The emergence of more than $200 million in requests for resources to plan state IT projects, called for in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposed Fiscal Year 2020-2021 budget, presents the Legislature with opportunities “to exercise more oversight,” a watchdog agency said.
In a report on Newsom’s IT project proposals, the state Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) said the Legislature could evaluate some projects before approval by the California Department of Technology (CDT); define project completion or take other actions to clarify statehouse intent; or condition approval of resources for some projects on lawmakers’ notification and approval.
The report, prepared by Brian Metzker, senior fiscal and policy analyst at the LAO and released Thursday afternoon, opens a window on the state’s ongoing internal process to spearhead IT initiatives. Among the takeaways:
• As of this month, 23 state-level IT projects under CDT’s authority are under development and implementation — at a total cost of $2.7 billion, with $1.5 billion of that being General Fund. The LAO ranked the projects by total cost, though it didn’t provide all numbers. Heading the list, however, was the Financial Information System for California (FI$Cal), at just more than $1.06 billion; followed by Child Welfare Digital Services’ Child Welfare Services — California Automated Response and Engagement System (CWS-CARES); SCVS’ Offender Video Surveillance; and the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration’s Centralized Revenue Opportunity System (CROS).
Metzker noted FI$Cal’s high cost and told Techwire the LAO is interested in working with the Newsom administration and the Legislature to “help decide what the project being complete means” and ensure that the Legislature can be confident it’s working.
“I think it will be a point of discussion for this budget cycle in particular,” Metzker said.
• The LAO said the proposed State Controller’s Office’s new California State Payroll System “merits Legislative Review.” Newsom’s budget seeks roughly $3.5 million and eight positions for the system, which is now in Stage 2 of CDT’s Project Approval Lifecycle (PAL) process. Once it’s approved by the agency, the Legislature has a chance to consider “a new project scope and/or technical solution” that could reduce its cost, risk or schedule. Metzker said the Legislature might consider “on a programmatic level even” whether it agrees with the project’s size or its proposed solution — understanding what each would mean for cost and scheduling.
The LAO also said the Employment Development Department’s Benefit Systems Modernization (BSM) project, proposed in 2016 to consolidate three systems, “limits Legislative oversight.” The governor’s budget seeks $46 million and 147.5 staff positions to begin development and implementation. Metzker said the project has been selected as a potential pilot for a new challenge-based procurement process, but the LAO is concerned that “compression of the planning process” could lead to risks going unidentified and wonders whether it could dampen vendor competition.
• The Legislature’s budget oversight process for IT projects could need organizational changes, the LAO said. Currently, the report said, most IT budget requests are vetted by subcommittees according to program area. But, it noted, there’s “no venue to vet the entire IT portfolio” including changes to policy, process or technology. One potential solution could be to assign an existing subcommittee to weigh all IT project budget requests — or to create a new subcommittee in each house with that responsibility. Doing so, the LAO said, could improve broad oversight and stimulate direct involvement in project planning.
• CDT’s four-stage PAL process for IT initiatives, which was implemented in 2016, appears to have had a positive effect. The LAO warned against “drawing firm conclusions” but said that since PAL began to be used, no project that has gone through all four stages “has required a Special Project Report on the basis that the project deviated from its initial cost or schedule.” (Some projects did need SPRs, the LAO said, due to additional scope being added.)
“This initial success suggests fewer SPRs might be required for projects approved through the PAL process in the future,” the report said, indicating few “complex and costly” initiatives have gone through PAL so far – and none of those few has been completed.
