Linea Solutions, Inc. - County of Fresno 22... · Linea Solutions, Inc. Proposal for Consulting Services fo r Multi-Year Implementation Program Proposal For Consulting Services for

Linea Solutio

ns, Inc.Pro

posal fo

r Co

nsulting Services for M

ulti-Year Im

plementatio

n Program

Proposal For Consulting Services for Multi-Year Implementation Program

June 16, 2010

Contact:

Akio TagawaPresident

10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 600Los Angeles, CA 90024310.261.1333 tel310.443.4192 fax

1 0 9 4 0 w i l s h i r e b l v d , S u i t e 6 0 0 l o s a n g e l e s , c a 9 0 0 2 4

o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2

PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL: CONTAINS TRADE SECRETS OF LINEA SOLUTIONS, INC. MAY NOT BE USED, REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED

WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF LINEA SOLUTIONS, INC.

Proposal for Consulting Services for Multi-Year I.T. Program

V1.0

5/28/2010

1 of 60

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ................................................................................................................................ 1

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................. 2

1.1. Overview of Project ................................................................................................................................ 3

1.2. Overview of Proposed Services ............................................................................................................. 4

1.3. Overview of Linea’s Qualifications ....................................................................................................... 5

1.4. Linea’s Competitive Advantage ............................................................................................................ 7 1.4.1. Competitive advantages for FCERA 7 1.4.2. General Competitive Advantages 8

2. PROPOSED SERVICES .................................................................................................. 9

2.1. Summary of Services in the I.T. Program ............................................................................................ 9

2.2. Summary of Pension Administration System Project Services ........................................................ 10 2.2.1. Summary of Reporting Services (Subproject of PAS) 11 2.2.2. Summary of Case Management/Workflow Services (Subproject of PAS) 11

2.3. Summary of EDMS Project Services .................................................................................................. 11

2.4. Summary of Web Self Service / Member Portal Services ................................................................. 12

2.5. Summary of Disaster Recovery / Business Continuity Planning Services ....................................... 13

2.6. Detailed Scope of Services by Task Area ........................................................................................... 14

2.7. Deliverables by Task Area ................................................................................................................... 19

3. PAS METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 25

3.1. Procurement: Picking the Right Partner for the Right Price ........................................................... 25 3.1.1. Emphasis on the Requirements, Not the Contract 25 3.1.2. Cost Savings from Linea’s Approach 27

3.2. Beyond Project Management: Linea’s Added Value for Oversight ................................................ 28

3.3. General Deployment Methodology ..................................................................................................... 31

4. CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE...................................... 33

4.1. Company Background ......................................................................................................................... 33


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

2 of 60

5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 37

6. PROJECT STAFFING ................................................................................................... 41

6.1. Project Advisor ..................................................................................................................................... 41

6.2. Project Manager ................................................................................................................................... 42

6.3. Senior Business Analyst ....................................................................................................................... 42

6.4. Senior Technical Architect .................................................................................................................. 43

6.5. Senior Consultant ................................................................................................................................. 43

7. CONSULTING SERVICES COST ............................................................................... 50

7.1. Hours By Consulting Area .................................................................................................................. 50

7.2. Project Costs by Task Area and Month ............................................................................................. 52

7.3. Total Project Cost ................................................................................................................................ 53

8. CONSULTING RATES ................................................................................................. 54

8.1. Standard Rate Sheet ............................................................................................................................ 54

8.2. Billing, Rates and Policies for Travel and Other Expenses .............................................................. 54

9. ASSUMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS ......................................................................... 55

9.1. Assumptions .......................................................................................................................................... 55 9.1.1. General Assumptions 55 9.1.2. Project Resource Assumptions 57 9.1.3. Project Schedule Assumptions 57 9.1.4. Program Scope Assumptions 57 9.1.5. Technical Assumptions 58


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

1 of 60

TITLE PAGE

Date: 5/28/2010

Subject: Proposal For Consulting Services for Multi-Year Implementation Program

Address: Linea Solutions, Inc. 10940 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 600 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Tel: 310.443.4191 Fax: 310.443.4192

Contact: Akio Tagawa

Title: Principal and President

Tel: 310.261.1333


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

2 of 60

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Linea Solutions, Inc., a Southern California-based IT and Management Consulting firm specializing in public pension funds, appreciates the opportunity to submit a proposal to Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association (FCERA) for a multi-year implementation program. We have put together a proposal crafted to the specific needs of FCERA’s project team. We appreciate the valuable time FCERA will spend evaluating this proposal.

We are confident that Linea Solutions can provide valuable leadership and support to ensure the success of this project. We feel we are the best company to assist FCERA for the following reasons:

We have by far the most 1937 Act experience of any firm, having worked with 14 of the 20 county systems

We have unmatched depth of experience in our firm We have tremendous experience in working with the software vendors in this industry,

especially those that are relevant to FCERA We are the only firm working with public defined benefit plans that has experience with

all the projects that are within the scope of FCERA’s I.T. Program, from Pension Administration Systems (PAS) to Business Continuity Planning

Additionally, we have many FCERA-specific reasons that support why we are the best fit: We have valuable knowledge of FCERA’s business processes, business rules,

procedures, and requirements The core team being proposed has already worked extensively with FCERA We have the most in-depth knowledge of conversions from Watson-Wyatt systems to

new PAS systems We are already familiar with gaps in project team resources, and feel that our proposal

addresses those gaps Because we wrote the original plan for the I.T. Program, we are the most familiar with

the scope and details behind what will be implemented Finally, we have proven that we can succeed at FCERA, with highly successful I.T. plan

and General Ledger implementations.

For all of these reasons, we feel we are the best choice for FCERA’s project. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity for us to present this proposal.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

3 of 60

1.1. Overview of Project

FCERA is beginning the implementation of a series of I.T. projects over the next five years. Over the course of this five-year program, FCERA intends to transform the administration of benefits by implementing new functionality, implementing a paperless office, expanding its reporting capabilities, improving its ability to support its I.T. infrastructure, and improving customer service for its members. In short, much is riding on the successful implementation of this program.

We suggest that our role as FCERA’s consulting partner is as follows:

Provide overall project leadership to ensure FCERA’s project objectives are met

Assist the FCERA project team in meeting its project responsibilities

Ensure the selected software vendors are successful in meeting the agreed upon scope of services for the project for the agreed upon cost, in the agreed upon timeframe

Ensure the major project risks are anticipated and mitigated

Linea Solutions is uniquely suited for this role on the project. We have the combination of relevant experience, skills, and local, senior resources to execute on all aspects of the project. We also have a track record of success at FCERA, both on the I.T. Roadmap and on the General Ledger project.

In this proposal, we intend to demonstrate why we are the right choice for this program and to explain in detail how we will ensure these projects will be successful in all ways. We do not intend to just bring in the projects “on time and on budget”: we intend to make the program an unambiguous success for staff, management, the Board of Retirement, and FCERA plan sponsors. We are enthusiastic about partnering with FCERA and the selected software vendors to make this vision a reality.

We will go far beyond the traditional oversight project management offered by our competitors to provide FCERA targeted consulting in the areas that are highly critical for the success of the program. Given our knowledge of FCERA, we have devised a plan that will ensure we supplement the FCERA project team, as well as lead the projects. Ultimately, we feel this is what FCERA requires for the program—targeted assistance and leadership.

In order to mitigate the first major risk of the program—that the initiatives are not successfully completed on time and on budget—FCERA requires more than just project oversight. It needs experienced, specialized resources in several key areas. We believe that our contribution in the specialized consulting areas, in concert with our project oversight, will ensure the program is completed on time and on budget. Without the specialized services, we question to what extent any oversight Project Manager would be able to solely ensure the projects are completed successfully. Since FCERA’s main challenge is resources, our proposal seeks to address this gap.

We believe we have developed an excellent business relationship with FCERA over the past year. As one of the 1937 Act systems, FCERA represents one of Linea’s core clients. As a result, Linea has a tremendous professional interest in making this program a success. We have


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

4 of 60

far more “skin in the game” with FCERA than any other firm could hope to have. We stake our reputation as a company on this program.

1.2. Overview of Proposed Services

Linea has segmented the proposed services into two categories: baseline and supplemental. Baseline services represent general oversight and the minimum consulting services required for the PAS project. We present these services as a separate category in order to make our proposal easier to compare to other consulting firms, who tend to limit themselves to these services. However, we feel strongly that there is another set of services that will be required for the successful completion of the program. These are referred to as supplemental services.

In order to develop our scope of work, we assumed that the program’s duration will be five years.

The services are summarized in the tables below.

Baseline Services

Area Description

Project Management Oversight Overall project management: reporting, change order control, risk mitigation, issue analysis and remediation, resource management

Procurement Develop the request for proposals for the PAS and EDMS projects and manage the procurement process, from gathering of initial requirements through contract negotiation.

Requirements Confirmation Management of functional specifications development process for the PAS and EDMS projects; ensure FCERA resources are properly utilized to gather requirements; act as advocate for FCERA in ensuring all requirements are met in an acceptable manner. Act as “best practice” expert, leveraging other ’37 Act experience.

Testing Oversight Manage user acceptance testing process, including testing resource management.

Taken as a whole, the baseline services will comprise about 8,050 hours or the equivalent of .95 FTEs over the five year program.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

5 of 60

Supplemental services

Area Description

Data conversion support Manage and implement data conversion and data clean-up. Provide technical guidance on the development of scripts and other tools for the conversion. Provide extraction and conversion services for critical data points (such as salary, service, and contributions).

Comprehensive Testing Support Write all user acceptance test scripts, manage parallel testing, offer full-time “help desk” on site during period.

Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) Backfile Oversight and Integration

Act as project manager for the conversion of paper files into electronic images. Act as SME for integration of the new EDMS with the new PAS. Provide guidance on the indexing schema and act as liaison between the two vendors.

Member Web Portal Work with FCERA and the PAS vendor to implement a member web portal to allow members to access their account information online. Assist in definition of what should be accessible and what processes should be member-initiated. Manage testing and roll-out of the portal in conjunction with FCERA staff and the PAS software vendor.

Case Management / Workflow Assist with definition and implementation of high-value workflows in the new PAS.

Reporting Assist with implementation of reporting portal to allow management and staff to create critical custom and pre-defined reports.

Disaster Recovery / Business Continuity Planning

Assist with the identification, selection, and implementation of a hot or warm-site for business continuity. Development of communications plan and disaster recovery strategy document. Management table-top testing of plans to ensure staff and management are trained in their use.

Taken as a whole, the supplemental services will comprise an additional 7,230 hours or approximately .85 FTEs over the five year program.

1.3. Overview of Linea’s Qualifications

We are uniquely qualified to provide the required services for FCERA. We also would like to emphasize the following points:

We have unmatched staff experience. Linea’s strength does not reside in its corporate resume alone. Our staff has a tremendous amount of both IT consulting and public retirement system experience. FCERA should note the following about our company:

o Linea staff averages 9.1 years of public retirement system experience


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

6 of 60

o Linea staff averages 15.6 years of system implementation consulting experience

o Linea’s staff has been working with the company for an average of 6.5 years: we have strong retention and excellent team cohesion

o All Linea Solutions Project Managers either have their PMP certification or will have the certification within twelve months

We have unmatched 1937 Act experience. Linea Solutions has more 1937 Act experience than anyone else. Our library of business rules and business practices encompasses the majority of 1937 Act systems, and we leverage this knowledge for every PAS project. Consider the following facts:

o 80% of Linea consultants have worked with three or more ’37 Acts

o 100% of Linea consultants have worked with at least two ’37 Acts

o Linea has consulted for, or is consulting for, fourteen of the twenty ‘37 Act systems. That is three times as many as our closest competitor.

o We have been consulting for ’37 Act systems for over 11 years, more than any other company

We have a track record of ensuring projects finish on time. Linea Solutions has an unmatched track record in terms of successfully driving projects to conclusion. For FCERA specifically, Linea Solutions was able to complete the I.T. Roadmap and General Ledger projects on-time and on-budget. The current program is a series of high priority and high visibility projects, and FCERA needs a resource that has a proven track record in successfully managing projects.

We have unmatched breadth of services. FCERA is not just looking for an oversight vendor: the organization is looking for a consulting partner that can address a series of I.T. needs. Linea Solutions is the only company that provides project management, procurement, data conversion, EDMS consulting, workflow, reporting, member portal, and disaster recovery / business continuity consulting services. Our competitors’ services are much narrower, focusing on oversight and IV&V. Linea’s breadth will ensure FCERA’s varied needs can be met by a single, qualified vendor.

We have the most recent and relevant experience with the PAS software vendors. As shown in table 1.0 below, Linea Solutions has significant experience with virtually all the software companies that are relevant to FCERA. More importantly, our experience is recent, meaning we have worked with the newest generation of the software.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

7 of 60

LEAST RELEVANT TO CALIFORNIA MARKET MOST RELEVANT TO CALIFORNIA MARKET

Ben XL

Cata-pult

Cedar Crestone

Deloitte (Bearing

Point) Corner-stone CPAS JEA LRS Sagitec Tyler Vitech

Evaluated Proposals From Company x x x x x x x x x x x

Extensive understanding of product from demos/interviews x x x x x x x x x

Relationship with company's management x x x x x x

Direct working experience on project x x x x x

Table 1.0: Experience with Software vendors.

1.4. Linea’s Competitive Advantage

Beyond our belief that we are well qualified for the FCERA’s program, we also feel that we are in a unique position to assist FCERA. We will describe our differentiators below, beginning with our unique advantages for FCERA and then discussing our general advantages.

1.4.1. Competitive advantages for FCERA

We do not believe we should be selected just because we have been working for FCERA on the last two projects. We should be selected because that experience will allow us to perform in ways our competitors cannot. Specifically, FCERA should consider the following:

We have knowledge of FCERA’s business processes, procedures and requirements; our consulting team developed many of them in conjunction with FCERA staff

We have familiarity of FCERA’s legacy system, Watson Wyatt, since our team has been converting two other ’37 Acts off of this system.

Our lead data consultant has expert knowledge of the Watson Wyatt database

We have strong working relationships with staff and management, which will allow us to motivate and guide the project team

Because we understand FCERA’s project team and environment, we have a strong grasp of the supplemental support FCERA needs to be successful


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

8 of 60

Changing consultants represents a risk for the program; maintaining the continuity of the current consultant will ensure FCERA does not need to learn another company’s oversight methodology

Taken as a whole, we feel that these reasons justify Linea Solutions as the best choice for FCERA for this project.

1.4.2. General Competitive Advantages

Beyond the FCERA-specific experience, we also feel we have some general advantages in terms of our approach:

More relevant, actionable experience. Our competitors in some cases may have more years of experience, if one were to include projects from the 1980s and 1990s. However, in terms of experience with the current software vendors and with business rules and data that are relevant for FCERA, Linea’s experience is unparalleled. Since 2006, Linea has worked on seven different PAS projects, more than any other consulting company.

Better relationship with software vendors. We have heard from both retirement systems and the software vendors that they are exasperated with the combative approach taken by some consulting firms. Rather than acting as an auditor, or contract administrator, Linea emphasizes our partnership role with the software vendor. Although we are not afraid to assert ourselves when it is required, our general approach is to work to make the vendor successful. We have been successful on many occasions in getting the vendors to waive change orders or agree to modifications to the scope of work without additional costs because the vendor believes that we are trying to help them.

“Human” centered vs. “Project” centered. Linea’s approach to project oversight has always been more about managing the people on the project, rather than managing the project plan. Our consultants use their people skills to motivate team members, to maintain their enthusiasm, and to ensure that the team is focused on the same goal. Regardless of the quality of the software, projects will either succeed or fail based on the dynamic of the project team.

Services that go far beyond oversight project management. Our most important differentiator is what we do on a project. We are very different than our competitors in terms of the day-to-day work we do on a project. We are like our competitors in that we also provide overall project management. However, we are different in that we do not feel that this is a full-time role, especially given that most software vendors assign their own full-time project manager. In short, Linea Solutions focuses much more on business analysis¸ data analysis, and staff support than our competitors.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

9 of 60

2. PROPOSED SERVICES

2.1. Summary of Services in the I.T. Program

Linea’s scope of services for this project is broad, spanning project management and a variety of targeted consulting services. The common thread of these services is that they are all highly specialized, all are required for the program, and FCERA’s project team is not likely to have the time required to complete these tasks. Linea consultants will be filling the critical gaps in the projects to make them successful. Given our experience with all of the projects within the program, we are able to perform these tasks efficiently and have many tools at our disposal to ensure that no tasks are missed.

In table 2.0 below, the projects within the program are summarized, along with the estimated fiscal years of each.

# Initiative Name Services Offered Fiscal Year

1 Pension Administration System (PAS) conversion

Project oversight as well as specialized consulting services. Define requirements, lead requirements confirmation, manage procurement process, provide oversight of implementation, provide interface consulting assistance, and assist with testing and training. Assist with data conversion process, training of employers to provide new active payroll interface.

2010-2011 – 2014-2015

2 Electronic Document Management System (EDMS) implementation

Project oversight as well as specialized consulting services. Define requirements, manage procurement process, provide oversight of implementation, provide interface consulting assistance to new PAS, and assist with testing and training. Assist with backfile conversion of paper records and implementation of day forward workflow process.

2010-2011 – 2012-2013

3 Disaster Recovery / Business Continuity Planning (DR/BCP)

Inventory systems, define disaster scenarios, assist with alternative site identification and implementation, create organization-wide communications plans, hold table-top and system testing plans, oversee documentation of DR plans for critical systems.

2010-2011, 2014-2015

4 PAS Reporting Tools

Identify appropriate reporting tools, assist with development of user interface for self-service reporting, identify data fields needed, assist with development of critical reports

2014-2015

5 Case Management / Workflow

Develop more efficient and/or automated processes with key stakeholders; implement business process management to monitor improved processes, train staff on new processes.

2014-2015


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

10 of 60

# Initiative Name Services Offered Fiscal Year

6 Web Self-Service / Member Web Portal

Define requirements, manage procurement process, provide oversight of implementation, and assist with testing and training.

2014-2015

Table 2.0: Summary of Projects within the I.T. Program

2.2. Summary of Pension Administration System Project Services

Linea will provide extensive services for this project, given its size and scope. At a general level, Linea will provide overall project management and independent validation and verification (IV&V), as well as targeted consulting services to assist with integrating the system into FCERA’s environment. These targeted services include detailed functional specifications development, interface analysis, user acceptance testing support, training support, and data conversion. A team of consultants will be used; one half-time project manager and one quarter-time senior consultant, who will oversee the implementation from end-to-end. Additionally, four to five consultants will assist with specific phases and activities.

Our services are summarized in figure 2.2 below by project phase:

Con

sulti

ng S

ervi

ces

Pro

ject

Ove

rsig

ht

Project Management

Interface Development

User Acceptance Testing

Data conversion

Parallel Testing

1. Procurement 2. Requirements

Development 3. Configuration 4. Testing / Training5. Parallel

Testing / Cutover

Procurement

Requirements Confirmation

Figure 2.2 High-Level View of Linea’s services


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

11 of 60

Linea has proposed two subprojects to the PAS project, both of which will follow the parallel testing phase. The purpose of these subprojects is to leverage the PAS to further two objectives: first, we will provide FCERA management and the Board greater access to data through enhanced reporting tools and reports. Second, we will utilize automated workflow to improve the efficiency of critical processes. These subprojects are discussed in greater detail below.

2.2.1. Summary of Reporting Services (Subproject of PAS)

A reporting tool (some software such as Crystal Reports that allows automated report writing, both easy and very complex) will have its requirements documented as part of the PAS initiative. However, reports will only be partially developed as part of the PAS implementation by the time the system goes live. During parallel testing, users will identify a series of new reports that will be needed to support critical processes.

Linea will utilize a single resource for assisting with managing this process, including gathering requirements and assisting with report development and rollout to the stakeholders.

This is a single-phase subproject of the PAS initiative.

2.2.2. Summary of Case Management/Workflow Services (Subproject of PAS)

Linea will utilize a business analyst to develop requirements for automated workflow after the parallel testing phase of the PAS project. During parallel testing, we anticipate that users will identify opportunities to leverage automation to increase the efficiency of key processes. During the post-parallel testing period, we will implement these high-value workflows.

Based on interviews, we believe the business processes that are the most likely candidates for workflow automation in Benefits are:

Service credit purchase contracts Disability Death processing Domestic Relations Orders Reciprocity – Transfers into the system in particular Contribution adjustments Benefit setup processing

Our role in this subproject will be to map out the new process, management the configuration of the new process, and oversee the training of staff and rollout of the new process.

2.3. Summary of EDMS Project Services

Linea’s involvement with this project will include project management, business analysis, and oversight of the backfile conversion. Linea will assist in requirements gathering, procurement, and overall implementation project management. Specifically, we will assist in defining the


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

12 of 60

document taxonomy and identifying the document repositories to be converted. We will also assist in implementation a day forward solution for scanning all incoming mail and faxes. Finally, we will help design the interface between the EDMS and the PAS.

Two resources will be used—a project manager and a business analyst. A second project manager may be used to oversee the backfile conversion.

The phases and task areas are pictured in figure 2.3 below.

Con

sulti

ng S

ervi

ces

Pro

ject

Ove

rsig

ht

Project Management

Testing

Backfile Conversion

Integration with PAS


Development 3. Configuration4. Testing / Day

Forward5. PAS

Integration

Procurement

Requirements / Doc Taxonomy

Day Forward

Figure 2.3: EDMS Services

2.4. Summary of Web Self Service / Member Portal Services

Linea will utilize two resources for this project. We will manage the overall implementation and will also set up the requirements in advance of selecting a PAS. We will assist with developing requirements, testing the portal and training staff. We will work with the FCERA project team to determine the degree of member access to data, the potential initiation points of workflow, and the ability of members to submit documents through the portal. FCERA will request pricing for a member portal as part of the selection and purchase of a PAS software vendor, but the project should be considered a post-PAS implementation initiative. Figure 2.4 describes the proposed phases and task areas.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

13 of 60

Con

sulti

ng S

ervi

ces

Pro

ject

Ove

rsig

ht

Project Management

PAS/EDMS Integration

User Acceptance Testing

Go Live

1. Procurement* 2. Requirements

Development 3. Configuration 4. Testing / Training 5. Go Live

Procurement

Requirements Confirmation

Figure 2.4: Web Portal Services

*Procurement may not be necessary if PAS vendor is providing an integrated portal solution

2.5. Summary of Disaster Recovery / Business Continuity Planning Services

One Linea consultant will be responsible for this project. We will work with ITSD to validate the recovery procedures on the current critical systems (since ITSD is responsible for these plans). Linea will develop the Business Continuity Plan’s (BCP) communication plan and emergency assessment protocol. Once the other systems are implemented as part of the execution of the IT Road Map, Linea will oversee the development of new Disaster Recovery Plans (DRPs) and will update the BCP. Linea will also assist in the implementation of an alternate site to conduct business continuity operations.

The services and phases are pictured in figure 2.5 below.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

14 of 60

Con

sulti

ng S

ervi

ces

Pro

ject

Ove

rsig

ht

Project Management

Document Plan

Alt Site / Tabletop Testing

Training


Development 3. Plan Development4. Tabletop / Alt Site

Testing 5. Training

Procurement

Requirements

Figure 2.5 DR/BCP Services

2.6. Detailed Scope of Services by Task Area

To this point, we have presented Linea’s services at a high level. In this section, we will present a detailed list of tasks by project area and include the Linea consultant who is primarily responsible for the task.

In Table 2.6 below, a field that is black and marked with a “P” indicates that the resource is primarily responsible for the task. A field that is gray and marked with an “S” indicates that the resource must also work on the task, but he or she is not the primary resource.

Task# Task Project Advisor PM

Sr. BA - Req

Data Conv

UAT SME

DR/BCP SME

Rpt/Wkf/Portal SME

PM-1

Assist in coordinating tasks associated with requirements definition, design, development, testing, and training and implementation activities. Ensure that the software vendors satisfy all items as listed in the RFP(s) and have an approach/strategy in place to address each item as stated. P

PM-2

Establish Sign-Off Process – Ensure that adequate sign-off procedures are followed throughout the system development life cycle. P


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

15 of 60


Sr. BA - Req

Data Conv

UAT SME

DR/BCP SME

Rpt/Wkf/Portal SME

PM-3

Review of Project Deliverables – Review– Review project management reports and metrics for accurate status and due date, reporting to key participants. Develop, review and comment on all project deliverables, documentation, e.g.: • Statement of Work and Task Descriptions • Data conversion plans and reconciliation procedures • System test plans, scripts, cases, etc. • End user and IT documentation • User acceptance plan, acceptance criteria, etc. • Operational system documentation • System administrator and end user manuals • System/program maintenance documentation • Cutover plans: timelines and process S P P P P P

PM-4

Project Methodology, Planning and Scheduling – Ensure that a rigorous methodology, plan and schedule is proposed and followed. Ensure that changes to the project schedule are properly reflected in the project plan. P S

PM-5

Project Communications – Ensure that project issues and status are properly communicated. S P

PM-6

Project Issues – Ensure that project issues are properly managed and if necessary, properly escalated and addressed in a timely manner. P P P P P P

PM-7 Project Risk – Identify and address project risk for proper management. P S S S S S

PM-8 Change Control – Ensure that change control procedures are followed. S P

PM-9 Quality – Develop testing procedures to ensure the highest level of quality. P P

PM-10

Consider and address other project management issues that might hinder successful completion of the project. S P S S S S

PM-11

Prepare regular reports to the FCERA Steering Committee and Board of Retirement, at FCERA’s discretion S P


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

16 of 60


Sr. BA - Req

Data Conv

UAT SME

DR/BCP SME

Rpt/Wkf/Portal SME

Req-1

Manage and attend all requirements confirmation sessions; ensure meetings are properly documented and all issues are tracked and assigned. Act as liaison between FCERA and the vendor and the central point of communication for the requirements phase. P

Req-2

Provide written review of the vendors’ requirements and design documentation of the new solutions, provide feedback and assistance to the vendors in improving the documentation. Work with FCERA to get SME feedback. Work with FCERA and vendors to come to an agreement and to accept the requirements specification in a reasonable amount of time, balancing practicality, quality, the project timeline, and FCERA’s business needs. P

Req-3

Monitor the vendors’ Requirements Traceability Matrices that lists all requirements over the course of the project, confirming that no RFP requirements are overlooked and that they are included at the appropriate time. P

Req-4

Provide new system requirements and design assistance based on prior experience and industry best practices. S S P S S

Int-1

Act as FCERA’s liaison to plan sponsors in communicating the goals and timeline on the project, in terms of the new transmittal process. P

Int-2

In conjunction with the software vendors, prepare training materials for the plan sponsor and conduct training sessions with the plan sponsors to ensure they understand the new process and file format. P

Int-3

In conjunction with FCERA IT, provide ongoing project management of transmittal process, answering ongoing questions and facilitating the production of test files. Work with FCERA IT to ensure all plan sponsors are able to meet the project timeline successfully. P


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

17 of 60


Sr. BA - Req

Data Conv

UAT SME

DR/BCP SME

Rpt/Wkf/Portal SME

Int-4

Work with software vendor and with Finance to successfully design the General Ledger interface from the PAS. Work with FCERA Finance to ensure that the SMEs understand the data reported through the G/L, the chart of accounts, and transactions definitions. P

Data-1 Act as FCERA liaison to the software vendor for the data conversion. S P

Data-2

Develop an overall data conversion and clean-up strategy and methodology and work with the FCERA data team to refine it and ensure it is understood. P

Data-3

Develop project timelines, task assignments, and a resource plan for data conversion and data clean-up. Work with FCERA data team to refine it and ensure it is understood. Communicate resource needs to FCERA management and the PM. S P

Data-4

Provide technical guidance and training to the FCERA data team in the software tools and methodologies required for the conversion P

Data-5

Assist in the oversight of the data clean-up effort: review clean-up reports, monitor progress against the timeline, report to FCERA management, and communicate issues as required. S P

Data-6

Oversee data conversion effort: review progress of FCERA data team, provide assistance in development where required, report progress to FCERA management and PM. S P

Data-7 Assist with final cut-over to parallel test phase. P

Wrk-1

Provide targeted business process reengineering utilizing the PAS’ workflow functionality, with the goal of providing automated workflow solutions where it is deemed cost-effective. P

Test-1 Develop User Acceptance Test Plan and associated test scripts. P


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

18 of 60


Sr. BA - Req

Data Conv

UAT SME

DR/BCP SME

Rpt/Wkf/Portal SME

Test-2

Managing testing process, including developing and maintaining user testing schedule. Work with software vendors to develop an issue tracking, communication, retesting, and certification process and tools. S P

Test-3

Provide full-time support during parallel testing on-site. Help provide on-the-spot training for users. Monitor, track, and communicate issues to the project team. S P

Test-4

Assist PAS software vendor in balancing all payroll results during parallel testing. Research anomalies with FCERA team. S P

Rpt-1

During PAS parallel testing, inventory all critical reports needed and work with FCERA IT and the software vendor to ensure the reports are developed. P

Port-1 Work with FCERA staff to identify data to be exposed via the member portal S P

Port-2

Develop functional specification specific to Member Portal, including PAS and EDMS integration points. P

Port-3

Work with FCERA I.T. to ensure security standards are communicated to Portal vendor and are properly tested prior to rollout. P

Port-4

Work with FCERA staff to determine workflow for documents submitted via the portal to determine what workflows (if any) are initiated through the Portal. P

Port-5 Develop and manage user acceptance test plan for the Portal. P

Port-6 Manage the roll-out process of the Portal into production. P

Port-7

Provide overall project management of the Portal project, including the development of a project plan, vendor management, and risk mitigation. P


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

19 of 60


Sr. BA - Req

Data Conv

UAT SME

DR/BCP SME

Rpt/Wkf/Portal SME

DM-1

Provide overall project management of the backfile conversion process, including the selection of an imaging company, development of a scan process, and overall monitoring of the boxing/shipping/upload process. P

DM-2

Assist in the development and implementation of a day forward process for scanning incoming mail and member documents. Work with the EDMS software vendor and FCERA staff to design the process, test it with FCERA staff, and roll it out. P

BCP-1

Work with FCERA I.T. to inventory all critical systems and identify what systems require inclusion at an alternate site. P

BCP-2

Draft a communications plan to ensure that there is a clear procedure for information FCERA staff, Board Members, and critical partners in the event of a business interruption / disaster. P

BCP-3

Assist FCERA I.T. in identifying and procuring an alternate site or similar service that will allow the resumption of critical systems in the event of disaster. P

BCP-4

Conduct a tabletop exercise with FCERA staff to test the communications plan and alternate site. P

BCP-5

Prepare written disaster recovery plans for FCERA’s critical systems, in conjunction with FCERA I.T. P

Table 2.6: Tasks by Resource

2.7. Deliverables by Task Area

Having listed out all of the tasks we will perform, we will now present the associated deliverable with each. In some cases, there is a recurring deliverable, and in other cases there is a single, large deliverable.

The deliverables are presented in Table 2.7 below.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

20 of 60

Task # Task Deliverable Type Frequency Description

PM-1

Oversight – Assist in coordinating tasks associated with requirements definition, design, development, testing, training and implementation activities. Ensure that the software vendor satisfies all items as listed in the RFP and has an approach/strategy in place to address each item as stated. Regular

Weekly and Monthly

Weekly updates to project plan, monthly status reports

PM-2

Establish Sign-Off Process – Ensure that adequate sign-off procedures are followed throughout the system development life cycle. Singular Once

Sign-off template and document describing process

PM-3

Review of Project Deliverables – Review project management reports and metrics for accurate status and due-date reporting to key participants. Develop, review and comment on all project deliverables, documentation, etc, e.g.: • Statement of Work and Task Descriptions • Data conversion plans and reconciliation procedures • System test plans, scripts, cases, etc. • End –user and IT documentation • User acceptance plan, acceptance criteria, etc. • Operational system documentation • System administrator and end user manuals• System/program maintenance documentation • Cutover plans: timelines and process Variable Variable

Assessments of deliverables will be included in weekly status reports. Additional documentation will be provided if the deliverable is deficient and requires significant remediation. Specific feedback will be given to the vendor in the form of comments on documents or in project meetings.

PM-4

Project Methodology, Planning and Scheduling – Ensure that a rigorous methodology, plan and schedule is proposed and followed. Ensure that changes to the project schedule are properly reflected in the project plan. Singular Once

Master Project Plan (MS Project), PAS Project Charter (MS Word).

PM-5

Project Communications – Ensure that project issues and status are properly communicated. Regular

Weekly and Monthly


PM-6

Project Issues – Ensure that project issues are properly managed and if necessary, properly escalated and addressed in a timely manner. Regular

Weekly and Monthly

Project issues will be reported to the project manager, who will include them in the weekly and monthly reports.

PM-7 Project Risk – Identify and address project risk for proper management. Regular

Weekly and Monthly

Project risks will be documented in the regular weekly and monthly reports.

PM-8 Change Control – Ensure that change control procedures are followed. Singular Once

Change control procedures will be discussed in the PAS Project Charter.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

21 of 60


PM-9 Quality – Develop testing procedures to ensure the highest level of quality. Cyclical As needed

Testing procedures will be detailed in the User Acceptance Test Plan.

PM-10

Consider and address other project management issues that might hinder successful completion of the project. Regular

Weekly and Monthly


PM-11

Prepare regular reports to the FCERA Steering Committee and Board of Retirement, at FCERA’s discretion Cyclical Variable

Monthly reports to Steering Committee; reports to the Board as directed by FCERA.

Req-1

Manage and attend all requirements confirmation sessions; ensure meetings are properly documented and all issues are tracked and assigned. Act as liaison between FCERA and the vendor and the central point of communication for the requirements phase. Regular Weekly

Requirements confirmation meeting notes.

Req-2

Provide written review of the vendor's requirements and design documentation of the new solution, provide feedback and assistance to the vendor in improving the documentation. Work with FCERA to get SME feedback. Work with FCERA and vendor to come to an agreement and to accept the requirements specification in a reasonable amount of time, balancing practicality, quality, the project timeline, and FCERA’s business needs. Singular Once

Requirements confirmation meeting notes and annotations of vendor-submitted deliverables.

Req-3

Monitor the vendor's Requirements Traceability Matrix that lists all requirements over the course of the project, confirming that no RFP requirements are overlooked and that they are included at the appropriate time. Singular Once

Requirements traceability report; all RFP requirements signed off with date and description of any pending issues

Req-4

Provide new system requirements and design assistance based on prior experience and industry best practices. Variable Variable

All feedback on requirements will incorporate prior knowledge and experience with multiple '37 Act implementations.

Int-1

Act as FCERA’s liaison to plan sponsors in communicating the goals and timeline on the project, in terms of the new transmittal process. Singular Once

Payroll Interface Workbook and Employers' Guide: documentation will provide a fully explicated file layout as well as a clear explanation of the business rules for all reporting scenarios.

Int-2

In conjunction with the software vendor, prepare training materials for the plan sponsor and conduct training sessions with the plan sponsors to ensure they understand the new process and file format. Variable Variable

Interface Specifications and Workbooks will be provided where appropriate.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

22 of 60


Int-3

In conjunction with FCERA IT, provide ongoing project management of transmittal process, answering ongoing questions and facilitating the production of test files. Work with FCERA IT to ensure all plan sponsors are able to meet the project timeline successfully. Singular Once

Transmittal conversion project plan (MS Project).

Int-4

Work with software vendor and with Finance to successfully design the General Ledger interface from the PAS to Solomon. Work with FCERA Finance to ensure that the SMEs understand the data reported through the G/L, the chart of accounts, and transactions definitions. Singular Once

G/L Interface requirements documentation.

Data-1 Act as FCERA liaison to the software vendor for the data conversion. Regular Biweekly

Biweekly data conversion status reports

Data-2

Develop an overall data conversion and clean-up strategy and methodology and work with the FCERA data team to refine it and ensure it is understood. Singular Once

Data Conversion Strategy document (MS Word)

Data-3

Develop project timelines, task assignments, and a resource plan for data conversion and data clean-up. Work with FCERA data team to refine it and ensure it is understood. Communicate resource needs to FCERA management and the SPM. Singular Once

Data Conversion Project Plan (MS Project)

Data-4

Provide technical guidance and training to the FCERA data team in the software tools and methodologies required for the conversion Multiple Variable

Various development tools, scripts and code.

Data-5

Assist in the oversight of the data clean-up effort: review clean-up reports, monitor progress against the timeline, report to FCERA management, and communicate issues as required. Regular Biweekly

Data Clean-up Project Plan (MS Project); Data Conversion Status reports

Data-6

Oversee data conversion effort: review progress of FCERA data team, provide assistance in development where required, report progress to FCERA management and senior PM. Singular Once

Data Conversion Project Plan (MS Project)

Data-7 Assist with final cut-over to parallel test phase. Singular Once

Successful delivery of FCERA data to the software vendor for final version.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

23 of 60


Wrk-1

Provide targeted business process reengineering utilizing the PAS’ workflow functionality, with the goal of providing automated workflow solutions where it is deemed cost-effective. Multiple Variable

To-Be workflow of critical processes (Visio) and simplified procedures documentation (MS Word) for each critical process that will have automated workflow.

Test-1 Develop User Acceptance Test Plan and associated test scripts. Singular Once

Acceptance Test Plan document, including error level definitions, acceptance criteria, test team definition, test environment definition. Individual test scripts, issue tracking reports, summary results report.

Test-2

Managing testing process, including developing and maintaining user testing schedule. Work with software vendor to develop an issue tracking, communication, retesting, and certification process and tools. Variable Once

Testing schedule and UAT Project Plan (MS Project).

Test-3

Provide full-time support during parallel testing on-site. Help provide on-the-spot training for users. Monitor, track, and communicate issues to the project team. Variable

During parallel testing

Set up of Help Desk in Member Services area. Provide assistance to FCERA staff throughout business hours.

Test-4

Assist software vendor in balancing all payroll results during parallel testing. Research anomalies with FCERA team. Cyclical

Monthly during parallel

Payroll balancing reports: detailed analysis of legacy system vs. new system for monthly payroll activity.

Rpt-1

During PAS parallel testing, inventory all critical reports needed and work with FCERA IT and the software vendor to ensure the reports are developed. Singular Once

Inventory of reports with a listing of the fields required in each (MS Word).

Port-1 Work with FCERA staff to identify data to be exposed via the member portal Singular Once

Worksheet listing PAS data fields that will be exposed on the internet, by Portal screen (MS Excel).

Port-2

Develop functional specification specific to Member Portal, including PAS and EDMS integration points. Singular Once Member Portal Functional

Port-3

Work with FCERA I.T. to ensure security standards are communicated to Portal vendor and are properly tested prior to rollout. Singular Once

Member Portal Security Testing Report (MS Word)

Port-4

Work with FCERA staff to determine workflow for documents submitted via the portal to determine what workflows (if any) are initiated through the Portal. Singular Once

Member Portal Document Workflow (Visio)

Port-5 Develop and manage user acceptance test plan for the Portal. Singular Once

User Acceptance Test Plan (MS Word)

Port-6 Manage the roll-out process of the Portal into production. Multiple Variable

Project issues will be reported to the project manager, who will


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

24 of 60


include them in the weekly and monthly reports.

Port-7

Provide overall project management of the Portal project, including the development of a project plan, vendor management, and risk mitigation. Multiple Variable


DM-1

Provide overall project management of the backfile conversion process, including the selection of an imaging company, development of a scan process, and overall monitoring of the boxing/shipping/upload process. Multiple Variable


DM-2

Assist in the development and implementation of a day forward process for scanning incoming mail and member documents. Work with the EDMS software vendor and FCERA staff to design the process, test it with FCERA staff, and roll it out. Singular Once

Day Forward workflow process and Day Forward process document (Visio and MS Word)

BCP-1

Work with FCERA I.T. to inventory all critical systems and identify what systems require inclusion at an alternate site. Singular Once

Critical Systems Inventory Worksheet (MS Excel)

BCP-2

Draft a communications plan to ensure that there is a clear procedure for information FCERA staff, Board Members, and critical partners in the event of a business interruption / disaster. Singular Once

Business Continuity Communications Plan (MS Word)

BCP-3

Assist FCERA I.T. in identifying and procuring an alternate site or similar service that will allow the resumption of critical systems in the event of disaster. Singular Once

Procurement of Alternate Site (executed contract)

BCP-4

Conduct a tabletop exercise with FCERA staff to test the communications plan and alternate site. Singular Once

Summary of BCP Test (MS Word report)

BCP-5

Prepare written disaster recovery plans for FCERA’s critical systems, in conjunction with FCERA I.T. Multiple Multiple

Disaster Recovery Plan documents (MS Word); (these will be co-written with FCERA IT)

Table 2.7: Deliverables by Task Area


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

25 of 60

3. PAS METHODOLOGY

Given that the Pension Administration Project is the largest and most critical of the I.T. Program, we describe our methodology for this project in this section.

Linea Solutions’ PAS implementation methodology is unique in the industry. We are the only company that offers procurement consulting, project management and specialized integration services. In this section, we discuss how we approach service delivery, and why we believe our approach offers clients the best value and the highest assurance that the right software partner will be chosen and the PAS project will be successfully completed.

3.1. Procurement: Picking the Right Partner for the Right Price

Linea Solutions approach to procurement is unique in the industry, and has a proven track record of getting the best value for our clients.

We emphasize the depth of detail of our functional specifications and the development of a strong three party relationship between the software vendor, retirement system, and Linea Solutions. Taken together, this approach offers our clients the optimal combination of a well-scoped system for the best price.

3.1.1. Emphasis on the Requirements, Not the Contract

One of our greatest distinctions in the industry is our customized, detailed requirements in the software RFP. We include a tremendous number of business rules in the functional specifications, and the lion’s share of our consulting costs during the procurement phase is on gathering requirements. Why does this matter? There are several reasons:

The software vendor needs to see the details to understand how to scope the solution.

The retirement system staff must have a firm grasp of what they are requesting of the software vendor in order to be able to prioritize “must haves” versus “nice to haves” during the implementation. In too many cases, we have heard that the staff is not even aware of what requirements are in the RFP, because the consultant used a recycled list of generic requirements.

Part of Linea’s vendor evaluation process involves analyzing the number of requirements that can be met by the system’s base functionality, versus those requirements that require customizations. This is how we establish how flexible a solution is. Without detailed specifications, the vendor cannot accurately assess the degree to which customization is needed.

Without detailed specifications, during the implementation phase, the vendor and client often will argue over the “real” meaning of a requirement. In many cases, the vendor will demand a change order if they deem the client’s interpretation is too broad. Detailed specifications can avoid this issue altogether.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

26 of 60

By contrast, our competitors emphasize contract and project requirements rather than functional and technical requirements. We suspect the reason for this is that contract and project requirements can be templatized and reused far easier than functional and technical requirements.

The difference in emphasis is described in figure 3.0 below.

Project

Technical

Functional

As the figure shows, the base of our pyramid is the functional requirements for the system, followed by the technical requirements. Our general view of project and contract requirements is to include enough to make sure our client is protected, and that the project adheres to general best practices.

However, we feel strongly that the software vendors must be able to employ their own implementation methodology—not an artificial one imposed externally. We have spent significant time discussing implementation approaches with the vendors, and they have categorically rejected the idea that PAS projects are improved by the heavy-handed, overly bureaucratic approach of PAS oversight consultants. Indeed, there is no evidence that these projects have higher success rates by any measure—cost, time, budget, quality of system—than projects that the software vendors run without externally-imposed project methodology.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

27 of 60

We have also found that software contracts that are penalty-laden, holdback heavy, and contain overly broad protections for the clients also do not correlate to project success. Our competitors argue that these contracts serve to control costs, simply because they offer no method that the vendor can ever submit a change order. We deal with this argument in the next section.

3.1.2. Cost Savings from Linea’s Approach

Our analysis has proven that our approach leads to dramatic cost savings on PAS projects. We have found that the same software vendor, bidding on projects with the same scope, will literally bid millions of dollars less when our RFPs are used. We have seen this at two California public retirement systems over the last two years.

The reasons for this difference are described in figure 3.1 below.

“Base” System

cost

“Base” System

cost

Margin for Require-

mentsHardware

Hardware

Project Overhead

Implementation

Services

Implementation

Services

Margin for Contract

PAS Vendor Costs – Linea RFP

PAS Vendor Costs – Competitor’s RFP

Figure 3.1: Contrast in PAS Vendor Pricing

Hardware. We ensure that the solution is “right-sized” for the particular client, containing sufficient hardware to meet the client’s performance standards. By contrast, our competitors include unnecessary redundancy requirements that can literally double the hardware cost.

Implementation Services. We emphasize general performance standards and ask for a detailed breakdown of the vendor’s approach, plan, and required client resources. We then analyze the vendor’s approach and use this as part of our selection criteria. This allows the vendor to propose their optimal approach to the project, which we feel will make for the best project. Our competitors, by contrast, dictate the implementation


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

28 of 60

methodology, forcing vendors to sometimes bid services that are not part of their base competency. This inevitably raises the cost of the implementation.

Project Overhead. We do not dictate the format and frequency of project status reports, the method of delivery of requirements documentation, and the like. We also do not list out dozens of document artifacts that must be created, many of which are redundant and are never read by the client. Our competitors traditionally have dozens of pages in their RFP devoted to documentation standards, all of which translates into hundreds of thousands of extra dollars. It also creates thousands of pages of documentation for the client to read!

Margin for Requirements. As we discussed in the section above, our requirements are detailed and customized for our clients. We also do not include blanket statements in our RFPs that hold the vendor responsible for requirements that are not even in the RFP. Our view is that the requirements should be as complete as possible the first time. We also know that vendors add significant cost to their RFPs to cover any type of guarantees regarding out of scope requirements.

Margin for Contract. We feel that the best contracts are fair to both parties and offer key protection to our clients. In truth, if a project fails, the contract will not save it, and it will not avoid litigation. The only affect we have seen an unfavorable contract have is to increase the retirement system’s cost. In a word, the software vendor increases the project cost if they are forced to sign a very one-sided contract.

Taken as a whole, the points above explain why one system is paying over $4 million for virtually the same system than another one that is paying less than $2 million. Likewise, this explains why one client is paying $15 million for a system that costs another system $8 million.

One of the secrets of PAS project costs is the degree to which it is not based on factors such as functional scope, technical requirements and the like. Rather, the vendors price on the basis of perceived risk. The worse the contract they must sign, the higher the perceived risk. The greater degree of bureaucratic reporting requirements they must meet, the higher the perceived risk. Put a different way, the procurement methodology itself is a strong driver of cost—not just the requirements of the system.

3.2. Beyond Project Management: Linea’s Added Value for Oversight

In addition to the points above, we also feel that our methodology is unique in terms of managing the PAS projects, once the procurement phase is complete.

The value of a firm that specializes in PAS projects for public retirement systems is in requirements confirmation, data conversion, payroll interfaces, plan sponsor education, user acceptance test script development, and a dozen other activities that are unique to these projects. For most retirement systems, the third party consulting firm is needed to both lead the project and to “lend a hand” in the trenches. It is in the trenches of the project where success is won, not at the project management level.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

29 of 60

Linea Solutions’ expertise is best leveraged in helping clients determine their detailed requirements, cleaning and converting their data and testing the software to make absolutely certain it is correct. Our project management and project leadership are essential for the project, but in our view, it is only one way we make the project successful. If we can provide the other services successfully, it greatly increases the overall chance of a successful project and lowers the risk of schedule slippage and cost overruns.

By contrast, our competitors tend to take the role of project auditor and project reporter, a highly administrative role that primarily involves documentation and reporting. Although we acknowledge that on a very large project, with more than 75 team members who are spread across different continents, this would be a valuable role. However, we question the value of this role on smaller projects, and likewise question how much value is added by this role. Indeed, we have heard other retirement systems wonder aloud if this project auditor role was really needed in the first place once their project was completed.

In Figures 3.2 and 3.3 below, two graphs illustrate the difference between our work and our competitors’ work on projects.

14.00%

34.50%

18.00%

33.50%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Percentage of Total Hours

Project Management RequirementsConfirmation

User Acceptance Testing Data ConversionAssistance

Linea PAS Project Hours Distribution

Figure 3.2: Linea’s typical hours distribution.

In the figure above, we have analyzed our hours on three PAS projects. Pure project management represents 14% of our hours, as opposed to 34.5% of our time spent on requirements confirmation, 18% on user acceptance testing, and 33.5% on data conversion support.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

30 of 60

We have estimated our competitors’ hours distribution on projects based on our national survey of retirement systems and our analysis of competitor RFPs (obtained through public records requests), and they are presented in figure 3.3 below.

80.00%

10.00% 10.00%

0.00%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Percentage of Total Hours

Project Management RequirementsConfirmation

User AcceptanceTesting

Data ConversionAssistance

Typical Oversight PAS Project Hours Distribution

Figure 3.3 Estimated Distribution of Hours of Other Consulting Firms

As figure 3.3 demonstrates, by our estimates, our competitors spend the vast majority of their time on “pure” project management, meaning reports, monitoring of project plans, status meetings, and the like. We do not suggest that these activities are not needed, and we would agree on very large projects this role is justified.

However, our general critique is that this role alone cannot make a project successful, and that on smaller projects (which we define as $10 million or less, and therefore include the vast majority of PAS projects), this role is part-time at best. In cases in which the software vendor allocates a full-time project manager, or even a full-time on-site project manager, we feel this lessens the value of this role even more. We would also question why a specialist consulting company is needed to fulfill such a narrow role, given many qualified project managers from any industry with a few weeks of training could be successful on this type of project.

In figure 3.4, we compare the hours distribution on a three-year project. This illustrates the consulting areas that we emphasize and to what extent we assign hours to those areas.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

31 of 60

910

2242

1170

2178

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Hours Spent

Project Management Requirements Confirmation User Acceptance Testing Data Conversion Assistance

Comparison of Linea vs. Competitors Hours Distribution on Three Year Implementation

Linea

Typical Consulting Firm

Figure 3.4: Comparison of Hours Distribution on a Three-Year Project: Linea vs. Competitors

3.3. General Deployment Methodology

Linea Solutions employs a customized version of a traditional SDLC (software development lifecycle) approach to PAS projects. Most organizations and FCERA in particular, are familiar with the general approach to implementation projects, so in the interest of brevity, we will not describe our methodology in great detail. Suffice it to say that we have an extensive library of templates and artifacts that we use for each project phase to ensure a consistent and rigorous approach to project management.

Although we strongly advocate for a human-centered approach to our projects, we are also methodology driven: our project managers use a well-developed structure to guide their management of the project.

The summary of our project phasing is included in Figure 3.5 below.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

32 of 60

Figure 3.5: PAS Implementation Phase Overview


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

33 of 60

4. CONSULTANT QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE

4.1. Company Background

Linea Solutions has been providing consulting services almost exclusively for 1937 Act public pension funds since 1999. The firm was founded by two Los Angeles-based IT consultants. Their goal was to create a specialized consulting firm that exclusively serviced defined benefit pension funds. In order to accomplish this, they created a team of project managers, business analysts and developers, and initiated a training program to ensure all team members acquired an intimate knowledge of the complex business rules surrounding defined benefits. As a result, after eleven years, Linea has distinguished itself throughout California as the leading IT consulting group for 1937 Act retirement systems. We have consulted for the majority of 1937 Act systems, more than double our closest competitor.

Our list of 1937 Act clients include the following:

Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association (ACERA)

Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement Association (CCCERA)

Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association (FCERA)

Imperial County Employees’ Retirement System (ICERS)

Kern County Employees’ Retirement Association (KCERA)

Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association (MCERA)

Merced County Employees’ Retirement Association (MCERA)

Mendocino County Employees’ Retirement Association (MCERA)

Orange County Employees’ Retirement System (OCERS)

San Diego County Employees’ Retirement Association (SDCERA)

San Joaquin County Employees’ Retirement Association (SJCERA)

San Mateo County Employees’ Retirement Association (SamCERA)

Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association (SCERA)

Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Association (VCERA)

For these clients, we have provided a broad range of services over the years, from large-scale, multi-year implementations to smaller feasibility studies. Many of our clients continue to use our services over many years and for many different types of projects. In general, our services fall into three distinct types:

Systems Implementation Consulting

Strategic IT Planning


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

34 of 60

Business Consulting

Systems implementation consulting is the service most relevant for FCERA. We include pension administration system and document management system projects in this area. Our services in this area are broad, from the initial feasibility study through to post-implementation initiatives. We have performed the same type of project that FCERA is about to start for six other 1937 Act systems, more than any other company, large or small.

Strategic IT planning includes the development of technology plans for retirement systems, including budgets, resources, ROI calculations and initiative sequencing. We also provide consultation on enterprise data management, data warehousing, enterprise reporting, and the organization of IT departments.

Our business consulting can be described as initiatives that may have little to do with IT. In this category we include business process management, 415(b) tax consultation process consulting, reorganization of member service departments, and other pure management consulting initiatives.

In Table 4.0 below, we list the services that overlap with this proposal for FCERA and that which we have provided for public pension funds.

Project Area Years of Experience

Clients

Pension administration system conversions

10+ Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association (ACERA)

Orange County Employees’ Retirement System (OCERS)

Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Association (VCERA)

Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association (SCERA)

San Diego County Employees’ Retirement Association (SDCERA)

Imperial County Employees’ Retirement Association (ICERS)

Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association (MCERA)

Kern County Employees’ Retirement Association (KCERA)

Retirement payroll interface conversions

8+ ACERA OCERS VCERA SDCERA MCERA KCERA

Electronic Document Management Systems consulting

6 San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System (SDCERS)

SamCERA San Joaquin County Employees’ Retirement


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

35 of 60


Clients

Association (SJCERA) VCERA OCERS ICERS MCERA

Financial system conversions / integration

5+ ACERA FCERA OCERS SDCERS

General IT infrastructure consulting services (including networking / client-server upgrades and conversions)

8+ ACERA VCERA

Intranet / extranet development

5+ ACERA SDCERS

Needs analyses / risk assessments

8+ ACERA OCERS SamCERA SDCERS Contra Costa County Employees’ Retirement

Association (CCCERA) SCERA SJCERA VCERA ICERS FCERA Merced County Employees’ Retirement

Association Mendocino County Employees’ Retirement

Association Data Conversion 9+ ACERA

OCERS MCERA SDCERA

Business Process Analysis / Reengineering

7+ SDCERS OCERS ACERA SDCERA MCERA

415B / IRS Regulation Consulting for PAS

5+ ACERA OCERS SDCERS


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

36 of 60


Clients

Procurement for PAS Projects

9+ OCERS ICERS MCERA SDCERA VCERA Public School Retirement System of Missouri

(PSRS/PEERS)

Table 4.0: Projects by Years and Clients


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

37 of 60

5. REFERENCES Below we have provided a partial list of references from 1937 Act County retirement system clients. We have chosen this list based on what we believe is most relevant for FCERA’s implementation project because they are 1937 Act systems and they are closer in asset size. However, if FCERA desires additional references from other systems, we would be happy to provide a supplemental list of 1937 Act references.

Name Tim Thonis, Administrator

Brenda Cummings, Communications Manager

Organization Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Association

Fund Size 7,250 Active, 4,300 retired

Address 1190 South Victoria Avenue Suite 200

Ventura, CA 93003

Telephone (805) 339-4266 (Thonis)

(805) 339-4264 (Cummings)

E-mail [email protected]

[email protected]

Project Pension Administration Project

Start/End Date July 2008 – present

Project Description Linea Solutions has been engaged to lead the PAS project, from the development of the RFP through the integration of the solution. Linea is responsible for requirements development and confirmation, interface consulting, user acceptance testing, training, data conversion, and overall project management and oversight. At present the project is nearing completion of the procurement phase.

Resources Applied One Senior Project Manager, one Senior Business Analyst, and one Technical Analyst are engaged.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

38 of 60

Name Anne Holdren, Retirement Administrator

Organization Kern County Employees’ Retirement Association

Fund Size 15,000 Active, Deferred, and Retired

Address 1115 Truxtun Avenue, First Floor, Bakersfield, California 93301

Telephone (661) 868-3753

Fax (661) 868-3779


Project PAS Implementation

Start/End Date 2008 – current

Project Description KCERA engaged Linea to take over the PAS project at the implementation stage of the project. Linea started by rescoping the software vendor’s proposal and contract, since the solution was inappropriately sized to KCERA’s environment, and the services also seemed overmatched to KCERA’s business needs. Linea was able to save KCERA $1.2 million by resizing the proposal. Linea is currently contracted to oversee the implementation of the CPAS PAS software, offering Project Management and Business Analysis oversight.

Resources Applied One Project Manager, one Director, and a series of senior specialists providing targeted consulting services.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

39 of 60

Name David Prince, Retirement Administrator

Organization Imperial County Employees’ Retirement System

Fund Size 2750 Active, Deferred, and Retired

Address 940 West Main Street, Suite 105, El Centro, CA 92243

Telephone (760) 482-4660

Fax (760) 482-4494


Project IT Roadmap and Pension Admin RFP & Implementation

Start/End Date 2008 – current

Project Description ICERS engaged Linea to develop an IT Roadmap, and then to procure and manage the replacement of their pension administration system. Linea crafted the RFP, recommended finalists and then conducted a TrialPhase™ between the final 2 vendors. Linea is also contracted to oversee the implementation of the software, offering Project Management, Business Analysis and Data Conversion services.

Resources Applied One Senior Project Manager and two Senior Business Analysts.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

40 of 60

Name Stephen Cadena, Assistant CEO

Organization Orange County Employees’ Retirement System

Fund Size 22,000 Active, 8,000 Retired

Address 2223 Wellington Avenue, Santa Ana, CA 92701

Telephone (714) 558-6215

Fax (714) 558-6236


Project PensionGold v2 Implementation and continuing support

Start/End Date July, 2002 – 2007

Project Description OCERS engaged Linea in 2002 to assess the status of the implementation phase of its conversion from an HP3000 Cognos PowerHouse database to PensionGold v2. Linea proposed and executed a remediation course of action to help OCERS achieve a successful implementation of the new system. The project was completed on time and on budget.

Linea continued to provide support services to OCERS to assist with Fund Manager documentation, interface to the Accounting system, customization support, and other system support.

Resources Applied One senior project manager, two business analysts (one used to manage testing efforts, the other to manage remediation of plan sponsor payroll interfaces), two technical leads to manage the data conversion effort. One analyst was engaged for six months to develop custom reports. The two business analysts performed BPR after the initial testing/customization phase.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

41 of 60

6. PROJECT STAFFING

On the following pages, we will provide more in-depth information about the consulting team. Linea has assigned a “core” team, who will have overall responsibility for their respective consulting areas, and who will do most of the work on the project. Linea may bring in other consultants to assist as required. FCERA will be given advanced notice and will have the final decision on Linea’s choice of consultants on the project.

The proposed team is also one of the most talented: it includes one of Linea’s founding Principals, the Director of Technology, Director of Strategy and Development and the most senior business analyst. All five team members have consulted for FCERA before: FCERA will therefore get proven talent for this program.

In short, Linea has proposed an “A” team for FCERA; this should underscore our commitment to FCERA and to the project. Table 6.0 below summarized the core team:

Name Title Role

Akio Tagawa

Principal Project Advisor

Susan John Project Manager

Overall Project Manager of PAS, Web Portal and EDMS projects

Lucille Young Senior Business Analyst Requirements Confirmation, User Acceptance Testing, Business Process Reengineering

Richard Hanson Senior Consultant Data Conversion Support

Barbara Scheffels Senior Consultant Workflow, Reporting, Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery Consulting

Table 6.0: Core Project Team

In the section below, each role is explained in more detail.

6.1. Project Advisor

The Project Advisor is the Linea Principal responsible for the overall successful delivery of the program. The Project Manager reports to the Project Advisor. The main role of the Project Advisor is to anticipate project risks and mitigate them. The responsibilities of the Project Advisor are to:

Establish project processes that are consistent with the overall project approach Create a Resource Plan for FCERA resources Report status and issues to Project Sponsor, FCERA Board of Retirement and the

Project Steering Committee, as required Monitor project risks and mitigating them as required


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

42 of 60

Support the Project Manager through regular communication Act as the main point of contact for FCERA for billing and budget issues Best practices support Vendor management

6.2. Project Manager

The Project Manager is the project team leader responsible for planning, coordinating the scope, staff, schedules, issues and reporting for the project. The responsibilities of the Project Manager are as follows (note the some overlap with the role above—this is intentional):

Establishing project processes that are consistent with the overall project approach Building and managing a detailed project schedule Project managing the day-to-day execution of the project, such that the project

schedule and budget are adhered to Resolving or escalating issues Managing Change Control process Working seamlessly with the software vendor’s project manager Advocating on behalf of FCERA when disagreements occur with the software

vendor Ensuring the software vendor adheres to the vendor’s contract Reporting status and issues to Project Sponsor, FCERA Board of Retirement and

the Project Steering Committee, as required Monitoring project risks and mitigating them as required

The Project Manager will be onsite an average of half-time throughout the course of the program. However, in the last year of the PAS project (from UAT through parallel testing and go-live), the Project Manager will be on-site closer to three-quarter time.

6.3. Senior Business Analyst

The Senior Business Analyst will be responsible for gathering functional specifications, ensuring they are met during user acceptance tests (UAT), helping FCERA adapt to the new system, and generally resolving most day-to-day project issues that do not fall under project management. The responsibilities of the Business Analyst are to:

Assist the Project Manager in managing the requirements and testing phases of the project.

Work with the vendors’ business analysts and FCERA SMEs to develop and document all functional specifications


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

43 of 60

Assist with identifying data fields for conversion team Develop UAT plans and test scripts Manage FCERA resources in performing UAT Document incident/bugs Assist with business process reengineering Report all project and product quality issues to the project manager and software

vendor

6.4. Senior Technical Architect

The Senior Technical Architect will be responsible for the overall design and execution of the data conversion effort. The responsibilities of the Senior Technical Architect are to:

Provide overall data conversion strategy and communicate strategy to the software vendor, Linea, and FCERA team

Develop data conversion project plan, schedule, and task lists in concert with software vendor’s Project Manager

Provide guidance and support to the FCERA data team for the conversion and data clean-up as required

Identify and mitigate risks to conversion effort Work with the FCERA system administrator to ensure extract programs are

written Analyze legacy data for issues Attend requirements sessions as required to inventory data fields for conversion

and to understand data flow by process Develop and maintain data clean-up plan utilizing FCERA staff Guide data profiling and cleansing effort Assist FCERA team with data transformations as required Work with the software vendor’s technical resources to ensure data meets the

vendor’s specifications for conversion Oversee dry run conversions Assist with identification and resolution of data anomalies Assist with final cut-over Analyze data issues during UAT and parallel testing

6.5. Senior Consultant

The Senior Consultant will be responsible for multiple subprojects, including case management/workflow, reporting, and the DR/BCP projects. The responsibilities of the Senior Consultant are to:


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

44 of 60

Work with FCERA staff to define and document critical workflows Work with FCERA staff to define and document critical reports Work with FCERA I.T. to identify systems requiring disaster recovery plans Develop business continuity plan in concert with FCERA I.T. Conduct tabletop testing of business continuity plan Support the Sr. Business Analyst and Project Manager

The core project team resumes are presented on the next four pages.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

45 of 60

Akio Tagawa, Principal

Role on Project: Project Advisor

Mr. Tagawa is one of the founding partners of Linea Solutions, and he has thirteen years of experience in I.T. He specializes in project management, business analysis, and business process reengineering for public retirement systems. His areas of specialization include benefits administration systems, electronic document management systems, enterprise content management systems, workflow and business process management. He has been consulting for public retirement systems since 1998. His most recent projects include the selection and implementation of a Pension Administration System for Imperial County Employees’ Retirement System and for San Diego County Employees’ Retirement Association.

Education University of California, Los Angeles, MA., Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Sociology

Sophia University, M.A., Department of Comparative Culture

University of Wisconsin, B.S., Mathematics & Japanese Literature

Certificate of Achievement in Public Plan Policy (CAPPP™), Pension Plans IFEBP

Recent, Relevant Project Experience

Client Years Project Role Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association

2009 - current IT Roadmap, G/L System Implementation

Project Director. Responsible for the development of an IT Roadmap and the implementation of a new G/L system.

Imperial County Employees’ Retirement System

2008 - current I.T. Strategic Plan, Pension Administration System Project

Senior Consultant and Project Advisor. Developed I.T. Plan, designed PAS project. Acting as Project Director for the project. Developed RFP for the project and managed TrialPhase™ process.

Merced County Employees’ Retirement Association

2007 - current I.T. Strategic Plan, Pension Administration System Project

Senior Consultant and Project Advisor. Developed I.T. Plan. Assisted with procurement phase of the project.

San Diego County Employees’ Retirement Association

2006 - current Pension Administration System Project

Senior Consultant and Project Advisor. Designed and managed TrialPhase™ for PAS project. Currently acting as engagement manager for the PAS implementation.

Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association

2005 - 2006 Pension Administration System Project

Senior Project Manager and Engagement Manager. Responsible for delivery of detailed requirements documentation and review with staff for the selection of a PAS.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

46 of 60

Susan John, PMP, Project Manager Role on Project: Project Manager

Ms. John is a certified project manager and has twelve years experience working on information technology projects. Prior to joining Linea Solutions, Inc., Ms. John spent over ten years working on HR/Payroll projects, most recently for Lawson. She has SAP workflow experience as well as five years of public sector experience, working at Imperial County Irrigation District. Ms. John has recently worked for FCERA on the G/L implementation project and is also consulting for Merced County Employees’ Retirement Association, on an implementation of a Pension Administration System. Education

BS, Business Administration, California State University, Fullerton; 1995 Major: Management Information Systems; Minor: Computer Science

Project Management Professional (PMP), Project Management Institute; 2002 Certified Scrum Master, 2009 Six Sigma Green Belt, 2009 Lawson Certified Project Manager, Lawson Software, 2008 Certificate in Corporate Application Development using Oracle,

California Polytechnic University, Pomona; 1997 Certificate in Client Server Computing, California State University, Fullerton; 1998

Recent, Relevant Project Experience Client Years Project Role

Fresno County Employees’ Retirement Association

2010 - current G/L System Implementation

Project Manager. Responsible for the implementation of a new G/L system.

Merced County Employees Retirement Association

2010 - current Pension Admin System Modernization Project

Project Manager. Responsible for the project management and oversight for new Pension Administration System.

Lawson Professional Services

2004-2009 HR/Payroll Implementation Projects

Project Manager. Responsible for project management oversight of multiple implementations of Lawson’s HR/Payroll software suite.

Imperial Irrigation District

1999-2004 SAP HR/Payroll Workflow Implementation

Technical Lead. Performed unit and integration testing for HR/PR and Workflow. Prepared Business Processes and Procedures (BPP) and training materials. Developed and conducted several training sessions for SAP Office Inbox and Workflow.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

47 of 60

Lucille Young, Senior Business Analyst Role on Project: Sr. Business Analyst

Ms. Young is a senior business analyst, and has seven years experience working on information technology projects. Prior to joining Linea Solutions, Inc., Ms. Young had over sixteen years of experience working for the public sector, nine of which was working for the Alameda County Employees’ Retirement System (ACERA), a ’37 Act public retirement system. At ACERA, Ms. Young worked in various capacities including as an Assistant Benefits Manager for their Supplemental Benefits and Records Management Units as well as a Retirement System Program Analyst responsible for the integration of business processes within ACERA’s pension administration program. Ms. Young’s most recent project is a pension administration conversion project for Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association. Education BA: History: UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, Berkeley, CA May, 1990 Certificate of Achievement in Public Plan Policy (CAPPP™), Pension Plans IFEBP Recent, Relevant Project Experience Client Years Project Role

Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association

2007 - current Pension Administration System

Business Analyst. Primary Business Analyst providing analysis and developing functional specifications for the implementation of a new Pension Administration System


2010 - current G/L System Implementation

Sr. Business Analyst. Responsible for the implementation of a new G/L system.

San Diego County Employees Retirement Association

2009 Pension Admin System Modernization Project

IV&V Responsible for IV&V for the requirements for new Pension Administration System.

San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System

2006 - 2007 Business Process Reengineering

Business Analyst. Responsible for development of workflow solutions and reengineering of business processes in the member services department.

Alameda County Employees’ Retirement Association

1997 - 2006 Pension Administration System and various other initiatives

Business Analyst / Benefits Manager. Key subject matter expert on PAS project. Acted as Assistant Benefits Manager, overseeing supplemental benefits processes and projects.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

48 of 60

Richard Hanson, Director of Information Technology Role on Project: Senior Consultant; Data Conversion Architect

Mr. Hanson is the Director of Information Technology, and he has over twenty years of experience in IT. He specializes in software development, data conversion, and IT strategy. His areas of specialization include benefits administration systems, electronic document management systems, enterprise content management systems. He has been consulting for public retirement systems since 2002. His most recent projects include the conversion of data to the CPAS system at Marin County Employees’ Retirement Association and San Diego County Employees’ Retirement Association. Education

B.S., Business Administration – Major: Computer Information Systems, 1987. California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

Microsoft Corporation: Visual Studio .NET Training Tour The Information Architecture Group, Inc.: Writing Business Requirements Specifications Training Young, Clark and Associates (YCA): Project Management Methodology Certification

Recent, Relevant Project Experience

Client Years Project Role

Marin County Employee’s Retirement Association

2007 - current

Pension Administration System

Senior Data Analyst. Responsible for the design and implementation of a data conversion from the legacy system to CPAS.

San Diego County Employees’ Retirement Association

2007 - current

Pension Administration System

Senior Data Analyst. Responsible for the design and implementation of a data conversion from the legacy system to CPAS.

Kern County Employees’ Retirement Association

2008 - current

Pension Administration System Project

Senior Data Analyst. Responsible for advising on the design and implementation of a data conversion from the legacy system to CPAS.


2007-2008 Web Member Portal Senior Architect. Responsible for the design and development of a web member portal for SDCERS members.

Orange County Employees’ Retirement System

2002 - 2003 Pension Administration System

Senior Data Analyst. Responsible for the design and implementation of a data conversion from the legacy system to PensionGold.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

49 of 60

Barbara Scheffels, Director of Strategic Development

Role on Project: Senior Consultant: Workflow, Reporting, DR/BCP

Ms. Scheffels is the Director of Strategic Development for the company and she has eight years of experience in IT. She specializes in Project Management, Business Process Analysis, Solutions Architecture and End-User Training. She has extensive experience gathering business requirements from end-users and translating them into technical specifications and system requirements, specifically in the areas of Pension Administration Systems, Knowledge Management Systems and Enterprise Reporting Solutions. She is currently acting as a Project Advisor for Kern County Employees’ Retirement Association and has worked as a Senior Consultant on several PAS projects for different clients over the past three years. Education Master of Science in Applied Computer Science and Technology, Azusa Pacific University

Diplom-Betriebswirtin (FH) International Business, International School of Management Dortmund (Germany) – comparable to B.S. in International Business

Certificate of Achievement in Public Plan Policy (CAPPP™), Pension Plans IFEBP

Recent, Relevant Project Experience Client Years Project Role Kern County Employees’ Retirement Association


Project Advisor. Responsible for the overall project oversight of the implementation of a new Pension Administration System.

Orange County Employees’ Retirement System


Senior Consultant. Responsible for the development of technical requirements for a new PAS


2009 IT Roadmap Senior Consultant. Responsible for the review and analysis of key IT initiatives and for the development of an IT plan.

Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Association


Senior Consultant. Responsible for the development of functional specifications and technical requirements for a PAS project.

Imperial County Employees’ Retirement System

2008 - 2009 Pension Administration System Project

Senior Consultant. Developed functional and technical specifications for the implementation of a PAS.


2006 - 2008 Business Process Reengineering, , Reorg of Member Services, IT Strategic Plan, Web Member Portal, Accounting Integration Project

Senior Project Manager and Engagement Manager. Project Management of business process reengineering, EDMS post-implementation initiatives, workflow development and Member Web Portal development.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

50 of 60

7. CONSULTING SERVICES COST

7.1. Hours By Consulting Area

In Table 7.0 below, we present the hours associated with our services by two-month increment over the five fiscal years of the program. FCERA should note the following:

In order to give FCERA a quick view of our allocation, the hours should be interpreted as follows:

o 346-350 hours is approximately full-time for a two-month period (40 hours per week)

o 170-180 hours is about a half-time resource

o 90 hours is about 25% time

FY2010-2011

Task Area Jul - Aug Sep-Oct Nov-Dec Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May-June TOTAL

PAS/EDMS Requirements 340 340 680RFP Development 120 120Procurement 200 240 440Project Oversight 170 170Functional Specifications 170 170

2010 - 2011 Hours 340 340 320 1580

FY2011-2012

Jul-Aug Sep-Oct Nov-Dec Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May-June TOTAL

Project Oversight 170 170 170 170 170 170 1020Functional Specifications 240 240 240 170 170 170 1230Build Testing 100 100 200Data Support 50 50 50 50 50 250

2011 - 2012 Hours 410 460 460 390 490 490 2700


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

51 of 60

FY2012-2013


Project Oversight 170 170 170 170 170 170 1020Data Support 100 100 100 170 170 170 810Testing 100 100 170 170 170 170 880EDMS - Backfile 170 170 170 510

2012 -2013 Hours 370 370 610 680 680 510 3220 FY2013-2014


Project Oversight 170 170 170 340 340 340 1530Data Support 170 170 170 340 340 340 1530Testing 170 170 170 170 340 340 1360EDMS Integration 50 50 100

2013 -2014 Hours 510 560 560 4520

FY2014-2015


Project Oversight 340 250 590Data Support 340 170 150 660Parallel Testing 340 170 510Member Web Portal 170 170 170 510Workflow 80 80 80 240Reporting 80 80 80 240

DR/DCP 170 170 170 510

2014 -2015 Hours 1020 590 480 3260

GRAND TOTAL 15280 Table 7.0: Hours By Year, By Consulting Area


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

52 of 60

7.2. Project Costs by Task Area and Month

In Table 7.1 below, we detail the cost of services by consulting area, two-month increment, and calendar year. FCERA should note that Linea’s costs are not evenly spread between the five fiscal years of the project; the costs are highest in FY2013-2014 during the main testing phase of the project. In fact, 52% of Linea’s billing occurs in the last two years of the program.

FY2010-2011

Task Area Jul - Aug Sep-Oct Nov-Dec Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May-June TOTAL

PAS/EDMS Requirements $62,900 $62,900 $125,800RFP Development $22,200 $22,200Procurement $48,000 $57,600 $105,600Project Oversight $31,450 $31,450Functional Specifications $34,850 $34,850

2010 Cost $62,900 $62,900 $70,200 $57,600 $0 $66,300 $319,900

FY2011-2012

Jul - Aug Sep-Oct Nov-Dec Jan-Feb Mar-Apr May-June TOTAL

Project Oversight $31,450 $31,450 $31,450 $31,450 $31,450 $31,450 $188,700Functional Specifications $49,200 $49,200 $49,200 $34,850 $34,850 $34,850 $252,150Build Testing $18,500 $18,500 $37,000Data Support $11,250 $11,250 $11,250 $11,250 $11,250 $56,250

2011-2012 Cost $80,650 $91,900 $91,900 $77,550 $96,050 $96,050 $534,100

FY2012-2013


Project Oversight $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $204,000Data Support $22,500 $22,500 $22,500 $38,250 $38,250 $38,250 $182,250Testing $20,000 $20,000 $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $176,000EDMS - Backfile $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $102,000

2012-2013 Cost $76,500 $76,500 $124,500 $140,250 $140,250 $106,250 $664,250


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

53 of 60

FY2013-2014


Project Oversight $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $68,000 $68,000 $68,000 $306,000Data Support $38,250 $38,250 $38,250 $76,500 $76,500 $76,500 $344,250Testing $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $34,000 $68,000 $68,000 $272,000EDMS Integration $10,000 $10,000 $20,000

2013-2014 Cost $106,250 $116,250 $116,250 $178,500 $212,500 $212,500 $942,250

FY2014-2015


Project Oversight $76,500 $56,250 $132,750Data Support $81,600 $40,800 $36,000 $158,400Parallel Testing $71,400 $35,700 $107,100Member Web Portal $35,700 $35,700 $35,700 $107,100Workflow $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $54,000Reporting $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 $54,000

DR/BCP $38,250 $38,250 $38,250 $114,750

2014-2015 Cost $229,500 $132,750 $107,700 $109,950 $109,950 $38,250 $728,100

GRAND TOTAL $3,188,600

Table 7.1: Cost

7.3. Total Project Cost

As is shown in the table above, Linea’s total proposed not-to-exceed consulting cost to FCERA is $3,188,600. We will add a 12% travel surcharge to this total, to arrive at a total not-to-exceed cost of $3,571,232.

We believe that these costs are appropriate, given the size of the I.T. Program, the five year duration, and the level of support and specialized services FCERA will require to be successful.

We look forward to discussing the scope of services with the FCERA team.


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

54 of 60

8. CONSULTING RATES

8.1. Standard Rate Sheet

Linea Solutions’ standard rate sheet is presented in table 8.1 below.

Role Person Hourly Rate

Senior Business Analyst Lucille Young $205

Project Advisor Akio Tagawa $290

Senior Consultant Richard Hanson $240

Senior Consultant Barbara Scheffels $240

Project Manager Susan John $185

Sr. Project Manager N/A $225

Table 8.1: Standard Rate Sheet

8.2. Billing, Rates and Policies for Travel and Other Expenses

Linea Solutions calculates the travel and incidental fees as a flat percentage of the total consulting fees. The percentage varies by client, according to the client’s geographic location, number of nights and days on site, the costs of meals, hotels, and transportation at the client location, and other factors. In the case of FCERA, we have determined that the travel surcharge will be 12%. This will be added to each invoice.

We invoice for services monthly


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

55 of 60

9. ASSUMPTIONS AND EXCEPTIONS

9.1. Assumptions

In order to be certain that we provide the services FCERA requires, we will detail the assumptions that were made in developing the scope of work for this program. These assumptions will help ensure that we have a productive working relationship.

9.1.1. General Assumptions

1. Project Management. We assume the software vendors will assign project managers for the PAS and EDMS projects. We assume that the vendor project managers will be responsible for the following tasks:

o Developing and maintaining the master project plan in conjunction with the Linea Project Manager

o Managing the overall project timeline and ensuring the software vendor works toward the timely completion of the vendor’s project milestones

o Reviewing and approving change orders

o Overall management of the vendor’s resources

o Issue tracking and resolution

o Software contract monitoring and any required amendments

o Day to day project communications

o Bi-weekly and monthly reporting on project progress

o Requirements Traceability Matrix updates

2. Project Tasks and Responsibilities. FCERA will provide the necessary subject matter experts and team members to perform the following tasks, in conjunction with the software vendor’s team:

o Attending requirements confirmation sessions as required

o Provide timely review of requirements and functional specifications documentation for all projects and subprojects

o Provide legal and actuarial resources as required to answer questions related to the ’37 Act, FCERA policies, and actuarial calculations

o Provide a “data team” to execute data clean-up and a majority of the data conversion tasks (under Linea’s direction)

o Provide a team to assist with document index information for the backfile conversion, including document prepping as required

o Provide technical and business input into the selection of an alternate site for the BCP project


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

56 of 60

o Provide technical resources for the development of disaster recovery plans

o Provide technical resources to assist with determining the technical requirements for all I.T. projects

o Hardware and infrastructure planning, procurement, testing, and development, including all subtasks

o Hardware and infrastructure performance and stress testing

o All tasks related to software, hardware and network security testing and certification, including the hiring of an external firm for penetration testing

o Provide a user acceptance test team to execute the scripts than Linea provides

o Document the results of testing in a manner directed by Linea

o Assist with Linea’s interface with third parties, including FCERA plan sponsors and all other parties as required

3. Expertise. FCERA will provide the necessary subject matter expertise to review all requirements and functional specifications documents in a timely and complete manner. Lack of available subject matter expertise will have an impact on the project schedule and on the quality of the software delivered.

4. Management Vision. FCERA management is perceived by staff to be driving the pension system administration effort; the modernization effort is a high organizational priority with full support from Executive management.

5. Staff Preparation. The FCERA staff is prepared for the coming changes and will be generally cooperative with the Linea team.

6. Software Vendor Preparation. The software vendors have a clear scope of work, executed contract, and a specified project team. The software vendor is aware of the oversight consultant’s role and will be generally cooperative with the Linea team.

7. Staff Prioritization. The FCERA staff will be given sufficient time to work with the Linea team to meet the project schedule. Any unscheduled appointments, emergency projects, unexpected shifts in priorities, or other interruptions to access to staff will have a detrimental impact on Linea’s ability to meet the deliverable schedule.

8. Number and Timing of Revisions. FCERA staff agrees that there will be a limit of two revisions of any documented deliverable and that all revision reviews will be limited to a mutually agreed upon timeframe. Deviations from schedule will be taken into account and may incur a cost impact.

9. Work Environment. Linea work will be performed primarily at FCERA site in Fresno. FCERA will make the following available for the duration of the project at no cost to Linea:

o Three dedicated cubicles with telephones, desks, filing cabinets, and drops for up to two computers

o Dedicated access to networking and internet while at FCERA facility


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

57 of 60

o Access to conference room facilities and a/v/teleconference services in those facilities

10. Own Laptop Policy. Linea staff will use their own laptops for the duration of the project. Linea staff will maintain necessary virus and security protection in accordance with FCERA policy.

9.1.2. Project Resource Assumptions

1. FCERA Resources. FCERA has significant responsibility in terms of allocating staff time for the project. We will be diligent in communicating FCERA’s resource needs to the management team, and we will ensure we notify FCERA with sufficient time to address these needs. We assume that FCERA will respond sufficiently to all reasonable requests for staff time and resources, even if it means hiring temporary staff. Should we feel that the project is not being sufficiently resourced, we may submit change orders to allow us to bring in additional consultants to fill resource needs. Our assumption is that FCERA will take sufficient action to make the project successful, including by increasing the project budget if required.

2. Linea Project Advisor. Linea has assigned Akio Tagawa as the Project Advisor for the duration of the project. The Project Advisor’s role is to provide risk management, ensuring all roadblocks to the successful completion of the project are removed. The Project Advisor works closely with the Project Manager, providing advice and direction as required.

9.1.3. Project Schedule Assumptions

3. Project Start Date. Linea assumes that the project will begin in July, 2010. We assume that the project will take about five years regardless of the start date. If the project begins later than July 2010, we assume that the timeline will remain 60 months.

4. Project Timeline. We have based our cost and hours assumptions assuming a five year program timeline. We agree that as the oversight vendor, we bear significant responsibility for the project’s completion during this timeframe. However, the program timeline may slip due to the fault of the software vendors, or due to external or internal issues at FCERA. Our pricing will remain at the current levels if the project timeline extends by up to six months past the five year mark. This guarantee will hold regardless of who is responsible for the slippage.

However, should the project timeline extend beyond this point, and Linea and FCERA mutually agree that the extension of the timeline is not the result of Linea’s failure to perform on the project, Linea will submit a change request to FCERA to allow for additional hours.

9.1.4. Program Scope Assumptions

1. Data Conversion Support. Linea is providing data conversion oversight, development expertise, and oversight of the data clean-up effort. We are providing the conversion methodology and assisting with the development of extract programs, scripts, and other tools for the project. In terms of executing the conversion, we are assuming that FCERA


o f f i c e / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 1 F a x / 3 1 0 . 4 4 3 . 4 1 9 2




V1.0

5/28/2010

58 of 60

will assign at least one full-time technical resources to work on the conversion. We are assuming that these resources either have the technical skills or can quickly develop the technical skills to significantly contribute to the conversion. We will inform FCERA if we feel that these assumptions are not being met and we will mutually determine an alternative means of completing the conversion.

2. Testing. Linea will provide the test scripts and a resource to manage testing. FCERA staff must conduct the testing, and they must do so within a compressed timeframe. The lack of availability of testers will impact the project schedule and may impact the quality of the software.

3. Requirements Confirmation. Linea will manage the requirements confirmation process and will work with the software vendor to ensure these meetings are conducted as efficiently as possible. We are assuming that FCERA staff will generally remain consistent with design and configuration decisions, and will not seek to revisit and revise completed processes with impunity.

4. Program Scope. Given the extended timeline of the program, we are aware that there is a considerable risk of the organization’s priorities changing in the later years of the program. This proposal is based on the assumption that the initiatives are sequenced as described, and our services and associated deliverables will reflect what is written in the proposal. If the projects are changed in either scope or sequence, this will impact our pricing and the guarantee described in 9.1.3 (4).

9.1.5. Technical Assumptions

1. Documentation Provided. FCERA will, on a timely basis, provide all “as is” documentation, strategy, studies and data necessary to perform the scope of services.

2. Access to Resources. FCERA will provide timely access to all data, systems, and subject matter experts necessary for the project.

3. Use of Software. FCERA will provide timely access to all licensed software products to be used in conjunction with this project.

We have made no further assumptions than those stated above.

Documents

Linea Solutions, Inc. - County of Fresno 22... · Linea Solutions, Inc. Proposal for Consulting Services fo r Multi-Year Implementation Program Proposal For Consulting Services for