Information Technology Division Executive Office for Administration and Finance IT Service Excellence Committee (ITSEC) Nov 10, 2010

2 Agenda TopicDesired Outcomes Discussion lead Allotted time Review take-aways and decisions from 10/28 mtg Responses on Cust. Service training Mission and charter Roadmap Donna Tom 15 min Proposal for SLO/SLT KPI’sAgreed upon reporting model and awareness of ISB- Jan. commitment Kevin M.25 min Change Calendar Sharing InitiativeDiscussion of Change Calendar sharing Tom/Kevin10 min Service ModelInitial discussion of what a service model might look like All20 min Incident ManagementAgreed upon Priority Definitions Tom10 min Next Steps/Wrap upKevin/Tom10 min

Take-aways from last meeting Task Assignments Date AssignedWhatWhoStatus Due Date Publish updated Mission Statement for feedback/approvalMission Statement Tom E. Complete Publish updated Roadmap for feedback/approvalTom E. Complete Obtain samples of existing KPI’s and synthesizeAll/Tom In process Provide Donna Perchase with number of people by office that would be candidates for the Delivering Outstanding Customer Service class and also with any possible classroom location. Each Committee member. Complete Develop proposed list for high level overviews of business serviceTom E. In process Review the updated roadmap & mission statement and provide any feedback to Tom by EOD Each Committee member Complete 11-1 Share to the committee a sample template for the definition of a service in the Service catalog Ron t. In process Provide a grouping of capabilities/skills by level or tier as defined for the service desk under their responsibility Each Committee member In process /18/20153

4

5 SLO/SLT (Service Level Target) KPIs – Proposal for ITSEC members

11/18/20156 SLO/SLT (Service Level Target) KPIs – Proposal for ITSEC members Infra: Based upon NNM monitoring of Related Devices Applic.: Will be based on ITSEC definitions of Incident Priorities & CH Classifications as Captured in SD Incident Ticket

Metrics detail 11/18/20157

Metrics detail (con’t) 11/18/20158 SLO sample

11/18/20159

10 Change Calendar Initiative

11 Service Level Management – Showing Inter- relationships between Customers; SLOs; OLA’s; UC’s OLAs Operating Level Agreements 1 The Business B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 2 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 1 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 3 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 2 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 1 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 3 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 2 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 1 B u s i n e s s P r o c e s s 3 Secretariat A Secretariat B Secretariat C SLOs SLO LOBs: Application Print & Mail Integration Network & Data Hosting Security Service B 2 Service A 1 Service C 3 Supplier B Supplier A Supplier C Service E Offering Service F Service G Service A Offering Service B Service C 3 rd Party Suppliers Support Teams SERVICE ACCONT MGT COMMONHELP LEGAL, PMO ITD Service Catalog ITD Service Catalog The Business 2 3 UC’s Underpinning contracts Service B 2 Service A 1 3 Service B 2 Service A 1 3 Service B 2 Service A 1 3 Service B 2 Service A 1 Service B 2 Service A 1 These are not betw services but rather Between services and Support functions

12 Service Level Management – Showing Inter- relationships Inter-agency – Secretariat and ITD OLAs Operating Level Agreements 1 The Business Messaging 2 EHS SERVICE DESK 1 EHS NMMIS 3 EHS Executive level 1 DMH 3 Secretariat: EHS EHS Agencies SLOs SLO NMMIS ITD LOBs: Application Print & Mail Integration Network & Data Hosting Security Service B 2 Service A 1 Service C 3 Supplier B Supplier A Supplier C Service E Offering Service F Service G Service H Service A Offering Service B Service C Service D 3 rd Party Suppliers Support Teams SERVICE ACCONT MGT COMMONHELP LEGAL, PMO ITD Service Catalog ITD Service Catalog The Business UC’s Underpinning contracts Service B 2 Service A 1 Service C 3 Service B 2 Service A 1 Service C 3 Service B 2 Service A 1 Service C 3 Service B 2 Service A 1 Service B 2 Service A 1 SLOs SLO These are not betw services but rather Between services and Support functions DPH

11/18/ End to end Draft Model

14 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 Objectives 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. (see Appendix for example) 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 - UC 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.

15 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. 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. Contained 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 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. TBD upon receipt of committee capabilitiy levels Terminology review (con’t)

Next Steps Next meeting – Tom B. Hosting in Malden on Tuesday 11/23 1-2:30 Follow-on meetings – Every two weeks? – Continue to rotate locations ? – Next dates: 12/9, 12/23 ?, 1/6 ISB update on 12/13 11/18/201516

17 APPENDIX

11/18/201518

19 IT Service Excellence Committee Mission “We continually strive to facilitate excellent IT service and support for our customers.” As Service Desk owners who are committed to Service Excellence, "Service is our Business“. We see ourselves as the "Voice of the Customer". At the end of the day, we are responsible for the providing the highest service levels to our customers and to that end, work to influence and drive changes in our service capabilities that will result in excellent service delivery. The objective of the IT Commonwealth Service Excellence Committee (ITSEC) is to better align IT with the business for the purpose of delivering the highest quality IT services at the most efficient cost. We foster inter-agency communication and effective service delivery through the collaboration, sharing and adoption of best practices to achieve our collective goal of best serving the agencies and citizens of the Commonwealth Back to last meeting take-aways

20 Our Charter The Commonwealth of Ma. as part of its overall Strategic plan has established as one of its 9 key objectives to adopt the industry best practices for IT Service Management for the purpose of ensuring that needs of the Secretariats and Agencies and Citizens served by IT are met and that those customers understand and are satisfied with their IT experience. The IT Service Excellence Committee is chartered by the ISB and (Infrastructure Services Board) and Commonwealth CIO Cabinet to lead this work through a multi-year effort. This committee’s work directly supports the Commonwealth’s IT Consolidation initiative. ITIL (IT Infrastructure Library) framework Version 3 has been adopted by the Commonwealth as it’s set of IT Service Management protocols. Many of the Commonwealth’s IT entities have been on a multi-year journey to adopt ITIL and we wish to build on their success to date in this regard by sharing and adopting best practices for common use across the Commonwealth. Back to last meeting take-aways

Commonwealth Incident Prioritization: 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 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 be effect public safety, health, financial servicing, or ability to deliver 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 4

URGENCY/ IMPACT High A service outage with broad impact to the Commonwealth, across one or more services that are not functioning, or whole 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 be effect public safety, health, financial servicing, or ability to deliver 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. down for the Commonwealth or across a Secretariat Full array failure impacting HRCMS Payroll causing data corruption – auto failover w/ 10 min outage but remedial data fix needed Mainframe down – outage impacting RMV branch office operations MITC Core Network down PBX Ashburton Place down DMA VOIP (data & voice) hardware switch failure interrupting ability to handle medical questions Mass.Gov database down preventing citizens from reaching service providers Entrpise XML Gateway Down; Interchge file xfers and Web service txns & VG impacted Mail server failure causing down for an agency or for SCIO (this typically a local agency IT issue) Switch fabric failure & host not configured for failover impacting BU & recovery service Open systems failure impacting OSD eFiling during financial filing season Remote Sheriff office network outage Eservices down - Agency lookup work com claims (ITD hosted) Enterprise XML Gateway Virus Scan Engines down – file transfer-based svcs cannot proceed (EHS FTS & HTS) SOARIS –online system (only) for applic’s to view civil service profiles- is unavailable Data base down for SD Tivoli in Dev. Environ. & upcoming proejct milestone on training impacted 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. PBX service at Ashburton is degraded due to storage failure HRCMS Payroll down for an Agency performance for an agency is slow ( >20 sec response time ) Commonwiki outage due to Linux server failure EQE Magnet issue causing inability to access Federal web sites for environmental applications ELIPSYS down (civil Serv. Certifications & appointments) ITD hosted HRCMS db down but payroll run in last 24 hrs window to recover is multiple days ATB Docket Tracking Syst.down database failure (impacts internal txn handling of dockets0 DOR Mobile user experiencing connectivity issues IMPACT – a DDS (MDH) hosted budgeting system is down Data base down for SD Tivoli in Dev. Environ. & no immediate project impact Low A service outage has occurred and a work around exists and/or the remediation and/or needed procurement is in process. Full array with auto fail-over recovery w/i 10 min & no further remedial action needed – i.e. no data corruption has occurred ITD print room down for a DPL printing SOLARIS down- Appointing authorities need to use manual list of civil Serv. info Loss of a port on a 600 Washington St. (just swap a port to remediate) Printer down for a dept outage for single user due to moving to new org (agency owns this issue) Storage: disk failure – no cust. impact; EMC schdl to replace Failed batch jobs, P4 missed SLAs with no customer impact Single user MARS access due to privilege error Commonwealth Incident Prioritization:( Examples for ITD) P1P2P3 P2 P3 P4

11/18/201524

Change Calendar Link : 11/18/201525

Sample SLO (SLT) for Storage E2E Service RequestDescription Lead Time- Business Days Add or Remove Disk Space This service is to allocate additional disk space in your system. A request for additional space will be reviewed by your Service Account Manager. This service request includes: − Allocate new storage to a host − Modify storage allocated for an existing host − De-allocate storage 2-14 Days 11/18/  Service Requests Back to Metrics