OED ILE-CMS RFP S-DASOBO-00012885 Attachment M-3 - Modernization Program Governance Plan~1.pdf

Modernization Program

Governance Plan

Version: 5.1

Revision date: April 2021

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 2 of 23

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Document Maintenance

Program Overview

Document Purpose

Document Audience

Risks, Assumptions, and Constraints

Governance Overview and Structure

Oversight Roles and Responsibilities

Modernization Oversight Forum

Decision Making Leadership Responsibility Assignment

Communication and Reporting

Decision and Escalation Process

Decision Communication

Approving Authorities

Appendix A – Decision Registry

Appendix B – Decision Analysis Template

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1 – Modernization Program within the Organization

Figure 2 – Modernization Program Governance Structure

Figure 3 – Leadership Responsibility Assignment

Figure 4 – Decision Levels

Figure 5 – Decision Flow

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 3 of 23

Document Maintenance This document is maintained by the Modernization Program team and will be reviewed and updated annually or when major revisions are necessary. Periodic process reviews assess the effectiveness of program plans and processes. Any identified changes or improvements are incorporated in program processes and reflected within revisions to these program plans. All program plans are stored within the program’s file share located here: \\WPOEDFILL04\Modernization\00 Program Management\Program Plans

Version Date Author Change Description

V1.0 12/2017 Jennifer Hannan, Modernization Program Manager

Initial version of the document.

V2.0 12/2018 Jennifer Hannan, Modernization Program Manager

Applied updated style template.

Included editorial adjustments, added decision process and diagrams.

V3.0 3/2019 Ethan Benatan, Modernization Director

Jennifer Hannan, Modernization Program Manager

Included role of stakeholder boards, clarified role of sponsors, described the decisions in further detail, and refreshed graphics to reflect other changes.

V4.0 1/2020 Jennifer Hannan, Modernization Program Manager

Clarified decision making authority, documentation, and communication.

Updated graphics with correct titles and organizations.

V5.0 03/2021 Alex Kasner, Modernization Senior Quality and Risk Analyst

Updated to incorporate PFMLI contributions program, updated roles and responsibilities, updated decision RACI, added clarification around documentation of decisions, and refreshed graphics as preparing plan for SG3 submission.

V5.1 04/2021 David Ford, Modernization Program Manager

Updated to incorporate EIS feedback from Stage Gate 3 submission.

file://///WPOEDFILL04/Modernization/00%20Program%20Management/Program%20Plans

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 4 of 23

Program Overview The Employment Department’s Modernization Program is a multi-year initiative focused on transforming the agency’s business processes and core technology systems. Computer systems supporting receipt of unemployment insurance taxes, paid family and medical leave insurance (PFMLI) contributions, payment of unemployment insurance benefits, and delivery of employment services will be replaced or established.

Further, business processes will be transformed to take advantage of opportunities and benefits available through new system capabilities.

Document Purpose This plan describes the individuals and entities that govern or have oversight of the Modernization Program and its projects, and identifies those accountable for ensuring that the program achieves its goals and expected benefits. This plan describes the roles and responsibilities of these individuals and entities, as well as their relationship within the program’s governance structure. This plan also describes the decision-making and escalation processes.

Document Audience This document is intended for these primary audiences:

Program governance entities – to understand their roles and responsibilities within the governance model.

Internal and external oversight entities – to understand our governance structure and determine whether appropriate processes are in place and continue to be followed.

Program and project team members and vendor staff – to understand the governance structure, roles and responsibilities, and decision-making hierarchy and escalation process.

Agency employees and external stakeholders – to reference for general awareness.

Risks, Assumptions, and Constraints

RISKS

Risks related to this governance plan, its associated processes, and other project management process groups are described and managed through the program’s risk and issue process. See the program’s risk management plan for further details on the risk and issue process. See the Modernization Risk-Issue Registry for a current listing of governance related risks.

ASSUMPTIONS

The agency’s strategic direction, leadership, and commitment to modernization will remain stable for the duration of the program. Any changes in direction or leadership will be identified early so that adequate planning and changes to the governance structure can occur in advance.

State and federal oversight requirements will remain constant, allowing the program to develop plans and structure that satisfy these requirements.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 5 of 23

CONSTRAINTS

The United States Department of Labor (USDOL) has oversight of the unemployment insurance and employment services programs. Changes initiated by USDOL during MOD projects have the potential to impact scope, schedule or budget of the projects.

The State of Oregon requires a contract with an independent quality management services (iQMS) vendor for all information technology projects exceeding certain thresholds. The agency is contracted with an iQMS vendor to fulfill this oversight role. This is a constraint if services are not appropriately acquired or available.

The State of Oregon requires oversight of major information technology projects and programs through its Enterprise Information Services; Department of Administrative Services, Chief Financial Office; and Legislative Fiscal Office.

The program’s future spending authority will be contingent, in part, upon recommendations from the state’s oversight entities based on reports of satisfactory progress from the agency and the iQMS vendor.

Oregon State Government budget follows a legislative budget cycle that does not always align with project work. The program’s future spending authority, including position authority and other costs will be constrained by this cyclical schedule.

The Legislature has the ability to create new tax and benefit programs during the annual legislative sessions. If these programs require OED to administer them, then it could potentially increase the Modernization Program complexity across multiple areas (e.g., staffing, schedule, stakeholder engagement).

Service delivery partners such as DOR have limitations on when they can or will make changes to their forms and processes which may significantly affect costs and readiness to accommodate changes needed to payment and reporting processes within our project schedule.

Governance Overview and Structure The Modernization Program’s governance structure and processes provide the framework within which modernization projects’ decisions will be made. The Modernization Program’s governance structure describes who has accountability for success of the program outcomes, as well as accountability that the agency’s business needs are met and that solution implementations are adopted and integrated into the agency’s operations. The agency’s director has ultimate authority and accountability for the success of the Modernization Program. The agency’s director has delegated authority for the oversight and management of the Modernization Program to the Modernization Director.

While the Modernization Program has stakeholders, partners, and advisory boards that will be involved, oversight entities, both internal and external, are accountable for ensuring that the program and its projects are being managed successfully, and that the program delivers the benefits for which it was intended.

There are multiple layers of oversight and accountability related to the execution and management of the Modernization Program and its related projects. These layers of oversight and accountability are described further within this plan to clarify roles, responsibilities, and decision-making authority.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 6 of 23

Further, Project Management Institute (PMI) standards as described in The Standard for Program Management will be utilized to manage the Modernization Program.

Appropriate disciplines that address project management standards, quality control processes, status reporting, budget and schedule variance reporting, and risk and issue monitoring, will be put in place to track and manage overall project performance. PMI standards as described in the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) will be utilized to manage modernization projects. The agency will partner with solution vendors to ensure the implementation methodology is sound, and industry best practices for program and project management are utilized. When necessary, the agency will augment processes and responsibilities to achieve these standards.

The Modernization Program has internal oversight by an executive sponsor, program sponsor, business sponsors representing key functional areas within the agency, and a steering committee that supports these sponsors by providing organizational strategic direction. An operations and policy team also provides oversight and direction on issues that arise during modernization projects that require policy decisions or that have cross-functional operational impacts.

The State of Oregon has several oversight entities external to the agency that provide guidance and accountability to the agency in delivering the outcomes for the program. The State of Oregon also requires external reviews to be provided by an Independent Quality Management Services (iQMS) vendor contracted through the state’s quality assurance procurement process. This iQMS vendor will report their assessment and recommendations to the agency and government oversight entities for consideration. The federal government also provides oversight and funding for agency programs.

The agency’s IT Governance Advisory Board acts as the agency’s decision-making body to review, approve, or reject substantive IT-related proposals, and establishes the workload priorities of the agency’s information technology efforts for project-related activities. This committee reviews proposals that are likely to exceed 200 hours of technical staff time (agency or contracted) or that are agency or enterprise-wide initiatives. The committee determines workload priority (ranking) of approved requests, and monitors the information technology and project management resource needs to provide guidance on allocation of those resources.

The agency’s IT Governance Advisory Board has ranked the Modernization Program as the agency’s highest priority effort. The Modernization Program will be comprised of multiple projects that will be reviewed with the IT Governance Advisory Board to establish priority, understand competing resource needs, and identify any adjustments to accommodate IT resource capacity constraints.

While the Modernization Program is the agency’s highest priority improvement initiative, the agency understands that it must continue to serve its customers and perform the current operations of the agency. It will be the responsibility of the program’s steering committee, in collaboration with the IT Governance Advisory Board, to ensure IT resources and priorities are balanced between the Modernization Program and agency operations.

It is the Employment Department’s belief that it is essential to engage, involve, listen to, and act upon input from our employees, partners, customers, and stakeholders as we envision and build our future. It is our intent to maintain a broader governance structure to formally support this goal. For example, key agency partners and stakeholders are invited to attend steering committee meetings as guests, or to serve on the steering committee. Further, project stakeholder boards are established to disseminate project information, plan and make decisions across agencies, and discuss concerns, needs, and impacts from planning through implementation. These boards will include key partners and service stakeholders.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 7 of 23

Once established, these entities will be added to this document, and a charter will be developed that describes each groups’ purpose and responsibilities, as well as membership and meeting frequency.

The following diagrams illustrate the structure of the Modernization Program, how it is prioritized within the agency’s IT portfolio, and the program’s governance entities.

Figure 1 – Modernization Program within the Organization

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 8 of 23

Figure 2 – Modernization Program Governance Structure

Additional information regarding the program organization is available in the Staff Management Plan and associated Roles and Responsibilities document.

Oversight Roles and Responsibilities

INTERNAL OVERSIGHT

Modernization Executive Sponsor

The Employment Department Director serves as the Modernization Executive Sponsor and has ultimate responsibility and accountability for the Modernization Program’s success and ability to achieve its goals and benefits for the agency. The Modernization Executive Sponsor ensures that program objectives are well defined, achievable, and aligned with the agency’s objectives and strategic direction. This person is the executive decision maker of the Modernization Program at the highest level and is the authorizing person with the delegated funding and approval authority. Key responsibilities:

Provides leadership and advocacy for ongoing funding and support.

Engages with oversight stakeholders and key partners to provide awareness and understanding of the program’s goals, benefits, and progress.

Delivers key messages to agency staff, external stakeholders, and partners.

Holds agency leadership accountable for thoughtfully planning and implementing changes that result from execution of the program and its projects.

Modernization Program Sponsor

The Employment Department’s Modernization Director serves as the Modernization Program Sponsor.

The Modernization Program Sponsor is responsible for the program’s success and the achievement of the program’s goals and expected benefits. The Modernization Program Sponsor is accountable for ensuring that the program is delivered within the agreed-upon scope, schedule, budget, and other established parameters. The Modernization Program Sponsor works closely with the business sponsors and the program’s steering committee to escalate decisions, risks, organizational or operational impacts when appropriate. Key responsibilities:

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 9 of 23

Develops the program strategy and provides guidance and direction to the modernization team.

Maintains relationships with oversight stakeholders and ensures business requirements are met and expectations are managed.

Clearly communicates the program’s goals and expected benefits.

Acts as the chair for the program’s steering committee.

Oversees the decision-making hierarchy and ensures that concerns, risks, and decisions are escalated to the appropriate individual or governance body.

Works closely with the Modernization Program Manager to monitor and communicate progress of the program and its projects.

Works with agency partners to explore opportunities to provide services in an innovative and streamlined way, being strategic within the enterprise.

Works with sponsors and steering members to communicate needs, changes, and impacts.

Modernization Business Sponsors

Modernization business sponsors include the program’s executive sponsor, the program sponsor, and business sponsors representing key functional and service areas within the agency. These individuals are responsible for agency management matters, such as allocation of internal resources or operational priorities. Key responsibilities:

Identifies and mitigates significant risks or barriers that are agency-centric, including internal resource allocation, performance, and prioritization.

Confirms or authorizes use of resources, such as funding for program expenses, staffing, or contract needs.

Provides unified leadership and fosters support for the program throughout the agency.

Supports the changes and impacts that result from the program through communication and integration within the agency’s operational areas.

Provides direction and sponsor-level decision-making.

Modernization Executive Steering Committee (ESC)

The ESC supports the Modernization Executive Sponsor and Modernization Program Sponsor, and provides oversight and direction for the Modernization Program, including authorizing and monitoring the scope, schedule, and budget of projects under the program. Members include agency executives representing the functional and service areas of the agency, as well as external members as appropriate.

They are accountable for providing guidance and direction to the Modernization Program Sponsor and ensuring that the program achieves the expected outcomes. The ESC charter describes the purpose and responsibilities of the committee, as well as membership, voting practices, and meeting frequency. Key responsibilities:

Establishes vision, goals, and objectives for the program that align with the agency strategic vision and goals.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 10 of 23

Advocates for the program and clearly communicates the program’s goals and expected benefits to their staff, external stakeholders, and partners.

Validates and delivers key messaging.

Provides oversight of progress against established baselines for scope, schedule, and budget, and ensure the program is achieving its goals and objectives. The respective scope, schedule, and budget management plans describe these baselines and indicate where they are documented.

Authorizes significant changes to scope, schedule, and budget.

Provides oversight of project risks and issues.

Identifies and mitigates significant risks or barriers that are program-centric (as opposed to those related to agency management, which are in the purview of the sponsors).

Provides unified leadership and fosters support for the program throughout the agency, as well as with partners and stakeholders.

Supports the changes and impacts that result from the program through communication and integration within their agencies’ operational areas, and with partners and stakeholders.

Provides direction and executive-level decision-making.

Considers feedback and input gathered from stakeholder boards.

Delegates work to other committees or workgroups as deemed necessary. It is expected that delegated work will be brought back to the ESC for review and approval.

Modernization Operations and Policy Team (OPT)

The OPT represents functional and service areas at the operational level within the agency. They are accountable for providing guidance and direction to modernization teams on implementation decisions relating to policy or operational impacts.

It is expected that, as the new systems are configured and refined to meet the agency’s needs, the majority of decisions will be made by modernization team members in partnership with program process owners and subject matter experts. Only those decisions that have a policy or cross-functional operational impact will be escalated to this team for decision. The OPT charter describes membership, voting practices, and meeting frequency of this group. Key responsibilities:

Analyzes major policy opportunities and/or issues and makes decisions, or escalates per the documented Modernization decision process.

Provides strategic direction to the modernization teams by understanding the operational impact of project decisions.

Communicates decisions and resulting impacts.

Leads the adoption of the new system within business units, bringing about organizational changes that may arise.

Provides support and input into organization change and communication planning.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 11 of 23

Delegates work to other committees or workgroups as deemed necessary. It is expected that delegated work will be brought back to the OPT for review and approval.

EXTERNAL OVERSIGHT

State and federal regulatory agencies are required to oversee and evaluate progress of large, enterprise projects to ensure they are being appropriately managed, are achieving their stated outcomes, and are delivering the value for the investment. These oversight entities will work directly with Modernization to review progress and provide guidance as necessary.

Modernization Stakeholder Boards

Each project under the program may convene a stakeholder board. The purpose of these stakeholder boards is to enable the Modernization Program to honor its first guiding principle, “Focus on our customers’ experience,” and to achieve its Goal 1, “Enhance customer experience” and Goal 2, “Transform business processes.”

It is expected that the majority of decisions will be made by modernization team members, in partnership with internal and external process owners and subject matter experts. Only decisions that have a cross-organizational operational impact will be escalated to this group for input and recommendation. The stakeholder board’s charter will describe membership, voting practices, and meeting frequency. Key responsibilities:

• Identifies opportunities to better serve shared customers, including Oregonians, businesses, state agencies, and other partners, including reviewing input from customer surveys.

• Represents the practices, needs, and opportunities of their parent organizations.

• Identifies and explores alternative approaches to take advantage of opportunities and makes recommendations to the ESC.

• Participates, through an elected representative as a voting member, in the ESC.

• Collaborates with the ESC to coordinate decisions and actions across agencies and organizations.

• As appropriate, charters technical work to support collaborative work across organizational boundaries. Using resources from their own agencies and those provided by the Modernization Program, ensures that these technical work groups are appropriately resourced, overseen, and held accountable for their assigned work.

• Identifies and responds to significant risks, issues, or barriers.

• Advocates for the Modernization Program and its projects.

• Communicates inside their organizations to ensure appropriate leadership support and change management for the changes resulting from modernization projects.

Enterprise Information Services (EIS)

EIS leads state government in enterprise information technology management, strategic planning, and policy. It is the state’s policy that information technology projects are justified by sound business cases, are linked to agency business plans, aligned with state enterprise information technology strategies, and are leveraged to the maximum extent reasonable for the benefit of the enterprise. State agencies are required to seek approval from EIS – Project Portfolio Performance (P3) in advance of purchase and to

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 12 of 23 report on information technology investments. In accordance with oversight policies and procedures, EIS will provide direction, support, and oversight throughout the stage gate process to ensure quality outcomes. Modernization will meet regularly with EIS staff and provide copies of status reports.

Oregon’s Enterprise IT Governance Steering Committee (EITGC)

Established by the Enterprise Leadership Team, in service to the Governor and the State CIO, EITGC will serve as communicators, advisors, and strategic decision makers to resolve issues that impact IT related policies, standards, and IT projects.

Oregon’s Chief Financial Office (CFO)

The CFO gives objective and accurate information to state leaders and the public for more efficient use of state resources. CFO reviews and evaluates project documentation to ensure funding is adequate, recommends approval for spending authority, and ensures policies are in alignment with the Governor’s priorities. Modernization will meet regularly with CFO staff and provide copies of reports.

Oregon’s Legislative Fiscal Office (LFO)

The LFO provides research, analysis, and evaluation of state expenditures, financial affairs, program administration, and agency organization. The LFO also provides fiscal impact statements on legislative measures and recommends funding. The LFO will review and evaluate project documentation to ensure adequate budget and project quality. Modernization will meet regularly with LFO staff and provide copies of reports.

Modernization Oversight Forum

The Modernization Oversight Forum brings together trusted expertise on Oregon Information Technology (IT) projects, legislative processes, and private sector IT technical experiences. The Modernization Oversight Forum is a convening for experts and stakeholders to partner with Employment Department leadership to review complex topics, ask tough questions, and provide thoughtful counsel and strategic advice to the Employment Department’s Modernization Program and all chartered projects.

U.S. Department of Labor

The U.S. Department of Labor has oversight of, and provides funding for, Employment Department programs. This includes the funding that will support the agency’s Modernization Program. The U.S.

Department of Labor has developed a pre-implementation checklist for states to complete prior to implementing a large-scale modernization effort, and the U.S. Department of Labor establishes ongoing performance expectations for the state’s Unemployment Insurance and employment services programs.

Independent Quality Management Services (iQMS)

The State of Oregon requires agencies to contract with an iQMS vendor for all IT projects exceeding certain thresholds. The agency has contracted with an iQMS vendor to fulfill this oversight role. The iQMS vendor independently evaluates processes and management practices to ensure projects are managed appropriately and deliver their desired outcomes, and that the program successfully meets its expected benefits. The iQMS vendor works with the Modernization Senior Quality and Risk Analyst to monitor progress and quality of the program and its projects. The iQMS vendor is required to submit

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 13 of 23 reports to the agency, EIS, LFO, CFO, and Department of Administrative Services (DAS) Chief Operating Officer using defined reports, templates, and reporting schedules. Key responsibilities:

Develops monthly and quarterly status reports that describe the project’s current quality assurance status.

Reviews project practices to ensure they are adequately monitoring and controlling the program and its projects.

Conducts risk assessments.

Reviews project documentation.

Ensures that solutions are implemented according to project requirements and specifications.

Regulatory Entities

The agency complies with data, reporting, and other regulatory standards. These standards are set by various state and federal entities. While these entities may not provide oversight for the Modernization Program, the program must ensure that these standards are adhered to. These entities include, but may not be limited to:

Social Security Administration – Personal identifiable information and confidentiality standards.

Internal Revenue Service – Handling of federal tax information.

Office of Child Support Enforcement – Data security and retention of national directory of new hires data.

Decision Making Leadership Responsibility Assignment As an additional means of confirming roles and responsibilities for the Modernization Program, a Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed (RACI) chart depicts the assignment of key areas amongst the program leadership roles to clarify decision-making authority and accountability. This is intended to depict the allocation of accountability and responsibility for decision making at the highest level of leadership for the program.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 14 of 23

Figure 3 – Leadership Responsibility Assignment

Modernization Program Leadership Decision Responsibility Assignment

R=Responsible, A=Accountable, C=Consulted, I=Informed (RACI)

Description Ex ec u ti ve

Sp o n so r

P ro gr am

Sp n so r

Sp o n so rs

ES

C

O P

T

St ak eh o ld er

B ar d s

Ex te rn al

O ve rs ig h t

Benefits and scope A R C C I I/C C

Budget funding A R C C I I/C C

Communication A R/C C/R I/C I/C I/C I/C

External oversight reporting A R C I I I C

Organizational change management C A R C C I/C I

Program and project health metrics C A/R C C C I/C C

Quality assurance C A/R R/C I I I C

Schedule A R C C I/C I/C C

Staffing C A/R R/C C C/I I I/C

Stakeholder engagement A R/C C/R I I/C C I/C

Vendor deliverable acceptance I A/R R/I I I I I/C

* Members of a project’s stakeholder board have responsibilities within a limited scope, as defined in its charter. Service delivery partners and customer representatives have somewhat different roles. Further, while members of the stakeholder board do not have direct responsibility for OED, service delivery partners are responsible for leading their respective agencies through the changes associated with modernization projects. These activities may relate to funding, scheduling, scoping, staffing, managing organizational change, and progress reporting.

Communication and Reporting Similar to the governance and oversight functions described earlier, there are multiple layers of accountability related to the execution and management of the Modernization Program and its projects.

MEETINGS

Meetings are intended to provide oversight entities with insight into how the Modernization Program is being managed, provide opportunity to offer guidance and direction on needed decisions, and review any concerns or escalated risks and issues. Meetings with identified governing entities are as follows:

Regular monthly meetings of modernization sponsors to address agency management matters.

Meeting are scheduled monthly, but may be convened more frequently if needed.

Regular meetings of the ESC to review status and discuss needed decisions or escalation of risks.

Meeting format and frequency is described within the ESC charter.

Regular meetings of project stakeholder boards to discuss project status, obtain guidance and input, and discuss cross-organizational impacts. Meeting format and frequency is described within the stakeholder board’s charter.

Regular meetings of the OPT to make decisions or provide advice on operational process and policy matters. Meeting format and frequency is outlined within the OPT charter.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 15 of 23

Regular meetings between the Modernization Program Sponsor, EIS, and LFO, as well as occasional meetings with CFO and legislative committees.

Regular meetings of the Modernization Oversight Forum to convene experts and stakeholders, to partner with the Employment Department, to address complex issues and provide thoughtful counsel and strategic advice to the Modernization Program and all chartered projects. Meeting format and frequency is described within the Modernization Oversight Forum charter.

Meetings may be adjusted as the Modernization Program initiates projects and proceeds through different phases of execution. The Modernization Program Sponsor is responsible for reviewing communication needs and adjusting the focus, attendance, or frequency of meetings as appropriate.

REPORTING

Reporting is provided or made available to the ESC, Modernization team, agency employees, partners, and oversight bodies.

Monthly status reports, including schedule, scope, budget, risk and issues, and change control.

Quarterly Major IT Project reporting, including schedule, scope, and budget variance reports.

Final approved iQMS vendor monthly and quarterly status reports that address findings and risks.

Reports, plans, and documents to meet legislative needs and requests for information.

Reporting of performance towards expected benefits, program health metrics and critical success factors. Periodicity of report is based on project milestones and accomplishments.

Reporting may be adjusted as modernization projects are initiated.

Decision and Escalation Process Over the life of the program, many decisions will need to be made that will impact the function of the system, business operations, service delivery partners, and customers. Modernization sponsors have empowered the Modernization team to research, analyze, and make decisions on the agency’s behalf for how best to configure or design new systems and deliver the desired benefits. It is expected that the majority of decisions will be made by the Modernization team in partnership with business process owners and subject matter experts. Designated business process owners have been identified for each functional area and documented here: \\WPOEDFILL04\Modernization\00 Program Management\Decisions. Decisions that have significant organizational or operational impacts will be escalated appropriately.

The Modernization team will ensure decisions are captured within meeting minutes and, when appropriate, the decision registry. Decisions that cause change impact to a business area will be evaluated by the OCM Team for action as part of the OCM Strategy and Plan activities to ensure agency managers and staff understand and are prepared to execute the change. Further information on the change management process can be found within the program’s organizational change management plan. See Appendix A for an example of the program’s decision registry. See Figure 5 (below) for the decision flow.

The figure below depicts the different levels of decisions along with the expected proportion of decisions that will be made at each level.

file://///WPOEDFILL04/Modernization/00%20Program%20Management/Decisions file://///WPOEDFILL04/Modernization/00%20Program%20Management/Decisions file://///WPOEDFILL04/Modernization/00%20Program%20Management/Decisions file://///WPOEDFILL04/Modernization/00%20Program%20Management/Decisions

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 16 of 23

Figure 4 – Decision Levels

Authority levels for different types of decisions have been established, along with thresholds for escalation to a higher authority. Figure 5 depicts the program’s decision-making process.

Figure 5 – Decision Flow

BASIC SYSTEM CONFIGURATION DECISIONS

The desire is for most system configuration decisions to be made by the project team. The project teams are staffed with experienced and knowledgeable business and technical experts selected by the program and the business together, and the agency has trust that they will make good choices on behalf of the agency. All decisions guiding the configuration and implementation of the new solution, except those that reach the thresholds described herein, will be made by the project team. Decisions at this level are reflected within meeting minutes and/or design documentation.

DECISIONS IMPACTING SINGLE WORK UNIT

Decisions that have operational impacts or shifting of work within a single work unit may be made by the project team. Project team members should discuss matters with the process owner for the area impacted. Decision authority remains with the project team and employees should indicate who they worked with to make the decision. Decisions at this level are reflected within meeting minutes and/or design documentation.

DECISIONS IMPACTING POLICY OR MULTIPLE WORK UNITS

Decisions with policy or broad operational impacts spanning multiple work units should be escalated to the OPT for decision. The project team should work with the process owners from the impacted areas and the project business team manager. The project team will complete decision analysis to document alternatives, risks, and impacts considered, and will present a recommendation to the committee for decision. See Appendix B for the decision analysis template. Decisions at this level are reflected within the program’s decision registry.

Committee members may consult with their leadership as they deem appropriate to ensure alignment and communication occurs. The OPT must consult with the ESC on decisions that:

Are highly visible;

Are politically sensitive;

Have impacts to partners;

Change service delivery to customers; or

Require executive-level leadership for successful and sustainable resolution.

The OPT may bring matters to the ESC or the Stakeholder Board, or the ESC may instruct the OPT to bring matters to them for decision. The ESC retains ultimate decision authority.

DECISIONS IMPACTING SERVICE DELIVERY PARTNERS OR CUSTOMERS

Decisions with policy or broad operational impacts that affect service delivery partners or customers will be addressed directly with the impacted service delivery partners, and may be escalated to the stakeholder board for consideration. The stakeholder board may charter technical work groups to analyze and advise on technical decisions. The project team shall participate in all technical work groups and shall provide staff support for the group (scheduling, document management, etc.). The technical work group shall complete decision analysis to documents alternatives, risks, and impacts considered, and shall present a recommendation to the committee for decision. See Appendix B for the decision analysis template. Decisions at this level are reflected within the program’s decision registry.

PROGRAM AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

Modernization project management decisions will be documented within the team meeting minutes and within the various program and project plans or other project artifacts. The individual project plans

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 19 of 23 describe where lower-level decisions are captured for each project management process area. Decisions that impact project baselines (e.g., scope, schedule, budget), that have external stakeholder impacts, or are significant risk impacts will be made by the ESC. Decisions impacting established baselines will be taken through the project’s change control board prior to escalation to the committee. Decisions related to risks and issues are made by the project’s risk and issue team, and will be communicated or escalated to ESC.

AGENCY MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

Decisions that are internal agency management matters, such as impacts to internal resources, internal budget, or that focus on operational priority or performance should be made by Modernization sponsors. These agency management decisions relate to “how” the program is working within the agency, as opposed to “what” it is producing. If the sponsors believe that the decision has a significant potential impact on scope, schedule, budget, or risk, they should consider informing or consulting the

ESC. Agency decisions that require analysis and a formal decision are made by sponsors and will be reflected within the program’s decision registry.

Decision Communication The Modernization Program Sponsor is responsible for directing communications regarding executive level decisions, those made by ESC, sponsors, and the stakeholder board. These decisions as documented in the decision registry are reviewed with the Modernization communications team so that they can be incorporated into the communication planning processes.

The project’s business team manager is responsible for directing communications related to configuration or design decisions, including decisions made by OPT. The business manager reviews team minutes and design documents, and provides a list of decisions that should be communicated. These decisions are reviewed with the Modernization communications team so that they can be incorporated into the communication planning processes.

The Modernization Program Manager, in consultation with the Modernization Director and Deputy Modernization Director, determines project management decisions or adjustments to be made as a result of project assessments, or plan development and refresh. These decisions or adjustments are shared with the program and project teams via email or team meetings.

Communication about decisions should include a summary of the decision made, who made the decision, any considerations (if appropriate), and the anticipated impacts or changes to policy, processes, or behaviors as a result.

Many times decisions will be communicated to agency managers, and managers are then expected to communicate and support those decisions with their staff. The project’s business and technical staff and managers will discuss decisions and partner with the Modernization Communications Specialist to prepare communications and present information to agency managers. Additionally, the program’s Organizational Change Management Manager and analysts will assist agency managers, as requested, in sharing impacts and coaching staff on decisions resulting in significant change.

The program and project(s) communication and outreach plan(s) provide further information on communications processes and roles. The program and project(s) change management plan(s) provide further information on change management processes and roles.

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 20 of 23

Approving Authorities

David Gerstenfeld, Modernization Executive Sponsor Date Oregon Employment Department, Acting Agency Director

Renee Royston, Modernization Program Sponsor Date Oregon Employment Department, Modernization Director

Renee Royston (Apr 29, 2021 17:10 PDT)

David K. Gerstenfeld (Apr 29, 2021 19:03 PDT) David K. Gerstenfeld https://oedsign.na2.echosign.com/verifier?tx=CBJCHBCAABAAhb4sEu-dpJzmBTAMBZimLDxYaQLlZ4Eg https://oedsign.na2.echosign.com/verifier?tx=CBJCHBCAABAAhb4sEu-dpJzmBTAMBZimLDxYaQLlZ4Eg

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 21 of 23

Appendix A – Decision Registry Example:

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 22 of 23

Appendix B – Decision Analysis Template

Decision Analysis Template Section 1: Overview

STATEMENT OF ISSUE TO BE DECIDED

[One or two sentence description]

BACKGROUND

[Describe the issue and also include any prior positions taken – what has happened in the past]

Section 2: Analysis

ASSUMPTIONS

[List any assumptions]

CURRENT SITUATION

[Describe what is happening now]

IMPACTS

[Describe impacts to organizational processes, processes, and stakeholders or partners]

ALTERNATIVES

[Indicate alternatives considered, along with pros and cons. Modify this form as necessary to present the information relevant to the decision requested. Add options as necessary.]

Option 1:

Pros Cons

Option 2:

Pros Cons

[Additional considerations or discussions:]

Q:\00 Program Management\Program Plans\Governance Plan\Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1.docx Last revised: 4/29/2021 Page 23 of 23

Section 3: Recommendation [Describe recommendation]

Section 4: Implementation Actions [Describe the steps that need to be taken to implement the recommendation – include the order or timing of the actions and the individual(s) responsible for carrying them out]

Section 5: Decision

DECISION DATE

[Indicate when the decision was made]

DECISION

[Describe the final decision made]

DECISION-MAKER

[Indicate the decision-making body or individual who made the decision]

COMMUNICATION NEEDS

[Describe how this decision should be communicated – to whom and by whom]

Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1 Final Audit Report 2021-04-30

Created: 2021-04-29

By: Lynn Kneeland (lynn.kneeland@oregon.gov)

Status: Signed

Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAhb4sEu-dpJzmBTAMBZimLDxYaQLlZ4Eg

"Modernization Program Governance Plan V5.1" History Document created by Lynn Kneeland (lynn.kneeland@oregon.gov) 2021-04-29 - 10:00:35 PM GMT- IP address: 159.121.204.129

Document emailed to Renee Royston (renee.r.royston@oregon.gov) for signature

2021-04-29 - 10:02:37 PM GMT

Document emailed to David K. Gerstenfeld (david.k.gerstenfeld@oregon.gov) for signature

2021-04-29 - 10:02:37 PM GMT

Email viewed by Renee Royston (renee.r.royston@oregon.gov) 2021-04-29 - 10:24:59 PM GMT- IP address: 159.121.204.129

Document e-signed by Renee Royston (renee.r.royston@oregon.gov) Signature Date: 2021-04-30 - 0:10:21 AM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 159.121.204.129

Email viewed by David K. Gerstenfeld (david.k.gerstenfeld@oregon.gov) 2021-04-30 - 2:03:38 AM GMT- IP address: 159.121.204.129

Document e-signed by David K. Gerstenfeld (david.k.gerstenfeld@oregon.gov) Signature Date: 2021-04-30 - 2:03:55 AM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 159.121.204.129

Agreement completed.

2021-04-30 - 2:03:55 AM GMT