Regulatory Lifecycle Management System (RLMS) PROJECT CHARTER€¦ · PROJECT CHARTER D3B-C-E-F Project Charter Page 4 1 Project Overview The department has evaluated the utilization

Regulatory Lifecycle Management System

(RLMS) PROJECT CHARTER

Regulatory Lifecycle Management System PROJECT CHARTER

D3B-C-E-F Project Charter Page 2

Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services

Office of Agriculture Technology Services

December 2015

Table of Contents

1 Project Overview ..................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Problem Statement ........................................................................................................... 4

1.2 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Project Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................ 7

1.4 Project Stakeholders .......................................................................................................11

1.5 Project Scope ..................................................................................................................13

1.5.1 Requirements ............................................................................................................13

1.5.2 Project Phases ..........................................................................................................13

1.5.3 Project Milestones .....................................................................................................14

1.6 Critical Success Factors ..................................................................................................15

1.7 Assumptions ....................................................................................................................16

1.8 Constraints ......................................................................................................................17

1.9 Project Risks ...................................................................................................................17

2 Project Authority .....................................................................................................................17

2.1 Project Organization ........................................................................................................17

2.2 Project Roles and Responsibilities ...................................................................................19

2.3 Project Governance .........................................................................................................22

2.4 Project Approval Requirements .......................................................................................22

2.5 Project Manager, Responsibility, Authority .......................................................................22

2.6 Project Sponsor, Authority, and Authorization ..................................................................22



Revision History

Date Author Version Change Reference

12/11/2015 North Highland 001 Initial draft

12/11/2015 North Highland 002 First revision

12/15/2015 North Highland 003 Second revision

12/17/2015 North Highland 004 Third revision

01/04/2016 North Highland 004 Fourth revision

01/04/2016 North Highland 005 Fifth revision

01/08/2016 North Highland 006 NH QA Review

01/11/2016 North Highland 007 Remediation

01/13/2016 FDACS 008 FDACS Review

01/14/2016 North Highland 009 Remediation

01/21/2016 FDACS 010 FDACS Review

01/22/2016 North Highland 011 Final Version

Quality Review

Name Role Date

Scott Rainey Client Lead 01/08/2016



1 Project Overview The department has evaluated the utilization of a Regulatory Lifecycle Management System (RLMS) to standardize regulation and licensing across all of the department’s divisions and offices that directly manage regulatory programs. The regulatory application portfolio currently contains more than 60 applications, making standardization problematic. An implementation strategy has been developed to achieve the goals of enterprise regulatory management, while minimizing risks and costs. The initial implementation will involve two divisions where the RLMS will yield the greatest benefits. In the first year, the Division of Licensing (DoL) implementation will subsume the Concealed Weapons Intake System, Licensing Reflections System, Imaging Business and Process Management, and Web-based Fast Track System into an enterprise solution. Subsequently, the implementation for the Division of Administration (DoA) will supplement the Agency Clerk, Revenue Online Collection, EGov, and Enterprise E – Commerce System applications, as well as additional components of the Revenue Receipt Accounting System (REV). Division of Licensing Call Center support will also be modernized as part of the implementation.

1.1 Problem Statement

The current system environment portfolio includes 68 systems (80% custom, 20% COTS with varying customization). Twelve of the 68 systems support multiple regulatory functions (certification, licensure, permitting, and registration), while another 29 systems support a single regulatory function. Additionally, there are currently 12 systems supporting regulatory functions being used by department employees that are still completely manual.

The majority of these systems were developed for specific division programs a decade or more ago with differing support requirements and end-of-life timeframes. Since there was no strategy to facilitate uniform data across FDACS, these isolated division database environments produce duplicative data across the department, and create a challenging environment to effectively communicate regulatory information internally among divisions and externally to stakeholder groups.

FDACS’ regulatory applications currently in place use a wide variety of technologies, design methodologies, and interfaces resulting in an overburden on budget. Stemming from a previous lack of IT governance, there are multiple databases which are unique to specific divisions, and operate without centralized, enterprise oversight within FDACS. FDACS identified three additional key strategic challenges. These include:

The proliferation of redundant division and office processes and supporting systems exposes FDACS to operational risk, which then increases their administrative and support costs while decreasing its operational efficiency and effectiveness.

The existing applications are inflexible and do not meet the changing demands of both internal and external stakeholders as a result of outdated and unsupported software and technology.

From an external perspective, weather forecasts, commodity market reports, disease outbreaks, and international political conflicts require FDACS to make constant operational course corrections.1

1 Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Long Range Program Plan, Fiscal Year 2014-15 through Fiscal year 2018-19 (Tallahassee, FL, 2013), page 17.



In order to overcome these strategic challenges and position the department to better service the needs of its constituents and the residents of Florida, the ultimate goal of FDACS is to implement an enterprise RLMS. Based upon research and analysis of all of the surrounding documentation, system requirements, and internal objectives, FDACS desires to implement a regulatory system modernization for DoL and all of its applications, then supplement the DoA revenue management system. Once these systems are successfully designed, implemented, and running, the department will then add on the outstanding divisions to the new system, fulfilling the enterprise model of the department.

1.2 Project Description

The project will include activities to design, develop, and plan the implementation of the enterprise RLMS including inventorying and organizing the data and procedures associated with the department’s enterprise regulatory responsibilities. Initially implementation will begin with the transformational changes with the DoL and DoA.

Migrating to a new enterprise RLMS system will require significant changes to business processes within the department. An industry-standard modeling language shall be used to model all processes, information, and systems.

Additionally, oversight, planning, management, execution, and organizational change management activities are key areas of work involved in the implementation. The activities described above fall under the following areas:

Project Management

Process

People

Technology

The table below represents defines the key responsibilities of each of the implementation teams.

TEAM ROLES KEY RESPONSIBILITIES

Project Management Team Define Roles and Responsibilities

Oversee and Manage Governance and Decision Making

Develop and Execute Project Management Approach

Develop and Execute Scope Management Plan

Develop and Execute Schedule Management Plan

Develop and Execute Cost Management Plan

Develop and Execute Quality Management Plan

Develop and Execute Risk Management Plan

Develop and Monitor Procurement Management Plan

Develop and Execute Document and Records Management

Plan

Process Team Capture and Refine Business Requirements

Define Future State Processes

People Team Manage Communication

Develop and Deliver Learning and Knowledge Activities

Define and Manage Value Realization



TEAM ROLES KEY RESPONSIBILITIES

Develop and Manage Work Force Transition

Define and Manage Organizational Change Management

Develop and Execute Human Resources Plan

Develop and Deliver Project Communications Plan

Develop and Execute Stakeholder Management Plan

Technology

Information

Develop and Manage Data Governance Structure Definition

and Implementation

Manage Data Migration

Manage Business Intelligence Requirements Definition

Manage Information Security (such as encryption)

Integration

Develop Integrated Solution Design

Oversee Configuration Management

Oversee Test Management

Develop and Oversee Cutover Management

Development

Design and Deliver Development Planning and Governance

Design and Manage Development Specifications

Manage and Deliver Development Object Coding and Unit

Testing

Manage Development Quality Assurance

Infrastructure

Develop and Manage Enterprise System Technical

Architecture Design

Develop and Manage Enterprise System Security

Authorization Design

Develop and Manage Enterprise System Administration

Exhibit 1: Team Roles and Responsibilities



1.3 Project Goals and Objectives

Vision

Implement an enterprise department regulatory lifecycle management system that empowers customers, supports efficient processes, and positions the department to be responsive to changing operational demands.

Objective

The primary objective is to create an improved and standardized enterprise regulatory system with a revenue component to replace the Division of Licensing’s (DoL) current licensing/regulatory applications, and supplement the Division of Administration’s applications that directly support the DoL. This objective will set the foundation for subsequent releases. In addition to setting this foundation, the department will gain knowledge through lessons learned through the inventorying and organizing of enterprise department data and procedures.

Goals

Enhance the customer experience in all interactions both with and within the department.

Optimize protection of the public and agricultural industry through enhanced monitoring and compliance information and techniques.

Enable an enterprise customer service operation.

Leverage a modern enterprise solution to improve the ability to recognize and respond to opportunities and issues.

In accordance with the achievement of the stated objectives and goals, the project is expected to deliver several benefits. A summary of the estimated benefits from the enterprise, integrated RLMS system is displayed in the Exhibit below.

# DESCRIPTION OF BENEFIT TANGIBLE /

INTANGIBLE BENEFIT RECIPIENT HOW WILL BENEFIT BE MEASURED?

1 Increase process efficiencies in anticipation of growth in overall transaction volume – estimated at $26,048,727 annually when fully implemented (increased at an annual inflation rate of 1.5%).2

Tangible Applicants

Permit/License Holders

FDACS/State

Citizens

Avoiding the majority of costs of adding staff to meet anticipated growth in permitting, licensure, inspection, and consumer response volumes.

2 Avoiding known costs of a previous system modernization involving only DoL from five years ago –

Tangible FDACS/State

Citizens

Avoiding the cost funding individual division system modernization projects.

2 “140923-FDACS-Cost-Model-v001” Excel document. October 29, 2014.





benefit is estimated over the life of the planned implementation at a total of $10,900,000.3

3 Enhance Emergency Response capabilities

Intangible FDACS/State

Citizens

Reduce the overall response time and level of effort required to support the Emergency Response effort.

4 Support anticipated growth in inbound calls to Consumer Services

Intangible FDACS/State

Citizens

Avoiding the cost of adding staff to meet anticipated growth in call volume.

5 Inspections will be able to be more tightly targeted to areas of risk

Intangible FDACS

Regulated Businesses and

Industries

Public

This benefit is a part of the efficiencies gained by the department for its inspection activities from this project. While challenging to quantify, being able to better target areas of inspection may reduce the overall number of inspections needed.

6 Improved communication, cooperation, and collaboration of regulatory information between FDACS program areas and divisions

Intangible

FDACS

Regulated

Businesses

This benefit is a part of the efficiencies gained by the department for its inspection activities from this project. While challenging to quantify, reducing the amount of data that needs to be collected during all inspections will improve the efficiency of inspection.

7 Improved program accountability through real-time access to data; increased visibility into how the department performs its regulatory activities

Intangible FDACS

Legislature


Industries

Public

Increased involvement in the accountability process.

8 Coordinated inspection scheduling to facilitate cross-

Intangible FDACS

Regulated

Businesses

Anticipated reduction in inspection visits, increased knowledge of department

3 Appendix C: Chapter 2, Section 4.3.3.1 Tangible Benefit Calculation.





program tasking where appropriate

regulatory efforts related to a site.

9 More timely and comprehensive cross-program area responses to requests for information

Intangible FDACS

Legislature


Industries

Public

Responding with more complete information provided in a timely manner to those requesting information from FDACS.

10 Improved department anticipation of and response to situations/events

Intangible FDACS

Legislature


Industries

Public

More timely responses to situations/events.

11 Rapid response to changing regulatory requirements

Intangible FDACS More timely responses to legislative mandates.

12 Increased customer satisfaction with the department

Intangible

FDACS

Legislature


Industries

Public

Reduction in number of customer complaints regarding the department.

13 Increased customer and public engagement with the regulatory process

Intangible FDACS

Legislature


Industries

Public

Improved relations between FDACS and regulated entities and the public.

14 Improved security stemming from enhanced emergency response capabilities

Intangible FDACS

Legislature

Increased data and communication of data within





Regulated

Businesses and Industries

Public

FDACS and to the public during emergency situation response.

15 Single online payment portal for customers to pay for an authorization, license, renewal, certification, registration, or permit which the Department regulates

Intangible Regulated Businesses and

Industries

Decreased online payment accounts required to do business with FDACS; increased online payment interactions with FDACS.

16 FDACS is internally more responsive to the mission and IT vision as communicated by executive leadership, and will continue to be as leadership changes

Intangible FDACS

Legislature

FDACS regulatory systems are aligned with the department’s IT Strategic Plan.

17 Empowers the department to achieve its related missions of improved customer service, efficiency of operations, and internal and external accountability.

Intangible FDACS

Legislature


Industries

Public

Increased customer satisfaction related to improved online payment portal and decreased touch points with FDACS to gather information and transact business.

Exhibit 2: Expected Benefits

FDACS identified numerous additional features available in modern systems which will provide value to both license holders and FDACS employees. Examples of these additional benefits include:

Improved self-service portal functionality for license holders

Enhanced mobile functionality available for inspectors

Enhanced geospatial mapping for inspectors and emergency response plans

Where appropriate, streamlined training of staff around standard functionality

Improved risk-based inspection assignments as a result of an enterprise data model

Improved program accountability through real-time access to data

Increased data quality and accuracy through reduction in duplicate data

Improved sense of data security stemming from up-to-date security technologies and coverage



1.4 Project Stakeholders

A broad group of stakeholders will be impacted by the expected RLMS project benefits as well as by the Pre-DDI activities and the design, development, and implementation of the RLMS project. The full implementation of the enterprise-wide RLMS will yield many benefits – both tangible and intangible – to a broad group of internal and external stakeholder groups. The following table provides details about these various groups.

STAKEHOLDER INTERNAL/EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER DESCRIPTION

FDACS Executive

Leadership

Internal Sets overall strategic direction, serve as key

decision-makers, funding authority

Division

Directors/Office

Directors

Internal Division of Licensing, Division of

Administration, and AG Law Directors

impacted by Release 1

Assistant Directors Internal Heavy day-to-day involvement in the Project

Bureau

Chiefs/Directors

Internal Involved in the Pre-DDI Project as SMEs,

Participants in workshops, Coordinate NH

activities with Staff

FDACS RLMS End-

Users

Internal Involved in the Pre-DDI Project as SMEs,

Participants in workshops, observations

FDACS Non-RLMS

Users

Internal Involved in the Pre-DDI Project to provide

feedback on potential operational and

technical impact of the RLMS Project on

Non-RLMS users

Florida County Tax

Collectors

External External Partners who provide Licensing

Intake activities in their offices, Participants

in observations

Governmental,

Legislative,

Oversight

External Others with key interests, oversight

authority, funding authority

Governmental

Stakeholders

External Additional interested Governmental parties

who can provide feedback on areas that

could impact or be impacted by the RLMS

Project

Information Sharing

Partners

External External resources such as FDLE who will be

impacted by process changes at FDACS

As Needed

Information

Partners

External Additional partners who may be involved to

provide information to support the RLMS

Project

External

Stakeholders

External Non FDACS groups involved to provide

feedback on how the RLMS Project might

impact or be impacted by the interest or

needs of their respective members



STAKEHOLDER INTERNAL/EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDER DESCRIPTION

Consumers,

Customers, License

and Permit Holders,

Applicants, General

Public

External External stakeholders impacted by the

rollout of the RLMS Project and the system

related public-facing and customer service

features and functionality

Exhibit 3: Project Stakeholders



1.5 Project Scope

The scope of the RLMS Project is to implement an enterprise regulatory management solution for the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Because of the complexity, scope, and risk in consolidating 68 disparate systems (and 12 programs that are currently manual), the department will utilize a phased implementation approach involving three releases. Breaking down the implementation into releases can provide significant risk mitigation. The following implementation plan is based on a “Crawl, Walk, Run” release approach. This approach starts by implementing the Divisions of Licensing and Administration, thus demonstrating business value before committing to an enterprise implementation. The focus during Release 1 (Crawl) is validation and refinement of the implementation tasks and deliverables. Lessons learned from the first release can be used to plan delivery of a larger scale roll out to two or three Divisions in Release 2 (Walk). In the Walk release, the focus will be on refining and optimizing the project schedule (e.g. load balancing of government and contractor resources). Refinements from the Walk release are then incorporated and used to implement the full-scale implementation for the remaining Divisions in Release 3 (Run).

1.5.1 Requirements The Divisions and Offices within the department are responsible for a broad range of services and regulatory activities. Requirements will be detailed during the requirements definition phase.

1.5.2 Project Phases

Breaking down the implementation into releases can provide significant risk mitigation. The following implementation plan is based on a “Crawl, Walk, Run” release approach. This approach starts by implementing Licensing and Administration, which demonstrates business value before committing to a broad scale implementation.

Release 1 (Licensing) – Crawl The focus during Release 1 (Crawl) is validation and refinement of the implementation tasks and deliverables. The effort will begin with the Division of Licensing transformation and move into sustainment 15 months after start up. The Division of Administration implementation is slated to begin six months after the start of the DoL implementation. With the schedule overlap and interdependencies between the two areas, the development schedules will need to be coordinated when finalizing the detailed implementation plan. Lessons learned from the first release can be used to plan delivery of a larger scale roll out to two or three divisions in Release 2 (Walk).

Release 2 – Walk The second release will implement RLMS functionality with a couple of “early adopters” that are representative of other divisions. The scheduled duration of Release 2 is nine months. In the Walk release, the focus will be on refining and optimizing the project schedule (e.g., load balancing of government and contractor resources). This is done to validate the scalability of the implementation tasks from the first release. It will also enable FDACS and the system integrator to build team resources through a “train the trainer/facilitate the facilitator” approach. Many enterprise application projects fail due to contention for key project resources. Projects must be realistic about availability of department resources that may continue to have normal job duties. This release will mitigate this risk by providing an opportunity to establish realistic scheduling of resources, both internal and external.



Release 3 - Run Refinements from the Walk release are then incorporated and used to implement the full-scale implementation for the remaining divisions in Release 3 (Run). Release 3 is scheduled to overlap Release 2, beginning six months into Release 2. This release would be used to implement the remaining divisions and applications. Interfaces to any applications that are not migrated to RLMS would also be built and implemented.

There are five implementation phases which are performed for each release lifecycle:

Plan and Assess – planning and preparation to ease design ramp-up

Design – gather requirements, design processes, and solidify scope

Develop – build and test the designed solution

Implement – end user education, user acceptance, and migration activities

Post Implementation – transition from Project mode into a live, supported production operation

The tasks in these phases are assigned to four basic domains (project teams).

Project Management – address return on sponsor investment for the project

Process – address business requirements and benefits

People – facilitate effective and efficient transition to the new business model

Technology – facilitate information quality and integrity, integrate task and solution dependencies across domains and project phases, and deliver objects that address specifications and coding quality standards and management of appropriate application architecture and technical infrastructure

1.5.3 Project Milestones

Milestones represent the completion of significant work packages, the start or end of a project phase, or some other key event. For activities in the RLMS Enterprise Project Schedule , milestones are used for two main purposes: 1) to designate key progress markers or events that can be used to monitor and measure project progress and provide management review points, and 2) to establish dependencies between the RLMS sub-projects. The major milestones for each phase of the RLMS Project are listed in Exhibit 4 below:

RELEASE 1 RELEASE 2 RELEASE 3 Initiate Release 1 Initiate Plan and Assess Phase Initiate System and Data Strategy

Activities Initiate Procurement Initiate OCM Program Begin Detailed Requirements

Gathering / Business Analysis Complete Detailed Requirements

Gathering/ Business Analysis Close Procurement Initiate Integration Planning and

Analysis Initiate Design Phase

Initiate Release 2 Initiate Plan and Assess Phase Initiate OCM Program Begin Detailed Requirements

Gathering Complete Detailed Requirements

Gathering / Business Analysis Initiate Integration Planning and

Analysis Initiate Design Phase Initiate Development Phase Initiate Implementation Phase Initiate Workforce Transition

Initiate Release 3 Initiate Plan and Assess Phase Initiate OCM Program Begin Detailed Requirements

Gathering Complete Detailed

Requirements Gathering / Business Analysis

Initiate Integration Planning and Analysis

Initiate Design Phase Initiate Development Phase Initiate Implementation Phase Initiate Workforce Transition



RELEASE 1 RELEASE 2 RELEASE 3 Initiate Development Phase Initiate Implementation Phase Initiate Workforce Transition Complete System and User

Acceptance Testing Complete Implementation Phase Close Integration Planning and

Analysis Begin Post-Implementation Phase Complete Workforce Transition Execute RLMS Cost-Benefit

Analysis Conduct Readiness Assessment for

Release 2 Divisions Determine Lessons Learned Close Release 1

Complete System and User Acceptance Testing

Complete Implementation Phase Close Integration Planning and

Analysis Begin Post-Implementation Phase Complete Workforce Transition Conduct Readiness Assessment

for Release 3 Divisions Determine Lessons Learned Close Release 2

Complete System and User Acceptance Testing

Close Integration Planning and Analysis

Complete Implementation Phase

Begin Post-Implementation Phase

Complete Workforce Transition Determine Lessons Learned Close Release 3

Exhibit 4: RLMS Milestones by Phase

1.6 Critical Success Factors

Critical success factors identified for the RLMS project include but are not limited to the following:

Executive management is engaged throughout the implementation. Executives will attain an understanding of the overall project scope, budget, milestones and key deliverables through monthly meetings. Key executives should create a vision for success, approve necessary resources, motivate the project management team and make high-level and sometimes tough decisions.

The establishment and maintenance of an enterprise Project Management Office over the life of the project to ensure the standardization of the project management processes and the visibility of project performance across the project teams, external stakeholders, and project and agency governance committees.

The development and implementation of a procurement strategy and plan to conduct the project solicitations. A well-defined procurement strategy and plan will maximize opportunities to achieve system integration and flexibility as well as provide business value.

Alignment of vendor and consultant contracts, roles, responsibilities, and relationships to establish a cohesive, collaborative, and harmonious team mutually focused on program goals and objectives.

The development and implementation of an organizational change management (OCM) strategy and plan that will ensure timely stakeholder communications and provide for an efficient organizational and workforce transition to the new RLMS with minimal disruption to the agency's day-to-day operation.

The establishment and application of the appropriate level of Governance provides adequate oversight, management, and control to keep projects on track and on target without introducing unnecessary layers of administration that can stall effective and efficient decision-making and ultimately project progress.



Management of requirements and system customizations ensure that project scope is maintained and stakeholder expectations and needs are met without costly impacts to schedule, quality, or budget.

Scaled value realization allows project teams to envision the big picture and then partition the project into smaller units and release cycles thereby reducing the risk of a large implementation while incrementally realizing the full project value.

1.7 Assumptions

Assumptions identified for the RLMS project include but are not limited to the following:

The Project Team has access to all supporting data that is pertinent and available to deliver the outcomes of this engagement.

Department staff and other stakeholders are available and actively participate in interviews and meetings and will respond to requests in a timely manner.

The Project Team, department resources, and RLMS stakeholders recognize that time is of the essence and will prioritize their participation accordingly.

The department will coordinate the availability of appropriate staff for consultation during the project as required to meet project timelines.

The Project and Portfolio Management Office (PPMO) Manager will coordinate with the Project Management Team so project goals, deliverables, and requirements are met within timelines established for this project.

The department will inform the Project Management Team in a timely manner of any people, process, or technology changes within FDACS which could impact the project.

The department will review, provide feedback, and approve/reject all project deliverables in accordance with contractual obligations.

The RLMS Project Team will adhere to the standards and process as set forth in the PMP.

Deliverables will go through the vendor’s Project Management Team quality review prior to being submitted to the department for review and/or approval.

Independent Verification and Validation by an outside third party will be conducted to ensure the RLMS meets requirements and specifications.

The following guiding principles are additional assumptions that have been established for the planning, development, implementation, and operation of RLMS:

The project will adhere to a scope management plan to manage the impact of program changes to scope.

Business and management requirements developed within the project are consistent with Federal and State requirements.



The operation and maintenance of the new system will be the responsibility of either the Office of Agriculture Technology Services (OATS) or a contracted vendor.

There will be qualified contractors willing to partner with the department to design, develop, implement, and maintain the new system.

The project will be managed in accordance with the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®) published by the Project Management Institute (PMI).

1.8 Constraints

Constraints identified for the RLMS Project include but are not limited to the following:

State and Federal regulations.

Department resource availability due to other projects or regular operations.

All subsequent Schedule IV-B documents must be completed by October 15th of each year to request legislative funding for the next fiscal year.

1.9 Project Risks

The Project Management Plan will articulate the process for capturing risks identified throughout the project and their corresponding responses.

2 Project Authority

The RLMS Project Organization consists of two integrated tracks of authority:

Project Governance Authority

Project Management Authority

Project Governance includes the activities and associated roles and responsibilities required to provide leadership, strategic direction, control, and accountability.

Project Management is concerned with administration and delivery through planning, monitoring and reporting. While the two areas are related, they are distinctly different functions.

The following sections describe the roles and responsibilities of the Project Organization.

2.1 Project Organization

The Project Organization includes the following project team and stakeholders:

Executive Steering Committee

Executive Sponsor

Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) Vendor

PPMO Manager

FDACS Project Management Lead

Other Project Management Leads



Business Advisors Group

Project Teams

› Project Management Team (PMT)

› System Integrator Team

› Strategy and Organization Transformation Teams

External Stakeholders

Information Technology

Exhibit 5: RLMS Project Organization and Governance Structure



Exhibit 5: RLMS Project and Organization and Governance Structure depicts the Governance structure for the RLMS Release 1 Project. This structure utilizes a multi-tiered approach, with the goal of pushing decision-making to the lowest level possible.

At Tier 4, the Governance structure is headed by an Executive Steering Committee supported by a strategic advisors group of leaders from the affected areas of the organization.

Tier 3 consists of the Executive Sponsor, with support from a Business Advisory Group. The Sponsor is also supported by an independent IV&V function to ensure that there is visibility into the health of project processes and associated project operations.

Tier 2 is based in the PPMO, with the PPMO Manager serving as the escalation point at this level. The PPMO manager and his team are the point of entry and communication with Information Technology and External Stakeholders.

Tier 1 is at the Project Level and consists of the Project Managers as they interact with the workstream leads for the individual initiatives making up the RLMS Program to address issues, actions, risks, opportunities, and decisions that cannot be managed by the workstream project teams. For the purposes of the RLMS Release 1 Project, this tier consists of the FDACS Project Manager and the vendor project manager.

Tier 0 consists of the workstream leads for the System Integrator, Project Management, and Strategy and Organizational Transformation and their respective project teams. This is the level at which issues and opportunities are typically identified and often resolved prior to raising them to Project Management.

This Governance Structure will be enhanced as the Enterprise Project Management Plan and associated processes are developed during the RLMS Release 1 Project.

2.2 Project Roles and Responsibilities

The table below represents defines the key responsibilities of each of the implementation teams.

As depicted above, the Project Management Team (PMT) consists of the FDACS Project Sponsor, the PPMO Manager, the FDACS Project Management Lead, and the other Project Management Lead. This group serves as the primary team responsible for operation of the project and for resolution of risks, issues, actions, decisions, and other related project management processes with the intent of minimizing the number of items escalated to the Executive Steering Committee.

The following exhibit (Exhibit 6: Project Governance – Roles & Responsibilities) is a description of the roles and responsibilities:

ROLE NAME DESCRIPTION STAKEHOLDER

Executive Steering Committee

Provides executive oversight to the project Establishes and supports the project vision

and strategic direction Resolves escalated issues Final Decision on scope and cost changes

Chief of Staff Deputy Commissioners Office of Policy and Budget Legislative Affairs Director Inspector General

Executive Sponsor Coordinates/Identifies business resources Controls project budget

FDACS Chief Information Officer




Serves as Liaison to the Agency for State Technology (AST)

Has programmatic decision making authority

Champions the project Provides business resources for project

success Has programmatic responsibility for

successful development and implementation of the project

Has IT decision-making authority Provides IT resources for project success Has responsibility for successful

development and implementation of the project

Facilitates communication with the Governance Board

IV&V Vendor Monitors project management processes and provides feedback on any deficiencies noted

Reviews and provides feedback on project deliverables

Presents to EMT on IV&V activities Future - Verifies that the system is

developed in accordance with validated requirements and design specifications

Future - Validates that the system performs its functions satisfactorily

PPMO Manager Has overall responsibility for the successful development and implementation of the project

Oversees the development and implementation of the project

Oversees the Project Management Office for the project

Liaison with IT Sponsor for resources Liaison with Project Business Sponsor for

business resources and day-to-day activities

FDACS PPMO Manager

FDACS Project Management Lead

Responsible for day-to-day project oversight Provides overall guidance and direction to

the System Integrator Coordinates with the PPMO Manager for

resources Works with System Integrator Project

Manager to ensure stakeholder needs are met (Future)

Has daily decision making authority Oversees and manages project plan Facilitates the Business Advisors Group

FDACS Project Manager




Coordinates project resources, budgets and contract management

Reviews and provides feedback on project deliverables

Responsible for project management areas including scope, risk, quality, and change control

Coordinates project status communications

Other Project Management Leads

Responsible for day-to-day oversight of individual teams

Has daily decision making authority Oversees and manages individual project

plan Coordinates individual project resources, Reviews and provides feedback on project

deliverables Responsible for project management areas

including scope, risk, quality and change control

Coordinates project status communications to FDACS

Other Project Managers

Business Advisors Group Responsible for input on functional requirements

Participates in project user group meetings and sessions

Provides input on project activities Reviews and comments on project

documents and deliverables Disseminates project information and

updates to local internal/external stakeholders

Bureau Chiefs – Licensing and Administration

Project Teams Identifies and Communicates Project Risks, Issues, Actions, Decisions

Creates Deliverables Participates in Risk/Issue Response

Team Resources and Leads

External Stakeholders Shares input to the Project Management Team on System and Issues

May be involved in Executive oversight Receives communication from the PMT Affected by the project

Constituents Legislature Agency for State Technology Florida Department of Law Enforcement Others

Information Technology Responsible for technical resources requested by PMT

Impacted by the project

Chief – Agriculture Management Information Systems




Receives communication from the PMT May be involved in risk response Sets technical and security

requirements/standards

Exhibit 6: Project Governance – Roles & Responsibilities

2.3 Project Governance Governance is the process and structure used to exercise overall control and set the direction for a project. It defines the purpose of the project, sets strategies for attaining the purpose, and gives authority for the use of resources to implement the defined strategies. Governance provides the structure that links process, resources and the business strategies and objectives. Detailed information is provided in the Project Management Plan (PMP).

2.4 Project Approval Requirements

Project approval requirements will be developed and maintained as appropriate for the RLMS Project as detailed in the PMP.

2.5 Project Manager, Responsibility, Authority

The Project Management approach utilized by the Project Management Team will be in compliance with the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK®) standards for Project management. Detailed information is provided in the PMP.

2.6 Project Sponsor, Authority, and Authorization Overall authority and responsibility for the RLMS Project lies with the project Sponsor. The Project Sponsor has full authority and responsibility for all project activities and outcomes including setting the strategic vision, approving program objectives, evaluating business results, and ensuring that program goals are met from initiation to completion of all RLMS Project phases. The table below provides responsibilities and levels of decision-making authority for the Project Sponsor.

ROLE NAME RESPONSIBILITIES LEVEL OF DECISION-MAKING

AUTHORITY

Project Sponsor

Authorize project Oversee project and program direction Perform program- and project-level decision-making and

approvals Coordinate program- and project-level approvals Oversee project and program scope, budget, and resources

Resource Selection Scope Criteria Schedule and project

Timeline Risk Mitigation

Exhibit 7: Project Sponsor Responsibilities



The official authorization for the project is granted upon sign-off of the RLMS Project Charter.

The Project Sponsor accepts the Project Charter for the RLMS Project with his/her dated signature below in Exhibit 8: Project Charter Approval.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES

RLMS PROJECT CHARTER ACCEPTANCE

Approved

Name: Date:

Title: Project Sponsor

Signature:

Exhibit 8: Project Charter Approval

Regulatory Lifecycle Management System (RLMS) PROJECT CHARTER€¦ · PROJECT CHARTER D3B-C-E-F Project Charter Page 4 1 Project Overview The department has evaluated the utilization

Documents