[head.htm]

ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES
JESS McDONALD, DIRECTOR
CWAC/POS SACWIS Advisory Committee
October 5, 1999 Meeting Minutes

Members in Attendance
Ken Dee, CHASI
Jeff Buhrmann, DCFS SACWIS
Darlene Sweeney, Allendale
Dennis Egolf, DCFS SACWIS
Priscilla Parker, LCFS
Foster Centola, DCFS SACWIS
Valerie Riley, Center for Hew Horizons
Steven Minter, DCFS, APT
Jim Erickson, New Life Social Services
Zack Schrantz, Uhlich
Sue Grady, Youth Svc. Bureau, IL Valley
Steve Bradshaw, DCFS/POS Liaison
Jan Schoening, CCA

Members Absent
Kevin Singletary, CSS � Peoria
George Thibeault, Catholic Charities
Carol Winn, Ada S. McKinley
Frances Barnes, VOA
Rebecca Cook, IARF

The meeting convened at approximately 10:35 a.m.

Minutes of September 14, 1999 meeting - upon a motion by Priscilla Parker and a second by Darlene Sweeney, the minutes were unanimously approved.

Update on SACWIS Project (Jeff Buhrmann)

	Work with WANG progresses as equipment and installations continue. The infrastructure operations center (IOC) is staffed and operational. The committee will not be able to hold its November meeting at the facility due to limited group meeting space; however, a tour of the facility will be placed on the November agenda. The consolidated services desk (CSD), or help desk, became operational on October 1st; the DCFS help desk is still functioning, also. A question was asked on the impact of the WANG operated CSD on the current help desk staff; Jeff reported that Sam Traylor has not finalized his plan in this area.
	Application Development and Implementation RFP � As reported last month, DCFS is currently negotiating with the selected vendor, American Management Services (AMS). Even though the negotiations have been slower than expected, the contract is expected to be ready by the end of the month. The projected start date continues to be February 1, 2000. After detailed discussion with AMS staff, the alternative approach to application development phasing was abandoned in favor of the original phasing proposal.
	QA RFP � Jeff B. gave a status report on the selection process of the quality assurance vendor. Both bidders, KPMG, Inc. and Spectrum Maximus, have made oral presentations. The technical review team has completed the scoring of the proposals and a decision will soon be made on the need to continue with a Best and Final Offer process (BAFO). The process continues on schedule for a start date on or about January 3, 2000.
	Web Site and Templates � Jeff reported in Tom Teague's absence that the templates development continues. It was noted that a date on the templates would assist users to recognize new documents posted since their last visit to the site. The SACWIS link is on the DCFS web site at: http://www.state.il.us/dcfs/

Federal Issues Paper Update
Jeff thanked the group for comments received on the draft of the paper. He has briefed Carolyn Cochran Kopel on the paper. Jeff has recommended the State meet with ACF to discuss the issues detailed in the paper, rather than rely on a paper review and response process. Jeff also recommended to the Director that private agencies' representatives should participate in any meeting with federal officials. Jeff expects to hear from Carolyn within a week or so and will keep Jan Schoening informed of the decision.

A question was raised on the importance of having the issues in the paper resolved prior to the application vendor starting work. Jeff wants and hopes to have answers prior to the scheduled date of the rate increase. It is in everyone's best interest to resolve the issues up front.

There was an extended period of questions and comments.

SACWIS Presentations to POS Agencies
Two sessions remain: October 14th in Aurora (Ken Dee and Darlene Sweeney), and, October 20 in Chicago for Cook North (George Thibeault and Priscilla Parker). Steve Bradshaw will prepare a list of agencies attending the Regional Presentations for the next meeting.

Financing POS Equipment, Software, and Other Costs � Status Report
Jeff explained that he has formed an internal team to discuss issues relevant to the financing methodology, and to bring those issues to the Advisory Committee. An example is how many seats might be funded using the rate increase methodology. A small group consisting of Dennis Egolf, Steve Bradshaw and staff from selected units will be meeting in the next two weeks to discuss the rate methodology document and possible changes to the process.

Jeff pointed out that the Director committed un-budgeted FY00 dollars for the rate increase.

Members of the committee met on 10/4 to review the procurement document presented at the last meeting. There were several questions, particularly on the specifications. It was noted that the document seems complicated and suggestions were made:

	Reformat to include an explanation section with the requirement section, followed immediately by the planning section for that item/area.
	Reduce the list of requirements and/or reformat to indicate required vs. desired vs. suggested specifications. What is critical and what's not?
	What is the review process, who will be doing it and what is the time frame?
	What allowances will be made for agencies that are waiting for COA peer review? Of specific issue are agencies who may have had their review dates changed by COA.
	What is the actual process for the rate increase?
	The desire for an explanation of why some hardware specifications are there, such as a 17" monitor, speaker & sound card, and CD-ROM drives.
	Would a "terminal server" approach be considered? This may allow some agencies to use older equipment at the presentation level.
	A request that the department be "open-minded" when looking at an agency's plan.
	Some reviews (of the procurement document) by agencies took 1 to 2 hours, restructure and simplify.

Questions on the specifications should be sent to Steve Bradshaw. Steve will build a "punch-list" to assure that questions are tracked and answers obtained.

The Advisory Committee informed Jeff Buhrmann of its plans to hire a consultant to review the cost figures and develop its own cost estimates. It was agreed that the Department's cost and specifications documents could be shared with a consultant, with the written understanding that the documents are confidential. The committee expects to have the consultant's report by the next meeting.

Arlene Happach's letter to Director McDonald was addressed by Jeff Buhrmann. Jeff will be drafting a response for the Director's consideration. Reply to Arlene is expected prior to the next meeting. The letter was also distributed to the internal team (mentioned earlier) for review and comment.

Jeff revisited the discussion with CMS regarding procurement law. Sue Grady expressed her concern over the possibility of private agencies receiving the same volume pricing that the department received. Is it realistic to expect private agencies purchasing only a few machines to receive the same prices as the state?

Priscilla Parker asked if there would be a benefit to having separate JADs for the POS agencies and DCFS staff? Jim Erickson thought that how people do business might come out more in separate groups. Jeff replied that SACWIS will be designed in accordance with Best Practice. This will drive the baseline for how the work is done; there shouldn't be any variation between DCFS and the POS agency caseworkers. It is likely, however, that small breakout sessions could be a part of the JAD process. A "JAD Preparatory Process" may be needed to get the most benefit from the JAD sessions.

The issue of union vs. non-union staff was raised but not discussed.

SACWIS Briefing for POS Executives
The briefing has been postponed due to the joint belief that it may be premature. The briefing will be rescheduled when more substantive content is available, and, a discussion will be held on who to invite to the briefing.

DCFS-POS "Bridge"/Data Dictionary � Status Report
It was suggested that this item be dropped from future agendas; however, the Data Group chaired by Priscilla Parker continues to meet and had planned to focus on the Data Dictionary. Priscilla discussed some of the questions and comments from the group's 9/21 meeting.

It was noted that data creep, and/or scope creep are major concerns during the detailed design. Also, the questions raised at this meeting are good ones, and may require some redefining of some concepts, such as "What is a case record?" The concept of the caseworker being the primary collector and recorder of the case information may result in a higher turnover for some agencies, including DCFS.

Jeff noted that SACWIS is a very complex, detailed project. It is, in fact, an organizational development activity.

Next Meeting
Scheduled for Tuesday, November 2, 1999 at the Mendenhall Building in Springfield, Illinois.

Adjournment
meeting adjourned at approximately 1:05 p.m.

 [foot.htm]