agile rings in tx dps e records retention
play

Agile Rings in TX DPS' e-Records Retention 1 Agenda - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Agile Rings in TX DPS' e-Records Retention 1 Agenda Introductions Definitions of CUP and CURT Agile E-Records Retention CURT Development & Delivery Process Finished Product 2 CU CUP & P & CU


  1. Agile Rings in TX DPS' e-Records Retention 1

  2. Agenda  Introductions  Definitions of CUP and CURT  Agile  E-Records Retention  CURT Development & Delivery Process  Finished Product 2

  3. CU CUP & P & CU CURT D T Defined  CUP – Compassionate Use Program  Mandated by 84th Legislative Session SB 339  Dispensing Organizations (DO) are licensed to grow and dispense Low THC prescriptions  CURT – Compassionate Use Registry of Texas  System developed by TX-DPS  Registers physicians  Track Prescriptions 3

  4. CUR URT F Fea eatures es  Registry of Physicians authorized to prescribe Low THC  Physician enters patient information (PII) and prescriptions  Prescription available to Dispensing Organization for fulfillment  Dispensing history retained in the system  Data is kept on the impact to patient’s quality of life during treatment 4

  5. Agile le Based ed Proj ojec ects: A : Agile le M Man anif ifesto We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value: Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Working software over comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Responding to change over following a plan That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more. http://agilemanifesto.org/history.html 5

  6. AGILE 6

  7. Scrum a as an A Agile Dev evel elopmen ent M Met ethod  Working Software  In hands of customer quickly  Versus spending a lot of time writing specifications up front  Cross-functional teams empowered to make decisions  Rapid iteration, with continuous customer input 7

  8.  Files and miles of paper  Storage Facilities  Heavy physical footprint  Resource intensive and entirely manual DPS Retention Before 8

  9. CU CUP P Implem emen entation on & & Funding  $0 funding for development  Mandated a system to be online by 9/1/17  Explored vendor solution • Determined too costly • Legislative due date not attainable  In-house development approved by DPS Execs 9

  10. Need eeded ed Resou ources & & I Impact o 6 Months RFO Development ◦ EPMO Staff o 3 Months Planning ◦ IT Development Resources o 16 Months Development ◦ IT DBAs ◦ IT QA Resources o Assigned Staff (60-95%): 18 o Ancillary Staff (1-2%): 13 ◦ RSD Program Staff ◦ Operations Support Staff o Estimated FT Hours: 15,250 ◦ Management Staffs o Estimated Ancillary Staff hours: 250 ◦ Cyber Security Staff o Estimated FT Staff Costs: $725 K ◦ Contracting Staff o Hardware (used existing): $0 ◦ Legal Staff o New Cloud Services: $3 K (p/year) 10

  11. Recor ord T Types es  DPS.0083 – RSD Regulatory License Applications and Registrations Multiple RSD AC + 7  DPS.0084 – RSD Administrative Hearing Files Programs: AC + 5  DPS.0591 – RSD CURT Physician Registrations AC + 5 CURT Specific :  DPS.0592 – RSD CURT Patient Records AC + 5  DPS.0593 – RSD CURT De-Identified Patient Records PM 11

  12. CU CURT e T e-Rec ecor ords R Reten ention on – Seren endipitou ous? M Mayb ybe…… Here are the dates….  Project Start: 3/17  Minimum Viable Product (MVP) - Due: 9/1/17  Records Retention (1st identified): 10/17  TSLAC Request for RR Amendment Clarification: 1/18  CURT Record Types finalized and added in Product Backlog: 4/18  CURT Project Closed: 6/30/18 12

  13. Development an and Ti Time C Con onstrain ints  1 Placeholder Story expected to be 3-5 full Stories  Grew to 18 Stories for the Records Retention Epic  Fully automated vs. manual destruction of records  Rapid, iterative backlog refinement sessions  Collaboration - impacts 13

  14. CU CURT S T Story Example: 14

  15. Qu Qual ality A y Assurance Difficulties es  Planning Test approach  Simulating dates to force records slated for purge in test environments  Restoring purged records creating downtime 15

  16. 16

  17. 17

  18. 18

  19. 19

  20. 20

  21. Qu Ques estion ons?  Austin Neal, PMI-ACP, PMP, CSM - Senior Project Manager, DPS EPMO: Austin.Neal@dps.texas.gov  John Douglas, PMP - DPS RSD OSS Infrastructure Support Group Team Lead: John.Douglas2@dps.texas.gov  Melissa Cawthon, PMP, CSPO – DPS RSD OSS – Project Coordinator: Melissa.Cawthon@dps.texas.gov  Diana Burns, PMP - DPS RSD OSS Operations Deputy Manager: Diana.Burns@dps.texas.gov 21

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend