Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

COMMITTEE ON JOINT TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE

Date:05/11/2015
ATTENDANCE
Time:10:03 AM to 12:03 PM
Martinez Humenik
X
Newell
X
Place:HCR 0112
Singer
X
Tate
E
This Meeting was called to order by
Tyler
X
Senator Neville T.
Neville T.
X
This Report was prepared by
Matt Becker
X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call
Bills Addressed: Action Taken:
IT Procurement
Other Business		Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only
Witness Testimony and/or Committee Discussion Only


10:03 AM -- IT Procurement

The committee was called to order. A quorum was present. Ms. Brenda Berlin, Deputy Chief Information Officer and Chief Financial Officer, Office of Information Technology (OIT), and Ms. Cindy Lombardi, State Purchasing and Contracts Director, Department of Personnel and Administration, came to the table to discuss the state's information technology (IT) procurement process. Committee members received a copy of the presentation, prepared by OIT (Attachment A). In response to a committee question regarding the Department of Education's involvement in the IT procurement process, Ms. Berlin discussed how some state agencies are exempt from portions of the procurement process. Discussion ensued on the statutory authority for IT procurement and the governance structure of OIT.

150511 AttachA.pdf150511 AttachA.pdf

10:10 AM

Committee discussion ensued on the IT Portfolio Management Team, the Executive Governance Committee (EGC), and the Local Governance Committee. Ms. Berlin further discussed the governance functions of OIT, project risk categories, the project gating process, and EGC reporting requirements. Ms. Berlin responded to committee questions regarding stakeholder input to the EGC and the role of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC). Ms. Berlin discussed the gating process in more detail, including: approval letters, stakeholder outreach, acceptance letters, training, and project acceptance.


10:27 AM

In response to a committee question regarding the business process, re-engineering, and appropriation for IT projects, Ms. Berlin discussed the Human Resource Information System (HRIS) project as an example. Discussion continued on the gating process used by OIT and how it compares to IT projects managed by other states. Ms. Berlin discussed other procurement tools, including: Request for Information (RFI), Request for Proposals (RFP), Documented Quote (DQ), Invitation for Bid (IFB), price agreements, enterprise agreements, and other discretionary tools. Ms. Lombardi discussed the RFI process as a way to obtain new and innovative information that encourages competition among vendors. In response to the use of consultants in the RFI process, Ms. Lombardi stated that if consultants are used by the state in the RFI process, they are not usually allowed to participate in the final project.

10:38 AM

Ms. Berlin discussed DQs as a way to procure goods or services under $150,000. She also discussed price agreements and enterprise agreements as tools for large contracts, such as department-wide office supplies. She also mentioned discretionary ways to procure goods under $10,000 and services under $25,000. Committee discussion ensued on OIT's security protocols for IT projects.

10:50 AM

Ms. Berlin discussed the Vendor Management Office within OIT. The office was created to assist programs in engaging with vendors and holding them accountable. The office also assists programs with disputes and navigating the OIT procurement process. In response to a committee question regarding overpayment to vendors, Ms. Berlin stated that the office monitors monetary penalties pursuant to service level agreements managed by the office. She also discussed other payment oversight functions within OIT. Committee discussion ensued on recent legislative actions related to accountability for IT projects.

10:55 AM

Ms. Lombardi discussed how the state's IT procurement process is different from the private sector. She also discussed the state's procurement code and the traditional process of issuing an RFP after a project appropriation has been made. She stated that the procurement code does not prohibit an RFP from being issued prior to an appropriation. She said it does, however, prohibit a contract being issued for a project. Committee discussion ensued on the benefits and disadvantages of the current RFP process. Ms. Lombardi also discussed a stakeholder group currently being formed to improve the state's IT procurement process and how the RFI process can be better utilized.

11:04 AM

Mr. Erick Scheminske, Deputy Directory, Governor's Office of State Planning and Budgeting, came to the table to discuss the current process of issuing RFPs after appropriations are made. He discussed the disadvantages of issuing RFPs prior to appropriations being made, including damaging relationships with the state's vendor community. He also urged a better and more consistent use of the RFI process and discussed the due diligence of IT projects, from the perspective of the annual capital budget process. In response to a committee question regarding supplemental budget requests, Mr. Scheminske stated that the RFI process can help better manage the increase in recent supplemental requests. Committee discussion ensued on different ways to procure projects, e.g., a "fast-track" process, and specific projects examples, e.g., the Colorado Operations and Resource Engine (CORE) and the Colorado Crime Information Center (CCIC) IT projects.


11:16 AM

In response to a committee question on ways to improve the state's IT procurement process, Ms. Lombardi stated that DPA has a lot of great ideas and will bring them back to the committee, in coordination with upcoming meetings of the National Association of State Procurement Officers.

11:22 AM -- Other Business

Ms. Jessika Shipley, Legislative Council Staff, came to the table to discuss recent legislation regarding the committee's oversight of IT capital projects, including House Bill 15-1266. Ms. Nicole Myers, Office of Legislative Legal Services, came to the table to discuss the details of HB 15-1266. Ms. Shipley also discussed a recent meeting between JTC staff and OSPB regarding the inclusion of a more detailed cost benefit analysis for IT projects in the annual budget instructions.

Ms. Shipley and Mr. Matt Becker, Legislative Council Staff, discussed potential interim meeting dates and possible Joint Technology Committee site visits.

11:44 AM

Ms. Shipley and Mr. Gary Lucas, Legislative Council Staff, discussed ongoing work related to asset management and an inventory of the state's IT systems.

11:51 AM

The committee finalized its 2015 interim meeting dates.

12:03 PM

The committee adjourned.