CIWQS Review Phase II: Evaluation and Final Recommendations March 14, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Establishing Performance Indicators in Support of The Illinois Commitment Presented to the Illinois Board of Higher Education December 11, 2001.
Advertisements

Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report District Accreditation Forsyth County Schools February 15, 2012.
Halton Housing Trust Customer Scrutiny Panel An introduction to our Service Reviews.
Migrant Education Comprehensive Needs Assessment
State of Indiana Business One Stop (BOS) Program Roadmap Updated June 6, 2013 RFI ATTACHMENT D.
HR Manager – HR Business Partners Role Description
Systems Analysis and Design in a Changing World
1 Requirements and the Software Lifecycle The traditional software process models Waterfall model Spiral model The iterative approach Chapter 3.
Waste Site Cleanup Advisory Committee Meeting June 23, 2011 MassDEP Reform Initiatives.
Chapter 7: Key Process Areas for Level 2: Repeatable - Arvind Kabir Yateesh.
The key steps in an annual cycle Produce the annual work programme Create an annual Internal Audit plan for approval by the Audit Committee, typically.
OVERVIEW OF ClASS METHODS and ACTIVITIES. Session Objectives By the end of the session, participants will be able to: Describe ClASS team composition.
BuildAMS – Governance Review Proposal Presentation to Council February 25 th, 2015.
Chesapeake Bay Program Goal Development, Governance, and Alignment Carin Bisland, GIT6 Vice Chair.
Family Resource Center Association January 2015 Quarterly Meeting.
1 LBNL Enterprise Computing (EC) January 2003 LBNL Enterprise Computing.
Orientation to the Accreditation Internal Evaluation (Self-Study) Flex Activity March 1, 2012 Lassen Community College.
The topics addressed in this briefing include:
Purpose of the Standards
Performance Management Open Information Session Spring 2009.
ISO 9001:2015 Revision overview - General users
NASFAA 2003: Reconnecting With Students! 2 FSA Assessments: A Key to Compliance & Improvement Session #: S106.
NESCC Meeting March 28, Topics Accomplishments Since Last Meeting Program Management for NESCC Support to the NESCC Sponsor Committee Review and.
Challenges Faced in Developing Audit Plans and Programs 21 st March, 2013.
APPRAISAL OF THE HEADTEACHER GOVERNORS’ BRIEFING
Strategic Planning Module Preview This PowerPoint provides a sample of the Strategic Planning Module PowerPoint. The actual Strategic Planning PowerPoint.
Atlanta Public Schools Project Management Framework Proposed to the Atlanta Board of Education to Complete AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” January 24,
Quality Assurance Program Presenter: Erin Mustain 1.
Deakin Richard Tan Head, Information Technology Services Division DEAKIN UNIVERSITY 14 th October 2003.
IT 499 Bachelor Capstone Week 8. Adgenda Administrative Review UNIT Seven UNIT Eight Project UNIT Nine Preview Project Status Summary.
Z26 Project Management Introduction lecture 1 13 th January 2005
© GEO Secretariat 5.2 Monitoring and Evaluation John Adamec Co-Chair, M&E Working Group GEO-XI Plenary November 2014 Geneva, Switzerland.
Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) Conference and Expo 2011 David L. Lawrence Convention Center/ 316 October.
Atlanta Board of Education AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” February 14, 2011.
University-wide Accreditation Academic Leadership Program February 18, 2010.
HECSE Quality Indicators for Leadership Preparation.
NSDI Strategic Plan Update FGDC Coordination Group Meeting September 10, 2013.
ACCREDITATION Goals: Goals: - Certify to the public and to educational organizations that the school is recognized as an effective institution of learning.
MYP Pre-authorisation Report April 12-13, 2010 Recommendations Summary Professional Development Day May 17 th 2010.
AdvancED District Accreditation Process © 2010 AdvancED.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report District Accreditation Bibb County Schools February 5-8, 2012.
Project Kick-off Meeting Presented By: > > > > Office of the Chief Information Officer.
Office of Performance Review (OPR) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Stephen Dorage.
TPEP Teacher & Principal Evaluation System Prepared from resources from WEA & AWSP & ESD 112.
Small Agency Meeting June 24, 2008 Sunflower Project Statewide Financial Management System.
TEAM Coordinating Committee Training (TCC).  Introductions  Mission of the TEAM Program  Design of the TEAM Program  Overview of the Module Process.
Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Methodology and Responsibilities for Periodic Safety Review for Research Reactors William Kennedy Research Reactor.
Quality Assurance Review Team Oral Exit Report School Accreditation AUTEC School 4-8 March 2012.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) Facilitating District-wide Improvement in Instructional Practices and Student Performance.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
Software Requirements Specification Document (SRS)
Gordon State College Office of Institutional Effectiveness Faculty Meeting August 5, 2015.
CAMPUS AND COMMUNITY OPEN SESSION MARCH 25 Higher Learning Commission Re-accreditation.
DEVELOPMENT OF A WHITE PAPER ON CORRECTIONAL SERVICES Ministry of Correctional Services.
U.S. Department of Agriculture eGovernment Program Smart Choice Pre-Select Phase Transition September 2002.
CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE SPRING MEETING MARCH 1—2, 2012 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA EPA’s Evaluation of Bay Jurisdictions’ Draft Phase II WIPs & Final
Cleveland State University Self Study 2010 North Central Association/Higher Learning Commission Accreditation.
Promoting the Vision & Mission of the School Governing Board Online Training Module.
Dutchess Community College Middle States Self-Study 2015
Why is My College on warning? Understanding the Accreditation Process.
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
Standards and Certification Training
Overview – Guide to Developing Safety Improvement Plan
Redefinition of Scope Presenter: Darrin Polhemus
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1. Organizational Structure
Get on Board: Reaffirmation 2016
Presentation transcript:

CIWQS Review Phase II: Evaluation and Final Recommendations March 14, 2008

Background n Review Panel convened in response to State Water Board’s request for external review of CIWQS n First Panel meeting held in May 2007 n Preliminary Panel report with recommendations issued July 2007 n Water Board staff to consider recommendations and demonstrate progress toward benchmarks through February 2008

Findings of Previous Review n Seven essential recommendations: u Reduce the project’s scope u Restructure CIWQS’ project management u Validate the system’s requirements u Rebuild key constituencies u Address data quality issues u Produce key reports u Improve user interface

Goals for Phase II n Water Board staff will demonstrate progress by responding to Phase I recommendations u Including specific actions, timelines, and additional performance measures for the coming year n Panel will review progress and prepare final report to: u Judge adequacy of Water Board’s response u Make final recommendations for future direction of the project

Overview of Final Review n CIWQS remains essential for the State Water Board to fulfill its mission u Terminating funding would be counterproductive n CIWQS should be funded at an appropriate level n The program’s new direction should lead to success u We are impressed with the remarkable turnaround since May n We are particularly impressed with progress in reorganizing management and communicating with users

Overview (cont.) n The redefinition of project scope was appropriate and effective n We have remaining concerns with some aspects of the technical approach, rate of data cleanup, and report production

Original Recommendations n Reduce the scope n Restructure management n Validate system requirements n Rebuild constituency n Address data issues n Produce key reports n Improve user interface

Reduce the Scope n Evaluation u Achieved significant scope reduction u Increased probability of project success u Achieved buy-in from Steering Committee & users u Phased eSMR implementation plan is reasonable u Implementation through eSMR Level 3 is desirable u We concur with need for a separate federal interface n Recommendation u Consider trimming unneeded parts of the database to meet reduced project scope

Restructure Management Restructure Management n Evaluation u The new management structure positions CIWQS for success u Effective new organization with leadership in Water Quality not in DIT ties the project closer to the Board’s mission u Buy-in from senior managers for the project’s importance and new direction

Validate System Requirements n Evaluation u Fundamentally improved systems design & implementation u Corrected design and approach based on testing u The underlying structure can be made to work Referential integrity issues are being addressed Referential integrity issues are being addressed u Requirements better reflect user inputs & needs n Recommendations u Demonstrate a disciplined systems engineering process Document team members’ roles, responsibilities, activities Document team members’ roles, responsibilities, activities u Use test cases to demonstrate successful resolution of referential integrity issues

Rebuild Constituency n Evaluation u Achieved remarkable cultural change that significantly improved user communication and support u Developed effective user community structure u Users attended Panel meeting and strongly supported the project u Users strongly engaged in most areas u Issues with stormwater group illustrate cultural improvements have further to go n Recommendations u Should apply approach used for eSMR to all groups and issues

Address Data Issues n Evaluation u Less was accomplished than we had expected u Acknowledged the need for systematic QA/QC u Database integrity is being addressed u Some progress on correcting existing data errors n Recommendations u Devote more focused effort to QA/QC and data cleanup u Develop coherent plan that prioritizes data cleanup and identifies needed resources and timeframe u Create formal QA/QC mechanisms, including user participation u Make QA/QC an integral part of database administration and operation

Produce Key Reports n Evaluation u Created a mechanism to identify and prioritize key reports u Made some progress on developing canned reports n Recommendations u Demonstrate that required reports can be produced from the core CIWQS system u Increase staff’s ability to create ad hoc reports u Accelerate report production

Improve User Interfaces n Evaluation u Created a mechanism for input and feedback from users u Created a successful and easy-to-use SSO module u Seem to be heading in the right direction n Recommendations u Create a formal mechanism for validating and testing user interfaces u Create context-specific drop-down menus u Create context-specific online help

Additional Recommendations n Build a non-CIWQS interface with ICIS-NPDES n Develop a set of persistent end-to-end tests to demonstrate that the data model and processes work n Develop a deployment plan for the system and data n Fund the system at an appropriate level

ICIS-NPDES Issue Must Be Resolved n ICIS-NPDES will not meet State Board’s needs n There are different reporting needs for EPA and for State Board n State system should cross-check violation determinations between state and federal systems to quickly identify erroneous violations n Download ICIS-NPDES data to CIWQS as needed for State Board purposes

Evaluate Interface Options w/EPA n Consider discharger submission using u eDMR (file-oriented) u netDMR (interactive) n Develop test plan and case(s) including EPA DMR data download to state system u EPA has agreed to this using currently submitted data; this should be formalized quickly to take advantage of the offer

Develop End-to-End Testing n Develop and maintain a library of test cases with known results that can be used to test system and processes as changes are made n Should be implemented as part of all deployment plans on an ongoing basis

Develop Deployment Plan n Develop a deployment plan for every system update and release n Should include software, hardware, data, and quality control aspects n End-to-end testing should be integral part of the plan n Each phase of the eSMR development needs a deployment plan

Fund CIWQS at Appropriate Level n Panel is encouraged by progress n Believe that changes make it likely the CIWQS project will result in a system that serves the State Board’s needs for accuracy, automation, and efficiency for the future n Encourage State Board and Legislature to fund the development at levels that can maintain and accelerate development

Next Steps n Full report of findings and recommendations, with performance metrics, within 2 months n Panel open to revisiting progress in 9 – 12 months if asked

SummarySummary n The project has made substantial improvements and is on a path to success u Management restructuring, rebuilding user constituencies, and system validation are clear successes u Additional progress needed on data cleanup, reporting, user interfaces n Additional recommendations include: u Build a non-CIWQS interface with ICIS-NPDES u Develop end-to-end tests to demonstrate all functionality u Develop comprehensive deployment plan u Fund CIWQS at an appropriate level