SENATE BILL REPORT

                                   SHB 2814

          AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS, FEBRUARY 27, 1992

Brief Description:  Regarding state information technology.

SPONSORS: House Committee on Appropriations (originally sponsored by Representatives H. Sommers, Silver, Anderson, Locke and Winsley; by request of Department of Information Services and Office of Financial Management)

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

SENATE COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS

Majority Report:  Do pass as amended. 

      Signed by Senators McDonald, Chairman; Craswell, Vice Chairman; Amondson, Bailey, Bluechel, Cantu, Gaspard, Hayner, M. Kreidler, Metcalf, Saling, L. Smith, Talmadge, West, Williams, and Wojahn.

Staff:  Martin Chaw (786‑7715)

Hearing Dates: February 26, 1992; February 27, 1992

BACKGROUND:

In 1987 the Legislature created the Department of Information Services.  The department was given the responsibility to oversee and review the costs, scope and feasibility of proposed computer systems for the state.  The department is composed of two primary divisions:

(1)the Planning and Policy Division which oversees long range system planning and system policy development; and

(2)the Service Division which provide telecommunications, data processing and equipment leasing support to state agencies.

The department is overseen by the Information Services Board which consists of nine members (three from cabinet agencies, one from higher education, one from a non-cabinet executive agency, two from the private sector, one from the judicial branch, and one from the legislative branch).

In the 1991-93 biennial budget, the Legislature appropriated $1.4 million and 16 FTEs for FY92 funding only for the Planning and Policy Division and included a proviso which required the division to submit a plan to improve the state's information systems development, review and approval process.

The plan has been completed.  The plan presented major weaknesses in information systems management and cost control and recommended improvements to the funding and planning approach to address these weaknesses.

Deficiencies in the current approach include the following:  (1) substandard work products; (2) poor project conception and planning; and (3) ineffective project oversight.

The Governor has requested $1.8 million and an additional 6 FTEs in the supplemental budget to continue to Policy and Planning Division in FY93.  This request increases the division's biennial appropriation to $3.2 million and 22 FTEs.

The House proposed budget includes funding at only $1.6 million with no increase in FTE authority.  The Senate proposed budget includes $1.4 million with no increase in FTE authority.

SUMMARY:

Reporting and procedural requirements are established for state agencies and the Department of Information Services in requesting and reviewing information services projects.

Four areas of policy and planning development are established to guide the implementation of the information technology projects.  These areas are as follows:

State Strategic Information Technology Plan.  The department will prepare a statewide plan establishing the mission, goals and objectives for the planning and implementation of state information resources.  This plan will be developed within the context of the policies and procedures as established by the Information Services Board.  The department will also submit an annual report on the status of this plan to the Governor and the legislative fiscal committees.

Agency Strategic Plan.  The state agency requesting a project will prepare an agency strategic plan demonstrating how the proposed project fits into the goals of the statewide information services plan.  The plan will include implementation schedules and costs.  An annual performance report on the project implementation will be submitted to the department for review.  Ultimate approval of the plan rests with the board.

Review of Funding Requests.  Upon request by the Office of Fiscal Management (OFM), the department will review an agency's project and submit a funding recommendation to OFM.

Planning and Funding of Major Projects.  The department will, with approval by the board, establish criteria to evaluate requested projects.  The department will also create a model process in which agencies can use or may accept an alternative format presented by the agency.  Project plans will be approved by the department director, the director of OFM, and the head of the agency requesting the project.

In addition, the composition of the board is increased by one member with the director of the department being the tenth.

The sunset date for the department and the board is extended two years to June 30, 1996.

Appropriation:  none

Revenue:  none

Fiscal Note:  available

Effective Date:  The bill contains an emergency clause and takes effect immediately.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED SENATE AMENDMENT:

The Director of the Department of Information Services is given authority to terminate a project if the director determines that the project is not meeting or expected to meet its anticipated performance standards.

The Assistant Director of the Policy and Planning Division within the Department of Information Services is appointed by the director and confirmed by the Information Services Board.

Information System projects shall be evaluated at three stages of project development:  initial needs assessment, feasibility study, and the final project implementation plan.

The Information Services Board composition is maintained at nine members instead of ten as proposed.

The Department of Information Services shall include testing and demonstration of projects through users to determine success of implementation.

In the case of institutions of higher education, the provisions of this act apply to business and administrative applications but does not apply to academic or research endeavors.

TESTIMONY FOR:

The proposed bill incorporates, to the greatest extent possible, concerns and suggestions of state agencies in the management of information systems.  Furthermore, the head of an agency requesting an information system has the responsibility to assure that the project is managed appropriately, programmatically, and fiscally.  The bill contains an emergency clause for the purpose of quickly implementing the policies outlined in the bill and to prepare for the biennial budget process.

TESTIMONY AGAINST:  None

TESTIFIED:  PRO:  Brad Blanchard, Director, Department of Information Services