Shared Services: Developing our Potential John Lally David Arbeit Director of Strategic Planning David Arbeit Minnesota Chief Geospatial Information Services Officer

Shared services The state’s Master Plan reflects the Governor’s and DTE’s vision of a truly contemporary IT environment, which includes: Enterprise management of common IT resources -- applications, data, hardware Recognition of centers of excellence Support for unique agency missions

Our Blueprint: The Federated Governance Model The federated enterprise model balances three ways of managing IT activities for the state Agency-specific services Shared services Utility services

Shared Services Shared services allow agencies to serve one another as centers of excellence

What are Shared Services? – A working definition Processes common to several agencies or levels of government Requires special expertise Tied to best practices, Centers of Excellence and the service center models Provided by lead agencies (or central IT) to other agencies on a cost-sharing basis Also called in-sourcing

Shared Services Drivers Business units need to realize economies of scale to redirect more resources to front line EGS demands 24x7 availability for users and customers Diminishing availability of technical staff in some areas Security-related requirements (access, authentication) are best met by coordination across the enterprise Information sharing requires better integration and data consistency across the enterprise

The potential advantages of shared services Direct a larger percentage of the total IT spend to unique applications and customer and agency services More efficient management of assets Protection of service levels Compatibility, interoperability, uniform quality

The potential disadvantages of shared services Confused priorities without SLA or equivalent Requires governance to set direction, tools and standards

Examples of Shared Services Examples include: Case management Document management Data warehouse Grant management Licensing and registration Debt collection Asset management

Financing shared services Partnerships Negotiated service level agreements Rates or fee-for-service Shared assets and resources Staff Programs Data

It’s not just for state agencies Local government IT consortia E-12 service centers Cooperative agreements for support services (parks, community ed) Purchasing alliances

A practical test Not needed by everybody? Not needed by everybody? Requires special expertise? Multiple delivery options? Not needed by everybody? Requires special expertise? Multiple delivery options?

Shared Services summary Directions Focus on shared resources Partners vs. vendor/customers Emphasis on performance and value Desired Results Increased efficiency Lower cost Wider array of options and services Shared governance

Two case studies Central services: Business continuation planning and operations and Data center consolidation Distributed services: Geospatial Information Systems and Services

Business Continuation aspects Coordination – central oversight Planning – central support COOP operations – decentralized or combined “Hot” sites Recovery services.

Typical agency Business Continuation situation Limited financial & human resources Lack of legislative support Lack of knowledgeable and committed executive sponsorship Lack of desire to do planning when other competing priorities exist Lack of appropriate facilities.

Benefits of a shared approach to BC Planning expertise, consulting and training available, along with tools and templates Living Disaster Recovery Planning System (LDRPS) & enterprise-wide tools All state COOPs complementary Workspace sharing for business recovery Interagency agreements

Benefits of a shared approach to BC Technology recovery strategies are costly State Recovery Center (SRC) Hot-site contracts Reciprocal agreements w/Wisconsin OET equipment and application hosting agreements Ability to share costs between organizations

Another central services example: Data Center Consolidation The business case: Less expensive More secure More stable More efficient

Another central services example: Data Center Consolidation The decision: One Tier III state data center A few Tier II DR sites Move to common architectures Mix of managed and colocated equipment Potential for partners

Distributed Solutions Geospatial Information Systems and Services David Arbeit Minnesota Chief Geospatial Information Services Officer

GIS: Not Just for Map Techies Anymore! MapQuest Yahoo Maps Google Maps Google Earth

Geographic Information is Everywhere On the Web On your TV In your Car On your Phone!

Location, Location, Location… Almost everything we do or are concerned about involves location People, Places, Things, Events

Geography: Why Do We Care? Geography is fundamental to almost everything we do in government service Where is it? How can I get to it? What’s near it? What’s affected by it? What can I build on it? What’s services are available there?

Geographic Information: Why Do We Need It? Most government functions concern Geographic Information Resource Management Transportation Management and Logistics Land Management Economic Development Health and Human Services Emergency Services Homeland Security

Geographic Information Systems: Why We Need Them Collect and store data Analyze complex relationships Produce new information Increase knowledge and understanding Solve complex problems at a level of detail that was not previously possible

GIS in the State: Big and Growing Until recently, no state has comprehensively reported scale of investment Conservative - $12.5 M/Yr Realistic - $25 M/Yr Growing ~ 10%/Yr Huge opportunity for controlling costs while enhancing capabilities through Shared Services. Even cutting growth in half would yield about $1 to $2 M/Yr

Typical Agency GIS Technology Situation Limited financial & human resources Limited technical capacity Lack of attention when other competing priorities exist Lack of appropriate facilities Lack of knowledgeable and committed executive sponsorship Lack of legislative support

Lots of GIS & IT Planning in MN Lately This project is part of a logical progression IT & TeleCom Systems and Services Master Plan OET, 2007 A Foundation for a Coordinated GIS MGCGI, 2004 State GIS Enterprise Conceptual Architecture Design - MGCGI, 2005 Compass Points Retreat Report – MGCGI / LMIC, 2007 The Case for a MN State GIS Enterprise MGCGI, 2006 Drive to Excellence Transformation Roadmap DOA, 2005 Drive to Excellence Launch of Enterprise GIS Project – D2E, 2008 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Transforming the GIS Business 2008: DTE GIS Coordination Study Extensive analysis of agency needs, capabilities, resources, and plans. Detailed profiles of State agency GIS programs. Analysis of GIS programs in other states. Identication of opportunities for collaboration and shared solutions. Recommended program elements and design. Implementation options.

Benefits of Shared Approach to GIS Shared HW, SW, infrastructure Staffing – greater breadth and depth Joint development teams Joint training Leveraged funding/cooperative purchasing Standardized solutions Services through “Shared Service Centers”

Minnesota Geospatial Information Office

Shared Application Services Concept Hosted Services Government Business Application C Government Entity 2 Government Business Application B Hosted Services Government Entity 1 Hosted Services Government Entity 3 Government Business Application A Service Provider Commercial Service Mash Ups!!??

Enterprise Geospatial Services Architecture Service providers identify & document services Broker Organization Service Provider Catalog MPCA Service Service Agriculture DNR Catalog Services MnDOT MnGeo Consumer applications interact directly with Service Providers Query for Service Access Service Consumers learn about services through a broker catalog service Consumer Consumer

Example Services Name Request Description Result Image   Request Description Result Image   Area of Interest Image file suitable for viewing Geocoding   Street Address Coordinate Location Lake Buffer Lake ID Buffer Distance Area feature (in GML format) Floodplain Test Coordinate Location 0 – Not in Floodplain 1 – In Floodplain Routing Service Start Location End Location Travel directions and route map

What Services Exist Now? Several Minnesota state agencies host geospatial services that potentially eliminate the need for duplication. MnGeo MN Department of Natural Resources MN Department of Transportation MetroGIS Organizations like these already have invested in expertise and technology. Why not use them?

500,000 images/month and growing! $6.5 M Investment

Who Uses WMS Image Server? MnGeo - NorthStar Mapper MN DOT-Boring Sites MN Dept. of Agriculture - Weed Mapping MN DNR- Firewise program U of MN - Swine Disease Mapping Project U of MN Natural Resources Research Institute Metropolitan Mosquito Control District Private companies Houston Engineering The Lawrence Group Riverside Companies

Shared Service Opportunities Application Function Services Address Geocoding Routing Service Mail Label Service Web Mapping Hosting Services Application Development Services Secure Data Center GIS Training Center Contract Coordination Services Enterprise Licensing Agreements

GIS Coordinated Affordable Reliable Effective The MnGeo Vision "Minnesota makes Coordinated, Affordable, Reliable, and Effective use of GIS technology to improve services throughout the state." Coordinated Affordable Reliable Effective GIS

Things to Watch For Positive Signs Strategic (serendipitous) opportunities Champions who “Get It” A community of partners Small successes to build on Warning Signs Territorial bahavior! That Turf Thing! Pride of ownership Failure to meet commitments Mistrust

Things to Watch For Champions Who Get It Brad Moore Project Sponsor Commissioner MN Pollution Control Agency Gopal Khanna Commissioner and State CIO Office of Enterprise Technology Dana Badgerow Commissioner Department of Administration

Things to Watch For Leaders and Team Members “Drive” Team Leadership Brad Moore, Sponsor Commissioner, Pollution Control Agency “Drive” Team Members David Arbeit, Department of Administration Michael Barnes, Department of Transportation Janet Cain, Department of Public Safety Margaret Kelly, Department of Health John Lally, Office of Enterprise Technology Fred Logman, Department of Administration Robert Maki, Department of Natural Resources Larry Palmer, Department of Agriculture Leo Raudys, Pollution Control Agency Dan Storkamp, Department of Corrections

Governance Governance that respects customers and promotes trust that their needs will be met.

Things to Watch For Advisors, Contributors and Stakeholders Community of Partners

Final Thoughts We face a fundamental challenge: Customers continue to expect more Technology is essential to providing it The era of budget growth has ended We are smart enough and committed enough to meet that challenge. Working together through creative shared service arrangements are key to getting it done. We can get it done!

Let’s Talk Shared Services