Savannah, GA Multi-State Consortia UI IT Systems Development Joe - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1

Information Technology Support Center

• 33rd. Annual National UI Issues Conference

Savannah, GA Multi-State Consortia UI IT Systems Development

Joe Vitale – ITSC Director June 19, 2014

Information Technology Support Center

2

Information Technology Support Center

NASWA Structure

3

Information Technology Support Center

Who is the ITSC?

4

Information Technology Support Center

ITSC Governance

5

Information Technology Support Center

ITSC and UI IT Modernization Services to States

• Overview of current UI IT Modernization projects
• Identifying and sharing best practices
• Establishing and supporting consortia
• Provide ongoing advisory services and technical assistance as

needed

• Coordinating communication and information sharing

among states

• Conducting assessments on request

6

Information Technology Support Center

UI IT Modernization

7

Information Technology Support Center

A National View of UI IT Systems (NASWA/ITSC Study – July 2010)

• States developed systems for UI operations generally in the 1970s and

1980s, and many are using the same “legacy” mainframe technology based systems today.

• Note: In the NASWA/ITSC survey, over 90 percent of states reported using benefits or tax

systems running on outdated hardware and software programming languages, such as COBOL.

• The survey found the average age of a state benefits IT systems is 22

years, and the oldest benefits system is 42 years. The average age of a state tax system is 24 years, and the oldest tax system is 41 years.

• Only eight states have a modernized benefits system, only three have a

modernized tax system, and only one has modernized benefits and tax systems.

8

Information Technology Support Center

A “modernized” UI system means the benefits or tax system uses an application technology that inherently supports web-based services and object-

• riented paradigms in combination with a relational

database technology. “Fully Modernized” refers to a UI system with both "modernized" benefits and tax systems.

What is a Modernized UI IT System?

9

Information Technology Support Center

Over two-thirds of states face growing costs for mainframe hardware and software support of their legacy systems. Additionally, seventy-five percent of states face major and growing challenges because in-house IT staff are retiring rapidly and there is a scarcity of IT staff skilled in older technologies

10

Information Technology Support Center

• Skyrocketing cost: Nine out of 10 states reported maintenance, support and ongoing
• perations of these old systems escalates in cost every year.
• Poor agility: Eighty-two percent of states reported difficulties implementing new federal or

state laws due to the constraints posed by their IT systems, including law changes involving Extended Unemployment Compensation and the $25 Federal Additional Compensation. Systems that add modern components onto old mainframe systems are difficult to enhance or reprogram.

• Poor scalability: Forty two percent of states reported trouble scaling-up in a timely manner to

handle workload surges. Increasing system capacity to handle higher claims levels is hampered by the number of components that must be increased rapidly and in unison

• Inhibited productivity: Only eight states indicated a high usage of productivity- and service-

enhancing technologies, such as automated case management systems and web-based user interfaces.

• Note: While the overwhelming majority of states have implemented internet-based services

using newer tools and technologies for UI claimants, limitations posed by integrating these technologies with legacy systems create numerous inefficiencies and data error

States Cannot Efficiently Handle Current Systems

11

Information Technology Support Center Modernized systems lower costs and improve services and staff productivity Even modernized UI IT systems present cost and other challenges, but the benefits of modernization are high and numerous. States with modernized benefits and/or tax systems (accompanied by re-engineered business processes) generally report:

• better staff productivity;
• improved customer service, including shorter wait times
• faster and more accurate benefit payments;
• quicker and more accurate implementation of new laws/programs; and
• lower costs.

Modernized Systems Challenges and Benefits

12

Information Technology Support Center

The Cost for UI IT Modernization – Single State Model

Studies indicate at least $4-5 billion needed nationwide to modernize state UI IT Systems

13

Information Technology Support Center

A New Concept State Consortia

 UI IT modernization through state consortia is a promising new paradigm.  Multiple states can pool their resources and reduce risk in pursuit

• f a single common system they can each use applying state-

specific minor programming and configuration settings.  The Unemployment Insurance State Information Data Exchange System (SIDES) is a recent model and example of a successful consortium project initially designed and developed by six states, some large employer TPAs and the ITSC  DOL began funding state consortia in FY 2009

14

Information Technology Support Center

Key Components of a Consortia System

 High percentage of common requirements among state members (80% or greater)  Executive Support and Sponsorship from all members  A good governance model  Willingness of one state to act as the Fiscal/Purchasing lead  Ability of lead state to have other members states participate in RFP creation, evaluation and recommendation  Agreement of states to work cooperatively together in person on requirements and implementation  Selection of a vendor understanding consortia model and approach  Common code for common functions with state specific subsets  One core system  Multi tenant environment  Open Source tools  Highly Configurable software framework  Table driven model  Inclusion of a Rules Engine

15

Information Technology Support Center

First Phase of the Consortia Model

 In FY 2010 USDOL funded two consortia to determine if a consortia model could be used to build a new UI IT Benefits and or Tax System.  Was it feasible and could the states work together?  In addition was there a high enough level of commonality of the requirements between the states in the consortium to make building a common system practical?  AWIN consisting of Arizona, Wyoming, Idaho and North Dakota and SCUBI consisting of Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee were the first two consortiums formed to test out this model.

16

Information Technology Support Center

Consortia Model Grows

 After two years of working together on the consortia model the states in both AWIN and SCUBI were able to develop a common core set of requirements for a new UI IT System  AWIN – developed both common Benefits and Tax requirements  SCUBI – developed common Benefits requirements  The Good News:

 States discovered they can actually work together on a UI IT Modernization project leveraging fiscal and staff resources  States had more in common than they initially realized going into the project  Common requirements were in the range of 80% to over 85%  Obviously there were still 15% to 20% of unique state requirements

17

Information Technology Support Center

Consortia Model Continues to Grow

 In FY 2011 USDOL provided funding for AWIN and SCUBI to move

• n to the next phase of their UI IT Modernization project

 Publish and RFP and Select a Vendor to Design, develop and Implement the new common UI IT System

 Note:

 AWIN changed to WyCAN as Idaho dropped out and decided to use the requirements developed to build a single state system for Idaho. Colorado joined the consortium and did a fit gap analysis of their requirements with the existing consortia requirements  In SCUBI the consortium was reduced to three states as Tennessee decided to also go the way of a single state model

 In FY 2011 USDOL also funded an additional consortium VMW (Vermont, Maryland and West Virginia) to do a phase one feasibility study and develop a common set of requirements

18

Information Technology Support Center

Consortia Model Continues to Grow (cont.)

 In FY 2012 DOL funded another consortium MRM (Mississippi, Rhode Island and Maine) for development of a common system  Mississippi was one of the first states to successfully modernize its UI IT system  They discovered early on that they were not going to be able to support this system as a single state  The vendor was still supporting it and there was no sign of Mississippi being able to take over this support both technically and financially as a single state  The MRM concept was to leverage the already built modern UI IT system and make it a multi tenant common system for all three states  Rhode Island and Maine agreed to accept core functionality in the Mississippi system that was not in conflict with their current UI laws

19

Information Technology Support Center

Consortia Model Continues to Grow (cont.)

 In FY 2013 USDOL funded VMW to design, develop and implement the new common UI IT system  USDOL also funded New York and New Jersey to develop common requirements for a new UI IT system  New Mexico, Florida and Massachusetts received funding from USDOL to develop common components

 Note: NM, FL and MA all have new modern UI IT systems developed by the same

• vendor. The concept of this project is to leverage resources for new components

to their single state systems

20

Information Technology Support Center

Consortium Name Scope Status Planned Deployment Date Contractors WyCAN (WY, CO, AZ, ND) FY 2009 – Feasibility FY 2011 - Development UI Benefits, UI Tax, UI Appeals In development 2016 HCL America (Developer and Application Support, SunGard (IaaS) SCUBI (SC, NC, GA) FY 2009 – Feasibility FY 2011 - Development UI Benefits, UI Appeals In development 2016 CapGemini (Developer and Application Support), Xerox (IaaS) MRM (MS, RI, ME) FY 2012 - Development UI Benefits, UI Tax, UI Appeals In development 2017 Tata Consultancy

• Services. IaaS will be

procured as well. VMW (VT, MD, WV) FY 2011 – Feasibility FY 2013 - Development UI Benefits, UI Tax, UI Appeals RFP Phase NJ/NY FY 2013 Feasibility UI Benefits, UI Tax, UI Appeals Developing Requirements NM/MA/FL FY 2013 - Build Components UI Benefits and UI Tax Common Module Development Requirements for and Implementation of Common Modules under Development On going

Where are The Consortia Today Current UI IT Modernization Consortia Projects

21

Information Technology Support Center

Current Status of All UI IT Modernizations Projects Single-state and Consortia

22

Information Technology Support Center

2 2

• Success: on time and budget, critical features and requirements delivered
• Challenged: schedule expanded, over budget and/or lacking critical features and

requirements

Note: Source of Project data is states responses to Project Data Collection Template as of Summer 10 and 2012/13. Do not reuse in any way without permission of the ITSC

UI Process and IT Modernization Projects Top-View

UI Modernization Projects (20 Projects)

Succeeded - 20% Challenged - 60% Never Completed - 20%

Summer 2010 Late 2012/Early 2013

Variance shrinking

23

Information Technology Support Center

Leading Reasons for Success….Ubiquitous

• 1. User Involvement (15.9%)
• 2. Executive Management Support (13.9%)
• 3. Clear Statement of Requirements (13.0%)
• 4. Proper Planning (9.6%) – overall plan with rolling detail
• 5. Realistic Expectations (8.2%)
• 6. Smaller Project Milestones (7.7%)
• 7. Competent Staff (7.2%)
• 8. Ownership (5.3%)
• 9. Clear Vision & Objectives (2.9%)
• 10. Hard-Working, Focused Staff (2.4%)

Percentages From Standish Group Study and matches UI Space On ITSC site, wiki covers above specifics plus:

• Terms and Conditions
• Pay for product, not paper
• Avoid Leading edge and proprietary technologies (expensive vendor

lock-in)

24

Information Technology Support Center

• Executive Ownership
• Commitment of Necessary Resources
• Building a ‘Progressive’ Project Team
• Willingness to allocate needed resources over long

duration

• Customer Outreach and Readiness Preparation
• Integration of Agency’s Business Entities
• External Stakeholder Management
• Promote Organizational Change Management
• Managing Vendor relationship
• Continually ensure Vendor executives understand the

importance of Project success – NE, MS, MN, VA, NV

Sponsors of Change

25

Information Technology Support Center

• In-house
• 1 TBD and 1 Terminated
• From Scratch Custom Approach
• 7 “Major” Challenges, 4 Terminated
• Framework based solution
• 4 Successes, 2 Challenged, 3 TBD
• COTS/MOTS
• 3 Successes, 1 Suspended, 1 TBD
• Transfer from another State
• 2 Challenged

“Challenged” has a wide range and needs to be understood specifically

IT Approaches for Modernization What We Learned – What works & Doesn’t

26

Information Technology Support Center

• UI Process and IT Modernization is past it’s

Infancy

• Successes have been achieved
• Vendors with credible and successful history exist
• There is a high degree of functional similarity

among states

• Evidence from Consortiums, including Requirement's
• Vendor Frameworks/COTS – like solutions
• Successful – Software Development Approaches

Leveraging vs. Do It ALL from Scratch

27

Information Technology Support Center

UI Process & IT Modernization Motivations and Outcomes

• High Level
• Expensive, inflexible Legacy/OLD systems
• They served their purpose
• Improved Customer Satisfaction
• Successes in MN, MS, NE, UT
• USDOL Performance Measures Improvement
• An indicator of ‘effective’ service delivery
• Substantial Productivity Improvements
• MN, MS, NM, UT continually reaping the Benefits of “Doing more with

Less”.

• System Flexibility:
• UT, MN, MS, NM, IL continually evolve their systems
• Create online Claimant Account Capabilities
• Auto-adjudication

28

Information Technology Support Center

• “Do more, with Quality, and for Less”
• Greater than 87% claims filed via Internet without staff intervention
• Other measures including overpayments improved
• Automated decisions
• 70% of non-sep BTQ cases are automatic decisions and all pass (UT)
• 66% of issues auto-adjudicated (MN)
• Staffing levels required to service employer accounts dropping approximately 70%
• 85% of claims filing through web-based self-service
• Even with intelligent Fact-Finding, Claimant takes an average of 13 minutes
• Reduction in Call Volume at the Call Centers.
• Reduction in Processing Time for Claims by 33~50% at the Call Centers
• Workflow
• Paperless environment – scanned documents, easy retrieval by everyone.
• Reduces work for everyone
• Adjudicators process Twice the cases/issues than, they did with Legacy process and

systems and provide better quality of determination

• For one state, greater than 95% of Employers are paying Quarterly without any Staff

intervention.

• UI Connectivity Integration

UI Process & IT Modernization Outcomes

• Examples

29

Information Technology Support Center

• Improved Overpayment Process & Fraud Prevention
• Erroneous Payments Reduced due to Timely processing of Employer Wage details

adjustment for Monetary Determinations.

• Automatic Overpayment Calculations resulting from Issue/Appeal amendments
• Reduce Fraudulent Payments by better System and Business Process Integration and

Identity Proofing services

• Generally implementation of Federal and State mandates at a Much

Lower Cost

• EUC’s, Sequestrations, law changes in MS, MN, UT, MI

UI Process & IT Modernization Outcomes

– Examples

30

Information Technology Support Center

Where are We Going?

• What the future holds…..

– Shrinking budgets – Loss of expert staff – Aging systems – Integrity Challenges

• Movement towards Collaborative Development

– Pooling resources and talent – Generally, better stewardship of governmental resources – Provide better oversight of vendor relationships – Incorporate Successful Practices within UI, and benefit from challenged project lessons – Leverage other Workforce initiatives (SIDES, OSOS, GUIDE) – Leverage Non-UI Examples

• Department of Defense
• Department of Agriculture
• IRS
• Open Source (Sourceforge, OW2, Google Code, Apache Archive, etc.)

– Acquisition insights from NASPO, WSCA, etc. – Cost Effectiveness and stewardship of limited dollars – Exploit inherent functional commonality between States

31

Information Technology Support Center

Contact Information & Questions ITSC Information: http://itsc.org

Joseph Vitale, ITSC Director Joe.vitale@itsc.org or (202) 650-5151