January 21, 2010 Project Status Report

 Introduction  Meeting Minutes Approval  Project Status Report  Other Business  Public Comments  Review of Action from Meeting  Scheduling of Next Meeting  Adjourn Page 2

 Introduction  Meeting Minutes Approval  Project Status Report  Other Business  Public Comments  Review of Action from Meeting  Scheduling of Next Meeting  Adjourn Page 3

 Budget & Timeline  Metrics Tracking and Reporting  Invitation To Negotiate (ITN)  Independent Validation and Verification (IV&V)  Workforce Services, Workforce Florida and Workforce Boards  Interviews with Other States  “To-Be” Process Review Workshop  Next Steps: Use Cases  Process Improvement Reviews Page 4

Page 5

Page 6

Page 7

 Feasibility Study has targeted $43M in annualized savings  Begin to document the cost drivers behind those savings, identify the supporting metrics and begin a disciplined process for collecting those metrics  Plan to complete a Benefits Realization Strategy and Plan prior to Phase 3 kick-off (October 2010) Page 8

 Approved to use existing available budget authority  Decision made to competitively procure the development of the ITN and Evaluation/Selection/Negotiation Strategy  RFQ currently under review Page 9

 Ernst & Young contract currently being approved  Prepared to start next Monday Page 10

 Project Description ◦ Conduct additional analysis into the Workforce Program as it relates to potential improvements that might be realized as part of the UC modernization effort ◦ Determining the possibility and plausibility of improving Workforce processes to provide better integration with the UC Program Page 11

 February 9, 2010 ◦ Workforce & UC Integration Goals and Objectives  February 19, 2010 ◦ High Level As-Is Process Flow Document ◦ Plan and estimate for potential definition of To- Be process flows and corresponding requirements related to the UC system  February 28, 2010 ◦ Final high-level requirements for UC Page 12

 Background ◦ Moving toward modernization for 10 years ◦ Presently in year 2 of a 5 year $150M effort for Tax and Benefits ◦ In-house development project team ­ dedicated SMEs ◦ Have broad requirements ­ Developing detailed requirements “Just In Time” through the Agile Methodology ◦ Technology driven initiative ­ Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) & Java Page 13

 Lessons Learned ◦ Had multiple vendors for requirements and switched project managers ◦ Contracts were poorly managed ◦ Did not develop quality use cases ◦ Did not have an enterprise architecture group ◦ Should have hired skilled consultants as needed Page 14

 Background ◦ 2002 defined requirements, use cases at a very high level - Issued RFP in 2003 ◦ After one year, realized that the project effort was underestimated by 100% ◦ Restarted detail design in 2007 ◦ Project team size ­ 12 SME’s for 12 functional areas who were responsible for getting additional resources from program areas and 30 UAT testers ­ 60 System Integrator (SI) staff Page 15

 Lessons learned ◦ Business process changes are only now being defined. Should have done this initially Page 16

 Background ◦ Benefits redesign phase began in Went to production in October 2007 ◦ Currently timely in all business areas, even with 3x normal workload ◦ Were focused on business vs. technical solution ◦ Project team ­ 30 agency SME’s & 12 agency technical staff ­ 30 SI developers; 30 SI technical staff ◦ Agency positions were not backfilled which created difficulties for Operations Page 17

 Lessons learned: ◦ Entire organization must be committed to the goal ◦ Important to understand that there will be unavoidable risks ◦ Ensure that your staff is integrated and understand their clearly defined roles ◦ Workforce Integration: built open structures so that integrations can be developed at a later date Page 18

 Background ◦ Benefit redesign timeline: January 2005 – March 2009 (included Katrina and EUC) ◦ Workflow was a major driving force ◦ Value added: number of claims takers down 30% and minimal incremental operational cost in ’09, but with triple the number of claims ◦ Project Team ­ 20 dedicated agency resources ­ Business analysts were assigned specific areas throughout development, implementation and testing ­ 40 SI associates dedicated to the project. Page 19

 Lesson learned: ◦ Would have developed federal reports as we went along instead of waiting until the end to develop reports. Page 20

 Lessons learned ◦ Broad consensus that we can begin with a transfer system from another state ◦ Project timeline of 4 years and $68M “feels” right ◦ Contract needs deliverable based milestones ◦ Key roles ­ Agency driven project – not System Integrator driven ­ SMEs to focus on functional knowledge ­ Business Analysts to pull operational vision together for continuity ­ System Integrator for technical and system expertise ­ Get agency technical staff involved early Page 21

 Lessons learned con’t ◦ Create an incentive structure for SMEs assigned to the project ◦ Ensure that you have a sponsor who can change spending authority and make scope decisions ◦ Phased implementation approach ­ Lower project risk but can cause operational challenges working with two systems during the interim ­ Develop a transition plan and training plan to mitigate identified risks ◦ Get interdependent agencies involved early including the shared data center Page 22

 The “To-Be” Process Flow Workshop was held January 6-7 with UC senior management in attendance  Great dialog from a business process viewpoint – not technological  Agreement on overall process vision ◦ Sign-off occurring this week as scheduled  Efforts underway to define Use Cases ◦ Based on Use Case training conducted in November Page 23

 All incoming and outgoing correspondence will be scanned, indexed and available on-line in electronic format  The system will include a business-rules driven workflow engine used to create work items, manage work queues, and route work items between queues  The system will include Case and Document Management functionality to manage related work components and artifacts  Generic work queues will be established, as appropriate, to support the processing of unknown, misrouted, or incomplete work items  The system will include clearly defined roles and authorities for all users; every user will be assigned to a specific role

 Employers, Claimants, and authorized third-parties will have system accounts, protected by appropriate security credentials, and all work items will be associated to those accounts  The system will maintain balances for all accounts and automatically recalculate balances based on the reversal or modification of prior actions  Claimants, Employers, and authorized third-parties will be able to opt for electronic communication  will be an accepted communication method for external parties (claimants, employers, and authorized third-parties) ◦ Communication will be in accordance with the preferred method (e.g., notifications, fax, paper)

 The system will not send sensitive information via . Users will be notified documents are ready to be viewed using their online accounts. Access to documents will be controlled using appropriate security credentials  All claims, claim weeks, determinations, and payments will be traceable to funding sources and employer chargeability records  The system will create and maintain an online history of all activities related to a particular claimant, employer, or authorized third-party to include claims, claim weeks, determinations, and decisions

Page 27

 Introduction  Meeting Minutes Approval  Project Status Report  Other Business  Public Comments  Review of Action from Meeting  Scheduling of Next Meeting  Adjourn Page 28