project management and qa consulting llc

DEBORAH SPAULDING PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND QA CONSULTING LLC

WSP Land Mobile Radio System

Upgrade Project

DEBORAH SPAULDING

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND

QA CONSULTING LLC

Project Quality Assurance Report

Washington State Patrol Land Mobile Radio System Upgrade Project Report for May 2019

Author: Deborah Spaulding, PMP

South Puget Sound Community College, Client Services Division

Phone: 360.250-1334



Upgrade Project

1

Table of Contents Project Summary and Purpose of the Report ............................................................................. 2

Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 3

QA Interviews/Events Since the Last Report .............................................................................. 4

Project QA Information ......................................................................................................... 5

Quality Assurance Assessment Summary .............................................................................. 5

Project Management Knowledge Area Assessment................................................................. 6

Detailed Report ................................................................................................................. 8

Key Project Risks ............................................................................................................ 17

QA Observations & Recommendations............................................................................... 17

QA Findings and Recommendations Since Last Report...................................................... 17

Ongoing QA Findings and Recommendations Tracking Log .............................................. 19

Schedule of Assessments ...................................................................................................... 20

Appendix A – Project Outlook Success Criteria ....................................................................... 21



Upgrade Project

2

Project Summary and Purpose of the Report

Description of Project

In 2012, as part of the WSP narrow banding project, the WSP purchased and deployed a Land Mobile

Radio (LMR) netw ork core in its’ Union Gap District Headquarters facility . The WSP LMR system is shared

by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Washington State Patrol (WSP). The current connection

betw een the tw o systems allow s WSP and FBI to share communications systems and enhance radio

coverage across the state for both agencies. FBI announced their intent to upgrade and separate the FBI’s

LMR system core from WSP LMR system core and then reconnect the tw o systems. FBI is upgrading their

LMR systems and WSP must also upgrade in order for the tw o agencies to reconnect.

Quality Assurance

Washington State Patrol has contracted w ith South Puget Sound Community College, Client Services

Division under an interagency support agreement to provide ongoing Quality Assurance for the Land Mobile

Radio System Upgrade Project. The QA evaluation engagement started in November 2018 and this report

is the65th monthly assessment of the project based on meetings and interview s conducted in the month of

May 2019.



Upgrade Project

3

Executive Summary

The previous months of this project continued to expose new FBI or Motorola system requirements that

impact core WSP functionality w hich are central to f ield operations. The LMRSUP project team spent much

of May reassessing requirements, design and scope specif ically around talk group functionality and

consolettes w hich are used to bridge coverage.

Convert WSP P25 radio systems from Zone 2 of the shared Federal Integrated Wireless Network

(IWN) trunked radio system to a standalone P25 trunked radio system .

Move the system core from WSP’s Union Gap location to the State Quincy data center

This w ork continues at a steady pace. It is not critical path.

Upgrade the voice recording system

Continued progress on this upgrade. Focus has been on resource preparation for training and support

of this upgraded voice recording system.

Install a new radio manager software

This w ork is being reassessed and rebaselined

Cresa cutover

The Cresa cutover is complete.

Project leadership is in negotiations w ith FBI and Motorola to fully define technical and architectural

changes, ensure systems are implemented to account for these changes, and systems are fully tested to

ensure any impacts to WSP business operations are fully understood and mitigated.

The project manager is rew riting much of the project plan as scope and schedule are impacted and budget

is also expected to change. The WSP contract is being amended or w ill change form to support these

impacts. The w ork on the Quincy data center move is not (yet) impacted and continues.

DES and Motorola have a state master agreement for the Land Mobile Radio system, installation and

integration services. WSP is the primary agency customer of that contract. WSP, DES and Motorola are

w orking on a remedy to extend the form and time of this contract to support the LMR project. Motorola has

been actively reengaged in their coordinating role as product ow ner and liaison w ith FBI and WSP. FBI

leadership w ill be onsite at WSP headquarters in June for partnership discussions.

There are no f indings for May but until the project reestablishes its baseline, the rating remains Red. It is

hoped this w ill be remedied in June.

The follow ing summary chart contains Know ledge Areas that w ere review ed for this report. This project QA

review w as conducted on the ten (10) Know ledge Areas listed below . Each of the ten areas w ere analyzed

and rated for project risk. The information contained in this report is based on documentation review and

interview s w ith key project staff.



Upgrade Project

4

QA Interviews/Events Since the Last Report

This table contains a list of interview s and communications events observed during the period of the report.

Date/Name of Event Organization/Role

05/02/2019: LMR Project Impact

meeting

Strategic meeting w ith Motorola on key design

changes

05/07/2019: QA/OCIO Check in QA/Amy Pearson

05/10/2019: QA/ESC Check in QA/Tom Wallace, Asst. Chief Lamoreaux, Asst. Chief

Sass

05/15/2019: QA/OCIO Check in QA/Amy Pearson

05/20/2019: QA review Contract review

05/24/2019: QA\Exec sponsor

meeting

Executive Team Meeting



Upgrade Project

5

Project QA Information

QUALITY ASSURANCE ASSESSM ENT SUMMARY

The follow ing table presents a current status summary of the LMR System Upgrade project. The summary is

provided in a format suggested by the Washington State Office of the Chief Information Officer, updated for

recent developments w ithin the industry.

QA Dashboard

Dashboard Area Status

Scope

(red)

Fundamental design issues disclosed by FBI and Motorola partners compromise the project scope from that of an upgrade to one of

significant changes (and potentially degraded service) in functionality

for field operations.

Schedule

Green

(red)

Fundamental design issues disclosed by FBI and Motorola partners and the time necessary to research and react to them have exceeded

schedule contingency. Forecast is that current schedule will not be met.

Budget

(yellow)

Fundamental design issues disclosed by FBI and Motorola partners and

the subsequent replanning of scope, schedule and cost put the

project’s budget at risk.

Success Factors

(red)

An assessment of project success factors for the LMRSUP project

yields a score less than 75%. Success is predicted by a score of 90% or more, as identified in Appendix A.

Project remains on hold pending impact analysis and resolution to

scope issues that impact schedule and budget. WSP Project team

continues to take a pragmatic approach to assessing impact, response and next steps.

Legend of Rating Indicators:

Green: Satisfactory

Yellow : Marginal Status Red: Unsatisfactory



Upgrade Project

6

PROJECT MANAGEM ENT KNOWLEDGE AREA ASSESSM ENT

The follow ing section of the report rates the project against the ten (10) project management know ledge areas identif ied in the Project Management Body of

Know ledge (PMBOK) and OCIO Policy 132.31.

Knowledge Area

Assessment 1 = fully addressed

0 = not addressed -1 = addressed

poorly

Comments

Project Integration Management – Over the life of the

project, are effective project management processes being

used and coordinated w ithin the project and w ith all project

participants to achieve desired results?

1

Standard practices are being integrated into

the project.

Project Scope Management – Does the project include an

approach to managing scope to ensure the project success? 1

Fundamental design issues disclosed by FBI

and Motorola partners compromise the project

scope from that of an upgrade to one of

signif icant changes in functionality for f ield

operations.

Project Time Management – Is the project effectively

managing the timely completion of the project? 1


and Motorola partners and the time necessary

to research and react to them are greater than

schedule contingency. Forecast is that current

schedule w ill not be met.

Project Cost Management – Is the project routinely

estimating, budgeting, managing and controlling costs so that

the project can successfully complete?

1


and Motorola partners and the subsequent

replanning of scope, schedule and cost put the

projects budget at risk

Project Quality Management – Is the project defining quality

measures and using continuously improving processes to

achieve project outcomes? 1

Product Quality plan has been developed.

Quality in this project is reliant on early

discovery of design issues. That w ork is on

track.

Project Human Resource Management – Is the project

acquiring, developing, and managing appropriately skilled and

adequately staffed project teams? 1

All shifts in resources have been completed

and the team is substantially reset. Team

continues to be stellar.



Upgrade Project

7

Knowledge Area

Assessment 1 = fully addressed

0 = not addressed -1 = addressed

poorly

Comments

Project Communications Management – Is the team

identifying stakeholders and supporting timely, appropriate

and accessible communications over the project’s life?

1

Communication improved in May for the

project team, Motorola, and FBI as issues are

negotiated betw een the three. This is an area

for project reset and reevaluation as this

Vendor relationship is fundamental to WSP

field operations.

Project Risk Management – Is the project effectively

identifying, analyzing, and controlling project risks and issues? 1

Risk identif ication activities are documented

and refreshed. Mitigation strategies are

ongoing.

Project Procurement Management – Is the project

appropriately managing the acquisition of products, services or

results needed from outside the project team? Is the project effectively managing the resulting contracts over the life of the

contract?

1

This project w as queued to be a

straightforw ard upgrade to existing products

w ith additional w ork for the system move to

the Quincy data center. It is, in reality, an

upgrade and redesign due to new FBI

requirements on this shared radio

infrastructure.

Progress w as made in May on the contract

form and content to support the project. And

this rating has improved.

Project Stakeholder Management – Has the project

identif ied key people, groups or organizations that could

impact/be impacted by the project? Is the project using

appropriate strategies to engage stakeholders on project

decisions? Is governance, sponsorship and stakeholder

engagement effective?

1

A formal review of Stakeholders w as

completed. Specif ic Stakeholder communications is being executed according

to the plan.

Overall Project Process Success Rating

(Maximum of 10 points) 10

Continued signif icant improvement since last

report – predictive of project success.



Upgrade Project

8

DETAILED REPORT

Project Health by Assessment Area

1.0 PROJECT INTEGRATION MANAGEM ENT

Baseline Assessment Activity Rating Benchmark Recommendation

1. A formal Charter for the procurement phase

has been developed and endorsed by the

Steering Committee. The charter clearly

states the intended business value, goals,

measurable objectives, and roles and

responsibilities. (+)

2. The Steering Committee members represent

the business areas affected by LMR System

Upgrade. They meet monthly, are highly

engaged, and committed to the stated

outcomes of the project. (+)

3. Subject Matter Experts appointed by the

Steering Committee members participate on

the project as representatives of their

business area. They participate by

defining/validating requirements, defining

workflows, making recommendations, and

keeping Steering Committee members

apprised. (+)

4. Decisions are made at the lowest level

possible and documented. Status is reported

twice monthly via emailed reports. (+)

Expected Outcome:

1. Clear understanding

of LMR System Upgrade

Project goals, objectives

and commitment by the

agency along w ith

measurable outcomes

2. Established forum w ith

clear membership and

responsibilities for

stakeholder

participation

3. Defined and engaged

sponsorship and

executive sponsorship.

Clear escalation

and decision-

making process

w ith easily accessible

record of decisions

4. Status reports that

monitor and report

progress against the

baselined schedule,

scope and budget

1.1 Consider inviting the Vender or FBI

partners to steering team meetings.

1.2 Consider including Technology Planning

and Implementation Manager in any

communication or meetings that require

cross project consideration.



Upgrade Project

9

5. Project Management Planning documents;

communication management, issue

management, scope management, quality

management, and risk management have

been completed.

5. High level infrastructure

design that details the

scope of the planning.

Project Controls:

• Project Charter

• Risk and Issue

Management Logs, Plan

and Processes

• Decision Log

• Status Reports

• Infrastructure diagrams

• Project Management

Plan

2.0 PROJECT SCOPE MANAGEM ENT


6. Requirements and infrastructure designs

are formally documented and managed (+)

7. Detail Scope statements have been

published (+)

8. Contract amendments have been

processed and clearly define scope and

schedule requirements. (+)

9. Requirements have been prioritized

10. Clearly defined and consistent business

criteria for managing scope, future change

Expected Outcome:

Clear and baselined scope w ith a

robust RTM to track the lifecycle of

requirements, and a formal change

control process w hen changes to

scope are proposed

Project Controls:

• Scope statement w ith

detailed requirements

• Requirements Traceability

Matrix (RTM)

2.1 Inventory the existing and upcoming

projects that might influence the WSP

infrastructure and complete impact analysis

as it related to the LMR System upgrade

project.

2.2 Consider including Technology Planning and

Implementation Manager in any

communication or meetings that require

cross project consideration.

2.3 Fundamental changes to scope have been

introduced by FBI and Motorola partners.



Upgrade Project

10

requests, and determining readiness for go

live have been established. (+)

11. There is a risk of other projects having

reliance or influence on the new LMR

System infrastructure (-)

12. A Change Management Process is defined

in the Scope management Plan. The

Vendor contract clearly defines scope and

change process. (+)

13. OCS design review completed in time to

incorporate any design changes.

14. 4 approved changes requests (1

completed) plus 1 change request in

development. All use approved change

management plan (+)

15. Fundamental changes to scope have been


Scope is being rebaselined.

• Formal Change Control

Process

• Appropriate use of change

process

Impact analysis is in process. Scope is being

rebaselined.

3.0 PROJECT SCHEDULE MANAGEM ENT


16. Contract amendments have been

processed and clearly define scope and

schedule requirements. (+)

17. Procurement tasks and milestones appear

to be achievable. Cannot be finalized until

the infrastructure design is finalized. (+)

Expected Outcome:

Project team continues to w ork the

schedule but that is largely

dependent on analysis activities.

Detailed w ork plan w ith realistic

estimates that is baselined and

actively managed

Project Controls:

3.2 Continued diligence and communication w ith

FBI partners to coordinate cutover to avoid

schedule and budget delays.



Schedule is being rebaselined



Upgrade Project

11

18. Must go Live with FBI which might

influence the schedule. (-)



Schedule is being rebaselined.

• Detailed integrated w ork

plan

• High level visual schedule

for communication

purposes

• Change requests that

appropriately substantiate

schedule changes.

4.0 PROJECT COST MANAGEM ENT


20. The Investment Plan has been accepted

the OCIO representative and has a

dependency with the retrospective

Readiness Assessment report by QA. (+)

21. Risk to the project: Budget must be

expended by end of biennium. Strategies

are being considered if project extends

into next biennium.



Budget is likely affected and being

evaluated as part of rebaseline of scope

and schedule.

Expected Outcome:

Approved funding w ith a detailed

budget for managing actual and

forecast expenditures for actively

managing costs

Project Controls:

• Baselined budget w ith

proactive budget forecasts

• Spend plan that supports

the project deliverables and

is sustainable by the agency

and other funding

sources.

4.2 Mitigations for resource issues w ill use some

budget contingency w hich is to be expected and

likely all positive investments. PM is diligent in

continued monitoring of the budget and

contingency.

4.3 Schedule changes and change requests tax

the budget contingency and extend the spend plan

into the next biennium. Continued close

monitoring is required.


introduced by FBI and Motorola partners. Budget

is likely affected and being evaluated as part of

rebaseline of scope and schedule.

5.0 PROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT




Upgrade Project

12

23. Project Quality Management Plan has

been developed (+)

24. Deliverable Expectation and Acceptance

has been formalized (+)

Expected Outcome:

1. Artifact/Deliverable review

and acceptance process that

includes review and

approval by business

participants and acceptance

criteria

Project Controls:

• Deliverable Acceptance

Process

5.1 (retiring) Incorporate retrospective review s at

the end of each major activity w ithin the w ork plan

to incorporate lessons learned to achieve

continuous process improvements.

6.0 PROJECT HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEM ENT


25. The Project Manager completed the initial

installation of a the LMR system and has a

good understanding of the business

environment, stakeholders and business

needs. (+)

26. The Technology Planning and

Implementation Manager is new to the

position at WSP, has appropriate

experience for the role and is receiving

guidance about the organization from the

Business Project Manager. (+)

27. A staffing model for Maintenance and

Operations (M&O) has been identified to

support. (+)

28. Low risk of the availability and attention of

WaTech staff to support WSP staff for the

Expected Outcome:

Staff ing management that ensures

appropriate level of resources and

skill levels to meet baseline

schedule

Project Controls:

• Resources Management

Plan w ith a strategy to f ill

any gaps in skills w ith

supplemental training

• Resourced w ork plan

• Status report that includes

progress against baselined

schedule



Upgrade Project

13

infrastructure move to the Quincy data

center. (-)

29. Risk is the availability and attention of

Vendor staff to support a tight timeline.

Vendor owns significant engineering

deliverables. (-)

7.0 PROJECT COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT


30. Communication management plan has

been formalized including internal and

external communications and

communication mediums. (+)

31. Internal and external communication has

started. (+)

32. WSP Communication officer is actively

engaged. (+)

33. Project materials and artifacts are stored

on central location accessible to the

internal project team. (+)

34. Communication with internal and external

stakeholders is the responsibility of the

Sponsor and Project Manager. (+)

35. Internal Project communication:

communication with vendor partners has

established role/responsibilities,

Expected Outcome:

Thoroughly understood goals,

objectives, plan and status

across project team, leadership,

stakeholders and partners

Communications to the right people at

the right time to support Organizational

Change Management (OCM) activities

and prepare users, stakeholders and

partners for the new system and user

roles

Project Controls:

• Project

Communication Strategy/Plan

• Talking Points

• Communication artifacts

7.1 Prepare and keep updated a ready

reference (graphic or legislative briefing

format) overview and status of the project for

stakeholders w ho are not involved in the

everyday project, may not be actively

communicated to, but require immediate

status.

7.2 (updated) Vendor, FBI and Motorola

communication and coordination is

improving.



Upgrade Project

14

escalation and change management

processes.

8.0 PROJECT RISK MANAGEM ENT


36. A formal Project Management Plan

addresses the risk management

approach including probability and

severity ratings. (+)

37. Risks are tracked in the Risk Log. (+)

38. High priority risks are discussed at

Steering Committee meetings. (+)

Expected Outcome:

Active risk management and

mitigation w ith formal input by Steering

Committee

Project Controls:

• Risk Management Plan and

processes including risk

log, probability and impact

ratings, mitigation plans and

contingency plans

8.1 No recommendations currently

9.0 CONTRACT MANAGEM ENT


39. Contract Project Manager was procured

in April 2018 with deliverables and

expectations clearly defined in the

contract. (+)

40. QA Resources were procured in late

November 2018 with deliverables and

expectations clearly defined in the

contract. (+)

41. Vendor contract is already in place and

contract amendments for the LMR

Expected Outcome:

Successful completion of procurement

w ith appropriate contract controls to

manage the statement of w ork.

Project Controls:

• Procurement documents and

Contract

• Appropriate contract

amendments are in place to

support schedule rebaseline

w hich also affects deliverable

acceptance and spend plan.

9.1 (updated) Full review of the contract and

amendments to incorporate recent scope changes

and to review vendor relationship and escalation

avenues is in progress.

9.2 inventory of all formal and informal agreements

related to ow nership, lease, partnership of the

entire LMR infrastructure.



Upgrade Project

15

System upgrade have been processed.

(+)

42. Contract and amendments offer clear

path of products, services, and license

contractually obligated. In addition,

vendor relationship definition,

escalation paths, and ongoing account

management is defined.

10.0 PROJECT STAKEHOLDER MANAGEM ENT


43. A Communication Matrix was developed to

address communication needs of the

various stakeholder groups. (+)

Expected Outcome:

• Clearly identif ied

stakeholders w ho are

engaged and receive the

right communication at the

right time

Project Controls:

• Assessment of stakeholder

needs

• Communication

Management

Plan/Strategy

10.1 See QA recommendation 7.1



Upgrade Project

16

Legend of Rating Indicators:

Color Project Impact

Green

The Project area is under control. Minor problems may exist, but the Project Manager has an effective plan in place to solve the problems.

Yellow

Problems exist that create significant probability of exceeding estimates or budget, user dissatisfaction, and/or limited financial exposure. Project Management action and

Project Sponsor involvement required. The Steering Committee should monitor

problems.

Red

Major problems exist with definite, serious financial exposure and/or User dissatisfaction. Steering Committee should review Business Justification and decide

whether and how to proceed with the Project, and how to mitigate impact to business.



Upgrade Project

17

KEY PROJECT RISKS

Initial risks are identif ied for the project in the table below . Risks that are retired during the project w ill be removed from subsequent reports, although a

perpetual log w ill be retained by the analyst and provided at the conclusion of the project.

Risk ID #

Description Severity of Impact

Likelihood of Occurrence

Strategy Finding Current Status

3 Technical Restrictions on the systems core design and

design assumptions

FBI has the right to impose

restrictions on their

system, many of these

must be accepted and

impacts to field operations

minimized.

Communication of these

restrictions was not

forthcoming in a timely

way. Continued push for

design details.

no Risk is Manifest

Project activities are essentially on hold while assessing impact and rebaselining scope schedule and budget.

QA OBSERV ATIONS & RECOMM ENDATIONS

QA Findings and Recommendations Since Last Report

The follow ing table lists Findings and Management Responses. The Log is posted to the OCIO Project Dashboard, under separate cover. Findings are

logged by Project Assessment Area. The description of each Finding includes the potential impact of the Finding if not addressed; both in this Phase and the

risk to subsequent Phases. Management Responses for open Findings are documented in the Log w ith the steps that are in progres s to address the Findings ,

and an estimated date for closure of the Findings. This includes the steps underw ay to implement the Recommendation as w ell as documentation of any

mitigating circumstances that Project Leadership feels may be relevant. There are no f indings for May 2019 report.

QA # Date

Identified Description Recommendation Finding Status

Time Open



Upgrade Project

18

QA # Date

Identified Description Recommendation Finding Status

Time Open



Upgrade Project

19

Ongoing QA Findings and Recommendations Tracking Log

This table identif ies observations made in previous reports, w hich w ere not closed by the publication date of the last report. Observations reported as closed

on the last report have been removed from this more current version of the Observations and Recommendations Tracking Log. The numbering system used

to track those observations has been preserved for observations made throughout the life of the project to ensure an appropriate audit trail. There are no

f indings as of May 2019 report

QA #

Date Identified

Description Recommendation Finding Status Time Open



Upgrade Project

20

Schedule of Assessments

Dates of reports may be modif ied based on the needs of the project, in collaboration w ith the Project Sponsor.

Deliverable Date Provided Status

Quality Assurance Plan

Initial Project Assessment 12/29/2018 Final

Quality Assurance Report 01/14/2019 Final








Upgrade Project

Appendix A – Project Outlook Success Criteria

PROJECT OUTCOM E SPOTLIGHT CRITERIA

Dashboard

Area Green Yellow Red

Scope • Total cost of all change

requests is 50% or less

of change request

budget, and

• All major system

components will be

implemented as planned,

and

• Project can easily handle

minor changes to

business processes or

data.

• Total cost of all change

requests is 75% or less of

change request budget, or

• Major system component

will be deferred to later

phase in order to meet

current phase’s schedule

or budget, or

• Changes to business

processes or data cause

moderate rework.

• Total cost of all change

requests is at least 75% of

the change request

budget, or

• Major system component

will not be implemented, or

• Changes to business

processes or data cause

significant rework.

Schedule • Schedule variance does

not impact completion

date for current phase,

and

• Work plan is updated at

least once every two

weeks.

• Schedule variance delays

completion date for

current phase but does

not impact completion

date for later phases or

critical path, or

• Major deliverables will be

late by two weeks or less,

or

• Work plan has not been

updated within last 30

days.

• Schedule variance affects

critical path, or

• Major deliverables will be

at least two weeks late, or

• Work plan has not been

updated for more than 30

days.

Budget • Budget variance is less

than 5% of total budget

and there is project

funding flexibility within

the agency’s control.

• Budget variance is within

10% of total budget and

there is project funding

flexibility within the

agency’s control.

• There is a budget variance

and there is no remaining

project funding flexibility,

or

• Budget variance is at least

10%.

Success Factors

• Weighted score is at

least 90%.

• Weighted score is

between 75% and 90%.

• Weighted score is less

than 75%.

project management and qa consulting llc

Documents