Information Technology Division Executive Office for Administration and Finance IT Service Excellence Committee (ITSEC) Dec. 23 rd Meeting Dec. 23, 2010

Happy Holidays 2

Agenda TopicDesired Outcomes Discussion lead Allotted time Welcome & new member/participant(s) introduction All5 min Update on On-going items Training: “Delivering Outstanding Cust. Service” Customer Surveys Committee awareness and follow-ups Donna/Tricia All 15 min Communications Update on ITSEC wiki enhancements Communication Plan ITSEC members feedback (& buy-in) Sandra/Tom20 min SLO Reporting discussion Continued discussion on ITSEC requirements Interest in Sharing KPIs Agreement on extension of LOB/SLO reporting proposal as related to Secretariat specific needs Agreement on monthly sharing of KPI data for those in a position to do so Tom B. /Jacquie & All Tom/Gerry/All 20 min Walk-thru End to End model Continued development of the end to end model All20 min New business & Next stepsTom10 min 3

4 Training Update A number of Secretariats had indicated an interest in leveraging off of the EHS “Delivering Outstanding Customer Service” course Some members had previously enrolled their team with very positive results The original idea of leveraging off of EHS capabilities may need to be “tweaked” since our last discussion Comptroller’s IT group (Scott Olsen) is approaching DOR regarding a similar need for his HelpDesk ITD through the LearnIT program has been successfully offering multiple technology related classes

5 Survey Discussion A number of Secretariats had plans for undertaking Helpdesk-driven surveys Our Target was Jan/Feb timeframe to share Survey results Several folks had shared Survey questions, formats etc. Some folks had built in tool capabilities, others did not and were looking at Survey Monkey, etc. Gerry has shared some of his data (EOLWD)(EOLWD) Are any other members actively planning for survey activity (of any kind)? Do we want to target a timeframe for a committee discussion of our collective learnings ?

6 Communications Discussion SE content in latest blast – Did you receive it? – Do you think others in your agency did? – SE content to be included in January blasts, if available More in-depth SE content in upcoming quarterly newsletter – Scheduled for early February – Ideas for projects/specific topics to be covered are welcome Communications plan discussion Wiki presence in development – What works? – What doesn’t? – What do you want / need ?

Discussion Document for IT SE Comm planSE Comm plan SE Communications Plan for ITSEC FOCUS: promoting awareness of the new Commonwealth-wide Service Excellence Program with the Commonwealht's IT community ITSEC Mission: We continually strive to facilitate excellent IT service and support for our customers. deliverable / eventmessage typetarget audiencevehicle / delivery methodauthor / editorultimate owner /frequency (required / informational / promotional) delivery person ongoing: ITSEC bi-weekly meeting deckrequiredITSECppt deckTom for each meeting; bi-weekly meeting minutesrequiredITSECword docTom after each meeting; biweekly ITSEC updates to ISBrequiredISBppt deck (+ report(s), if needed)Tom + ITSECTommonthly ITSEC wiki presencerequired, promotional, & informationalall audiences wiki page w/background info, downloadable attachments, & FAQ; link to from related communicationsTom/ITSEC + sandraTomongoing; to be updated bi-weekly brief, frequent, regular updates promotional & informational; what's happening, what it means for you, why you should careall audiences bi-weekly (consolidation) blastTom/ITSEC + sandraSandrabi-weekly in-depth articles promotional & informational; highlight related projects / progress in specific areasall audiences quarterly (consolidation) newsletter individual members of ITSEC + sandraSandraquarterly FAQ docinformationalall audiences wiki page + downloadable attachment; link from related messages Tom/ITSEC (+ sandra, if needed)Tom/ITSEC create & post to wiki; link to from related communications; update as needed one-time and/or event-driven: "Smart cards" re: ITIL frameworkpromotional & informationalall audiencescardboard stock hand-outsTom/ITSEC + sandra posters for high-level awareness/ brandingpromotional & informationalall audiences hard-copy posters + internet & intranet sites (where appropriate / possible)Tom/ITSEC + sandravariesongoing - determine start date high-level briefings (w/promo materials) promotional & informational; what's happening, what it means for you, why you should care/help us promote senior-level management mtgs with senior managers, distribution of promo materials, follow up Tom/ITSEC (+ sandra, if needed)senior-level manager: Kevinongoing - determine start date secretariat/agency town hall mtgspromotional & informational varies by Secretariat / agency: from agency head to line employeesppt deck Tom/ITSEC + agency lead (+ sandra, if needed)varies; Kevin + agency leadvaries other possibilities include: videopromotional & informationalall audiencesvideo on YouTube Tom/ITSEC + sandra + DOR ?!one-time (to start) customer surveyresearchcustomerssurvey monkeyTom/ITSEC + sandraTom/ITSECannual ? employee surveyresearchemployeessurvey monkeyTom/ITSEC + sandraTom/ITSECannual ? mouse padspromotional & informationalall audiencesbranded mouse padsTom/ITSEC + sandraTom/ITSECone-time Service Excellence "day"promotional & informationalall audiences??? 7

ITSEC Wiki presence 8 Our wiki site

9 Secretariat specific page format

10 LOB/SLO reporting – Update and Continued Req’s definition A Model for ITD LOB/SLO reporting was endorsed by us, CIO Cab & ISB ITD has begun working on this reporting (i.e. initially for internal use)reporting The ITSEC discussion also resulted some additional thoughts relative to Secretariat specific needs We want to capture the needs, document those needs and bake them into our planning process/roadmap

11 KPI Sharing Discussion We have agreed on our Incident Management Priorities We explained to the ISB that it would take some time to actually implement these definitions We have an event on our roadmap that speaks to being able to report IM KPIsreport IM KPIs Earlier this year some members had been sharing some Incident dataIncident data Is there interest in beginning to share this kind of data and using it to discuss trends/opportunities ? – The idea is that this would be totally optional and not something we would share publically – The idea is that ITD is just coming off implementation and this will likely take some time to build (and the classifications of incident types we had been using are not immediately relevant to the service classifications)service classifications – The idea is some folks are just beginning to plan for implementing a tool – EHS has a whole new Helpdesk structure and the reporting may be different

12 Draft- Commonwealth Incident Management Policy  Our SE roadmap also shows us publishing a Commonwealth-wide IM policy: Our SE roadmap Proposed important inclusions in our policy:  The will be an owner of each Incident Management process at the Secretariat/Enterprise levels  All Incidents will be managed using a commonly agreed to end-to-end Enterprise model (in progress of being defined)  All incidents will be reported and tracked in a tool by the Service Desk/HelpDesk  All Incidents will be prioritized according to the Commonwealth Incident Policy  All incidents will be classified as to service impacted at the Enterprise level  There will be a model for use by Secretariats for classifying service outages  All incidents will only be closed upon user confirmation (or 7 day elapsed window)  Changes to the Commonwealth Incident Management policy must be approved by the ITSEC  Other ?

Commonwealth Incident Prioritization – ITSEC Endorsed: Defines Priority with which Incident will be managed URGENCY/ IMPACT High A service outage with broad impact to the Commonwealth, across one or more services that are not functioning, or whole sites or agencies are impacted, or an agency specific critical severity (outage) has occurred causing complete service outage (as opposed to for example, a performance degradation). (see attached Critical Applic. List). May effect public safety, transportation, health, financial servicing, or ability to deliver other public services. Medium There is impact to a portion of an agency or office, with one or more services to the Commonwealth, either not functioning or seriously degraded so the effect is that the agency’s mission is impacted. Also may apply if one or more very high profile parties are impacted (I.e. Secretary or direct report). Low Impact is to an individual or a small workgroup or the service impacted is not of a mission critical nature. High Immediate action is required to restore service (s) or prevent failure of a service. No work around exists. Priority 1Priority 2 Priority 3 Medium A service outage occurred & there is a work around but service degraded or work around not sufficiently timely, too costly or too much effort. Or service has not failed but potentially may do so. Priority 2 Priority 3Priority 4 Low A service outage has occurred and a work around exists and/or the remediation and/or needed procurement is in process. Priority 3Priority 4 Priority 4/5* *reflects the fact that some existing ticketing systems currently use a fifth priority level 13 See Examples

11/14/ End to End Service Model

15 End to End Model work  Which Secretariats have an internal Incident Process flow?  EOLWD  ANF  ITD  EHS  MassDOT  EEA  EPS  Office of Comptroller  EOE  Next steps  Continue individual Reviews existing Secretariat level internal process flows/issues/concerns & refine top level model-Tom  Begin work on specific steps for each major area ( Network, Desktop/LAN, Applications, etc.) - ??  Finalize On & Off Hours Major Incident Coverage Policy (Commonwealth- wide SPOC discussion)  Other

16 Next meeting  SLA’s/OLA’s  Follow-up on Education plan  End-to-End Model  Others ?

17 Appendix

18 BackBack to Comm Back to policy Back to KPI

19 Back To Category breakdown

20 Back

Establish SE Culture Offer of Enterprise Service Delivery tool Commonwealth Policies, Processes and Metrics for Incident Management Develop Commonwealth SLOs and SLO Reporting Commonwealth Policies, Processes & Metrics for Change Management Common H/W & S/W Asset Mgt tool Institute single Commonwealth Virtual Operations Culture 21 Overall Service Excellence Program 3 year Road Map FY 11 Q2-Q4 We Are Here Model fully implemented FY 12 FY 13 ITSEC established Internal ITD Pilot- Monthly LOB/SLO Rpting Single Metrics reporting Framework established ITSEC Wiki presence ITD COMiT implemented 1 st Sec. Adoption COMiT 2 nd Sec. Adoption COMiT Follow-on COMiT Adoptions or integrations Incident Priorities Defined & ISB approved Incident end-to-end Model defined ITD LOB/SLO reporting to Customers ITD BSLO customer metrics Change Types & Stnd Windows Defined & ISB approved Weekly CW wide Change Calendar ITD weekly CM Calendar published All ITD h/w s/w in Enterprise toolCommonwealth h/w s/w in Enterprise tool Operational Framework Defined and agreed Monitoring tools rationalized/integrated in support of end to end SE model Education & Marketing plan ITSEC Road show ITSEC Day & Symposium Commonwealth- wide Reporting of Incident metrics

EOLWD Survey activity DWD CUSTOMER SATISFACTION Oct & Nov 2010 TotalsTotal surveysReturned surveys Ratings Questions How satisfied were you with receiving updates during the issue resolution process How satisfied were you with the helpfulness of Help Desk Staff? How satisfied were you with the resolution? How satisfied were you with the time it took us to respond? How satisfied were you, overall, with this particular service incident? Percentage of responses 2.8%2.5%5.1%10.2%79.4%100.0% 17.25% 22 Back

URGENCY/ IMPACT High A service outage with broad impact to the Commonwealth, across one or more services that are not functioning, or whole sites or agencies are impacted, or an agency specific critical severity (outage) has occurred causing complete service outage (as opposed to for example, a performance degradation). (see attached Critical Applic. List). May effect public safety, transportation, health, financial servicing, or ability to deliver other public services. Medium There is impact to a portion of an agency or office, with one or more services to the Commonwealth, either not functioning or seriously degraded so the effect is that the agency’s mission is impacted. Also may apply if one or more very high profile parties are impacted (I.e. Secretary or direct report). Low Impact is to an individual or a small workgroup or the service impacted is not of a mission critical nature. High Immediate action is required to restore service (s) or prevent failure of a service. No work around exists. FastLane user accounts inaccessible; Unable to Log into Citrix; Network to Lowell office out. ESE Mail (Exchange) down effecting all 550 Secondary Ed. end users -Complete loss of mission critical EHS application (ex. Beacon 3, Meditech, Family- net) Critical gateway loss (AD, VG, Mass.Gov) Complete Massmail outage at an EHS site -Complete loss of Commonwealth mission critical service (HRCMS, MMARS, etc.) DEP network down effecting 400 users; e- Permitting system down; EEA’s network down causing ELA (Environment Law Enforcement) outage and public safety impact LWD network ISP circuit failure all services impacted Registrar’s PC down; AutoCAD Licensing server down, Oracle Fin. Down ELAR -Educator Licensing applic. down preventing all admins & teachers from obtaining licensing records & certifications -Severe degradation of service from critical gateway (AD, VG, Mass.Gov) Complete loss of MassMail at an EHS agency EEA’s Waste site Cleanup data unavailable to Lic. Site professionals due to server outage Bad network switch - Springfield LWD call center down ANF: Governors Network down or Agency critical applic. out/degraded MassDot Employee’s hard drive down Medium A service outage occurred & there is a work around but service degraded or work around not sufficiently timely, too costly or too much effort. Or service has not failed but potentially may do so. Critical voice service components are not functional (ex. Voice Mail) MassMail service for the Commonwealth is degrading ANF: node down effecting some users Nutrition Applic. Performance is degraded – health educators have difficulty obtaining necessary info. IVR redundancy failover required causing degradation for Lawrence Call Center Single EEA user BB out ANF: EE keyboard broken Low A service outage has occurred and a work around exists and/or the remediation and/or needed procurement is in process. EEA’s HelpDesk HelpStar application unavailable but workaround via phones avail for short-term ANF: Phone system outage but redundant node processing calls EE PC down- temp. replacement not true image ANF: switch port out but other is avail. Local MASS.DOT printer outage – EE ability to do primary job no impacted ESE Corrupted outlook file on siwillngle user –w/a is: use OWA Printing for a group of users at An EHS site down, but alternative printing in the site available. Commonwealth Incident Prioritization: ITSEC member examples P1 P2 P3 P2 P3P4P4/P5 P4 23 Return to IM Model

URGENCY / IMPACT HIGH IMPACT - A service outage with broad impact to the Commonwealth or all of EHS. A voice or data loss of service across whole agencies. The loss of a mission critical application or service across a single agency as opposed to a performance degradation. The loss may immediately or in a short time effect public safety, health, financial servicing, or the ability to deliver public services. MEDIUM IMPACT - There is impact to a portion of an agency or office, with one or more services to the Commonwealth, either not functioning or seriously degraded so the effect is that the agency’s mission is impacted. Also may apply if one or more very high profile parties are impacted. LOW IMPACT - Impact is to an individual or a small workgroup or the service impacted is not of a mission critical nature. HIGH URGENCY -Immediate action is required to restore service (s) or prevent failure of a service. No work around exists. PRIORITY 1 -Complete loss of MassMail at a site/s -Complete loss of Commonwealth mission critical service (HRCMS, MMARS, etc.) -Complete loss of Magnet at a site/s -Complete loss of voice service at a site/s -Complete loss of mission critical applications (ex. Beacon, Meditech, Family- net) -Complete loss of critical gateway (AD, VG, Mass.Gov) PRIORITY 2 -Complete loss of MassMail at an agency -Complete loss of Magnet at a site -Severe degradation of mission critical applications performance (ex. Beacon, Meditech, FamilyNet) -Severe degradation of service from critical gateway (AD, VG, Mass.Gov) PRIORITY 3 -Loss of the voice service to a part of a site -Loss of data connectivity to a part of a site -Intermittent service to a non-critical application MEDIUM URGENCY - A service outage occurred & there is a work around but service degraded or work around not sufficiently timely, too costly or too much effort. Or service has not failed but potentially may do so. PRIORITY 2 -Critical voice service components are not functional (ex. Voice Mail) -MassMail service for the Commonwealth is degrading -Data service is becoming unstable and causing intermittent outages -Mission critical applications performance is degrading at a number of sites but other sites remain stable (eg. Beacon, Meditech, Familynet) -Severe degradation of service from critical gateway (AD, VG, Mass.Gov) from some sites, but others remain stable PRIORITY 3 -Loss of some voice services (ex. Voice Mail) to some users -Loss of data services to some users at some sites -Intermittent service to a non-critical application for some users at some sites -Loss of enterprise services to a few users across one or more sites PRIORITY 4 -Non-critical service loss experienced by limited number of users for which a simple. readily available solution is available (ex. Moving a user/s to a working port from a non-working port returns the user to service, follow-up to the overall repair to follow) LOW URGENCY - A service outage has occurred and a work around exists and/or the remediation and/or needed procurement is in process PRIORITY 3 -Service is stabile, additional service or upgrade recommended to avoid future potential impact or to improve service -Intermittent loss of data services to some users at some sites -Intermittent service to a non-critical application for some users at some sites for which changes are needed to insure stability PRIORITY 4 -Service loss experienced by limited number of users with limited impact for which a service solution based on a simple change is readily available (ex. Moving a user/s to a working port from a non- working port returns the user to service, follow-up to the overall repair to follow) PRIORITY 5 - Simple repair to non-critical service/application for a limited number of users - Printing for a group of users at a site down, but alternative printing in the site available. EHS Incident Prioritization model 24

25 Priority Start Date End date Elapsed Time (Hr.) Impacted Area Incident DescriptionResolutionOwner Resolver Group Owner 3rd Party Dependency P211/1/1011/2/1020.2HighwayT1 down at 10 Park Plaza. Impact to Westwood and D Street. Verizon testing the circuit. Verizon replaced a bad card at the central office location.O'DonnellNetworkY P111/4/10 0.2RMVLicensing stations down in Brockton.Rebooted workstations.ColonHelp DeskY P111/4/10 7.2RMVQmatic printer down in NatickRoller replaced; vendor sent the wrong part.KulickHelp DeskY P211/4/10 0.2HighwayGDS CAD server down.Rebooted server.FitzgeraldServerY P211/8/10 5.0RMVSection 5 users are receiving an application error.Server ran low on virtual memory. Closed Instance Manager and rebooted server. HopeNetworkN P111/10/1011/11/1020.1RMVOne of the two payment gateway IP's (provider is TSIS) is experiencing sporadic outages. Users have been notified to retry transactions, and the Internet sweepers have been turned off (transactions will be queued). Problem resolved itself… Vendor said that they did not have any problems??? HunterITSY P211/16/10 4.7HighwayWestwood circuit is down; Verizon is checking it.Vendor restored circuit.O'DonnellNetworkY P211/17/10 2.8HighwayWestwood circuit is down.Re-set router.O'DonnellNetworkN P111/18/10 1.8RMVProblem with booking license exams (ATS).C: drive on RMV1MQS01 full. Deleted log files.NguyenServerN P211/18/10 0.2HighwayGDS down at Kneeland Street.Applied start-up process.ColonHelp DeskN P211/22/10 1.4HighwayDistrict 1 can not complete logins (Script Logic issue).MHD-Concord-DC1 rebooted and the SLDA service started. WittServerN MassDOT example of IM KPI reporting

11/14/ Back

Terminology review (source is primarily The Office of Gov. Commerce (OGC): owner of ITIL framework) ITIL V3 TermOfficial ITIL V3 DefinitionCommonwealth Equivalent Description/Comment Service Level Agreement: SLA An Agreement between and IT Service Provider and a Customer** describing IT Service, documents Service Level Targets and specifies responsibilities of IT Service Provider and Customer; may cover multiple services or multiple customers SLO – Service Level Offering (or Objective) Based on Service Catalog Offerings 1 an agreement between ITD and a Customer** - describing Financials (BARs); IT Services In Scope and Out of scope; SLR’s; Expected Notifications; Customer responsibilities, Maint windows; some SLT’s (i.e. response targets); Contacts; Design Doc’s; Chargeback rate Info. Service level Requirement: SLR A customer requirement for an aspect of an IT Service. SLR’s are based on business objectives and used to negotiate Service Level Targets Service Requirements Contained within SLO Service Level Targets SLT: (formerly called SLOs in V2) A commitment that is documented in an SLA and based on SLRs and are needed to ensure that the IT Service is Fit for Purpose. These targets are usually based on KPIs. Service Targets Contained with SLO Operational Level Agreement (OLAs) An agreement between an IT Service Provider and another part of the same organization. Defines the services or goods to be provided and the responsibilities of both parties. Underlying Service Offerings –OLAs between Service groups and Support Functions Contain Service Descriptions & Targets (SLT’s) which are referred by SLOs above; Cust. Responsibilities; Service Reporting Between LOB services i.e. Applic. Storage, Network etc. And Support functions: Service Desks; Account Management ; Monitoring Underpinning Contracts (UCs) A contract between an IT Service Provider and a 3rd party. It defines the targets and responsibilities that are required to meet agreed Service Level targets in an SLA Vendor Agreements or UC’s Legally binding vendor contractual agreements 1 That is, the SLO document can help avoid redundancy by not repeating all the content of the Service Catalog but leverages and refers directly to Catalog Descriptions ** Someone who purchases goods or services; person or group who defines and agrees with service level targets. 27

ITIL V3 TermOfficial ITIL V3 DefinitionCommonwealth Equivalent Description/Comment Incident An unplanned interruption to an IT Service or a reduction in the quality of that Service. Failure of a Config. Item that has not yet impacted service is also an Incident, i.e. failure of one disk from a mirror set. Same.An Incident is distinguished from a request for service in that an incident reflects an interruption or reduction in service levels on an existing service and not a request for a new service or change to an existing service. Service Request A request from a user for information, or advice or for a standard change or for access to an IT Service. Service Requests are usually handled by a service desk, and do not require a Request for Change (RFC) to be submitted. Service Request (SR)Some Service Requests may be handled entirely by the Request Fulfillment process (such as requests for information whereas others are routed to other processes for fulfillment (such as Incidents and Changes). Service A means of delivering value to Customers by facilitating outcomes customers want to achieve without the ownership of specific Costs & Risks. SameContained with SLO Service Desk Single Point of Contact between the Service Provider and the Users. A typical Service Desk manages the Incident and Service Requests and also handles communication with the users. Same Tier 1, 2, 3,4 ITIL does not spell out these definitions nor provide skill set descriptions; So there is no right or wrong here; Service Desk is defined as first point of contact and thus Tier 1. Calls unable to be resolved by the SD are referred to Tier 2. Tier 3 may be another internal team or may be a Supplier. If applicable, Tier 4 would most typically be a supplier. See Appendix for definitions Terminology review (con’t) 28

29 Incident management Off-hours Coverage Policy (6:00 pm – 7:00 am weeknights and 24 x 7 weekends) An established Process exists (see Appendix for timeline) Process is executed by the Duty Manager Process is being enhanced to provide better Communication For off-hours Major Incidents (i.e. Priority 1 or Priority 2 outages) the ITD Duty Manager will assume responsibility for handling senior level IT Customer communications Where we need your support: – From Each Secretariat we need a single point of contact for any off-hours P1 or P2 incidents – We are also asking that SCIOs help us by utilizing the Duty Manager process and leveraging Duty Manager as the ITD single point of contact – for initial escalation

LOB/SLO/SLT (Service Level Target) KPIs ITSEC Endorsed Infra: Based upon NNM monitoring of Related Devices Will be based on ITSEC definitions of Incident Priorities & CH Classifications as Captured in SD Incident Ticket 30 ** ** May be available in a later iteration BackBack to SLO

Trending aspect of LOB reporting 31 Months (rolling 12) Hosting Trend Incidents/month P1’s P2’s P3’s Weighted moving average Track by Incident Priority Rolling 12 months in order to account for seasonality aspects Weighting to handle smoothing Once you have 12 months history, we could show month over month from prior year Start fresh with COMiT data BackBack to SLO