Moreover, numerous continual focus to build credibility. Surveys will be distributed at the
stops and starts to new system initiation of the project to establish
implementations have produced Credible State personnel will deliver
information, supported by baseline data on perception.
additional skepticism.
professionally developed Pulse surveys will be taken
communications collateral. periodically to provide tangible
evidence of acceptance of change.
Mid-course corrective action will be
taken based on survey data.
Multiple feedback loops will be
established to continually gauge
acceptance.
The BearingPoint team will work
with the program and central
financial leadership, as well as with
HR as needed, to determine
workforce transition strategies.
Honest communications about
these strategies will help build
credibility in the eyes of employees.
Inability to accomplish Aggressively identify barriers to
knowledge transfer for all key adequately transferring knowledge to
personnel needed to integrate State personnel who will be required
expertise throughout the State to effectively operate and maintain
and sustain effectiveness after the system in house upon completion
implementation (central and of the project.
agency level). For example, Identify two levels of State functional
technical staff will be unable to and technical staff will be identified:
acquire all technical capabilities
while having to maintain the old Level I staff will work side by side with
FLAIR system. Bearing Point Staff and will learn
configuration tasks by doing. They
will demonstrate proficiency multiple
times before the end of the project.
Level II staff will be assigned to
FLAIR but will be rotated regularly
into configuration tasks so that they
will also experience on the job
training (OJT). During OJT for level II
staff, level I staff will cover for level II
staff on FLAIR.
Page II–52
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
Risk Areas and Description Preemption Strategy Mitigation Strategy
State training staff will not be Central education staff will be If State trainers do not feel
adequately prepared. Unless certified as master trainers. To confident, they can take several
there is sufficient support and qualify for this, they will: additional steps (BearingPoint will
time to learn as well as to Work side by side with contractor on recommend these steps based on
practice, they will not have the early design tasks. the progress of the individual
expertise to train effectively. The trainers):
Train-the-Trainer approach Attend a seven day formal Train-the-
Trainer class. Co-teach multiple additional
sometimes produces a situation classes with BearingPoint trainers.
in which users are trained by Be required to train nine days with a
staff several times removed from BearingPoint trainer (three times for Attend Wave 2 Train-the-Trainer
knowledgeable trainers. each 1-day class that they will be session for agency trainers.
training).
Co-teach as lead trainer for ten days
(20 classes) with a BearingPoint
trainer observing and coaching.
All users will be trained with either a
BearingPoint trainer or State master
trainer to promote integrity of classes.
II.G Assumptions/Open Questions
The following are key assumptions used in formatting the project management section:
The State will provide resources:
– Consistent with levels identified in the project plan
– With the necessary skill sets identified by BearingPoint
– That will perform the tasks assigned and to the schedule outlined in the plan
– That remain committed to this project despite other conflicting State initiatives
Any contractors or consultants whose services are acquired directly by the State in connection to
this project will perform their assigned tasks in a timely manner.
The State will not willfully, or through its own negligence, cause a delay in the project schedule.
MS project will be the preferred scheduling and planning tool for the project:
– The administrative tasks involved to input weekly updates to the plan do not take more that
eight hours total regardless of the number of people inputting (excludes time to provide
updates)
– The time for each team lead individually to provide updates to the plan does not exceed two
hours for any given week.
Page II–53
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
FLAIR/CMS REPLACEMENT PROJECT
STATEMENT OF WORK
AUGUST 27, 2003
The costs listed in the requirements matrix are merely for comparison purposes for the State, and
do not reflect the true cost of implementing each requirement.
The current version of the plan, as revised by BearingPoint and approved by the State will be:
– The version that the state references for all contractual and measurement criteria.
– Adhered to unless revised by BearingPoint and approved by the State (or revised by the State
and approved by BearingPoint).
During the initial stages of the project the overall implementation strategy will be reviewed in
consultation with the state. BearingPoint has great flexibility in changing the implementation
strategy, so long as the following remains true:
– The implementation occurs in three waves
– Wave 1 will occurs on February 1st 2005
– Each wave contains relatively similar numbers of end users
– The last cutover occurs no later than July 1st 2005
– The level effort on the project will not change.
A tailored implementation methodology will be the basis for the software implementation at State
and will be followed by the Project Team.
There will be no modifications to the BearingPoint PMOnline Software.
The State will make certain the existing infrastructure (i.e. server environment, communications
environment, and network environment) is sufficient to provide suitable project team
performance levels.
The State will make every effort to expedite business decisions for any process
decision/validation. Most business decisions will be escalated or resolved within five business
days. On an exception basis only, BearingPoint Team understands that some decisions will take
longer. BearingPoint Team assumes that these exceptions will take no longer than ten business
days.
State is responsible for the establishment of procedures to provide physical site security for the
hardware and software systems and their elements.
Page II–54
Related docs
