Date: 02/06/2015
Final
FY 2015-16 Project Prioritization
COMMITTEE ON JOINT TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
| Votes: View--> | Action Taken: |
| <none> | <none> |
03:08 PM -- Discussion of FY 2015-16 Project Prioritization
Gary Lucas, Legislative Council Staff, came to the table and discussed his concerns with state IT systems currently in use and funding requests that the committee must review. He spoke to options the committee has in the future in its consideration of projects and the additional information that it should request from departments that submit an IT capital budget request. The committee discussed its role in considering state IT projects and the quarterly project reporting requirements it could implement for state agencies.
03:18 PM
The committee discussed how it can get information on KPIs from departments for their requested projects and metrics that the committee can use to rate and rank project budget requests. Mr. Lucas walked the committee through an initial project ranking list that staff prepared (Attachment D). He noted that there were two initial criteria for ranking considered: whether there was anything in a project contract or Request for Proposal (RFP) to hold a vendor accountable to the project's performance; and if the funding request quantified cost savings. Discussion of how projects were ordered and ranked in the table ensued. Mr. Becker explained how the Colorado Commission on Higher Education ranked, in terms of priority, the two projects for which it submitted a FY 2015-16 IT capital budget request.
150206 AttachD.pdf
03:26 PM
The committee discussed ranking criteria for the consideration of FY 2015-16 IT budget requests, such as: whether the scope for the project is appropriate; if project performance requirements and accountability for contractors are included; and if the department is engaging end users to make sure they are planning the project based on user needs. The committee also discussed the importance of focusing on the causes of failures in past projects, successful project management of state IT projects, the need for specifications and terms for commercial off-the-shelf products to be included in project contracts, the risk for projects to see overruns coming from the system customization side, and what happens when a project is mismanaged by an agency and not executed successfully.
03:39 PM
Michael Shea, OIT legislative liaison, and Jack Wylie, DPA legislative liaison, came to the table and stated that the departments were working on responses to staff questions and would return them to the committee as soon as possible. Discussion ensued.
03:43 PM
The committee discussed the prioritization of FY 2015-16 IT budget requests and whether it could use a decision matrix when considering projects. Kori Donaldson, LCS, came to the table and discussed how the Capital Development Committee has considered using a decision matrix in the past but never ultimately implemented one. She said that there had been hesitation to lock criteria for scoring down to specific aspects of a project. She responded to questions on how the Governor's Office ranks projects for funding. Mr. Lucas discussed how he would analyze projects and rank them for the committee's consideration.
03:50 PM
The committee was adjourned.