7100-237 Document Management System (DMS)

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.

Project Details

IPOR Reporting Period	Overall IPOR Rating
04/01/2026 - 04/30/2026	Yellow

Independent Project Oversight Dashboard

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?No

Is the project on track to achieve the objectives within the approved budget?No

Project Overall Health

Comments

Yellow

During the April 2026 reporting period the overall project health did not change. The areas of governance, resourcing, risk management, and transition management are performing satisfactorily. However, the overall project status is Yellow for the following reasons: 1) Insufficient QA and review processes across multiple testing areas may result in an increased number of defects entering production which could impact system stability and the programs ability to meet Service Level Agreements (SLA). 2) The new Tax and Remittance Release 4 has not yet been incorporated into the project schedule. As a result, a comprehensive impact analysis cannot be performed to assess the impact on downstream milestones, resource allocations, and overall project delivery timelines. 3) The lack of itemized cost detail in WA#4 limits the project team’s ability to independently validate the reasonableness and accuracy of individual work item costs reducing the level of financial transparency needed for informed decision making.

Focus Area/Rating	Comments
Governance Green	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 Yellow	o Project team needs to add Release 4 Tax “Part 2” to the project schedule and conduct a schedule analysis to determine the impact on downstream milestones. 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 Yellow	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 Grouping multiple contract-backed cost items into a single cost line in the monthly Project Status Report’s Costing Table makes it difficult to conduct a spend vs budget variance analysis for each cost item to identify overspending. o Project budget and project spend are misaligned – elapsed project time to date is 65%, yet spend to date is only 39%.
Scope Management Yellow	o WA#4 lacks individual work item level cost transparency needed to support CR#4 approval. The IPO Manager recommended an independent analysis to validate cost. o Concerns remain regarding the individual work items and the request for nearly $1 million in additional funding for migrating a reduced subset of forms and documents. o In the schedule, the CR#6 dates need to be finalized so there is clarity in how the timing of CR#4 and CR#6 will align with the timing of the related SPR.
Resources Green	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 April 2026, the Project Team resource balanced the schedule and confirmed results during the weekly schedule review meetings.
Quality Yellow	o An independent IPO review of DMS test execution activities across Data Migration, Production M&O Releases, and Sprints 18–21 identified significant QA and testing concerns. o The IPO Manager has recommended strengthening SI, DMS, and IV&V processes, mandatory peer reviews and documented approvals. o There are sixteen (16) 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.
Risk And Issues Green	o The project team appears to be following the processes outlined in the Risk and Issue Management plan.
Transition Readiness Green	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 was created in April 2026.
Conditions For Approval Green	All conditions for PAL Stage Gate approvals have been met.
Corrective Action Green	Comments about Corrective Action Plan Items • N/A

20250626 Release-16