The EDD has analyzed a variety of existing software solutions used for its existing imaging, data capture, electronic file submissions, document storage, and retrieval services infrastructure. The proposed vendor solutions must provide the capability to develop processes that are streamlined, scalable, and flexible for variable workloads. The solution features should support the deployment of new configurable, scalable, and robust software for imaging paper and electronic submissions as well as efficiently process defined business workflows. The DMS project will provide foundational capabilities necessary to support EDD modernization and GovOps Strike team recommendations.
| Agency / State Entity | Labor and Workforce Development / Employment Development Department |
|---|---|
| Total Cost | $106,171,267 |
| Last Approved Start Date | 06/17/2024 |
| Last Approved Finish Date | 06/30/2027 |
| Criticality Rating | Medium |
| IPOR Reporting Period | Overall IPOR Rating |
|---|---|
| 02/01/2026 - 02/28/2026 |
Key Questions
Is the project on track to satisfy the customer's business objectives?Yes
Is the project on track to achieve the objectives in the approved timeframe?Uncertain
Is the project on track to achieve the objectives within the approved budget?No
| Project Overall Health | Comments |
|---|---|
| The Release 2 Disability Insurance went live on February 26, 2026. However, the overall project status is yellow for the following reasons: o The Release 3 (Tax) Go-Live date is at risk due to lightly loaded initial sprints and the initial sprints focused on many items other than Tax. o The result from the extended Tax discovery period is unknown. If the Tax scope significantly increases then this will also contribute to the Release 3 (Tax) Go-Live risk. o When faced with schedule uncertainty, the schedule should be regularly analyzed using best case, worst case, and most likely case forecasts. o The project schedule should have a clearly defined and validated critical path. o Several cost categories are currently exceeding budget while the project completion date is still a year away. o State staff should perform a comprehensive review of all (DI) Data Migration test scripts and include the functional Program Team in data migration testing earlier in the schedule before User Acceptance Testing. |
| Focus Area/Rating | Comments |
|---|---|
| Governance |
o The DMS project team appears to be following the authority levels and decision-making processes as outlined in the EDDNext Governance Management Plan. |
| Time Management |
The following observations may require additional Release 3 (Tax) sprints which could impact the project schedule and cost: o The initial three (3) Sprints that define work in Release 3 (Tax) had a lower workload relative to the historical averages for Releases 1 and 2. o The initial three (3) sprints in Release 3 (Tax) focused on many work activities unrelated to the Tax program. o The findings from the extended Tax discovery period may significantly increase the scope of work in Release 3 (Tax). Other contributors to the Focus Area rating: o The Project Team should conduct frequent schedule simulations, leveraging best-case, worst-case, and most-likely forecasts when schedule uncertainty exists. o The Project Schedule was analyzed using an industry-standard assessment tool and found to have several deficiencies, including dangling starts or finishes, excessive lags, high slack, and overuse of relationship types, which impact the integrity of the schedule. o The industry standard assessment tool includes two (2) critical path tests. The project team should ensure the schedule passes both tests to maintain schedule integrity and consistent milestone forecasting. |
| Cost & Contract Management |
o The Project Team should reconcile the funding for Project Management, Project Executive, Project Advisor, Data Governance, Technology Transition Support, and IV&V services since the actual expenditure has exceeded the budgeted amount and is expected to continue increasing during the project. o The DMS project is underspending, partly due to the Release 1 Software Package for Unemployment Insurance not yet included in the monthly Project Status Report (PSR). o The QA/QC Contract should be leveraged to add state testing resources to support testing during sprints. |
| Scope Management |
o CR#3 which a) extended the Tax discovery period, b) added several new and updated UI and DI forms, and c) moved the PFL rollout from Release 2 to Release 3, required a SI contract amendment which was executed on February 27, 2026. o The scope of CR#4 is unknown as of the end of February 2026. If the Tax scope increases significantly, additional development and testing time will be necessary, which would impact the Release 3 Go-Live date and increase project cost. In addition, CR#4 is expected to trigger a Special Project Report (SPR). |
| Resources |
o Due to the increased level of parallel execution between the Releases, the Project Team should conduct a resource leveling analysis to ensure that a) availability of both state and vendor resources align with planned activities, and b) resources are not overallocated. o During February 2026, the Project Team begun resource balancing the schedule, and should now include a review of resource usage during periodic schedule reviews. |
| Quality |
o There are nineteen (19) open defects with workarounds carried forward from Release 1. The impact on the business is a reduction in efficiency as workarounds take longer to complete than a best practice flow. o The DMS Project State staff should perform a comprehensive review of all forward-looking Release 2 (DI) Data Migration test scripts. o The Project Team should include the functional Program Team in data migration testing earlier in the schedule before User Acceptance Testing. o The State’s DMS technical team is conducting Release 2 record count validation between the legacy system and the new system. |
| Risk And Issues |
o The project team appears to be following the processes outlined in the Risk and Issue Management plan. |
| Transition Readiness |
o The Project Team should prioritize prerequisite technical training to increase the effectiveness of the Knowledge Transfer (KT) sessions to ensure the State can maintain the new system once the SI vendor leaves the project. o The Data Cap (document capture) sandbox was created in February 2026, and the FileNet (document processing) sandbox will be created by the end of March 2026. |
| Conditions For Approval |
All conditions for PAL Stage Gate approvals have been met. |
| Corrective Action |
Comments about Corrective Action Plan Items • N/A |
20250626 Release-16