1. Presented by:Lt Gen Ngubane 2013-08-13

2. Total cost of IT requirements Question 1 1.1Table 1 below provides a summary of the multi-year cost estimates for the development, deployment and expected operational costs for the implementation of the Bill for the Financial Year (FY) 2013/14 to FY 2015/6. Total costing, including the specific IT elements, in summarized format are as follows: Table 1 – DNA Bill Implementation Cost Estimates 1.2The DNA Bill cost overview estimates as per Appendix “A”. ITEMFY’2013/14 (R’000)FY’2014/15 (R’000)FY’2015/16 (R’000) Development CostsR 71,490R 42,993R 33,144 Deployment CostsR 50,848R 87,684R 92,717 Operational CostsR 60,287R 404,496R 421,096 ANNUAL TOTAL: R 182,625R 535,173R 546,958 3 YEAR TOTAL: R1,264,755

3. Historical Question 2 2.1The following meetings were held between the various role-players. 2.1.1Meeting held on 2013-06-10. Purpose: Discuss and prepare the presentation for the Portfolio Committee on the status / timeframes / costs of Information Technology Systems in support of the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Bill. Attendance:  Divisional Commissioner: TMS;  Members of the Divisions: TMS, FSL & Legal Services;  Chairperson of the IJS Board;  CEO of SITA & SITA representatives. Content:  Background information on the DNA Bill;  “Implementation of the DNA Bill” as presented by the Division: FSL;  Current process of DNA processing;  Security access to the database;  System Integration;  Budget;  Final compilation of the presentation

4. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.2Meeting held on 2013-07-11. Purpose: Meeting to discuss and prepare the presentation for the Portfolio Committee session to be held on 24 July 2013. Attendance:  Divisional Commissioner: TMS;  Members of the Divisions: TMS, FSL & Legal Services;  Chairperson of the IJS Board;  SITA representatives;  Department Home Affairs representatives. Content:  Feedback of presentation to Portfolio Committee;  Discussion of the As-Is & To-Be process;  Integration / Interfaces between various IJS systems in support of the DNA Bill;  Cost breakdown of implementation;  Comparison regarding SOLVE & CODIS to be done by SITA.

5. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.3Meeting held on 2013-07-12. Purpose: Broader team of role-players participated in a detailed discussion of the content and implementation of theDNA Bill. Attendance:  Members of the Division: TMS – System Managers of all relevant systems;  Members of the Division: FSL;  Members from IJS;  SITA representatives; Content:  Detailed discussion of the DNA Bill;  Tasking of TMS & SITA in support of the implementation of the DNA Bill;  Plans for hosting the National Forensic DNA database (NFDD);  Disaster recovery plans that supports the DNA Bill;  Status on what has been done on the establishment of NFDD; elaborate on contractual obligations if any;  Additional functionality on information management and expert system (DeSTRLab) to support NFDD;  Availability of network infrastructure (cabling) and hardware requirements (LAN/WAN);  Gap Analysis between SOLVE and CODIS;  Internal and external integration / interface plans;  Availability of resources for development and enhancement of the solution.

6. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.4Meeting held on 2013-07-15. Purpose: Preparation meeting for the implementation of the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Bill. Attendance:  Members of the Divisions: TMS & FSL;  Members from IJS;  SITA representatives; Content:  Compilation of As-Is & To-Be process flows;  Integration / Interfaces between various IJS systems in support of the DNA Bill;  Stipulate cost breakdown of implementation;  Action plans for the implementation of the DNA Bill;  Discussion of the comparison made by SITA regarding SOLVE & CODIS.

7. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.5Meeting held on 2013-07-17. Purpose: Finalization of the presentation and implementation plan of the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Bill for Portfolio Committee, Attendance:  Members of the Divisions: TMS & FSL;  SITA representatives; Content:  Compilation of As-Is & To-Be process flows;  Integration / Interfaces between various IJS systems in support of the DNA Bill;  Stipulate cost breakdown of implementation;  Action plans for the implementation of the DNA Bill.

8. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.6Meeting held on 2013-07-26. Purpose: To identify the work streams contributing to the implementation of the DNA Bill Program. Team leaders were allocated to the 17 different work streams and the following information was requested to be consolidated into one DNA Bill program plan.  Scope o Statement o Assumption(Internal) o Dependencies(External)  Deliverables  Timescales (Standardise on months)  Risks  Issues to be resolved  Budget requirements o Quarterly expenditure  Hardware / Software split o Deployment separate from development o Recurring costs Attendance:  Members of the Divisions: TMS;  IJS representatives;  SITA representatives.

9. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.7Meeting held on 2013-07-29. Purpose: Consolidation of the inputs provided from each work stream. The project plans were submitted, the risks as identified by each team were discussed and the budgets were consolidated to provide a total cost budget for the DNA Bill program. Attendance:  Members of the Divisions: TMS;  IJS representatives;  SITA representatives. 2.1.8Meeting held on 2013-08-02. Purpose: Focus on compiling the response to the questions from the Portfolio Committee. The questions were allocated to managers from the various areas and feedback was provided on the progress with the consolidated program plan and budget. Attendance:  Members of the Divisions: TMS & FSL;  IJS representatives;  SITA representatives.

10. Question 2 (cont.) 2.1.9Meeting held on 2013-08-05. Purpose: Verify and consolidate the feedback to the Portfolio Committee in response to the questions. Attendance:  Members of the Divisions: TMS & FSL;  IJS representatives;  SITA representatives. Question 3 3.1The SOLVE software was bundled for free as part of the PCEM tender award. As the costs to align and configure the SOLVE product with the business requirements was un-quantified and were expected to be high, no decision to use SOLVE was made by the Division: Technology Management Services (TMS).

11. Analysis of sample and a database Question 4 4.1The four year period stipulated in the presentation was referring to the development and implementation of the Labware Software in the entire Forensic Science Laboratory i.e all sections of the Laboratory e.g. Ballistics; Chemistry, etc. The implementation of Labware to meet the requirements of the DNA Bill is required at the Biology Section of the Forensic Science Laboratories. This implementation at the Biology Section is estimated to be approximately 511 days. 4.2This office is of the opinion that the concern of obsolescence does not pose a major risk as the analysis process is well established and supported.

12. Question 5 5.1CODIS: The Division: TMS will sign an agreement with the FBI to acquire software and obtain training on CODIS. The estimated cost of this is budgeted at R1million. An additional estimated cost of R11,9million is required to address the functionality of the NFDD system which is not provided for by CODIS. The timeframe will be dependent on the availability of stakeholders to sign the agreement and finalisation of the travel arrangements of the FBI trainers. 5.2Labware: The Division: TMS and SITA will continue to compile the generic business process models for the Division: Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL). These generic models form the baseline of all processes within the Division: FSL components e.g. registration, etc. 5.3Parallel to defining the generic models, the Division: TMS is also compiling the business processes for Biology. Refer to WBS 15 of the attached programme plan for timelines. Attached as per Appendix “B”. 5.4Meetings are underway to identify the process gaps between the functionality provided as standard within Labware versus the business processes required by the Division: FSL. The identified gap functionality that is not provided within Labware will have to be developed. Timeframes for the development is dependent on the extent of the gap and complexity of the processes. 5.5The configuration and development of additional functionality for Labware specific to the Biology division was budgeted at R8million. Refer to WBS 15 of the attached programme plan (Appendix “B”) for timelines.

13. Question 6 6.1DeSTRLab consists of a simple laboratory process management capability and the expert system modules for DNA analysis work. The goal is to replace the process laboratory process management capability of DeSTRLab with that of Labware, while retaining and enhancing the processing throughput of the DNA expert system modules of DeSTRLab, which will continue to be utilized for DNA analysis into the foreseeable future. 6.2In the short term, DeSTRLab will be configured to support the Bill and the processing throughput scaled up to meet the expected biology testing demand. The more detailed analysis and configuration of the Labware will take place in parallel to this and will systematically replace the process management of DeSTRLab as and when the Labware changes have been effected. 6.3Reference is again made to the relevant sections of the attached programme plan (Appendix “B”) for more information. Question 7 7.1As discussed under paragraph 3, no decision was made to use SOLVE. Reference is made to the attached programme plan (Appendix “B”) to illustrate the integration planning through the SIBus to existing SAPS systems. The planning is based on the use of CODIS.

14. Integration and ‘dependencies’ Question 8 8.1Additional hosting capacity is required for hosting the system, which must be sized and procured as well as additional disk storage for NFDD. 8.2Cost estimates for the additional hosting and storage capacity is provided in Table 2 below. These figures have been rolled up in the cost summary provided in paragraph 1 supra. Table 2 - Hosting Capacity and Storage Upgrade cost estimates 8.3Timescales of approximately 20 weeks are required from proposal initiation to implementation of the servers as is provided for in the attached programme plan (Appendix “B”). Expenditure Type (Development) DescriptionOnce-off CostsRecurring Costs (p.a.) CAPEX – hardware (servers) Additional serversR 700,000n/a CAPEX – hardware (storage) New storage requirement not catered for in the current RFQ. R 5,000,000R 300,000 Total:R 5,700,000R 300,000

15. Question 9 9.1In the short to medium term there are sufficient support staff to support the hardware and server operating system, but for the long term an additional Microsoft WINDOWS Server system administrator will have to be appointed. Question 10 10.1Attention is drawn to the attached programme plan (Appendix “B”) showing the planning for the integration of the various SAPS systems. 10.2The integrations with PIVA, the NPA (ECMS) and DOJ&CD (ICMS) are not reflected on this plan as they are part of the overall IJS Programmes integration roadmap. The status plan for these additional integrations are as follows: 10.2.1Person Identity Verification – development has been completed and tested with DHA. The solution is currently in pilot test phase within the SAPS and the commencement of rollout is imminent; 10.2.2The NPA ECMS version 2 system is currently in development. Additional changes to support the electronic I/O diary integration with SAPS ICDMS are currently in the analysis phase;

16. Question 10 (cont.) 10.2.3Development on ECMS is expected to be completed by end FY ’2013/14. The electronic I/O diary functionality on ICDMS has been completed. Integration will follow between ICDMS and ECMS once the ECMS development has been completed. This integration will support the notification of prosecutors of the existence of DNA lead reports for dockets that have been booked out to the NPA; 10.2.4The next version of the DOJ&CD ICMS is being prepared to provide case outcome information, which will be provided via the IJS transversal hub to the NPA ECMS and SAPS CAS/ICDMS and CRIM systems once completed. The expected timeframes for the completion of the development is by the end of FY ’2013/14 to coincide the ECMS phase 2 integrations; 10.2.5It should be noted that the deployment of the DOJ&CD ICMS and NPA ECMS systems will be in accordance with the IJS priority court rollout schedule; 10.2.6Funding has also been approved for the upgrade of the DHA HANIS system to support requests for identification searches. This project started in the current FY ‘2013/14 and is expected to be ready for integration via the IJS Transversal to SAPS during the 4 th quarter of the 2014 calendar year; 10.2.7No comment on planning in regards to the DCS RDOM System can be made at this time due to supplier issues that are currently being addressed by DCS.

17. Question 11 11.1The current version of PCEM does not provide all the functionality that is currently in development in the PCEM project. Once the development and testing of the next release of PCEM is completed, it will replace the current version that has been deployed at the 14 sites. 11.2The rollout plan for the PCEM project to the SAPS 13 stores is depicted in table 3 below. Table 3 – PCEM SAPS13 Stores Rollout Plan ProvinceTotal Stations201420152016 North West822827 Limpopo973332 Free State11037 36 Western Cape15050 Northern Cape913130 Eastern Cape194656465 Mpumalanga8629 28 Gauteng14147 Kwazulu Natal1846261 Total1135382377376

18. Question 12 12.1The only reliable means to confirm that a buccal sample has been taken is to use a fast searchable biometric test to positively identify the person at the time of the taking of the sample. 12.2Although the business process requires that a SAPS76 set of fingerprints is taken at the time of arrest, the turnaround time on the associated fingerprint search is not currently fast enough to confirm the identity of the person (and their sample test status) at the time of arrest. Until this issue is overcome (see paragraph 12.3 below), it will be necessary to take a buccal sample and redoing the DNA profile test each time a person is arrested for a schedule 1 offence. 12.3The Person Identity Verification Application may provide some short term assistance, but this will only be to the extent that the SA ID number of the arrested person is disclosed at the time of arrest. Although the (“10-P”) identification search capability is being developed as part of the overall HANIS upgrade project, it is unlikely that the performance will assist in solving this problem as the overall database is considerably larger than that of the SAPS AFIS database. Furthermore, this will not help with persons arrested who are not known to DHA.

19. Question 12 (cont.) 12.4To overcome the limitations and accuracy issues, SAPS is in parallel with the DNA process, currently exploring the use of multi-modal biometrics testing that can be taken at the point of arrest to confirm if the person is previously known to SAPS, to return their personal information including if a buccal sample has previously been taken. This investigation is being conducted as part of the IJS Person Strategy and associated Integrated Booking Project that is currently being initiated within SAPS. 12.5Once the Integrated Booking Process has been established in SAPS and supported by the necessary backend biometric matching systems, it will be possible to assign a unique criminal justice person identifier for each person, which in turn will carry a DNA profile status indicator. 12.6Until such time as this is possible, linkages of DNA profiles will continue to be made via the FP number of the CRIM system. The integration between CAS/ICDMS and CRIM will also provide a link between the CAS “mens-nommer” and the FP number and DNA profile status linked via the FP number on CRIM.

20. Project Management Question 13 13.1A number of risks have been identified in each of the project areas. The headline risks and their associated mitigation strategies are provided in table 4 below. Table 4 – DNA Bill Programme Headline Execution Risks and Mitigation Strategies RISKSMITIGATION STRATEGIES Resources: availability of suitably qualified and experienced project resources. This may delay a number of projects by up to 4 months.  Use existing SITA development SLA and ensure that the FY’2014/15 SLA updates are agreed to before the start of the new financial year  Use the SAPS skills tender to appoint additional resources. PCEM contract renewal before expiry date December 2013. Address the lack of procurement vehicle of PCEM related equipment and consumables. Initiate negotiations before end of August 2013 with supplier for contract renewal. Hosting capacity limitations – current hosting capacity limitations (mainframe processing, memory and storage) impacting on all SAPS crime systems and integrations. Expedite the finalization of a proposal from SITA and necessary approvals to order and implement upgrades (see programme plan: Hosting Environment Upgrade) Network Capacity Upgrades – the SAPS NNUP is focused on upgrading the station local area network (LAN) infrastructure and does not carry operational budget for the necessary increase in wide area network (WAN) bandwidth costs (once-off upgrade and increased monthly bandwidth costs). SITA to produce proposal to increase WAN bandwidth in accordance with IJS deployment requirements. Application to be made to increase the allocation of WAN infrastructure networking costs. Maintain alignment and performance of all project areas.Establish a DNA Bill programme with appropriate steering committee representing all the stakeholders, supported by a dedicated programme management capability.

21. Question 14 14.1There are currently two Microsoft SQL Server database administrators available for the administration of the NFDD database which is sufficient for short to medium term. In the long term an additional database administrator will need to be appointed. Question 15 15.1All projects supporting the implementation of the Bill will be under the leadership of the Component Head: Applications Portfolio Management as well as SITA Head of Systems Solutions. A Programme Manager will be appointed under the EPMO. The project will also be monitored by the EPMO of the Division: TMS. Question 16 16.1The SAPS regards the implementation of the Bill as a Programme with different project teams managing systems involved in the Bill, the resources on these teams have supported SAPS systems over a number of years on Application Maintenance SLA (7 years on average). SITA is in the process to appoint technical resources to establish dedicated teams for the DNA Database and Labware configurations.

22. Question 17 17.1 The composition of the steering committee is provided in Table 5 below. Table 5 – DNA Bill Programme Steering Committee Nominations DivisionPerson Forensic Science LaboratoryChairperson: Divisional Commissioner: FSL: Lt Gen JK Phahlane DetectivesMaj Gen Johnson Maj Gen Botsheleng Visible PolicingSection Head: Community Services Section Forensic Science LaboratoryComponent Head: Quality Management: Maj Gen A Shezi Section Head: Forensic Database Management: Brig J Smit Organisational DevelopmentSection Head: Process Development: Brig Britz Supply Chain ManagementBrig Prinsloo Brig Du Plooy Technology Management ServicesComponent Acting Head: Application Portfolio Management: Brig N Pillay Acting Section Head: Enterprise Project Management: Colonel J Barnard Section Head: Enterprise Architecture: Brig T Malapela Section Head: Specialised Crime Investigation Systems: Brig M Ngake Section Head: Crime Systems: Brig P Mosoeu SITADivisional Head SITA Government Solutions and Standards: Dr Daniel Mashao IJSIJS Board Chairperson: Mr G Leseba

23. Additional Question 18 18.1As the planning is currently underway, it is not yet available for submission to the committee as at the date of this response.

24. THANK YOU