Mike\'s thoughts on the Federal, state and local government information technology ecosystem.

1. Addressing Federal IT Challenges
Mike Locatis, State Chief Information Officer
Governor’s Office of Information Technology
December 1st, 2008
1

2. Michael Locatis - Background
• State of Colorado
– State CIO - serves Governor Bill Ritter, Jr.
– Statewide IT Consolidation Architect
– Chair Governor’s Health IT Commission
• City & County of Denver
– City & County CIO - served Mayor Hickenlooper
– Developed Denver311 & award winning IT consolidation
• 2008 Democratic National Convention Committee
– National Technology Advisory Council member
– Host Technology Committee member
• National Assoc. of State Chief Information Officers
– 2009 Director
– 2008 - 2009 Security & Privacy Committee Chair
• 22 yrs private sector
2

3. Colorado Leads Nation in State-Level IT Reform
3

4. Contents
Executive Overview………………………. 4
The First 100 Days………………………..12
Fed IT operations issues in review………..23
Fed IT organizational issues in review……31
Fed IT state program delivery continuum...38
4

5. Federal IT Executive Summary
• Federal leadership on enterprise architecture and
systems is critical during this difficult fiscal time for
state and local governments.
• The Federal government is currently not realizing the
full potential in leveraging enterprise architecture and
solutions – more than $300 Billion annually ($600
with Medicaid) in State program grants could benefit.
• A focus on a “coordinated enterprise approach” will
help the next President in critical strategic objectives,
including:
• Improving healthcare quality & efficiency
• Sustaining national security
• Providing world class education
• Public safety next gen communications
• Citizen access to services & transparent government
• Citizen involvement in democracy
• Modernizing aging legacy systems and infrastructure
This approach is currently yielding positive results within
State and Local governments.
5

6. Our Future: Realizing Strategic Vision
Vision for America Enabling The Vision Realizing the Vision
Enterprise
Chief Program
Technology Management
Officer Office
• Employ science and
• Leverage, expand, and
technology to solve our • Champion for the Vision
champion effective
nation's most pressing
• Prioritizes the Agenda
programs & technology
problems.
• Developing industry and
• Build Better State and
• Create a transparent and
association partnership
Local Enterprise Solutions
connected democracy.
• Foster state/local
• Eliminate Ineffective Silo
• Encourage a modern
partnerships
Solutions
communications
• Extending Federal
infrastructure. • Enforce FEA Standards
Enterprise Architecture
• Prepare all of our children • Develop Center of
standards and Models
for a 21st century Excellence for Enterprise
economy. Solutions
• Improve America's • Develop Incentives for
competitiveness. Technical Innovation.
6

7. Our Future: Key Next Steps
Appoint Leadership Scan and Assess Execute
• Appoint Chief Technology • Assign an Enterprise
• Assess Federal Agencies
Officer (CTO) Program Management
• Establish enterprise
• Build a transition team of Office and Staff
performance models and
seasoned IT professionals • Produce the plan for
score agencies
and visionaries execution of the program
• Determine opportunities
• Include proven leadership portfolio
for enterprise
in enterprise architecture • Determine success
collaboration with State
and consolidation measurements
and Local entities
• Assemble a governance • Establish intra-agency
• Identify high-performing
council to help set the governance boards
technological solutions
priorities and evaluate
• Establish private sector
• Prioritize a portfolio of
existing programs,
and association advisory
programs for the CTO.
standards, enterprise
council
solutions & cost allocation
7

8. Scan and Assess
Program Evaluation Methodology
• The following process would be used to evaluate the program portfolio
Initiate Evaluate Score Act
• Setup program • Establish evaluation • Score programs on • Develop action plans
evaluation steering criteria – approval from agreed upon criteria for all programs,
committee program evaluation including:
• Identify:
steering committee • Legislative agenda
• Contract independent • High priority national
assessment entity • Understand national • Public relations
programs
strategic priorities
• Assemble data for • Termination of failing
• High priority programs
programs
that need additional
federal programs • Conduct evaluation by
investment
including: agency by priority • Investment into
• Budgetary information effective programs
• Programs which should
• Research and
• Program sponsorship be terminated
• Creation /
understand new
• Program key contacts
combination of
• Produce federal agency
legislative agenda
• Protocol for evaluation
programs
report and review with
• Agency prioritization
• Conduct stakeholder program evaluation • Leadership
• Finalize program analysis assignments for high
steering committee
schedule and priority / strategic
expectations programs
8

9. Evaluate
Evaluating Federal Programs
• The complexity of evaluating a multi-billion dollar program portfolio will depend
upon setting agreed upon evaluation criteria. The following highlights criteria as a
starting point.
Relevance to Enterprise Program
Strategic Platform Performance Sponsorship
How does the program enable Is the program performing Who are key sponsors for the
Definition the Administration’s strategic and producing the desired program and how do they
vision for the nation? results and impacts? impact strategy?
• Alignment to strategy and • Financial performance / • Stakeholder analysis
political platform return on investment • Alliances
Critical • Schedule / Efficiency
• National priority • Bipartisan
Program • Constituency impact opportunities
• Campaign promise
Metrics • Program objectives • High risk
• Critical dependency for other stakeholders
• Delivery methods
strategic objectives
• Program leadership
• Overall effectiveness –
capabilities
key measure
This process will be difficult and nearly impossible if these
criteria are not agreed upon by the Cabinet before evaluation.
9

10. Score
Scoring the Portfolio O Level
• Highly aligned to Obama Administration national
platform and strategy
Strategic Priority
High • Effective programs – overall effectiveness
Value • Sponsored by friendly stakeholders / or have
strong bi-partisan opportunities
• Focus: How to Optimize
Y O
X Level
• Higher priority program but lower impact to national
platform.
VALUE
• Dependency for other strategic programs
• Overall high to moderate program effectiveness
• Sponsorship is wide ranging
• Focus: How to Improve Value
Y Level
• High value program and highly effective
Z • Not aligned to national platform
X • Sponsorship is wide ranging
• Focus: Value over Strategic Value
Z Level
• Strategically opposed to the national platform
High
Lower Value and
Higher Priority • Ineffective delivery
Priority
Lower Priority
• Sponsored by higher risk stakeholders
• High political erosion factor
10 • Focus: How to Terminate

11. Possible Organization Structure for Federal IT
President of the
United States
Cabinet Level Positions
Department
NEW-Cabinet Level CTO Director OMB
Secretary(s)
Deputy CTO Deputy Director Assistant Secretary
Office of E-Government Deputy Assistant
Special Assistants
& Information Technology Secretary (Agency CIO)
Vision Project Oversight PMO Execution
Technology Strategy Project Budget Accountability
Policy Alignment Enterprise Procurement Extend Architecture
to state & local partners
Goals & Objectives FEA & LOB Standards
Executive Oversight Status Reporting PMO Compliance
11

12. Contents
Executive Overview………………………. 4
The First 100 Days………………………..12
Fed IT operations issues in review………..23
Fed IT organizational issues in review……31
Fed IT state program delivery continuum...38
12

13. Perform Assessment
Deep Environmental Scan/Assessment
– Project portfolio
– Standards and architecture
– Department level CMM
– Staff skills
– Legislative review
– Governance review
– Gap analysis
– Federal/State/Local program delivery
– Recommendations
– Roadmap
– Deliver “State of Federal IT Report” to President, Cabinet,
Congress & Citizens
13

14. Form Enterprise Program Management Office
• Appoint top notch leader for • Form enterprise Program
OMB Office of E-Gov & Management Office (ePMO)
Information Technology • Implement project and portfolio
• Exercise full authority of the management (PPM) to achieve
E-Government Act of 2002. highest possible return on IT
investments while mitigating risk.
• Perform top to bottom
assessment of Federal IT & • Drive agency level accountability
cyber security. • Develop remediation strategies for
• Synchronize with new Federal existing failing projects
CTO policy objectives • Engage agencies in solution
14

15. Accelerate Standards Adoption
• Federal – Data Reference Model (DRM)
• Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA)
• National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST)
• Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS)
• National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI)
• National Information Exchange Model (NIEM)
• National Historical Publications and Records Commission (NHPRC)
• United States Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT)
15

16. Strengthen State Coordination
• Review IT performance of Federally
mandated, state administered projects
and from “lessons learned”…
• explore a Federal enterprise approach
to IT delivery
• reform Federal funding model to
encourage shared services & state IT
consolidation efforts
• standardize federal agency
interpretation of OMB Circular A-87
shared cost allocation guidelines to
encourage state IT consolidation,
shared services and flexible
comingling practices
16

17. Coordinate Cyber Security Programs
CIPAC - Critical
Infrastructure
Partnership Advisory
Council
17

18. Leverage Geospatial Technology Assets
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) greatly improve
information management capabilities
Leverage state efforts in developing the National Spatial
Data Infrastructure
Promote geospatial enabled line of business applications
Coordinate silo GIS modernization efforts among
federal agencies
– FEMA flood plain mapping
– Census map modernization
– BLM wildfire management
Imagery for the Nation
18

19. Fast Track Citizen Access
Deploy Web/CRM 2.0
technology across
federal agencies
Promote & lead national
broadband availability
policy
Promote citizen access &
government transparency
19

20. Promote Public Sector Collaboration
Planning for future initiatives
requires communication of
vision and…
alignment of priorities for the
success of partnerships across
branches at local, state &
federal level
Most have appetite for
leadership and roadmap from
the federal government.
20

21. Engage Private Sector
Engage private sector
industry partners in
dialog and partnership to
architect best practice
solutions to government
issues
Adoption of standards &
enterprise architecture
Innovation council
approach
21

22. Pursue Innovation
• Leverage Federal IT to
showcase technology R&D
• Contribute to maintaining
U.S. leadership position in
innovation of networking
and information technology
• Drive national broadband
coverage initiatives with a
goal of high speed internet
access availability for all
U.S. citizens
22

23. Contents
Executive Overview………………………. 4
The First 100 Days………………………..12
Fed IT operations issues in review………..23
Fed IT organizational issues in review……31
Fed IT state program delivery continuum...38
23

24. GAO Report Cards Identify Serious Fed IT Issues
24

25. Many Fed IT Projects Suffer Multi-year Shortfalls
2008
2008 2007 2006
25

26. Federal Enterprise Architecture Slow to Mature
Federal Enterprise
Architecture and federal
standards initiatives face
resistance and slow
adoption rates among
federal agencies
Lack of promotion with
state/local government
Economies of standards
based computing should
transcend government
boundaries
26

27. July 2008 - Growing Legislative Concern
27

28. Senator Carper’s Report Card
28

29. Legislative Action
29

30. Federal IT In the Press: Billions Wasted
30

31. Contents
Executive Overview………………………. 4
The First 100 Days………………………..12
Fed IT operations issues in review………..23
Fed IT organizational issues in review……31
Fed IT state program delivery continuum...38
31

32. How Federal IT is Organized (1)
• The Cabinet includes the Vice President and the heads of 15
executive departments - the Secretaries of Agriculture,
Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human
Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban
Development, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation,
Treasury, and Veterans Affairs, and the Attorney General.
• Each federal department is required to have an agency CIO
by law under the Information Technology Management
Reform Act (Clinger-Cohen Act) of 1996.
• Varied results have been
achieved as departments
continue to struggle with IT
delivery as well as interagency
collaboration and data sharing.
32

33. How Federal IT is Organized (2)
• Under the current President, Cabinet-level rank also has been
accorded to the Administrator, Environmental Protection
Agency; Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB);
the Director, National Drug Control Policy; and the U.S.
Trade Representative.23
• The 2002 E-Government Act
established a Federal Chief
Information Officer in OMB
and created the Office of
Electronic Government &
Information Technology, which
is headed by a Presidentially
appointed Administrator/CIO.
33

34. Federal IT Legislative Background
Legislative Background of E-Gov
Freedom of Government Clinger-
Information Performance Cohen Act
Act Results Act
1966 1974 1993 1995 1996 2002
E-Gov Act
Paperwork
Privacy Act
Reduction Act
FISMA Act
6
34

35. OMB Office of E-Government
Pursuant to the E-Government Act of 2002 the Administrator should provide
overall leadership and direction to the executive branch on electronic government
and oversees implementation of IT throughout the Federal government, including:
• Overseeing the E-Government Fund to support interagency partnerships and innovation in using
E-Government;
• Directing the activities of the CIO Council, which consists of Federal agency CIOs, advising on
the appointments of agency CIOs, and monitoring and consulting on agency technology efforts;
• Advising the Director of OMB on the performance of IT investments, as well as identifying
opportunities for joint agency and government-wide IT projects;
• Overseeing the development of enterprise architectures within and across agencies, which is
being fulfilled through the Federal Enterprise Architecture, the framework for describing the
relationship between business functions and the technologies and information that support them;
• Overseeing specific IT reform initiatives, activities, and areas of shared responsibility relating to:
– Capital planning and investment control for IT;
– The development of enterprise architectures;
– Information security and privacy;
– Access to, dissemination of,
and preservation of government information;
– Accessibility of IT for persons with disabilities; and
– Other areas of electronic government.
35

36. Line of Business Initiative
In 2004 and 2005 the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
initiated a government-wide line of business analysis with a goal of
identifying opportunities to reduce the cost of government and improve
services to citizens through business performance improvements:
Case Management (CM)
Financial Management (FM)
Grants Management (GM)
Human Resources Management (HR)
Federal Health Architecture (FHA)
Information Systems Security (ISS)
Budget Formulation and Execution (BFE)
Geospatial LoB
IT Infrastructure (ITI)
36

37. Possible Organization Structure for Federal IT
President of the
United States
Cabinet Level Positions
Department
NEW-Cabinet Level CTO Director OMB
Secretary(s)
Deputy CTO Deputy Director Assistant Secretary
Office of E-Government Deputy Assistant
Special Assistants
& Information Technology Secretary (Agency CIO)
Vision Project Oversight PMO Execution
Technology Strategy Project Budget Accountability
Policy Alignment Enterprise Procurement Extend Architecture
to state & local partners
Goals & Objectives FEA & LOB Standards
Executive Oversight Status Reporting OMB PMO Compliance
37

38. Contents
Executive Overview………………………. 4
The First 100 Days………………………..12
Fed IT operations issues in review………..23
Fed IT organizational issues in review……31
Fed IT state program delivery continuum...38
38

39. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Federal/State IT delivery models vary from program
to program with wide ranging results
Success often correlates to the level of enterprise
leadership and direction from the initiating federal
agency or program
The following slides describe the IT delivery
continuum with examples of real program outcomes
39

40. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• Emergency Comm. • State is a pass through or
bypassed all together
• Geospatial
• Results in point solutions at
• Health IT HIE/RHIO
local level
• Broadband
• Limits state, regional or
• Credentialing
national compatibility &
• Mitigation interoperability
UASI
• Preparedness
HHS ONC
• Sustainability issues
PSIC
40

41. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• Emergency Comm. • State is a pass through or
bypassed all together
• Geospatial
• Results in point solutions at
• Health IT HIE/RHIO
local level
• Broadband
• Limits state, regional or
• Credentialing
national compatibility &
• Mitigation interoperability
UASI
• Preparedness
HHS ONC
• Sustainability issues
PSIC
41

42. State Health IT Priorities
Source: The Commonwealth Fund and National Governors Association E-Health Survey,
conducted by Health Management Associates, 2007.
42

43. Federal Health IT – Inconsistent Outcomes
AHIC
CMS AHRQ
Use Cases
SRD
NHIN I, II
State Medicaid Agencies State/regional
Demonstrations
Medicaid Transformation demonstrations
Grants
HITSP
HRSA
ONCHIT
Standards
CCHIT
Community
Health Clinics State Level HIE
Product/Network
HISPC
Certification
Consensus Project
(RTI)
(AHIMA-FORE)
Privacy and Security
State Alliance Steering Committee
CDC CA, CO, FL, IN, LA,
for e-Health
ME, MA, NY, RI,TN, UT
(NGA)
State Governments
eHealth
Initiative
State
HIMSS
NCSL
Bio-surveillance
Industry
State legislators
HIT
43

44. Astute Policy Response
44

45. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• HHS multi-program • Complex, monolithic,
eligibility expensive state one-offs
• CMS Medicaid • State general fund match
impact up to 25%
• CMS MITA
• Many underperforming or
• HAVA Voting
failed IT projects
• Real ID
• Require significant operating $
• Program interpretations differ
to sustain
by Federal region
45

46. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• • Complex, monolithic,
HHS multi-program
expensive state one-offs
eligibility
• • State general fund match
CMS Medicaid
impact up to 25%
• CMS MITA
• Many underperforming or
• HAVA Voting
failed IT projects
• Real ID
• Require significant operating $
• Program interpretations differ
to sustain
by Federal region
46

47. Federal Program Funding Approach Promotes
Costly State-Level IT Stovepipes
The following illustrates how Federal programs are funded and how this
CRITICAL ISSUES/RISKS
impacts state-level IT spending as well as the risks associated with this model.
• Departments are not leveraging a
Direct Funds From the Federal Government shared services architecture.
Direct Funds From the Federal Government
• Multiple programs result in a
proliferation of IT environments,
services and staffing.
Federal Federal Federal
Federal Federal Federal
Program #1 Program #2 Program #3 • This model does not allow efficiency
Program #1 Program #2 Program #3
savings or a pooling of technology
staff and assets to better meet the
Program Funding Costs Program Funding Costs Program Funding Costs
Department #2
Department #1
program needs.
• Program Personnel • Program Personnel • Program Personnel
• Facilities • Facilities • Facilities • Individually, the programs are not
able to provide the best of class
• Operational Expenses • Operational Expenses • Operational Expenses
enterprise services, key risks include:
• Technology • Technology • Technology
• Security
• Disaster Recovery
Specific Technology Specific Technology Specific Technology
Funding Funding Funding
• Customer Services and
• IT Staff • IT Staff • IT Staff Service Level Agreements
• Hardware • Hardware • Hardware
• Enterprise Architectural
• Software • Software • Software
• Standards
• Facilities • Facilities • Facilities
• Other IT Costs • Other IT Costs • Other IT Costs • Configuration Management
47

48. Federal Program Funding Approach Promotes
Costly State-Level IT Stovepipes
Each program makes a purchase of IT assets such as servers
which could be more effectively leveraged across the enterprise.
The resulting stovepipe IT environment creates unnecessary
complexity, is harder to secure and maintain and more costly to
support.
More IT staff with different skills and capabilities are required to
support scattered environments, creating greater risks with IT
resource management and succession planning.
Critical functions such as security, disaster recovery, and
customer support are simply not supported due to the limited
individual program funding.
Bottom line: The current model does not effectively leverage IT
investments and personnel while increasing both risks and costs.
48

49. Fed/State Need Move Toward Enterprise
Departments are responsible for meeting the needs of the program and have limited technology budgets. The future
model below illustrates the benefits for a shared services approach to managing the IT needs for Federal programs
Future (Shared Services)
Current (Distributed)
Federal Program 1 Federal Programs
Federal Programs
Federal Program 1
Hardware IT Staff
Software
Hardware IT Staff
Business Applications
Architecture
Software Business Applications
Facilities
Architecture
Facilities
Enterprise IT Resource Management
Enterprise IT Resource Management
Federal Program 4
Federal Program 3
Shared Data Centers
Shared Data Centers
Hardware IT Staff
Software Enterprise
Enterprise
Hardware Data Architecture
IT Staff
Data Architecture
Architecture Application Servers
Application Servers
Facilities
Software
Architecture
Facilities Enterprise Architecture
Enterprise Architecture
Major Risks Enterprise Enterprise Enterprise SLA
Enterprise Enterprise Enterprise SLA
Disaster Cyber / Customer
Disaster Recovery Security Disaster Cyber / Customer
Recovery Security Support
Customer Service Enterprise Architecture Recovery Security Support
49

50. Future Benefits
There are long term reductions in the financial costs as the
enterprise is leveraged to support Federal programs. For
example, new programs should not have to provide & maintain
a unique data center for their program.
Critical support functions, disaster recovery, and security
services are provided consistently across the programs.
IT personnel are more adequately positioned and aligned to
support the programs. Customers receive better support and
service level agreements can be realized.
Enterprise architectural standards can be implemented and this
standardization can reduce procurement and support costs,
reduce program implementation time, improve integration, and
help build a more stable environment.
Network and system monitoring are more effective and thus
reduce operational risks.
50

51. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• 5-year initiative to plan, • 3 consortiums funded
develop and deploy • 3 different designs
model information • 3 different development efforts
systems in WIC State – none deployed
agencies using a multi-
• Project issues & lack of
state consortia model.
incremental deliverables
Work in progress.
• Limited use of Federal
Enterprise Architecture
51

52. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment* Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• Public health & disease • Successful deployment
control lab software • In use at state level
• DHS Constellation • Promotes common data model,
Automated Critical Asset sharing, workflow
Management System • Continuity in approach across
• DHHS PECOS/PES states nationally
provider enrollment
* software developed for
• Limits state flexibility to
the Federal agency & system & fraud detection customize
used by states
52

53. Federal/State Program IT Delivery Continuum
Point Solution Enterprise
IT Delivery
Project Matched State One System One System
Seed Program Agency Federated Enterprise
Grants Grants Model Deployment Deployment
Agencies Programs Outcome
• National Federal income • Successful deployment
tax system with goal of • Build once use nationally
having 80 percent of tax • 68 million returns filed
returns filed electronically in 2005
electronically by 2012
• Promotes commercial
innovation
53

54. Michael W. Locatis
State Chief Information Officer
Governor Bill Ritter, Jr.
State of Colorado
www.colorado.gov/oit
mike.locatis@state.co.us
(303) 866-6060 Office