AB 2523, as amended, Cooley. Department of Technology.
Existing lawbegin delete establishes, until January 1, 2015,end deletebegin insert establishesend insert the Department of Technology, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs and consider feasible alternatives to address the identified needs and benefits consistent with statewide strategies, policies, and procedures.
This bill would require the Director
ofbegin delete Technology, on or before July 1,
2016, to report recommendations to the Legislature, as specified, on how a team of senior consulting information technology experts could be developed to serve as support for state agencies and senior project team members in state government on information technology projects. This bill would require the director to consider specified factors when making those recommendations.end deletebegin insert Technology to review a specified manual and draft a report based on that manual and other specified factors, to be transmitted to certain legislative committees on or before July 1, 2016, that recommends how a team of senior consulting information technology experts could be developed to serve as support for state agencies and senior project team members in state government. This bill would require the director, after reviewing the manual and drafting the report, to establish a unit, within the Department of Technology, of consulting information
technology experts to serve as support for state agencies.end insert This bill would make legislative findings in this regard.
This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
The Legislature finds and declares all of the
2following:
3(a) The state has identified the management of large technology
4projects as high risk for the last several decades.
5(b) Large technology projects may take years to develop and,
6similar to issues with a recent technology project for the
7Department of Employment Development, the implementation of
8a project, from conception through implementation, can span
9multiple gubernatorial administrations and include a change in
10senior managers, retirements, and career moves that affect the
11project.
12(c) To address these issues, the state has steadily worked to
13improve its organizational and institutional capacity to manage
14large technology programs. This effort is vital, because at the
15present time, therebegin insert areend insert over 100 identified information technology
16projects in progress throughout state government in various phases
17of progress and completion.
18(d) An important milestone in this ongoing effort was the July
192013 issuance of the California Project Management Methodology
20Reference Manual completed by the Director of Technology, also
21known as the State Chief Information Officer. The manual breaks
22large information technology projects into the phases of initial
23concept, initiating, planning, executing, and closing. The manual
P3 1emphasizes
that the critical role throughout these phases is with
2the attendant management duties of monitoring and controlling to
3ensure the project is advancing in accordance with budget and
4outcome expectations. The manual highlights the critical role of
5the project management team, which includes the distinct roles of
6the executive sponsor, project steering committees, project directorbegin insert,end insert
7 and project manager.
8(e) The difficulty of maintaining continuity among senior project
9leadership is highlighted by the experience of a recent technology
10project for the Department of Employment Development, which
11began under Governor Davis, continued under Governor
12Schwarzenegger, and is now being implemented under Governor
13Brown. In addition, testimony before the
Assembly Committee on
14Insurance oversight hearing made clear the project has lost key
15personnel during the project course to retirement and career
16transfer.
17(f) The state would benefit from the development of a senior
18cadre of information technology consultative expertise in the
19Department of Technology who can serve as technology advisors
20to executive sponsors and other senior level persons charged with
21project implementation throughout state government.
The heading of Chapter 5.6 (commencing with Section
2311545) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code
24 is amended to read:
25
Section 11547.5 is added to the Government Code, to
29read:
(a) The Director of Technology shallbegin delete reviewend deletebegin insert establish
31a unit, within the Department of Technology, of consulting
32information technology experts to serve as support for state
33agencies.end insert
34begin insert(b)end insertbegin insert end insertbegin insert Prior to establishing the unit described in subdivision (a),
35the Director of Technology shall reviewend insert the California Project
36Management Methodology Reference Manual and draft
a report,
37based on the manual, recommending how a team of senior
38consulting information technology experts could be developed to
39serve as support for state agencies and senior project team members
40in state government to support their exercise of leadership,
P4 1monitoring, control, and direction over information technology
2projects to minimize risks of those projects being completed
3improperly and over budget. In drafting the recommendations, the
4Director of Technology shall also consider how a team of senior
5consulting advisors can assist senior executives charged with
6oversight of major information technology projects in terms of the
7challenges arising from all of the following:
8(1) Governance.
9(2) Development and management of contracts.
10(3) Testing.
11(4) Organizational change management.
12(5) Data conversion and migration.
13(6) Schedule development and management.
14(7) Evaluation and possible pitfalls of seeking value for
15taxpayers by re-engineering state systems and procedures.
16(8) Risk and issue identification and management.
17(9) Interface identification and management.
18(10) Quality assurance and quality control.
19(11) Requirements definition and management.
20(12) Architecture.
21(13) Roll-out planning and approach.
22(b)
end delete
23begin insert(c)end insert On or before July 1, 2016, the Director of Technology shall
24transmit the report completed pursuant to subdivisionbegin delete (a)end deletebegin insert (b)end insert to all
25legislative committees with jurisdiction over state information
26technology, including, but not limited to, the Assembly Committee
27on Accountability and
Administrative Review, in compliance with
28Section 9795.
O
97