executive summary · web view2019/07/18 · in addition to fostering competition within the vendor...

STATEWIDE AUTOMATED WELFARE SYSTEMS

CalSAWS PROJECT

IMPLEMENTATION ADVANCE PLANNING DOCUMENT

September 2018

STATE OF CALIFORNIAHEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

OFFICE OF SYSTEMS INTEGRATION

Name of State: California

Name of State Medicaid Agency: Dept. of Health Care Services

Name of Contact(s) at State Medicaid Agency: Mari Cantwell, Chief Deputy Director, Health Programs, State Medicaid Director

Email Address(es) of Contact(s) at State Medicaid Agency: [email protected]

Telephone Number(s) of Contact(s) at State Medicaid Agency: 916-440-7400

Date of IAPD Submission to CMS:

Note: A signed transmittal letter to CMS is required with any IAPD Submission. Version # 1.0

Brief Description of Latest Version Additions/Changes/Deletions: CalSAWS Implementation Advance Planning Document

mailto:[email protected]

STATEWIDE AUTOMATED WELFARE SYSTEMCALSAWS PROJECT


TABLE OF CONTENTS1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..........................................................................................................

1.1 INTRODUCTION AND STATUS..............................................................................................................1.2 SAWS BACKGROUND AND GOVERNANCE..........................................................................................1.3 IAPD BACKGROUND.........................................................................................................................1.4 THIRD-PARTY ASSESSMENT AND KEY FINDINGS SUMMARY.................................................................

1.4.1 Requirements and Costs Analysis and Key Findings........................................................1.4.2 Implementation Planning Assessment, Key Findings and Roadmap.................................1.4.3 Procurement Strategy Assessment and Key Findings.....................................................111.4.4 Risk and Mitigation Assessment and Key Findings.........................................................13

1.5 BUDGET SUMMARY.........................................................................................................................171.6 COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS SUMMARY................................................................................................171.7 NEXT STEPS FOR THE OVERALL CALSAWS INITIATIVE.....................................................................19

2.0 RESULTS OF ACTIVITIES INCLUDED IN THE PAPDU......................................................213.0 STATEMENT OF NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE IAPD..............................................234.0 REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS, FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERATIONS.......................................................................................................................24

4.1 ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS APPROACH.........................................................................................244.2 STATEMENT OF REQUIREMENTS......................................................................................................254.3 FEASIBILITY.................................................................................................................................... 294.4 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS................................................................................................................30

4.4.1 Data Center Consolidation and Hosting...........................................................................304.4.2 Data Consolidation and Migration....................................................................................304.4.3 Portal and Mobile Application..........................................................................................314.4.4 Ancillary Capabilities........................................................................................................31

4.5 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................................... 40

5.0 COST BENEFITS ANALYSIS................................................................................................435.1 DATA AND DATA CENTER CONSOLIDATIONS AND MIGRATION PATH...................................................435.2 CALSAWS PORTAL........................................................................................................................ 455.3 CALSAWS MOBILE APPLICATION....................................................................................................475.4 ANCILLARY CAPABILITIES................................................................................................................48

5.4.1 Appointment Management...............................................................................................485.4.2 Business Intelligence (Management & Reporting Tools).................................................495.4.3 Central Print.....................................................................................................................505.4.4 Contact Center.................................................................................................................525.4.5 County Data Extract.........................................................................................................545.4.6 Notifications (Email, Robo-calls, and Text Messaging)....................................................565.4.7 Imaging............................................................................................................................ 595.4.8 IT Help Desk.................................................................................................................... 605.4.9 Lobby Management.........................................................................................................615.4.10 Task Management...........................................................................................................625.4.11 Additional Tools...............................................................................................................635.4.12 Ancillary Capabilities Savings Summary..........................................................................64

5.5 DD&I (MIGRATION) AND M&O.........................................................................................................64

6.0 NATURE AND SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES................................................................................676.1 OVERVIEW..................................................................................................................................... 67

September 2018 Page i



6.2 CALSAWS MIGRATION PROJECT SCOPE.........................................................................................686.2.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT.............................................................................................686.2.2 CORE APPLICATION DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT..................................................696.2.3 ANCILLARIES DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT..............................................................696.2.4 TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE...................................................................................706.2.5 CONVERSION.................................................................................................................706.2.6 TRAINING, CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT................716.2.7 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS..............................................................................726.2.8 QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA)..........................................................................................726.2.9 IV&V................................................................................................................................ 736.2.10 PROCUREMENTS..........................................................................................................746.2.11 CalSAWS DD&I DELIVERABLES...................................................................................75

6.3 CALSAWS MIGRATION PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS..............................................................................79

7.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND PROCUREMENT..........................................807.1 CALSAWS GOVERNANCE..........................................................................................................817.2 STATE MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT............................................................................................82

7.2.1 Advocates........................................................................................................................ 837.2.2 Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V)...............................................................83

7.3 CONSORTIUM MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT..................................................................................837.3.1 CalSAWS Guiding Principles...........................................................................................857.3.2 CalSAWS JPA Board of Directors...................................................................................857.3.3 Project Steering Committee.............................................................................................867.3.4 Change Control Board (CCB)..........................................................................................867.3.5 RACI Matrix..................................................................................................................... 877.3.6 Escalation Process..........................................................................................................917.3.7 CalSAWS Consortium Organization................................................................................92

7.4 PROJECT MANAGEMENT.................................................................................................................. 937.4.1 Project Control Document (PCD).....................................................................................947.4.2 Project Work Plan............................................................................................................96

7.5 PROCUREMENT STRATEGY.....................................................................................................97

8.0 PERSONNEL RESOURCE STATEMENT...........................................................................1018.1 CONSORTIUM PERSONNEL............................................................................................................101

8.1.1 Executive Management.................................................................................................1058.1.2 Policy/Design/Governance Team..................................................................................1068.1.3 Application Development and Test Team......................................................................1078.1.4 Technical and Operations Team....................................................................................1088.1.5 Project Management Office (PMO) Team......................................................................1118.1.6 Customer Engagement Team........................................................................................113

8.2 STATE PERSONNEL.................................................................................................................1158.3 LEGAL SUPPORT......................................................................................................................1208.4 OTHER STAKEHOLDERS & ADVOCATES...............................................................................1218.5 CONTRACTOR DD&I TEAM......................................................................................................1218.6 CONTRACTOR M&O SERVICES..............................................................................................1258.7 QA CONTRACTOR TEAM.........................................................................................................1278.8 PROCUREMENT SERVICES....................................................................................................131

8.8.1 CalSAWS M&O Procurement........................................................................................1328.8.2 CalSAWS Consortium Procurement Consultants..........................................................1338.8.3 CalSAWS M&O Procurement Consortium Project Team...............................................1338.8.4 CalSAWS M&O Procurement Vendor Project Team.....................................................135

9.0 PROPOSED ACTIVITY SCHEDULE...................................................................................1379.1 DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION..................................................................................139

September 2018 Page ii



10.0 PROPOSED BUDGET.........................................................................................................14210.1 CALSAWS DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION................................................................142

10.1.1 Personnel...................................................................................................................... 14310.1.2 Contractor Services – IV&V...........................................................................................14910.1.3 Contractor Services – QA..............................................................................................15010.1.4 Contractor Services – DD&I Core and Ancillary.............................................................15210.1.5 Contact Center Services................................................................................................15310.1.6 Portal & Mobile Services................................................................................................15410.1.7 Change Management & Implementation Services.........................................................15510.1.8 Legal Support................................................................................................................15610.1.9 Facilities......................................................................................................................... 15710.1.10 Hardware & Software.....................................................................................................15710.1.11 Production & Operations................................................................................................15910.1.12 Training..........................................................................................................................16010.1.13 Travel............................................................................................................................. 16210.1.14 DD&I Procurement.........................................................................................................16610.1.15 Summary of CalSAWS Design, Development & Implementation Costs........................167

10.2 CALSAWS MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS.....................................................................................16910.2.1 Consortium Personnel...................................................................................................16910.2.2 County Staff................................................................................................................... 17210.2.3 Application Maintenance................................................................................................17210.2.4 Quality Assurance..........................................................................................................17410.2.5 Legal Support................................................................................................................17610.2.6 Facilities......................................................................................................................... 17610.2.7 Hardware & Hardware Maintenance..............................................................................17710.2.8 Software & Software Maintenance.................................................................................17810.2.9 Production & Operations................................................................................................17910.2.10 Travel............................................................................................................................. 18010.2.11 M&O Procurement.........................................................................................................18110.2.12 Summary of CalSAWS M&O Costs...............................................................................190

10.3 TOTAL COST SUMMARY................................................................................................................19310.4 COMPARISON TO INDEPENDENT ANALYSIS.....................................................................................195

11.0 COST ALLOCATION PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES.................................19811.1 COST ALLOCATION PLAN OVERVIEW.............................................................................................198

11.1.1 CalSAWS Persons Count..............................................................................................19811.2 CALSAWS COST ALLOCATION METHODOLOGY..............................................................................199

11.2.1 Design, Development & Implementation (Non-Recurring).............................................19911.2.2 DHCS Personnel...........................................................................................................20211.2.3 CDSS Personnel............................................................................................................20211.2.4 Maintenance & Operations............................................................................................202

11.3 SECTION 1311 EXCHANGE ESTABLISHMENT GRANT FUNDING.........................................................204

12.0 SECURITY, INTERFACE, DISASTER RECOVERY, AND BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLANNING...................................................................................................................................205

12.1 SECURITY OVERVIEW.................................................................................................................... 20512.2 PHYSICAL SECURITY.....................................................................................................................20512.3 SYSTEM SECURITY.......................................................................................................................20512.4 DISASTER RECOVERY & BUSINESS CONTINUITY.............................................................................20612.5 CALSAWS MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS.....................................................................................206

13.0 CONDITIONS AND STANDARDS FOR RECEIPT OF ENHANCED FFP..........................20813.1 ENHANCED FEDERAL FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION.............................................................................20813.2 COMPLIANCE WITH THE CMS SEVEN STANDARDS & CONDITIONS...................................................208

September 2018 Page iii



14.0 IAPD REQUIRED FEDERAL ASSURANCES.....................................................................210APPENDIX A: BUDGET COMPARISON BY FISCAL YEAR.....................................................211APPENDIX B: PROJECT BUDGET............................................................................................212APPENDIX C: COST ALLOCATION PLAN...............................................................................213APPENDIX D: MEDICAID DETAILED BUDGET TABLES........................................................214APPENDIX E: ACQUISITION CHECKLIST................................................................................215APPENDIX F: CALSAWS REQUIREMENTS.............................................................................219APPENDIX G: CALACES DELIVERABLE 2 - STEP 1: CALACES ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, INTERIM ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT...................................................220APPENDIX H: CALACES DELIVERABLE 2 - STEP 2: CALACES ANCILLARY SYSTEMS ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT.......................................................................................221APPENDIX I: CALACES MIGRATION PLANNING & ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT DELIVERABLE 03: DRAFT FACTBASE FOR CALSAWS REQUIREMENTS CONSOLIDATION & PRIORITIZATION......................................................................................222APPENDIX J: WCDS CALWIN FINAL REPORT ON EMERGING VIEW OF BUSINESS PROCESS AND ANCILLARY SYSTEMS ACROSS CALWIN (DELIVERABLE #4)..................223APPENDIX K: CALSAWS MIGRATION PLANNING & ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT DELIVERABLE 10: FINAL CALSAWS REPORT (AUGUST)....................................................224APPENDIX L: AMENDED AND RESTATED LEADER REPLACEMENT SYSTEM AGREEMENT EXHIBIT U (STATEMENT OF WORK FOR CALSAWS DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION (“DD&I”) PROJECT).............................................225

TABLE OF FIGURESFigure 1 - CalSAWS Governance Model.......................................................................................4

Figure 2 - CalSAWS JPA Regional Model.....................................................................................5

Figure 3 - Summary of Third-Party Assessment Work Streams....................................................7

Figure 4 - Steady-State M&O Cost Projection...............................................................................9

Figure 5 - Implementation Sequencing Scenarios.......................................................................10

Figure 6 - Implementation Planning Risk and Mitigation Assessment Approach........................14

Figure 7 - Visualization of Overall Risk Assessment...................................................................15

Figure 8 – CalSAWS Roadmap...................................................................................................16

Figure 9 – Gap Identification, Analysis & Prioritization Approach...............................................25

Figure 10 – Summary of CalSAWS Requirements......................................................................26

Figure 11 – CalSAWS Requirements..........................................................................................27

Figure 12 – Traceability Analysis Results....................................................................................28

Figure 13 – High-Level Results of Comprehensive Analysis.......................................................29

September 2018 Page iv



Figure 14 – Summary of Supplementary Capabilities.................................................................32

Figure 15 – Potential Alternatives for Business Intelligence........................................................34

Figure 16 – C-IV and LRS County Extract Models......................................................................35

Figure 17 – CalWIN Extract Model..............................................................................................36

Figure 18 – LRS and C-IV IT Helpdesk Models..........................................................................37

Figure 19 – CalWIN Helpdesk Models........................................................................................38

Figure 20 – Ancillary Capabilities Analysis (Summary 1)............................................................41



Figure 23 – CalSAWS Organization............................................................................................82

Figure 24 CalSAWS Regional Structure......................................................................................84

Figure 25 CalSAWS Escalation Process.....................................................................................91

Figure 26 CalSAWS Project Organization...................................................................................92

Figure 27 Methodology for Procurement Strategy.......................................................................98

Figure 28 Procurement Approach...............................................................................................99

Figure 29 – CalSAWS Project Organization..............................................................................102

Figure 30 - CalSAWS DD&I Timeline........................................................................................138

Figure 31 – Manual Data Cleansing Estimates.........................................................................146

Figure 32 – Shared Security Model...........................................................................................207

TABLE OF TABLESTable 1 – Procurement Key Findings..........................................................................................12

Table 2 – D&I High-Level Cost Summary....................................................................................17

Table 3 – M&O High-Level Cost Summary.................................................................................17

Table 4 – Procurement Cost Summary.......................................................................................17

Table 5 – CBA Summary.............................................................................................................18

Table 6 - Next Steps....................................................................................................................19

Table 7 – Key Planning Activities Status.....................................................................................21

Table 8 – August 2018 CalACES and CalSAWS Migration Planning PAPDU Expenditures Update.........................................................................................................................................22

Table 9 – Data Center Consolidation and Migration Path Benefits.............................................44

Table 10 – CalSAWS Portal Benefits..........................................................................................46

Table 11 – CalSAWS Mobile Application Benefits......................................................................47

Table 12 – Appointment Management Benefits..........................................................................48

September 2018 Page v



Table 13 – Business Intelligence (Management & Reporting Tools) Benefits............................49

Table 14 – Central Print Benefits – CalACES.............................................................................51

Table 15 – Central Print Benefits - CalWIN.................................................................................51

Table 16 – Contact Center Benefits - CalACES..........................................................................53

Table 17 – Contact Center Benefits - CalWIN.............................................................................53

Table 18 – County Data Extract Benefits - CalACES..................................................................55

Table 19 – County Data Extract Benefits - CalWIN.....................................................................56

Table 20 – Notifications Benefits - CalACES...............................................................................57

Table 21 – Notifications Benefits - CalWIN.................................................................................58

Table 22 – Imaging Benefits - CalACES.....................................................................................59

Table 23 – Imaging Benefits - CalWIN........................................................................................60

Table 24 – IT Help Desk Benefits................................................................................................61

Table 25 – Lobby Management Benefits.....................................................................................62

Table 26 – Task Management Benefits - CalWIN.......................................................................63

Table 27 – Ancillary Capabilities Savings Summary...................................................................64

Table 28 – CalSAWS DD&I and M&O Costs and Benefits..........................................................64

Table 29 – Procurement Key Findings........................................................................................67

Table 30 – CalSAWS DD&I Deliverables....................................................................................75

Table 31 – CalSAWS RACI Matrix..............................................................................................88

Table 32 – Procurement Key Findings........................................................................................99

Table 33 – M&O Consortium Project Team FTE Comparison..................................................101

Table 34 - Consortium Personnel – DD&I Leveraged Staff and New Staff Loading.................103

Table 35 - Consortium Personnel – M&O Staff Loading...........................................................104

Table 36 – Executive Management Roles & Responsibilities...................................................106

Table 37 – Policy/Design/Governance Roles and Responsibilities...........................................106

Table 38 – Application Development and Test Team – Roles and Responsibilities.................107

Table 39 – Technical and Operations Team Roles and Responsibilities..................................108

Table 40 – Project Management Office (PMO) Team – Roles and Responsibilities.................111

Table 41 – Customer Engagement Team – Roles and Responsibilities...................................113

Table 42 – State Resources – Roles and Responsibilities........................................................115

Table 43 – Legal Support Roles and Responsibilities...............................................................120

Table 44 – Vendor Services – DD&I Key Roles & Responsibilities...........................................122

Table 45 – Contractor Services M&O Key Roles & Responsibilities.........................................125

Table 46 – QA Personnel DD&I Staff Loading..........................................................................128

September 2018 Page vi



Table 47 – QA Personnel M&O Staff Loading...........................................................................128

Table 48 – QA Roles & Responsibilities....................................................................................129

Table 49 – Procurement Personnel – Leveraged Staff and New Staff Loading........................132

Table 50 – Procurement Services – Consortium/Vendor Key Roles & Responsibilities...........134

Table 51 – Procurement Services Consortium/Vendor Key Roles & Responsibilities..............136

Table 52 – Design, Development & Implementation Activity Schedule.....................................139

Table 53 – Procurement Activity Schedule................................................................................140

Table 54 – Maintenance and Operations Activity Schedule......................................................141

Table 55 - Consortium Personnel Details..................................................................................143

Table 56 – Consortium Personnel SFY.....................................................................................145

Table 57 – Consortium Personnel FFY.....................................................................................145

Table 58 - County Staff Manual Conversion..............................................................................147

Table 59 - County Staff Ancillaries............................................................................................147

Table 60 - County Staff SFY......................................................................................................147

Table 61 - County Staff FFY......................................................................................................148

Table 62 - State Personnel Cost Detail.....................................................................................148

Table 63 - State Personnel Cost SFY.......................................................................................149

Table 64 - State Personnel Cost FFY........................................................................................149

Table 65 – IV&V Detail..............................................................................................................150

Table 66 – IV&V SFY................................................................................................................150

Table 67 – IV&V FFY.................................................................................................................150

Table 68 – QA Detail.................................................................................................................150

Table 69 – QA SFY....................................................................................................................151

Table 70 –QA FFY.....................................................................................................................151

Table 71 – DD&I Contractor Services Details...........................................................................152

Table 72 – DD&I Contractor Services SFY...............................................................................153

Table 73 – DD&I Contractor Services FFY................................................................................153








September 2018 Page vii





Table 83 - Legal Support Details...............................................................................................156

Table 84 - Legal Support SFY...................................................................................................156

Table 85 - Legal Support FFY...................................................................................................156

Table 86 – Facilities Details.......................................................................................................157

Table 87 - Facilities SFY...........................................................................................................157

Table 88 - Facilities FFY............................................................................................................157

Table 89 - Hardware & Maintenance Details.............................................................................158

Table 90 - Software & Maintenance Details..............................................................................158

Table 91 - Hardware, Software, & Maintenance SFY................................................................158

Table 92 - Hardware, Software, & Maintenance FFY................................................................159

Table 93 – Technical Infrastructure & Network Details.............................................................159

Table 94 - Production & Operations SFY..................................................................................160

Table 95 - Production & Operations FFY..................................................................................160

Table 96 Detailed Consortium Personnel Training....................................................................160

Table 97 - Contractor Services - Training..................................................................................161

Table 98 - Training Facilities.....................................................................................................161

Table 99 - Training Hardware & Software.................................................................................161

Table 100 - Training Travel Details...........................................................................................161

Table 101 - Training Travel.......................................................................................................162

Table 102 - Training SFY..........................................................................................................162

Table 103 - Training FFY...........................................................................................................162

Table 104 – Travel Rates..........................................................................................................163

Table 105 – Consortium Travel Details by Team......................................................................164

Table 106 – County Travel Details by Type..............................................................................164

Table 107 - Travel Costs by FY and Team................................................................................165

Table 108 - Travel SFY.............................................................................................................165

Table 109 - Travel FFY..............................................................................................................165

Table 110 – Procurement Personnel Details.............................................................................166

Table 111 – DD&I Procurement SFY........................................................................................166

Table 112 - Procurement FFY...................................................................................................166

Table 113 – DD&I Cost Summary SFY.....................................................................................167

Table 114 – DD&I Cost Summary FFY.....................................................................................168

September 2018 Page viii



Table 115 – M&O Consortium Personnel Details......................................................................169

Table 116 – M&O Consortium Personnel SFY..........................................................................171

Table 117 – M&O Consortium Personnel FFY..........................................................................171

Table 118 – M&O County Staff Details......................................................................................172

Table 119 – County Staff SFY...................................................................................................172

Table 120 – County Staff FFY...................................................................................................172

Table 121 – Application Maintenance Details...........................................................................173

Table 122 – Application Maintenance SFY...............................................................................173

Table 123 – Application Maintenance FFY................................................................................174

Table 124 - QA Details..............................................................................................................174

Table 125 - QA SFY..................................................................................................................175

Table 126 - QA FFY...................................................................................................................175

Table 127 - Legal SFY...............................................................................................................176

Table 128 - Legal FFY...............................................................................................................176

Table 129 - Facilities SFY.........................................................................................................176

Table 130 - Facilities FFY..........................................................................................................177

Table 131 - Hardware & Maintenance Details...........................................................................177

Table 132 - Hardware & Maintenance SFY...............................................................................177

Table 133 – Hardware & Maintenance FFY..............................................................................177

Table 134 - Software & Maintenance Details............................................................................178

Table 135 - Software & Maintenance SFY................................................................................178

Table 136 – Software & Maintenance FFY................................................................................178

Table 137 - Prod Ops Details....................................................................................................179

Table 138 - Prod Ops SFY........................................................................................................179

Table 139 – Prod Ops FFY........................................................................................................180

Table 140 – M&O Travel SFY...................................................................................................180

Table 141 – M&O Travel SFY...................................................................................................181

Table 142 – M&O Travel FFY....................................................................................................181

Table 143 – Prior Procurement Project Costs...........................................................................181

Table 144 – Comparison to Previous CalACES Procurement Estimate...................................182

Table 145 – Procurement Personnel Details.............................................................................182

Table 146 - Procurement SFY...................................................................................................183

Table 147 - Procurement FFY...................................................................................................183

Table 148 – Contractor Services - Procurement Details...........................................................183

September 2018 Page ix



Table 149 – Contractor Services - Procurement SFY...............................................................184

Table 150 – Contractor Services - Procurement FFY...............................................................184

Table 151 – Procurement Legal Details....................................................................................184

Table 152 - Procurement Legal SFY.........................................................................................184

Table 153 - Procurement Legal FFY.........................................................................................185

Table 154 - Procurement Facilities Details................................................................................185

Table 155 - Procurement Facilities SFY....................................................................................186

Table 156 - Procurement Facilities FFY....................................................................................186

Table 157 – Procurement HW/SW Details................................................................................186

Table 158 - Procurement Hardware & Maintenance SFY.........................................................188

Table 159 – Procurement Hardware & Maintenance FFY.........................................................188

Table 160 - Procurement Software & Maintenance SFY...........................................................188

Table 161 – Procurement Software & Maintenance FFY..........................................................188

Table 162 - Procurement Travel Details....................................................................................189

Table 163 - Procurement Travel SFY........................................................................................189

Table 164 – Procurement Travel FFY.......................................................................................189

Table 165 – Summary of Procurement Costs SFY...................................................................190

Table 166 – Summary of Procurement Costs FFY....................................................................190

Table 167 – M&O Cost Summary SFY......................................................................................190

Table 168 – M&O Cost Summary FFY......................................................................................191

Table 169 – Total Cost by Line Item..........................................................................................193

Table 170 – Comparison of DD&I/Procurement Costs..............................................................196

Table 171 – Comparison of M&O Costs....................................................................................197

Table 172 – CalACES Persons Count.......................................................................................199

Table 173 – CalSAWS DD&I –Non-Application Development CAP..........................................200

Table 174 – CalSAWS DD&I – Application Development CAP.................................................200

Table 175 – CalSAWS DD&I – Training Development and Delivery CAP................................201

Table 176 – CalSAWS IV&V CAP.............................................................................................202

Table 177 – DHCS State Personnel CAP.................................................................................202

Table 178 – CDSS Personnel CAP...........................................................................................202

Table 179 – CalSAWS M&O CAP.............................................................................................203

Table 180 – CalSAWS CalHEERS M&O – Application Maintenance CAP...............................203

Table 181 – CalSAWS Covered CA M&O – Covered CA CAP.................................................204

September 2018 Page x



1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe California Department of Social Services (CDSS) and the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) together with the California Office of Systems Integration (OSI), the California Automated Consortium Eligibility System (CalACES) Consortium and the Welfare Client Data System (WCDS) Consortium jointly submit this Implementation Advance Planning Document (IAPD) to request approval for the design, development, implementation, maintenance and operations activities associated with the consolidation of the three existing California Statewide Automated Welfare Systems (SAWS) into the single statewide California Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS).

The importance of this statewide initiative is underscored in the California Assembly Bill 1811 as chaptered by the Secretary of State on June 27, 2018:

SEC. 15.The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:

(a) Through the Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS) consortia, the state and counties provide health and human services to over 13 million Californians.

(b) The state is currently working in partnership with the federal government to consolidate the existing consortia systems and functionality into one single California Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS). This consolidation will heavily leverage the existing Los Angeles Eligibility, Automated Determination, Evaluation, and Reporting (LEADER) Replacement System, rather than building a new system.

(c) California, its counties, and stakeholders have a decades-long partnership and commitment to excellence in service delivery for its health and human services programs. This partnership is a relationship built on effective communication, transparency, and a shared vision of service to millions of low-income and vulnerable Californians.

(d) The CalSAWS will be the primary automation system for delivering benefits for several decades.

(e) The CalSAWS development process will be improved through meaningful stakeholder, client, and advocate input on elements that impact service delivery.

1.1 Introduction and StatusExecution of California’s strategy to implement a single system began with the completion of the LEADER Replacement System (LRS) Project for the County of Los Angeles. By leveraging the application software of the SAWS Consortium IV (C-IV) system as its code base, the LRS was designed and developed with new code and code revisions for enhanced automation, modularity and configurability using rules engine technology and task management functionality

September 2018 P a g e | 1



for business process flexibility, as well as an advanced, more scalable technical architecture and platform with Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) design and Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) technology. Such efforts to date have created a strong foundation for SAWS consolidation, scalability and extensibility to support statewide capacity. The advancement in SAWS technologies and respective investments made to the LRS solution will be leveraged well into the future for unification, expansion, and longevity of applicable technologies through CalSAWS.

In order to receive Federal Financial Participation (FFP) for the SAWS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) require that California implement a single statewide system by the end of 2023. To consolidate the number of systems in California, the State enacted California Assembly Bill 1 16 (ABX 1 16, 2011) to codify the mandate for the migration of the 39 C-IV counties “to a system jointly designed by the C-IV counties and the County of Los Angeles, under a specified contract”. This effort, managed under the LEADER Replacement System (LRS) contract, has thus far resulted in the formation of the 40-county CalACES Consortium and the design and implementation of the LRS; however, the modifications needed to support the migration of the 39 C-IV counties to the CalACES system were deferred to accommodate additional planning activities requested by FNS and CMS.

The State of California has accelerated its effort to achieve the goal of a single statewide system by supporting the establishment of the statewide CalSAWS Consortium. Leadership representatives from the California counties are meeting regularly to finalize a formal Joint Powers Authority (JPA) governance structure by June 2019.

The CalSAWS project will use the funds requested in this IAPD to modify the LRS to support the statewide CalSAWS case management system. The plan for development of the CalSAWS Software leverages releases of CalSAWS-required modifications to the base LRS code into the LRS production instance, thereby, eliminating the need for on-going merges of LRS code changes with a separate set of CalSAWS Software and a Los Angeles County conversion effort. When the CalSAWS Software development and implementation effort has been completed, the 39 C-IV System counties will be converted to the CalSAWS in a single cutover event, followed by the WCDS CalWIN Case Data conversions in six waves over a 13-month period. The Design, Development and Implementation (DD&I) phase is planned for completion in April 2023, assuming a January 7, 2019 DD&I CalSAWS Project start date, inclusive of a 6-month stabilization period.

1.2 SAWS Background and GovernanceThe SAWS are the county-administered case management systems that support California’s public assistance programs by providing eligibility determination and benefit calculation for program recipients. The SAWS provide support for the administration of programs such as Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid program), California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs), CalFresh/Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants (CAPI), Foster Care, Refugee Cash Assistance, Kinship Guardianship Assistance Program (KinGAP), California Food Assistance Program (CFAP), General Assistance/General Relief (GA/GR), and Adoption Assistance.

Currently, there are three separate SAWS, each managed by two discrete consortia of California counties:

The WCDS Consortium maintains and operates the CalWORKs Information Network (CalWIN) system supporting 18 counties.




The CalACES Consortium is a Joint Powers Authority established September 22, 2017. CalACES maintains and operates the LRS, supporting Los Angeles County, and the C-IV system supporting 39 counties.

With the recognition the CalSAWS Project is groundbreaking in its scope and scale, and in accordance with best practices in the health and human services systems development arena, California is wholly committed to actively engaging at the highest stakeholder levels as well as assigning appropriate numbers and types of resources to participate on a fulltime basis throughout the DD&I phase. Toward that end, California has designed a unified governance model that will reflect a greater level of commitment and participation than in past SAWS projects, and that will facilitate informed decision-making and escalation processes. From a cultural perspective, California’s governance model will help foster transparency and visibility as well as communication and collaboration.

The summary of the CalSAWS Guiding Principles that follow were developed in April 2018 by the California Department of Social Service (CDSS) and the Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) in consultation with the CalSAWS Executive Leadership team and the County Welfare Directors Association (CWDA). These guiding principles establish the intent of the parties and the key precepts that shape the governance structure and processes as they exist today and as they will exist into the future.

1. A guiding governance principle for the implementation and administration of CalSAWS will be a consensus-based governance process between the state and the counties in order to achieve the best outcomes for the citizens of California.

2. The State will be present in CalSAWS executive board and committee meetings. The State will strive for consistency in attendance and executive-level representation at meetings.

3. The State shall have access to client level data sufficient to support single state agency functions and program evaluation, including cross-program utilization, budget construction, and trends. Plans for data exploration and dissemination will be coordinated through a Data Management Board comprised of state and county staff.

4. Governance must support the concepts of modular procurement so one vendor does not dominate more than necessary, user-centered design, and interoperability. In addition to fostering competition within the vendor community, governance will strive to obtain best value for the state, counties, and clients.

5. The State will be part of the change control board. The State will strive for consistency in attendance and executive-level representation at meetings.

6. As new statewide functionality for the programs SAWS supports is created, it shall be added to CalSAWS. If, due to expediency, this is not initially possible, it shall be developed in a manner that allows it to be efficiently integrated into CalSAWS at the next available opportunity.

7. Governance will support consistent practice to promote equity in service delivery and access for clients while still allowing for program delivery innovation.

The unified CalSAWS governance model driven by the guiding principles and the stakeholder roles and responsibilities is depicted in Figure 1 below.




CA Health & Human Services

(CHHS)

Department of Social Services

(CDSS)

CalSAWS Project Steering

Committee

CalSAWS Executive Director

CalSAWS Joint Powers Authority

C-IV LRS

Department of Health Care

Services (DHCS)

CalSAWS Organization

Office of Systems Integration (OSI)

CalWIN

CalSAWS Project DD&I and M&O

Change Control Board

Other Stakeholders /

Advocates

Legal Counsel

Figure 1 - CalSAWS Governance Model

The CalACES and WCDS consortia, as represented by the CalSAWS Leadership Team, are currently working in concert to finalize the statewide CalSAWS Joint Powers Authority (JPA) based on a regional governance model. The CalSAWS Leadership Team includes county welfare directors from both CalACES and WCDS consortia as well as two members of the County Welfare Directors Association of California (CWDA) Executive Committee, the President and Vice President at Large/Chair of the IT Committee. The expanded Consortium is based on the existing 40-county JPA Agreement and Bylaws but has been extended and revised to reflect the addition of the 18 WCDS counties. The CalSAWS JPA will constitute a single legal entity for purposes of managing the CalSAWS Consortium and the CalSAWS System. The CalSAWS JPA will also manage the existing SAWS until each is decommissioned. The JPA will also serve as the contracting vehicle for all procurements. The 58 California counties will be grouped into six regions. The JPA will be governed and administered by its 12-member Board of Directors through the regional representation model. The six regions and the Board of Directors will be served and supported by 20 Regional Managers (RMs). The number of RMs will decrease from 20 to 18 upon Final Acceptance of the CalSAWS System as it moves into the M&O phase. The regions, member counties, the number of votes per region and the number of Regional Managers are reflected in Figure 2 below.




Riverside

Del Norte

Siskiyou Modoc

LassenHumboldt

Trinity Shasta

Tehama

Mendocino Glenn Butte

Plumas

Sierra

LakeColusa

NevadaPlacer

AlpineSonoma NapaYolo

SolanoContraCosta

San Francisco

San MateoAlameda

SanJoaquin

TuolumneMono

Mariposa

SantaClara Merced

Madera

FresnoSan Benito

Monterey KingsTulare

Inyo

SanLuis

Obispo

SantaBarbara

Kern

San Bernardino

LosAngeles

Ventura

SanDiego

Imperial

Santa Cruz

Region# Counties # Votes

# of RMs % PC

1 12 2 3 15.12%

2 13 1 2 6.49%

3 14 1 2 2.84%

4 11 2 3 16.35%

6 1 3 4 28.66%

Total 58 12 18 100%

5 7 3 4 30.53%

Figure 2 - CalSAWS JPA Regional Model

With the merger of the CalACES and WCDS consortia into the new CalSAWS JPA planned for June 2019, costs will begin to shift from existing M&O IAPDUs to this single statewide IAPD and its subsequent updates. The CalSAWS Consortium and State will work with the Federal partners to determine specific timing for discontinuance of existing M&O IAPDUs.

More detailed governance information, including a Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed (RACI) Matrix, with roles and responsibilities reflected for the key state and Consortium entities, is provided in Section 7.0, Project Management Planning and Procurement.

1.3 IAPD BackgroundThe initial LRS/C-IV Migration IAPD was submitted by the State on December 9, 2016. In response to federal questions and comments, the State submitted revised versions of IAPDUs on March 21, May 15 and October 9, 2017. On December 8, 2017, both FNS and CMS requested additional information and more detailed analysis surrounding the project scope and approach in order to support and approve the Migration IAPDU and project. As a result, on January 2, 2018, the State submitted a CalACES Planning Advance Planning Document




(PAPD) for additional planning and analysis in response to the requests from FNS and CMS. The PAPD was approved by FNS and CMS on January 5 and 9, 2018, respectively.

In February 2018, the Federal sponsors, both FNS and CMS, requested further analysis regarding the comprehensive planning for CalSAWS requirements and cost estimates for both the C-IV migration as well as the CalWIN migration to CalSAWS. Specifically, the feedback emphasized that a) CalACES decisions be reflective of a statewide system, b) the requirements that originated from the original CalACES gap analysis be validated, and that c) CalWIN planning be incorporated earlier than originally planned, so that the full picture of DD&I costs for CalSAWS could be reflected in an IAPD.

Guidelines and conditions provided by the Federal partners in January and February 2018 are summarized below:

PLANNING AND APPROACH Completion of the single system by end of calendar year 2023 Leverage LRS with minimum modifications to ensure a cost-efficient statewide solution Planning and analysis by an independent third-party vendor including:

Thorough and data supported analysis Risk assessment Alternative assessment Estimate of the total costs for complete migration to single system

STATEWIDE SYSTEM CONSISTENCY IN: Technology, including single database and single hosting (cloud) solution Eligibility policy Worker experience Consumer experience

FUNDING No new funding for enhancements to legacy systems, except for compliance with federal

regulations No funding for more than one system after 2023 Overall cost reduction for M&O

PROJECT APPROVAL DOCUMENT WILL INCLUDE: Complete scope/detailed list of requirements for a single, statewide system Roadmap/timeline based on the outcomes of the third-party analysis Total estimated costs, staffing model and migration sequencing

ESTABLISH DETAILED GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE, INCLUDING STATE PARTICIPATION

1.4 Third-Party Assessment and Key Findings SummaryThrough the services of an independent third-party vendor, an in-depth technical assessment, requirements analysis, business process gap analysis, ancillary systems analysis, cost benefit analysis and implementation planning were conducted as required by FNS and CMS. The details and outcomes of these analyses form the basis of this IAPD and are provided and referenced throughout this IAPD.

Figure 3 below provides a high-level summary of the key independent assessment




workstreams.

Figure 3 - Summary of Third-Party Assessment Work Streams

High-level details of each of the work streams include:

CalSAWS User Labs: to help the CalWIN counties understand and become familiar with the LRS destination system and corresponding 560 CalACES requirements to enable informed participation in the subsequent requirements gathering sessions.

CalSAWS Requirements Gathering Sessions: to review and validate the existing 560 CalACES requirements with the CalWIN counties and to identify and document where refinements/revisions need to be made to support the CalWIN counties.

CalWIN/CalSAWS Business Process Gap Analysis: to document As-Is and To-Be business processes, compare CalWIN functionality to CalSAWS functionality, document gaps in business processes, and identify and prioritize requirements to address the business gaps.

CalWIN Ancillary Systems Analysis: to document the fact-base and existing requirements associated with ancillary systems, compare the ancillary functionality to CalSAWS and identify and prioritize requirements for ancillary systems.

CalWIN/CalSAWS Data Migration Strategy: to outline options for data migration and conversion, conduct alternatives assessment, for evaluating the relative cost schedule, and risk of each option, and determine evaluation criteria for selecting the emerging option and highlight key implications (e.g., timing, sequencing, etc.).

Validation and Review of CalACES Requirements: to conduct an independent




assessment of CalACES requirements and present an objective articulation of the underlying rationale for each of the requirements.

Validation of Consolidated Requirements for CalSAWS: to compile CalSAWS requirements from all sources with validated CalACES requirements and present an objective articulation of the business need and rationale for each of the new requirements, including criticality for go-live.

DD&I Costs for CalACES and CalSAWS: to develop high-level estimates for one-time migration costs for CalACES, and to extend and expand the methodology to estimate costs associated with CalSAWS.

M&O Costs for CalACES and CalSAWS: to develop high-level estimates for ongoing, steady state M&O costs for CalACES, and to extend and expand the methodology to estimate M&O costs associated with CalSAWS.

Implementation Planning: including sequencing, to evolve the CalSAWS requirements into a roadmap leading to implementation and to identify dependencies with procurement options, timeline, and potential risks.

1.4.1 Requirements and Costs Analysis and Key FindingsKey findings from the independent third-party vendor assessment are summarized for the following primary areas:

Requirements DD&I Costs M&O Costs

KEY FINDINGS REQUIREMENTS: The overarching guiding principles for the requirements gathering and validation activities was to use LRS “as-is” wherever possible and to limit changes only to critical business needs. In addition to the core functional application requirements, requirements were reviewed and validated for technical infrastructure, conversion, project management, training, change management and implementation support areas. Although Section 4 of this IAPD provides in-depth details related to the requirements analysis, feasibility study and alternatives considerations, the following offers a high-level summary of the key requirements-related findings from the third-party analyses.

CalSAWS Requirement Gathering Sessions produced 145 new requirements and 166 modified requirements.

CalSAWS Requirements Validation was completed with 857 valid requirements out of the 920 requirements collected. Of the 857 valid requirements, 691 were categorized as go-live critical; the remaining 166 were categorized as post-go live opportunities.

Traceability: 778 of 920 requirements have been mapped to the federal template, thereby providing the mandatory traceability.

Comprehensiveness: the comprehensiveness analysis tested that several elements of the future system were covered through one or more requirements gathering workstreams.

KEY FINDINGS DD&I COSTS: While Section 5 provides the in-depth results of the Cost Benefit Analysis and Section 10, the Proposed Budget, the following offers a high-level summary of the third-party cost estimation for CalSAWS Design, Development and Implementation (DD&I) and Maintenance and Operations (M&O).

Overall, the DD&I analysis resulted in a new bottoms-up estimate for CalSAWS of $426M,




which represents a comprehensive view of the full costs necessary to reach a statewide solution. This represents an outside-in estimate, which is based on assumed rates and effort estimates as it has been performed by an independent third party. It should be noted that these costs have been adjusted to reflect the actual negotiated costs and implementation methodology where applicable. It should also be noted that these costs do not include costs for items that were outside the scope of the independent assessment, specifically Quality Assurance services, IV&V services and procurement services associated with securing long-term ongoing CalSAWS M&O goods and services after the DD&I and Initial M&O phases are complete. Those additional costs are described in detail in Section 10, Proposed Budget.

KEY FINDINGS M&O COSTS: M&O cost analysis has confirmed the overall consortia M&O baseline (inclusive of LRS, C-

IV and CalWIN consortia costs and ancillary system costs currently budgeted as county administrative costs), with $364M spend per year.

Figure 4 below summarizes the steady-state M&O cost projection for CalSAWS based on the completed analysis. The current M&O cost projection is $221.8M, excluding costs that will remain within the county administrative budgets. The costs are described in detail in Section 10, Proposed Budget.

Figure 4 - Steady-State M&O Cost Projection

1.4.2 Implementation Planning Assessment, Key Findings and RoadmapThe Implementation Planning analysis focused on providing a fact-base for implementation planning. It features three modules:




Implementation Sequencing of building blocks for implementation of CalSAWS (e.g., planning, procurement, implementation, governance), including a reference case, potential variant options, evaluation criteria, weighting, and scoring of options.

Procurement Strategy focused on understanding the objectives of procurement, details of procurement approach, including considerations for what should be competitive vs. noncompetitive, and in what combinations

Risks and Mitigations to identify potential risk scenarios across the project, scored against Severity / Impact and Frequency / Likelihood, with an inventory of potential mitigation approaches

The implementation sequencing analysis resulted in several implementation scenarios. Figure55 below shows the four overall scenarios for county migration sequencing that were assessed. These scenarios are representative and explain various options, though there are variations on each. The de facto sequencing scenario was assumed for (i) LRS (LA County) to migrate first, followed by (ii) C-IV counties and finally (iii) CalWIN counties (as the CalSAWS application would be built from the LRS code base).

Figure 5 - Implementation Sequencing Scenarios

The four alternatives that were considered have different variations on how the migration sequence transitions from C-IV counties for CalWIN counties.

Alternative A outlines a wave migration approach, with Los Angeles County migrating as the first wave, then the C-IV counties migrating in five waves, then the CalWIN counties migrating in six waves. The waves are sequential, though there may be some overlap/ staggering between each wave.




Alternative B proposes moving up the first CalWIN Wave to be run in parallel with one of the later CIV county waves, with the intent to provide more schedule flexibility and extend the overall migration window for CalWIN counties.

Alternative C aims to achieve the same (e.g., schedule flexibility and a longer CalWIN migration window) by taking a single-step migration approach for C-IV counties.

Alternative D aims to address some risks inherent in Alternative A through a pre-Migration Proof of Concept phase to validate the migration approach for CalWIN counties prior to the CalWIN migration waves.

Each of these was evaluated against a holistic set of evaluation criteria.

It should also be noted that the migration of the CalWIN counties is expected to be riskier than that of C-IV counties due to:

The degree of difference between the CalWIN source and CalSAWS target data structures The more fragmented ancillary systems that CalWIN counties currently leverage

Both factors add complexity to the migration. It is important to note that, while the high-level sequencing between LRS, C-IV and CalWIN counties was analyzed as part of the third-party assessment, county-by-county sequencing analysis was not done, and such sequencing decisions will be made as part of a statewide decision, after developing the design of the CalSAWS solution including the detailed disposition of ancillary systems. Final decisions will be made following the design sessions in early 2019, which will be memorialized in a change order and amendment approved by the CalSAWS Executive Leadership Team and the CalACES JPA Board of Directors. This information will be included in the first update to this IAPD.

KEY FINDINGS IMPLEMENTATION SEQUENCING: Several implementation scenarios were developed to determine a leading alternative. Each alternative was evaluated against a set of criteria that included Risk, Benefits, Cost and Schedule. Alternatives A and C scored very closely in the areas of Benefits, Cost and Schedule with Alternative A being less Risk averse. Alternative A scored slightly ahead of Alternative C: 2.85 to 2.84, and thus was identified as the emerging alternative. The analysis showed that the risk associated with a single step wave for the C-IV counties could be mitigated by sufficient testing of the ETL coding, performance and accuracy on the full C-IV migration load, having well tested roll-back procedures, and by having sufficient resources mobilized to support all the counties in a single migration wave. Based upon the analysis and vendor estimates based upon the requirements, the State and county leadership selected Alternative C as the approach. Primarily because for C-IV, it mitigates the risk of having operational issues due to overlapping person records, linked cases and multiple code merges for the C-IV counties. For CalWIN, it allows for conversion efforts to start sooner providing CalWIN counties early exposure to the LRS application and their converted data. It also eliminates the need for CalWIN implementation waves to overlap and for lessons learned to be implemented between waves. Cost was also a factor to consider. The estimated vendor costs for Alternative A was $27M over the independent estimate while the vendor estimate for Alternative C was within the overall independent estimate.

1.4.3 Procurement Strategy Assessment and Key FindingsThere were two clear objectives for the procurement of activities in support of the CalSAWS Migration project. These included:

The requirement to complete CalSAWS implementation by end of 2023, based on federal guidance from CMS and FNS. This was especially critical as FNS has outlined expectations




that “the transition to one statewide eligibility system with one consolidated database be completed no later than the end of 2023”, without which, effective at the start of calendar year 2024, FNS would not reimburse California for the operation, maintenance or other costs for any other SNAP eligibility system or database.

Balance the need for non-competitive procurements (to meet 2023 schedule) and demonstration of a competitive procurement environment

With these objectives, the filter for activities that needed to be procured non-competitively from incumbent vendors were based on two specific questions:

Would the activity require deep knowledge / expertise of the application or business knowledge?

Would the activity require high-level of coordination with any of the activities that required deep knowledge / expertise of the application or business knowledge?

When the answer to either of the above questions was “yes”, the leading procurement approach was determined to be non-competitive for the respective activity, and the collection of all these activities represented the “minimum set” of activities for which the leading procurement approach was noncompetitive.

For all remaining activities, the procurement approach was determined by applying two additional filters. This included an assessment of:

Whether the activity should need to be bundled with any other activity as a result of technical complexity or operational complexity (e.g., challenging to separate activities related to ancillary systems that were being centralized with the core eligibility system from activities for design and development of the core system)

Whether it was advantageous to bundle the activity with either the minimum set or with any other activity. Based on this, a set of logical procurement bundles were created, and various procurement options were considered and evaluated to identify the leading options.

KEY FINDINGS PROCUREMENT STRATEGY: The following table summarizes the conclusions of the assessment with regards to the procurement strategy:

Table 1 – Procurement Key Findings

Items to be Procured Procurement Method

Negotiated Costs

Finalized for an IAPDU

McKinsey Assessment Conclusions

1 Infrastructure set-up, core application design, development and testing, central implementation support, PMO, functional design and development related to core and ancillary functions such as imaging, contact center, notifications, management reporting, lobby management, county data extract, central print, task management, appointment management, collections and other supporting functions, and data mapping/gap analysis of data from C-IV and LRS to CalSAWS. Note: imaging, central print and task management functions will be further defined through requirements confirmation sessions.

Incumbent Vendor

September 2018/March

2019





Negotiated Costs


2 Data mapping/gap analysis of core data from CalWIN to CalSAWS, conversion activities related to ancillaries for CalWIN counties such as developing the print stream for barcode, supporting the legacy print vendor during migration, call routing and support of central CalWIN IVR during conversion migration, building interfaces and mapping schema for the county data extract for CalWIN counties, and data migration from CalWIN counties for imaging, Fraud/IEVS, QA/QC, collections and task management

Incumbent Vendor

December 2018

3 Onsite implementation, organizational change management and training activities for CalACES counties

Incumbent Vendor

September 2018

4 Onsite implementation, organizational change management and training activities for CalWIN counties

Competitive Procurement

February 2020

5 Services and required infrastructure for design, development, implementation and support of the CalSAWS Statewide Portal and Mobile Application


January 2020

6 Ongoing Maintenance and Operations services and required infrastructure including IT Help Desk software to support CalSAWS over the long-term


October 2022

7 Services and infrastructure to establish and support the CalSAWS Contact Center (since contract negotiations with incumbent vendor did not result in an acceptable price)


December 2019

Not Within Scope of the McKinsey Assessment

1 Tasks and activities for Quality Assurance services Competitive Procurement

March 2019

2 Tasks and activities for IV&V services Competitive Procurement

March 2019

While the items above that were part of the McKinsey analysis have been identified as the leading alternatives for procurement, this strategy should be reconsidered and alternatives should be pursued, if the negotiations don’t yield satisfactory results from a cost/timing/ capability perspective.

Details regarding the CalSAWS Procurement Strategy can be found in Section 7.4, Procurement Strategy.

1.4.4 Risk and Mitigation Assessment and Key FindingsFigure 66 below explains the approach of the Risk and Mitigations section of Implementation




Planning. The approach was consistent with previous assessments which utilized a similar 4-part risk framework across Financial, Legal, Operational, and Stakeholder risk categories, assessing each across two axes: the severity/impact and the likelihood/probability. The overall objective of this module was to conduct a holistic scan across all the different workstreams of CalSAWS Migration Planning, ranging from the CalACES Technical Assessment to the Data Migration analysis to CalWIN Ancillary Systems Analysis and compile a comprehensive inventory of all risks identified throughout the process, categorizing the top risk scenarios, scoring and prioritizing them across Severity/Impact and Likelihood/Probability, and cataloging mitigation actions. This effort allows for a comprehensive view of tiered risk scenarios and ensures preparation of mitigation actions, both as preventative measures and contingencies in case risks materialize. CalSAWS

2CONFIDENTIAL DRAFT – DO NOT DISTRIBUTECOMMERCIALLY SENSITIVE – NOT TO BE SHARED WITH VENDORS OR ANY OTHER PARTY OUTSIDE OF PROJECT TEAMCONFIDENTIAL DRAFT – DO NOT DISTRIBUTECOMMERCIALLY SENSITIVE – NOT TO BE SHARED WITH VENDORS OR ANY OTHER PARTY OUTSIDE OF PROJECT TEAM

Approach to Assessing Potential Risks and Mitigations PRELIMINARY

1) Identify potential risk scenarios across four risk categories to be used as basis for mitigation development Operational risk (e.g., system outage, process failure) Stakeholder risk (e.g., buy-in, alignment) Financial risk (e.g., vendor lock-in, cost overrun) Legal risk(e.g., policy non-compliance, litigation)

2) Score each potential risk scenario across two measures that help prioritize mitigation Severity / Impact of risk, if actualized Likelihood / Probability of risk actualizing

3) Develop actions to mitigate risk Preventative measures Contingency responses

Figure 6 - Implementation Planning Risk and Mitigation Assessment Approach

KEY FINDINGS RISK AND MITIGATION: Figure 77 below reflects a visualization of the overall results. The coloring shows a segmentation that is a standard industry practice to tier various risk scenarios. The blue risk scenarios warrant the most attention – daily, immediate attention – to ensure that both preventative and contingency actions are applied wherever possible. Risk scenarios such as “Data Inconsistency” or “Vendor Delivery”, which have had significant focus during overall CalSAWS planning, are included. The risk scenarios in the middle orange tier are important risks that warrant regular, periodic action and mitigation actions. The gray risk scenarios, the lowest priority, are still legitimate, tangible risks; however, they should be tracked with mitigation actions in place.




Likelihood

5

Data Inconsistency

Advocate Community

4

Technology Design

3

Customer (Beneficiary) Experience

Interfacing/ Integrating Systems

Labor Union Vendor Lock-in Policy

Environment

Vendor Management

Vendor Delivery

2

Capacity Management

of Multiple Systems

User (Worker) Experience

Cost Overruns Sourcing/

Procurement

Syndication/ Alignment

Lack of Momentum

Funding

Governance

1

Vision Vendor

1 2 3 4 5 Severity

Figure 7 - Visualization of Overall Risk Assessment

The outcomes of the technical assessment, requirements analysis, business process gap analysis, and ancillary systems analysis tasks approved in the August 2018 PAPDU have been used in this IAPD, where ever actual negotiated costs are not available, to size and estimate the level of effort and costs associated with the execution of CalSAWS DD&I and M&O activities outlined in this IAPD.

Based on the overall results of the Implementation Planning portion of the assessment, and subsequent procurement planning, Figure 8 below reflects the summary version of the current CalSAWS Roadmap.


Jan-

19

Feb-

19

Mar

-19

Apr-

19

May

-19

Jun-

19

Jul-1

9

Aug-

19

Sep-

19

Oct

-19

Nov

-19

Dec-

19

Jan-

20

Feb-

20

Mar

-20

Apr-

20

May

-20

Jun-

20

Jul-2

0

Aug-

20

Sep-

20

Oct

-20

Nov

-20

Dec-

20

Jan-

21

Feb-

21

Mar

-21

Apr-

21

May

-21

Jun-

21

Jul-2

1

Aug-

21

Sep-

21

Oct

-21

Nov

-21

Dec-

21

Jan-

22

Feb-

22

Mar

-22

Apr-

22

May

-22

Jun-

22

Jul-2

2

Aug-

22

Sep-

22

Oct

-22

Nov

-22

Dec-

22

Jan-

23

Feb-

23

Mar

-23

Apr-

23

May

-23

Jun-

23

Jul-2

3

Aug-

23

Sep-

23

Oct

-23

Nov

-23

Dec-

23

Jan-

24

Feb-

24

Mar

-24

Apr-

24

May

-24

Jun-

24Ju

l-24

Aug-

24Se

p-24

Oct

-24

Nov

-24

Dec-

24Ja

n-25

Feb-

25M

ar-2

5

C-IV

LRS

Cal

WIN

Base Contract End 1/31/2020

M&O Vendor Transition Period (12 Months)

Long Term CalSAWS M&O Period

CalSAWS Contact Center Setup, Development, Test & Implementation CalSAWS Contact Center M&OCalSAWS Contact Center in the Cloud Procurement

Proposal Prep, Submit, Evaluate & Award

CalSAWS 58-County M&O Procurement

Consolidated Portal/Mobile App Planning & Procurement

Consolidated Portal/Mobile App Design, Develop & Implement

FCED Planning & Procurement FCED Design, Develop & Implement

Acquire & Contract with Procurement Vendor (9 months)


Requirements Analysis, Develop RFP & Draft

Contract


SFY 2022/23

CalSAWS Stabilization(6 Months)

QA Support for CalSAWS 58-County DD&I

OCAT Procurement (began 2018) OCAT Design, Develop & Implement

Negotiate & Approve ContractPrepare & Approve RFP

SFY 2021/22

Con-tingency

RFP Approvals

Negotiate Contract(s)

Contract Approvals

2020 2021 2023

Cal

SAW

S M

&O Proposal Prep, Submit, Evaluate

& Prepare Vendor Selection Report(s)

QA Support for CalSAWS 58-County M&O

20242022SFY 2024/25SFY 2023/24

2025

Com

mon

Ser

vice

s

Governance

CalSAWS 58-County Design, Development, Test, Conversion and Implementation

CalWIN OCM, Training & Imp Support ProcurementCalWIN Business Process Alignment, Org Change Management, Training &

Implementation Support

SFY 2018/19 SFY 2019/20 SFY 2020/21

Negotiate & Approve Contract

Prepare & Approve RFP

Cal

SAW

S D

D&

IPl

anni

ng

Proposal Prep, Submit & Evaluate

QA Procurement (began 2018)

2019

Single Portal/Mobile App Go-live7/2021

39-County Go-live7/2021

10/31/2020Optional Extension Year 1




10/31/2024Optional Extension Year

1/31/2023Optional Extension 3 Years

1/31/2025Optional Extension 2

Last CalWIN Wave: CalSAWS Migration Complete

10/2022

CalSAWS Planning Completed12/31/2018

LRS ---> CalSAWS11/2020

1st CalWIN Wave Go-live10/2021

CalWIN OCM, Training, Imp Support End

11/2022

Long Term CalSAWS M&O Begins

5/2024

FCED Go-live7/2021

39-CountyGo-live7/2021

1st CalWIN Wave Go-live

10/2021

Last CalWIN Wave Go-live10/2022

11/7/2023LRS Base Contract End

CalSAWS JPA Approval6/28/2019

CalSAWS OCAT Go-live1/2021

LRS ---> AWS Cloud7/2019

Figure 8 – CalSAWS Roadmap

September 2018 Page 16



1.5 Budget SummaryThe DD&I costs summarized below by State Fiscal Year are based on the selected alternatives from the technical assessment. Table 1 below provides a high-level summary of the costs for CalSAWS DD&I.

Table 2 – D&I High-Level Cost Summary

Development & Implementation Cost SummarySFY 2018/19 SFY 2019/20 SFY 2020/21 SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 Total

$30,338,749 $154,372,147 $156,702,144 $80,082,488 $31,949,674 $453,445,202

The M&O costs summarized below by State Fiscal Year are based on the selected alternatives from the technical assessment for the DD&I phase as continued into the steady state. Table 2 below provides a high-level summary of the CalSAWS M&O costs through SFY 2025/26. The full description of both the DD&I and M&O budgets can be found in Section 10 of this IAPD.

Table 3 – M&O High-Level Cost Summary

Maintenance & Operations Cost SummarySFY 2020/21 SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 SFY 2023/24 SFY 2024/25 SFY 2025/65 Total$75,317,719 $207,342,559 $221,867,628 $221,867,628 $221,867,628 $221,867,628 $1,170,130,790

In addition to the DD&I and M&O, the Consortium will continue procurement activities. The procurement costs are summarized below by State Fiscal Year.

Table 4 – Procurement Cost Summary

Procurement Cost SummarySFY 2018/19 SFY 2019/20 SFY 2020/21 SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 Total

$559,440 $1,118,880 $2,271,431 $3,627,880 $578,990 $8,156,621

1.6 Cost Benefit Analysis SummaryThe DD&I and M&O costs summarized below are based on the selected alternatives from the technical assessment. The full description of the costs can be found in Section 10 of this IAPD and the details associated with benefits are provided in Section 5. Table 4 below provides a high-level summary of the costs and benefits for the entire effort. It is important to note that the cost savings include only those associated with the CalSAWS IAPD and exclude any that may be associated with county administrative funding. In addition, the annual savings is based on 12 months of CalSAWS steady-state M&O; the impact to existing M&O IAPDUs as counties migrate is not yet known but will be addressed in future CalACES and CalWIN M&O IAPDUs as the plans for decommission of legacy systems are developed.




Table 5 – CBA Summary

CalSAWS Average Annual Cost $ 221.9 M

C-IV System Decommision -$ 101.9 MLRS System Decommission1 -$ 69.8 MCalWIN Decommission -$ 113.2 MTotal Annual Average Cost Benefit -$ 284.9 M

Total Annual Average Savings -$ 63.0 M

1.28

Cost Benefit Analysis

Costs

Benefit / Cost Ratio =Quantitative Benefits

Does Not Account for County Administrative Savings

Savings

1LRS includes a portion of Consortium Personnel costs from the PAPDU

Qualitative Benefits

Builds upon, reuses, and leverages optimal system features across the consortia and counties to best align with the future CalSAWS core application and end state.

Maximizes reusability of the technology for future initiatives and business needs.

Enables a consistent user and client experience statewide.

Enables cost-efficient operations.

Utilizes new technologies, where needed, to optimize process flow, maintenance, and system life.

Minimizes training and implementation costs for the majority of users.

Utilizes architectures and technologies that scale easily to accommodate additional sites and users and can be adapted to meet the continually evolving policy needs of the programs and state.

Increases data security to better defend against cyber-attacks, protect personal information, and comply with regulations and policies.

Enhances data management for policy decisions at a statewide level.

Enables easier statewide management reporting.

Reduces the vendor lock-in for certain software and services.

Optimizes maintenance of certain components.

Minimizes disruption to customer service.

Reduces systems maintenance and operations costs.

Optimizes systems and interfaces design that enable ease of use and support, including improving case management data sharing with CalHEERS, MEDS, and other State and Federal systems.

Provides high-performance systems that are quick to deploy and run workloads.

Minimizes integration challenges and maximizes interoperability.

Enables business continuity for all users and clients.

Establishes a single statewide governance structure and system for the delivery and administration of welfare benefits.




1.7 Next Steps for the Overall CalSAWS InitiativeBased on the outcomes of this technical assessment which included approach, requirements and associated costs, emerging alternative for ancillaries, DD&I costs of migration, and ongoing M&O costs post-migration, the CalACES and CalWIN Consortia jointly submit this IAPD. The information resulting from this assessment effort has been used in this IAPD to size and estimate the level of effort and costs associated with the execution of CalSAWS DD&I and M&O activities outlined in this IAPD, except where actual DD&I costs have been negotiated with the CalACES incumbent vendor.

The following table outlines the status of the next steps for the overall CalSAWS initiative.

Table 6 - Next Steps

Next Steps Status1. Continue Planning and Budgeting through

December 2018 Leverage the cost assessments to prepare an

IAPD in support of the critical initiatives Complete

Work with key system SMEs and consortia resources to further refine timelines, options and dependencies

Complete

Develop timelines, key milestones and gates for migration activities

Complete

Hold demo sessions for pending statewide validation of requirements from CalWIN visits

Scheduled for October and November 2018

2. Initiate Procurements Initiate source discussions to determine sole and

competitive procurements Complete

Prepare the CalSAWS IAPD based on negotiations for DD&I including refinement of requirements costs and certain vendor choices (e.g., central print)

Complete

Develop long term competitive sourced timeline Complete

Initiate contract extensions to align to DD&I timeline and account for legacy decommission plans

In process and scheduled for completion June 2019

3. Begin Implementation Finalize the LRS Cloud Proof of Concept (POC)

and determine critical architecture and infrastructure modifications needed to ensure performance of CalSAWS in the cloud environment

In process and scheduled for completion in December 2018

Establish cloud development and test environments and operating procedures

Scheduled to begin in January 2019

Hold design sessions to further detail technical solutions

Scheduled to begin in January 2019

4. Establish CalSAWS Governance Formalize multi-vendor management model and

responsibilities Targeted for completion in Q1 2019. This will be responsibility of the CalSAWS Consortium Project Management Office (PMO).




Next Steps Status Begin staffing technical Center of Excellence for

CalSAWS architectural guidance Targeted for completion in Q2 2019. Once the POC results are finalized and resulting changes to the architecture are known, the CalSAWS Technical Director will lead the effort to establish architectural and infrastructure standards, processes and best practices as part of a CalSAWS Technical Center of Excellence.

Establish application roadmap governance team and processes

In process and targeted for completion in Q1 2019. A Pre-Consolidation Governance Workgroup consisting of key managers from the existing CalWIN, C-IV and LRS system maintenance organizations has been established to coordinate single designs associated with key changes and releases across existing systems. This workgroup will also help refine processes associated with analyzing and approving common changes as well as changes that facilitate the transition to CalSAWS. As an example, the analysis of potential CalWIN system changes will always include the impact associated with conversion to CalSAWS, with the goal of facilitating the conversion effort. This workgroup includes participants in both the CalWIN and CalACES Project Steering Committees and Change Control Boards.

Establish method of escalation of changes on the IAPD (e.g., additional requirements)

The CalSAWS Consortium team will coordinate IAPD revisions and formal updates with OSI, CDSS and DHCS in accordance with established processes.

Finalize documentation on official governance and communicate with consortia

The revised JPA Agreement and Bylaws will be approved by all county Boards of Supervisors during January – May 2019.

5. Staff Acquisition and Recruitment of CalSAWS Consortium Organization Develop Staff Acquisition and Recruitment Plan Began Staff Acquisition Plan development in

September 2018. Expected completion: November 2018.

Execute Staff Acquisition and Recruitment Plan Conduct recruiting activities: December 2018 – January 2019 geared towards CalSAWS DD&I Project start in January 2019 and beyond for future positions




2.0 RESULTS OF ACTIVITIES INCLUDED IN THE PAPDUThe CalSAWS planning activities began in January 2018. The August 2018 As-Needed PAPDU includes the following scope of work:

Workflow 1: Continuation of CalACES migration planning and joint development between LRS and C-IV to conduct ongoing evaluation and tracking of changes to avoid further divergence between the two systems. This team also supports project readiness, staff recruitment, and contract negotiations.

Workflow 2: Technical planning and analysis related to migration to the cloud and transition to a single database, as well as finalization of requirements for all 58 counties, development of cost estimates for the requirements, and establishing a new DD&I schedule and budget for the CalSAWS IAPD. In addition, Workflow 2 includes development of a single SAWS roadmap, implementation and procurement strategy. The CalSAWS IAPD is based on the outputs of the analysis.

Workflow 3: Continue CalWIN conversion planning that began in Workflow 2, execute CalSAWS procurement tasks based on Workflow 2 results, and accommodate CalWIN participation in the LRS to Cloud Proof of Concept activities. Workflow 3 also includes support for the CalSAWS IAPD review and approval, and maintenance of the single SAWS roadmap.

The results of these activities including the complete set of technical alternatives and an updated Statement of Requirements with associated levels of effort and costs have been used as inputs to this IAPD. The status of the activities is provided in the following table.

Table 7 – Key Planning Activities Status

WBS Task Name Start Date End Date Status

1 Project Initiation Jan-18 Jan-18 Complete2 Continuation of Migration D&I Planning (Joint

Development) Jan-18 Dec-18 Ongoing

3 Planning Advance Planning Document Updates Feb-18 Aug-18 Complete4 CalWIN/CalSAWS Requirements Planning &

Analysis Feb-18 Jun-18 Complete

5 Technical Analysis (Step 1 - Cloud, Database, Data Center, Portal) Jan-18 Mar-18 Complete

6 Technical Analysis (Step 2 – CalACES Ancillary, Shared Services) Mar-18 May-18 Complete

7 Conduct Business Process Assessment in CalWIN Counties Mar-18 Jun-18 Complete

8 Conduct CalWIN Ancillary Systems/External Tools Analysis Mar-18 Jul-18 Complete

9 Develop CalWIN/CalSAWS Data Conversion Strategy Jun-18 Jul-18 Complete

10 Update Master Statement of Requirements Jun-18 Aug-18 Complete11 Develop CalSAWS Timing, Sequencing,

Implementation Plan and Roadmap Jul-18 Jul-18 Complete

12 Develop Procurement Strategy Jun-18 Aug-18 Complete13 Conduct Non-Competitive Procurement for CalSAWS

DD&I Services Jul-18 Sept-18 Complete

14 Review and Approve Contract for CalSAWS DD&I Services Oct-18 Dec-18 In Process

15 Initiate CalSAWS Competitive Procurement Activities Jul-18 Dec-18 In Process




WBS Task Name Start Date End Date Status

16 Develop CalSAWS Implementation Advance Planning Document Jun-18 Sept-18 Complete

17 Review and Approve CalSAWS Implementation Advance Planning Document Oct-18 Dec-18 In Process

18 Conduct Project Readiness, Internal Change Management and Operational Governance Jul-18 Dec-18 In Process

19 Conduct Ongoing Conversion Planning and Cloud POC Oversight Oct-18 Dec-18 In Process

20 Begin Migration D&I Jan-19 Jan-19 Not Started A summary of PAPDU costs as of August 15, 2018, are provided in the following table.

Table 8 – August 2018 CalACES and CalSAWS Migration Planning PAPDU Expenditures Update




3.0 STATEMENT OF NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE IAPDThe purpose of the CalSAWS project is to migrate all 58 California Counties to CalSAWS in order to align with State of California legislation and strategy to achieve a single SAWS. To this end, CalACES and CalWIN will execute non-competitive and competitive procurements to secure the design, development, implementation, maintenance, and operations services needed to expand LRS to accommodate the business and technical needs of all counties.

Through consolidation of SAWS, the CalSAWS anticipates achieving the following objectives:

1. Enable a consistent client experience across California

2. Consolidate systems for cost efficient operations

3. Scale infrastructure and architecture to allow for an easy expansion and inclusion of all counties

4. Provide high-performance systems that are highly available with minimal downtimes

5. Secure systems for data and workloads that comply with required regulations and policies

6. Ensure business continuity

7. Maximize reusability of the technology for future initiatives and business needs

8. Build sustainable business capability. DD&I project activities will span the course of 46 months, but will shape the consortium organizations for many years to come. By focusing on long-term solutions and not short-term fixes, organizational changes resulting from the project will prepare the consortium to better assimilate change in the future. In the rapidly changing culture of welfare, flexibility and adaptability are critical business capabilities. The DD&I project will be managed with this key precept in mind.

9. Utilize architecture that allows flexibility and adaptability for changing business needs

10. Promote a competitive vendor environment to avoid locking into a specific vendor, and enable ability to transition between vendors

Successful implementation of the strategy outlined in this IAPD will meet California’s needs and achieve automation benefits for the entire State’s caseload. These benefits include, but are not limited to:

Reduced systems maintenance and operations costs

Enhanced data management for policy decisions at a statewide level

Optimized systems and interfaces design that enable ease of use and support, including improved case management data sharing with CalHEERS, MEDS, and other State and Federal systems

High-performance systems that are quick to deploy and run workloads

Minimized integration challenges and maximized interoperability

The participating federal, state, and county stakeholders are committed to implementation of the single SAWS. Stakeholders, together with strategic technology partners, are positioned to achieve the objectives of developing, implementing, operating, and maintaining an efficient and cost-effective automated welfare system for California.




4.0 REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS, FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND ALTERNATIVE CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 Assessment and Analysis Approach The approach to obtaining the statewide CalSAWS requirements was multi-faceted and developed over time. The initial effort took place in 2015 and 2016 focusing on what was needed to implement the CalACES 40-county system and utilized a Fit Gap methodology with a side-by-side comparison of the LRS and C-IV systems with a clear set of guiding principles including using LRS as-is whenever possible. Participants representing the 40 counties in 17 different topic sessions discussed key gaps and needs resulting in 560 CalACES requirements. The requirements were set aside in December 2017 when at the request of Federal sponsoring agencies, CMS and FNS, the migration planning was extended.

In early 2018 the planning effort to implement a single-system was expanded and accelerated with CMS and FNS requesting that California conduct a formal requirements analysis, alternatives analysis, and cost benefit analysis. As part of this effort, the 560 CalACES requirements were validated by an independent third party using a three-step approach that included:

Process Validation

Requirement Validation

Comprehensiveness and Traceability

In April and May 2018, User Lab sessions were conducted to introduce representatives from the 18 CalWIN counties to the CalACES requirements, LRS functionality and workflows through demonstrations and task-based scenarios. Their feedback in the form of comments and potential gaps became discussion points for the CalSAWS functional Formal Requirements Gathering Sessions conducted in May and June 2018. A subset of the 560 requirements that were identified by the User Lab participants as needing updates and potential gaps were reviewed and LRS functionality demonstrated with representatives from CalACES and CalWIN counties to determine the impact to requirements such as modifications to existing requirements or new requirements.

Additional requirements gathered from the CalSAWS Non-functional Requirements Sessions, CalWIN County Visits, and existing Portal & Mobile Requirements were consolidated with the functional requirements by the independent third party using a gap identification and gap analysis/prioritization approach depicted in the following figure.




Figure 9 – Gap Identification, Analysis & Prioritization Approach

4.2 Statement of Requirements As a result of the Requirements Analysis process, a total of 920 CalSAWS requirements were defined:

394 CalACES requirements that remain (from the Side-by-Side effort)

166 updated CalACES requirements to enable a statewide solution

127 requirements gathered from CalWIN county visits

233 new requirements to implement a statewide system

The CalSAWS requirements are organized into the following high-level categories:

1. Project Management

2. System Development

3. Data Collection and Eligibility

4. Fiscal

5. Foster Care

6. Special Investigations Units

7. Manage Personnel

8. Utilities

9. Batch Interface

10. Reports

11. Correspondence

12. Resource Data Bank




13. Task Management

14. Testing

15. Training Development

16. CalACES/CalSAWS Migration Deployment

17. Change Management

18. Conversion

19. Training Delivery

20. Equipment and Software

21. Enterprise Infrastructure

22. Site Preparation and Installation

23. Central Print

24. Help Desk

25. Imaging

26. Call Center

27. Lobby Management

28. Operations

29. Analytics

30. General Requirements

The figure below provides a summary of the requirements (details are located in Appendix F – CalSAWS Requirements.

Figure 10 – Summary of CalSAWS Requirements

Of the 920 requirements, 63 already have been addressed through maintenance and




enhancement of the LRS base system or requirement consolidation. Of the remaining 857 requirements deemed to be valid, 691 are necessary for counties at Go-Live as illustrated in the following figure.

Figure 11 – CalSAWS Requirements

The 166 requirements classified as Post Go-Live Opportunities are included in the scope of the DD&I effort. While they were not identified as critical for Go-Live, there is value in their inclusion and a trade-off between their implementation cost (less than $3M) and the additional change management activities/costs that would be required if they were not implemented. Opportunities include updating system terms that are outdated or not commonly used to terms that are recognized (e.g. GAIN changed to WTW, SSS to Specialized Supportive Services). New and less experienced staff would need to know how to translate unfamiliar, old terms without these changes. Displaying the name of the CalSAWS county associated with the user while not critical for Go-Live will be confusing for users who have the ability to log into multiple counties, which is a Go-Live requirement.

As part of the Requirements Analysis, a Traceability Analysis mapping of the CalSAWS requirements to the federal partners’ template was performed. The results of the analysis are documented in this IAPD as part of Appendix K, which includes Deliverable 10, Appendix F, Requirements Traceability Matrix. This analysis mapped the CalSAWS requirements into the following groups:

336 requirements had a 1 to 1 mapping to the federal requirements template (e.g., CalSAWS central print requirement maps to the Client Correspondence category on the federal template).

442 requirements had a 1 to N mapping to the federal template (e.g., CalSAWS lobby management requirement maps to many categories - Data Services, Intake, Case Management, Presentation Services – on the federal template).




142 requirements did not have a direct mapping to the federal template or there was not a federal template category corresponding to the CalSAWS requirement (e.g., CalSAWS development and execution of a Change Management Plan does not map to any of the categories on the federal template).

The following figure illustrates the mapping and traceability analysis results.

Figure 12 – Traceability Analysis Results

During DD&I, the CalSAWS requirements will be traced via a Requirements Traceability Matrix (RTM) and maintained throughout the scope of the CalSAWS Migration DD&I by the Contractor. During the CalSAWS Software System Test planning phases, the Contractor’s CalSAWS Software System Test Team will create test conditions and test scenarios to validate the CalSAWS requirements.

A Comprehensive Analysis also was preformed to validate that the requirements gathering process covered all areas that would be part of CalSAWS. The team created a comprehensiveness framework by examining all potential sources of gaps and requirements, including:

Business Processes: All various types of processes that are conducted using the SAWS systems

Programs: All programs administered by the SAWS systems

Ancillary Systems: All systems not wholly in the core application1

1 Core application is defined as key components of the application such as automated eligibility determination, benefit calculation, and case management. Ancillary systems provide supplemental support and reside outside of the core application




Interfaces: All systems that may have one-way or two-way data exchange

Technical layers: UI, Database, Infrastructure

Output functionality: Correspondence, Ad-hoc reports, State reports

Core systems: Core web application, portal, mobile

Nonfunctional requirements: Categories include Training, Change Management, PM, etc.

The result of the analysis as shown in the figure below confirms that all areas of the system were covered by one or more work streams, ranging from the initial CalACES Side-by-Sides, through User Labs, Formal Requirements Gathering, and CalWIN County Visits. It should be noted that the interfaces and functionality related to outputs were addressed at a higher level and may require further definition.

Figure 13 – High-Level Results of Comprehensive Analysis

This extensive process validated that the CalSAWS requirements address and cover what is needed for the future-state CalSAWS system. Finalization of requirements for topics such as Task Management, Non-State Forms, Ancillary Conversion, and Imaging, as well as validation by the 58 counties of the 127 requirements gathered during the CalWIN county visits, will occur during Functional Design Sessions. Although requirements associated with ancillary systems must still be processed through the 58-county governance process, the Consortium has assumed the costs will accommodate county operational decisions.

4.3 FeasibilityA CalSAWS Feasibility Study was not conducted as part of the planning effort. The federal




mandate to implement a SAWS single system by 2023 along with a request from FNS and CMS for additional analysis on the migration scope and approach resulted in the submission of a Planning Advance Planning Document (PAPD). The PAPD included a technical alternatives analysis and cost benefit analysis, and while the initial planning effort focused on CalACES, it quickly expanded to CalSAWS.

4.4 Alternatives Analysis With key objectives of providing a consistent user experience across the state, gaining cost efficiencies through consolidation, and implementing an infrastructure that can easily be expanded, an alternatives analysis was performed by the independent third party. The analysis focused on the CalACES 40-counties with the ability to scale to the CalSAWS 58-counties and included the following components:

Data Center Consolidation and Hosting

Data Consolidation and Migration

Portal and Mobile Application

Ancillary Capabilities

The methodology involved a series of steps starting with a range of alternatives or options to explore for each component. Options were evaluated against a set of criteria (e.g. on-going costs in a steady end-state, payback timeline, and risks) and sub-criteria to filter out options that were not viable. Weighting of criteria and sub-criteria was based on feedback provided by all project stakeholders and further filtered the options until the best option emerged.

4.4.1 Data Center Consolidation and Hosting

C-IV, LRS, and CalWIN systems are hosted in three separate on-premise Data Centers. Various options were considered for the hosting and infrastructure consolidation including an on-premise consolidated data center, cloud-based hosting with the core application hosted on a virtual infrastructure environment, and a hybrid solution. The cloud-based hosting option included analysis of hosting on a public, private, and Government Cloud. After weighting cost, schedule, capabilities, and risk evaluation criteria to the scores for the alternatives the Government Cloud platform on Amazon Web Services (AWS) was determined to be the best option to host CalACES and the future CalSAWS. AWS is the most established leading vendor in the market offering more capabilities (i.e. ease of deployment, migration and maintenance; platform viability; and innovative services) and lower risk. The first step of this migration path is a six-month Proof of Concept (PoC) that leverages LRS production data in extrapolating and simulating data and transaction volumes of 40 counties, then 58 counties. The results of the PoC along with other activities required following the PoC such as production and disaster recovery network provisioning, security configuration, and security assessment may lead to updates to the costs included in this IAPD.

4.4.2 Data Consolidation and Migration

LRS and C-IV data is contained in separate databases. The team evaluated options for consolidation and migration of the data, including cloud-based and on-premise infrastructures. Criteria used to evaluate the options focused on cost, schedule, and risk. On-premise infrastructure options were eliminated with the selection of cloud-based hosting. Other options did not advance due to higher costs, longer schedule, and more risk in comparison to the remaining two options. Combining stakeholder priorities with the combinations of migration paths and technology stacks produced the leading alternative of creating a replica of CalACES in the cloud




and migrating the counties in a wave approach. CalWIN counties have 18 separate databases. Using the same approach, the CalWIN to CalSAWS data migration considered four broad options for consolidating the CalWIN county data into a consolidated system. Based upon the assessment, a direct merge into the CalSAWS system by the CalWIN counties was determined to be the best balance of schedule, cost, and risk.

4.4.3 Portal and Mobile Application

LRS, C-IV, and CalWIN have different self-service portals and mobile applications. Options for consolidation considered for the analysis were:

Leveraging an existing California State System (i.e., YourBenefitsNow! (YBN), C4Yourself, MyBenefitsCalWIN, CalHEERS)

Leveraging an existing non-California State System (e.g., Idaho)

Building a new portal

Two sets of criteria were used to evaluate the options. The first set included functionality and technical features such as accessibility, user experience, up-to-date technology, and ability to scale. The second set considered were DD&I costs, schedule, and risks. Applying the first set of criteria for Portal, YBN was the most aligned with the future CalACES/CalSAWS core application and possessed the overall technical features of accessibility, user experience, and ability to scale using the CalHEERS architecture, which is the most up-to-date. YBN also was the best of the three options applying the second set of criteria as it had the lowest cost, shortest schedule, and least risk of the three options. After applying the criteria to the Mobile application, the C4Yourself Mobile application was determined to be the best option.

4.4.4 Ancillary Capabilities

LRS and C-IV ancillary capabilities for this analysis included:

Imaging

Contact Center (including IVR)

IT Help Desk (Levels 1, 2, and 3)

Notifications (Email, Robo-calls, and text messaging)

Management Reporting

Lobby Management

County Data Extract

Central Print

These capabilities varied in their interaction with the core application. Some were fully integrated into the core application while others interfaced or functioned completely outside the application. Management of the ancillary capabilities also varied with some being managed centrally by the consortium and others managed at a county level. The figure below summarizes the capabilities for C-IV and LRS.




Figure 14 – Summary of Supplementary Capabilities

An analysis of the CalWIN county ancillary systems also was performed as part of the Alternatives Analysis using the following approach:

A baseline of both CalACES system and CalWIN system was documented for each business capability, through a combination of working sessions with CalACES and CalWIN subject matter experts, documentation review, and participation in both CalACES and CalWIN UAT and training environments.

Data collected from counties during county visits was compared against the CalACES baseline to pre-identify potential differences to discuss.

An 18-county workshop was held for all CalWIN counties to review and validate facts. A detailed analysis was conducted to assess county ancillary systems based on a comprehensive assessment framework to determine the path forward of ancillary systems, and identify requirements related to ancillaries.

In addition to the LRS and C-IV ancillary capabilities the analysis included CalWIN ancillary capabilities for:

Appointment Management

Business Intelligence

Task Management

Additional Tools (e.g., Collections, QA / QC, Fraud / IEVS, Employment Services, Fiscal / Printing, Workforce Management, Client Experience Tools, Workflow Tools, Middleware /




Integration Tools)

4.4.4.1 APPOINTMENT MANAGEMENTAppointment management is a critical component of eligibility work, allowing policy-mandated interviews to be scheduled in advance. Though appointment management is built into the core of CalWIN, the eighteen CalWIN counties handle appointments in a wide variety of ways with various software tools. C-IV and LRS both have appointment management capabilities built directly into the core. Unlike in CalWIN counties, those features are used by the counties as their primary scheduling system for appointments. Alternatives were considered for using a centralized CalSAWS appointment management as-is, an enhanced centralized CalSAWS appointment management, and maintaining current solutions. The best alternative was to use an enhanced centralized CalSAWS management for an improved worker experience as well as a consistent and improved customer experience.

4.4.4.2 BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE (MANAGEMENT REPORTING)Standardized reports with application and user data are used to monitor and analyze workload, compliance, and performance. LRS and C-IV both use OBIEE for Management Reporting, which is housed with the core application. C-IV counties have additional reporting capabilities using the County Data Extract and their own on-premise data warehouses. CalWIN counties have built a variety of reporting solutions to give them the information they need to make key business decisions. Many of the CalWIN counties use a data warehouse to support their state, management, and operational reporting needs. Some of the CalWIN counties have built horizontally-integrated dashboards combining data from the core application with data from sources such as CMIPS, CWS/CMS, and probation records as well as other county ancillary systems (e.g. task management, lobby management, or call center). Options to use a centralized CalSAWS Business Intelligence solution exclusively; a centralized CalSAWS Business Intelligence solution in conjunction with county Business Intelligence infrastructure; or county reporting exclusively were evaluated. The centralized CalSAWS Business Intelligence in conjunction with county Business Intelligence infrastructure solution was considered the best option as it provides consistent state and standardized reports across all counties along with county flexibility to produce ad hoc reports using core and county-specific data. Most leverage analytics and visualization tool such as SAP Business Objects or Microsoft Power BI running against a data warehouse. The following figure outlines the three alternatives considered.




Figure 15 – Potential Alternatives for Business Intelligence

4.4.4.3 CENTRAL PRINTCentral Print capability is divided into two main activities:

1. Determining what to print, how to print, when to print and generating the print instruction.

2. Executing the print instruction to print the documents, sorting the documents and dispatching the envelopes to the relevant post office.

Both LRS and C-IV have logic pertaining to the first set of activities that is embedded in their respective core applications. Since the core application will be consolidated, the Central Print analysis did not require a technical assessment. Instead the analysis focused on single versus multiple print facilities and single versus multiple managed print services. LRS and C-IV use different print vendors and facilities. Sixteen CalWIN counties use a central print facility with a third-party print vendor. Two of the CalWIN counties use their county’s own shared print services. The options were evaluated against criteria related to deployment and maintenance, innovation, and risk. The best option identified is having multiple print facilities as this offers the ability to switch print jobs between facilities for load balancing and backup as well as to deliver mail timely to customers. A single CalSAWS Managed Print Services vendor is the best option due to ease of support, potentially better print price and lower vendor management complexity.

4.4.4.4 CONTACT CENTER (INCLUDING IVR)The Contact Center provides customer support to beneficiaries through Customer Service Centers (CSCs) and Regional Contact Centers (RCCs). An Interactive Voice Response (IVR) triages calls by answering standard questions and routing calls when needed to the contact




centers. Metrics are captured utilizing call, task, and worker data. Currently the main difference between LRS and C-IV Contact Centers is LRS uses the Lagan application for automatic contact center related task creation and journal entry whereas in C-IV the Contact Center agent performs it manually. CalWIN counties use a variety of Contact Center solutions. The analysis focused on the infrastructure and hosting options. Options that did not include consolidation of the Contact Center technology set-up were eliminated due to the risk of increased complexity to implement changes across counties, consistent reporting, and lower compatibility with the core application. Options that did not include co-locating the Contact Center technology with the core application were not considered viable due to the increased risk of downtime and lower scalability. An option to implement a Cloud provider for the Contact Center service was also eliminated due to the increased risk of disruption of services as well as increased dependency with such a provider. The best option with the least amount of risk and on-going costs is to adopt an enhanced centralized solution. The enhanced centralized solution offers more features including requesting a call back from an agent, county flexibility to manage IVR set-up and queues, and lower costs.

4.4.4.5 COUNTY DATA EXTRACTCounty Data Extract is a general term for using data extracted from the core application to meet individual county reporting needs. C-IV and LRS currently use different models as illustrated in the following figure.

Figure 16 – C-IV and LRS County Extract Models

The County Information System (CIS) is the database that supports county reporting needs and the various ancillaries found in the CalWIN counties. CalWIN counties receive a replica of the core database on a near real time basis. In addition, they receive management reporting extracts on a nightly basis.. This data push is received by counties and fed to operational ancillary systems, such as task management and contact center software, as well as business intelligence




infrastructure and tools.

Figure 17 – CalWIN Extract Model

Options considered involved leveraging the current models, the current models with enhancements, one model with enhancements on the cloud and architectural changes. Criteria related to risks, including cyber security, and costs were applied to the options. The best option is to provide a single enhanced nightly extract of core data that can be used for reporting, as well as Application Programming Interface (API) access for ancillary systems such as lobby management that rely on current data.

4.4.4.6 NOTIFICATIONS (EMAIL, ROBO-CALLS, AND TEXT MESSAGING)Electronic notifications are sent to beneficiaries through email, automated calls and text messaging. Email and Robo-calls are set-up similarly in LRS and C-IV and have a clearly identified end state architecture. Text messaging is set-up differently in LRS and C-IV. The CalWIN system sends messages through all three media on behalf of counties for scheduled and policy-mandated reminders (e.g., Balderas calls). Counties can also request one-off messages to be sent through core CalWIN by transferring a message and list of chosen target clients. Options were considered for the text messaging software solution since hosting will be in the cloud. Criteria related to user experience, deployment and maintenance, platform viability, and data security risk were applied. An enhanced centralized solution with counties retaining administrative rights was determined to be the best option. The enhanced centralized solution provides a standardized, consistent client experience and features such as client responses to Robo-calls.




4.4.4.7 IMAGINGThe Imaging capability performs functions to scan, manage, and store documentation associated to client and case data in the core application. LRS and C-IV use different technology but the same flow and integration points. CalWIN counties use a variety of different technologies including what is used by LRS today. Options related to scanning software, document management software, and hosting components were evaluated against criteria such as the user experience, deployment and maintenance, platform viability, innovative features as well as risks associated with costs, services, legal requirements, and employee change management. A variety of options were analyzed that included use of existing software, new and standardization of software with an on-premise or cloud-based hosting infrastructure. Standardized use of Kofax, one of the packages currently used by the existing systems and employees, was chosen as the best option since it is the easiest to integrate with the target CalSAWS platform, more actively developed and familiar with the user community. Enhancements to the centralized solution are required to address functionality gaps. Documentum, also one of the document management software currently used, was selected as the best document management software option since it had a lower implementation costs and risks. Hosting the system on the cloud was selected as the best option due to the integration with the target CalSAWS platform as well as the consistent reliability and low cost of cloud storage.

4.4.4.8 IT HELP DESK (LEVELS 1, 2, AND 3)IT Helpdesk Services in both C-IV and LRS are responsible for logging and resolving tickets related to policy, hardware (e.g. computers, network), and application. Based on the type of ticket as well as the level of escalation, tickets are routed to Level 1 (L1), Level 2 (L2), and Level 3 (L3). LRS and C-IV use different ticketing software and have different operating models for L1 and L2. L3, which is primarily application related issues, will be consolidated once there is a single CalSAWS application.

Figure 18 – LRS and C-IV IT Helpdesk Models

CalWIN counties have County Managed L1 and L2 helpdesks and use a variety of software solutions to manage tickets.




Figure 19 – CalWIN Helpdesk Models

4.4.4.9 ALL COUNTIES WILL USE CENTRALIZED CALSAWS MANAGED SERVICES FOR L3 HELP DESK, WHICH WILL BE SUPPORTED BY TICKETING SOFTWARE PROVIDED BY THE VENDOR. COUNTIES MAY ELECT TO USE THE L3 TICKETING SOFTWARE FOR THEIR L1/L2 TICKETS OR USE THEIR OWN SOFTWARE. THIS OPTION PROVIDES STANDARDIZATION FOR L3 AND OPERATIONAL FLEXIBILITY FOR L1/L2 AT THE COUNTY LEVEL. LOBBY MANAGEMENT

Counties use Lobby Management to manage traffic in their lobbies and offer self-service opportunities for customers. As county office size and functionalities differ between counties and within counties, Lobby Management is used in varied ways. Using hand held scanners and kiosks, Lobby Management applications allow for self-service appointment check-in, obtaining status information, and scanning of documents. LRS and C-IV Lobby Management applications function similarly, yet each has specific features that the other does not. Most CalWIN counties have ticketing systems and kiosks to manage queues within their lobbies. A few of the CalWIN counties also leverage systems that allow customers to self-scan documents. Based on the decision for the core application to migrate to the cloud, Lobby Management will migrate to the cloud. Alternatives considered were 1) use the centralized solution as-is; 2) use the centralized solution with enhancements; 3) maintain current solutions, and 4) use an innovative off-the-shelf solution used by a CalWIN county. While option 1 offered consistency and a standard client experience across the counties, there were significant costs for counties having to repurchase hardware, update dashboards and interfaces to other ancillary systems. As a result, maintaining the current solutions with an upgrade alternative was determined to be the best option with the lowest financial risk and least disruption to clients.

4.4.4.10 TASK MANAGEMENTCalWIN counties use task management software solution to manage the hour-to-hour eligibility




work. The task management solutions used across the 18 counties varies widely in their complexity and scope. LRS and C-IV will be using the C-IV model that is integrated in the core application. Alternatives were considered for using a centralized CalSAWS core as-is, an enhanced centralized CalSAWS core, and maintaining current solutions. The best alternative was to use an enhanced centralized CalSAWS core since it will improve worker experience, lower the risk of decoupling task management with other ancillaries (e.g. imaging), and provide county flexibility.

4.4.4.11 ADDITIONAL TOOLS

4.4.4.11.1 CollectionsThere are four unique tools used across CalWIN counties to manage collection of over- issuance and overpayments. These tools offer largely the same functionality, key to effectively handling overpayment collections: tracking individual claims, tracking payments made toward each claim, issuing statements of accounts to clients, generating files to forward to tax intercept. LRS and C-IV use the core application. Alternatives were evaluated to maintain the current county solutions or use a centralized CalSAWS collections solution. The best option was determined to be the centralized CalSAWS collection solution due to the integration into the core application, consistent state reports, and reduced reliance on legacy systems.

4.4.4.11.2 QA/QCMany of the CalWIN counties utilize tools that are outside of the core application for supervisors and county QA staff to track notes and status of case reviews. LRS and C-IV use the core application. Alternatives were evaluated to maintain the current county solutions or use a centralized CalSAWS solution. The best option was determined to be the centralized CalSAWS solution as-is without changes due to the integration into the core application, standardization, and low cost.

4.4.4.11.3 Fraud/IEVSCalWIN counties utilize a variety of tools outside of the core application to refer and track fraud cases as well as IEVS abstracts. LRS and C-IV use the core application. Alternatives were evaluated to maintain the current county solutions or use a CalSAWS solution. The best option was determined to be the centralized CalSAWS solution as-is without changes due to the integration into the core application and referrals, standardization, and consistent state reporting.




4.4.4.11.4 Employment ServicesTen of the CalWIN counties have built additional tools outside of the core application to help deliver employment services. LRS and C-IV use the core application. Alternatives were evaluated to maintain the current county solutions or use a CalSAWS solution. The best option was determined to be the centralized CalSAWS solution with enhancements of functionality currently maintained in the county systems such as case status tracking and workforce participation.

4.4.4.11.5 Fiscal/PrintingFiscal/Printing tools enable counties to issue benefits determined by the cores application that fall into the following categories:

Fiscal integration: formatting banking files to match the format expected by county’s bank

Check imaging: formatting checks to match format of county check printers

Warrant printing: formatting warrants to match format of county warrant printers and generating positive pay files for warrants printed to send to the bank

Childcare issuance: exporting manually-entered childcare payments to county financial systems

Alternatives were evaluated to maintain the current county solutions or use a centralized CalSAWS solution. Due to the needs varying by county, the best option was determined to be maintaining the current county solutions with an interface to the core application.

4.5 SummaryThe alternatives analysis concluded that the best option to host CalSAWS is the Government Cloud platform on AMS with a six-month PoC to simulate data and transaction volumes of all counties. Following the PoC, the SAWS consortia will be able to size cloud technology and project the full cost of migrating all 58 counties into the end-state cloud environment.

The alternatives analysis also concluded that the best option for the CalSAWS Mobile application was to enhance the leveraged existing solution to include features supporting all counties.

The following three figures summarize the ancillary capabilities alternatives analysis.




Figure 20 – Ancillary Capabilities Analysis (Summary 1)





5.0 COST BENEFITS ANALYSISThis cost benefit analysis focuses on the evaluation of options and alternatives to migrate CalACES and CalWIN to the CalSAWS end state. In lieu of selecting a set number of holistic alternatives for migrating to CalSAWS, the independent third-party vendor analyzed options and alternatives for various components of the total effort. The collective results of these individual efforts were used to support the comprehensive evaluation and determine the best path forward. The third-party vendor also analyzed the full project scope and approach and provided cost estimates based on the evaluation of current and future states. These estimates provided a solid foundation for the final costs presented in Section 10. Costs and benefits (quantitative and qualitative) were identified and analyzed for options/alternatives identified for:

Data and Data Center Consolidation and Migration Path

CalSAWS Portal

CalSAWS Mobile Application

Ancillary Capabilities

DD&I and M&O costs for this effort were projected based on the level of effort required for achieving the CalSAWS end state, taking into consideration each selected option/alternative. Total costs to achieve the final CalSAWS and projected quantitative and qualitative benefits can be found at the end of this section.

5.1 Data and Data Center Consolidations and Migration Path C-IV, LRS, and CalWIN systems are hosted and managed in three separate on-premise Data Centers; CalWIN has 18 separate databases; and data will need to be consolidated and managed effectively as part of CalSAWS. Because the data center consolidation serves as the first step to supporting the data consolidation and migration, the cost and benefits for these combined efforts are being presented jointly. The Government Cloud platform on Amazon Web Services (AWS) was determined to be the best option to 1) host the future CalSAWS and 2) support the consolidation and migration of data. To optimally implement and utilize the Government Cloud platform, eight different paths were explored; however, only two paths were determined viable and fully evaluated from a cost/benefit perspective. Path 2 included creating a copy of one system in the cloud first and merging in the other system. Path 3 included creating a new end-state instance in the cloud first, then merging in both systems. Within these two paths, the following four alternatives were evaluated:

Alternative 2A: Government Cloud on incumbent technology stack (i.e., Oracle) via Migration Path 2. The total cost of ownership for this alternative was estimated at $2.0B over the next ten years. This alternative requires 36-42 months for implementation, meets approximately 59% of the desired capabilities, and carries a risk factor of 3.59.

Alternative 2B: Government Cloud on non-incumbent technology stack via Migration Path 2. The total cost of ownership for this alternative was estimated at $2.0B over the next ten years. This alternative requires 36-42 months for implementation, meets approximately 65% of the desired capabilities, and carries a risk factor of 3.02.

Alternative 3A: Government Cloud on incumbent technology stack via Migration Path 3. The total cost of ownership for this alternative was estimated at $1.9B over the next ten years. This alternative requires 24-30 months for implementation, meets approximately 59% of the desired capabilities, and carries a risk factor of 3.65.

Alternative 3B: Government Cloud on non-incumbent technology stack via Migration




Path 3. The total cost of ownership for this alternative was estimated at $1.9B over the next 10 years. This alternative requires 24-30 months for implementation, meets approximately 65% of the desired capabilities, and carries a risk factor of 3.08.

Alternative 3B was selected because of its overall lower cost and shorter timeframe for implementation. See Appendix G – CalACES Alternatives Analysis, Interim Alternatives Analysis Report, Section 5.2 for more information. The following provides a summary of the quantitative and qualitative benefits of the alternatives evaluated.

Table 9 – Data Center Consolidation and Migration Path Benefits

Category Alternative 2A Alternative 2B Alternative 3A Alternative 3B

Quantitative Benefits

Eliminates current ongoing system costs related to data hosting.





Reuses and leverages CalACES.

Utilizes the government cloud, which is designed for more sensitive workloads with various government-specific requirements.

Contains elements that make it the easiest to deploy, migrate, and maintain because of bulk data services, shared database components, share platform components, and requirement network latency.

Includes good customer service.

Utilizes high-market share and well-supported web services.


Includes bulk data services and requirement network latency.

Provides high platform viability because of its market share, customer services, depth and breadth of



Contains elements that make it the easiest to deploy, migrate, and maintain because of bulk data services, shared database components, share platform components, and requirement



Includes bulk data services and requirement network latency.

Provides high platform viability because of its market share, customer services, depth and breadth of public sector case examples, executive of




Category Alternative 2A Alternative 2B Alternative 3A Alternative 3B

Utilizes a mature partner and developer ecosystem.

Provides innovative services include auto-scaling, Share PaaS, Shared SaaS, and unstructured data services).

public sector case examples, executive of past roadmap, robustness of image marketplace, and maturity of partner and developer ecosystem.

Provides innovative services include auto-scaling, unstructured data services, machine learning, advanced developer tools, DaaS, and UCaaS).

network latency.

Includes good customer service.

Utilizes a mature partner and developer ecosystem.

Provides innovative services include auto-scaling, Share PaaS, Shared SaaS, and unstructured data services).

past roadmap, robustness of image marketplace, and maturity of partner and developer ecosystem.

Provides innovative services include auto-scaling, unstructured data services, machine learning, advanced developer tools, DaaS, and UCaaS).

5.2 CalSAWS Portal To deliver the new CalSAWS Portal, three options were explored:

Option 1: Build a new portal to accommodate all 58 counties. The total cost of ownership for this option was estimated at $7.6M. This alternative requires a minimum of 12 months to build and implement it for CalSAWS.

Option 2: Leverage an existing non-California State System (e.g., Idaho). The total cost of ownership for this option was estimated at $6.9M. This alternative requires a minimum of 12 months to modify and implement it for CalSAWS.

Option 3: Leverage the existing YourBenefitsNow! (YBN) portal, as it is the most technically similar and is best aligned to the CalSAWS end state. Both LRS and CalHEERS use the YBN portal, and key elements of each system’s technical solution were integrated in this option. Specifically, LRS APIs were included as they best align with the future CalSAWS since LRS is being used as the base for CalACES/CalSAWS, and CalHEERS architecture was included because it best provides accessibility, user experience, and ability to scale. The total cost of ownership for this option was estimated at $5.4M. This alternative requires nine months to fully expand and implement it for CalSAWS.

Option 3 was selected because of its overall lower cost, technical alignment, and shorter timeframe for implementation. See Appendix G – CalACES Alternatives Analysis, Interim




Alternatives Analysis Report, Section 5.2 for more information. As CalWIN migrates to CalSAWS, the portal will be enhanced with CalWIN features, as approved through the 58-county governance/validation process. The following provides a summary of the qualitative and quantitative benefits of the options evaluated.

Table 10 – CalSAWS Portal Benefits

Category Option 1(Build from Scratch)

Option 2(Existing Non-CA

State System)

Option 3(YBN as base application)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing Portal costs.

Eliminates current ongoing Portal costs.

Eliminates current ongoing Portal costs.

Qualitative Benefits Meets all desired requirements to support all 58 counties’ use of CalSAWS Portal.


Scales easily. Utilizes up-to-date

technology.

Reuses and leverages existing technology.

Utilizes technology and APIs that are similar to the base application.

Reuses and leverages CalACES and CalHEERS.

Utilizes technology and APIs that align with the CalACES and future CalSAWS core application.

Utilizes CalHEERS architecture to best support accessibility, scalability, and user experience.

Reduces training and implementation because it is known by over 21% of users and is similar to the C4Yourself, which is used by another 30% of statewide users.

Provides a consistent user experience.

Utilizes up-to-date technology and scales easily.




5.3 CalSAWS Mobile ApplicationTo deliver the new CalSAWS Mobile Application, three options were explored:

Option 1: Build a new mobile application to accommodate all 58 counties. The total cost of ownership for this option was estimated at $0.6M. This alternative requires a minimum of six months to build and implement it for CalSAWS.

Option 2: Leverage an existing non-California State System (e.g., Idaho). The total cost of ownership for this option was estimated at $0.6M. This alternative requires a minimum of six months to modify and implement it for CalSAWS. Because of the tight coupling of mobile applications with core applications in other states, this option became equivalent to building from scratch.

Option 3: Leverage the existing C4Yourself mobile application, as it is the most technically similar and is best aligned to the CalSAWS end state. The total cost of ownership for this option was estimated at $0.4M. This alternative requires only five months to fully expand and implement it for CalSAWS.

Option 3 was selected because of its overall lower cost, technical alignment, and shorter timeframe for implementation. See Appendix G – CalACES Alternatives Analysis, Interim Alternatives Analysis Report, Section 5.2, which also accounted for CalWIN, for more information. The following provides a summary of the cost and benefit analysis of the options evaluated.

Table 11 – CalSAWS Mobile Application Benefits



State System)

Option 3(C4Yourself as base

application)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing Mobile Application costs.

Eliminates current ongoing Mobile Application costs.

Eliminates current ongoing Mobile Application costs.

Qualitative Benefits Meets all desired requirements to support all 58 counties’ use of CalSAWS web application.


Scales easily. Utilizes up-to-date

technology.


Utilizes technology that is similar to the base application.


Utilizes technology that aligns with the CalACES and future CalSAWS core application.

Reduces training and implementation because it is known by 30% of statewide users.

Provides a consistent user experience.

Utilizes up-to-date technology and






State System)

Option 3(C4Yourself as base

application)

scales easily.

5.4 Ancillary CapabilitiesThe third-party vendor analyzed each ancillary component and capability to determine if current practices or other options would most optimally support CalSAWS; what needs to be consolidated, expanded, or developed to meet the needs of all counties; and what needs to be maintained on an ongoing basis. The following describes the costs and benefits of each ancillary component / capability evaluated. For selected options that include enhancing CalSAWS with CalWIN features, the inclusion of those features will be subject to the 58-county governance/validation process for adding, modifying, or removing system functionality.

5.4.1 Appointment Management

Appointment management software features that are currently being used to augment the system will be built into the core system, thus eliminating the need and costs for the individual ancillary capability. For C-IV and LRS, a total of $376,996 is required to integrate the appointment management features into the CalSAWS core, and $0.4M will be saved annually through this integration. No additional costs or benefits were analyzed for C-IV and LRS.

For CalWIN, three options were explored. Option 1 included using the centralized CalSAWS features as-is. Option 2 included enhancing the centralized CalSAWS features with CalWIN features. Option 3 included maintaining the current system. It was determined that Option 2, enhancing the CalSAWS features to meet the needs of the CalWIN counties, was the best option long-term to ensure the CalWIN counties’ requirements were met while also ensuring consistency across the state. An additional $3.7M will be required to build in the features to meet the requirements of the CalWIN counties, and ongoing costs will be absorbed into the core. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.1 and Appendix K – CalSAWS Migration Planning & Analysis Assessment, Deliverable 10: Final CalSAWS Report (August), Section 10 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the appointment management options for CalWIN are shown in the following table.

Table 12 – Appointment Management Benefits

Category

CalWIN Option 1(Use Centralized

CalSAWS features as-is)

CalWIN Option 2(Use Enhanced

Centralized CalSAWS features)

CalWIN Option 3(Maintain Current

System)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current appointment management tool costs.

Eliminates current appointment management tool costs.

Qualitative Benefits Integrates a Integrates a Continues to feed




Category

CalWIN Option 1(Use Centralized

CalSAWS features as-is)

CalWIN Option 2(Use Enhanced

Centralized CalSAWS features)

CalWIN Option 3(Maintain Current

System)

consistent set of appointment management features across all 58 counties.

Continues to feed county reporting systems and dashboards.

consistent set of appointment management features across all 58 counties.

Provides functionality to meet the specific needs of the CalWIN counties.

Continues to feed county reporting systems and dashboards.

Improves worker experience through robust tools built into core (e.g., automatic client correspondence).

county reporting systems and dashboards.

Used across social services in some counties.

Total CalSAWS DD&I costs are estimated to be $4M, with ongoing costs being absorbed into the core, saving $0.4M/year.

5.4.2 Business Intelligence (Management & Reporting Tools)

Only one technical decision was made regarding management reporting tools for C-IV and LRS, and that was to migrate all CalACES counties to use OBIEE for core Business Intelligence (BI) management reporting and move that to the cloud with the other CalSAWS core infrastructure. The third-party vendor estimated it will cost $17M to migrate the counties to the OBIEE in the cloud; however, no new ongoing costs would be required to maintain the capability. See Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.7 for more information.

For CalWIN, three alternatives for business intelligence were explored. Alternative A included the exclusive use of the centralized CalSAWS BI solution. Alternative B included the combined use of the centralized CalSAWS BI solution and County BI infrastructure, since many counties have a complete management reporting solution in place. Alternative C included using county reporting solutions exclusively. Based on leveraging solutions in place, consistency, and adapting to the needs of various counties, Alternative B was selected. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.2 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the selected BI management reporting options are shown in the following table.

Table 13 – Business Intelligence (Management & Reporting Tools) Benefits




Category

C-IV/LRS Option 1(Move to OBIEE, hosted in cloud –

CalSAWS BI)

CalWIN Alternative A

(Use Centralized CalSAWS BI Exclusively)

CalWINAlternative B

(Use Centralized CalSAWS BI in

Conjunction with County BI)

CalWINAlternative C(Use County

Reporting Exclusively)


Eliminates current ongoing management reporting tool costs.

Eliminates current county ongoing management reporting tool costs.


Enables the counties to continue using custom queries and accessing additional data for management reporting beyond the standard reports provided by the core systems.

Provides consistency and sets of standard reports across all counties.

Provides consistency and sets of standard reports across all counties.

Balances standardization with operational flexibility at county level, including changes in reporting needs, such as generating reports with other county data sets.

Meets county-specific needs for operational and management reporting for counties with established solutions.

Total CalSAWS DD&I costs are estimated to be $17M to migrate the 58 counties to the OBIEE in the cloud. Because the CalWIN counties will continue to use the County BI, the counties will continue to pay the ongoing M&O costs with county administrative funding, which are expected to remain at $12.4M/year, and no savings will be realized.

5.4.3 Central Print

The third-party vendor conducted a multi-factored analysis to determine if 1) a single facility or multiple print facilities and 2) single vendor or multiple vendors were the best options for CalSAWS (reference Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.5). The analysis concluded that multiple print facilities with a single Managed Print Services (MPS) vendor was the most optimal way to proceed based on ease of support, lower




vendor management complexity, speed of mail delivery, load balancing, backup, and potentially better print pricing. Once the decision was made to pursue a single MPS, the vendor evaluated two options. Option 1 included using the LRS MPS vendor model. Option 2 included using the C-IV MPS vendor model. The analysis yielded a finding that the C-IV model was 10% more cost effective ($0.05/page) than the LRS model ($0.056/page) and more in line with market pricing. The following provides the quantitative and qualitative benefits for the central print options.

Table 14 – Central Print Benefits – CalACES

Category Option 1(LRS Central Print Model)

Option 2(C-IV Central Print Model)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing central print costs.

Qualitative Benefits Enables easy print support, print process changes, monitoring and reporting of print performance, and enforcement of print policies.

Provides Consortium negotiation leverage over MPS vendor.

Minimizes MPS vendor management complexity.

Enables rapid backup features.

Enables load balancing during peak print demand periods.

Enables easy print support, print process changes, monitoring and reporting of print performance, and enforcement of print policies.

Provides Consortium negotiation leverage over MPS vendor.

Minimizes MPS vendor management complexity.

Enables rapid backup features.

Enables load balancing during peak print demand periods.

For CalWIN, two Central Print alternatives were explored. Alternative A included 16 of the 18 counties switching to the CalSAWS centralized print managed services. Alternative B explored continuing with the current print solution, either via vendor or county in-house printing. It is important to note that Tulare and Contra Costa elected to maintain their current county print solutions regardless of the Alternative selected. For CalWIN, Alternative A was selected because it simplified the maintenance of the overall print solution, enabled load balancing and rapid print between two print facilities, and standardized one well-maintained interface between core and printing. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.3 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the Central Print alternatives are shown in the following table.

Table 15 – Central Print Benefits - CalWIN




CategoryAlternative A

(Switch to CalSAWS Print Managed Service)

Alternative B(Keep Current Vendor)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing central print costs.

Qualitative Benefits Enables consistency across 56 counties.

Enables two remaining counties to access standard stream and barcode to support printing.

Increases ease in maintenance with only one primary print service.

Balances load and print speed between two print facilities.

Enables printing on Day 1 of go-live.

Takes advantage of consolidation of vendor contracts and negotiations.

Increases economies-of-scale benefits.

Provides a standardized and well-maintained interface between the core system and printing.

Enables counties to continue using their vendor or in-house county print services.

Total DD&I costs for CalSAWS Central Print is estimated at $493,359. M&O costs will be reduced by $0.3M/year, from $16.6M/year to $16.2M/year (rounded), based on current counts of images, envelopes, and inserts, using the current lowest contract rates.

5.4.4 Contact Center

For CalACES, six contact center options were evaluated, including combinations of consolidated and unconsolidated centers and on-premise and cloud hosting options (reference Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.4). The two options that led the evaluation were LRS and C-IV consolidated contact centers with software hosted in the cloud. Option 1 included consolidating the LRS contact center with cloud hosting. This option required the purchase and maintenance of Lagan software, which added approximately $1.3M to annual ongoing costs. Option 2 included the C-IV contact center with cloud hosting, did not require additional core software, and only added $2,000 per year to the overall costs. Option 2 was selected because it had lower implementation and ongoing costs, did not require additional software, and minimized the vendor lock-in risk. The following provides the quantitative and qualitative benefits for the LRS and C-IV contact center options.




Table 16 – Contact Center Benefits - CalACES

CategoryOption 1

(LRS Consolidated Cloud Contact Center)

Option 2(C-IV Consolidated Cloud

Contact Center)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing contact center costs.

Eliminates current ongoing contact center costs.

Saves approximately $1.3M per year over Option 1.

Qualitative Benefits Meets or exceeds system uptime Service Level Agreements (SLA).

Scales easily to meet the needs of all 58 counties.

Minimizes response time of transactions with core system.

Enables easy system upgrades and maintenance.

Contains features that enable users to quickly assimilate to software usage and complete required management reporting.

Minimizes training and implementation as it is already used by 21% of the county users.

Meets or exceeds system uptime Service Level Agreements (SLA).

Scales easily to meet the needs of all 58 counties.

Minimizes response time of transactions with core system.

Enables easy system upgrades and maintenance.

Contains features that enable users to quickly assimilate to software usage and complete required management reporting.

Minimizes training and implementation as it is already used by 30% of the county users.

For CalWIN, three alternatives were evaluated. Alternative A included using the CalSAWS Contact Center solution as-is. Alternative B included using the CalSAWS Contact Center and enhancing it to provide features needed by the CalWIN counties. Alternative C included using the current system. Alternative B was selected based on the ability for standardization across all 58 counties while providing additional features needed to support the CalWIN counties and gaining economies of scale. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.4 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the Central Print alternatives are shown in the following table.

Table 17 – Contact Center Benefits - CalWIN




Category


(Use CalSAWS Contact Center Solution As-Is)

CalWINAlternative B

(Use Enhanced Centralized CalSAWS

Contact Center)

CalWINAlternative C

(Maintain Current System)


Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN contact center costs.

Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN contact center costs.

Qualitative Benefits Provides consistent client experience across all counties.

Features available at go-live.

Provides consistent client experience across all counties.

Enhances client experience with the addition of CalWIN county features.

Enables counties to manage their call center needs (e.g., queue management and IVR setup).

Enhanced features available at go-live.

Maintains best county features in individual counties.

One-time costs for the selected Contact Center Alternative range from $9.5M to $16M and include those to migrate CalWIN and LRS to the C-IV contact center (CalSAWS Contact Center). For the total CalSAWS Contact Center costs, DD&I costs are estimated at $8.9M, and ongoing costs are estimated at $20.3M/year, which is a savings of $1.0M/year.

5.4.5 County Data Extract

The third-party vendor assessed five options for CalACES county data extracts and evaluated each against two separate filters. The first filter applied only capability criteria to meet the counties’ needs and eliminated one option (architectural changes) from proceeding. The second filter applied standard cyber security criteria, risk considerations, and industry best practices for data protection to the four remaining options. Option 1 included continuing to use both C-IV and LRS to extract county data. Option 2 included continuing both C-IV and LRS but enhancing each with cloud hosting and security enhancements to the staging server. Option 3 included continuing both C-IV and LRS but enhancing each with cloud hosting, security enhancements, and reduced data in the staging server. Option 4 included using the LRS approach.

From this analysis, Option 3 best met the county capability criteria and bolstered security to thwart cyber risks. This option included continuing data extracts as they are completed today for each county but via cloud hosting with enhanced security and reduced data in the staging server. One-time costs for Option 3 were estimated to be $6.5M, and ongoing costs were estimated at $4.3M per year, which is approximately a $0.6M increase over current expenditures. See Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.6 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the four options are shown in the following table.




Table 18 – County Data Extract Benefits - CalACES

Category

Option 1(As-is on Cloud (mix of C-IV and

LRS models)

Options 2(As-is on cloud +

security enhancements for

staging server)

Option 3(As-Is in Cloud +

security enhancements + reduced data in staging server)

Option 4(LRS Approach,

e.g., custom queries)


Eliminates current ongoing county data extract costs.





Enables the counties to continue using custom queries and accessing additional data beyond the standard reports provided by the core systems.

Minimizes county cost overruns

Minimizes service interruptions.

Supports client change management.


Slightly increases data security, reducing risk of security breaches and misuse of data by encrypting data at rest and in transit.


Minimizes PII risks.



Increases data security, reducing risk of security breaches and misuse of data by encrypting data at rest and in transit and segregating data.





Increases data security, reducing risk of security breaches and misuse of data by encrypting data at rest and in transit and segregating data.



For CalWIN, two alternatives were evaluated as part of joining CalSAWS, which provides nightly




extracts with all core tables, operational functionality for several ancillary systems requiring real-time data, and integrated business intelligence with real-time access to all core data and reporting. Alternative A included providing a nightly replica and API access. Alternative B included providing a near real-time and nightly replica of a subset of tables. Alternative A was selected because CalSAWS is able to provide the needed nightly extracts and API access as well as increase the ease in maintenance of one solution and reliability and immediacy of the nightly and real-time data needs of the CalWIN counties. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.5 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the two options are shown in the following table.

Table 19 – County Data Extract Benefits - CalWIN

Category


(Provide Nightly Replica and API Access)

CalWINAlternative B

(Provide Near-Real-Time and Nightly Replica of Subset of

Tables)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN data extract costs.

Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN data extract costs.

Qualitative Benefits Provides the needed nightly extracts and API access for counties that need immediate data access to support lobby management, dashboards, employment services tools, and other similar services.

Increases the ease in maintenance.

Increases reliability and immediacy of the nightly and real-time data needs of the CalWIN counties.

Provides mostly needed tables on a near-real-time basis and the remainder on a nightly basis.

Total CalSAWS DD&I County Data Extract costs are estimated to be $9.2M. Ongoing costs are estimated to increase by $0.6M/year, from $3.7M/year to $4.3M/year.

5.4.6 Notifications (Email, Robo-calls, and Text Messaging)

The third-party vendor determined that the CalSAWS notifications (email, robo-calls, and text messaging) should be hosted in the cloud with the other core systems and services (reference Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.8). A second filter was applied to three options for notifications to determine if a single or mix of current models best met the needs of the counties while aligning to the CalSAWS end state. Option1 included a mix of C-IV and LRS models. Option 2 was the C-IV model (OpenMarket). Option 3 was the LRS




model (Acqueon). Of the three options, the C-IV model was determined to best meet the evaluation criteria and cost less (i.e., estimated at $0.126M in one-time and $0.2M/year ongoing) to migrate, operate, and integrate with the core system because it is based on API integration. The C-IV Model’s ongoing costs are projected to be less than the current combined ongoing costs. The qualitative and quantitative benefits for the options are shown in the following table.

Table 20 – Notifications Benefits - CalACES

CategoryOption 1

(C-IV and LRS Models mixed)

Option 2(C-IV Model – OpenMarket)

Option 3(LRS Model –

Acqueon)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing Notifications costs.

Eliminates current ongoing Notifications costs.

Reduces ongoing costs by approximately $0.3M per year.

Eliminates current ongoing Notifications costs.

Qualitative Benefits Provides a high-performing system with a high user experience.

Uses a platform with high vendor viability.

Provides a high-performing system with a high user experience.

Enables easy maintenance, low cost to migrate and operate solution, minimal dependencies, and easy integration with core.

Provides innovative features that integrate seamlessly with core.


Minimizes data security risks.

Provides a high-performing system with a high user experience.

Enables easy maintenance.


For CalWIN, three alternatives were explored for providing notifications under CalSAWS. Alternative A included using the centralized CalSAWS notification suite as-is. The CalSAWS notification suite includes email maintained by the vendor; automated outbound calling that enables counties to retain administrative control over campaigns through multi-tenant model; and use of the OpenMarket to support SMS notifications. This alternative, however, would. result in a loss of functionality (e.g., interactive robo-calls, SMS notifications in threshold languages, etc.) on




which the CalWIN counties currently rely. Alternative B included using an enhanced version of the centralized CalSAWS notification suite, which would include adding innovative features such as allowing a client to respond to a robo-call by selecting a choice with the number pad, sending SMS notifications in threshold languages (e.g., Vietnamese, Chinese, and Spanish), and utilizing reusable templates for SMS campaigns across counties. Alternative B decidedly resolves the gaps in configurations and enables all counties to gain greater functionality and control over notifications. Alternative C included maintaining the current system. Alternative B was selected based on the ability to have a single, standardized client experience across all counties, improved innovative features, and ability for counties to maintain admin rights. Additional costs will be required to integrate and maintain the new enhanced features, which are described in the below table, and meet the requirements of the CalWIN counties. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.6 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the Notifications alternatives are shown in the following table.

Table 21 – Notifications Benefits - CalWIN

Category


(Use Centralized CalSAWS Notification

Suite As-Is)

CalWINAlternative B


Notification Suite)

CalWINAlternative C



Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN notifications costs.

Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN notifications costs.


Features available at go-live.


Enhances client experience with the addition of innovative CalWIN notification features (e.g., client response to robo-call).

Enables counties to manage the administration of their notifications (e.g., campaign management)

Enhanced features available at go-live.


County business process remains unchanged.

Total CalSAWS DD&I costs are estimated to be $1.9M, with ongoing costs decreasing by $0.3M/year, from $0.5M/year to $0.2M/year.




5.4.7 Imaging

The third-party evaluation of the imaging scanning and document management software and image hosting options resulted in the selection of Kofax for the scanning software; Documentum for the document management software, edging out Alfresco on capabilities and licensing cost; and cloud-based hosting for image storage for CalSAWS. CalACES costs derived (i.e., approximately $16.7M in one-time for design, development, and implementation, and $10.8M/year in ongoing costs for software licenses, infrastructure and network) were based on economies of scale with enterprise software licensing and combined labor efforts for the total imaging solution. See Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.3 for more information. The following provides the quantitative and qualitative benefits for the comprehensive imaging solution.

Table 22 – Imaging Benefits - CalACES

Category Selected Imaging Software and Hosting Options (Kofax, Documentum, and Cloud Hosting)

Quantitative Benefits Eliminates current ongoing imaging costs.

Qualitative Benefits Reuses and leverages the best of existing technology.

Software readily integrates and aligns with the target CalACES and end CalSAWS platform.

Reduces training and implementation since over 51% of county users are familiar with the recommended software.

Utilizes a long-term platform to standardize on for reasons of features, vendor, and cost.

Integrates cloud storage with system hosting options and provides a consistent, reliable, and low cost option for storing images.

For CalWIN, three alternatives were explored for imaging as part of joining CalSAWS. Alternative A included using the centralized CalSAWS solution (Kofax, Documentum, and cloud hosting). Alternative B included enhancing the CalSAWS solution to address functionality gaps. Alternative C included maintaining the current system, with each county maintaining its own scanning solution. Alternative B was selected because the centralization of one solution decreased maintenance effort and costs and enhanced features improve experience for clients and workers. CalWIN costs derived (i.e., approximately $27.3M in one-time costs and $3.7M/year in ongoing costs) were based on economies of scale with enterprise software licensing and combined labor efforts for the total imaging solution. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.7 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the Notifications alternatives are shown in the following table.




Table 23 – Imaging Benefits - CalWIN

Category


(Use Centralized CalSAWS Imaging

Solution As-Is)

CalWINAlternative B


Imaging Solution)

CalWINAlternative C



Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN imaging costs.

Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN imaging costs.

Qualitative Benefits Provides consistent client experience across all counties

Enables easy maintenance of one imaging solution.

Imaging features available at go-live.


Enhances client experience with the addition of CalWIN imaging features not available in CalSAWS.

Enables easy maintenance of one imaging solution.

Imaging features available at go-live.


County business process remains unchanged.

Total CalSAWS DD&I costs for Imaging are estimated to be $44M. Ongoing costs are anticipated to be $14.5M/year.

5.4.8 IT Help Desk

When evaluating possible scenarios for providing IT Help Desk services across all 58 counties, the third-party vendor found that a spectrum of possibilities existed because of how counties utilize consortium and/or county help desk services and software to support their individual needs. To narrow the focus and evaluate costs, three options for help desk ticketing software were explored for providing IT Help Desk L1, L2, and L3 services across all counties. For purposes of evaluation, the options assumed that help desk staffing and approach (managed vs. non-managed) would remain the same in each county. Option 1 included all counties using their own ticketing software for L1 and L2 services in lieu of using the CalSAWS Central Helpdesk Ticketing Software. Option 2 was similar to the current state and included maintaining the current mix of counties using their own software and others using the central CalSAWS (L3) CalSAWS Central Helpdesk Ticketing Software. Option 3 included all counties using the central CalSAWS Central Helpdesk Ticketing Software for L1, L2, and L3. Option 2 was selected because of 1) the low probability and/or ability of the counties to adopt either Options 1 or 3; 2) the marginal cost increase over current costs was within a feasible and acceptable range; and 3) the minimal disruption to current operations across counties. Costs for Option 2 were initially estimated to be $0.5M for one-time and $5.6M/year for ongoing costs, which is a minimal increase over current




costs. See Appendix H – CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.2 and Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.8 for more information. The following provides a summary of the quantitative and qualitative benefit analysis of the options evaluated.

Table 24 – IT Help Desk Benefits

CategoryOption 1

(Counties use own ticketing software)

Option 2(Counties use mix of

own and central software)

Option 3(Counties use central

ticketing software)

Quantitative Benefits . Eliminates current ongoing IT Help Desk costs.

Eliminates current ongoing IT Help Desk costs.

Qualitative Benefits Reduces the need for the Consortium to integrate and maintain the integration with individual county software ticketing systems.

Provides counties with greater autonomy over their ticketing systems.


Enables counties that are unable to establish and maintain their own software to integrate with the Consortium for full or supplemented Help Desk support.

Enables consistency in services provided today and minimizes business and services disruptions when migrating to CalSAWS.

Reduces the need for counties to maintain their own ticketing systems.

5.4.9 Lobby Management

During the analysis, it was immediately determined that the Lobby Management software should reside in the cloud with the other core systems and services. The second part of the assessment focused on the end-state functionality and cost impacts. The third-party vendor determined that the As-Is model, with both LRS and C-IV models supported, was the closest to the desired end-state and had the lowest cost and risk profile. It requires no change in hardware, as current kiosks are known/available and can access the latest software; meets the needs of the 40 CalACES counties; and causes minimal disruption to users. Alternatively, new hardware would have been




required resulting in a significant cost investment. See CalACES Ancillary Systems Alternative Analysis Report, Section 2.9 for more information.

The vendor further analyzed four alternatives for CalWIN joining CalSAWS and using Lobby Management software. As with CalACES, the leading alternative was to continue using the current system, with providing counties the option to utilize the CalSAWS lobby management software. All current hardware and client interfaces would be maintained, and APIs would be created to ensure real-time data was available. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.9 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the selected option and selected alternative are shown in the following table.

Table 25 – Lobby Management Benefits

CategoryOption 1

(As-Is Model – both C-IV and LRS)

Alternative C(Maintain Current System)


Qualitative Benefits Creates minimal disruption for users.

Scales easily. Enables high user experience

due to performance and system uptime.

Retains compatibility with current hardware.

Enables counties to maintain their hardware.

Creates minimal disruption for users.

Enables high user experience due to performance and system uptime.

Retains compatibility with current hardware.

Enables counties to maintain their hardware.

There are no new DD&I costs for CalSAWS Lobby Management, and ongoing M&O costs are expected to remain as-is.

5.4.10 Task Management

Task management software features that are currently being used to augment the system will be built into the core system, thus eliminating the need and costs for the ancillary capability. For the CalACES counties, a total of $1.5M will be saved annually. No additional costs or benefits were analyzed for CalACES. See Appendix K – CalSAWS Migration Planning & Analysis Assessment, Deliverable 10: Final CalSAWS Report (August), Section 10 for more information.

For CalWIN, three alternatives were evaluated. Alternative A included using the centralized CalSAWS core as-is features to perform task management. Alternative B included enhancing the centralized CalSAWS core with approximately 35 innovations identified across counties, including functionality such as robust automated task generation, imaging integration, single sign on and no duplicate data entry or multiple screens, bulk task creation, enhanced automatic task assignment, other customizable features and the flexibility for workers to configure workflows per their needs (i.e., case-based, task-based, program-based). Alternative C included maintaining the current task management solutions on a standalone basis. Alternative B was selected because one system is easier and more cost-effective to maintain, and the additional features benefited all 58 counties




and improved client and worker experience. A total of $22M will be required to build the enhanced features. Ongoing costs will be absorbed into the core and offset by the $1.5M in CalACES savings. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Section 8.10 for more information. The quantitative and qualitative benefits for the alternatives are shown in the following table.

Table 26 – Task Management Benefits - CalWIN

Category


(Use Centralized CalSAWS core As-Is)

CalWINAlternative B


Core)

CalWINAlternative C



Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN task management costs.

Eliminates current ongoing CalWIN task management costs.


Task Management features available at go-live.


Enhances client experience with the addition of CalWIN innovative features not available in CalSAWS.

Enables easy maintenance of one solution.

Enhanced task Management features available at go-live.

Maintains existing task management solutions in individual counties.

Minimizes rethinking of county business processes.

Total CalSAWS DD&I costs for Task Management are estimated to be $22M ($21.8M for CalWIN and $0.2M for CalACES). Ongoing costs are anticipated to be absorbed into the core, saving $1.5M/year.

5.4.11 Additional Tools

Additional tools for CalWIN include Collections, QA/QC, Fraud/IEVS, Employment Services, Fiscal/Printing, Workforce Management, Client Experience, Workflow, and Integration Tools. The third-party vendor has recommended that the CalWIN counties utilize the available CalSAWS tools for collections, QA/QC, Fraud/IEVS, and Employment Services. For Fiscal/Printing, Workforce Management, Client Experience, and Workflow, the counties will maintain their current solutions. As the ancillary solutions become more tightly integrated with the core, the overall ongoing costs for additional tools are expected to decrease from $13.2M to $10.8M annually. See Appendix J – WCDS CalWIN Final Report on Emerging View of Business Process and Ancillary Systems Across CalWIN (Deliverable #4), Sections 8.11 -8.19 and Appendix K – CalSAWS Migration Planning & Analysis Assessment, Deliverable 10: Final CalSAWS Report (August),




Section 10 for more information.

5.4.12 Ancillary Capabilities Savings Summary

The following provides a summary of the anticipated annual savings from consolidating the ancillary capabilities. Total savings are projected to be approximately $10.3M/year. Please also note that only a portion ($63.3M) of the $91.8M is included in this IAPD for centralized ancillaries, while the remainder ($28.5M) is expected to continue to be funded through the county administrative budgets.

Table 27 – Ancillary Capabilities Savings Summary

Ancillary Capability Current M&O Cost

EstimatedM&O Cost Savings*

Appointment Management $0.4M $0.0M ($0.4M)

Business Intelligence $12.4M $12.4M 0.0M

Central Print $16.6M $16.2M ($0.3M)

Contact Center $21.3M $20.3M ($1.1M)

County Data Extract $3.7M $4.3M $0.6M

Notifications $0.5M $0.2M ($0.3M)

Imaging $17.2M $14.5M ($2.7M)

IT Help Desk (L1, L2, L3) $13.5M $11.5M ($2.0M)

Lobby Management $1.6M $1.6M $0.0M

Task Management $1.5M $0.0M ($1.5M)

Additional Tools $13.2M $10.8M ($2.4M)

Total $102.1M $91.8M ($10.3M)

*Calculations shown in millions and therefore may not add up exactly

5.5 DD&I (Migration) and M&OThe DD&I and M&O costs summarized in this section include data migration, application maintenance, implementation, change management, training, and the selected options/alternatives discussed the preceding sections. The full description of the costs can be found in Section 10 of this IAPDU. The following provides a high-level summary of the costs and benefits for the entire effort.

Table 28 – CalSAWS DD&I and M&O Costs and Benefits




Category DD&I and M&O

Projected Costs

CalSAWS DD&I (Excludes Procurement) CalSAWS M&O

$453.4M$221.9M average/year


Current Ongoing Costs – C-IV Current Ongoing Costs – LRS Current Ongoing Costs – CalWIN

(Excludes County Ancillary Costs funded through County Administrative Budgets)

($101.9M)/year($69.8M)/year

($113.2M)/year($284.9M/year)

Net New Costs/Savings

CalSAWS DD&I (Excludes Procurement) CalSAWS M&O

$453.4M($63M)/year

Qualitative Benefits Builds upon, reuses, and leverages optimal system features across the consortia and counties to best align with the future CalSAWS core application and end state.

Maximizes reusability of the technology for future initiatives and business needs.

Enables a consistent experience statewide. Enables cost-efficient operations. Utilizes new technologies, where needed, to

optimize process flow, maintenance, and system life.

Minimizes training and implementation costs for the majority of users.

Utilizes architectures and technologies that scale easily to accommodate additional sites and users and can be adapted to meet the continually evolving policy needs of the programs and state.

Increases data security to better defend against cyber attacks, protect personal information, and comply with regulations and policies.

Enhances data management for policy decisions at a statewide level.

Enables easier statewide management reporting.

Reduces the vendor lock-in for certain software




Category DD&I and M&O

and services. Optimizes maintenance of certain components. Minimizes disruption to customer service. Reduces systems maintenance and operations

costs. Optimizes systems and interfaces design that

enable ease of use and support, including improving case management data sharing with CalHEERS, MEDS, and other State and Federal systems.

Provides high-performance systems that are quick to deploy and run workloads.

Minimizes integration challenges and maximizes interoperability.

Enables business continuity for all users and clients.

Establishes a single statewide system for delivery and administration of welfare benefits.




6.0 NATURE AND SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES

6.1 OverviewThis section describes the following CalSAWS development, implementation, maintenance and operations and supporting major tasks and activities:

Project Management

Core Application Design and Development

Ancillaries Design and Development

Technical Infrastructure

Conversion

Training, Change Management and Implementation Support

Maintenance and Operations

Quality Assurance (QA)

IV&V

Procurement

This section also includes a list of DD&I deliverables as negotiated with the incumbent CalACES LRS vendor and key project assumptions.

As described in Section 4.0, Requirements Analysis, Feasibility Study, and Alternative Considerations, the consortia jointly developed a set of requirements to support all 58 counties. The CalSAWS project will include project management, design, software development, technical infrastructure, testing, conversion, training, change management, implementation, QA, IV&V and procurement services required to:

Develop a fully functional and operational CalSAWS software platform in the AWS Cloud

Modify the LRS application to support the core and ancillary business and operational needs

Convert and migrate the 58 counties to CalSAWS

Maintain and operate CalSAWS

The scope of work will be procured through both competitive and non-competitive acquisitions as described in Section 7.0, Project Management and Procurement, Subsection 7.5, Procurement Strategy). Details of the competitive procurement activities are described in Section 6.10, Procurement, below. The procurement activities are summarized in the following table:



Negotiated Costs



1 Infrastructure set-up, core application design, development and testing, central implementation support, PMO, functional design and

Incumbent Vendor






Negotiated Costs


development related to core and ancillary functions such as imaging, contact center, notifications, management reporting, lobby management, county data extract, central print, task management, appointment management, collections and other supporting functions, and data mapping/gap analysis of data from C-IV and LRS to CalSAWS. Note: imaging, central print and task management functions will be further defined through requirements confirmation sessions and costs finalized by March 2019.

2019


Incumbent Vendor

December 2018


Incumbent Vendor

September 2018



February 2020



January 2020



October 2022



March 2019


March 2019



December 2019




6.2 CalSAWS Migration Project Scope

6.2.1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Ongoing project management will be conducted for the duration of the CalSAWS project, as described in Section 7.0, Project Management Planning and Procurement. The project management tasks include: planning, controlling and managing project scope, tasks, budget and schedule. Additional key tasks are tracking the detailed work activities, identifying and resolving issues, identifying and mitigating risks, defining and confirming deliverable and milestone acceptance criteria and regularly communicating project updates to stakeholders.

Project management activities will include project initiation, status reporting and meetings, communications management, risk and issue management, scope management, requirements management, deliverable management, quality management, facility management, staff management, contract management, financial management and document management.

6.2.2 CORE APPLICATION DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT

CalSAWS application software development will occur in the cloud infrastructure during the design, build and test phase of the project timeline. The LRS production instance will be moved as-is to the cloud. Changes to LRS to transform it into CalSAWS will then be incorporated into the normal modification and enhancement production deployment releases. These changes may include architectural changes defined in the Cloud Proof of Concept Roadmap. These potential architectural changes are not included in this estimate but will be incorporated into an IAPDU if necessary. As described in Section 4.0, Requirements Analysis, Feasibility Study, and Alternative Considerations, the consortia jointly developed a set of requirements to support all counties. The activities to incorporate the requirements into the application include:

Manage Application Team and Technical Resources Manage Unit Testing and System Testing Conduct Release Management including Production Code Merges Develop Configuration Management Protocols Develop Requirements Traceability Matrix Develop Master Test Plan Develop UAT Support Plan Document Develop UAT Readiness Report/Milestone Document Research Requirements and System Impact Perform Detailed Code Analysis Develop Functional Designs Complete Application Development Develop General and Technical Design Documents Plan, Document and Test System Security Features Execute Converted Data Tests Execute Batch Performance Tests Execute Online Performance Tests Plan, Document and Execute Business Continuity/Disaster Recovery Testing

6.2.3 ANCILLARIES DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT

Supplementary capabilities, or ancillaries, are defined as the capabilities that do not exist wholly in




the core application (existing outside of the core Java-based codebase). Although these capabilities are not part of the core, they remain key to the business delivery model and county operations. These ancillary capabilities must be designed and developed either within the core or an interface built to support the business needs of the 58 counties:

Web Portal/Mobile Application Appointment Management Business Intelligence Central Print Contact Center County Data Extract (CIS / EDR), includes Online API/web services County-Developed Notifications Imaging Helpdesk Services L1/L2 and Helpdesk L3 Lobby Management Task Management

The scope of work for the ancillaries includes licenses, development labor, change management, and infrastructure.

6.2.4 TECHNICAL INFRASTRUCTURE

Technology set-up, support and administration is required for the migration of the 58 Migration Counties to the CalSAWS Software. IT infrastructure management is critical in providing structure and control of key tasks to support technical activities and operations. Necessary tasks and activities include the following:

Deployment of technical infrastructure Maintenance of technical architecture documentation Capacity optimization Resource and Storage forecasting Infrastructure monitoring/troubleshooting Network deployment and monitoring Manage network and application security functions Provide Support and Integration for active directory Development and conversion environment technical support Performance and stress/load testing Training environment technical support Database administration Business Architecture Design Client data protection and security Application Development Facilities and Project Management Office support.

6.2.5 CONVERSION

The contractor will support a strategy for first converting two groups of CalACES counties. Los Angeles County will be considered one group and will be migrated in its entirety; the second group will be the remaining 39 CalACES counties currently being served by the CIV system. The contractor will then support the migration of the CalWIN countiesover a series of six waves.




The conversion activities focus on the planning, development and execution of tasks to extract, transform and load the data residing within the CalACES systems (LRS, C-IV) and CalWIN system into the CalSAWS Software. To minimize any disruption to the public and county staff in the normal operation of business during the conversion, the conversion activities also account for communication, collaboration and coordination between the project teams, the Consortium, and the counties. Conversion activities for the converted data involve defining the conversion approach, detailed schedule and processes, analysis of data structures, developing data transformation, providing data clean-up reports, manual data cleansing, executing mock conversions, performing data validation and acceptance and executing the conversion of source system data into the CalSAWS software. The key conversion tasks follow.

Manage Conversion Team Develop Conversion Approach Create Conversion Data Dictionary Define and Document Data Mapping Develop CalACES Master Conversion Plan Develop CalWIN/CalSAWS Master Conversion Plan Develop Conversion Design - LRS, C-IV & CalWIN Build Conversion Programs - LRS, C-IV & CalWIN Test Conversion Programs - LRS, C-IV & CalWIN Conduct Converted Data testing and Mock Conversion Dry Runs - LRS, C-IV & CalWIN Support Converted Data Validation by Counties Manual Data Cleansing by Counties Maintain Conversion Data Dictionary and Programs - LRS, C-IV & CalWIN Complete LRS County Migration to CalSAWS Complete C-IV 39 County Migration to CalSAWS Complete CalWIN 18 County Migration to CalSAWS

6.2.6 TRAINING, CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT

To assist counties in transitioning to the CalSAWS system, training, change management and implementation support will be provided by the incumbent LRS contractor for the 40 CalACES counties, and will be competitively procured for the 18 CalWIN counties.

Training development activities will include a combination of a one-time Web-Based Training (WBT) focused on key system changes, peer review of Job Aid content and deploying the Job Aids to the environments and creating/updating/deploying the On-line Help pages. End users for the 40 CalACES counties will receive WBT only, while the 18 CalWIN counties will receive a combination of WBT and Instructor-Led training (ILT). Training materials will be developed for Instructor-Led Training required for the 18 CalWIN counties.

Training delivery will include management of the training team and delivery of the training plan and materials.

Change management activities include development of the change management approach, change readiness approach, and communication strategy. Change management material will include a County Decision Point Template, Change Readiness Assessment Template, Change Assessment Tracking Template, Communication Roadmap Template, and Targeted Topic Template. Change readiness assessments will be completed and progress reported at regular intervals.

Implementation support will be detailed in a Migration Deployment Plan that will also describe how




the CalSAWS software will be transitioned to all users for each implementation wave. The plan will include the following tasks and activities:

Ensure key deployment milestones are met Ensure end users are prepared for system and business process changes Ensure end user operational and training tools and resources are available Conduct monitoring of implementation resources to ensure alignment with business needs Establish a communication plan for reporting issues and disseminating essential information to

end users Establish a communication plan for executive management and stakeholders for reporting

critical implementation information Identify and track lessons learned from early phases of migration activities to be applied to

later phases of the migration timeline

6.2.7 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS

This IAPD also includes maintenance and operations, which will begin with the first go-live implementation. This includes ensuring the availability, efficiency and performance of the system to meet all contractual requirements. Key activities include maintenance of the infrastructure and operational environments that support the application, monitoring the system for consistent, reliable quality of service and consistent deployment of system changes to internal and external customers. Some additional tasks that support ongoing system maintenance and operations include the following:

Review and analyze monthly Service Level Agreement (SLA) reports to ensure system meets contractual SLAs

Review and analyze other key performance indicators that do not rise to the level of formal SLAs

Design, develop, test and deploy system enhancements Support defined system change management governance processes Maintain data dictionaries Define and enforce enterprise architectural standards Operations planning and management Annual technology refresh assessments and capacity planning Plan and execute disaster recovery and business continuity testing Plan, monitor and test system security controls Execute performance and regression testing Cloud provisioning, administration, and maintenance of central and local hardware and

software Contact center and Help Desk support Telecommunications network support to operate CalSAWS Production Health Check support and issue reporting Production and batch control and monitoring Installing, configuring and upgrading the databases Perform database backup and recovery routines for data integrity and recovery Ensure all M&O processes are documented Plan and configure network upgrades as needed Support annual operational audits




6.2.8 QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA)

As support to the CalSAWS Consortium, the QA vendor will assist in assessing and evaluating the work products and deliverables prepared by the DD&I vendor as well as overall processes conducted by both the DD&I vendor and the Consortium. The QA vendor will be actively engaged for the duration of the project and will focus on embedding quality earlier in the deliverable development cycle rather than just an “after the fact” review. The QA vendor will work in a cooperative coordinated manner with the DD&I contractors and the IV&V vendor, and will continue to support the Consortium during M&O. The QA contractor’s project activities include:

Formal review and assessment of DD&I vendor Deliverable Expectation Documents (DEDs), deliverables and work products, including recommendations regarding acceptability

Assessment of proposed system change requests and associated impacts Risk assessment and mitigation planning Issue analysis and recommendations for solutions Assessment of Consortium and vendor project management processes and recommendations

for change where appropriate Ongoing analysis and monitoring of the work plan and tracking of actual against estimated

expenditures Monitoring and reporting of all costs, deliverable due dates and related activities. Review the suite of Automated Regression Test scripts and the outcome reports Develop an Independent QA Test Plan Establish and execute a structured Independent Test approach and plan Design and execute independent test scripts for Critical/High priority items and functionally

complex components, and document results Review and evaluate the DD&I vendor System Test process and results Provide recommendations for improvements to the System Test process Provide QA Independent Test Monthly Reports Develop a CalSAWS User Acceptance Test (UAT) Management and Support Plan Manage the overall UAT effort for the Consortium Develop methodologies and tools for UAT support Monitor DD&I vendor activities to ensure readiness for UAT Provide a Security Review Plan and Quarterly Security Reports which address National

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Federal Information and Processing Standards (FIPS) publications

6.2.9 IV&V

As part of the State oversight team, the IV&V vendor will conduct periodic independent assessments of project processes, risks, issues, requirements and deliverables to provide an additional level of quality management. The IV&V vendor will be responsible for the following tasks:

Review and make recommendations on the project management structure and processes at the State, Consortium and vendor levels.

Conduct risk management assessments on an ongoing basis. Review and make recommendations regarding the technical infrastructure, including capacity

planning and other technical aspects of the Project.




Consult with all stakeholders and assess the user involvement and buy-in regarding system functionality and the system's ability to support program business needs.

Analyze overall Project performance sufficient to identify and make recommendations for improvement. This includes developing and tracking key performance metrics for completion of key Project milestones.

The formal IV&V assessment reports will be submitted to state and federal sponsors at the same time. The IV&V vendor will also provide corresponding briefings to both State and Federal sponsors.

6.2.10 PROCUREMENTS

In conjunction with the CalSAWS Migration DD&I effort, several competitive procurements will be planned and executed to secure goods and services from the vendor community. The conclusions from the independent assessment as well as procurement decisions that were not within the scope of the assessment are documented in Table 28, Section 6.1 above. A brief summary and purpose of each of the planned competitive procurements follows.

Contact CenterThe Contact Center procurement will acquire a vendor to develop, deploy and maintain a consolidated system/solution that will integrate with the CalSAWS system supporting standard telephone service, text messaging and live chat communication channels. The solution will provide an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) with options for counties including voice authentication and self-service capabilities, and provide a workforce management and reporting suite of tools that supports variable county requirements.

CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation SupportThe CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation Support procurement is to acquire a vendor that will support the CalWIN county migration activities focused on analyzing the readiness of the CalWIN counties for the CalSAWS implementation and designing Training, Change Management and Implementation Support strategies. The vendor will support each component as follows -

Training Development and Delivery: training course development, planning and conducting user training, and the provision of training equipment and facilities.

Change Management: assessment and documentation of the CalWIN Counties’ current processes and procedures and their future processes and procedures after the CalSAWS implementation.

Implementation Support: Support the local county implementation activities during the CalWIN migration waves.

Statewide Portal/Mobile AppThe Statewide Portal/Mobile App procurement is to acquire a vendor to build a Statewide Portal/Mobile application to serve the residents of all California Counties and integrate seamlessly with the CalSAWS system. The solution will enable the public to securely apply for benefits, report changes, access case information, schedule appointments and access electronic correspondence, as well as support a customer centric/user friendly design and be ADA 508 compliant.




CalSAWS M&O ProcurementThe CalSAWS M&O procurement or set of procurements will bundle infrastructure and services to support the integrated statewide CalSAWS solution for the long term. This will include all required goods and services to support the ongoing maintenance and operations of CalSAWS as noted in Section 6.7 above. This will be the largest and most complex CalSAWS-related procurement effort in terms of scope, schedule, resources and cost.

6.2.11 CalSAWS DD&I DELIVERABLES

The following list of CalSAWS DD&I deliverables are part of the negotiated amendment with the CalACES LRS incumbent vendor. Additional required DD&I deliverables will be defined as part of CalSAWS procurement efforts such as Contact Center and CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation Support.

Table 30 – CalSAWS DD&I Deliverables

Number Deliverable Name Review Period (Days) Due Date

1 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Initial 5 February 2019

2 CalSAWS Migration Project Control Document Initial 10 February 2019

3 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 March 2019

4CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 April 2019

5 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 April 2019

6 CalACES Master Conversion Plan 10 April 2019

7Application Development Preparation and Installation Plan 10 April 2019

8 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 May 2019

9CalSAWS Master Test Plan (to address unit, system, regression, performance and converted data testing) 10 May 2019

10 CalSAWS Business Architecture Design 10 May 2019

11CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 June 2019

12 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 June 2019

13 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 July 2019

14CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 August 2019

15 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 August 2019

16 C-IV Master Training Plan 10 August 2019

17 CalWIN/CalSAWS Master Conversion Plan 10 August 2019





18 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 September 2019

19 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Initial 10 October 2019

20CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 October 2019

21 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 October 2019

22 C-IV Deployment Readiness Plan 5 October 2019

23 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 November 2019

24 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 1 10 December 2019

25CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 December 2019

26 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 December 2019

27 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 January 2020

28 CalWIN/CalSAWS Master Conversion Plan - Update 1 10 January 2020

29CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 February 2020

30 CalSAWS Migration Project Control Document Update 10 February 2020

31 CalSAWS Migration Work Plan Update 5 February 2020

32 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 2 10 February 2020


34CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 April 2020


36 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 3 10 April 2020


38 C-IV Change Management Plan 10 June 2020


40 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 4 10 June 2020

41CalSAWS General Design (Page/Report/Correspondence Changes per Requirement) 10 June 2020







44 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 5 10 August 2020


46 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 6 10 October 2020


48 CalSAWS UAT Support Plan 10 November 2020


50 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 7 10 December 2020


52 CalSAWS (C-IV) UAT Readiness Report/Milestone 5 January 2021






58 CalSAWS (CalWIN) UAT Readiness Report/Milestone 5 April 2021



61 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 8 10 July 2021





66 CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix - Update 9 10 October 2021

67 CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - C-IV 5 October 2021








71 CalACES Migration Final Acceptance Certification 5 January 2022

72CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 1 5 January 2022





77CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 2 5 April 2022




81CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 3 5 July 2022



84CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 4 5 September 2022



87CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 5 5 November 2022



90CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 6 5 January 2023

91CalSAWS Deployment Complete Report - CalWIN Wave 1-6 10 January 2023









96 CalSAWS Migration Final Acceptance Certification 5 April 2023

6.3 CalSAWS Migration Project AssumptionsThe following conditions and assumptions were used in determining the costs, schedule and scope for the CalSAWS project. If any of these assumptions change or cannot be upheld, the project costs, schedule, and scope may need to be re-evaluated and restated. The assumptions are:

The costs do not account for potential outcomes as a result of the Proof of Concept testing of the current LRS application software in the AWS commercial cloud environment. Any significant re-architecture required to support the current LRS application and the 58-county performance load has not been included within this project scope, costs or schedule. As a deliverable of the Accenture SOW, an LRS Application Re-Platform Roadmap will be submitted which will contain the recommendations to optimize performance and system availability of the LRS application in the AWS cloud. These recommendations will be based on the executed test phases and results of the Proof of Concept and the roadmap will also include estimated costs and timelines for implementation of those proposed changes. Potential opportunities to leverage additional cloud-native architectural principals also be considered as part of additional enhancements and may require additional funding.

Sufficient project funding for CalSAWS DD&I activities will be approved and available beginning January 7, 2019.

Current application and operational support services for each consortium system will continue to be funded until all Counties using that consortium system have fully migrated to the CalSAWS and conversion activities are complete. This includes any parallel processing required until all Counties have transitioned.

The statewide CalSAWS JPA will be in place by July 2019.

There will be two project facilities for the CalSAWS project for both DD&I and M&O: the CalACES South project site in Norwalk, California and the CalACES North project site in Rancho Cordova, California. In addition, the Consortium will leverage the CalWIN M&O Project site in Roseville, California on an as-needed basis for conference rooms.

The counties will continue with the current managed and non-managed operational models during M&O.

Cost estimates are based on a combination of negotiated rates and estimated rates. The results of future procurements will impact the actual rates and costs.




7.0 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLANNING AND PROCUREMENTThis IAPD section describes the CalSAWS governance framework and processes, organizations and their respective responsibilities and encompasses communication and decision-making across the State, Consortium and project levels. This section also addresses the overall Project Management methodology and procurement strategy.

Foundational to these processes and governance structure is the recent California Assembly Bill 1811 as chaptered on June 27, 2018, with an increased focus on engaging health and human services advocates, stakeholders and clients:

SEC. 15.The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(a) Through the Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS) consortia, the state and counties provide health and human services to over 13 million Californians.(b) The state is currently working in partnership with the federal government to consolidate the existing consortia systems and functionality into one single California Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS). This consolidation will heavily leverage the existing Los Angeles Eligibility, Automated Determination, Evaluation, and Reporting (LEADER) Replacement System, rather than building a new system.(c) California, its counties, and stakeholders have a decades-long partnership and commitment to excellence in service delivery for its health and human services programs. This partnership is a relationship built on effective communication, transparency, and a shared vision of service to millions of low-income and vulnerable Californians.(d) The CalSAWS will be the primary automation system for delivering benefits for several decades.(e) The CalSAWS development process will be improved through meaningful stakeholder, client, and advocate input on elements that impact service delivery.SEC. 16. Section 10823.1 is added to the Welfare and Institutions Code, to read:10823.1. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature that representatives from the State Department of Social Services, the State Department of Health Care Services, the Office of Systems Integration, the CalSAWS consortia, and the counties meet with advocates, clients, and other stakeholders no less than quarterly to review the development status of the California Automated Consortium Eligibility System (CalACES) and the California Statewide Automated Welfare System (CalSAWS) projects.(b) Meeting agendas shall be established based on input from all parties, who may indicate their priorities for discussion.(c) The State Department of Social Services, the State Department of Health Care Services, the Office of Systems Integration, and the CalSAWS consortia shall engage with stakeholders to discuss current and planned functionality changes, system demonstrations of public portals and mobile applications, and advocates’ identification of areas of concern, especially with the design of public-facing elements and other areas that directly impact clients.




(d) These meetings shall commence in the summer of 2018 and shall continue at least quarterly through development, implementation, and maintenance.SEC. 17. Section 10823.2 is added to the Welfare and Institutions Code, to read:10823.2. (a) The State Department of Social Services, the State Department of Health Care Services, and the Office of Systems Integration shall develop, in consultation with the County Welfare Directors Association of California, the CalSAWS consortia, and stakeholders, a formal process for health and human services advocates and clients to provide input into new or changing public facing elements of CalACES and CalSAWS.(b) The process described in subdivision (a) shall include public portals, mobile applications, notices, certain ancillary services, and intercounty transfers.(c) The process described in subdivision (a) may include focus groups, user-centered design sessions, and user acceptance testing.

7.1 CalSAWS GOVERNANCEProjects are governed by people who belong to organizations; those people are empowered with delegated authority and responsibility to carry out specific tasks and make decisions in accordance with guiding principles, business needs and established processes. Establishing clear stakeholder expectations and defining roles and responsibilities are foundational to effective governance.

With the recognition the CalSAWS Project is groundbreaking in its scope and scale, and in accordance with best practices in the health and human services systems development arena, California is wholly committed to actively engaging at the highest stakeholder levels as well as assigning appropriate numbers and types of resources to participate on a fulltime basis throughout the DD&I phase. Toward that end, California has designed a unified governance model that will reflect a greater level of commitment and participation than in past SAWS projects, and that will facilitate informed decision-making and escalation processes. From a cultural perspective, California’s governance model will help foster transparency and visibility as well as communication and collaboration.

This IAPD section summarizes the State and Consortium management and oversight organizations, the CalSAWS guiding principles, a RACI Matrix which describes the responsibilities of the primary stakeholders and the detailed CalSAWS Consortium Project organization. The unified CalSAWS governance model driven by the guiding principles and the stakeholder roles and responsibilities as described in the RACI Matrix is depicted in the figure below.




Figure 23 – CalSAWS Organization

7.2 State Management and OversightUnder the direction of the California Health and Human Services (CHHS) Agency, the Office of Systems Integration (OSI) is responsible for state-level project management and oversight of the CalSAWS project. The project sponsors, the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS), partner with OSI to confirm that project activities are conducted in accordance with contracted standards and adhere to accepted information technology best practices. A primary goal of the program sponsors and OSI leadership is ensuring the consistent application of policy within the CalSAWS system and a consistent client/customer experience throughout the State.

The State oversight functions for the CalSAWS Project are fulfilled as follows:

The California Health and Human Services Agency provides direction to OSI, CDSS, and DHCS relative to key project issues and reviews and addresses project risk reports

CDSS and DHCS provide strategic and policy direction for the CalSAWS Project OSI provides state-level project management and independent project oversight using

statewide project management staff and specialized technical consultants The State retains the ultimate decision and authority regarding requests for federal approval

and funding, including all APDs and APD Updates.




7.2.1 Advocates

As codified through the recent legislative trailer bill language provided at the beginning of this section, CalSAWS has recently established a collaborative relationship with the customer advocate community which includes quarterly meetings and a process by which the advocate representatives can provide meaningful input to the CalSAWS overall design, specifically related to user-centered public-facing designs.

7.2.2 Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V)

As a key part of the State oversight effort, the OSI will acquire IV&V services for the CalSAWS project in accordance with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) rules in 45 CFR Part 95, Subpart F. The DHHS rules require IV&V assessments of all high-risk projects that receive federal financial participation, including all large-scale software development projects such as CalSAWS. OSI will procure and manage these services as the IV&V assessments must be conducted by an entity that is technically and managerially independent from the project itself.

The IV&V contractor will perform periodic project reviews and produce structured assessment reports based on their findings, including strengths and weaknesses, and corresponding recommendations for corrective action; these reports will be provided to the state and federal stakeholders at the same time they are provided to the project. This helps assure the true independent nature of the IV&V efforts.

7.3 Consortium Management and OversightThe full integration of CalACES and WCDS into the CalSAWS Consortium for purposes of management and oversight of CalSAWS DD&I and M&O activities is essential to the success of the project. The Consortium will work as a cohesive team, providing direct program and project management, managing the day-to-day development activities, actively participating in design and test tasks, managing the QA contractor and corresponding activities, conducting procurements and reviewing all vendor deliverables throughout the life cycle of CalSAWS.

The establishment of the CalSAWS Consortium Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is slated for June 2019. The goal is to begin the DD&I project activities while the governance structure is finalized. Decisions will continue to be made collaboratively with a focus on ensuring business continuity by minimizing integration challenges and maximizing interoperability. Once the JPA is established the LRS M&E, C-IV M&O, CalWIN M&O and CalSAWS DD&I projects will be managed by the single entity.

The CalSAWS Leadership Team is charged with establishing the JPA. This group is comprised of representatives from the current CalACES and WCDS consortia, along with the County Welfare Directors Association (CWDA) President and Vice President at Large. The CalSAWS Leadership Team is tasked with two primary goals: establishing the JPA and working together to address the collective decisions needed in preparation for CalSAWS. This effort includes how the counties will make decisions under the CalSAWS JPA, and coordinating interim decisions, such as joint procurements and contract amendments prior to establishment of the JPA. This team operates on a time-limited basis and will disband once the CalSAWS JPA is officially formed (after the JPA Agreement and Bylaws have been approved by the Boards of Supervisors of all California counties).

The CalACES and WCDS consortia are working in concert via the CalSAWS Leadership Team to finalize the statewide CalSAWS Joint Powers Authority (JPA) based on a regional governance model. The expanded Consortium is based on the existing 40-county JPA Agreement and Bylaws, but has been extended and revised to reflect the addition of the 18 WCDS counties. The




California counties will be grouped into six regions as reflected in the following figure. The CalSAWS JPA will constitute a single legal entity for purposes of managing the CalSAWS Consortium and the CalSAWS System. The JPA will be governed and administered by its 12-member Board of Directors through the regional representation model, with each of the 12 Directors having one vote on Board agenda action items. The State has a seat on the JPA Board of Directors. The six regions and the Board of Directors will be served and supported by 18 Regional Managers (RMs).

The JPA serves as the procurement and contracting vehicle for all contracted entities. It should be noted that upon finalization of the CalSAWS JPA, existing CalACES and CalWIN vendor contracts will be assigned to the JPA. The JPA will rely on its competitively procured independent Legal Counsel throughout the project.

The regions, member counties, the number of votes per region and the number of Regional Managers are reflected in the figure below.

Riverside

Del Norte

Siskiyou Modoc

LassenHumboldt

Trinity Shasta

Tehama

Mendocino Glenn Butte

Plumas

Sierra

LakeColusa

NevadaPlacer

AlpineSonoma NapaYolo

SolanoContraCosta

San Francisco

San MateoAlameda

SanJoaquin

TuolumneMono

Mariposa

SantaClara Merced

Madera

FresnoSan Benito

Monterey KingsTulare

Inyo

SanLuis

Obispo

SantaBarbara

Kern

San Bernardino

LosAngeles

Ventura

SanDiego

Imperial

Santa Cruz

Region# Counties # Votes

# of RMs % PC

1 12 2 3 15.12%

2 13 1 2 6.49%

3 14 1 2 2.84%

4 11 2 3 16.35%

6 1 3 4 28.66%

Total 58 12 18 100%

5 7 3 4 30.53%

Figure 24 CalSAWS Regional Structure

The following subsections address the Guiding Principles, the Consortium Leadership entities, the CalSAWS RACI Matrix, the escalation process and the Consortium organization.




7.3.1 CalSAWS Guiding Principles

The CalSAWS Guiding Principles that follow were developed in April 2018 by CDSS and DHCS in consultation with the CalSAWS Leadership team and the County Welfare Directors Association. These guiding principles establish the intent of the parties and the key precepts that shape the governance structure and processes as they exist today and as they will exist into the future.

1. California and its counties have a decades-long partnership and commitment to excellence in service delivery for its health and human service programs. This partnership is a relationship built on effective communication, transparency and a shared vision of service to millions of low-income and vulnerable Californians. Accordingly, a guiding governance principle for the implementation and administration of CalSAWS will be a consensus-based governance process between the state and the counties in order to achieve the best outcomes for the citizens of California.

2. The State will be present but not voting in CalSAWS executive board and committee meetings. The State will strive for consistency in attendance and executive-level representation at meetings. State staff will not attend meetings, nor portions of meetings, involving personnel and sensitive vendor contract negotiations.

3. The State shall have access to client level data sufficient to support single state agency functions and program evaluation, including cross-program utilization, budget construction, and trends. State staff provided such access will be subject to the same confidentiality requirements as consortia and county staff. Plans for data exploration and dissemination will be coordinated through a Data Management Board comprised of state and county staff.

4. Governance must support the concepts of modular procurement so one vendor does not dominate more than necessary, user-centered design, and interoperability. In addition to fostering competition within the vendor community, governance will strive to obtain best value for the state, counties, and clients.

5. The State will be part of the change control board. The State will strive for consistency in attendance and executive-level representation at meetings.

6. As new statewide functionality for the programs SAWS supports is created, it shall be added to CalSAWS. If, due to expediency, this is not initially possible, it shall be developed in a manner that allows it to be efficiently integrated into CalSAWS at the next available opportunity.

7. Governance will support consistent practice to promote equity in service delivery and access for clients while still allowing for county innovation.

The central CalSAWS Consortium leadership bodies are described below in the following three subsections.

7.3.2 CalSAWS JPA Board of Directors

The JPA Board of Directors are responsible for providing overall guidance and direction to the CalSAWS Executive Director, communicating with the Project Steering Committee and Regional Managers, and facilitating the participation of county and project staff necessary to actively participate in all aspects of development, testing and implementation. The JPA Board of Directors also serve as a high-level approval and decision-making body for key milestones, procurements and contracts, critical issues and risk mitigation strategies. When the expansion of the CalSAWS JPA is completed, the JPA Board of Directors will be comprised of 12 Directors plus one Director of CDSS, DHCS or OSI.




Consistent with Guiding Principle #1 in section 7.3.1 above, the JPA will strive to reach consensus with its voting members and non-voting state sponsor departments, with the acknowledgement that the JPA voting structure requires 7 of 12 voting Directors from 5 of 6 regions to affirmatively take action. If consensus on a critical item cannot be reached, the state sponsoring departments may escalate the issue to the appropriate level, potentially to the Secretary of the Health and Human Services Agency.

7.3.3 Project Steering Committee

The Project Steering Committee (PSC) structure mirrors that of the JPA Board of Directors. Consistent with Guiding Principle #1 in section 7.3.1 above, the PSC will strive to reach consensus with its voting members and non-voting state sponsor departments, with the acknowledgement that the PSC follows the JPA voting structure to affirmatively take action. If consensus on a critical item cannot be reached, the state sponsoring departments may escalate the issue to the appropriate level, potentially to the Secretary of the Health and Human Services Agency.. The PSC is a formal committee identified in the JPA Agreement and also conducts public meetings in accordance with the Brown Act. The PSC provides leadership and support to the CalSAWS Project by overseeing and approving major project elements, including:

Prioritization of project objectives and outcomes as identified by the JPA strategic priorities, state stakeholder initiatives or escalated committee priorities

Working in concert with the Change Control Board to establish system change priorities based on approved System Change Requests

Resolving any items escalated from the Change Control Board Release schedule Risk management strategies, ensuring that approaches to address potential risks to the

success of the Project have been identified and documented, that corresponding mitigation plans have been formalized and that the risks are regularly reassessed.

Communicating and coordinating with Regional Managers Identifying and soliciting Consortium resources for work groups, subcommittees and special

initiatives Monitoring project progress against the approved CalSAWS Work Plan timelines and Key

Deliverable acceptance dates Approving any plans related to the transition to production and monitoring that transition.

7.3.4 Change Control Board (CCB)

The Change Control Board is the final approval authority before work begins on System Change Requests (SCRs). System Change Requests are created to implement State regulation/policy changes and enhancement requests from the Counties. Consistent with Guiding Principle #1 in section 7.3.1 above, the CCB will strive to reach consensus with its voting members and non-voting state sponsor departments. If consensus on a critical item cannot be reached, the state sponsoring departments may escalate the issue to the appropriate level, potentially to the Secretary of the Health and Human Services Agency.

SCRs are planned and designed in County/Consortium/State Committee meetings. Once an SCR is approved by the appropriate Committee and prioritized to be implemented, the approved request, including explicit prioritization information, is then packaged for the Change Control Board meeting with the final design and implementation release schedule. The package is sent to the state and counties for review and confirmation. Feedback, if any, is provided to the Regional Managers. The Regional Managers provide the final approval for SCRs at the Change Control Board meeting based on state and county input. Once an SCR is approved at the Change Control Board, the vendor begins build, test and deployment process.




7.3.5 RACI Matrix

One of the fundamental concepts of effective governance is to ensure that roles and responsibilities for the entire organization are defined. This establishes a clear baseline and helps all members of the organization to understand not only their specific role, but to also understand how their role fits within the overall framework. This awareness helps promote a culture of openness and transparency.

Toward that end and to further elaborate how the guiding principles will be put into practice, the stakeholders documented their shared and mutually agreed roles and responsibilities in the form of a RACI Matrix. RACI is an acronym that stands for Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, and Informed. Often used as a facet of stakeholder analysis and confirming stakeholder expectations, the RACI Matrix is a systematic way of clarifying responsibilities that each party plays in relation to activities that will be performed and decisions that must be made. The RACI Matrix also helps ensure that stakeholder roles are complementary and aligned with business priorities. The key indicators for the RACI Matrix are summarized below.

Responsible – R

This person/entity actually performs the task. They are the doers and are responsible for the actions and implementation. Responsibility can be shared.

Accountable – A

This is the person or entity accountable and ultimately, answerable for all the activities in an area. They have the power of saying yes or no to anything. The accountable person must sign-off (approve) work the responsible person(s) provides. While responsibilities can be divided, accountability cannot be shared among people. There is only one A assigned to a task.

Consulted – C

Those subject matter experts whose opinions are sought and who possess input to the task. They need to be consulted before taking a final decision or action. The consulted are active participants and are always in the loop. They may be responsible for providing information about the project to others. This subject matter expert task can be given to multiple people or entities.

Informed – I

This person/entity needs to be informed of the results after a decision or action is taken. The informed are kept up-to-date on progress, often on completion of the task or deliverable; and with whom there is just one-way communication.

The CalSAWS RACI Matrix is provided in the table below.




Table 31 – CalSAWS RACI Matrix

CalSAWS Project Tasks State Sponsors

CalSAWS JPA BOD

Project Steering

Committee


State Sponsors: CDSS, DHCS and OSI

1 Oversees progress on the Agency and Department strategic goals as they relate to the CalSAWS Project, and makes adjustments as necessary. R, A I I I

2 Ensures that the highest-level external stakeholders, such as the Agency Secretary, the Legislature, the Governor’s Office, state control agencies, and federal partners are consulted and informed, as appropriate, on matters of significance.

R, A C, I I I

3 Serves as the final point of escalation (unless Governor or Legislative approval is required) for decisions related to the CalSAWS Project. R, A C, I I I

4 Serves as a member of the JPA Board of Directors and participates in monthly Board meetings, semi-annual member representative meetings and the annual strategic conference. R, R, A I I

5 Responds to JPA Board of Directors escalation matters, including, but not limited to significant risks or issues and contract disputes. R, A C, I I I

6 Reviews and approves state level budget change proposals, APDs and APD Updates. R, A I I I

7 Oversight and coordination of information sharing, development, testing and releases for other state systems and shared services efforts such as CalHEERS, Statewide Portal/Mobile App, MEDS and the like.

R, A C, I C C

8 Participates in PSC and CCB process and meetings to review, prioritize and approve program/policy system changes and corresponding release schedules and budgets. C C, I R, A R

9 Responds to PSC escalation matters, including, but not limited to policy interpretation and clarification to ensure consistent understanding of new and revised policy. R, A C, I C, I C, I

10 Coordinates and conducts quarterly meetings with Advocate Stakeholders to facilitate their input and involvement related to user-centered design and test activities for public-facing functionality. R, A R C, I C, I

11 Ensures appropriate and effective state resource allocation, directing state staff to resolve issues, mitigate risks, clarify policy, provide guidance, make decisions and support design, development and test work efforts.

R, A C I I





CalSAWS JPA BOD

Project Steering

Committee


CalSAWS JPA Board of Directors (includes State and County representatives)

1 Ensures that the vision, goals, and objectives of the Project are clearly understood by the JPA member representatives (58 counties) and communicates the strategic priorities for the Project. C, I R, A I I

2 Empowers the PSC and CCB members to act, up to their level of authority, to implement the goals, objectives and priorities of the JPA Board of Directors. I A R R

3 Responds to PSC escalation matters, including, but not limited to, significant issues or risks, change requests, key decisions or points of dispute. C, I A R R

4 Conducts monthly JPA Board of Directors meetings (as a public meeting in accordance with the Brown Act) to take action on APDs and APD Updates, procurements, contracts and contract amendments.

C, I R, A C, I C, I

5 Escalates matters of significance to state sponsors/ stakeholders, including, but not limited to key risks or issues and contract disputes. C R, A I I

6 Prepares and submits APDs and APD Updates to State sponsors. C R, A I I

7 Communicates project status on a regular basis including Key Performance Indicators such as schedule, budget, scope/requirements, open issues and risks, resources, deliverables and contract adherence.

I R, A C, I I

8 Ensures appropriate and effective resource allocation, directing Consortia and county staff to accomplish CalSAWS DD&I and related procurement work efforts in consultation with State and vendor resources.

I R, A C, I I

9 Formally establishes new subcommittees and workgroups as needed. I C R,A I

10 Conducts annual elections to designate JPA BOD Chair and Vice Chair representatives, Board of Director representatives and PSC members. C, I R, A C, I I

11 Conducts annual financial and operational audits. I R, A I I

Project Steering Committee (PSC) (includes State and County representatives)

1 Ensures that the vision, goals, and objectives of the Project and the priorities of the JPA Board of Directors are clearly understood by the PSC member representatives. C, I R R, A I





CalSAWS JPA BOD

Project Steering

Committee


2 Conducts monthly meetings (as a public meeting in accordance with the Brown Act) to discuss new program/policy items, PSC priorities, progress and priorities of subcommittees and workgroups on System Change Requests, key risks and issues, release schedules, JPA region updates, and potential items to escalate to the JPA Board of Directors.

I C, I R, A C, I

3 Responds to CCB escalation matters, including, but not limited to, significant issues or risks regarding pending System Change Requests or points of dispute. I I R, A C, I

4 Escalates and communicates key PSC risks, issues, decision items, and points of dispute to the JPA Board of Directors as appropriate. I C R, A C

5 Escalates and communicates requests for policy interpretation and clarification to State Sponsors to ensure consistent understanding and application of policy in CalSAWS. C I R, A C, I

6 Ensures appropriate and effective resource allocation for subcommittees and workgroups, directing Consortia and county staff to review and analyze SCRs (including county impact analysis) and make corresponding recommendations.

I I R, A C

7 Formally establishes subcommittees and workgroups as needed. I C,I R,A I

Change Control Board (CCB) (includes State and County representatives)

1 Ensures that the vision, goals, and objectives of the Project and the priorities of the JPA Board and PSC are clearly understood by the CCB members. C, I C, I R R, A

2 Conducts biweekly meetings to serve as the final approval authority to begin design and build activities for pending SCRs, including confirming committee and non-committee review and analysis, assignment to a release, and potential items to escalate to the PSC.

C, I C, I C, I R, A

3 Escalates and communicates requests for policy interpretation, key CCB risks, issues, decision items, and points of dispute to the PSC as appropriate. C, I C, I C, I R, A

4 Ensures appropriate and effective resource allocation for the CCB as the final approval step to authorize work to begin on SCRs. I I C, I R, A




7.3.6 Escalation Process

Consistent with Guiding Principle #1 in section 7.3.1 above, the JPA Board of Directors, the PSC and the CCB will strive to reach consensus with its voting members and non-voting state sponsor departments. The JPA voting structure requires 7 of 12 voting Directors from 5 of 6 regions to affirmatively take action; the PSC voting structure follows the JPA process. The CCB is not a formal subcommittee of JPA, but it also operates using the same voting basis as the JPA and PSC.

If consensus on a critical item cannot be reached, the state sponsoring departments may escalate the issue to the appropriate level, potentially to the Secretary of the Health and Human Services Agency. The escalation process will be used on an as-needed exception basis. The following graphic illustrates the escalation criteria and process.

Figure 25 CalSAWS Escalation Process




7.3.7 CalSAWS Consortium Organization

The CalSAWS Consortium organization, as illustrated by Figure 26 CalSAWS Project Organization below, is comprised of leveraged and new staff across the state. Details related to the scope of responsibilities of the Consortium teams can be found in Section 8.1, Consortium Personnel.

Executive Director (1)

Chief Deputy Director (1)

Policy/Design/Governance Director (1)

Application Development & Test Director (1)

Technical & Operations Director (1)

PMO Director (1)Customer

Engagement Director (1)

Executive Assistant (2)

Customer Engagement Manager (2)

Regional Managers (18)

Fiscal & Contract Manager (1)

PMO Lead (1)

Fiscal & Contract Analysts (10)

PMO Analysts (5)

Change Management

Leads (2)

Procurement Manager (1)

Procurement Analysts (2)

Cloud Manager (1)

Cloud Analysts (4)

System Performance Manager (1)

Technical Analysts (2)

Technical Operations

Manager (1)


Help Desk Manager (1)

Help Desk Analysts (3)

Project IT Manager (1)

System Admin/Tech Support

(12)

Policy Manager (1)

Policy Analysts (4)

Design Manager (1)

Product Owners (16)

Development Manager (1)

Analysts (10)

Test Manager (1)

Testers (12)

Release Manager (1)

Release Coordinators (2)

Quality Assurance (25)

CalSAWS Project Organization

Consortium Legal Counsel

(1)

Conversion Lead (1)

Conversion Analysts (12)

Procurement Support (3-11)

Non-Recurring

Recurring

Training/Implementation

(30 Peak)

Product Owners (9)

Analysts (6)

Technical Analyst (1)

Figure 26 CalSAWS Project Organization




7.4 Project ManagementThe CalSAWS State and Consortium management and working teams will employ a structured project management approach for the CalSAWS Project. The CalSAWS project management methodology is based on the successful tenets and practices established and used by the State program stakeholder agencies and the existing Consortia projects. The CalSAWS project will use a formal project management methodology based on the Project Management Institute’s Project Management Body of Knowledge. The State and Federal program sponsors will have access to all project tools and documentation. The following summarizes the key features of the project management approach for the DD&I phase.

Project Monitoring, Controlling and Reporting. For the DD&I project, the Project Control Document (PCD) will serve as the foundation for all monitoring, controlling, and reporting activities. This PCD will include multiple detailed plans that will document the approaches for managing communication, issue, risk, scope, requirements, deliverables, contracts, and quality management.

Involve stakeholders. Substantial and meaningful user and stakeholder involvement is another key to the success of the project. End-user and stakeholder involvement is critical to ensure the resulting solution meets the intended needs and requirements of each party. The project management processes provide for, and depend on stakeholder participation not only in the application development and test processes, but also in the areas of budget and schedule management. The DD&I team will focus on transparency and visibility in reporting to all county, Consortium, state and federal stakeholders.

Communicate openly and honestly. Open communication is essential to earning trust from the people involved with and affected by the project and in facilitating collaborative working relationships among and across project organizations and teams. To mitigate the risks commonly associated with ineffective communication, the project will develop a Communication Plan that will promote frequent, thorough and accurate communication.

Work cooperatively. The most successful projects are those where an integrated client and contractor project team works closely together to achieve the desired objectives. Establishing strong working relationships and mutual respect requires an understanding of communication styles, management styles and areas of expertise of each party. The Executive Director and contractor Project Managers will emphasize the importance of team members working together in a productive manner to share approaches, knowledge and work effort.

Quality Assurance. The DD&I project will employ a QA vendor to assist in monitoring of project activities, formal review of work products and deliverables, requirements management and to provide QA at all stages of DD&I.

Ensure individual accountability. Although this type of project relies on a well-coordinated team effort, the individual performance of every team member is vital to achieving success. The CalSAWS project management approach will provide each team member with a clear understanding of their assignments, how their assignment fits within the overall project, the budget and schedule for each task, and the expected end product. Only by paying careful attention to the individual efforts of each team member and then integrating them into the overall project effort will quality be delivered. The project will conduct periodic performance reviews to acknowledge demonstrated skills and contributions, and to help detect and correct any issues.




Build sustainable business capability. The DD&I project activities will span the course of 52 months (including the 6-month stabilization period), but will shape the consortium organization for many years to come. By focusing on long-term solutions compared to short-term fixes, organizational changes resulting from the project will prepare the consortium to better assimilate change in the future. In the dynamic culture of welfare, flexibility and adaptability are critical business capabilities. The DD&I project will be managed with this key precept in mind.

7.4.1 Project Control Document (PCD)

The Project Control Document will serve as the cornerstone for the management of the CalSAWS DD&I effort by providing the overall plan and approach for project management processes. The project will develop, maintain and operate in accordance with this PCD throughout the DD&I and M&O phases. The PCD will encompass approaches for communication management, risk management, issue management, scope management, requirements management, deliverable management, staff management, contract management, organization and staffing plans and assumptions supporting the PCD components.

The CalSAWS DD&I contractor will prepare and maintain the PCD to govern and control the project. The PCD will provide all project team members and stakeholders with an understanding of how and when the activities of the DD&I project will be executed.

7.4.1.1 COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENTCommunication is vital to the administration of any project, especially a project the size, complexity, and geographical dispersion associated with DD&I project. Whether it is design teams communicating issues they have discovered, county leaders communicating the reasons for change to end users, or external stakeholders providing input to application changes, it is critical that all involved in the DD&I project receive and share information timely, openly and honestly. In establishing both internal and external communication approaches, the DD&I project will take advantage of industry best practices and lessons learned from other large-scale government information system development projects.

7.4.1.2 ISSUE MANAGEMENTThe purpose of the Issue Management Plan is to describe the process for identifying, analyzing, assigning and tracking project related issues. The intent of the process is to identify and resolve all issues quickly and completely in order to facilitate the success of the Migration D&I project.

The Issue Management Plan will be reviewed at least annually and updated, as needed, as a result of continuous process improvement efforts by the DD&I project team. Lessons learned as a result of continuing issue management tasks will be captured at the end of each project phase and used to improve project processes going forward.

7.4.1.3 RISK MANAGEMENTLarge, complex software implementation projects such as the CalSAWS DD&I effort contain areas of potential risk that, if not properly managed, will jeopardize project success. The DD&I project management team will use a set of proven methodologies and tools to mitigate a significant level of the risk inherent in similar engagements. The risk management process will include an iterative cycle with five sequential phases including: Planning, Assessment, Analysis, Handling, and Reporting.




The Risk Management approach will be reviewed at least annually and updated, as needed. Lessons learned in the risk management area will be captured at the end of each project phase and used to improve project processes.

7.4.1.4 SCOPE MANAGEMENTScope Management is a high priority to the consortium. Given the many factors that will influence the decisions made throughout the course of the project, scope changes will inevitably result from some of those decisions. The purpose of the CalSAWS Scope Management function is to ensure changes are identified, documented and addressed using standard processes and tools to accurately assess the need for and impact of proposed changes to the DD&I project, and to minimize the impact of change as it occurs.

7.4.1.5 STAFF MANAGEMENTA clear understanding of roles and responsibilities within the organization is an important component of ensuring effective communication and interaction across the team. The Staff Management plan will define and describe the roles and responsibilities of the key staff members and all project positions. The plan will also include organization charts indicating functional responsibilities for all key staff.

Additionally, the Staff Management plan will describe the processes for managing and communicating project team changes during the DD&I project and will reflect separate sets of organization charts and responsibilities for each major phase of the DD&I project. Processes for onboarding staff, reporting staff performance issues and rolling staff off the project will also be addressed.

7.4.1.6 REQUIREMENTS MANAGEMENT

Changes to business and technical requirements may occur at any time during the project. The changes may occur due to new policy, technology, revisions in the project schedule or budget and emerging needs. In order to be responsive to changes and conscientious about managing the impact of change, the DD&I project management team will be responsible for formal requirements management processes.

Key elements of requirements management will include:

Defined assumptions associated with requirements Tracking and traceability across tasks and phases using the Requirements Traceability Matrix

(RTM) Business requirement definition, tracking, traceability, and test verification Technical requirement definition, tracking, traceability, and test verification Phase and product entry and exit (acceptance) criteria definition, tracking and approval.

To accomplish this, the requirements and associated assumptions will be confirmed and refined early in the project life cycle by Consortium and Vendor representatives within the Requirements Traceability Matrix. As changes are requested or needed, the scope management process will ensure such requests are documented, analyzed and reviewed, and notification of approved changes will be distributed to appropriate parties.

All changes to requirements will be formally documented as updates to the Requirements Traceability Matrix.




7.4.1.7 DELIVERABLE MANAGEMENTThe purpose of the Deliverable Management function is to set expectations for tracking and reporting regarding the set of required deliverables and to ensure awareness and concurrence of the expectations of each Deliverable during the DD&I project. The Deliverable Management plan will provide the process and procedures for the development, creation, submission and Acceptance of draft and final Deliverable Expectation Documents (DED), creation, submission and Acceptance of draft and final Deliverables, tracking and reporting of Deliverables including a Deliverable Tracking Log, Deliverable Deficiency Log and DED/Deliverable Checklists.

All project Deliverables will be preceded by the creation and approval of the corresponding Deliverable Expectation Document (DED).

7.4.1.8 QUALITY MANAGEMENTAs part of a sound project management methodology, the DD&I project will focus on ways to incorporate quality processes throughout the project lifecycle and as part of every task, work product and deliverable. This will help ensure the CalSAWS project will meet all objectives, expectations and requirements.

The DD&I quality management approach focuses on being proactive and preventing problems rather than allowing problems or defects to occur and then devoting valuable resources on correction. The project team will establish and implement well-defined processes to ensure that work products and deliverables meet business objectives, end-user expectations, defined requirements, and are as free of errors as possible. Achieving this objective involves a cooperative working relationship between Consortium and Contractor members of the DD&I teams. This collaborative approach will help ensure that input and recommendations are promoted and documented in a timely manner.

7.4.1.9 CONTRACT MANAGEMENT

Contract Management plays an important role in the success of any project that involves the procurement of goods or services. The DD&I project approach will include specific contract management processes and procedures to ensure that:

Contractual terms and conditions are fulfilled Deliverables, and associated due dates, review and approval dates, invoice and payment

dates are documented and tracked Vendor invoices can be objectively assessed for accuracy, completeness and adherence to

contract terms, the approved work plan and related cost schedules The implications of potential contract changes are carefully considered, analyzed and

documented as part of a formal change order and amendment.

7.4.2 Project Work Plan

The CalSAWS Project Work Plan is another primary project management tool that serves as an adjunct to the PCD. The Project Work Plan contains the following fundamental information and metrics to facilitate overall understanding of the schedule and tracking of progress throughout the DD&I phase:

Tasks and subtasks Planned start and end dates




Actual start and end dates Duration in days % complete Review and approval timeframes for Consortium staff for all deliverables Timeframes for revisions and resubmittal of all deliverables after Consortium review Level of effort in hours required to complete each task Vendor resources assigned to tasks

Monthly Work Plan reports will reflect actuals as compared to the approved baseline Work Plan and will include:

Overall progress and percent complete Estimate to Complete (ETC) Estimate at completion (EAC), Task usage Resource usage Tasks past their start or finish dates Tasks over budget Over-allocated resources Upcoming Tasks for Consortium staff such as Deliverable review obligations Critical path view

The CalSAWS Project Work Plan will be updated on a monthly basis throughout the life of the project to accurately reflect the current status of the project as scope, schedule and resources assigned to tasks change.

7.5 PROCUREMENT STRATEGYOne of the key components in accomplishing CalSAWS migration is a procurement strategy that maximizes competition while balancing the need to complete CalSAWS implementation by end of 2023 based on federal direction from CMS and FNS. This is especially critical as FNS has outlined expectations that “the transition to one statewide eligibility system with one consolidated database be completed no later than the end of 2023.” Otherwise, effective at the start of calendar year 2024, FNS would not reimburse California for the operation, maintenance or other costs for any other SNAP eligibility system or database. Accordingly, an assessment of the activities for CalSAWS was conducted based on the methodology depicted in the figure below to develop the procurement strategy.




Figure 27 Methodology for Procurement Strategy

The activities procured non-competitively from incumbent vendors include those that:

Require deep knowledge/expertise of the application or business knowledge, and/or a high-level of coordination with such activities

Need to be logically bundled due to technical complexity or operational complexity (e.g., challenging to separate the activities related to ancillary systems that will be centralized with the core eligibility system from the activities for design and development of the core system)

Require vendor-specific expertise which increases the bar of knowledge Lack sufficient time to complete a competitive procurement

The activities to be procured competitively include those that:

Enhance M&O competitiveness by allowing vendors to gain insight to the full functionality and business processes supported by the CalSAWS application

Accommodate flexibility in contract terms, with room for interpretation and variation in what the vendors could propose

Are less tightly coupled with the core system and business processes

The results of the assessment are described in Deliverable 10 (Final CalSAWS Report) attached as Appendix K and summarized in the figure below.




Figure 28 Procurement Approach

The following are the more detailed conclusions of the assessment with regards to the procurement strategy:



Negotiated Costs



1 Infrastructure set-up, core application design, development and testing, central implementation support, PMO, functional design and development related to core and ancillary functions such as imaging, contact center, notifications, management reporting, lobby management, county data extract, central print, task management, appointment management, collections and other supporting functions, and data mapping/gap analysis of data from C-IV and LRS to CalSAWS. Note: imaging, central print and task management functions will be further defined through requirements confirmation sessions and costs finalized by March 2019.

Incumbent Vendor


2019


Incumbent Vendor

December 2018





Negotiated Costs



Incumbent Vendor

September 2018



February 2020



January 2020



October 2022



March 2019


March 2019



December 2019

While the items above that were part of the McKinsey analysis have been identified as the leading alternatives for procurement, this strategy should be reconsidered and alternatives should be pursued, if the negotiations don’t yield satisfactory results from a cost/timing/ capability perspective.

The timelines for each procurement are provided in Section 9.0, Activity Schedule.




8.0 PERSONNEL RESOURCE STATEMENTThis section provides detailed organizational information regarding the CalSAWS project teams including position descriptions for Consortium, State, contractor, QA, and procurement staff. In addition to their specifically defined duties, all staff are responsible for attending required meetings, completing required status reports and identifying, documenting, resolving, and/or escalating issues to the appropriate level.

The hours by team and costs associated with each team within the CalSAWS Project Team are provided in Section 10, Proposed Budget.

8.1 Consortium PersonnelThe consortia will form a single project team for the DD&I phase of CalSAWS, including a combination of new staff and staff leveraged from the existing projects. The staff loading is based on the anticipated 46-month DD&I period and six-month stabilization period. These staff will continue into the M&O phase with the exception of the conversion, implementation and training delivery teams and the procurement support resources (as reflected in the darker gray boxes in the organization chart below). In M&O, resources will be added to handle additional responsibilities, such vendor management, as well as onsite technical support at the project sites.

The table below provides a comparison of the CalSAWS M&O team to the current baseline, as well as the FTEs associated with the new scope.

Table 33 – M&O Consortium Project Team FTE ComparisonTeam C-IV LRS CalWIN Total Baseline CalSAWS DifferenceMgmt & Admin 3 8 2 13 4 (9)Enterprise PMO 6 10 3 19 17 (2)Application and Testing 7 27 7 41 28 (13)Policy and Governance 5 18 5 28 23 (5)Customer Engagement 7 4 4 15 21 6Tech & Business Operations 12 16 11 39 26 (13)Total FTE 40 83 32 155 119 (36)New ScopeEnterprise PMO - Vendor Management 0 0 0 0 4 4Tech & Business Operations - IT Support 0 0 0 0 15 15Total FTE 40 83 32 155 138 (17)




Figure 29 – CalSAWS Project Organization

Executive Director (1)


Policy/Design/Governance Director (1)

Application Development & Test Director (1)

Technical & Operations Director (1)

PMO Director (1)Customer

Engagement Director (1)


Customer Engagement Manager (2)

Regional Managers (18)

Fiscal & Contract Manager (1)

PMO Lead (1)

Fiscal & Contract Analysts (10)

PMO Analysts (5)

Change Management

Leads (2)



Cloud Manager (1)

Cloud Analysts (4)



Technical Operations

Manager (1)





System Admin/Tech Support

(12)

Policy Manager (1)

Policy Analysts (4)

Design Manager (1)

Product Owners (16)


Analysts (10)

Test Manager (1)

Testers (12)

Release Manager (1)

Release Coordinators (2)

Quality Assurance (25)

CalSAWS Project Organization


(1)

Conversion Lead (1)


Procurement Support (3-11)

Non-Recurring

Recurring


(30 Peak)

Product Owners (9)

Analysts (6)





The table below delineates the staff loading timeframes of consortium personnel during the DD&I phase by position and number of staff in each position. The chart also reflects the composition of the teams in terms of new staff and leveraged staff. Leveraged staff (and their associated costs) are already included in one of the existing M&O organizations: CalACES or CalWIN.

Table 34 - Consortium Personnel – DD&I Leveraged Staff and New Staff Loading

DD&I Consortium Staff Loading

POSITION NO. OF FTEs

LEVERAGED

START DATE

END DATE

NO. MONTHS

Executive Director 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Chief Deputy Director 1 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Executive Assistant 2 Jan-19 Jul-21 31 PMO Director 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Fiscal & Contract Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Fiscal Analyst 4 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Fiscal Analyst 4 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Contract Analyst 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Contract Analyst 1 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31PMO Lead 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31PMO Analyst 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Procurement Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Procurement Analyst 2 Jan-19 Jul-21 31 Customer Engagement Director 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Customer Engagement Manager 2 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Regional Manager 4 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Regional Manager 3 Jul-19 Jul-21 31Regional Manager (CalWIN and C-IV) 11 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Change Management Leads 2 Jul-19 Jul-21 31 Implementation Lead 1 Jan-20 Oct-22 34Implementation Coordinator 3 Jan-20 Oct-22 34Implementation Coordinator 6 Mar-21 Oct-22 20Implementation Coordinator 8 Aug-21 Oct-22 15 Training Lead 1 Feb-19 Oct-22 45Trainer 5 Mar-19 Oct-22 44Trainer 6 Nov-20 Oct-22 24 Technical & Operations Director 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Cloud Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Cloud Analyst 4 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Technical Operations Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Technical Analyst 6 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Technical Analyst 6 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Technical Analyst 5 Leveraged Apr-19 Jul-21 28System Performance Manager 1 Apr-19 Jul-21 28 Conversion Lead 1 Jan-19 Dec-22 48




DD&I Consortium Staff Loading


LEVERAGED

START DATE

END DATE

NO. MONTHS

Conversion Analyst 6 Jan-19 Dec-22 48Conversion Analyst 6 Oct-19 Oct-22 37 Policy/Design/Governance Director 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Policy Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Policy Analyst 4 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Design Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Product Owner 6 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Product Owner 9 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Product Owner 10 Leveraged Apr-19 Jul-21 28 Application Dev & Test Director 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Development Manager 1 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Business Analyst 5 Jan-19 Jul-21 31Business Analyst 3 Leveraged Jan-19 Jul-21 31Business Analyst 8 Leveraged Apr-19 Jul-21 28 Test Manager 1 Jul-19 Jul-21 25Tester 6 Jul-19 Jul-21 25Tester 6 Jan-20 Jul-21 19 Release Manager 1 Leveraged Apr-19 Jul-21 28Release Coordinator 2 Leveraged Jul-19 Jul-21 25 Total New 113 Total Leveraged 65 Total DD&I 178

The chart below delineates the staff loading timeframes of consortium personnel during M&O by position and number of staff in each position.

Table 35 - Consortium Personnel – M&O Staff Loading

M&O Consortium Staff Loading


START DATE

END DATE

NO. MONTHS

Executive Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Chief Deputy Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Executive Assistant 2 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 PMO Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Fiscal & Contract Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Fiscal Analyst 8 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Contract Analyst 2 Aug-21 Jun-26 59PMO Lead 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59PMO Analyst 5 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Procurement Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Procurement Analyst 2 Aug-21 Jun-26 59




M&O Consortium Staff Loading


START DATE

END DATE

NO. MONTHS

Customer Engagement Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Customer Engagement Manager 2 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Regional Manager 18 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 Technical & Operations Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Cloud Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Cloud Analyst 4 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Help Desk Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Help Desk Analyst 3 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Technical Operations Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Technical Analyst 16 Aug-21 Jun-26 59System Performance Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Project IT Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59System Admin/Tech Support 12 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 Policy/Design/Governance Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Policy Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Policy Analyst 4 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Design Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Product Owner 16 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 Application Dev & Test Director 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Development Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Business Analyst 10 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 Test Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Tester 12 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 Release Manager 1 Aug-21 Jun-26 59Release Coordinator 2 Aug-21 Jun-26 59 Total M&O 138

8.1.1 Executive Management

The Executive Management Team will oversee and direct the projects and activities of the CalSAWS portfolio. Specific roles and responsibilities are described in the table below.




Table 36 – Executive Management Roles & Responsibilities

Role Responsibilities Team OutputsExecutive Director (1)

The Executive Director is responsible for overseeing and directing projects within the CalSAWS portfolio, serving as a point of escalation for issues and risks, communicating with stakeholders on project status. The Executive Director has the authority to commit Consortium resources to project activities. The Executive Director has the authority to approve invoices.

� Stakeholder Communications

� Meeting Schedules, Agendas, Minutes & Presentations

� Issue Resolutions & Risk Mitigation Plans

� Invoice Approvals� Budget Approvals� Deliverable Approvals� Contract Review &

Approval � Recommendations� Final System Acceptance


The Chief Deputy is responsible for overseeing contractor and project staff performance, ensuring appropriate representatives participate in planned activities and key decisions, facilitating timely resolution of issues, ensuring timely review and approval of deliverables, supporting communications with state and federal stakeholders, and ensure the system design meets applicable county, state and federal requirements.


The Executive Assistants are responsible for supporting the daily activities and duties of the Consortium Management Team, including correspondences, calendaring, meeting logistics, agendas, compiling meeting content, capturing minutes, file maintenance, travel arrangements, and project distribution lists.

8.1.2 Policy/Design/Governance Team

The Policy/Design/Governance Team will manage policy interpretation, requirements traceability, design and governance processes for the CalSAWS portfolio. Specific roles and responsibilities are described in the table below.

Table 37 – Policy/Design/Governance Roles and Responsibilities

Role Responsibility Team Outputs

Policy/Design/ Governance Director (1)

The Policy/Design/Governance Director is responsible for overseeing the interpretation, approval, and implementation of policy into system changes, verifying the translation of policy to functional requirements, and oversee project governance and change approval processes.

� Policy Input and Clarification

� Policy Update Report� Committee Meeting

Agendas & Minutes� General Design

Feedback � System Change Request

Requirements� Design Documents� System Change Request

Approval� Requirements

Traceability Matrix Review

Policy Manager (1)

The Policy Manager is responsible for tracking and reviewing policy changes, communicating policy questions and concerns to state stakeholders, tracking state and federal policy initiatives, participating in policy discussions with the County Welfare Directors Association and state stakeholders, verifying functional requirements align with policy mandates, and briefing the Project Steering Committee and Joint Powers Authority on policy changes

Policy Analysts (4)

The Policy Analysts are responsible for analyzing and interpreting policy changes, monitoring state and





federal policy initiatives, defining requirements for the automation of policy changes, interacting with state policy staff, and preparing policy update reports.

Design Manager (1)

The Design Manager is responsible for planning and facilitating the development of system designs, reviewing the design traces to the functional requirements, facilitating committee approval, managing and tracking system change requests through the Change Control process.

Product Owners (25 during DD&I, 16 during M&O)

The Product Owners are responsible for defining requirements, joint application design, providing input and feedback on designs, analyzing and validating the design traces to the functional requirements, tracking system change requests through the Change Control process, and validating the Requirements Traceability Matrix. The Produce Owners will manage specific system changes from beginning to end, and will coordinate with the vendors. The Product Owners will communicate with Regional Managers on system change details and impacts on the counties and provide final acceptance.

8.1.3 Application Development and Test Team

The Application Development Team will manage and validate design specifications and application development, test plans and results, release management, and change control processes for the CalSAWS portfolio. Specific roles and responsibilities are described in the table below.

Table 38 – Application Development and Test Team – Roles and Responsibilities


Application Development and Test Director (1)

The Application Development and Test Director is responsible for overseeing functional validation of requirements and design, coordinating with vendor and stakeholders across test phases, setting and maintaining project architectural standards, coordinating releases, and coordinating with Help Desk.

� Application Development Status

� Detail Design Feedback � Deployment Readiness

Feedback� Deployment Complete

Input� Final Acceptance Input� UAT Readiness Report

Input� Test scenarios� Test cases� Test schedule� Application development

walkthrough of complex changes


The Development Manager is responsible for monitoring application development status, validating requirements and design, providing guidance and clarification to the vendor Application Development Team, identifying issues that may impact the design or other functional areas.

Analysts (16 during DD&I, 10 during M&O)

Under the direction of the Development Manager, these Analysts will support the Product Owners to provide program-specific expertise such as Medi-Cal, CalWORKs, CalFresh, Foster Care, Employment Services, and GA/GR. They are responsible for





reviewing requirements and design, providing detailed design input, assessing deployment readiness, validating deployment completion, and providing final acceptance input.

Test Manager (1)

The Test Manager is responsible for managing the development of scenarios and cases to test business functionality, managing the testing functionality in meeting requirements and design specifications, tracking defects through resolution, and coordinating User Acceptance Test (UAT).

Testers (12) The Testers are responsible for developing scenarios and cases to test business functionality, testing functionality in meeting requirements and design specifications, recording defects through resolution, and participating in UAT.

Release Manager (1)

The Release Manager is responsible for planning and prioritizing system change requests, scheduling and planning releases, and facilitating and managing Change Control Board (CCB) process.

Analysts (2) Under the direction of the Release Manager, these Analysts are responsible for supporting the planning and prioritization of change requests, release planning, and the CCB process.

8.1.4 Technical and Operations Team

The Technical and Operations Team will manage and administer the technical operations and environments of CalSAWS core and ancillary systems, including the cloud computing environment, system architecture, Help Desk operations, performance management, tool and user administration and technical support, as well as conversion activities. Specific roles and responsibilities are described in the table below.

Table 39 – Technical and Operations Team Roles and Responsibilities


Technical and Operations Director (1)

The Technical and Operations Director is responsible for overseeing the administration and operations of consortium systems, including centrally managed ancillaries and internal tools, monitoring system performance, service level agreements, security, ad-hoc reporting and data requests (e.g., state requests).

� Technical Architecture Designs Input

� Service Level Agreement Assessments

� Performance Issue Resolution Input

� Batch Report Reviews� Help Desk Ticket Trend

Analysis � Deliverable Tracking

Logs� SOSP Review Results� System Change Request

Feedback

Cloud Manager (1)

The Cloud Manager is responsible for providing cloud engineering expertise in reviewing technical and architectural updates, managing the system integrator and cloud vendor's ongoing development and operations, ensuring the architectural principles are aligned with CalSAWS business objectives, providing input on the management of the cloud infrastructure to





support 24x7 operations. � Status Reports� Onboarding/Off-boarding

Checklists� Application Dev Facility

Network � Performance Metrics� SharePoint Usage

Metrics� Conversion Results

Reports� CalACES Master

Conversion Plan� CalWIN/CalSAWS Master

Conversion� Plan

Cloud Analysts (4)

The Cloud Analysts are responsible for monitoring the performance of the cloud environment, reviewing technical architecture designs, supporting the management of the cloud infrastructure, evaluating technical work products and deliverables.

The Analysts will work with the security team in implementing and measuring strategic cloud security programs, standards and policies. Acts as the product manager for select cloud service offering(s) and responsible for defining and delivering cloud service features to the project. Helps manage overall cloud economics and analyze opportunities for infrastructure cost savings as new cloud services become available. Helps develop future cloud business cases and drive value realization. Responsible for determining capacity requirements and costs for a given system or feature and augmenting both financial and monitoring models. Manage and provision administration rights to authorized cloud accounts. Reconciliation of cloud services billing invoices to actual usage reports on a monthly basis.


The Help Desk Manager is responsible for evaluating and monitoring technical trouble tickets and help/service desk performance and response metrics including trend analysis and recommendations for process improvements and compliance with service level agreements, ensuring all Help Desk activities are properly coordinated and executed, facilitating periodic Help Desk Committee meetings with county IT representatives, validating Help Desk knowledge database and procedures documents, and reviewing technical System Change Requests.


The Help Desk Ticket Analysts are responsible for reviewing and analyzing trouble tickets for CalSAWS core system, Regional Call Centers, Self Service Portal/Mobile app, Imaging, lobby management, IVR, etc. In addition, the analysts review and analyze tickets submitted for both level 1 and level 2 help desk support which varies county to county. Full technical support to managed counties includes project management of the local network infrastructure, workstations and printers down to the county level. Non-managed county support includes technical support to the network point of presence at the county’s data center and triage of all trouble-tickets related to the systems supported by the project. Once tickets are triaged and determined to be a valid issue, the tickets moved into level 3 help desk support which is managed by the system integrator vendor. In addition, analysts perform ticket trend analysis, monitoring system performance for compliance with service level





agreements, and communicating with end users surrounding the remediation of trouble tickets and system performance issues.

Technical Operations Manager (1)

The Technical Operations Manager is responsible for ensuring changes to the application integrate with existing operations for each county, reviewing and evaluating technical work products and deliverables, ensuring adherence to the processes and procedures within the CalSAWS System Operations and Support Plan (SOSP), reviewing and analyzing technical System Change Requests, reviewing and evaluating the Operations Contractor Technical Team operational responsibilities, including Capacity Planning, Platform Management, Configuration Management, Security Management, Reporting Management, and Asset Management

Technical Analysts (15 during DD&I, 14 during M&O)

Under the direction of the Technical Operations Manager, these Technical Analysts are responsible for supporting the technical operations of CalSAWS, monitoring adherence to processes and procedures of the CalSAWS SOSP, analyzing technical System Change Requests, evaluating technical work products and deliverables, and supporting Capacity Planning, Platform Management, Configuration Management, Security Management, Reporting Management, and Asset Management. This includes working to draft requirements of technical change requests to be reviewed by the CalSAWS technical committee. Facilitating the committee meetings along with reviews of design documents of technical change requests for county committee voting and prioritization. The analysts are also responsible for system test and validation of technical system change requests prior to deployment and post production validation and monitoring. Analysts will work closely with the security officer in defining and implementing security governance practices, assist in system security audits and ensure corrective actions identified from audit reviews are implemented.


The System Performance Manager is responsible for evaluating hardware and system performance reports, batch operations (daily & monthly), and subcontractors and third-party service providers to ensure compliance with Operational Level Agreements, monitoring and evaluating network, software, and hardware needs and performance of the overall system as a result of changes in demand for the system, and evaluating network, software, and hardware needs for increases or decreases in the number of local county offices.


Under the direction of the System Performance Manager, these Technical Analysts are responsible for





monitoring hardware and system performance, batch operations, and subcontractors and third-party service providers to ensure compliance with Operational Level Agreements, evaluating network, software and hardware needs, monitoring the performance of the overall system, assess compliance of Service Level Agreements, support performance issue resolution, and review batch reports.


The Project IT Manager is responsible for managing project email, intranet and extranet, maintaining project SharePoint, managing project staff roll-on and roll-off protocols for system access, and procuring project equipment.

System Admin/Tech Support (12)

The System Admin/Tech Support resources are responsible for administering email, intranet and extranet connectivity, setting up project SharePoint, controlling onboarding/off-boarding checklists and protocols, monitoring Application Development Facility Network Performance Metrics, and configuring and supporting project equipment. This workload is currently being handled by the system integrator vendor staff and will be transitioned to the consortium staff. The workload includes management of the CalSAWS project across multiple project sites with 138 consortium staff plus county access to project services across all counties and state partners.

Conversion Lead (1)

The Conversion Lead is responsible for supporting and coordinating conversion planning and preparation activities including the review of source system data elements, data mapping, conversion testing, and conversion of existing data to the CalSAWS.


The Conversion Analysts are responsible for supporting conversion preparation, data mapping from source system data elements to the CalSAWS database schema, extract-transform-load conversion results, and conversion of existing data to the CalSAWS.

8.1.5 Project Management Office (PMO) Team

The PMO Team will manage and operate the PMO functions across the CalSAWS portfolio, including resource management, financial management, procurements, deliverable management, issues and risks, facility management, and contract and vendor management. Specific roles and responsibilities are described in the table below.

Table 40 – Project Management Office (PMO) Team – Roles and Responsibilities


PMO Director (1)

The PMO Director is responsible for overseeing the delivery of financial, contract and vendor management,

� IAPDs & Updates� Premise APDs





facility and procurement activities. � County Allocations� Monthly & As-Needed

Financial Reports� County Share of Cost

Reports� Invoice Review Results

and Approvals� Invoice Tracking Log� Payment Vouchers� Claim Tracking Reports� GASB 51 Forms� Annual Financial Audit

Artifacts� Contract Compliance

Communications� Contract Tracking Log� Contract Review Results� Issue & Risk Registers� Work Plans� CalSAWS Information

Transmittals � CalSAWS Requests for

Information � Deliverable Tracking

Logs� Communication Tracking

Log� Document Library� M&O Processes &

Procedures� Request for Proposals� Proposal Evaluation

Results� Vendor Selection

Recommendations

Fiscal and Contract Manager (1)

The Fiscal and Contract Manager is responsible for developing and controlling project budgets and funding requests, reviewing and tracking invoices, facilitating the invoice payment process, coordinating the county claim process, tracking and reporting claimed costs including county share, managing the travel expense process, supporting the annual financial audit, supporting capital asset inventory, completing GASB 51 forms, preparing cash accrual reports, tracking contract terms and conditions for compliance, facilitating contract amendment process, and preparing financial reports and county share of cost reports.

Fiscal Analysts (8)

The Fiscal Analysts are responsible for preparing Advance Planning Documents, supporting the county allocation process, validating, tracking and processing invoices, supporting payment vouchers, tracking claims, compiling financial audit artifacts. In addition, the Fiscal Analysts support budget management, including tracking system change request costs across multiple vendors, and tracking actual costs to planned.

Contract Analysts (2)

The Contract Analysts are responsible for monitoring the vendor compliance of contract terms and conditions, monitoring service level agreements, preparing contract compliance communications, supporting the contract amendment process, and tracking contract changes.

PMO Lead (1) The PMO Lead is responsible for facilitating issue and risk management, reviewing and developing work plans, coordinating deliverable review and approvals, preparing project communications and reports, developing and maintaining project management processes and procedures, maintaining the document library, developing and maintaining templates and standards, managing facility operations, including staff roll-on and roll-off protocols, coordinating repairs and maintenance (office cleaning, copier & equipment), supplies, and project site security (after-hours monitoring, issuing and managing badges).

PMO Analysts (5)

The PMO Analysts are responsible for tracking work plans, deliverable reviews, preparing status reports, processing staff roll-on and roll-off protocols, maintaining issue and risk registers, work plans, deliverable tracking log, communication tracking log, and document library.


The Procurement Manager is responsible for conducting competitive and non-competitive procurements, including QA services, CalWIN implementation, training & change management





services, contact center, shared services and long-term CalSAWS M&O.


The Procurement Analysts are responsible for preparing Requests for Proposals (RFPs), supporting the solicitation, proposal evaluation, and vendor selection processes.

8.1.6 Customer Engagement Team

The Customer Engagement Team will manage stakeholder relations and communications across the regions of counties, as well as training, change management, and implementation support. Specific roles and responsibilities are described in the table below.

Table 41 – Customer Engagement Team – Roles and Responsibilities


Customer Engagement Director (1)

The Customer Engagement Director is responsible for managing relationships between county and regional stakeholders, as well State partners, on defining and cultivating strategic customer experience and innovation initiatives, supporting go/no-go decisions and Change Control Board decisions, and supporting counties in attainment of strategic priorities as established by the Consortium.

� Regional Status Reports� System Change Request

Feedback� Change Control Board

Decisions� Release Packages Input� Go/No Go Decisions� Deliverable Review

Comments� CalSAWS Information

Transmittals � CalSAWS Requests for

InformationCustomer Engagement Manager (2)

The Customer Engagement Managers are responsible for providing direction to the Regional Managers, and overseeing managing and communicating status of county activities, communicating issues that impact the counties and assisting in the resolution process, engaging in the Project Steering Committee, briefing County Directors on project status, facilitating the county enhancement request process, coordinating county participation in committees, facilitating release package input, arranging and facilitating regional meetings, and supporting deliverable reviews. The Customer Engagement Managers will work with Regional Managers to present county innovations to Project Steering Committee, Joint Powers Authority Board and General Membership, as well as State partners.

Regional Manager (18) The Regional Managers serve as the key management points of contact between the project and the counties. During CalSAWS





DD&I the Regional Managers will help support the organizational and change management efforts and oversee the implementation of the new CalSAWS governance model. The Regional Managers are responsible for managing and communicating the status of their counties’ activities, coordinating between all counties and the project, facilitating system change request feedback, communicating issues that impact the counties and assisting in the resolution process, actively engaging in the Project Steering Committee, briefing County Directors on project status, and coordinating CalSAWS Information Transmittals and CalSAWS Requests for Information. Regional Managers will work directly with the counties to manage regional representation in committees and work groups, and assist counties to improve program performance through implementation of system best practices. The new structure expects active personal relationships with the counties which requires travel to the individual counties and participation in county meetings. The Regional Managers will also support communications with State sponsors, as needed.

Change Management Leads (2)

The Change Management Leads will interface with the Contractor’s Change Management Team, and coordinate with the Regional Managers and county change coordinators on redesigned business models. The Change Management Leads will be responsible for working with the Implementation Contractor Change Management Team Lead, managing the teams and work associated with the change management planning, leadership training and implementation tasks; evaluating work plans, staffing plans, and schedules and coordinating the work assignments of the Consortium Training Team; ensuring that individual county processes, procedures and operations are well understood, documented and effectively addressed; reviewing, analyzing and recommending acceptance for change management work products and deliverables and related training deliverables associated with leadership training, including, but not limited to Change Management Plans and documentation such as Role Gap Analysis and Change Discussion Guides; ensuring that the change management plans and activities are fully aligned with the overall





implementation and training approaches and the county requirements; leading the integrated change management approach including: leadership support and liaison, and conduct of leadership training to enable managers and supervisors to prepare their staff for process, procedural and position/role changes associated with migrating to the CalSAWS system and business model; developing and submitting written status reports; and identifying, documenting, resolving, and/or escalating issues to the appropriate level.

Training/Implementation Support (11 average/30 peak)

The Training and Implementation Support Team is responsible for facilitating and communicating with counties on organizational transformation to a statewide system and organization, supporting counties in their role in the organization and provide ongoing communication channels, gathering input from counties, supporting training activities, providing ongoing implementation support for counties both pre and post go-live. The Training and Implementation Support Team will support the development and execution of the Change Management Plan, change control guides. Training communications, master training plan, training materials, web-based training, job aids, implementation communications, webinars, and click-throughs.

8.2 STATE PERSONNELAs a result of the federal directive to reduce California’s SAWS to a single system, the State stakeholder agencies will commit resources throughout the CalSAWS project life cycle. The State will be involved on a day-to-day basis to monitor progress and communicate with State stakeholders.

IV&V services will be procured through the OSI. OSI will oversee the IV&V contractor activities.

The scope of responsibilities for these resources is outlined in the table below.

Table 42 – State Resources – Roles and Responsibilities


DHCS

DHCS Resources (4 Program FTEs)

� Serve as primary State sponsor representatives in establishing the CalSAWS system’s formal long-term governance structure inclusive of direct State oversight roles and responsibilities







� Monitor, communicate, and oversee the CalSAWS strategy and roadmap development at the state-level

� Develop processes and procedures within the Medi-Cal Eligibility Division (MCED) for ongoing oversight and governance of the CalSAWS system (CalSAWS) due to the expanded State role

� Consult with CMS, CDSS, OSI, CWDA, and the county consortia to facilitate the successful implementation of the CalSAWS system

� Identify, document, assess, track, and communicate key CalSAWS project risks to DHCS executive leadership, and provide guidance to county consortia for mitigation

� Escalate CalSAWS project issues and risks, as appropriate, to DHCS executive leadership for decision

� Identify, review, and assess capabilities and risks from the Medi-Cal program administration perspective of the various migration paths of the CalSAWS platform

� Validate final business requirements analysis to ensure compliance to state and federal statute and regulations as it relates to the Medi-Cal program

� Review all CalSAWS deliverables produced by CalSAWS DD&I vendors

� Participate in user acceptance testing for the CalSAWS system

� Support county readiness of the CalSAWS system implementation

� Support vendor procurement, contract negotiations, and contract amendments for the CalSAWS implementation

� Review all CalSAWS Advance Planning Documents (APDs) as the Single State Medicaid Agency and track and reconcile SAWS monthly invoices to DHCS

� Participate in stakeholder engagement activities with OSI and CDSS

� Serve as primary DHCS technology stakeholder and subject matter expert and communicate interface requirements to MEDS to the CalSAWS system project stakeholders

� IAPD Updates Review & Approvals

� Deliverable Input





� Identify, document, assess, track, and communicate key CalSAWS system project risks to DHCS executive leadership

DHCS Resources

(4 IT FTEs)

� Serve as primary DHCS technology stakeholder and subject matter expert and communicate interface requirements to MEDS and CalHEERS as applicable to the CalSAWS system project stakeholders

� Identify, document, assess, track, and communicate key CalSAWS system project risks to DHCS executive leadership

� Validate business requirements and technical design documents to ensure baseline connectivity and adherence to appropriate state and federal data security protocols

� Address data integrity issues, provide recommendations, and subject matter expertise associated with data cleansing strategies between MEDS and CalSAWS.

� Collaborate with CalWIN and CalACES technical staff and other stakeholders to help plan and develop a comprehensive and consolidated technology solution/system

� Review all CalSAWS system deliverables for architecture and interface requirements and to ensure adherence to industry best practices

� Escalate CalSAWS system project risks, issues, and mitigation plans, as appropriate, to DHCS executive leadership for decision making

� Serve as project technical lead for any modifications to existing MEDS interfaces necessary to support the implementation of CalSAWS

� Consult with California Department of Technology (OTech) to ensure that CalSAWS system connectivity needs are met during the migration and any architectural needs are addressed

� Develop interface documentation and an ongoing plan of support as well as an updated Technical Recovery Plan (TRP)

� Develop comprehensive test plans to mitigate risks associated with phased county trading partner cutovers throughout the CalACES migration and the CalWIN





migration to the CalSAWS system

� Lead MEDS integration testing from the DHCS side for CalSAWS

� Coordinate MEDS connectivity testing efforts with CalSAWS

� Support troubleshooting of reported MEDS connectivity issues during testing, initial cutover, and ongoing

� Proactively address interface security protocol risks and issues

� Provide technical guidance and review to DHCS executive management for the CalSAWS system vendor procurement

CDSS

CDSS Resources

(6 FTEs)

� Serve as primary State sponsor representatives in establishing the CalSAWS system formal long-term governance structure inclusive of direct State oversight roles and responsibilities

� Monitor, communicate, and oversee the CalSAWS strategy and roadmap development at the state level

� Develop processes and procedures within FEED for ongoing oversight and governance of the CalSAWS system due to the expanded State role

� Consult with the CMS, FNS, DHCS, OSI, CWDA, and the county consortia to facilitate the successful implementation of the CalSAWS system

� Identify, document, assess, track, and communicate key CalSAWS system project risks to CDSS leadership, and provide guidance to county consortia for mitigation

� Escalate CalSAWS system project issues and risks, as appropriate, to CDSS executive leadership for decisions

� Participate in business process gap analysis between CalACES and CalWIN

� Participate and provide food and cash assistance programs policy guidance for the CalSAWS system business requirements gathering sessions

� Validate final business requirements analysis to ensure compliance to state and federal statute and regulations as it relates









to the food and cash assistance programs overseen by CDSS

� Review all CalSAWS system deliverables produced by the CalSAWS DD&I Vendor

� Participate in script development, user acceptance testing, and regression testing for the CalSAWS system


� Support vendor procurement, contract negotiations, and contract amendments for the CalSAWS system implementation

� Review all CalSAWS system APDs and track and reconcile OSI and SAWS monthly invoices to CDSS

� Ongoing support and oversight of the CalSAWS system activities and system stabilization for six months following full migration to

OSI

OSI Resources

(2 FTEs – Funded Separately)

� Ensure participation of CDSS/DHCS during the prioritization of CalSAWS change requests

� Ensure CDSS/DHCS assumptions and program requirements are clearly communicated to the consortia. This includes discussing and clarifying any assumptions and/or any requirements provided by CDSS/DHCS legislative staff before reaching out for consortia cost estimates

� Ensure that requested cost estimates are provided in a timely manner and notify project sponsors if more information is needed to obtain estimates

� Set up and facilitate meetings to ensure State sponsors are consistently engaged in the CalSAWS change control board(s)

� Follow-up to ensure unanticipated issues are resolved promptly and do not become barriers to completing system changes

� Serve as primary OSI representatives in establishing the CalSAWS formal long-term governance structure of direct State oversight roles and responsibilities

� Participate in the monitoring, communicating, and overseeing of the









CalSAWS strategy and roadmap development at the state-level

� Participate in the ongoing oversight and governance of the CalSAWS system due to the expanded State role

� Consult with CMS, FNS, CDSS, DHCS, CWDA, and the county consortia to facilitate the successful implementation of the CalSAWS system

� Identify, document, assess, track, and communicate key CalSAWS system project risks to OSI executive leadership, and provide guidance to county consortia for mitigation

� Escalate CalSAWS system project issues and risks, as appropriate, to OSI executive leadership



� Review all CalSAWS system APDs and facilitate State level review and approval of all CalSAWS APDs with CDSS and DHCS


� Provide ongoing support and oversight of the CalSAWS system activities and system stabilization for six months following full migration to the single system

IV&V

IV&V Consultants

(2 FTEs)

� Conduct continuous, structured, and objective project examinations independent of the project development and system integration organization, including independent assessments of project methodologies, processes, and deliverables with respect to applicable standards and best practices across the IT industry, and briefing State and federal sponsors on such independent assessments

� Independent Project Oversight Reports

� Independent Assessments




8.3 LEGAL SUPPORTLegal Support will be utilized to assist the CalSAWS consortia in legal research, legal advice, and procurement and contracting processes. Legal Support also responds to requests by the JPA Board of Directors and Executive Director for assessments of legal implications and risks associated with project direction or key issues. Legal Support will be retained throughout the lifecycle of the CalSAWS project to provide such legal services.

Table 43 – Legal Support Roles and Responsibilities


Legal Counsel (1) � Providing legal assistance regarding contract negotiations, contract compliance, contractor performance, and fulfillment of contractual terms and conditions, such as warranties, rights, remedies, equipment, software and system licensing and ownership

� Assessing and providing guidance regarding potential contract changes and ensuring proper documentation as part of a formal change order and amendment process

� Providing legal review and support for CalSAWS procurement efforts, including drafting of contracts for RFPs, participation in evaluation as applicable, review of vendor selection reports, prepare for contract negotiations and assist in preparing the business team for negotiations.

� Evaluating License Agreements and associated documents with respect to compliance with legal requirements of the Consortium and the contract policies of the Consortium Legal Counsel, including communicating comments/revisions and confirming comments are resolved

� Providing legal assistance in the development and approval of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CalACES and WCDS Consortia that reflects the initial agreement of a combined governance model

� Assessing and providing guidance for a 58-county governance model and modifications to the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement, Bylaws, and MOUs under the proposed governance model

� Providing support for governance educational sessions with counties

� Providing support for public records requests under the Freedom of Information

� Legal evaluation and guidance on contract performance

� Input to contract amendments, change orders and MOUs

� Legal guidance on procurement efforts





Act (FOIA) and the California Public Records Act (PRA)

8.4 OTHER STAKEHOLDERS & ADVOCATESThe Consortium will engage other stakeholders through the State’s stakeholder engagement process, which include advocates whom represent the community and consumers of public assistance programs, in quarterly project status meetings, and reviews of user-centered designs and public-facing application changes.

8.5 CONTRACTOR DD&I TEAM The CalSAWS DD&I Contractor Team will be integrated with existing efforts for C-IV M&O and LRS M&O. This approach will allow it to efficiently deliver on-going maintenance for the 40 CalACES Counties while preparing for the migration of all 58 counties of the CalSAWS Consortium to CalSAWS. The below figure identifies the contractor’s organization.

CalSAWS Delivery Advisor

PMO Manager Solutions Delivery Technology Delivery

(Implementation)

Conversion

Deployment

Cloud

Imaging & Ancillary Systems

Environments Equipment &

Network

C-IV Technical Operations/Data

Center

LRS Technical Operations/Data

Center

Design (CalACES & CalSAWS)

CalACES M&O Build 1

CalACES M&O Build 2

CalSAWS Application

Development

CalSAWS Test

PMO

Business Operations

Release Management

D&I Contractor Organization

CalSAWS Project Executive

New Position

CalACES Funded

Partially Leveraged

Figure 3 - CalSAWS DD&I Contractor Organization

The key vendor DD&I project teams and associated roles and responsibilities are outlined in the following table.




Table 44 – Vendor Services – DD&I Key Roles & Responsibilities


Executive Leadership

CalSAWS Project Executive Director

Responsible for oversight across the integrated CalSAWS Software delivery organization and CalSAWS DD&I functions, as well as coordination with existing CalACES service delivery functions.

� CalSAWS Project Status Reports


Responsible for providing strategic leadership and guidance to the CalSAWS Project Executive Director to support the CalSAWS DD&I functions and the existing CalACES service delivery functions.

Project Management Office Team

PMO Manager Responsible for delivery management for the CalSAWS DD&I functions, including deliverables management, status reporting, contract and commercial management, as well as coordination with CalSAWS PMO functions, facilities and other commercial concerns relating to software delivery.

� CalSAWS Migration Work Plan – Initial & Updates

� CalSAWS Migration Project Control Document – Initial & Updates

PMO Lead Responsible for leading vendor Project Management Office (PMO) functions, including deliverables management, financial management, contract management, and project status reporting.

Business Ops & Release Management

Responsible for operations and release management of CalSAWS software releases.

Solutions Delivery Team

CalSAWS Solutions Delivery Manager

Responsible for the design, development and test of the CalSAWS Software and associated Deliverables. The Solution Delivery Manager will also be responsible for the design, development and test of the LRS Software and C-IV Software.

� CalSAWS General Design

� CalSAWS Master Test Plan

� CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix

� CalSAWS UAT Support Plan

� CalSAWS (C-IV)

CalACES & CalSAWS Design Lead

Responsible for leading the design of the CalSAWS application.

CalSAWS Application Development Lead

Responsible for leading the development of the CalSAWS application.





UAT Readiness Report

� CalSAWS (CalWIN) UAT Readiness Report

CalSAWS Test Lead Responsible for leading the testing of the CalSAWS application.

Technology Team

Technical Lead Responsible for managing the overall technology of CalSAWS.

� Application Development Preparation & Installation Plan

� CalSAWS Business Architecture Design

AWS Cloud Lead Responsible for leading the Cloud computing environment for CalSAWS.

Environments, Equipment and Network Lead

Responsible for managing the application development environments, project equipment, and the network infrastructure.

Imaging & Ancillary System

Responsible for leading document imaging and ancillary systems.

Technology & Data Operations

Responsible for technology and data operations.

Delivery (Implementation) Team

CalSAWS Delivery Lead

Responsible for the overall management of the CalSAWS data conversion, training, change management and CalSAWS Migration Deployment activities.

� CalACES Master Conversion Plan

� C-IV Master Training Plan

� CalWIN/CalSAWS Master Conversion Plan

� C-IV Change Management Plan

� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - C-IV

� CalACES Migration Final Acceptance Certification

� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report -

Conversion Lead Responsible for leading data conversion planning and execution.

Change Management & Training Lead

Responsible for leading training development and delivery, as well as change management materials.

Deployment Support Responsible for managing and reporting on the deployment schedule and critical path, managing the readiness of the 39 C-IV Counties as they prepare to migrate to the CalSAWS software, and providing support during deployment of the CalSAWS software for the 39 C-IV Counties.





CalWIN Wave 1

� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Wave 2





� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Report - CalWIN Wave 1-6

� CalSAWS Migration Final Acceptance Certification

8.6 CONTRACTOR M&O SERVICES The key vendor M&O project teams and associated roles and responsibilities are outlined in the following table.

Table 45 – Contractor Services M&O Key Roles & Responsibilities


Executive Leadership

CalSAWS Project Executive Director

Responsible for oversight across the integrated CalSAWS Software delivery organization and CalSAWS M&O functions.

� CalSAWS Project Status Reports






Responsible for providing strategic leadership and guidance to the CalSAWS Project Executive Director to support the CalSAWS M&O functions.

Project Management Office Team

PMO Manager Responsible for delivery management for the CalSAWS M&O functions, including deliverables management, status reporting, contract and commercial management, as well as coordination with CalSAWS PMO functions, facilities and other commercial concerns relating to software delivery.

� CalSAWS Work Plan Updates

� CalSAWS Project Control Document/Project Management Plan UpdatesPMO Lead Responsible for leading vendor Project

Management Office (PMO) functions, including deliverables management, financial management, contract management, and project status reporting.

Business Ops & Release Management

Responsible for operations and release management of CalACES software releases.

Solutions Delivery Team


Responsible for the design, development and test of the CalSAWS Software and associated Deliverables. The Solution Delivery Manager will also be responsible for the design, development and test of the LRS Software and C-IV Software.

� CalSAWS Design Documents

� CalSAWS Master Test Plan

� CalSAWS Requirements Traceability Matrix

� CalSAWS Application Software Code & Documentation

CalACES & CalSAWS Design Lead

Responsible for leading the design of the CalSAWS application.




Technology Team


Responsible for the design, development and test of the CalSAWS software and associated deliverables.

� Application Development Preparation & Installation Plan


CalSAWS Design Lead Responsible for leading the design of the CalSAWS application.




Technology Team





Technical Lead Responsible for managing the overall technology of CalSAWS.

� CalSAWS Application Development Preparation & Installation Plan


AWS Cloud Lead Responsible for leading the Cloud computing environment for CalSAWS.

Environments, Equipment and Network Lead

Responsible for managing the application development environments, project equipment, and the network infrastructure.

Imaging & Ancillary System

Responsible for leading document imaging and ancillary systems.

Technology & Data Operations

Responsible for technology and data operations.

8.7 QA CONTRACTOR TEAM The QA contractor project team is organized to align with the Consortium and DD&I contractor teams. QA contractor services will be acquired through a competitive procurement.

The estimated staffing levels were developed based on comparable benchmarks from previous competitively procured QA services for similar California SAWS consortia projects (C-IV, CalWIN, ISAWS Migration, and LRS), and the assumption that the CalSAWS QA services would be similar in nature to the ISAWS Migration QA effort. It was also assumed that the CalSAWS QA effort would be more complex due to multiple points of integration. An additional service area was added for security support review.

The overall structure of the Consortium and DD&I Vendor organizational structures was analyzed, and the CalSAWS QA Services were decomposed into the following five key functional areas: Project Management/Leadership, Business/Functional, Technical, Testing, and Implementation Support. The team size was then established utilizing the required services levels from the QA Services RFP for each of the five functional areas.

The following organization chart illustrates the required key staff; and delineates between recurring and non-recurring resources.




QA Project Manager (1)

Testing Manager (1)

Functional Manager (1)

Technical Manager (1) PMO Lead (1) Implementation

Manager (1)

Change Mgmt / Implementation

Analyst (2)


Analyst (1)

PMO Analyst (1)

Project Control Analyst (1)

Technical Architect (Cloud)

(1)

Technical Specialists/ Sr

Analyst (1)


Security Specialist (1)

UAT Lead (1)

Independent Testers (3)

Tech Analyst/ Regression Tester (1)

Business Analysts (3)

Conversion Analyst (1)

CalSAWS QA Project Organization

Non-Recurring Recurring

Key Staff

Figure 4 CalSAWS QA Vendor Organization

The chart below delineates the staff loading timeframes of QA personnel during DD&I by position and number of resources in each position. All staff reflected on the chart are new staff.




Table 46 – QA Personnel DD&I Staff Loading

DD&I QA Staff Loading


START DATE END DATE NO. MONTHS

QA Project Manager 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24

QA PMO Lead 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA PMO Analyst 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Project Control Analyst 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24

QA Functional Manager 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Business Analyst 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Business Analyst 1 May-19 Mar-21 23QA Business Analyst 1 Jun-19 Mar-21 22QA Conversion Analyst 1 May-19 Mar-21 23

QA Implementation Manager 1 Apr-19 Oct-22 43QA Change Management/ Implementation Analyst

2 Jun-19 Oct-22 41

QA Training/Implementation Analyst 1 Jun-19 Oct-22 41

QA Technical Manager 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Technical Architect (Cloud) 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Technical Specialist/Sr. Analyst 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Technical Analyst 2 Jun-19 Mar-21 22QA Security Specialist 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24

QA Testing Manager 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA UAT Manager 1 Apr-19 Mar-21 24QA Independent Tester 1 May-19 Mar-21 23QA Independent Tester 2 Sep-19 Mar-21 19QA Technical Analyst/Regression Tester

1 Jun-19 Mar-21 22

Total New 25 Total Leveraged 0 Total DD&I 25

The chart below delineates the staff loading timeframes of QA personnel during M&O by position and number of staff in each position.

Table 47 – QA Personnel M&O Staff Loading

M&O QA Staff Loading



QA Project Manager 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42

QA PMO Lead 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA PMO Analyst 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Project Control Analyst 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42




M&O QA Staff Loading



QA Functional Manager 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Business Analyst 3 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Conversion Analyst 1 Apr-21 Apr-23 25

QA Implementation Manager 1 Nov-22 Apr-23 6QA Change Management/Implementation Analyst

2 Nov-22 Jan-23 3

QA Training/Implementation Analyst 1 Nov-22 Jan-23 3

QA Technical Manager 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Technical Architect (Cloud) 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Technical Specialist/Sr. Analyst 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Technical Analyst 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Technical Analyst 1 Apr-21 Apr-23 25QA Security Specialist 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42

QA Testing Manager 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA UAT Manager 1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Independent Tester 3 Apr-21 Sep-24 42QA Technical Analyst/Regression Tester

1 Apr-21 Sep-24 42

Total M&O 25

The vendor project teams and associated roles and responsibilities are outlined in the following table.

Table 48 – QA Roles & Responsibilities

Role Responsibility Team OutputsQA LeadershipQA Project Manager Responsible for managing the overall QA scope of

services and team. The QA Project Manager is the primary liaison with the CalSAWS Executive Director and is responsible for the QA project team delivery of all QA deliverables.

� QA Project Status Reports

QA Project Management TeamQA PMO Lead Responsible for leading the development and

administration of the QA Management Plan, overall reporting efforts, and the establishment and maintenance of the QA work plan.

� QA Work Plan - Initial & Updates

� QA Management Plan

QA PMO Analyst Responsible for leading vendor Project Management Office (PMO) functions, including deliverables management, financial management, contract management, and project status reporting.

QA Project Control Analyst

Responsible for oversight of the Vendor Project Control processes.




Role Responsibility Team OutputsQA Business TeamQA Functional Manager

Responsible for leading the analysis of business functional requirements and their execution within the CalSAWS system including reviewing Vendor Deliverables with a focus on the accurate implementation of business requirements, tracking changes and corresponding requirements, and supporting the QA testing efforts.

� Vendor QA Review - � CalSAWS General

Design� CalSAWS

Requirements Traceability Matrix

� Quarterly QA Requirements Traceability Matrix review report

QA Business Analyst Responsible for executing Business related QA review of the Business/Functional activities.

QA Conversion Analyst

Responsible for executing Business related QA review of the Conversion activities.

QA Technical TeamQA Technical Manager Responsible for managing the overall Technical QA

activities including monitoring the overall success of the CalSAWS technical solution, tracking industry changes in technology and their effect on CalSAWS, enforce the project’s technical standards and communicating the QA review results with CalSAWS Executive Management.

� Vendor QA Review - � Application

Development Preparation & Installation Plan


� Security Review Plan

QA Technical Architect (Cloud)

Responsible for leading the Cloud computing environment QA review for CalSAWS.

QA Technical Specialist/Senior Analyst; QA Technical Analyst

Responsible for executing the technical QA activities including ensuring adherence to project’s technical processes/procedures, reviewing technical components, identifying and recording risks/issues, and supporting QA monthly reporting.

QA Security Specialist Responsible for developing the Security Review Plan and executing all Security-related QA activities.

QA Test TeamQA Test Manager Responsible for managing the overall QA Test Plan

including the development of the Independent Test Plan, UAT Support Plan and all Vendor Test QA Deliverables. Responsible for the development of the Monthly Testing reports documenting Independent Test, UAT, and other Consortium Test Support activities.

� Vendor QA Review - � CalSAWS Master

Test Plan� CalSAWS UAT

Support Plan� CalSAWS (C-IV)

UAT Readiness Report

� CalSAWS (CalWIN) UAT Readiness Report

� Independent Test Plan

� Monthly Testing reports

QA UAT Lead Responsible for developing the UAT Test Plan, coordinating with the Consortium and counties to support and execute the CalSAWS UAT. Supporting the Monthly Test reports.

QA Independent Tester

Responsible for developing the Independent Testing scripts and execution. Supporting the Monthly Test reports.

QA Technical Analyst / Regression Tester

Responsible for leading the review of System Testing and Regression Testing. Supporting the Monthly Test reports.

Implementation TeamQA Implementation Lead

Responsible for the overall management of QA services associated with the Implementation activities including change management, training and deployment.

� Vendor QA Review - � CalACES Master

Conversion Plan� C-IV Master

Training Plan� CalWIN/CalSAWS

QA Change Management /

Responsible for leading the Change Management QA review.




Role Responsibility Team OutputsImplementation Analyst

Master Conversion Plan

� C-IV Change Management Plan

� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - C-IV

� CalACES Migration Final Acceptance Certification

� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Milestone/Report - CalWIN Waves 1 through 6

� CalSAWS Deployment Complete Report - CalWIN Wave 1-6

� CalSAWS Migration Final Acceptance Certification

QA Training / Implementation Analyst

Responsible for leading the Training QA review.

8.8 PROCUREMENT SERVICES The Procurement Services Team will support the CalSAWS Consortium organization reflected in Section 8.1 above, specifically reporting to the CalSAWS PMO Lead and CalSAWS Procurement Manager. The Procurement Services Team is designed to support two different periods of contractor procurement support work. In addition to the competitive procurement to secure the QA contractor services described above, the first period will support three additional procurements including the Contact Center, the Statewide Portal/Mobile Application Solutions, as well as the CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation Support. The second period will support the CalSAWS M&O contractor procurement.

The Procurement Services Team for the first period will consist of three Consortium Procurement Consultants who will be devoted to supporting the multiple simultaneous procurements with the Consortium PMO Procurement Team. The Procurement Team for the second period is larger and requires additional Consortium and vendor support; as such this section provides additional detail regarding the support required for that effort.

Each procurement as described in Section 6, Nature and Scope of Activities, is identified below.

First Procurement Period: Contact Center CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation Support Statewide Portal and Mobile Application

Second Procurement Period: CalSAWS M&O




8.8.1 CalSAWS M&O Procurement

The CalSAWS M&O Procurement is the only competitive procurement effort for which this IAPD requests resources and funding for a separate Consortium and Vendor Procurement Team. The CalSAWS M&O Procurement effort will be conducted in parallel with the CalSAWS DD&I effort, beginning in January 2021 and concluding in February 2023. In developing the CalSAWS M&O RFP, this procurement team will define requirements, a statement of work with tasks and deliverables, new Service Level Agreements and a new draft contract to support all 58 counties for an estimated 10-year duration.

The estimated staffing levels were based, to a great extent, on the previously submitted resources, schedule and budget for the CalACES 40-county M&O Procurement effort. That procurement consisted of an average of 11.1 FTEs through the contract negotiations task (6.3 Consortium staff and 4.8 Procurement Vendor staff). This statewide CalSAWS M&O procurement effort consists of 11.5 average FTEs through contract negotiations (6.5 Consortium staff and 5.0 Procurement Vendor staff), or an increase of less than 0.5 FTEs

As the largest in scale and most complex procurement, the CalSAWS M&O Procurement Team will consist of a Consortium Team and a Procurement Vendor Team. These teams will work together in a collaborative, integrated manner to complete all procurement related tasks and deliverables within the overall schedule and budget. The Procurement Consultants and Procurement Vendor resources are expected to consist of experienced, seasoned staff who have engaged in similar, large-scale, government IT procurement efforts. In addition to the roles as defined below, all staff are responsible for tracking and reporting their progress for assigned tasks and deliverables. All staff are also responsible for identifying, escalating and resolving issues throughout the procurement project.

All staff are dedicated to the M&O Procurement effort as represented in the below table. Staff loading is based on the anticipated scope of work.

The chart below delineates the staff loading timeframes of the Procurement Personnel for both Procurement Periods by position and number of staff in each position. The chart also reflects the composition of the teams in terms of new staff and leveraged staff. Leveraged staff (and their associated costs) are already included in one of the existing M&O organizations: CalACES or CalWIN.

Table 49 – Procurement Personnel – Leveraged Staff and New Staff Loading

Procurement Personnel

POSITION NO. OF FTEs LEVERAGED START

DATEEND

DATENO.

MONTHSConsortium Procurement Consultant 2 Jan-19 Oct-22 46Consortium Procurement Consultant 1 Jan-19 Dec-20 24

Consortium Project Manager 1 Leveraged Jan-21 Feb-23 26Consortium Functional Lead 1 Leveraged Feb-21 Jun-22 17Consortium Business Ops Lead 1 Jan-21 Oct-22 22Consortium Technical/Ops Lead 1 Jan-21 Oct-22 22Consortium Tech/Ops Support 1 Leveraged Feb-21 Jul-22 18Consortium Legal Counsel 0.5 May-21 Oct-22 12

Vendor Project Manager 1 Jan-21 Sep-22 21Vendor Procurement Lead 1 Jan-21 Jun-22 18Vendor Technical/Ops Lead 1 Jan-21 Sep-22 21Vendor Tech/Ops Support 1 Feb-21 Jun-22 17




Procurement Personnel Vendor PMO/Fiscal Lead 1 Jan-21 Jun-22 18Vendor PMO/Admin Support 1 Jan-21 Jun-22 18 Total New 11.5 Total Leveraged 3 Total 14.5

8.8.2 CalSAWS Consortium Procurement Consultants

The Procurement Consultants, working with the Consortium Procurement Project Manager and team, will assist in managing and supporting the first set of procurements including the QA, Contact Center, the Statewide Portal/Mobile Application, as well as the CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation Support effort.

For the large-scale M&O Procurement, the Procurement Consultants will act as members of the Consortium Procurement Team, providing guidance, perspective and support throughout the process. This advice and assistance includes knowledge transfer and training of less experienced Consortium resources in RFP development and evaluation processes and the dependencies between what is requested in a proposal, how that information can be evaluated and how that ultimately translates to costs and expected contract outcomes. The Procurement Consultants will help the Consortium Procurement Team fully engage with and understand the impacts and implications of Procurement Vendor recommendations and documentation, and will help monitor Procurement Vendor performance. The Procurement Consultants are an integral part of preparing the Consortium team to take full ownership of subsequent procurement work.

In addition to the knowledge transfer focus, specific activities to be performed by the Procurement Consultants will include defining the procurement strategy, schedules and work plans, developing and assessing procurement models, RFP cost schedules, evaluation criteria and scoring models, helping identify and facilitate key procurement related decisions by the Consortium executive management team and JPA, ensuring consistency with other CalSAWS procurement efforts, responding to vendor questions during the Q&A period, supporting the Consortium in the bidder conference, providing as-needed analysis and support to the evaluation teams, particularly in the cost, PMO and work plan areas, and providing support during contract negotiations. The Procurement Consultants will also work collaboratively with the Procurement Vendor Project Manager, Procurement Lead and PMO/Fiscal Lead.

8.8.3 CalSAWS M&O Procurement Consortium Project Team

The roles and responsibilities and high-level tasks for each Consortium Procurement position are described below.




Table 50 – Procurement Services – Consortium/Vendor Key Roles & Responsibilities

Role Responsibility

Consortium Procurement Project Manager

� Responsible for representing the Consortium to all project stakeholders.

� Provide direction for the Procurement Project Team relative to Consortium needs and expectations, ensure appropriate Consortium representation and participation for all procurement tasks, and contribute to the development of the RFP(s) for one or more new M&O Vendors.

� Identify, document and resolve and/or escalate issues to the appropriate level to help the project adhere to the approved schedule and budget, as well as provide oversight of all Procurement Vendor activities.

� Assist the CalSAWS Executive Director in contract negotiations with the selected M&O Vendor(s).

� Prepare for and participate in meetings and briefings with Consortium Project Management, the CalSAWS JPA Board of Directors, the CalSAWS Project Steering Committee and State sponsors and stakeholders.

Consortium Functional Lead

� Represent the Consortium’s interests from a functional perspective and will provide knowledge and expertise regarding the application and related Consortium/county requirements.

� Provide knowledge and experience in the application, mobile application, training materials, job aids, and on-line help.

� Provide expertise with the existing system change control processes and the Consortium committee/workgroup structure.

� Work with the Vendor Procurement Lead and lead the evaluation of functional/application aspects of M&O vendor proposals.

Consortium Business Operations Lead

� Represent the Consortium’s interests from a business operations perspective and will provide knowledge and expertise regarding Consortium/county business operational needs and requirements including contact/service centers/help desk, IVR, imaging/document management and lobby management functions.

� Provide knowledge of the existing Service Level Agreements (SLAs), existing performance issues that impact county business operations and where improvements to SLAs could be made from a business and county perspective.

� Provide experience with the existing system change control processes and the Consortium committee/workgroup structure.

� Work in tandem with the Vendor Procurement Lead and will lead the evaluation of business operational aspects of M&O vendor proposals.




Role Responsibility

Consortium Technical/ Operations Lead

� Provide an overall understanding of all technical and operational requirements and aspects of both procurements.

� Provide knowledge and expertise of the existing Consortium operations and approaches in areas such as data centers, local network, document management, IVR/texting, data warehouse/data analytics and mobile application infrastructures, evaluating software and equipment needs, and an understanding of existing Service Level Agreements (SLAs), existing performance issues and where improvements to SLAs could be made.

� Work in tandem with the Procurement Vendor Technical/Operations Lead to conduct analysis and will lead the evaluation of the Technical operational portions of the M&O Vendor proposals.

� Participate in technical aspects of contract negotiations, as needed.

Consortium Technical/ Operations Support

� Work in a supportive role to the Consortium Technical/Operations Lead to collect and consolidate Consortium technical information and documentation, conduct analysis and provide expertise regarding specific technical and operational requirements and aspects of the project.

� Provide expertise in areas such as cloud, networks, document management, IVR/texting, data warehouse/data analytics and mobile application infrastructures, evaluating software needs, and an understanding of existing SLAs.


� Lead the development of draft contracts to include in the M&O RFP(s)

� Review and analyze exceptions vendors take to contracts during the evaluation processes.

� Review the Vendor Selection Report.

� Prepare the Consortium business team for M&O contract negotiations and participate in M&O contract negotiations.

8.8.4 CalSAWS M&O Procurement Vendor Project Team

The roles and responsibilities and high-level tasks for each Vendor Procurement position are described below.




Table 51 – Procurement Services Consortium/Vendor Key Roles & Responsibilities

Role Responsibility

Vendor Procurement Project Manager

� Overall responsibility for ensuring the Vendor Team successfully completes all procurement related tasks and deliverables as defined in the Procurement Vendor Contract.

� Provide ongoing advice and support to the Consortium Procurement Manager throughout the Procurement process.

� Secure all necessary vendor resources to complete procurement tasks and direct and monitor all work performed by the Vendor Procurement Team.

� Assist in preparing for and participating in meetings and briefings with Consortium Project Management, the CalSAWS JPA Board of Directors, the CalSAWS Project Steering Committee and state sponsors and stakeholders.

Vendor Procurement Lead

� Provide thought leadership and strategies for the procurement approach, including ways to maximize competition.

� Provide expertise in areas such as procurement planning and execution, RFP(s) development, and evaluation approaches, criteria and modeling of evaluation scenarios.

� Development of the approach, proposal submission and evaluation portions of the RFP(s) and providing analysis and support during the procurement execution phase.

Vendor Technical/ Operations Lead

� Conduct analysis and provide expertise regarding all technical and operational requirements and aspects of the project.

� Provide expertise in areas such as cloud infrastructure and operations, evaluating local networks, document management, IVR/texting, data analytics and mobile application infrastructures, evaluating software needs, assisting in defining SLAs, and communicating complex technical information to non‐technical Consortium representatives.

� Deliver the technical portions of the Procurement Vendor deliverables and lead the training for technical Consortium evaluators.

Vendor Technical/ Operations Support

� Work in a supportive role to the Technical/Operations Lead to conduct analysis and provide expertise regarding specific technical and operational requirements and aspects of the project.

� Provide expertise in areas such as cloud infrastructure and operations, designing or evaluating local networks, document management, IVR/texting, data warehouse/data analytics and mobile application infrastructures, evaluating software and equipment needs, assisting in defining SLAs, and communicating complex technical information to non‐technical Consortium representatives.




Role Responsibility

Vendor PMO/Fiscal Lead

� Establish and maintain the Procurement Project work plan and track and report progress against the work plan.

� Lead the PMO functions in support of the Consortium and Vendor Procurement Teams including deliverable management, work plan management, budget management, communication management, contract management and issue and risk management.

� Develop the cost proposal structure and related instructions for the M&O RFP(s) and for leading training to the Consortium cost evaluators.

Vendor PMO/Admin Support

� Provide general support to the Consortium and Vendor Procurement Teams including document and deliverable preparation and tracking, establishing and maintaining the project library, assist in maintaining the procurement project work plan, time tracking, meeting scheduling and support, file maintenance, correspondence, and various project tasks as assigned.

9.0 PROPOSED ACTIVITY SCHEDULEThis section provides a summary level CalSAWS schedules for the DD&I phase, the Procurement phase and the M&O phase. The CalSAWS DD&I timeline is depicted in Figure 27 below, which identifies the negotiated scope associated with the System Integrator. The additional activities and timeframes, including procurement schedules, follow in subsequent tables.




Figure 30 - CalSAWS DD&I Timeline


LRS go-live on AWS Cloud

7/2019

LRS AWS Cloud Proof of

Concept Results

1/2019



9.1 Design, Development & Implementation

Table 52 – Design, Development & Implementation Activity Schedule

CalSAWS Project Schedule Estimated Start Date

Estimated Finish Date

DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION (DD&I)

LRS AWS Cloud Proof of Concept Results Report January 2019 January 2019

CalSAWS Functional Design January 2019 July 2019

LRS Go-Live on AWS Cloud July 2019 July 2019

CalSAWS Design January 2019 September 2020

39 C-IV County Conversion Analysis January 2019 June 2019

18 CalWIN County Conversion DB Legacy Analysis January 2019 June 2019

CalSAWS Application Development and System Test April 2019 September 2021

39 C-IV County Conversion Design July 2019 November 2019

18 CalWIN County Conversion Design July 2019 November 2019

39 C-IV County Conversion Build December 2019 August 2020

18 CalWIN County Conversion Build December 2019 September 2020

39 C-IV County Training Design February 2020 March 2020

39 C-IV County Training Build April 2020 November 2020

39 C-IV County Implementation Readiness Preparation July 2020 July 2021

39 C-IV County Conversion Test/CDT Support September 2020 December 2020

18 CalWIN County Conversion Test/CDT Support October 2020 March 2021

39 C-IV County Converted Data Test November 2020 February 2021

39 C-IV County Install LMS, Load Courses, Test Reports December 2020 May 2021

39 C-IV County Conversion Mock Conversions January 2021 June 2021

39 C-IV County User Acceptance Test (UAT) February 2021 June 2021

State Interface Testing April 2021 May 2021

39 C-IV County Interface Testing April 2021 May 2021

18 CalWIN County Conversion Mock Conversions April 2021 September 2021

39 C-IV County Batch Performance Testing May 2021 May 2021

39 C-IV County State Report County Support May 2021 September 2021

18 CalWIN County UAT May 2021 September 2021

39 C-IV County Training Support June 2021 July 2021

39 C-IV County Go-live July 2021 July 2021






39 C-IV County Implementation Support July 2021 September 2021

18 CalWIN County Interface Testing July 2021 June 2022

18 CalWIN County Batch Performance Testing August 2021 April 2022

18 CalWIN County State Report County Support August 2021 December 2022

18 CalWIN County Go-live October 2021 October 2022

CalSAWS Implementation Complete in all 58 Counties October 2022 October 2022

CalSAWS 6-Month Stabilization Period November 2022 April 2023

Table 53 – Procurement Activity Schedule

CalSAWS Procurement Projects Schedule Estimated Start Date


CalSAWS QA PROCUREMENT

Prepare Request for Proposal August 2018 September 2018

Approve Request for Proposal October 2018 November 2018

Release Request for Proposal November 2018 November 2018

Proposal Prepare, Submit, Evaluate & Award December 2018 February 2019

Negotiate & Approve Contract March 2019 April 2019

QA Support for CalSAWS DD&I May 2019 October 2022

QA Support for CalSAWS M&O November 2022 March 2025

CalSAWS CONTACT CENTER IN THE CLOUD PROCUREMENT

Prepare Request for Proposal January 2019 March 2019

Approve Request for Proposal April 2019 May 2019

Release Request for Proposal June 2019 June 2019

Proposal Prepare, Submit, Evaluate & Award June 2019 October 2019

Negotiate & Approve Contract November 2019 December 2019

Contract Approval January 2020 February 2020

CalSAWS Contact Center Setup, Development, Test & Implementation March 2020 October 2020

39 C-IV County Go-live July 2021 July 2021

18 CalWIN County Go-live October 2021 October 2022

CalSAWS Contact Center M&O November 2022 March 2025

CalSAWS CONSOLIDATED PORTAL/MOBILE APP PLANNING & PROCUREMENT




CalSAWS Procurement Projects Schedule Estimated Start Date


Consolidated Portal/Mobile App Planning & Procurement March 2019 February 2020

Consolidated Portal/Mobile App Design, Development & Implementation March 2020 July 2021

CalSAWS Portal/Mobile Eligibility Determination Go-live July 2021 July 2021

CalWIN OCM, TRAINING & IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT PROCUREMENT

Prepare Request for Proposal May 2019 June 2019

Approve Request for Proposal July 2019 August 2019

Release Request for Proposal September 2019 September 2019

Proposal Prepare, Submit, Evaluate & Award September 2019 December 2019

Negotiate Contract January 2020 February 2020

Contract Approval March 2020 April 2020

CalWIN Business Process Alignment, OCM, Training & Implementation Support May 2020 November 2022

CalSAWS 58-COUNTY M&O PROCUREMENT

Acquire & Contract with Procurement Vendor April 2020 December 2020

Requirement Analysis, Develop Request for Proposal & Draft Contract January 2021 July 2021

Approve Request for Proposal August 2021 October 2021

Release Request for Proposal November 2021 November 2021

Proposal Prepare, Submit, Evaluate & Prepare Vendor Selection Report November 2021 June 2022

Negotiate Contract July 2022 October 2022

Contract Approval November 2022 February 2023

Contingency March 2023 April 2023

Table 54 – Maintenance and Operations Activity Schedule



CalSAWS M&O

Maintenance and Operations Vendor Transition Period May 2023 April 2024

Maintenance and Operations (Assumes 7-Year Base Contract) May 2024 April 2031




10.0 PROPOSED BUDGETThe proposed CalSAWS budget is based on the analysis and estimates provided by an independent third-party contractor, the results of contract negotiations with the current CalACES contractor, and additional estimates developed for QA, IV&V and State staff. Key sources for the estimates include:

Deliverable 10, Final CalSAWS Report (Appendix K) CalSAWS D&I statement work, work plan, and cost schedules (Appendix L) Requirements gathering sessions conducted with the CalACES and CalWIN Counties during the period May through June 2018 County visits conducted with the CalWIN Counties during the period May through June 2018 Cost information provided by CDSS, DHCS, and OSI Cost information developed by the Consortium for QA and procurement activities

Although requirements associated with ancillary systems must still be processed through the 58-county governance process, the Consortium has assumed the costs will accommodate county operational decisions. The costs do not account for results of testing the current LRS application software in the AWS commercial cloud environment as part of the proof of concept. Any significant re-architecture has not been included within the scope, costs nor timeline.

10.1 CalSAWS Design, Development & Implementation This section details cost estimates for the design, development, and implementation of the CalSAWS system. The costs described in this section are identified by categories that correspond to the detailed financial worksheets included in the appendices, and further organized into the following subsections:

Personnel, including Consortium, County and State staff Contractor Services – DD&I for Core and Ancillaries Contact Center Portal and Mobile Change Management and Implementation Legal Support Facilities Administrative Services Hardware and Hardware Maintenance Software and Software Maintenance Production and Operations Training Travel




10.1.1 Personnel

The CalSAWS project will require dedicated resources from the Consortium, counties, and State.

10.1.1.1 CONSORTIUM PERSONNELThe hourly rates for consortium personnel are based on the salary benchmarks identified the independent third-party vendor assessment, and actual rates. The rates were assigned to the specific positions identified for the CalSAWS project team described in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement. The consortium personnel costs account for 178 FTEs during DD&I, which includes 65 leveraged staff and 12 training staff. Training personnel costs are described in Section 10.1.12.

Table 55 - Consortium Personnel Details

Consortium Personnel NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL

(ROUNDED)Management & Administration Executive Director 1 $160.00 5,373.27 $859,723 Chief Deputy Director 1 LeveragedExecutive Assistant 2 $48.08 10,746.84 $516,708 Management & Administration Total $1,376,431 Project Management Office PMO Director 1 $139.78 5,373.22 $751,068 Fiscal and Contract Manager 1 $107.00 5,373.14 $574,926 Fiscal Analyst 4 LeveragedFiscal Analyst 4 $81.00 21,493.33 $1,740,960 Contract Analyst 1 LeveragedContract Analyst 1 $81.00 5,373.33 $435,240 PMO Lead 1 $107.00 5,373.14 $574,926 PMO Analyst 1 $94.00 5,373.22 $505,083 Procurement Manager 1 $107.00 5,373.14 $574,926 Procurement Analyst 2 $81.00 10,746.67 $870,480 Project Management Office Total $6,027,609 Customer Engagement Customer Engagement Director 1 $139.78 5,373.22 $751,068 Customer Engagement Manager 2 $117.18 10,746.56 $1,259,282 Regional Manager (C-IV and CalWIN) 11 LeveragedRegional Manager (LA County) 4 $96.59 21,492.99 $2,076,008 Regional Manager 3 $96.59 12,999.79 $1,255,650 Change Management Leads 2 $96.59 8,666.53 $837,100





(ROUNDED)Implementation Lead 1 $117.18 5,893.28 $690,574 Implementation Coordinator 3 $96.59 17,679.72 $1,707,684 Implementation Coordinator 6 $96.59 20,799.67 $2,009,040 Implementation Coordinator 8 $96.59 20,799.67 $2,009,040 Customer Engagement Total $12,595,446 Technical & Operations Technical & Operations Director 1 $139.78 5,373.22 $751,068 Cloud Manager 1 $116.49 5,373.17 $625,921 Cloud Analyst 4 $116.49 21,492.69 $2,503,684 Technical & Operations Manager 1 $116.49 5,373.17 $625,921 Technical Analyst 11 LeveragedTechnical Analyst 6 $116.49 32,239.04 $3,755,526 System Performance Manager 1 $116.49 4,853.19 $565,348 Conversion Lead 1 $93.71 8,319.97 $779,664 Conversion Analyst 2 $63.76 16,640.40 $1,060,992 Conversion Analyst 4 $63.76 31,894.10 $2,033,568 Conversion Analyst 6 $63.76 38,480.93 $2,453,544 Technical & Operations Total $15,155,236 Policy/Design/Governance Policy/Design/Governance Director 1 $139.78 5,373.22 $751,068 Policy Manager 1 $107.07 5,373.10 $575,298 Policy Analyst 4 LeveragedDesign Manager 1 $107.07 5,373.10 $575,298 Product Owner 19 LeveragedProduct Owner 6 $71.21 32,239.83 $2,295,798 Policy/Design/Governance Total $4,197,462 Application Development & Test Application Dev & Test Director 1 $139.78 5,373.22 $751,068 Development Manager 1 $107.07 5,373.10 $575,298 Business Analyst 11 LeveragedBusiness Analyst 5 $71.21 26,866.52 $1,913,165 Test Manager 1 $107.07 4,333.15 $463,950 Tester 6 $71.21 25,999.86 $1,851,450 Tester 6 $71.21 19,759.89 $1,407,102 Application Dev & Test Total $6,962,033 Release Management Release Manager 1 Leveraged





(ROUNDED)Release Coordinator 2 LeveragedRelease Management Total $0

Consortium Personnel Total $46,314,217

Table 56 – Consortium Personnel SFY

Consortium Personnel TOTAL SFY

2018/19(6 Months)

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

(4 Months)TOTAL

September 2018 IAPD $5,818,389 $15,338,214 $16,806,528 $6,459,224 $1,891,862 $46,314,217 Total $5,818,389 $15,338,214 $16,806,528 $6,459,224 $1,891,862 $46,314,217

Table 57 – Consortium Personnel FFY

Consortium Personnel TOTAL FFY

2019(9 Months)

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

(1 Month)TOTAL

September 2018 IAPD $9,286,848 $15,970,935 $15,080,444 $5,445,504 $530,486 $46,314,217 Total $9,286,848 $15,970,935 $15,080,444 $5,445,504 $530,486 $46,314,217

10.1.1.2 COUNTY STAFF

10.1.1.2.1 County Staff for Manual Data Cleansing ActivitiesAs part of Implementation, the counties will be required to perform manual conversion of cases. To develop cost estimates for the manual data cleansing activities, the independent third-party vendor completed and compiled research and referenced the LEADER to LRS case. The key takeaways from the analysis and the specific calculations for determining manual data cleansing costs for CalACES and CalWIN are described in the following figure.


*Hours are based on 173.33 per month



Manual Cleansing Estimation

CalACES CalWIN

1. CalWIN data will require more transformation & hence will have greater opportunity for initial improvement

2. Reduced by GA/GR caseload of approximately 0.74%3. Assumes $69.95 USD/h, calculated at $80 / Hour for CalFresh/CalWORKs cases (33%) and

$65 / Hour for Medi-Cal cases (67%)

3,755,339 Active Cases

4-8% Optimized ratio for aligned systems

225,320 Potential data conflict

25% pre rollout remediation

168,990 (A) General Failure Case Hours

3,463,000 Active Cases

12-18% inline with LEADER to LRS for raw mismatches

554,080 Potential data conflict

35%1 pre rollout remediation

360,152 (B) General Failure Case Hours

General Failure ScenariosGeneral Failure Scenarios

529,142 Total Case Hours (A) + (B)

$ 69.95 Effective EW Rate3

1% Additional for Critical cases e.g. person data conflict, image cleanup

1% Additional for Critical cases

1 hr Effort estimate 1 hr Effort estimate

$ 36.7 M Funded Manual Cleanup

525,226 After GA/GR Reduction2

Reference Case -LEADER to LRS

▪ LEADER to LRS is technically comparable to the CalWIN to CalSAWS

▪ The success rate materially improved throughout the lifecycle of the waves

▪ Many of the identified issues could have been resolved through further ETL testing & refinement

Figure 31 – Manual Data Cleansing Estimates

The table below includes the manual conversion costs for county staff by consortia.




Table 58 - County Staff Manual Conversion

County Staff – Manual Data Cleansing NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL (ROUNDED)

CalACES County Staff Variable $69.95 167,735.98 $11,733,132 CalWIN County Staff Variable $69.95 357,480.00 $25,005,726 Manual Data Cleansing Total $36,738,858

10.1.1.2.2 County Staff for Ancillary ActivitiesThe design, development of ancillaries will require county staff to manage the activities, modify business intelligence reports maintained in county systems, integrate with central county data extracts (including audit logs), retrofit county systems for county data extracts, conduct system test, and provide production support. The costs are based on the independent third-party analysis.

Table 59 - County Staff Ancillaries

County Staff - Ancillaries NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL

CalACES County Staff Variable $100.00 93,657.00 $9,365,700 CalWIN County Staff Variable $100.00 87,671.00 $8,767,100 Ancillaries Total $18,132,800

Table 60 - County Staff SFY

County Staff - Manual Data Cleansing

TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23 TOTAL

September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $10,755,371 $12,091,417 $13,892,070 $36,738,858 Total $0 $0 $10,755,371 $12,091,417 $13,892,070 $36,738,858

County Staff - Ancillaries TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $0 $12,466,300 $5,666,500 $0 $0 $18,132,800 Total $0 $12,466,300 $5,666,500 $0 $0 $18,132,800

Total $0 $12,466,300 $16,421,871 $12,091,417 $13,892,070 $54,871,658




Table 61 - County Staff FFY

County Staff - Manual Data Cleansing

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023 TOTAL

September 2018 IAPD $0 $1,955,522 $9,777,610 $15,281,277 $9,724,449 $36,738,858 Total $0 $1,955,522 $9,777,610 $15,281,277 $9,724,449 $36,738,858

County Staff - Ancillaries TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $2,266,600 $13,599,600 $2,266,600 $0 $0 $18,132,800 Total $2,266,600 $13,599,600 $2,266,600 $0 $0 $18,132,800

Total $2,266,600 $15,555,122 $12,044,210 $15,281,277 $9,724,449 $54,871,658

10.1.1.3 STATE PERSONNEL

The State oversight agencies will be involved throughout the life cycle of the CalSAWS project in achieving the State’s single SAWS system strategy. DHCS and CDSS have committed 16 FTE resources, and OSI will provide two (2) resources in support of the State’s oversight role. The State’s involvement in the CalSAWS project will continue to help ensure federal and state statutory compliance to California’s public assistance programs. The specific roles and responsibilities for these resources are presented in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement. The detailed associated costs are provided below.

Table 62 - State Personnel Cost Detail

State Personnel NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL (ROUNDED)

CDSS - Year 1 Staff Services Manager I Specialist 4 $68.76 8,319.84 $572,072 Staff Services Manager II 1 $76.93 2,079.96 $160,011 Information Technology Specialist I 1 $83.18 2,079.96 $173,011

CDSS - Year 2 Staff Services Manager I Specialist 4 $64.43 24,959.52 $1,608,142 Staff Services Manager II 1 $70.20 6,239.88 $438,040 Information Technology Specialist I 1 $76.92 6,239.88 $479,972

DHCS Staff Services Manager I 1 $60.46 8,319.84 $503,018 Associate Governmental Program Analyst 3 $55.05 24,959.52 $1,374,022




State Personnel NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL (ROUNDED)

Information Technology Specialist I 3 $71.39 24,959.52 $1,781,860 Information Technology Specialist II 1 $76.15 8,319.84 $633,556

State Personnel Total $7,723,704


Table 63 - State Personnel Cost SFY

State Personnel TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $989,110 $1,946,678 $1,915,164 $1,915,168 $957,584 $7,723,704 Total $989,110 $1,946,678 $1,915,164 $1,915,168 $957,584 $7,723,704

Table 64 - State Personnel Cost FFY

State Personnel TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.2 Contractor Services – IV&V

The State oversight agencies will be involved throughout the life cycle of the CalSAWS project in achieving the State’s single SAWS system strategy. DHCS and CDSS have committed 16 FTE resources, and OSI will provide two (2) resources in support of the State’s oversight role. The State’s involvement in the CalSAWS project will continue to help ensure federal and state statutory compliance to California’s public assistance programs. The specific roles and responsibilities for these resources are presented in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement. The detailed associated costs are provided below.

Table 65 – IV&V Detail

IV&V Contractor NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL (ROUNDED)

IV&V Technical Consultant 1 $150.00 7,728.00 $1,159,200 IV&V Business Consultant 1 $150.00 7,728.00 $1,159,200 IV&V Contractor Total $2,318,400

*Hours are based on 168 per month




Table 66 – IV&V SFY

Contractor Services - IV&V Contractor

TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $302,400 $604,800 $604,800 $604,800 $201,600 $2,318,400 Total $302,400 $604,800 $604,800 $604,800 $201,600 $2,318,400

Table 67 – IV&V FFY

Contractor Services - IV&V Contractor

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.3 Contractor Services – QA

The Consortium will secure QA services to assist in assessing and evaluating the work products and deliverables prepared by the DD&I contractor as described in Section 6.2.8, Quality Assurance, and in Section 8.7, QA Contractor Team. QA cost estimates were not part of the independent analysis scope of work. The detailed costs are provided below, with hourly rates based on the C-IV QA contract rate card, which is comparable to the industry rates listed in the IT MSA contractors list.

Table 68 – QA Detail

Quality Assurance Contractor NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL

QA Project Manager 1 $215.00 4,368.00 $939,120 QA PMO Lead 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA PMO Analyst 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA Project Control Analyst 1 $104.00 4,368.00 $454,272 QA Functional Manager 1 $184.00 4,368.00 $803,712 QA Business Analyst 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA Business Analyst 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA Business Analyst 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA Conversion Analyst 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA Implementation Manager 1 $184.00 4,368.00 $803,712 QA Change Management/Implementation Analyst 2 $135.00 13,776.00 $1,859,760 QA Training/Implementation Analyst 1 $135.00 6,888.00 $929,880





QA Technical Manager 1 $209.00 4,368.00 $912,912 QA Technical Architect (Cloud) 1 $154.00 4,368.00 $672,672 QA Technical Specialist/Senior Analyst 1 $154.00 4,368.00 $672,672 QA Technical Analyst 1 $154.00 8,400.00 $1,293,600 QA Security Specialist 1 $154.00 4,368.00 $672,672 QA Testing Manager 1 $184.00 4,368.00 $803,712 QA UAT Manager 1 $135.00 4,368.00 $589,680 QA Independent Tester 3 $135.00 12,096.00 $1,632,960 QA Technical Analyst/Regression Tester 1 $135.00 4,200.00 $567,000 Quality Assurance Contractor Total $17,146,416


Table 69 – QA SFY

Contractor Services - Quality Assurance Contractor

TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $440,496 $7,449,120 $7,539,840 $1,376,760 $340,200 $17,146,416 Total $440,496 $7,449,120 $7,539,840 $1,376,760 $340,200 $17,146,416

Table 70 –QA FFY

Contractor Services - Quality Assurance Contractor

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $2,234,736 $7,539,840 $6,419,280 $816,480 $136,080 $17,146,416 Total $2,234,736 $7,539,840 $6,419,280 $816,480 $136,080 $17,146,416

10.1.4 Contractor Services – DD&I Core and Ancillary

DD&I contractor services for the core and ancillary systems include project management, application development, and conversion. The contractor training costs, including training services, hardware, hardware maintenance, software and software maintenance are addressed separately in Section 10.1.12, Training.

The costs are based on the estimates provided by an independent third-party contractor, and the negotiated costs with the System Integrator (Accenture) and the CalWIN Conversion Contractor (DXC). The draft amendment with Accenture’s detailed costs and scope of work is attached as Appendix L. Costs listed as “Other Contractor” are reserved for the remaining scope that will be negotiated in a




future acquisition. The following tables provide a breakdown of the negotiated costs and costs that are based on the independent analysis.

Table 71 – DD&I Contractor Services Details

Contractor Services - Project Management Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

System Integrator (Accenture) 91,942.00 $169.00 $15,538,198.00 CalWIN Conversion Contractor (DXC)* 2,569.16 $142.46 $366,003.00 Other Contractor 38,198.67 $190.00 $7,257,747.00 Total 132,709.83 $174.53 $23,161,948.00

Contractor Services - Application Development Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

System Integrator (Accenture) 293,085.00 $169.00 $49,531,365.00 Other Contractor 347,328.00 $190.00 $65,992,320.00 Total 640,413.00 $180.39 $115,523,685.00

Contractor Services - Conversion Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

System Integrator (Accenture) 171,033.00 $169.00 $28,904,577.00 CalWIN Conversion Contractor (DXC)* 47,285.27 $142.46 $6,736,260.00Other Contractor 5,032.00 $190.00 $956,080.00 Total 223,350.27 $163.85 $36,596,917.00

Combined Total 996,473.10 $176.02 $175,282,550.00

Note: Cost is rounded, which results in fractions to hours.

Table 72 – DD&I Contractor Services SFY

Contractor Services - Core & Ancillary

TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22



Table 73 – DD&I Contractor Services FFY




Contractor Services - Core & Ancillary

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.5 Contact Center Services

The selected contact center solution (the C-IV model) must be expanded to accommodate all 58 counties. The contractor services costs include hours for project management, provisioning of servers, installing software, configuring the IVR, creating automated contact center related tasks, data migration, system test, UAT support, conducting a multi-tenant pilot, implementation, and post cut-over support.


Contact Center Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

Project Management 4,172.00 $190.00 $792,680.00 Application Development 17,377.00 $190.00 $3,301,630.00 Conversion 10,547.00 $190.00 $2,003,930.00 Production & Operations 12,019.00 $190.00 $2,283,610.00 Total 44,115.00 $190.00 $8,381,850.00


Contact Center TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $0 $1,419,738 $4,904,966 $1,542,859 $514,287 $8,381,850 Total $0 $1,419,738 $4,904,966 $1,542,859 $514,287 $8,381,850





Contact Center TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $0 $2,484,541 $4,225,878 $1,542,859 $128,572 $8,381,850 Total $0 $2,484,541 $4,225,878 $1,542,859 $128,572 $8,381,850

10.1.6 Portal & Mobile Services

The YBN portal and C4Yourself mobile application must be updated to accommodate all 58 counties. The costs for contractor services include hours for design, development, testing, data migration and technical infrastructure. The contractor services associated with the portal and mobile development effort are summarized below, while hardware and software costs are included in Section 10.1.10 and change management and implementation activities are included in Section 10.1.7.


Portal & Mobile Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

Project Management 3,801 $190.00 $722,190 Application Development 11,230 $190.00 $2,133,700 Conversion 2,092 $190.00 $397,480 Production & Operations 110 $190.00 $20,900 Total 17,233 $190.00 $3,274,270


Portal & Mobile Summary TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22




Portal & Mobile Summary TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022






10.1.7 Change Management & Implementation Services

The counties will require change management and implementation services to assist in the transition to the CalSAWS business model and the supporting CalSAWS system. These services include organizational readiness assessments and preparation activities, transition to the new business model in terms of its new focus, operational goals, changing worker roles and responsibilities, local office processes and procedures, process and role gap analysis, development of change discussion guides and comprehensive county-specific plans to build change readiness and positive user acceptance.

Implementation services include planning preparation and execution activities related to the actual implementation of the CalSAWS system. This includes overall and county-specific implementation planning, readiness assessment, establishment of “go” and “no-go” implementation criteria and contingency plans, coordination of other implementation related activities including conversion, change management and training delivery, and providing support staff in the counties during and immediately following the implementation period.


Contractor Services - Change Management Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

System Integrator (Accenture) 5,576 $169.00 $942,344 Other Contractor 60,883 $190.00 $11,567,770Total 66,459 $188.24 $12,510,114

Contractor Services - Implementation Hours Average Hourly Rate Total Cost

System Integrator (Accenture) 35,872 $169.00 $6,062,368 Other Contractor 124,233 $190.00 $23,604,270 Total 160,105 $185.29 $29,666,638

Combined Total 226,564 $186.16 $42,176,752


Contractor Services - Change Management & Implementation

TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22







Contractor Services - Change Management & Implementation

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.8 Legal Support

The JPA will rely on the services of its legal counsel throughout the project life cycle. A high-level summary of the legal support costs is provided in the table below. The costs include legal support for both CalACES (full-time at 168 hours per month) and CalWIN during the first six months (part-time at 84 hours per month), and for CalSAWS at 168 hours per month thereafter. The hourly rate is based on the Consortium’s contract rate with Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard, who was selected through a competitive procurement by the Consortium. The number of hours is based on the expected level of effort associated with a multi-vendor development effort, and the expanded JPA which will include multiple coordination points with individual counties.

Table 83 - Legal Support Details

Legal Counsel FTEsHOURLY

RATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL

CalSAWS Legal Counsel (includes CalACES 1st six months) 1 $300.00 5,208.00 $1,562,400 WCDS Legal Counsel (1ST six months) 0.5 $300.00 504.00 $151,200 Legal Counsel Total $1,713,600

Table 84 - Legal Support SFY

Legal Counsel TOTAL SFY

2018/19(6 Months)

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

(1 Month) TOTAL SFY

2022/23 TOTAL

September 2018 IAPD $453,600 $604,800 $604,800 $50,400 $0 $1,713,600 Total $453,600 $604,800 $604,800 $50,400 $0 $1,713,600

Table 85 - Legal Support FFY

Legal Counsel TOTAL FFY

2019(9 Months)

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

(10 Months) TOTAL FFY

2022 TOTAL FFY

2023 TOTAL

September 2018 IAPD $604,800 $604,800 $504,000 $0 $0 $1,713,600 Total $604,800 $604,800 $504,000 $0 $0 $1,713,600




10.1.9 Facilities

The facilities costs include negotiated one-time charges for build-out of additional space required at the application development facility located in Rancho Cordova, California to support Consortium, State, QA, and contractor staff. Additionally, the costs include monthly recurring charges for rent/lease, utilities, furniture/fixtures, security, janitorial, maintenance, administration of web conference lines, and teleconferencing lines.

The facilities costs also include subsequent expansion required for additional resources needed to support application development of ancillary systems.

Table 86 – Facilities Details

Facilities - ADF Months Monthly Rate Total Cost

System Integrator (Accenture) 46.00 $155,603.00 $7,157,738 Other Contractor 31.00 $52,951.00 $1,641,481 Total $8,799,219

Table 87 - Facilities SFY

Facilities TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22



Table 88 - Facilities FFY

Facilities TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.10 Hardware & Software

The costs for hardware, software, and maintenance are based on known actual prices and estimates per the third-party independent analysis. The costs include database licenses, cloud subscription for the IaaS model, middleware licenses, workstations, and developer software. Imaging requires Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) for storage and instances, Kofax licenses, and Documentum. The Kofax licenses cost is assumed to be list desktop version price, and it is assumed Documentum development licenses will be covered by an enterprise agreement.




The Consortium requests permission to charge the full cost of equipment for CalSAWS at the time of the acquisition. The request is based on cost savings gained by eliminating interest fees for equipment.

The hardware, software, and maintenance costs are summarized the table below, followed by SFY and FFY summaries.

Table 89 - Hardware & Maintenance Details

Hardware & Maintenance TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


Developer Workstations $299,726 $231,548 $0 $0 $0 $531,274 Developer Monitors $94,171 $72,850 $0 $0 $0 $167,021 Developer Laptops $143,750 $0 $0 $0 $0 $143,750 Cloud Environments $18,456 $276,633 $806,539 $662,978 $217,842 $1,982,448 Imaging Infrastructure as a Service $0 $0 $413,950 $0 $0 $413,950 Total $556,103 $581,031 $1,220,489 $662,978 $217,842 $3,238,443

Table 90 - Software & Maintenance Details

Software & Maintenance TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


Developer Software Licenses & Support $353,917 $1,154,533 $271,276 $573,438 $0 $2,353,164 Imaging (Kofax & Documentum) $0 $0 $14,894,438 $8,020,082 $0 $22,914,520 Total $353,917 $1,154,533 $15,165,714 $8,593,520 $0 $25,267,684

Table 91 - Hardware, Software, & Maintenance SFY

Hardware TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $556,103 $581,031 $1,220,489 $662,978 $217,842 $3,238,443 Total $556,103 $581,031 $1,220,489 $662,978 $217,842 $3,238,443

Software TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $353,917 $1,154,533 $15,165,714 $8,593,520 $0 $25,267,684 Total $353,917 $1,154,533 $15,165,714 $8,593,520 $0 $25,267,684

Total $910,020 $1,735,564 $16,386,203 $9,256,498 $217,842 $28,506,127




Table 92 - Hardware, Software, & Maintenance FFY

Hardware TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $589,968 $1,148,359 $798,485 $628,039 $73,592 $3,238,443 Total $589,968 $1,148,359 $798,485 $628,039 $73,592 $3,238,443

Software TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $353,917 $8,601,752 $15,738,577 $573,438 $0 $25,267,684 Total $353,917 $8,601,752 $15,738,577 $573,438 $0 $25,267,684

Total $943,885 $9,750,111 $16,537,062 $1,201,477 $73,592 $28,506,127

10.1.11 Production & Operations

The production and operations costs are based on negotiated and estimated costs per the independent analysis for technical infrastructure services to operationalize the production and disaster recovery environments, provision test databases, develop the security specifications design, determine combined storage needs, develop the hardware specifications document, define the development/test/production software and patch installation process, design disaster recovery for new hardware, develop the network infrastructure design, set up development and test environments, complete deployment, and provide post cut-over support. The production and operations costs also include network charges.Table 93 – Technical Infrastructure & Network Details

Production & Operations - Technical Infrastructure Hours/Units Average Hourly Rate Total CostSystem Integrator (Accenture) 37,489.00 $169.00 $6,335,641 CalWIN Conversion Contractor (DXC)* 22,096.78 $142.46 $3,147,907 Other Contractor 528.07 $190.00 $100,333 Total 60,113.85 $159.43 $9,583,881

Production & Operations - Network Months Monthly Rate Total CostOther Contractor 45.00 $21,630.00 $973,350 Total 45.00 $21,630.00 $973,350

Combined Total $10,557,231

Note: Cost is rounded, which results in fractions to hours.




Table 94 - Production & Operations SFY

Production & Operations TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22



Table 95 - Production & Operations FFY

Production & Operations TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.12 Training

CalSAWS training activities require consortium personnel, contractor services, hardware and hardware maintenance, software and software maintenance, and travel.

Training was estimated by leveraging a benchmark-based approach to understand the effort associated with training as a percent of implementation effort, accounting for (i) a train-the-trainer approach, (ii) number of users to be trained, and (iii) hours of training needed. The consortium has negotiated training services with its existing contractor for the CalACES counties and will competitively procure training services for CalWIN along with change management and implementation services as described in Section 10.1.2.4, Change Management and Implementation. The costs for Training are provided in the tables that follow.

Table 96 Detailed Consortium Personnel Training

Consortium Personnel - Training NO. FTEs TOTAL HOURS* HOURLY

RATE TOTAL (ROUNDED)

Training Training Lead 1 7,799.92 $117.18 $913,995 Trainer 5 38,132.73 $96.59 $3,683,240 Trainer 6 24,959.60 $96.59 $2,410,848 Training Total $7,008,083

*Hours are based on 173.33 per month.




Table 97 - Contractor Services - Training

Contractor Services - Training Hours Rate Total CostSystem Integrator (Accenture) 19,568 $169.00 $3,306,992Other Contractor 72,217 $190.00 $13,721,230Total 91,785 $185.52 $17,028,222

Table 98 - Training Facilities

Training Facilities Months Monthly Rate Total CostFacilities 14 $340,090.00 $4,761,260 Total $4,761,260

Table 99 - Training Hardware & Software

Training Hardware & Software Total CostHardware & Hardware Maintenance $25,560 Software & Software Maintenance $1,222,404 Total $1,247,964

Table 100 - Training Travel Details

Training Travel Details # Months # Trips Per Month Rate TotalConsortium Training Team Training Leads 45 4 $1,489 $268,020 Training Leads and Coordinators 44 20 $1,489 $1,310,320 Training Leads and Coordinators 24 24 $1,489 $857,664 Training Development County Trainers and Coordinators 18 30 $969 $523,260 Training for Trainers & ILT County Trainers 16 100 $1,489 $2,382,400 Total $5,341,664




Table 101 - Training Travel

Training Travel TOTALTraining Lead & Coordinators $2,436,004 Training Development $523,260 Training for Trainers & ILT $2,382,400 Total $5,341,664

Table 102 - Training SFY

Training TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


Training - Consortium Personnel $436,395 $1,248,252 $2,051,868 $2,453,676 $817,892 $7,008,083 Contractor Services - Training $0 $4,936,468 $11,761,055 $310,857 $19,842 $17,028,222 Training Facilities $0 $680,180 $4,081,080 $0 $0 $4,761,260 Training Hardware $0 $0 $25,560 $0 $0 $25,560 Training Software $0 $0 $611,202 $611,202 $0 $1,222,404 Training Travel $148,900 $632,322 $1,183,390 $2,644,464 $732,588 $5,341,664 Total $585,295 $7,497,222 $19,714,155 $6,020,199 $1,570,322 $35,387,193

Table 103 - Training FFY

Training TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


Training - Consortium Personnel $748,458 $1,248,252 $2,353,224 $2,453,676 $204,473 $7,008,083 Contractor Services - Training $0 $7,876,731 $8,820,792 $310,857 $19,842 $17,028,222 Training Facilities $0 $1,700,450 $3,060,810 $0 $0 $4,761,260 Training Hardware $0 $0 $25,560 $0 $0 $25,560 Training Software $0 $0 $1,222,404 $0 $0 $1,222,404 Training Travel $256,108 $719,532 $1,650,088 $2,644,464 $71,472 $5,341,664 Total $1,004,566 $11,544,965 $17,132,878 $5,408,997 $295,787 $35,387,193

10.1.13 Travel

Project and county staff will be required to travel to/from worksites located in Rancho Cordova, Norwalk and Roseville. While team members will be utilizing teleconferencing and web-based collaboration tools, in-person meetings will need to be conducted for design sessions, UAT. The staff assigned to the project will follow the travel policies established by their respective counties of employment. The




sections below describe each travel type and include the estimated costs.

The estimated travel rates include the following:

Table 104 – Travel Rates

Travel Maximum Rates

Weekly Rate(4 Nights/5 Days 1 Night/1 Day 2 Nights/3 Days

Lodging Average Rate Per Night1 $151.00 $604.00 $151.00 $302.00 Lodging Rate Per Night (Los Angeles area) $173.00 Lodging Rate Per Night (Sacramento area) $128.00 Meals & Incidentals Per Day (both LA & SAC)1 $64.00 $320.00 $64.00 $192.00 Breakfast $15.00 Lunch $16.00 Dinner $28.00 Incidentals (includes tips) $5.00 Airfare Average Roundtrip (Rounded)2 $282.00 $282.00 $282.00 $282.00 Sacramento to Orange County $343.00 Ontario to Sacramento $373.00 San Diego to Sacramento $268.00 San Francisco to LAX $145.00 Rental Car Average Daily Rate (Rounded)3 $45.00 $225.00 $90.00 $135.00 Sacramento Area $45.00 Los Angeles Area $45.00 Mileage4 $58.00 $58.00 $58.00 $58.00 Average Mileage to Airport (Round Trip 53 miles) $58.00

Total Cost Per Trip per Week $1,489.00 $645.00 $969.00

The following table identifies the expectations for consortium personnel travel by team, including the number of months and number of trips per month by position type. Trips may vary in duration and number based on need.


� ¹ Rates based on GSA.gov� ² Rates based on average of North to South and South to North trips using SWA.com rates� ³ Rental Car rates based on sample from LA County travel rates through Enterprise for standard-size vehicle (without taxes)� 4 Rates based on a sampling of counties' average mileage to airport



Table 105 – Consortium Travel Details by Team

Consortium Travel Details # Months # Trips Per Month Monthly Rate TotalManagement & Administration Director 31 1 $1,489 $46,159 Project Management Office Director/Managers 31 4 $1,489 $184,636 Customer Engagement Director/Managers 31 11 $4,467 $1,523,247 Regional Managers 25 5 $4,467 $558,375 Implementation Lead/Coordinators 34 4 $5,956 $810,016 Implementation Lead/Coordinators 20 6 $5,956 $714,720 Implementation Lead/Coordinators 15 8 $5,956 $714,720 Technical & Operations Director/Managers 31 3 $1,489 $138,477 Manager 28 1 $1,489 $41,692 Conversion Lead/Analysts 48 3 $5,956 $857,664 Conversion Lead/Analysts 46 4 $5,956 $1,095,904 Policy/Design/Governance Director/Managers 31 3 $1,489 $138,477 Application Development & Test Director/Managers 31 2 $1,489 $92,318 Manager 25 1 $1,489 $37,225 Analysts (All Teams - Local Travel) 31 25 $645 $499,875 Total $7,453,505

Table 106 – County Travel Details by Type

County Travel Details # Months # Trips Per Month Rate TotalDesign Sessions County Participants 30 36 $1,489 $1,608,120 User Acceptance Test County Participants 5 200 $1,489 $1,489,000 JPA General Membership County Directors 3 58 $645 $112,230 Strategic Planning County Directors & Designees 2 70 $969 $135,660 Project Steering Committee




County Deputy Directors 25 12 $645 $193,500 Total $3,538,510

Table 107 - Travel Costs by FY and Team

DD&I Project Staff Travel TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


Management & Administration $8,934 $17,868 $17,868 $1,489 $0 $46,159 Project Management Office $35,736 $71,472 $71,472 $5,956 $0 $184,636 Customer Engagement $294,822 $1,000,608 $1,286,496 $1,310,320 $428,832 $4,321,078 Technical & Operations $281,421 $571,776 $571,776 $506,260 $202,504 $2,133,737 Policy/Design/Governance $26,802 $53,604 $53,604 $4,467 $0 $138,477 Application Development & Test $114,618 $247,104 $247,104 $20,592 $0 $629,418 Total $762,333 $1,962,432 $2,248,320 $1,849,084 $631,336 $7,453,505

DD&I County Staff Travel TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


Design Sessions $357,360 $1,072,080 $178,680 $0 $0 $1,608,120 User Acceptance Test $0 $0 $595,600 $893,400 $0 $1,489,000 JPA General Membership $37,410 $37,410 $37,410 $0 $0 $112,230 Project Steering Committee $0 $92,880 $92,880 $7,740 $0 $193,500 Annual Strategic Planning Conference $0 $67,830 $67,830 $0 $0 $135,660 Total $394,770 $1,270,200 $972,400 $901,140 $0 $3,538,510

Total $1,157,103 $3,232,632 $3,220,720 $2,750,224 $631,336 $10,992,015

Table 108 - Travel SFY

DD&I Travel TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22



Table 109 - Travel FFY




DD&I Travel TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.1.14 DD&I Procurement

The Consortium will conduct multiple procurements related to DD&I between January 2019 and December 2020, including a continuation of the QA procurement. In addition, procurements will be conducted for CalWIN Training, Change Management and Implementation Support, the Statewide Portal and Mobile Application and other ancillary systems. As a result, the Consortium must augment its consortium personnel with subject matter experts.

10.1.14.1 PROCUREMENT CONSORTIUM PERSONNELThe costs for staff are based on actual rates for the expected resources, and the staff loading plan described in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement.

Table 110 – Procurement Personnel Details

Procurement - Consortium Personnel HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL (ROUNDED)

Project Manager (Leveraged Position) $0.00 - $0 Functional Lead (Leveraged Position) $0.00 - $0 Tech/Ops Support (Leveraged Position) $0.00 - $0 Procurement Consultant $185.00 12,096.00 $2,237,760 Procurement Total $2,237,760

*Hours are based on 168 for consultants per month; variances may result due to rounding

Table 111 – DD&I Procurement SFY

Consortium Personnel - Procurement Team

TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $559,440 $1,118,880 $559,440 $0 $0 $2,237,760 Total $559,440 $1,118,880 $559,440 $0 $0 $2,237,760

Table 112 - Procurement FFY





TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $839,160 $1,118,880 $279,720 $0 $0 $2,237,760 Total $839,160 $1,118,880 $279,720 $0 $0 $2,237,760

10.1.15 Summary of CalSAWS Design, Development & Implementation Costs

Table 113 – DD&I Cost Summary SFY

IAPD Line Items SFY 2018/19 SFY 2019/20 SFY 2020/21 SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 TotalDD&I Personnel

Consortium DD&I $5,818,389 $15,338,214 $16,806,528 $6,459,224 $1,891,862 $46,314,217 Consortium Procurement $559,440 $1,118,880 $559,440 $0 $0 $2,237,760 County $0 $12,466,300 $16,421,871 $12,091,417 $13,892,070 $54,871,658 State $989,110 $1,946,678 $1,915,164 $1,915,168 $957,584 $7,723,704

Contractor Services DD&I Contractor $14,446,076 $97,271,810 $70,081,373 $34,953,651 $10,058,002 $226,810,912 QA Contractor $440,496 $7,449,120 $7,539,840 $1,376,760 $340,200 $17,146,416 IV&V Contractor $302,400 $604,800 $604,800 $604,800 $201,600 $2,318,400 Legal Counsel $453,600 $604,800 $604,800 $50,400 $0 $1,713,600 Facilities $2,694,950 $1,563,227 $1,637,232 $1,637,235 $1,266,575 $8,799,219 Hardware $556,103 $581,031 $1,220,489 $662,978 $217,842 $3,238,443 Software $353,917 $1,154,533 $15,165,714 $8,593,520 $0 $25,267,684 Production & Operations $2,541,310 $4,661,780 $1,769,458 $2,966,912 $922,281 $12,861,741 Consortium Travel $1,157,103 $3,232,632 $3,220,720 $2,750,224 $631,336 $10,992,015 Training Consortium Training Personnel $436,395 $1,248,252 $2,051,868 $2,453,676 $817,892 $7,008,083 DD&I Contractor Training Services $0 $4,936,468 $11,761,055 $310,857 $19,842 $17,028,222 Training Facilities $0 $680,180 $4,081,080 $0 $0 $4,761,260 Training Hardware $0 $0 $25,560 $0 $0 $25,560




IAPD Line Items SFY 2018/19 SFY 2019/20 SFY 2020/21 SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 Total Training Software $0 $0 $611,202 $611,202 $0 $1,222,404 Consortium Training Travel $148,900 $632,322 $1,183,390 $2,644,464 $732,588 $5,341,664

Total $30,898,189 $155,491,027 $157,261,584 $80,082,488 $31,949,674 $455,682,962

Table 114 – DD&I Cost Summary FFY

IAPD Line Items FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFY 2023 TotalDD&I Personnel

Consortium DD&I $9,286,848 $15,970,935 $15,080,444 $5,445,504 $530,486 $46,314,217 Consortium Procurement $839,160 $1,118,880 $279,720 $0 $0 $2,237,760 County $2,266,600 $15,555,122 $12,044,210 $15,281,277 $9,724,449 $54,871,658 State $1,483,660 $1,930,918 $1,915,166 $1,915,168 $478,792 $7,723,704

Contractor Services DD&I Contractor $30,474,298 $106,995,900 $50,059,131 $34,476,208 $4,805,375 $226,810,912 Quality Assurance Contractor $2,234,736 $7,539,840 $6,419,280 $816,480 $136,080 $17,146,416 IV&V Contractor $453,600 $604,800 $604,800 $604,800 $50,400 $2,318,400

Legal Counsel $604,800 $604,800 $504,000 $0 $0 $1,713,600 Facilities $3,400,910 $1,266,575 $1,637,232 $1,929,433 $565,069 $8,799,219 Hardware $589,968 $1,148,359 $798,485 $628,039 $73,592 $3,238,443 Software $353,917 $8,601,752 $15,738,577 $573,438 $0 $25,267,684 Production & Operations $6,358,771 $1,125,758 $2,080,859 $2,966,913 $329,440 $12,861,741 Consortium Travel $1,903,215 $3,214,764 $3,902,600 $1,786,800 $184,636 $10,992,015 Training Consortium Training Personnel $748,458 $1,248,252 $2,353,224 $2,453,676 $204,473 $7,008,083 DD&I Contractor Training Services $0 $7,876,731 $8,820,792 $310,857 $19,842 $17,028,222 Training Facilities $0 $1,700,450 $3,060,810 $0 $0 $4,761,260 Training Hardware $0 $0 $25,560 $0 $0 $25,560 Training Software $0 $0 $1,222,404 $0 $0 $1,222,404 Consortium Training Travel $256,108 $719,532 $1,650,088 $2,644,464 $71,472 $5,341,664




IAPD Line Items FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFY 2023 TotalTotal $61,255,049 $177,223,368 $128,197,382 $71,833,057 $17,174,106 $455,682,962

10.2 CalSAWS Maintenance & OperationsMaintenance and operations will begin with LA County’s go live in October 2020. The budget term for the CalSAWS IAPD continues through June 2026 for a 68-month M&O period.

10.2.1 Consortium Personnel

The hourly rates for consortium personnel are based on the salary benchmarks identified by the independent third-party vendor, and actual rates. It is important to note that the cost estimates used for the analysis relied on average market rates and an assumed pyramid for experience levels and resource categories (which included entry-level at lower costs and 30% benefits) resulting in a cost range between $22M and $26M and FTE counts of 147 to 162. The Consortium has estimated costs for each position described in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement, and assumed an increased ratio of experienced resources due to higher benefits between 40-60%, however the Consortium has assumed 138 FTEs, which results in an annual cost of $25.6M.

M&O for consortium personnel begins immediately following the C-IV counties’ go-live in August 2021, which is the point at which decommissioning begins for C-IV and will be complete for LRS. The costs include 59 months of consortium personnel through the budget term of June 2026.

Table 115 – M&O Consortium Personnel Details

CalSAWS M&O NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL (ROUNDED)

Management & Administration Executive Director 1 $160.00 10,226.54 $1,636,247 Chief Deputy Director 1 $139.78 10,226.44 $1,429,452 Executive Assistant 2 $48.08 20,453.66 $983,412 Management & Administration Total $4,049,111 Project Management Office PMO Director 1 $139.78 10,226.44 $1,429,452 Fiscal & Contract Manager 1 $107.00 10,226.30 $1,094,214 Fiscal Analyst 8 $81.00 81,813.33 $6,626,880 Contract Analyst 2 $81.00 20,453.33 $1,656,720





PMO Lead 1 $107.00 10,226.30 $1,094,214 PMO Analyst 5 $94.00 51,132.29 $4,806,435 Procurement Manager 1 $107.00 10,226.30 $1,094,214 Procurement Analyst 2 $81.00 20,453.33 $1,656,720 Project Management Office Total $19,458,849 Customer Engagement Customer Engagement Director 1 $139.78 10,226.44 $1,429,452 Customer Engagement Manager 2 $117.18 20,453.13 $2,396,698 Regional Manager 18 $96.59 184,077.07 $17,780,004 Customer Engagement Total $21,606,154 Technical & Operations Technical & Operations Director 1 $139.78 10,226.44 $1,429,452 Cloud Manager 1 $116.49 10,226.36 $1,191,269 Cloud Analyst 4 $116.49 40,905.45 $4,765,076 Help Desk Manager 1 $93.71 10,226.62 $958,337 Help Desk Analyst 3 $63.76 30,680.74 $1,956,204 Technical & Operations Manager 1 $116.49 10,226.36 $1,191,269 Technical Analyst 14 $116.49 163,621.80 $19,060,304 System Performance Manager 1 $116.49 10,226.36 $1,191,269 Project IT Manager 1 $93.71 10,226.62 $958,337 System Admin/Tech Support 14 $63.76 122,722.96 $7,824,816

Technical & Operations Total $40,526,333

Policy/Design/Governance Policy/Design/Governance Director 1 $139.78 10,226.44 $1,429,452 Policy Manager 1 $107.07 10,226.23 $1,094,922 Policy Analyst 4 $71.21 40,906.45 $2,912,948 Design Manager 1 $107.07 10,226.23 $1,094,922 Product Owner 16 $71.21 163,625.78 $11,651,792

Policy/Design/Governance Total $18,184,036

Application Development & Test





Application Dev & Test Director 1 $139.78 10,226.44 $1,429,452 Development Manager 1 $107.07 10,226.23 $1,094,922 Business Analyst 10 $71.21 102,266.11 $7,282,370 Test Manager 1 $107.07 10,226.23 $1,094,922 Tester 12 $71.21 122,719.34 $8,738,844 Release Manager 1 $107.07 10,226.23 $1,094,922 Release Coordinator 2 $71.21 20,453.22 $1,456,474

Application Development & Test Total $22,191,906

Consortium Personnel Total $126,016,389

Average Annual Consortium Personnel Total $25,630,452


Table 116 – M&O Consortium Personnel SFY

Consortium Personnel TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 117 – M&O Consortium Personnel FFY

Consortium Personnel TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025


September 2018 IAPD $4,271,742 $25,630,452 $25,630,452 $25,630,452 $25,630,452 $19,222,839 $126,016,389 Total $4,271,742 $25,630,452 $25,630,452 $25,630,452 $25,630,452 $19,222,839 $126,016,389

10.2.2 County Staff

The county staff costs include county-specific resources to support first level help desk for county users and system administration that have been carried forward as-is, without analysis.




Table 118 – M&O County Staff Details

County Staff NO. FTEs HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL (ROUNDED)

CalWIN County L1/L2 Help Desk Variable $31.00 1,782,592.00 $55,260,352 CalWIN County Support Staff Variable $33.33 294,037.80 $9,800,280 County Staff Total $65,060,632 Average Annual County Staff Total $13,941,564

Table 119 – County Staff SFY

County Staff TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25


September 2018 IAPD $0 $9,294,376 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $65,060,632 Total $0 $9,294,376 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $65,060,632

Table 120 – County Staff FFY

County Staff TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025


September 2018 IAPD $0 $12,779,767 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $10,456,173 $65,060,632 Total $0 $12,779,767 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $10,456,173 $65,060,632

10.2.3 Application Maintenance

The methodology for estimating the steady-state M&O application maintenance costs is based on the following methodology as documented in the Deliverable 10 (Appendix K):

Baseline current spend for C-IV, LRS and CalWIN

Estimate complexity overhead factor for CalSAWS

Determine future-state policy hours

Extrapolate maintenance needs for 58 counties

Add business process enablement, optimization and innovation hours

A projected total of 8,775 hours per month is devoted to policy-related changes. This considers the effort for clearing existing backlog and address all policy-related changes in the future. A complexity overhead of 36% was applied to account for impact of system




consolidation on various modules including a bulkier code base, statewide configurability, migration of ancillaries to core, and new interfaces to support centrally managed ancillaries. A total monthly estimate of 15,075 hours for application maintenance includes:

8,775 Policy Hours

2,900 Application Maintenance Hours

3,400 Business Process Enablement, Optimization, and Innovation Hours

15,075 Total Hours

The estimated hours are based on the top end of a range of hours identified during the analysis. The Consortium expects to utilize the maximum projected hours due to the increased complexity and support of all 58 counties.

In addition, the eHIT interface between CalHEERS and the core system must be maintained. The approach to estimating the steady-state CalHEERS-related M&O cost involved using the LRS baseline as a starting point and then applying the appropriate scale factors. For CalHEERS-related application maintenance, the same complexity overhead was used to calculate 3,361 hours per month.

The following table reflects the estimated future steady-state M&O application maintenance costs based on a $160 hourly rate.

Table 121 – Application Maintenance Details

Contractor Services - Application Maintenance Hours Per Month Hourly Rate Monthly Total Annual TotalOngoing Policy, Maintenance & Business Enablement 15,075 $160 $2,412,000 $28,944,000 CalHEERS 3,361 $160 $537,760 $6,453,120 Combined Total 18,436 $35,397,120

Table 122 – Application Maintenance SFY

Contractor Services - Application Maintenance

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY

2023/24 TOTAL SFY

2024/25 TOTAL SFY

2025/26 TOTAL


Contractor Services - Application Maintenance - CalHEERS M&O

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY

2023/24 TOTAL SFY

2024/25 TOTAL SFY

2025/26 TOTAL


Total $20,648,320 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $197,633,920




Table 123 – Application Maintenance FFY

Contractor Services - Application Maintenance

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025



Contractor Services - Application Maintenance - CalHEERS M&O

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025



Combined Total $29,497,600 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $26,547,840 $197,633,920

10.2.4 Quality Assurance

The Consortium will secure QA services to assist in assessing and evaluating the work products and deliverables prepared by the M&O contractor as described in Section 6.2.8, Quality Assurance, and in Section 8.7, QA Contractor Team. The detailed cost estimates are provided below and are based on other contracts of similar size and scope. The rates used were based on the C-IV QA contract rate card, which is comparable to the industry rates listed in the IT MSA contractors list.

Table 124 - QA Details


QA Project Manager 1 215 9,744 $2,094,960 QA PMO Lead 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA PMO Analyst 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Project Control Analyst 1 104 9,744 $1,013,376 QA Functional Manager 1 184 9,744 $1,792,896 QA Business Analyst 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Business Analyst 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Business Analyst 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Technical Manager 1 209 9,744 $2,036,496 QA Technical Architect (Cloud) 1 154 9,744 $1,500,576





QA Technical Specialist/Sr Analyst 1 154 9,744 $1,500,576 QA Technical Analyst 1 154 9,744 $1,500,576 QA Security Specialist 1 154 9,744 $1,500,576 QA Testing Manager 1 184 9,744 $1,792,896 QA UAT Manager 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Independent Tester 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Independent Tester 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Independent Tester 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 QA Technical Analyst/Regression Tester 1 135 9,744 $1,315,440 Quality Assurance Contractor Total $27,887,328


Table 125 - QA SFY

Contractor Services - Quality Assurance TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 126 - QA FFY

Contractor Services - Quality Assurance

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025


September 2018 IAPD $480,816 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $4,327,344 $27,887,328 Total $480,816 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $4,327,344 $27,887,328

10.2.5 Legal Support

The JPA will continue to rely on the services of its legal counsel as part of ongoing operations. The costs are based the Consortium’s contract rate of $300/hour with Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard, who was selected through a competitive procurement by the Consortium. Legal counsel is estimated to be part-time at 84 hours per month once the project moves into M&O.




Table 127 - Legal SFY

Legal Counsel TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 128 - Legal FFY

Legal Counsel TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025


September 2018 IAPD $50,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $226,800 $1,486,800 Total $50,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $226,800 $1,486,800

10.2.6 Facilities

The Consortium will maintain facility space to support ongoing operations. The costs are based on the third-party independent assessment, and assume existing space will continue to be utilized. The costs do not include one-time charges for a future relocation.

Table 129 - Facilities SFY


TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 130 - Facilities FFY


TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025



10.2.7 Hardware & Hardware Maintenance

The costs for hardware and maintenance are based on estimates per the third-party independent analysis. The costs include cloud subscription for the Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) model, the fees include development, production and test environments. In addition, the costs include county-specific hardware and maintenance for local equipment such as servers and switches that have been carried forward from current M&O budgets without analysis.




The hardware and maintenance cost details are provided below, and then summarized by SFY and FFY.

Table 131 - Hardware & Maintenance Details

Hardware & Maintenance Average Annual Cost by Category

Cloud Environments $2,250,000 County-Specific (As-Is) $15,760,296 Imaging (IaaS) $849,168 Contact Center - Cov CA $818,976 Total $19,678,440

Table 132 - Hardware & Maintenance SFY


TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 133 – Hardware & Maintenance FFY

Hardware & Maintenance TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025



10.2.8 Software & Software Maintenance

The costs for software, and maintenance are based on estimates per the third-party independent analysis. The costs include database licenses and middleware licenses. Imaging requires Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) for storage and instances, Kofax licenses, and Documentum. The Kofax licenses cost is assumed to be list desktop version price, and it is assumed Documentum development licenses will be covered by an enterprise agreement. In addition, the costs include county-specific software and maintenance such as oracle and business objects licenses that have been carried forward from current M&O budgets without analysis.

The software and maintenance cost details, SFY and FFY summaries are provided below.

Table 134 - Software & Maintenance Details




Software & Maintenance Average Annual Cost by Category

Middleware, Database, Application Licenses $8,717,820 Helpdesk - L1/L2 Software $4,334,923 County-Specific (As-Is) $4,170,888 Helpdesk - L3 Software $78,060

Imaging (Kofax, Adobe Sign, Server Licenses) $10,685,740 Contact Center $11,631,961 Contact Center - Covered CA $273,660 Total $39,893,052

Table 135 - Software & Maintenance SFY


TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 136 – Software & Maintenance FFY

Software & Maintenance TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025



10.2.9 Production & Operations

Ongoing production and operations costs include ongoing WAN administration, network, and technical infrastructure services to support the core infrastructure and cloud hosting model, as well as ancillaries. In addition, level 3 help desk is included, and operations support for remote maintenance of managed workstations.

The annual costs are based on the independent analysis, as well as currently budgeted costs for managed counties and county-specific networks, which are being carried forward as-is, without analysis. The number of images is directly impacted by policy. The growth factor is based on the independent third-party assessment of the Sacramento County central print contract and the LRS contract.




Table 137 - Prod Ops Details

Production & Operations Average Annual Cost by Category

Core Infrastructure & Cloud Hosting $20,283,564 Technical Infrastructure Services (CalHEERS) $1,052,352 M&O Base WAN Admin $16,150,872 Ancillary Network $31,320 Level 3 Help Desk $5,283,816 Imaging $2,936,684 County Data Extract $564,054 Notifications $153,817 Contact Center $7,283,097 Contact Center - Covered CA $259,668 Help Desk L1/L2 $950,405 Notifications (Text Packages) $28,951 Managed Counties Other Support & Supplies (As-Is) $809,880 County-Specific Network (As-Is) $4,461,456 Otech (POP Counties, As-Is) $311,100 Central Print $16,212,276 Total $76,773,312

Table 138 - Prod Ops SFY

Production & Operations TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 139 – Prod Ops FFY

Production & Operations TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025






10.2.10 Travel

Travel will be required during ongoing operations for project and county staff to travel to and from the project sites for ongoing policy and committee meetings, governance meetings, and coordination with project team members across multiple locations. The annual cost estimate for travel is included in the table below, followed by SFY and FFY cost summaries.

Table 140 – M&O Travel SFY

Consortium Travel Details # Months # Trips Per Month

Monthly Rate Total

Management & Administration Director/Deputy Director 59 5 $1,489 $439,255 Project Management Office Director/Managers 59 4 $1,489 $351,404 Customer Engagement Director/Managers/Regional Managers 59 21 $4,467 $5,534,613 Technical & Operations Director/Managers 59 6 $1,489 $527,106 Policy/Design/Governance Director/Managers 59 3 $1,489 $263,553 Application Development & Test Director/Managers 59 4 $1,489 $351,404 Analysts (All Teams - Local Travel) 59 15 $645 $570,825 Total $8,038,160 Average Annual Travel Total $1,634,880

Table 141 – M&O Travel SFY

M&O Travel TOTAL SFY 2021/22

TOTAL SFY 2022/23

TOTAL SFY 2023/24

TOTAL SFY 2024/25



Table 142 – M&O Travel FFY




M&O Travel TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023

TOTAL FFY 2024

TOTAL FFY 2025


September 2018 IAPD $272,480 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,226,160 $8,038,160 Total $272,480 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,226,160 $8,038,160

10.2.11 M&O Procurement

The Consortium will conduct the largest procurement effort for CalSAWS M&O between January 2021 through February 2023. The Consortium must assign consortium personnel and legal support, as well as secure facility space, provision hardware and software for assigned staff, and accommodate travel for procurement-related meetings and activities.

In developing the CalSAWS M&O RFP, this procurement team will define requirements, a statement of work with tasks and deliverables, new Service Level Agreements and a new draft contract to support all 58 counties for an estimated 10-year duration. To estimate the costs, prior procurement efforts were assessed for comparison as listed below.

Table 143 – Prior Procurement Project Costs

Procurement Project Start Finish

Mid point Year

Duration (Months)

Average Consortium

FTEs

Average Vendor

FTEs

Average Total FTEs Cost

Value Today Based on Actual US Inflation

Original C-IV 1998 2001 1999 39 4 5 9 5,400,000$ 7,755,158$ LRS 2005 2012 2007 88 5 2 7 7,000,000$ 8,077,606$ ISAWS Migration 2006 2008 2007 24 3 6 9 4,900,000$ 5,654,324$ CalWIN M&O 2010 2015 2012 50 2.3 3.5 5.8 3,000,000$ 3,126,314$

Averages 50.3 3.6 4.1 7.7 5,075,000$ 6,153,351$

Note: Value Today is as of 2016

As another point of reference, the following table provides a comparison to the original 40-county CalACES M&O procurement effort that was approved by the State sponsoring agencies, but later removed at the request of the Federal sponsoring agencies. The total cost of this M&O Procurement request is lower than the previous request.




Table 144 – Comparison to Previous CalACES Procurement Estimate

Consortium Staff 2,151,926$ 2,236,797$ (84,871)$ Procurement Vendor 2,819,040$ 2,802,400$ 16,640$ Legal 378,000$ 780,000$ (402,000)$ Facilities 120,690$ 120,677$ 13$ Hardware/Software 47,175$ 46,775$ 400$ Travel 402,003$ 578,201$ (176,198)$ Total 5,918,834$ 6,564,850$ (646,016)$

Procurement IAPD Budget Line

CalSAWS M&O

Procurement Total

CalACES M&O Procurement

Total Variance

Note: Cost includes only the CalSAWS M&O procurement

Using the previous procurement estimates described above, adjustments were then applied to consider increased scope of the procurement, which will need to accommodate all 58-counties M&O plus ancillaries, as well as the additional time needed to coordinate across an expanded set of stakeholders. Finally, the Consortium’s ability to leverage resources was considered. The resulting procurement costs are described in the subsequent sections.

10.2.11.1 PROCUREMENT CONSORTIUM PERSONNELThe costs for consortium staff are based on actual rates for the expected resources, and the staff loading plan described in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement.

Table 145 – Procurement Personnel Details

Procurement - Consortium Personnel HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL (ROUNDED)

Project Manager (Leveraged Position) $0.00 - $0 Functional Lead (Leveraged Position) $0.00 - $0 Business Ops Lead $107.00 3,553.21 $380,193.00 Technical/Ops Lead $140.00 3,553.24 $497,453.00 Tech/Ops Support (Leveraged Position) $0.00 - $0 Procurement Consultant $185.00 6,888.00 $1,274,280 Procurement Total $2,151,926

*Hours are based on 173.33 per month for Consortium staff and 168 for consultants per month; variances may result due to rounding




Table 146 - Procurement SFY


TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $629,832 $1,259,664 $262,430 $2,151,926 Total $0 $0 $629,832 $1,259,664 $262,430 $2,151,926

Table 147 - Procurement FFY


TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.2.11.2 CONTRACTOR SERVICES - PROCUREMENTThe costs for consortium staff are based on actual rates for the expected resources, and the staff loading plan described in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement.

Table 148 – Contractor Services - Procurement Details

Contractor Services - Procurement HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS* TOTAL

Project Manager $190.00 3,360.00 $638,400 Procurement Lead $150.00 3,024.00 $453,600 Technical/Ops Lead $175.00 3,360.00 $588,000 Tech/Ops Support $150.00 2,856.00 $428,400 PMO/Fiscal Lead $150.00 3,024.00 $453,600 PMO/Admin Support $85.00 3,024.00 $257,040 Procurement Total $2,819,040


Table 149 – Contractor Services - Procurement SFY

Contractor Services - Procurement TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22






Table 150 – Contractor Services - Procurement FFY

Contractor Services - Procurement

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $1,335,600 $1,483,440 $0 $2,819,040 Total $0 $0 $1,335,600 $1,483,440 $0 $2,819,040

10.2.11.3 PROCUREMENT LEGAL SUPPORTAdditional part-time legal counsel will be required for the procurement activities. The costs are based on the Consortium’s contract rate with Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard, who was selected through a competitive procurement, as well as the staff loading plan described in Section 8.0, Personnel Resource Statement.

Table 151 – Procurement Legal Details

Procurement - Legal Counsel HOURLY RATE TOTAL HOURS TOTAL

Legal Counsel $300.00 1,260 $378,000 Procurement Total $378,000

Table 152 - Procurement Legal SFY

Legal Counsel TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $50,400 $226,800 $100,800 $378,000 Total $0 $0 $50,400 $226,800 $100,800 $378,000

Table 153 - Procurement Legal FFY

Legal Counsel TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.2.11.4 PROCUREMENT FACILITIESThe facility costs are based on averages from Loopnet.com for Sacramento Class B Office Space. Facility costs will be incurred beginning in December 2020 to set up for the M&O procurement team starting in January 2021 and will continue through February 2023 for a total of 27 months.




Table 154 - Procurement Facilities Details

CalSAWS M&O Procurement Office Space Costs Space

12 office spaces + 2 landing areas 1,200 Large Conference Room 500 Small Conference Room 144 Breakroom 120 Printer/Copy/Supply Room 120 Hallways, Foyer/Reception, etc. 470 Total Square Feet 2,554 Cost / Square Foot per Month $1.75 Monthly Cost (Rounded) $4,470 Number of Months 27 Total Cost $120,690

Table 155 - Procurement Facilities SFY


TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22



Table 156 - Procurement Facilities FFY


TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $44,700 $53,640 $22,350 $0 $120,690 Total $0 $0 $44,700 $53,640 $22,350 $0 $120,690

10.2.11.5 PROCUREMENT HARDWARE, SOFTWARE & MAINTENANCEThe Procurement Team will require equipment and support to execute day-to-day tasks. The costs include laptops, phones, software including data loss prevention software, and Microsoft Project and Visio for lead staff, as well as copier/printer costs.




Table 157 – Procurement HW/SW Details

Hardware, Software & Maintenance Details Quantity Unit Price Price Taxes Estimated Shipping

& HandlingTotal

(Rounded)Hardware Charges

HP 9470m Laptops for ADF (includes 3 Years Parts and Labor Next-Business-Day Onsite Warranty)

7 $1,400.00 $9,800.00 $857.50 $294.00 $10,951.00 RSA SecureID token 7 $50.98 $356.86 $31.23 $10.71 $399.00 Laptop Privacy Screens 7 $60.00 $420.00 $36.75 $12.60 $469.00 Cisco IP Phones 7 $303.80 $2,126.60 $186.08 $63.80 $2,376.00 Cisco IP Phone Power Transformer 7 $27.90 $195.30 $17.09 $5.86 $218.00 Cisco 7900 Series Transformer Power 7 $6.20 $43.40 $3.80 $1.30 $49.00 Cat6 Ethernet Patch Cables 28 $2.00 $56.00 $4.90 $1.68 $63.00 Printer 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,500.00 Hardware Support Charges Cisco IP Phones 7 $19.76 $138.32 $0.00 $0.00 $138.00 Cisco 8831 IP Conference Phone 7 $147.84 $1,034.88 $0.00 $0.00 $1,035.00 Copier 27 $400.00 $10,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $10,800.00 TOTAL $26,471.36 $1,137.35 $389.95 $27,998.00 Software Charges Serena PVCS Professional Licenses (includes 1 Year of Software Support) 3 $1,780.00 $5,340.00 $0.00 $0.00 $5,340.00 Cisco Call Manager 7 $123.53 $864.71 $0.00 $0.00 $865.00 Cisco Unity Connection 7 $44.12 $308.84 $0.00 $0.00 $309.00 SnagIT 7 $23.00 $161.00 $0.00 $0.00 $161.00 TextPad 7 $15.00 $105.00 $0.00 $0.00 $105.00 Symantec DLP Endpoint Prevent 11.6 Xplat 7 $29.63 $207.41 $0.00 $0.00 $207.00

Symantec DLP Network Monitor and Network Prevent7 $30.27 $211.89 $0.00 $0.00 $212.00

Symantec DLP Endpoint Discover 11.6 Xplat7 $20.08 $140.56 $0.00 $0.00 $141.00

Microsoft System Center Config Manager Client (SCCM)7 $35.85 $250.95 $0.00 $0.00 $251.00

Microsoft Windows Server Client Access License7 $22.00 $154.00 $0.00 $0.00 $154.00

Microsoft Office 2013 Standard 7 $255.00 $1,785.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,785.00




Hardware, Software & Maintenance Details Quantity Unit Price Price Taxes Estimated Shipping

& HandlingTotal

(Rounded)McAfee Complete Data Protection (includes 3 Years of Software Support) 7 $28.50 $199.50 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00

McAfee Deep Defender, Deep Command, and EndPoint Protection (includes 3 Years of Software Support)

7 $22.00 $154.00 $0.00 $0.00 $154.00 Microsoft Project 2013 7 $660.00 $4,620.00 $0.00 $0.00 $4,620.00 Microsoft Visio 2013 Pro 7 $340.00 $2,380.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,380.00 Software Support Charges Cisco Call Manager 7 $21.18 $148.26 $0.00 $0.00 $148.00 Cisco Unity Connection 7 $11.76 $82.32 $0.00 $0.00 $82.00 SnagIT 7 $5.16 $36.12 $0.00 $0.00 $36.00 Symantec DLP Endpoint Prevent 11.6 Xplat 7 $20.43 $143.01 $0.00 $0.00 $143.00

Symantec DLP Network Monitor and Network Prevent7 $20.91 $146.37 $0.00 $0.00 $146.00

Symantec DLP Endpoint Discover 11.6 Xplat7 $13.83 $96.81 $0.00 $0.00 $97.00

RSA Authentication Manager - Base 7 $75.64 $529.48 $0.00 $0.00 $529.00 Annual On-going Support 2 $555.95 $1,111.90 $0.00 $0.00 $1,112.00 TOTAL $19,177.13 $0.00 $0.00 $19,177.00

Table 158 - Procurement Hardware & Maintenance SFY


TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22



Table 159 – Procurement Hardware & Maintenance FFY

Hardware & Maintenance TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $21,198 $4,800 $2,000 $0 $27,998 Total $0 $0 $21,198 $4,800 $2,000 $0 $27,998




Table 160 - Procurement Software & Maintenance SFY


TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $18,065 $556 $556 $19,177 Total $0 $0 $18,065 $556 $556 $19,177

Table 161 – Procurement Software & Maintenance FFY

Software & Maintenance TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022

TOTAL FFY 2023


September 2018 IAPD $0 $0 $18,065 $556 $556 $0 $19,177 Total $0 $0 $18,065 $556 $556 $0 $19,177

10.2.11.6 PROCUREMENT TRAVELTravel is required for the 3 FTEs assigned to the M&O procurement team beginning in January 2021 through October 2022 to facilitate in-person meetings and working sessions surrounding the requirements, scope and contracting models. A travel rate of $1,489 per trip was used (see also Section 10.1.14), which will cover lodging, car rental, mileage, airfare, and meals. In addition, nine project and/or county staff will be selected to serve on the evaluation team, which will require travel to and from the project site over the course of a four-month period to participate in evaluation training and to conduct the evaluation between February 2022 and May 2022. This travel is not accounted for in the base DD&I or M&O travel. The table below provides the procurement travel details.

Table 162 - Procurement Travel Details

Procurement Travel Details # Trips/Month Trip Rate Monthly Rate # Months TOTAL

Business Ops Lead 3 $1,489.00 $4,467.00 22 $98,274 Technical/Ops Lead 3 $1,489.00 $4,467.00 22 $98,274 Tech/Ops Support (Leveraged Position) 3 $1,489.00 $4,467.00 22 $98,274 Evaluation Team 18 $1,489.00 $26,802.00 4 $107,208 Total $402,030

Table 163 - Procurement Travel SFY

Consortium Travel - Procurement Team TOTAL SFY 2018/19

TOTAL SFY 2019/20

TOTAL SFY 2020/21

TOTAL SFY 2021/22






Table 164 – Procurement Travel FFY

Consortium Travel - Procurement Team

TOTAL FFY 2019

TOTAL FFY 2020

TOTAL FFY 2021

TOTAL FFY 2022



10.2.11.7 SUMMARY OF PROCUREMENT COSTS

Table 165 – Summary of Procurement Costs SFY

IAPD Line Items SFY 2018/19 SFY 2019/20 SFY 2020/21 SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 TotalProcurement Consortium Personnel $0 $0 $629,832 $1,259,664 $262,430 $2,151,926 Contractor Services $0 $0 $882,000 $1,814,400 $122,640 $2,819,040 Legal Counsel $0 $0 $50,400 $226,800 $100,800 $378,000 Facilities $0 $0 $31,290 $53,640 $35,760 $120,690 Hardware $0 $0 $19,998 $4,800 $3,200 $27,998 Software $0 $0 $18,065 $556 $556 $19,177 Consortium Travel $0 $0 $80,406 $268,020 $53,604 $402,030

Total $0 $0 $1,711,991 $3,627,880 $578,990 $5,918,861

Table 166 – Summary of Procurement Costs FFY

IAPD Line Items FFY 2019 FFY 2020 FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFY 2023 TotalProcurement Consortium Personnel $0 $0 $944,748 $1,154,692 $52,486 $2,151,926 Contractor Services $0 $0 $1,335,600 $1,483,440 $0 $2,819,040 Legal Counsel $0 $0 $75,600 $277,200 $25,200 $378,000 Facilities $0 $0 $44,700 $53,640 $22,350 $120,690 Hardware $0 $0 $21,198 $4,800 $2,000 $27,998 Software $0 $0 $18,065 $556 $556 $19,177 Consortium Travel $0 $0 $120,609 $268,020 $13,401 $402,030

Total $0 $0 $2,560,520 $3,242,348 $115,993 $5,918,861




10.2.12 Summary of CalSAWS M&O Costs

Table 167 – M&O Cost Summary SFY

IAPD Line Items SFY 2021/22 SFY 2022/23 SFY 2023/24 SFY 2024/25 SFY 2025/26 SFY 2026/27 Total

Maintenance & Operations Personnel

Consortium M&O $0 $32,788,957 $39,572,016 $39,572,016 $39,572,016 $39,572,016 $191,077,021 Consortium Procurement $629,832 $1,259,664 $262,430 $0 $0 $0 $2,151,926

Contractor Services Application Maintenance $20,648,320 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $197,633,920 Quality Assurance $0 $4,808,160 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $27,887,328 Procurement $882,000 $1,814,400 $122,640 $0 $0 $0 $2,819,040

Legal Counsel M&O $0 $277,200 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $1,486,800 Procurement $50,400 $226,800 $100,800 $0 $0 $0 $378,000

Facilities M&O $1,660,526 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $15,893,606 Procurement $31,290 $53,640 $35,760 $0 $0 $0 $120,690

Hardware M&O $5,350,086 $18,365,082 $19,678,440 $19,678,440 $19,678,440 $19,678,440 $102,428,928 Procurement $19,998 $4,800 $3,200 $0 $0 $0 $27,998

Software M&O $14,086,352 $37,924,923 $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $211,583,483 Procurement $18,065 $556 $556 $0 $0 $0 $19,177

Production & Operations $33,572,435 $73,435,861 $76,773,312 $76,773,312 $76,773,312 $76,773,312 $414,101,544 Consortium Travel

M&O $0 $1,498,640 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $8,038,160 Procurement $80,406 $268,020 $53,604 $0 $0 $0 $402,030

Total $77,029,710 $210,970,439 $222,446,618 $221,867,628 $221,867,628 $221,867,628 $1,176,049,651




Table 168 – M&O Cost Summary FFY

IAPD Line Items FFY 2021 FFY 2022 FFY 2023 FFY 2024 FFY 2025 FFY 2026 TotalMaintenance & Operations Personnel

Consortium M&O $4,271,742 $38,410,219 $39,572,016 $39,572,016 $39,572,016 $29,679,012 $191,077,021 Consortium Procurement $944,748 $1,154,692 $52,486 $0 $0 $0 $2,151,926

Contractor Services Application Maintenance $29,497,600 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $35,397,120 $26,547,840 $197,633,920 Quality Assurance $480,816 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $5,769,792 $4,327,344 $27,887,328 Procurement $1,335,600 $1,483,440 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,819,040

Legal Counsel M&O $50,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $302,400 $226,800 $1,486,800 Procurement $75,600 $277,200 $25,200 $0 $0 $0 $378,000

Facilities M&O $2,372,180 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $2,134,962 $15,893,606 Procurement $44,700 $53,640 $22,350 $0 $0 $0 $120,690

Hardware M&O $8,956,338 $19,678,440 $19,678,440 $19,678,440 $19,678,440 $14,758,830 $102,428,928 Procurement $21,198 $4,800 $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $27,998

Software M&O $22,091,486 $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $29,919,789 $211,583,483 Procurement $18,065 $556 $556 $0 $0 $0 $19,177

Production & Operations $50,167,080 $76,034,544 $76,773,312 $76,773,312 $76,773,312 $57,579,984 $414,101,544 Consortium Travel

M&O $272,480 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,634,880 $1,226,160 $8,038,160 Procurement $120,609 $268,020 $13,401 $0 $0 $0 $402,030

Total$120,720,64

2 $223,209,41

1 $221,983,62

1 $221,867,62

8 $221,867,62

8 $166,400,72

1 $1,176,049,65

1




10.3 Total Cost Summary

Table 169 – Total Cost by Line Item

CalSAWS Cost by Line Item TotalDD&I Personnel

Consortium DD&I $46,314,217 Consortium Procurement $2,237,760 County $54,871,658 State $7,723,704

Contractor Services Design, Development & Implementation $226,810,912 Quality Assurance $17,146,416 IV&V $2,318,400

Legal Counsel $1,713,600 Facilities $8,799,219 Hardware $3,238,443 Software $25,267,684 Production & Operations $12,861,741 Consortium Travel $10,992,015 Training

Consortium Training Staff $7,008,083 Contractor Training Services $17,028,222 Training Facilities $4,761,260 Training Hardware $25,560 Training Software $1,222,404 Consortium Training Travel $5,341,664

Total DD&I $455,682,962




CalSAWS Cost by Line Item TotalMaintenance & Operations Personnel

Consortium M&O $191,077,021 Consortium Procurement $2,151,926

Contractor Services Application Maintenance $197,633,920 Quality Assurance $27,887,328 Procurement $2,819,040

Legal Counsel M&O $1,486,800 Procurement $378,000

Facilities M&O $15,893,606 Procurement $120,690

Hardware M&O $102,428,928 Procurement $27,998

Software M&O $211,583,483 Procurement $19,177

Production & Operations $414,101,544 Consortium Travel

M&O $8,038,160 Procurement $402,030

Total M&O $1,176,049,651

Combined Total $1,631,732,613




10.4 Comparison to Independent AnalysisThe following table includes a comparison of the September IAPD cost estimates for DD&I and procurement to the results of the independent analysis, excluding county administrative costs. The differences are primarily due to the additional costs associated with QA, IV&V and State personnel.

Table 170 – Comparison of DD&I/Procurement Costs

Design, Development & Implementation Sept 2018 IAPD v2 Independent Analysis Difference Description of Difference

Consortium Personnel $46,314,217 $48,883,263 ($2,569,046) Recategorized as Training Personnel

County Staff $54,871,658 $54,873,324 ($1,666) Rounding

Contractor Services - DD&I $226,810,912 $226,811,562 ($650) Rounding

Legal $1,713,600 $934,000 $779,600 Based on Expected Hours and Negotiated Rate

Facilities - ADF $8,799,219 $8,799,231 ($12) Rounding

Hardware and Hardware Maintenance $3,238,443 $3,181,511 $56,932 Categorization

Software and Software Maintenance $25,267,684 $25,322,855 ($55,171) Categorization

Prod Ops - Technical Infrastructure $12,861,741 $12,861,900 ($159) Rounding

Travel $10,992,015 $16,340,544 ($5,348,529) Recategorized as Training Travel

Training $35,387,193 $28,026,214 $7,360,979 Offset by Staff & Travel

TOTAL $426,256,682 $426,034,404 $222,278

DD&I Additional Scope Sept 2018 IAPD v2 Not Analyzed Difference Description of Difference

Quality Assurance $17,146,416 $0 $17,146,416 Not in Scope of McKinsey Analysis

IV&V $2,318,400 $0 $2,318,400 Not in Scope of McKinsey Analysis

State Personnel $7,723,704 $0 $7,723,704 Not in Scope of McKinsey Analysis

Procurement for DD&I $2,237,760 $0 $2,237,760 Not in Scope of McKinsey Analysis

TOTAL $29,426,280 $0 $29,426,280

Total Sept 2018 IAPD v2 Independent Analysis Difference Description of Difference

COMBINED TOTAL $455,682,962 $426,034,404 $29,648,558

CalSAWS IAPD - DD&I and Procurement




The following table includes a comparison of the September IAPD cost estimates for 12 months of M&O to the results of the independent analysis, plus one-time procurement costs associated with 58-county M&O. The differences are primarily due to higher benefit rates for consortium personnel and revised travel based on actual staff loading.

Table 171 – Comparison of M&O Costs

Maintenance & Operations Sept 2018 IAPD Independent Analysis Difference Description of Difference

Consortium Personnel $25,630,452 $23,786,250 $1,844,202 Accounts for Higher Benefit Rates

County Staff $13,941,564 $13,941,564 $0

Contractor Services - Application Maintenance $35,397,120 $34,966,580 $430,540 Assumes High-End of Range

Legal $302,400 $122,500 $179,900 Based on Expected Hours and Negotiated Rate

Facilities - ADF $2,846,616 $2,846,616 $0

Hardware and Hardware Maintenance $19,678,440 $19,678,445 ($5) Rounding

Software and Software Maintenance $39,893,052 $39,893,052 $0

Prod Ops - Technical Infrastructure $76,773,312 $76,773,305 $7 Rounding

Travel $1,634,880 $511,166 $1,123,714 Based on Actual Staff Loading

TOTAL $216,097,836 $212,519,478 $3,578,358

M&O Additional Scope Sept 2018 IAPD Not Analyzed (As-Is) Difference Description of Difference

Quality Assurance $5,769,792 $7,268,278 ($1,498,486) Not in Scope of McKinsey Analysis

TOTAL $5,769,792 $7,268,278 ($1,498,486)

Steady State Subtotal Sept 2018 IAPD Independent Analysis Difference Description of Difference

SUBTOTAL (Steady State) $221,867,628 $219,787,756 $2,079,872

M&O Additional Scope Sept 2018 IAPD Not Analyzed Difference Description of Difference

Procurement for M&O $5,918,861 $0 $5,918,861 Not in Scope of McKinsey Analysis

COMBINED TOTAL $227,786,489 $219,787,756 $7,998,733

CalSAWS IAPD - Annual Average M&O




11.0 COST ALLOCATION PLAN FOR IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES

Does the state intend to invoke the OMB Circular A-87 exception? ☐ Yes ☒ No

Our understanding is the OMB Circular A-87 expires in December 2018, and therefore will not apply to this effort.

11.1 Cost Allocation Plan OverviewExhibit C contains the Cost Allocation Plan (CAP), which provides the cost allocations and equitable distribution of CalSAWS costs among benefiting programs and the corresponding Federal, State and County funding sources.

The cost allocation methodologies are commensurate with actual persons count distribution, system functionality, and programs benefiting from such functionality. Federal, state and county funding participation for costs attributable to benefiting programs is based on statutory funding ratios established by agreements between Federal, State and County funding entities. State funding sources will include the California Department of Social Services (CDSS) and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS). The CAP resulting from the cost allocation methodologies is consistent with OMB Circular A-87, 45 CFR Part 95, Subpart E, and the California Welfare and Institutes Code Section §10824, which prescribes funding policies for the SAWS Consortia.

The CAP addresses nine cost categories, as follows:

Non-Application Development software development costs

Application software development costs

Training development and delivery costs

IV&V costs

CDSS State Personnel costs

DHCS State Personnel costs

CalSAWS M&O costs

CalHEERS Interface M&O costs

Covered California Customer Service Center costs

The cost allocation methodologies for these cost categories are fully described in the subsequent sections. Cost distributions for both non-recurring and recurring costs are based (either solely or partially) on actual average person counts by program. The cost allocation also shows the cost distributions (share of cost percentages and share amounts) by program, jurisdiction, category, and fiscal year, as well as the person count and prescribed funding ratios used to calculate the cost distributions.

11.1.1 CalSAWS Persons Count

The most current combined CalSAWS person count is reflected in the table below.




Table 172 – CalACES Persons Count

11.2 CalSAWS Cost Allocation MethodologyThe Cost Allocation Plan details the actual allocation of non-recurring and recurring costs by funding source. Program shares will be updated based on revised person counts published annually by CDSS. The program shares were determined using the Cost Allocation Methodologies (CAM) toolkit published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, dated December 2014, and as described in the following subsections.

11.2.1 Design, Development & Implementation (Non-Recurring)

This section describes the cost allocation methodology for DD&I costs. The DD&I CAPs are comprised of costs for personnel, contractor services for project management, conversion, training, implementation, and change management, as well as QA, IV&V, legal, facilities, hardware, software, and production and operations.

The Benefit Received cost allocation methodology was applied to costs categorized as application development work, including requirements, design, build, testing, and release management. The current basis of this allocation methodology is person hours as documented in the final CalSAWS contractor costs and the independent assessment. Such person hours reflect the contractors’ cost models and work breakdown structures to develop and deploy the common CalSAWS application.

The CalSAWS planning teams conducted a detailed analysis of the cost models for formal requirements and level of effort to determine direct costs (single program), shared costs or cost pools (multiple programs), and common costs (all programs) among benefiting programs and formulated an appropriate cost distribution for software development costs, as described in the following sections.

Allocation Base and Structure

Person hours reflecting the contractor’s cost models associated with the defined requirements were used to form the allocation base and structure.

A two-level cost allocation structure was used to represent application software development work and to designate direct or shared usage by benefiting program, where the first level reflects high-level, categorical requirements and the second level reflects work breakdown structures associated with the specific detailed requirements.

Benefit Received Cost Allocation Methodology

The Benefit Received cost allocation methodology was used to determine the proportionate share




of development costs for each program benefiting from the work being performed. To account for system usage, benefiting program(s) are identified for each requirement.

As required, the CalWORKs, Medi-Cal, and CalFresh programs, which have more than five percent (5%) of the total number of program beneficiaries, were designated as large programs, and the remaining programs were designated as small programs.

The program share of cost percentages were computed within the CAM tool based on the aggregate of level of effort values for all requirements to provide an objective measure of “Benefit Received.” These program shares of cost percentages are applied to the DD&I costs to calculate each benefiting program’s share amount as further described in the subsequent sections.

11.2.1.1 NON-APPLICATION DEVELOPMENTThe non-application development cost category includes personnel, travel, legal, QA, contractor services including project management, change management, implementation, QA, legal, facilities, hardware, software, and production and operations. The program shares were determined using the CAM toolkit as described above. The programs, program share of costs, and FFP are included in the following table.

Table 173 – CalSAWS DD&I –Non-Application Development CAP

Federal/State Program Program Share of Cost Costs F/SW/SH/C Federal

ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

CalWORKs 33.05% $94,872,301 100/0/0/0/0 $94,872,301 $0 $0 $0 $0CalFresh 29.50% $84,681,782 50/50/0/0/0 $42,340,890 $42,340,892 $0 $0 $0CFAP 0.27% $775,053 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $775,053 $0 $0 $0Medi-Cal 30.84% $88,528,350 90/0/10/0/0 $79,675,515 $0 $8,852,835 $0 $0Foster Care 3.64% $10,448,871 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $10,448,871 $0 $0 $0Refugee 0.01% $28,705 100/0/0/0/0 $28,705 $0 $0 $0 $0CAPI 0.08% $229,645 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $229,645 $0 $0 $0KinGAP 0.12% $344,468 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $344,468 $0 $0 $0CMSP 0.00% $0 0/0/100/0/0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0GA/GR 2.49% $7,147,715 0/0/0/100/0 $0 $0 $0 $7,147,715 $0Total $287,056,890 $216,917,411 $54,138,929 $8,852,835 $7,147,715 $0Total % 100.00% 75.6% 18.9% 3.1% 2.5% 0.0%

CALSAWS DD&I Non-Application Development

11.2.1.2 APPLICATION DEVELOPMENTThe application development cost category includes hours associated with requirements, analysis, design, coding and testing. The program shares were determined using the CAM toolkit as previously described. The programs, program share of costs, and FFP are included in the following table, and adjusted for a county share shift of 5%. It is expected that the 5% county share will follow payment months, e.g. the costs from January 2019 through June 2019 will occur in July 2019 and later. The specific process to accommodate the county share payments is being developed.

Table 174 – CalSAWS DD&I – Application Development CAP




Federal/State Program Program Share of Cost Costs F/SW/SH/C Federal

ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

CalWORKs 33.05% $39,976,953 100/0/0/0/0 $39,976,953 $0 $0 $0 $0CalFresh 29.50% $35,682,909 50/50/0/0/0 $17,841,454 $17,841,455 $0 $0 $0CFAP 0.27% $326,589 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $326,589 $0 $0 $0Medi-Cal 30.84% $37,303,763 90/0/10/0/0 $33,573,387 $0 $3,730,376 $0 $0Foster Care 3.64% $4,402,907 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $4,402,907 $0 $0 $0Refugee 0.01% $12,096 100/0/0/0/0 $12,096 $0 $0 $0 $0CAPI 0.08% $96,767 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $96,767 $0 $0 $0KinGAP 0.12% $145,151 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $145,151 $0 $0 $0CMSP 0.00% $0 0/0/100/0/0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0GA/GR 2.49% $3,011,880 0/0/0/100/0 $0 $0 $0 $3,011,880 $0SubTotal $120,959,015 $91,403,890 $22,812,869 $3,730,376 $3,011,880 $0County Share Shift 100.00% (5,897,357) 5,897,357TOTAL $120,959,015 $91,403,890 $16,915,512 $3,730,376 $8,909,237 $0Total % 100.00% 75.6% 14.0% 3.1% 7.4% 0.0%

CALSAWS DD&I Application Development

11.2.1.3 TRAINING DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERY The training development and delivery cost category includes hours associated with training activities that are not related to the integrated development of the system. The program shares for were determined using the CAM toolkit as previously described, with the Medi-Cal FFP adjusted to 75/25. The programs, program share of costs, and FFP are included in the following table.

Table 175 – CalSAWS DD&I – Training Development and Delivery CAP

Federal/State Program

Program Share of Cost Costs F/SW/SH/C Federal

ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

CalWORKs 33.05% $11,695,467 100/0/0/0/0 $11,695,467 $0 $0 $0 $0CalFresh 29.50% $10,439,222 50/50/0/0/0 $5,219,610 $5,219,612 $0 $0 $0CFAP 0.27% $95,545 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $95,545 $0 $0 $0Medi-Cal 30.84% $10,913,412 90/0/10/0/0 $8,185,059 $0 $2,728,353 $0 $0Foster Care 3.64% $1,288,094 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $1,288,094 $0 $0 $0Refugee 0.01% $3,539 100/0/0/0/0 $3,539 $0 $0 $0 $0CAPI 0.08% $28,309 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $28,309 $0 $0 $0KinGAP 0.12% $42,464 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $42,464 $0 $0 $0CMSP 0.00% $0 0/0/100/0/0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0GA/GR 2.49% $881,141 0/0/0/100/0 $0 $0 $0 $881,141 $0Total $35,387,193 $25,103,675 $6,674,024 $2,728,353 $881,141 $0Total % 100.00% 70.9% 18.9% 7.7% 2.5% 0.0%

CALSAWS Training Integrated Application Development

11.2.1.4 IV&VThe program shares for IV&V were determined using the CAM toolkit as previously described, and adjusted to exclude GA/GR. The programs, program share of costs, and FFP are included in the following table.




Table 176 – CalSAWS IV&V CAP



ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

CalWORKs 33.90% $785,938 100/0/0/0/0 $785,938 $0 $0 $0 $0CalFresh 30.25% $701,316 50/50/0/0/0 $350,658 $350,658 $0 $0 $0CFAP 0.28% $6,490 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $6,490 $0 $0 $0Medi-Cal 31.63% $733,312 90/0/10/0/0 $659,980 $0 $73,332 $0 $0Foster Care 3.73% $86,477 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $86,477 $0 $0 $0Refugee 0.01% $230 100/0/0/0/0 $230 $0 $0 $0 $0CAPI 0.08% $1,855 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $1,855 $0 $0 $0KinGAP 0.12% $2,782 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $2,782 $0 $0 $0CMSP 0.00% $0 0/0/100/0/0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0SubTotal $2,318,400 $1,796,806 $448,262 $73,332 $0 $0Total % 100.00% 77.5% 19.3% 3.2% 0.0% 0.0%TOTAL $2,318,400 $1,796,806 $448,262 $73,332 $0 $0

IV&V

11.2.2 DHCS Personnel

The DHCS personnel costs are allocated 100% to the Medi-Cal program. The CAP is reflected in the table below.

Table 177 – DHCS State Personnel CAP



ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

Medi-Cal 100.00% $4,292,456 90/0/10/0/0 $3,863,211 $0 $429,245 $0 $0Total $4,292,456 $3,863,211 $0 $429,245 $0 $0Total % 100.00% 90.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0%

DHCS

11.2.3 CDSS Personnel

The CDSS personnel costs are allocated using the latest persons count and are distributed within the programs provided by CDSS in accordance with the federal, state, and county sharing ratios for each program. The CAP is reflected in the table below.

Table 178 – CDSS Personnel CAP



ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

CalWORKs 15.74% $540,080 100/0/0/0/0 $540,080 $0 $0 $0 $0CalFresh 82.54% $2,832,150 50/50/0/0/0 $1,416,073 $1,416,077 $0 $0 $0CFAP 0.91% $31,225 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $31,225 $0 $0 $0Foster Care 0.78% $26,763 50/50/0/0/0 $13,381 $13,382 $0 $0 $0Refugee 0.03% $1,030 100/0/0/0/0 $1,030 $0 $0 $0 $0SubTotal $3,431,248 $1,970,564 $1,460,684 $0 $0 $0Total % 100.00% 57.4% 42.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%TOTAL $3,431,248 $1,970,564 $1,460,684 $0 $0 $0

CDSS

11.2.4 Maintenance & Operations

11.2.4.1 CALSAWS M&OThe CalSAWS M&O costs are allocated using the latest Persons Count and are distributed within the programs in accordance with the federal, state, and county sharing ratios for each program as described below.

CalWORKs and Refugee Program - funding ratio for M&O costs is 100 percent federal, 0 percent state, and 0 percent county.




California Food Assistance Program (CFAP), CAPI, KinGAP, and CMSP – funding ration for M&O costs is 0 percent federal, 100 percent state, and 0 percent county.

CalFresh – funding ration for M&O costs is 50 percent federal, 35 percent state, and 15 percent county.

Medi-Cal - funding ratio for M&O costs is 75 percent federal, 25 percent state, and 0 percent county.

Foster Care - funding ratio for M&O costs is 0 percent federal, 70 percent state, and 30 percent county.

GA/GR - funding ratio for M&O is 0 percent federal, 0 percent state, and 100 percent county. County costs are distributed to each county by a percentage of the consortium person count.

As each county goes live on CalSAWS, there will be parallel operations during the legacy decommission period. It is assumed that decommissioning will occur three months following go-live of LRS and C-IV. It is assumed that CalWIN will be decommissioned three months following the last wave of the counties. During parallel operations, the CalSAWS M&O county share will be shifted to the State. The CAP is reflected in the table below.

Table 179 – CalSAWS M&O CAP



ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

CalWORKs 4.97% $55,703,964 100/0/0/0/0 $55,703,964 $0 $0 $0 $0CalFresh 26.11% $292,641,952 50/35/0/15/0 $146,320,976 $102,424,682 $0 $43,896,294 $0CFAP 0.29% $3,250,333 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $3,250,333 $0 $0 $0Medi-Cal 67.37% $755,085,729 50/0/50/0/0 $377,542,864 $0 $377,542,865 $0 $0Foster Care 0.25% $2,802,011 0/70/0/30/0 $0 $1,961,409 $0 $840,602 $0Refugee 0.01% $112,081 100/0/0/0/0 $112,081 $0 $0 $0 $0CAPI 0.09% $1,008,724 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $1,008,724 $0 $0 $0KinGAP 0.13% $1,457,045 0/100/0/0/0 $0 $1,457,045 $0 $0 $0CMSP 0.00% $0 0/0/100/0/0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0GA/GR 0.78% $8,742,272 0/0/0/100/0 $0 $0 $0 $8,742,272 $0SubTotal $1,120,804,111 $579,679,885 $110,102,193 $377,542,865 $53,479,168 $0County Share Shift 100.00% $0 $9,939,528 $0 ($9,939,528) $0TOTAL $1,120,804,111 $579,679,885 $120,041,721 $377,542,865 $43,539,640 $0Total % 100.00% 51.7% 10.7% 33.7% 3.9% 0.0%

CALSAWS M&O

11.2.4.2 CALHEERS INTERFACE M&OThis section describes the cost allocation methodology for California Healthcare Eligibility, Enrollment and Retention System (CalHEERS) Interface Application Development costs. The relative program percentages for the application maintenance (Change Request) costs are based on a Benefiting Program methodology utilizing direct charges whereas Covered California covers 12.38% of the SAWS/CalHEERS interface costs.

Table 180 – CalSAWS CalHEERS M&O – Application Maintenance CAP



ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

Medi-Cal 87.62% $36,717,646 75/0/25/0/0 $27,538,234 $0 $9,179,412 $0 $0Covered CA 12.38% $5,187,906 0/0/0/0/100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,187,906TOTAL $41,905,552 $27,538,234 $0 $9,179,412 $0 $5,187,906Total % 100.00% 65.7% 0.0% 21.9% 0.0% 12.4%

CalHEERS M&O




11.2.4.3 COVERED CALIFORNIA M&OThis section describes the cost allocation methodology for the regional customer service center costs for Covered California. The costs are direct-charged to Medi-Cal. The CAP is reflected in the table below.

Table 181 – CalSAWS Covered CA M&O – Covered CA CAP



ShareState Welfare

ShareState Health

ShareCounty Share

Covered CA Share

Medi-Cal 100.00% $7,421,127 75/0/25/0/0 $5,565,845 $0 $1,855,282 $0 $0TOTAL $7,421,127 $5,565,845 $0 $1,855,282 $0 $0Total % 100.00% 75.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Covered CA

11.3 Section 1311 Exchange Establishment Grant Funding

Does the state intend to share the costs of the system work related to this funding request with Section 1311 Exchange establishment grant funding?

☐ Yes ☒ No




12.0 SECURITY, INTERFACE, DISASTER RECOVERY, AND BUSINESS CONTINUITY PLANNING

12.1 Security OverviewMajor information systems, such as the LRS, C-IV and CalWIN systems, require extensive safeguards to protect the integrity of the programs administered and to prevent unauthorized access to the systems or their information. The CalACES and WCDS Consortia will continue to ensure appropriate security, backup, and contingency plans and processes are in place for their respective systems until such time that the CalSAWS System is fully deployed on the Amazon Web Service (AWS) or “Cloud”. The implementation of the Cloud will trigger a CalSAWS shared responsibility model for security.

In addition to the individual system security features described below, the Consortia are also cognizant of the requirements to meet both state and federal regulations related to security, confidentiality, and auditing during the development, implementation, and operation phases of the project. CalACES and CalWIN Consortia have incorporated into their solutions the requirements to comply with the specifications of the following publications:

Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Systems (National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Special Publication 800-53)

Standards for Security Categorization of Federal Information and Information Systems (Federal Information and Processing Standards (FIPS) Publication 199)

Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules (FIPS Publication 140-2)

Minimum Security Requirements for Federal Information and Information Systems (FIPS Publication 200)

Automatic Data Processing Physical Security and Risk Management (FIPS, Publication 31)

Computer Security Guidelines for Implementing the Privacy Act of 1974 (FIPS, Publication 41)

Guidelines for Security of Computer Applications (FIPS, Publication 73)

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Public Law 104-191 and the associated Standards for Privacy of Individually Identifiable Health Information

12.2 Physical SecurityThe Consortia are aware of the importance of maintaining effective physical security measures. At a minimum, all counties and their associated systems utilize coded access card systems to restrict perimeter access to system server areas. Additionally, accountability controls record access attempts of all users and timely cancellation of unauthorized or fraudulent access cards. Physical security at all central-processing sites support fire suppression systems, smoke detectors, and electrical alarms monitored by security personnel for key processing areas. Local area network servers are also physically protected from non-authorized access and are secured behind a locked door wherever possible.

12.3 System SecurityAlthough the LRS and the C-IV system will share a common code base and data model during the Migration DD&I effort, they will not share the same data center or database until the full deployment and stabilization in the Cloud. Likewise, CalWIN will maintain its own data centers




and database until full Cloud deployment and stabilization is achieved. Accordingly, the system security policies currently employed by LRS, C-IV and CalWIN, which presently comply with the federal mandates listed in Section above , will remain in place until the Cloud stabilization period is over. Security policies are reviewed and updated as needed on an annual basis.

12.4 Disaster Recovery & Business ContinuityEach Consortium and System has procedures and facilities in place to ensure that mechanisms exist to reconstruct the System and the affected databases, in the event of major problems at any processing site(s) housing systems that are required to support critical programs and services. Backup and recovery mechanisms are incorporated at all processor levels that meet the requirements of the Disaster Recovery & Business Continuity (DR/BC) plans for each Consortium. The DR/BC plans are reviewed, tested and updated as needed on an annual basis.

The Consortia also employ Service Level Agreements (SLAs) to define the requirements for disaster recovery, security incidents, local consortia infrastructure impact and online availability, and to hold contractors accountable for meeting those requirements.

12.5 CalSAWS Maintenance & OperationsIt is critical that procedures and facilities be in place to ensure that, in the event of major problems at any processing sites that house systems required for supporting critical programs and services, a mechanism exists to reconstruct the system and the affected databases. Backup and recovery mechanisms including documentation that specifies and describes the activities required to ensure that the primary central site, backup central site, central print facility, backup print facility, Project office, enterprise connecting hardware, which includes the gateway, and software, is able to recover from any disruption in service regardless of the level of severity.

The CalSAWS DR/BC Plan must be incorporated at all processing levels to ensure they meet the state, federal and Consortium requirements. The CalSAWS DR/BC will be tested annually and updated as appropriate.

While maintaining the existing levels of security compliance discussed above, the implementation of the Cloud will introduce a shared responsibility model of security between the AWS and the CalSAWS System Integrator (SI) in which the SI will be responsible for the security of the CalSAWS content within the Cloud and AWS is responsible for the security and availability of the Cloud.




Figure 32 – Shared Security Model

In addition to the federal standards listed in Section 12.1 above, AWS cloud services are also compliant with the following global and USA standards and controls:

CSA - Cloud Security Alliance ControlsISO 9001- Global Quality StandardISO 27001- Security Management ControlsISO 27017 – Cloud Specific ControlsISO 27018 – Personal Data ProtectionPCI DSS Level 1 – Payment Card StandardsSOC 1 – Audit Controls ReportSOC 2 – Security, Availability & Confidentiality ReportSOC 3 – General Controls ReportCJIS – Criminal Justice Information ServicesDoD SRG – Dept. of Defense Data ProcessingFedRAMP – Government Data StandardsFERPA – Educational Privacy ActFFEIC – Financial Institutions Regulations

FIPS – Government Security StandardsFISMA – Federal Information Security ManagementGxP – Quality Guidelines and RegulationsHIPAA – Protected Health InformationITAR – International Arms RegulationsMPAA – Protected Media ContentNIST – National Institute of Standards and ConditionsSEC Rule 17a-4(f) – Financial Data StandardsVPAT Section 508 – Accessibility Standards




13.0 CONDITIONS AND STANDARDS FOR RECEIPT OF ENHANCED FFP

13.1 Enhanced Federal Financial ParticipationAs described in 42 CFR Part 33, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has authorized enhanced federal financial participation funding (FFP) that allows 90 percent Medicaid FFP on State expenditures for the design, development, installation and enhancement of new Medicaid eligibility systems, and allows 75 percent FFP on expenditures for the maintenance and operations of new Medicaid eligibility systems. Prior CMS rules offered only 50 percent Medicaid FFP for Medicaid eligibility systems costs. The new enhanced FFP rates for Medicaid eligibility systems has been made available to states because the Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA) requires states to invest in new technology to implement new Medicaid eligibility requirements and procedures, to process streamlined applications, to verify income information electronically, and to generate notices to applicants through their Medicaid eligibility systems.

The enhanced Medicaid FFP rates are available for Medicaid eligibility systems only if the systems meet or are on a path to the CMS Seven Standards and Conditions as described in the April 2011 Medicaid IT Supplement (11-01-v1.0). In brief, this means that the qualifying systems must be designed to achieve interoperability with other systems and demonstrate a modular, flexible approach to systems development as well as cost-effective sharing and reuse of reliable system components within states or among collaborating states.

The 90 percent rate applies indefinitely and the 75 percent rates for maintenance and operations remain applicable as long as the Medicaid eligibility systems continue to meet all requirements under the enhanced funding rules.

13.2 Compliance with the CMS Seven Standards & ConditionsThe CalSAWS design, development, and implementation will comply with the Seven Standards and Conditions (SS&C) and advance the state’s alignment with the Medicaid Information Technology Architecture (MITA) initiative.

As required by the SS&C, the CalACES-CalSAWS Migration Project will use a system development life cycle (SDLC) methodology for improved efficiency and overall system quality.

The LRS system is the basis for CalACES and ultimately CalSAWS, is a standards-based technological solution that leverages both the web-based C-IV eligibility system and the existing LRS technical platform allowing the CalACES system to be a more modular, flexible, and scalable service-oriented architecture (SOA) based system.

The CalSAWS system leverages CalACES to incorporate aspects of the CalWIN system solution in order to provide broader automation. CalACES and subsequently CalSAWS will each support open standards and comply with federal architectural standards including MITA.

The CalSAWS system SOA platform retains the CalACES discrete repository of health and human services program rules, which was created in a portable format separate from the core programming that can be reused by another system or exposed as a web service to other systems. Its SOA-based design also enables integration of fragmented business processes and allows business process flexibility and performance monitoring for customer service optimization. The system’s business intelligence capabilities provide a user-friendly, reporting architecture that enables the creation of standard and ad-hoc reports necessary for oversight, administration, evaluation, integrity, and transparency.




The CalSAWS solution provides an agile SOA solution with reusable and sharable components. Such components or assets will be managed in an enterprise repository that can be reused within the CalSAWS system application or by other systems. Utilizing the CalSAWS system Enterprise Service Bus (ESB), the same component assets can be exposed as a web service and seamlessly shared in real-time with discrete or external systems. The CalSAWS system SOA solution helps minimize redundant development efforts and maximize the return on investment. It also facilitates broad standardization of service delivery while providing multiple agencies with the greatest flexibility in supporting various business models and unique business processes.

The CalSAWS system architectural requirements (SOA, open standards, modularity, scalability, etc.), coupled with its software requirements (rules engine, business process management engine, and business intelligence, etc.), supports a solution that is fully compliant with MITA standards and aligns with the Department of Health and Human Services Code of Federal Regulations regarding enhanced federal funding participation (EFFP) for Medicaid eligibility determination and enrollment activities




14.0 IAPD REQUIRED FEDERAL ASSURANCESThe following responses apply to the Development & Implementation related to the migration and Maintenance & Operations of both the CalACES and CalSAWS systems.

Procurement Standards (Competition / Sole Source)

SMM, Part 11 ☒ Yes ☐ No

45 CFR PART 95.615 ☒ Yes ☐ No

45 CFR 92.36 ☒ Yes ☐ No

Access to Records, Reporting and Agency Attestations

42 CFR Part 433.112(b) (5) – (9) ☒ Yes ☐ No

45 CFR Part 95.615 ☒ Yes ☐ No

SMM Section 11267 ☒ Yes ☐ No

Software & Ownership Rights, Federal Licenses, Information Safeguarding, HIPAA Compliance, and Progress Reports



45 CFR Part 164 ☒ Yes ☐ No

Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V)





APPENDIX A: BUDGET COMPARISON BY FISCAL YEAR




APPENDIX B: PROJECT BUDGET




APPENDIX C: COST ALLOCATION PLAN




APPENDIX D: MEDICAID DETAILED BUDGET TABLES




APPENDIX E: ACQUISITION CHECKLIST




The Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have developed the following optional checklist for States and Territories to use to provide assurances that an acquisition of automated data processing equipment and/or services complies with all Federal regulations and policies. The Federal Department(s), in accordance with the regulations at 45 CFR 95.611, may grant an exemption from prior approval for an acquisition document based on a State’s favorable responses to this checklist.

This checklist may be used for certain Requests for Proposal, Requests for Quote, Invitations to Bid, contracts, contract amendments, or similar State and Territory acquisition documents; however, it may not be submitted for contracts or Advance Planning Documents that require Federal prior approval (unless specifically exempted by the Department). Please include the following information:

A brief paragraph describing the acquisition activity should be included in the cover letter submitted with this request. The submission should identify (1) the state or territorial agency(s) and stakeholders involved, (2) basic system characteristics, project scope, life span, benefits and all pertinent details, (3) the type of contract or agreement that is expected to result from the acquisition. For each “No” response to the checklist, a full narrative explanation must be provided either directly following the checklist or on a separate sheet of paper.

The California Statewide Automated Workforce System (referred to as “CalSAWS” or “Consortium”), acting for the benefit of the fifty-eight (58) California Counties, which include the 40 County Members of California Automated Consortium Eligibility System (“CalACES”), and the eighteen (18) Welfare Client Data System (“WCDS”) Consortium Counties are requesting proposals from qualified vendors for Quality Assurance (QA) services for the Design, Development and Implementation of the CalSAWS system within the fifty-eight (58) California Counties. This procurement solicits QA services including, but not limited to, Project management support, DD&I Vendor Deliverable reviews, planning and execution of Independent Testing, and Consortium User Acceptance Testing (UAT) support for the Design, Development and Implementation (DD&I) phases of the Project.

The Consortium is seeking QA Vendors that are also prepared to provide QA Services for the Maintenance and Operations (M&O) phase of the CalSAWS System. The M&O phase will eventually include M&O QA services for all thirty-nine (58) counties following completion of Migration of the WCDS counties to the CalSAWS System.

The Consortium intends that the term of the Agreement resulting from this procurement for DD&I QA Services to encompass the development of modifications to the existing CalSAWS System, and Implementation of the CalSAWS System in the Migration Counties. The base term for the M&O QA Services will support the first 12 months of M&O with two (2) optional 1-year extensions. Total duration of 5-year base with two (2) optional 1-year extensions.

# Description Checkbox

1. Will the acquisition be conducted in a manner that provides, to the maximum extent practicable, open and free competition? (Note 1)

☒ Yes ☐ No

2. Does the acquisition, if funded in whole or part by FNS and/or HHS meet the standards and functional requirements set forth in the Federal program regulations?

☒ Yes ☐ No

3. Does the acquisition comply with all applicable Federal, State and Territorial acquisition standards, laws, policies and procedures?

☒ Yes ☐ No




# Description Checkbox

4. Does the acquisition document contain a clause that provides the United States Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services and/or their representatives access to State or Territorial agency documents papers, or other records pertinent to the procurement in order to make audits, examinations, excerpts and transcripts?

☒ Yes ☐ No

5. Does the acquisition comply with Federal rules relative to State or Territorial ownership rights to all software products, documentation and intellectual property created under this acquisition?

☒ Yes ☐ No

6. Does the acquisition document contain a clause that grants the Federal Government a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use and to authorize others to use for Federal Government purposes, software, modifications, and documentation developed and/or obtained through this acquisition?

☒ Yes ☐ No

7. Does the Statement of Work in the acquisition document convey expectations to be met by the successful contractor including items such as required tasks, deliverables and their schedule of delivery, technical requirements, security, privacy and confidentiality requirements, roles and responsibilities, and project reporting requirements?

☒ Yes ☐ No

8. Does the acquisition document include clauses covering mandatory contract terms and conditions, order of precedence, compliance with laws, liability, period of performance, Force Majeure, availability of funds, notices, disputes, failure of performance, damages and termination?

☒ Yes ☐ No

9. Does the acquisition document include information about the evaluation and selection process such as technical and cost scoring and weighting, and proposal ranking and selection?

☒ Yes ☐ No

10. Has the evaluation and selection process been finalized relative to technical and cost scoring prior to the release of the acquisition document?

☒ Yes ☐ No

11. Does the acquisition document delineate responsibilities relative to key staff, the change order process, and documentation requirements?

☒ Yes ☐ No

Note 1: The acquisition document must be submitted to the appropriate Federal Agency or Agencies if the acquisition is a sole source solicitation and the cost exceeds the thresholds established in the Federal regulations.

This form must be signed by either the appropriate State or Territorial official authorized to submit acquisition documentation to the Federal Department(s) or the State or Territorial director of purchasing.

SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME

TITLE DATE




APPENDIX F: CALSAWS REQUIREMENTS




APPENDIX G: CALACES DELIVERABLE 2 - STEP 1: CALACES ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, INTERIM ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT




APPENDIX H:CALACES DELIVERABLE 2 - STEP 2: CALACES ANCILLARY SYSTEMS ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS REPORT




APPENDIX I: CALACES MIGRATION PLANNING & ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT DELIVERABLE 03: DRAFT FACTBASE FOR CALSAWS REQUIREMENTS CONSOLIDATION & PRIORITIZATION




APPENDIX J: WCDS CALWIN FINAL REPORT ON EMERGING VIEW OF BUSINESS PROCESS AND ANCILLARY SYSTEMS ACROSS CALWIN (DELIVERABLE #4)




APPENDIX K:CALSAWS MIGRATION PLANNING & ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT DELIVERABLE 10: FINAL CALSAWS REPORT (AUGUST)




APPENDIX L: AMENDED AND RESTATED LEADER REPLACEMENT SYSTEM AGREEMENT EXHIBIT U (STATEMENT OF WORK FOR CALSAWS DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION (“DD&I”) PROJECT)
