Strategic Advisory Council

1. Strategic Advisory Council July 20, 2005

2. Agenda Strategic Advisory Council July 20, 2005 Welcome/New Member Introduction • Strategic Technology Plan (STP) 2006-2008 • 2002-2005 IT Accomplishments • STP Imperatives • Investment Strategies • Governance Feedback • Endorsement of the STP 2006-2008 • Wrap-up

3. Welcome New Member Gary Robinson Strategic Advisory Council

4. Gary Robinson, Director, Washington State Department of Information Services (DIS) • The governor appointed Gary Robinson on February 16th as the director of the Department of Information Services. Gary served as acting director in 2001 and 2002, and most recently as the senior assistant director at the Office of Financial Management. • Gary began his career with Washington State as a member of the Committee staff of the House of Representatives and then the Senate. He next joined the administrative staff of the Parks and Recreation Commission and then moved to the Office of Financial Management (OFM). In addition, Gary has been a member of the Washington State Economic and Revenue Forecast Council, the Information Services Board, the Public Employees Benefits Board, and the Sentencing Guidelines Commission. • Gary was raised in Washington State. He received his Bachelor’s Degree from Pitzer College in Claremont, California and his Master’s Degree from The Evergreen State College. He has also completed the Program for State and Local Executives at the Kennedy School of Government. Strategic Advisory Council

5. Approval of Minutes September 23, 2004 SAC Meeting Minutes Strategic Advisory Council

6. I. Strategic Technology Plan2006-2008 IT Accomplishments STP Imperatives Investment Strategies Governance Feedback Endorsement Strategic Advisory Council

7. IT Accomplishments Overview of IT Accomplishments from 2002-2005 Presented by: David Martinez Strategic Advisory Council

8. IT Accomplishments Highlights Strategic Advisory Council

9. STP Imperatives Presented by: Ron Sims Strategic Advisory Council

10. Imperatives • High level direction for prioritizing investments for the next three years. • We may not agree on the details, but we should find common ground to guide us into the budget process. Strategic Advisory Council

11. Imperative #1 • Technology investments will be prioritized for funding consideration based on a compelling business case that considers the total cost of ownership for alternative solutions including operations, upgrades, replacement and disposal costs of equipment. The business case shall be aligned to the agency’s priority services as detailed in the agency’s business plans and/or operational master plans and as supported by the agency’s technology plan and the county’s strategic technology plan. Standardized management tools and practices, collaborative efforts to coordinate IT planning and/or service delivery, and other ways to provide more efficient and effective services will be encouraged. • Action Requested: Endorsement Strategic Advisory Council

12. Imperative #2 • All county agencies support an expansion of the county’s web site to increase public access to information and services and promote equal opportunity and healthy communities with appropriate privacy and security controls in place and the ability of agencies to control their websites. • Action Requested: Endorsement Strategic Advisory Council

13. Imperative #3 • Provide an appropriate level of IT support to enable all county agencies to comply with their responsibilities under King County’s Emergency Management Plan. • Action Requested: Endorsement Strategic Advisory Council

14. Imperative #4 • Provide an appropriate level of resources to ensure compliance with privacy and security regulations and county policies and to protect the county’s information assets, including personal and sensitive information, from threats: internal and external, intentional and accidental. • Action Requested: Endorsement Strategic Advisory Council

15. Imperative #5 • Provide an appropriate level of resources to conduct and support performance measurement activities related to the technology that supports county services and initiatives. This will provide important information for the county’s management and elected officials to improve decision-making regarding the use of technology to support delivery of services and ensure that departments stay focused on top priorities. • Action Requested: Endorsement Strategic Advisory Council

16. Investment Strategy & Approach Presented by: Bob Cowan Strategic Advisory Council

17. Financial Situation Background • Structural deficit has not disappeared. • Revenue growth rates lag behind expenditure growth rates to maintain same service levels and is forecast to continue. • County has started significant initiatives to mitigate structural deficit, such as the annexation initiative. • 2006 budget outlook is best in five years, primarily due to previous service level reductions. Strategic Advisory Council

18. Budget Imperatives • Ongoing need to realize efficiencies in the way the County delivers services. In the absence of revenue enhancements, this is the most effective way for the County to fund new and expanded services. • New ways of doing business – including the use of technology -- must be examined and implemented where those improvements lead to efficiencies. • Agencies must be held accountable for promised efficiencies when business processes are changed or technology projects are funded. • County must minimize the institution of new programs which create a “bow wave” in future years. • Planning for future known costs where those costs are significant and unavoidable, e.g. increases in employer contribution rates for state retirement pension plans. • County should emphasize the benefits of county-wide technology projects and encourage the joint development of those projects. Strategic Advisory Council

19. Investment Strategy • Invest in technology needs based on established prioritization criteria • Leverage technology investments by applying inter-agency and county-wide solutions where applicable • Establish performance measurement methods for technology projects to assure that planned efficiencies and other investment goals are realized Strategic Advisory Council

20. Prioritization Criteria • Consistent with County Strategic Technology Plan • Adequate funding for Strategic Technology Plan imperatives • Documented cost savings or cost avoidance • Accountability and transparency • Risk management • Improvements to public and customer service and access Strategic Advisory Council

21. Technology Investment Funding Strategies • Utilize debt for large long life multi-year projects, allocating debt service to benefiting agencies • Establish and maintain dedicated short-term reserves for funding significant smaller duration projects (Transition Fund to create operational efficiencies and enable agencies to maintain service levels at lower costs) • Allow agencies to use operating funds within the constraints of available resources for agency-specific projects Strategic Advisory Council

22. Significant Strategic Technology Projects • Law, safety and justice systems for courts, jail, health, public defense and Sheriff • County-wide security, business continuity and network infrastructure optimization • Unified payroll/human resources and financial systems • Major projects in elections and transit Strategic Advisory Council

23. Initial Review of 2006 Budget Technology Requests • Additional funding for 10 existing technology projects (7 county-wide, 3 agency projects) • Funding for 35 new technology projects (5 county-wide, 30 agency projects) Strategic Advisory Council

24. Governance Feedback Presented by: David Martinez Strategic Advisory Council

25. Governance Feedback BMC/TMB members endorsed the 2006-2008 Strategic Technology Plan with two qualifiers: • The IT Performance Measures and Investment Strategy sections were not available to be included in the draft version. • Status: The IT Performance Measures section has been completed and added to the STP. The revised section was presented to the BMC/TMB for their review on July 12th. • Status: The Investment Strategy section will be completed and include direction received today. • The Strategic Technology Plan 2006-2008 Reorganize Technology Functions objective was not endorsed because the Executive’s recommendation was not available. Strategic Advisory Council

26. Endorsement Checklist • STP Imperatives • Strategic Technology Plan 2006-2008 Strategic Advisory Council

27. Follow-up Items • Complete the Investment Strategy section and incorporate into the Strategic Technology Plan 2006-2008. • Other action items? Strategic Advisory Council

28. II. Wrap-up • Proposed agenda topics for next SAC meeting • Tentative date for next SAC meeting Strategic Advisory Council

29. Strategic Advisory Council Thank you for your support of King County IT Governance. Strategic Advisory Council