Chapter 4 – Information Technology

44030.5 PIER Content and Format

• The level of detail included in the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report shall be commensurate with the scope and complexity of the project and its anticipated benefits. The narrative portion of the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report for a minor project can be as brief as one or two pages. However, it shall provide sufficient information for Department management, executive branch control agencies, and the Legislature to assess the success of the project (see SAMState Administrative Manual Section 4947.2).

• PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report Composition

  • The PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report is comprised of five sections:

    • Background and Summary of Results Section. A brief summary is provided of the project history, objectives, and results. Topics to be discussed normally include: how the project was initiated, how it progressed, problems that were overcome, user and management acceptance of the operational application, how Department management views the management of the project, and how the application fits into the Department’s overall management and operations strategy.

    • Attainment of Objectives Section. Specific objectives are established during the feasibility study for each project and are documented in the FSRFeasibility Study Reports. These objectives, which are normally defined in terms of measurable impact on Department programs and resources, provide the baseline for measurement of the project’s success. Accordingly, the narrative portion of this section of the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report shall describe the project outcome with respect to each objective included in the FSRFeasibility Study Reports. This section shall also include a clear statement regarding the capture of benefits and whether they were achieved as anticipated.

  • Two attachments shall be included with this section of the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report:

    • Attachment 1 – PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report Economic Summary Report. Project costs and benefits shall be summarized using the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report Economic Summary (SAMState Administrative Manual 4947.2 Illustration1). This spreadsheet allows comparison of the anticipated costs of the selected alternative, as documented in the FSRFeasibility Study Reports Economic Analysis Summary (SAMState Administrative Manual 4929.3), with actual project costs from the project start date through the period of project operation chosen as the basis for the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report. For detailed information on the completion of entries in the PIEREconomic Summary, see the instructions for the FSREconomic Analysis Worksheet (SAMState Administrative Manual 4929.1 through 4929.2) and the Economic Analysis Summary (SAMState Administrative Manual 4929.3).

    • Significant deviations from the anticipated costs shall be explained in the narrative portion of this section.

    • Attachment 2 Project Management Schedule Report. Arevised Project Management Schedule (see SAMState Administrative Manual 4928.4) showing targeted and actual completion dates for major accomplishments during the project shall be provided, with significant deviations from the original schedule explained in the narrative.

    • Projected Operations/Maintenance Costs Section. The Summary of Projected Operations/Maintenance Costs documents anticipated costs of systems operation and maintenance by fiscal year over the expected operational life of the application or system. These costs shall begin where the costs contained in the PIERPost Implementation Evaluation Report Economic Summary ended. For detailed information on completion of the specific line items in the Summary of Projected Operations/Maintenance Costs, see the instructions for continuing costs found on lines 9-16 of the FSRFeasibility Study Reports Economic Analysis Worksheet contained in SAMState Administrative Manual 4929.1 through 4929.2.

    • Special Observations Section. This section is optional. If completed, it should contain a narrative of any notable occurrences or factors that contributed to the project’s success, or problems or other information that could be helpful during future project efforts.

    • Corrective Actions Section. This section shall be included when the project is deemed to be a limited success or a failure, or when there are significant differences between project expectations (as expressed in the FSRFeasibility Study Reports) and project results.

      • If the project was a limited success or involved significant differences between expectations and results, alternatives for improving the outcome shall be summarized. If the project was a failure, available alternatives for addressing the problem or opportunity shall be summarized.