IRP DATA REPOSITORY TASK ORDER #3 PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN - KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY October 1, 2020
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
IRP DATA REPOSITORY
TASK ORDER #3
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CENTER,
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
Responsible Principal: Jennifer Walton
Co-Principal: Brian Howell
October 1, 2020IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................................. 4
1.1 PURPOSE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN ................................................ 4
1.2 PROJECT PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES ................................................................... 4
1.3 PROJECT STAFFING .............................................................................................. 5
1.3.1 IRP, Inc. ............................................................................................................... 5
1.3.2 IRP, Inc. Board of Directors ................................................................................ 5
1.3.3 Kentucky Transportation Center (Project Management and CMV consultants .. 6
1.3.4 Seikosoft (IT Developer) ..................................................................................... 6
1.3.5 IRP Steering Panel ............................................................................................... 6
1.3.6 IRP Data Panel ..................................................................................................... 7
1.3.7 Requirements/Testing/Reporting Jurisdiction Volunteers ................................... 7
1.3.8 Pilot Jurisdictions ................................................................................................. 8
1.4 GOVERNANCE ....................................................................................................... 9
1.4.1 Governance Purpose ............................................................................................ 9
1.4.2 Governance Hierarchy ......................................................................................... 9
1.5 ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................................................ 11
1.5.1 IRP, Inc. ............................................................................................................. 11
1.5.2 IRP Board of Directors ...................................................................................... 11
1.5.3 Member Jurisdictions ......................................................................................... 11
1.5.4 Kentucky Transportation Center ........................................................................ 12
1.5.5 Seikosoft ............................................................................................................ 13
1.5.6 IRP Steering Panel ............................................................................................. 13
1.5.7 IRP Data Panel ................................................................................................... 13
PROJECT PLANS ...................................................................................................................... 14
1.6 SCHEDULE PLAN................................................................................................. 14
1.6.1 Milestone Schedule ............................................................................................ 14
1.6.2 Tasks & Deliverables Schedule ......................................................................... 17
1.6.3 Payment Schedule .............................................................................................. 17
1.7 COMMUNICATIONS PLAN ................................................................................ 17
1.7.1 IRP Board of Directors ...................................................................................... 18
1.7.2 IRP Jurisdiction Members.................................................................................. 18
1.7.3 IRP Steering Panel ............................................................................................. 18
1.7.4 IRP Data Panel ................................................................................................... 19
1.8 RISK REGISTER PLAN ........................................................................................ 20
1.8.1 Executive Support .............................................................................................. 21
1.8.2 Scope .................................................................................................................. 21
1.8.3 Costs................................................................................................................... 21
Page 2 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.8.4 Changes .............................................................................................................. 21
1.8.5 Stakeholders ....................................................................................................... 22
1.8.6 Communications ................................................................................................ 22
1.8.7 Resources ........................................................................................................... 23
1.9 CHANGE CONTROL PLAN ................................................................................. 23
1.10 DOCUMENTATION PLAN .................................................................................. 25
PROJECT MONITORING ....................................................................................................... 25
1.11 METHODOLOGIES AND TOOLS ....................................................................... 25
1.12 MEASURING AND REPORTING PROGRESS ................................................... 26
1.12.1 Scope .................................................................................................................. 26
1.12.2 Schedule ............................................................................................................. 26
1.12.3 Costs................................................................................................................... 27
CLOSURE ................................................................................................................................... 27
APPENDIX A: PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN APPROVAL........................................28
Page 3 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
OVERVIEW
1.1 PURPOSE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Project Management Plan, or PMP, is a single, approved document that guides the
project’s execution, monitoring and control, and closure. The intended audience of the IRP
Data Repository PMP is all project stakeholders including IRP, Inc., IRP board of
directors, Seikosoft, Kentucky Transportation Center, and other project stakeholders.
1.2 PROJECT PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES
The IRP Data Repository project will result in a high-quality, timely, and complete vehicle
registration database that is readily accessible to enforcement in all states and Canadian
provinces. This project phase focuses on developing the data exchange architecture for the
future IRP Data Repository in accordance with the requirements stated within the IRP
request for proposals (RFP). In Task Order 3, Seikosoft will develop the IRP Data
Repository in coordination with IRP, Inc., and IRP’s project manager (Kentucky
Transportation Center) to ensure conformance to RFP functional requirements while
meeting project timelines within budget.
The objectives for this project are as follows:
a. Ensure Shared Project Understanding
b. Develop IRP Data Repository
c. Migrate Existing IRP Member Data into New System
d. Validate IRP Data Repository
Page 4 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.3 PROJECT STAFFING
1.3.1 IRP, Inc.
No. Member Name Position Role Email Phone
1 Tim Adams CEO Executive Sponsor tadams@irpinc.org (502) 845-0398
2 Ken Carey Director, IRP Plan Compliance and Education Plan Compliance kcarey@irpinc.org (703) 963-1604
3 Robin Murphy Director, Clearinghouse and Information Systems Mgt. Program/Project Manager rmurphy@irpinc.org (703) 963-1286
1.3.2 IRP, Inc. Board of Directors
No. Name State/Province Position Organization Email Phone
1 Tammi Popp Pennsylvania Chair Department of Transportation tpopp@pa.gov (717) 783-4508
2 Vacant Vice Chair
3 Vacant Past Chair
4 Kevin Davis Idaho Treasurer State Tax Commission kevin.davis@tax.idaho.gov (208) 334-7601
5 Renee Kyser Alabama Secretary Department of Revenue renee.kyser@revenue.alabama.gov (334) 479-3101
6 James Walker New Jersey Region I NJ Motor Vehicle Commission james.walker@mvc.nj.gov (609) 777-1637
7 Portia Manley North Carolina Region II Division of Motor Vehicles pmanley@ncdot.gov (919) 861-3332
8 Deann Williams Kansas Region III Division of Motor Vehicles deann.williams@kdor.ks.gov (785) 296-3686
9 Paul Harbottle Ontario Canadian Rep Road User Safety Division paul.harbottle@ontario.ca (416) 235-4559
10 Terry Wallace Alberta Canadian Rep Alberta Transportation terry.wallace@gov.ab.ca (780) 427-7508
11 Vacant Rotating Position
Page 5 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.3.3 Kentucky Transportation Center (Project Management and CMV consultants
No. Name Position Email Phone
1 Jennifer Walton Program Manager jennifer.walton@uky.edu (859) 257-7239
2 Brian Howell Project Manager brian.howell@uky.edu (859) 218-0017
3 Jeff Tipton Project Consultant jeffrey.tipton@uky.edu (502) 321-1333
4 Mark Bell Project Consultant markbell@twc.com (859) 433-7799
1.3.4 Seikosoft (IT Developer)
No. Name Position Email Phone
1 Chris Campbell CEO/Owner chris@seikosoft.com (208) 589-2860
(208) 497-0637 (office)
2 Toby Piquet Project Manager toby@seikosoft.com
(208) 715-1050 (cell)
3 Cody Marshall Applications Architect/Owner cody@seikosoft.com (208) 716-7295
4 Jordan Hayashi IT Leader Developer/Owner jordan@seikosoft.com (206) 473-7402
5 Christian Martinsen Software Developer christian@seikosoft.com (209) 736-7930
1.3.5 IRP Steering Panel
No. Name State/Province Organization Email Phone
1 Tammi Popp Pennsylvania Department of Transportation tpopp@pa.gov (717) 783-4508
2 Ravi Surapaneni Indiana Department of Revenue rsurapaneni@dor.in.gov (317) 615-7446
3 James (Jim) Walker New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission james.walker@mvc.nj.gov (609) 777-1637
4 Kevin Davis Idaho State Tax Commission kevin.davis@tax.idaho.gov (208) 334-7601
5 Deann Williams Kansas Division of Motor Vehicles deann.williams@kdor.ks.gov (785) 296-3686
6 TBD (Canadian)
7 Tom Kelly NA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration thomas.kelly@dot.gov (202) 480-5240
8 Tim Adams NA IRP, Inc. tadams@irpinc.org (502) 706-0196
9 Robin Murphy NA IRP, Inc. rmurphy@irpinc.org (703) 963-1286
Page 6 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.3.6 IRP Data Panel
State/
No. Name Organization Email Phone
Province
1 Chris Flynn NA Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration chris.flynn@dot.gov (617) 494-2662
2 Edmond Joe NA Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration edmond.joe@dot.gov (202) 507-3794
3 Drew Clark Kentucky Transportation Cabinet drew.clark@ky.gov (502) 892-8580
4 Tammy Gomez Texas Department of Transportation tammy.gomez@txdmv.gov (512) 465-3756
5 Val King Saskatchewan Government Insurance vking@sgi.sk.ca (306) 775-6351
6 Deb Roeder Iowa Department of Transportation deborah.roeder@iowadot.us (515) 237-3255
7 Cathy Beedle Nebraska Department of Motor Vehicles cathy.beedle@nebraska.gov (402) 471-3894
8 Scott Greenawalt Oklahoma Corporation Commission s.greenawalt@occemail.com (405) 522-8772
9 Isai Marichamy Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles iamarichamy@dmv.nv.gov (775) 684-4913
10 Robin Murphy NA IRP, Inc. rmurphy@irpinc.org (703) 963-1286
11 TBD (Law Enforcement Representative)
1.3.7 Requirements/Testing/Reporting Jurisdiction Volunteers
No. Name State/ Province Organization Email Phone
1 Cassidy Cade South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles cassidy.cade@scdmv.net (803) 896-2693
2 Mathieu Chasse Quebec Automobile Insurance Corporation mathieu.chasse@saaq.gouv.qc.ca (418) 528-3333
3 Cindy Douglass New Hampshire Department of Safety cindy.douglas@dos.nh.gov (603) 227-4110
4 Jerri Hunter Idaho Transportation Department jerri.hunter@itd.idaho.gov (208) 334-8626
5 Charito Mackay British Columbia Insurance Corporation charito.mackay@icbc.com (604) 981-8305
6 Mary Withkowski New York Department of Motor Vehicles mary.withkowski@dmv.ny.gov (518) 473-8187
7 Jared Hill (Data Privacy) Georgia Department of Revenue jared.hill@dor.ga.gov (404) 724-7660
Page 7 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.3.8 Pilot Jurisdictions
State/
No. Name Organization IRP Platform Email Phone
Province
1 Dina Smith Colorado Department of Transportation FAST dina.smith@state.co.us (303) 205-5621
2 Jenny Adler " " " jenny.adler@state.co.us NA
3 Natalie Wendell Minnesota Department of Transportation Explore natalie.wendell@state.mn.us (651) 201-7972
4 Mike Thomas North Carolina Department of Transportation In House methomas@ncdot.gov (919) 508-1776
5 Mike Spears " " " mspears@ncdot.gov (919) 508-1880
6 James (Jim) Walker New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission Legatus james.walker@mvc.nj.gov (609) 777-1637
7 Mary Withkowski New York Department of Motor Vehicles Celtic mary.withkowski@dmv.ny.gov (518) 473-8187
8 Valerie King Saskatchewan Government Insurance In-House vking@sgi.sk.ca (306) 775-6351
Page 8 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.4 GOVERNANCE
1.4.1 Governance Purpose
Governance empowers organizational leaders with the authority and the appropriate
mechanisms to execute their role as decision-makers. Complex and highly coordinated
projects must have a robust governance hierarchy to be successful. IT projects such as this
rely on good governance to maintain proper communications and decision-making for all
parties involved. This governance hierarchy will delineate clearly defined roles and
responsibilities for each organization involved (see Roles and Responsibilities section for
details). The governance hierarchy will also appoint decision-making authorities at
different levels commensurate with their designated oversight roles. KTC will provide
periodic updates to the governance authorities as outlined within the communication plan.
1.4.2 Governance Hierarchy
The governance hierarchy provides a framework for coordinating efforts throughout the
project life-cycle for successful development and implementation of the IRP Data
Repository. There are currently seven major parties identified within the governance
hierarchy: IRP, Inc., IRP Board of Directors, IRP Member Jurisdictions, IRP Steering
Panel, IRP Data Panel, Seikosoft, and KTC. Although each party serves a different
purpose, all must work together within their established roles to successfully execute the
project.
The governance hierarchy relationship occurs along three main efforts: line of
coordination, line of execution, and line of oversight. First, separate parties communicate,
share information, and coordinate efforts through the line of coordination approach. Lines
of coordination are the most basic, yet fundamental, principle for mission success. The
second approach, line of execution, charges a party with responsibility for producing an
intended outcome and/or deliverable. For example, the IT consultant would be responsible
for producing project deliverables through its line of execution to IRP, Inc. All lines of
execution are conducted through the terms of formal agreed upon arrangements such as
contracts, statements of work, or memorandums of agreement. Lastly, the line of oversight
ensures governance authorities execute their roles as decision-makers at agreed upon
stages during the stage. Technically complex and cost-intensive projects require robust
oversight to ensure the project meets its intended goals, satisfies the client’s (IRP member
jurisdictions) needs, and sufficiently considers key stakeholder concerns. This project
assigns oversight roles to three main parties: IRP, Inc.; IRP Steering Panel; and the IRP
Board of Directors. IRP, Inc. is responsible for routine, day-to-day decisions. The IRP
Steering Panel and IRP Board of Directors will be responsible for higher-level decisions
elevated to intermediate or executive status. Those statuses are defined in the following
Roles and Responsibilities section. The IRP Data Repository Governance Hierarchy figure
depicts all involved parties and their relationships to one another.
Page 9 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
Figure 1. IRP Data Repository Governance Hierarchy
Page 10 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.5 ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES
1.5.1 IRP, Inc.
Role
• Serves as the main supervisory authority for the development and implementation
of the IRP Data Repository
Responsibilities
• Provides routine decision-making authority for daily project tasks (i.e., all
responsibilities not specifically assigned to the IRP Steering Panel and IRP Board
of Directors)
• Serves as first-line oversight authority for the IT consultant (Seikosoft)
• Facilitates required coordination and communications across the different project
groups
• Ensures various stakeholder concerns and values are incorporated into the design
and build process for the platform
1.5.2 IRP Board of Directors
Role
• Serves as the executive authority for project governance, most notably on major
functional requirements and budget decisions
Responsibilities
• Provides oversight and direction on the project
• Issues final-authority executive decisions
o On budget requests exceeding $25K for any milestones identified in the
Seikosoft signed contract
o On any additions, deletions, or significant changes to the functional
requirements as identified in the Seikosoft signed contract
• Allocates financial resources to support the project in line with the agreed upon
contract
• Monitors and supervises IRP, Inc. as the representative authority for the IRP
member jurisdictions
1.5.3 Member Jurisdictions
Roles
• General: Membership base of the IRP Plan and represent the end-use customers
and beneficiaries of the new IRP Data Repository
Page 11 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
• Requirements/Testing/Reporting Volunteers: Assist IRP, Inc. with developing
requirements for the IRP Data Repository; testing specific features/components of
the developed system and providing user interface assessments (e.g., user tests);
and formulating and testing reporting requirements (e.g., viable system reports)
• Pilot Volunteers: Provide initial validation of the new IRP Data Repository netting
procedures and ensure conformance to requirements (i.e., netting data matches
between existing and new systems)
Responsibilities
• Grant authority to the IRP Board of Directors to act on behalf of their interests
• Provide expertise and knowledge to the project by allowing key personnel to
contribute to the project’s outcomes. Select jurisdictions will provide volunteers to
assist with, but not limited to, the following activities:
o Project panels and volunteers
o User feedback vis-à-vis beta testing
o Focus groups
o Surveys
o Interviews
• Provide financial resources to the project through their participation in the IRP Plan
1.5.4 Kentucky Transportation Center
Role
• Provides project management and commercial motor vehicle registration/safety
services to IRP, Inc. on the IRP Data Repository
Responsibilities
• Assist IRP, Inc. in managing the project through the development and
implementation stages
• Develop the IRP, Inc. Project Management Plan and assist IRP, Inc. with its
compliance. Notable PMP requirements include:
o Assist IRP, Inc. with defining roles and responsibilities for project
participants
o Assist IRP, Inc. with developing a decision-making matrix for the project’s
organizational authorities
o Assist IRP, Inc. with defining a change control process
o Assist IRP, Inc. with defining elevated project risks and corresponding
mitigation measures
• Monitor project schedule and assist IRP, Inc. with ensuring project participants
adhere to project milestones and time-phased tasks
• Assist IRP, Inc. with tracking Seikosoft progress and deliverables through the
project timeline for contractual compliance
Page 12 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
• Research and develop a service level agreement for the new IRP Data Repository
• Develop written project progress updates and correspondence on behalf of IRP, Inc.
to communicate with specified project stakeholders (see Communications Plan)
• Plan and facilitate IRP Steering Panel and IRP Data Panel meetings
• Document minutes/notes from IRP Steering Panel and IRP Data Panel meetings
• Research funding opportunities such as federal grants
• Develop grant applications, as applicable
• Provide grant reporting for any financial awards received
1.5.5 Seikosoft
Role
• IT developer responsible for developing, operating, hosting, and maintaining the
IRP Data Repository
Responsibilities
• Meet all requirements as stated within the First Statement of Work (SOW) dated
August 28, 2020
• Meet all requirements as stated within the IRP Data Repository Development,
Operation, Maintenance, and Hosting Agreement dated August 28, 2020
1.5.6 IRP Steering Panel
Role
• Serves as a mid-level authority for project governance, most notably on
intermediate functional requirements and budget decisions
Responsibilities
• Serves as primary advisory group to IRP, Inc. and KTC on the project
• Provides oversight and direction on the project
• Issues intermediate executive decisions
o On budget requests exceeding $10K but less than $25K for any milestones
identified in the Seikosoft signed contract
o On any intermediate changes to the functional requirements as identified in
the Seikosoft signed contract
• Supports the project through project review, guidance, and decisions, as needed
1.5.7 IRP Data Panel
Role
• Provides knowledge and expertise on data needs and requirements for the project,
particularly in electronic verification of credentials (EVOC)
Page 13 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
Responsibilities
• Reviews and prioritizes data needs within the scope of the contract
• Defines data requirements for the electronic verification of credentials
• Defines data attributes for consistency across data fields
• Identifies potential data needs for the future
• Reviews and evaluates data errors from the different IRP Data Repository sources
(e.g., member jurisdictions, database partners)
• Proposes mitigation measures for data errors. These may include:
o Screening protocols/logic for system
o Standardization for data inputs
o Automation to reduce manual errors
• Actively participates and contributes to the project through scheduled meetings,
feedback sessions, document reviews, and content creation
PROJECT PLANS
1.6 SCHEDULE PLAN
1.6.1 Milestone Schedule
The vendor’s proposed project schedule commences October 1, 2020 and concludes on
August 30, 2022. It is divided into separate milestones associated with key deliverables
and due dates.
Page 14 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
Table 1. Seikosoft Project Milestones
Milestone Deliverable
Milestone Description Phase
Number Date
1 1.0 Project Initiation 1 1-Oct-2020
2 5.0 Netting Functionality 1 1-Jan-2021
3 6.0 Historical Data Migration 1 1-Feb-2021
4 2.0 Hosting Environment Setup 1 31-Mar-2021
5 4.0 Back-End Base System Development 1 1-Apr-2021
6 3.0 Front-End Base System Development 1 1-Jun-2021
7 Phase 1 - 10%, Hold Back Released upon Successful Parallel Processing 1
8 7.0 Jurisdiction Onboarding - Current Layout 1 1-Sep-2021
Phase 1 - Hold Back Released upon Successful Onboarding of all
9 1
Jurisdictions to Current Layout and Normal Operation for 3 months.
10 11.0 Documentation and Training (Phase 1 Partial at 50%) 1 30-Sep-2021
11 9.0 FMCSA and Enforcement Interface 2 1-Oct-2021
12 8.0 Development of Dynamic Layout Tool 2 1-Nov-2021
Phase 2 - 10%, Hold Back Released when Milestones 11 and 12 are in
13 2
production for 30 days
Phase 2 - 5%, Hold Back Released 30 days after the acceptance of Milestone
14 2
13
15 10.0 Jurisdiction Transition - Future Layout 3 1-Jul-2022
16 11.0 Documentation and Training (SOW 3 partial at 50%) 3 30-Aug-2022
17 12.0 Project Closeout (Phases I, II, and III) 3 30-Aug-2022
18 Phase 3 Hold Back Released upon Project Closeout 3
Page 15 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
Table 2. Seikosoft Project Schedule
Phase I Phase II Phase III
May-21
May-22
Mar-21
Mar-22
Nov-20
Aug-21
Nov-21
Aug-22
Milestone Task Description
Dec-20
Dec-21
Sep-20
Oct-20
Feb-21
Apr-21
Sep-21
Oct-21
Feb-22
Apr-22
Jan-21
Jun-21
Jan-22
Jun-22
Jul-21
Jul-22
0.0 Continual Project Administration
1 1.0 Project Initiation
2 5.0 Netting Functionality
3 6.0 (a) Historical Data Migration - Option 1
4 2.0 Hosting Environment Setup
5 4.0 Back-End Base System Development
6 3.0 Front-End Base System Development
8 7.0 Jurisdiction Onboarding - Current Layout
10 11.0 Documentation and Training
11 9.0 FMCSA and Enforcement Interface
12 8.0 Development of Dynamic Layout Tool
15 10.0 Jurisdiction Transition - Future Layout
16 11.0 Documentation and Training
17 12.0 Project Closeout (Phases I, II, and III)
13.0 Initial SOC Audit Compliance
14.0 Hosting, Operations, and Maintenance
Page 16 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.6.2 Tasks & Deliverables Schedule
Seikosoft will adhere to all requirements contained within the first statement of work dated
August 28, 2020. Each of the listed 18 milestones has an agreed upon list of tasks and
deliverables required for successful completion of that milestone.
1.6.3 Payment Schedule
IRP, Inc. will pay the vendor (Seikosoft) per the terms and conditions stated within the IRP
Data Repository Development, Operation, Maintenance and Hosting Agreement.
Specifically, the vendor will be paid per the following:
7. Fees and Payment, Page 19: “Subject to all terms and conditions set forth herein, and
SEIKOSOFT's performance of Services to IRP's reasonable satisfaction and IRP's
Acceptance of the applicable Deliverables and SEIKOSOFT’s fulfillment of applicable
Milestones, IRP shall pay SEIKOSOFT the fees ("Fees") for the work described in the
RFP as contained in the Implementation Plan.”
Milestone deliverables must be accepted by IRP, Inc. for satisfactory completion of the
contract and subsequent payment. The deliverable review process will determine the status
of successful milestone completion. This review process will include the following steps:
1. Vendor will provide milestone contractual deliverables by their respective due dates
as stated within the SOW to IRP, Inc.
2. IRP, Inc. will have up to a two-week review and comment period to review the
deliverables for acceptance (see First SOW).
a. If any discrepancy is noted from the expected scope of the deliverable/s, then
IRP, Inc. will notify the vendor of the discrepancy/s for correction.
b. The vendor will have up to 3 business days to review the noted discrepancy/s
and submit a plan for correction to IRP, Inc.
3. Upon IRP, Inc. acceptance, the payment to the vendor may proceed within the
terms and conditions stated within the contract.
1.7 COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
The IRP Data Repository project has many project participants and impacts various
stakeholders. Robust and frequent communications are critical to project success. Due to
geographical distances and time constraints, the primary means of communication will
occur through Microsoft Teams. The Teams platform will allow for project members to
Page 17 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
interactively engage in real-time through audio/video streaming. This forum also enhances
project coordination through other capabilities including:
• Repository for sharing documents
• Allow real-time changes to documents by multiple users during sessions
• Recording option for capturing meetings
• Enhanced security through invite features and real-time participant monitoring
In select instances, it may be beneficial to bring project members together in-person for a
facilitated session and/or formal meeting. IRP, Inc. will make these determinations on a
case-by-case basis and rely upon up-to-date protocols involving the still ongoing COVID-
19 health crisis.
1.7.1 IRP Board of Directors
IRP, Inc. will provide periodic project updates to the IRP Board of Directors during
regularly scheduled board meetings. These updates will typically occur through an oral or
PowerPoint presentation. KTC may assist IRP, Inc. in that effort, as requested. KTC will
also produce monthly progress reports for the board. These progress reports will highlight
the project’s current status, major accomplishments, and expenditures incurred during the
monthly period.
1.7.2 IRP Jurisdiction Members
IRP, Inc. will provide quarterly progress reports to all IRP jurisdiction members
throughout the development phase. KTC will develop these reports and send to IRP, Inc.
for review and acceptance prior to dissemination. The one-page reports will provide a
high-level description on the project’s status and major accomplishments. This report will
also indicate future project tasks that may impact jurisdictions.
1.7.3 IRP Steering Panel
IRP, Inc. and KTC will conduct monthly conference calls with the IRP Steering Panel.
KTC will schedule and coordinate these meetings and provide agendas to participants
beforehand. Typically, these calls occur during the 3rd Tuesday of each month from 11:00
am Eastern Standard Time and last one hour. Additional meetings may be scheduled on an
as-needed basis. The purpose of these calls is to facilitate interactive dialogue and
accomplish the following:
• Provide project progress updates to the IRP Steering Panel, including completed
work and deliverables
• Promote discussion on project direction and focus
Page 18 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
• Obtain periodic reviews and feedback from the IRP Steering Panel on project
deliverables
These meetings will take place primarily through Microsoft Teams. The provided agendas
for each meeting will indicate the topic/s of discussion and any other pertinent notes.
Afterward, KTC will draft meeting minutes and provide a copy to panel members. In some
instances, IRP, Inc. and/or KTC may communicate with the IRP Steering Panel through
focused and succinct emails for follow-up items stemming from meetings or other minor
issues. The full 2020-2022 meeting dates are listed below.
Table 3. IRP Steering Panel Meeting Schedule, 2020-2022
2020 2021 2022
Meeting Meeting Meeting
Month Month Month
Date Date Date
January -- January 19 January 18
February -- February 16 February 15
March -- March 16 March 15
April -- April 20 April 19
May -- May 18 May 17
June -- June 15 June 21
July -- July 20 July 19
August -- August 17 August 16
September -- September 21 September --
October 20 October 19 October --
November 17 November 16 November --
December 15 December -- December --
1.7.4 IRP Data Panel
IRP, Inc. and KTC will conduct conference calls every two weeks with the IRP Data Panel
or on an as-needed basis. KTC will coordinate the scheduling of these meetings and
provide agendas to meeting participants beforehand. Typically, these calls occur during the
2nd and 4th Tuesday of each month from 11:00 am Eastern Standard Time and last one
hour. Additional meetings (or longer scheduled meetings) may be scheduled on an as-
needed basis. The purpose of these calls is to promote dialogue and accomplish the
following:
• Identify and discuss confirmed (and possibly emerging) data needs and requests
for the IRP Data Repository
• Prioritize data needs and requests
• Define data attributes and standardization for data fields
• Identify and review data errors and ways to mitigate them
o Identify existing IRP member jurisdiction errors
o Identify potential future IRP member jurisdiction errors
Page 19 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
o Brainstorm and develop screening protocols and logic for identifying errors
o Examine tools (e.g., automation) to reduce errors
• Assign data reviews and/or tasks to select members and/or the overall panel on an
as-needed basis
These meetings will take place primarily through Microsoft Teams. The provided agendas
for each meeting will indicate the topic/s of discussion and any other pertinent notes.
Afterward, KTC will draft meeting minutes and provide a copy to panel members. In some
instances, IRP, Inc. and/or KTC may communicate with the IRP Data Panel through
focused and succinct emails for follow-up items stemming from meetings or other minor
issues. The full 2020-2022 meeting calendar is tentatively projected with the project dates
as listed below.
Table 4. IRP Data Panel Meeting Schedule
2020 2021 2022
Meeting Meeting Meeting
Month Month Month
Date Date Date
January -- January 12, 26 January 11, 25
February -- February 9, 23 February 8, 22
March -- March 9, 23 March 8, 22
April -- April 13, 27 April 12, 26
May -- May 11, 25 May 10, 24
June -- June 8, 22 June 14, 28
July -- July 13, 27 July 12, 26
August -- August 10, 24 August 9, 23
September -- September 14, 28 September --
October 27 October 12, 26 October --
November 10, 24 November 9, 23 November --
December 8 December 14 December --
1.8 RISK REGISTER PLAN
All projects have inherent risk. A risk is a known or unknown condition or event that can
have an adverse impact on the project’s stated objectives and goals. For many projects,
risks are most associated with unfavorable outcomes related to requirements, quality,
schedule, and costs. Nevertheless, a risk may directly or indirectly impact any aspect of
project management. This project management plan lists the anticipated risks associated
with the IRP Data Repository project in the form of a risk register. Furthermore, the project
management plan seeks to mitigate any identified risk through a mitigation plan. The
mitigation plan recommends strategies for reducing the identified risks. However, no risk
can be completely eliminated. Rather, KTC seeks to fully inform the project sponsors on
the potential risks associated with this project, along with measures to counter those risk.
In doing so, this strategy should allow all project stakeholders to successfully complete all
tasks per the project work plan.
Page 20 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
1.8.1 Executive Support
• Risk #1: Decision makers not clearly defined for project approval and/or decision
points
• Risk #2: Decision makers fail to reach agreement on approvals and/or decisions
• Risk #3: Decision makers provide inadequate support to project (e.g., absent from
project meetings, provide feedback past requested deadlines, etc.)
• Mitigation Plan: IRP identifies a clearly defined approval process and decision-
making bodies for inclusion into the approved work plan (see Governance
Hierarchy). Project decision makers agree to abide by and cooperate within the
architecture of the project’s statement of work and accompanying project
management plan. This will help ensure that decision makers support final project
decisions and meet their project commitments, including required meetings and
reviews.
1.8.2 Scope
• Risk #1: Scope lacks critical tasks and/or activities
• Risk #2: Scope creep due to the additional requests during project duration
• Risk #3: Estimates are inaccurate for scope (e.g., costs, time requirements)
• Mitigation Plan: IRP, Inc. and Seikosoft have an agreed upon statement of work
and contract detailing the scope of services required, including project milestones,
tasks, costs, and schedule. Scope creep will be minimized through strict adherence
to the statement of work, vendor contract, and the change control plan contained
within this PMP.
1.8.3 Costs
• Risk #1: Invoiced costs fail to meet the established standards stated within the
SOW and the IRP Data Repository Development, Operation, Maintenance, and
Hosting Agreement
• Risk #2: Unanticipated cost exceedances occur during the course of this project
• Mitigation Plan: IRP, Inc. will only provide scheduled payments when project
milestones have been satisfactorily met per the SOW and the IRP Data Repository
Development, Operation, Maintenance, and Hosting Agreement. Unanticipated cost
exceedances will be submitted by Seikosoft to the Change Control Board using the
process established within this PMP.
1.8.4 Changes
• Risk #1: Changes requested outside of Change Control Plan
Page 21 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
• Risk #2: Excessive changes requested by IRP, Inc., and other stakeholders
• Risk #3: Ambiguous or non-specific changes requested by IRP, Inc., and other
stakeholders
• Mitigation Plan: IRP and Seikosoft will only implement changes per the
stipulations found within the Change Control Plan, including the creation of a
Change Control Board. Only project changes validated and approved by the
Change Control Board will be considered for implementation.
1.8.5 Stakeholders 1
• Risk #1: Internal stakeholders fail to provide reviews and/or feedback in a timely
manner per the project schedule
• Risk #2: Internal stakeholder conflicts hinder consensus on project milestones and
deliverables, particularly those items requiring review and/or approval
• Risk #3: Internal stakeholders have inaccurate expectations involving project
deliverables, schedule, etc.
• Risk #4: Internal stakeholders become disengaged and ignore requests for
information (e.g., surveys, interviews, etc.)
• Risk #5: Legal and/or regulatory changes from external stakeholders impact
project
• Mitigation Plan: Internal stakeholders agree to abide by and cooperate with the
scope contained within this PMP. This will help ensure that internal stakeholders
agree to meet timely review requests and support project decisions as agreed upon
through the formal approval process. Furthermore, IRP, Inc. and KTC will monitor
the external environment for any potential issues (i.e., legal, regulatory, events) that
could potentially disrupt or alter the project.
1.8.6 Communications
• Risk #1: Miscommunications between IRP, Inc., Seikosoft, and any internal
stakeholder groups (see organizational hierarchy) lead to a lack of shared
understanding on intended requirements, inputs, timelines, etc.
• Risk #2: Insufficient communications between IRP, Inc., Seikosoft, and any
internal stakeholder groups lead to knowledge gaps and potential for unmet
expectations at project milestones
1
Internal Stakeholders include those parties defined within the organizational hierarchy: IRP Board of
Directors; IRP Member Jurisdiction; IRP, Inc.; IRP Steering Panel; IRP Data Panel; Seikosoft; and KTC.
Page 22 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
• Risk #3: Excessive communications between IRP, Inc., Seikosoft, and any internal
stakeholder groups lead to excessive project hours dedicated simply to
communications and diverted from other project activities
• Mitigation Plan: IRP, Inc., Seikosoft, and internal stakeholder groups will follow
the communications plan as contained within the approved project management
plan.
1.8.7 Resources
• Risk #1: Inadequate vendor personnel resources available to meet project scope
within budgetary and schedule constraints
• Risk #2: Vendor personnel turnover leads to gaps in knowledge and/or increased
workload distribution among remaining personnel
• Mitigation Plan: Seikosoft will adhere to the project staffing plan contained within
the contract. IRP, Inc. will work with Seikosoft to identify any concerns should
Seikosoft experience unexpected attrition on any key project staff members.
1.9 CHANGE CONTROL PLAN
Complex projects inherently entail risk, or a possible hazard, as requirements, schedules,
and costs change through a project life-cycle. By themselves, changes are not necessarily
harmful to the project’s intended outcomes. However, changes which lead to unexpected
outcomes contribute to project risks. A major risk for any project is deviation from the
original defined plan which results in an adverse outcome. Unforeseen changes frequently
result in detrimental project outcomes, sometimes quite severe. This can be seen in the
form of increased project resources, excessive costs, schedule delays, poor quality,
inadequate standards, or a myriad of other unfavorable outcomes. For the purposes of this
project, changes are defined as any item involving scope, requirements, schedule, budget,
or a similarly-related project item that deviates from the originally approved Seikosoft
contract, statement of work, and project management plan, respectively.
The project will rely upon an IRP Change Control Plan (CCP) to make any official
changes to the project contract, work plan, and management plan throughout its duration.
This plan will rely upon designated groups with formal authority to authorize any changes
to the contract, work plan, or management plan. No other project member, advisory
official, or group forum can approve official project changes outside of the groups listed
within this CCP. For this project, the change control plan will be delegated to three groups:
the Change Control Board, the IRP Steering Panel, and the IRP Board of Directors.
The initial change control authority will be the Change Control Board or CCB. This body
is comprised of equal membership between Seikosoft, and IRP, Inc. The members on this
board are as follows:
Page 23 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
• Tim Adams, IRP, Inc.
• Robin Murphy, IRP, Inc.
• Chris Campbell, Seikosoft
• Cody Marshall, Seikosoft
The CCB will be responsible for making decisions on minor project changes. These
insignificant changes are those expected to occur more frequently and do not have a
medium- or large-scale impact on the project’s scope or budget. The CCB will meet and
formulate a resolution anytime a minor discrepancy occurs from the original project scope
or budget. The CCB will have sole authority for resolving changes when both of the
following conditions apply:
• On budget requests not exceeding $10K for any milestones identified in the
Seikosoft signed contract
• On any minor changes to the functional requirements as identified in the Seikosoft
signed contract
For scope or budget changes beyond these thresholds, the CCB is expected to elevate those
concerns to the appropriate authority in accordance with the change control plan
descriptions described further below.
The IRP Steering Panel will be responsible for reviewing and authorizing any intermediate
project changes. This panel has been authorized decision-making authority on behalf of the
IRP Board of Directors when those decisions are minor to intermediate in nature.
Specifically, any vendor or stakeholder requested changes to the vendor contract, statement
of work, or project management plan require IRP Steering Panel approval whenever one of
the following two conditions apply:
• On budget requests exceeding $10K but less than $25K for any milestones
identified in the Seikosoft signed contract
• On any intermediate changes to the functional requirements as identified in the
Seikosoft signed contract
Any intermediate changes to the approved contract, work plan, or management plan may
impact the project scope, resources, budget, and/or schedule. In such an event, the
requesting party (e.g., vendor, stakeholder, etc.) will submit their change order request to
IRP, Inc. at least 10 business days prior to the date of the requested change to initiate the
review and approval process. The IRP Steering Panel will have up to 10 business days to
review the request and make its decision.
The IRP Board of Directors will be responsible for reviewing and authorizing any major
project changes. Specifically, any vendor or stakeholder requested changes to the vendor
Page 24 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
contract, statement of work, or project management plan require IRP Board of Directors’
approval whenever one of the following two conditions apply:
• On budget requests exceeding $25K for any milestones identified in the Seikosoft
signed contract
• On any additions, deletions, or significant changes to the functional requirements as
identified in the Seikosoft signed contract
Any major changes to the approved contract, work plan, or management plan will likely
impact the project scope, resources, budget, and/or schedule. In such an event, the
requesting party (e.g., vendor, stakeholder, etc.) will submit their change order request to
IRP, Inc. at least 20 business days prior to the date of the requested change to initiate the
review and approval process. The IRP Board of Directors will have up to 20 business days
to review the request and make its decision.
The vendor will make a good faith effort to provide immediate notifications when they
expect to make project changes impacting the original contract approval. Examples of
significant changes may include, but are not limited to, the following: reduction in project
scope to other items, increase in project budget, increase in personnel, lengthening of
project schedule, or other project items.
1.10 DOCUMENTATION PLAN
All official project documents will be stored and archived within the designated IRP
Teams channel. This includes any documents developed by or for the following
stakeholder groups: Seikosoft, IRP Steering Panel, IRP Data Panel, KTC, and IRP, Inc.
Finalized documents may be transferred into the IRP share drive for archiving by
authorized users (e.g., IRP, Inc. and KTC) upon completion Project documents may
include, but are not limited to, the following: meeting agendas, meeting minutes,
presentations, project plans, project decisions/approvals, and other deliverables.
PROJECT MONITORING
1.11 METHODOLOGIES AND TOOLS
IRP, Inc. and KTC will use the following tools during this project.
• IRP Portal
• Microsoft Office
• Microsoft Excel
• Microsoft PowerPoint
• Microsoft Teams
Page 25 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
IRP, Inc. and KTC also reserves the right to use other project tools that provide additional
value to the project deliverables and/or outputs. Other tools will only be used if they
provide added value to the final product and/or means of communication and enhance
project outcomes.
1.12 MEASURING AND REPORTING PROGRESS
KTC will assist IRP, Inc. with managing the overall project across the various project
phases. In the initial development phase, this effort will primarily occur through three
domains: scope, schedule, and costs. Additional details on those domains and their
monitoring requirements are described within this section. Once the IRP Data Repository
goes live, the primary management tool will be the approved Service Level Agreement
(SLA) between Seikosoft and IRP, Inc. IRP, Inc. and KTC will monitor Seikosoft’s
performance at this time using terms stipulated within the SLA, including their hosting,
security, maintenance and tier 2 level help desk services.
1.12.1 Scope
The IRP Data Repository scope encompasses those deliverables and milestones specified
within the approved Seikosoft Statement of Work (082820) and Operation, Maintenance
and Hosting Agreement (082820). If additional statements of work (SOWs) are added to
this project at a later date, they will correspondingly be added to the overall project scope
and monitored. Seikosoft will submit a monthly progress report as defined in the statement
of work. This monthly status report will be submitted by Seikosoft within 5 business days
of the close of each month. At a minimum, this report will include the following:
• Identification and description of completed work items
• Identification and description of work items not completed (in accordance with the
project schedule) and why
• Comprehensive list of issues by priority, status, and estimated completion date
• List of all project risks and their mitigation strategies
KTC will work directly with IRP, Inc. to monitor completed work items per these
contractual agreements and upon official acceptance by IRP, Inc.
1.12.2 Schedule
KTC will assist IRP, Inc. with monitoring the overall project schedule. This will rely on
two components: vendor development schedule and stakeholder involvement. In the
former, KTC will rely on Seikosoft’s released project schedule (see table 2) to track their
on-time completion of required tasks. In the latter, KTC will actively take the lead in
Page 26 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
coordinating meetings with the IRP Steering and Data Panels to ensure stakeholder
involvement and project oversight. Those meetings are intended to follow the published
schedule shown within Tables 3 and 4 within this document but may be subject to change.
Additional meetings with other stakeholders may be requested on an as-needed basis at
IRP, Inc.’s direction.
1.12.3 Costs
KTC will assist IRP, Inc. with monitoring the overall project costs. The total costs are
expected to be incurred across three groups: Seikosoft, KTC, and the Escrow Vendor.
Seikosoft is the IRP Data Repository system developer and primary driver of costs. The
other groups, KTC and Escrow Vendor, will help manage the overall project and secure
software code via deposit, respectively. IRP, Inc. will provide copies of monthly invoices
they receive from Seikosoft and the Escrow Vendor to KTC. KTC will combine these cost
invoices with their own monthly invoice and develop a monthly cost tracker to monitor
overall project costs.
CLOSURE
The project will be considered officially closed once the terms and conditions found within
the vendor statement of work and contract have been successfully met.
Page 27 of 28IRP Data Repository – Project Management Plan
Appendix A: Project Management Plan Approval
The undersigned acknowledge they have reviewed the IRP Data Repository Project
Management Plan and agree with the approach it presents. Changes to this Project
Management Plan will be coordinated with and approved through the processes outlined
within the Change Control Board (as shown in the Change Control Plan).
Signature: Date:
Print Name:
Title:
Role:
Signature: Date:
Print Name:
Title:
Role:
Page 28 of 28You can also read
