1. The West Virginia ERP Story – Part 1 NASACT August 12, 2014

2. Daniel Keene Vice President State and Local Government ERP Solutions Phone: 703-267-8827 Email: daniel.keene@cgi.com Introductions Glen Gainer, III Auditor State of West Virginia Phone: 304-558-2251 Greg Smith Vice President Phone: 978-244-6324 Email: gsmith@krons.com 2

3. Topics Project background Initial challenges How we addressed the challenge wvOASIS ERP solution Lessons learned Questions 3 3

4. Project Background Business Case West Virginia has disparate, redundant, unsupported systems supporting mission critical back office needs Business case justifies implementation of the largest IT system in the State’s history: –$110 Million, 8 year project (3 implementation + 5 support) –Streamlines business processes eliminating redundant activity –Integrates key financial data across the State improving business decisions and transparency –Replaces financial, human resource, time and attendance, payroll, budgeting, purchasing, and linear asset management system across the State –50,000 employees, $23.4 billion annual budget 4

5. Governance Scope Project Timeline Staffing Initial Challenges

6. 66 Initial Challenges Governance Project sponsored by three independently elected officials –Governor –Auditor –Treasurer Transition to new Governor during ERP procurement Consequently… –Significant angst due to enormity and visibility of project –Compounded by lobbyists spreading fear, uncertainty, and doubt –Legislation created new ERP Board of the 3 sponsors whose organizations previously operated independently –Budget projections decreasing largely due to price of natural resources As a result… –Project progress was affected due to delayed decisions –Approval of deliverables requires additional time

7. Scope – Unprecedented scope and scale – 10% of RFP requirements were not met – 375 additional requirements/new business processes surfaced during the project – RFP requirements did not always accurately capture state’s real need As a result… – Fit/Gap Analysis required more time to complete – Anticipated significant change to planned software enhancements (some removed, some added) 7 Initial Challenges Scope 7

8. Initial project timeline mandated by RFP to level the playing field Timeline was risky 8 Initial Challenges Timeline – No capacity for additional scope – Contract started two months later than assumed – Deployments close together in rapid succession – Inadequate time for stabilization – Financial go-live not at start of fiscal year As a result… – A new project timeline was required 8

9. Progress project hampered by – Decentralized current business processes require multiple SMEs to come together to define new centralized business processes – Lack of State SMEs available – Slow ramp up of State and consulting resources at the start of project – Consultant turn-over – Resource conflict caused by concurrent phases 9 Initial Challenges Staffing As a result… – More State agency SME participation was required – Initial progress in defining requirements took longer than expected – Facilities for project proved inadequate 9

10. 10 How WV Addressed the Challenge Daniel Keene, CGI 10

11. Governance Scope Project Timeline Staffing How We Addressed the Challenge 11

12. 12 How We Addressed the Challenge Governance Project sponsored by three independently elected officials –Sponsors’ offices took a more active role in governance process supporting the change to the plan and sending strong message of commitment –More frequent board meetings All three sponsors were re-elected which provided stability and continuity for the project Developed a strong Enterprise Readiness team to provide communication and coordinate deployment activities with 171 agencies and boards Cost of scope increase and revised schedule less than projected by the business case As a result… Decisions and deliverable approval are accomplished in a more timely manner

13. 13 How We Addressed the Challenge Scope Scope was finalized Scope of project increased Incorporated high ROI functionality – Federal Reciprocity (TOPS program) – Capital Program Mgmt. System to manage federal STIP (Statewide Transp. Improvement Program) As a result… – Meets the objectives of the business case – Defined a solution that will improve the state’s ability to conduct state business – A new timeline was required to deliver the functionality 13

14. Timeline was revised – Plan allows for adequate time for stabilization between deployments – Advantage Budgeting brought up early to align with the 2015 budget cycle – FM go live aligns with start of fiscal year – HR/Payroll go live aligns with start of calendar year – DOT given more time to prepare As a result… – More achievable with less risk 14 How We Addressed the Challenge Timeline 14

15. Staffing continues to be a challenge for both the state and its partners State is looking to add between 20-40 part-time and full-time employees to the project State is looking at improved facilities to accommodate this growth As a result… – Budgeting went live as scheduled on August 5, 2013 – Other phases are tracking to plan 15 How We Addressed the Challenge Staffing 15

16. 16 wvOasis ERP Solution Greg Smith, Kronos 16

17. 17 wvOASIS ERP Solution 17

18. 18 Lessons Learned Glen Gainer, III Auditor, West Virginia 18

19. 19 Lessons Learned (so far) Active governance participation needed for success – a good structure is not enough Change management is critical to success – not just system user population – organization and even project team Push back hard on software changes – say no to changes to address “possible problems” or low risk “what if scenarios”

20. 20 Lessons Learned (so far) Fit Gap results are the true measure of what’s needed – the RFP and vendor proposal are only leading indicators Analysis paralysis will doom a project – “a bad decision is better than no decision” Commit the right staff to the project and deliver the staff

21. Questions?