Business Case OnBase Business Case

Technology Solutions Business Case OnBase Upgrade/Enhancements

Project: OnBase Upgrade/Enhancements Primary Objective: To upgrade and enhance OnBase, which is both the City’s Agenda and Contract Management Solutions Platform

Desired Business Value: • To be operational in a compliant environment • Maintain end user and department usability for initiating and managing agenda and contract items • Improved business efficiency • Improved customer service, support, and satisfaction Stakeholders: • Technology Solutions • City Manager’s Office • All City Departments • City Council • City of Durham Residents

Current State - OnBase •

Durham has a legacy OnBase Agenda Approval Workflow solution that was developed over 16 years ago. This is one of the City’s Enterprise Applications.

•

The OnBase traditional Agenda management workflow allows for inter-departmental users to submit agenda items to be approved and ultimately added to the Agenda, and then published to the Web.

•

A Contract management workflow is also built into OnBase, which allows for creation, review, tracking, and approval via digital signatures.

Current Pain Points - Phase 1 • Existing customized scripts and forms have a deprecated functionality and can’t be used in later versions.

• Due to outdated technology and specific customizations within our existing OnBase platform, we have been unable to maintain the vendor's recommended upgrade schedule.

• Our current OnBase vendor has stated that support for the City’s current OnBase version will no longer be cost effective for them thus the cost to provide support will increase in the calendar year 2020.

Current Pain Points – Phase 2/3 City Manager Agenda Workflow • Notifications are currently received by the submitter when documents are modified by the reviewer.

• i.e. The approver does not get notifications when the submitter makes changes to the Agenda Item • Documents are not locked down, allowing changes at later dates (City Manager would prefer a cut-off point) • i.e. After the City Manager approves, there is still the ability to modify changes from someone other than the Agenda Coordinator

Current Pain Points – Phase 2/3 City Manager Agenda Workflow • Department Director’s agenda submittal queues do not exist.

• i.e. Some agenda items are submitted without a Department Director’s knowledge • Currently, access to submitted Agenda items is accessible by all City Departments.

• No ability to properly manage potential priority items • No ability to distinguish Ceremonial Agenda Items vs. Ceremonial Events

Future State – OnBase Upgrade/Enhancement

For the City of Durham to enhance their Agenda Management and Contract Management solution in order address some of the following areas: 1. To operate in a compliant environment with fully supported forms and workflows 2. To reduce the cost of maintaining and supporting the existing platform 3. To increase user friendliness for initiating and managing agenda and contract items

Future State Benefits for OnBase Enhancements •

Increase and improve notifications when Agenda items are changed

•

Allow document revisions/modifications and importing related documents up to a certain point within the workflow; then allow only specific individuals to make changes

•

Upgraded HTML Forms

•

Updated workflows which eliminate the roadblock to future releases

Future State Benefits for OnBase Enhancements •

Agenda Management solution new functionality and capabilities that can improve the agenda submission, review, and approval process

•

Have the ability to prevent each City Department from viewing submitted agenda items from other departments.

OnBase Enhancement Roadmap Phase 1 Compliance Value = KTLO

Phase 2/Phase 3 Performance Value = Enhancements

• Fixing and updating customized scripts within OnBase so that it can be supported • Fixing and updating HTML Forms and deprecated functionality • Upgrading our current OnBase Environment to a compliant version

• New functionality and capabilities that can improve the agenda submission, review, and approval process • Modernizes our OnBase platform to the OnBase next generation client.

Solution Options & Analysis

12

Solution Options Considered 1. Proceed with Phase 1 which upgrades OnBase to a compliant environment with fully supported forms and workflows

13

Description

Proceed with Phase 1 which upgrades OnBase to a compliant environment with fully supported forms and workflows

•

Pros

• •

•

Fixing and updating customized scripts within OnBase so that it can be supported Fixing and updating HTML Forms and deprecated functionality Upgrading our current OnBase Environment to a compliant version None

Cons

14

COST ESTIMATES Description

FUNDING

Total One Year Costs (Hours)

Run Costs (Hours)/ KTLO

Departmental Funding Amount:

$0

Labor $ (Hours) Internal TS: Business Analysis TS Services TS Project Management:

External:

522 hours

521 hours

0 hours

0 hours

522 hour

521 hours

312 hours

0 hours

$ (0 hours)

$0 (0 hours)

Project Management

$ (0 hours)

$0 (0 hours)

Professional Services

$32,595 (159 hours)

$0 (0 hours)

Hardware:

$0

$0

Software:

$0

$0

Other:

$0

$0

Funding Requested (Y/N):

Project One Time Costs

Y

$32,595.00

Project Run Cost (External)

$0

*Total Project Funding Requested

$32,595.00

Non-Labor $

*Total Project Funding Requested (External), includes External Year 1 Run Costs and Non-Labor

15

SECURITY OBJECTIVE CATEGORY

Confidentiality

POTENTIAL IMPACT

LOW

Unauthorized disclosure of information = limited adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals.

Integrity

Unauthorized modification or destruction of information = limited adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals.

Availability

Disruption of access to or use of information or an information system = limited adverse effect on organizational operations, organizational assets, or individuals.

The information type identified for OnBase is Services Acquisition Information Type, with the following security categorization recommendation: Final Security Categorization = Confidentiality: Low; Integrity: Low; Availability: Low 16

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-60, Volume 1, Rev. 1

Risk: Are there proper resources in place to help with the development and implementation of the Enterprise-Wide OnBase Phase 1 upgrade?

Risk Mitigation Plan: Technology Solutions will mitigate this risk by utilizing very experienced Subject Matter Experts Utilizing Experience and Qualified Employees: Fred McCurdy, OnBase Systems Administrator: •

24+ years + experience in IT

•

20+ years in OnBase

•

Pioneer in standing up the City’s current Agenda and Contract Management Platform

17

Summary & Recommendation

18

Our Ask

We are asking to approve the Business Case for Phase 1 of OnBase Enhancements

Estimated Project Planning

Implementation Overview

Project Timeline

April 2019 • Approval from IT Steering Committee to move forward with Phase 1 July 2019 • Procurement of Professional Services from OnBase vendor for Phase 1 • Begin development stages to upgrade work forms and scripts July - August 2019 • Enterprise Business Analyst to begin to gather specific requirements on enhancements and features from stakeholders (Phase 2/3) Fall 2019 • Based on requirements that were gathered, the vendor to provide Proof of Concept to stakeholders • Testing for Phase 1 begins December 2019 • Complete Phase 1 Upgrade February 2020 • Present Phase 2/3 Business Case of OnBase upgrade to IT Steering Committee

21

xxx 2018

22

Questions?

OnBase Upgrade/Enhancements