State of Washington Administrative Office of the Courts

State of Washington Administrative Office of the Courts

State of Washington Administrative Office of the Courts Review and Validation of the Statewide Judicial Information System (JIS) Strategy JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement: 221051040 September 30, 2005 Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 1 Agenda Introductions Purpose and Background Gartner Methodology JIS Business Case and Current Approach JIS Migration Risk and Readiness Assessment (Bottoms Up) JIS Strategy Assessment (Top Down) JIS Migration Alternatives Analysis Recommended Roadmap

Next Steps Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 2 Purpose The purpose of this presentation is to: Review and solicit feedback on Gartners initial findings regarding the State of Washingtons Judicial Information System (JIS) Strategy. Discuss the Business Case. Present and flesh out Strategy and Execution Alternatives. Vet Recommendations and Roadmap. Agree on Next Steps. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 3 Background

The Judicial Information System (JIS) is a statewide information system. JIS was formed in 1976 upon recommendation by a task force comprised of Supreme Court justices, trial court judges and legislators. JIS supports automation in juvenile, municipal, district, superior, and appellate courts and over 10,000 users access data in the JIS, including judges, court staff, attorneys, law enforcement, and private sector businesses. Governance of the JIS is delegated to the JIS Committee (JISC). The JISC developed a JIS Migration Plan to: Guide the transition from the current legacy systems to an integrated, service oriented system that will deliver intuitive tools for performing court functions to increase access to data across all court levels and improve court processes and business practices. Specify the priority in which systems will be replaced. Provide the basis for project plans, schedules and budgets over the three biennia from FY2002 through FY2007. The project is faced with questions and issues similar to many large IT projects, including scope, schedule and budget concerns. The AOC has, therefore, decided to conduct a review of its overall strategy for JIS and current capabilities to implement the JIS Migration Plan. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts.

2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 4 Gartner Engagement Objectives We are focusing on the four key objectives for this engagement: 1. Business Case Validation validate and update the business case for the JIS and provide a strategy for validating overall requirements for the entire court system. 2. Current Capability Validation complete a comprehensive review of JIS resources in order to determine capabilities and readiness. 3. Plan Validation validate planning assumptions through an assessment of the project scope, governance model, communications plan and budget and make recommendations for improvement. 4. Review of other States Applications assist the AOC in planning visits to other states that have undertaken or are currently completing a development cycle similar to JIS. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 5 Gartner Methodology Aug 22 Sep 30 Oct 31 Assess Project Mgt Plans and Deliverables 4

Review JIS Replacement Strategy 4 1 1 Project Planning & Initiation Document Business Case & Strategy 2 2 Review Current/Target Environment Best Practices & Technology Trends 3 3 Conduct Risk & Readiness Assessment 6 6 5 Validate Business Case & Strategy 7 7 8 Final Report and Presentation

8 Assess Proposed Technology Gartners Project Assessment methodology encompasses a multistep process that identifies both the business and technical issues, and supporting mitigation strategies that must be addressed to successfully implement the project objectives of the State. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 6 Assessment Approach Bottoms-Up and Top-Down Assessments Gartners methodology includes five levels of review: Court Interviews Executive Interviews AOC Staff Interviews Work Product Reviews Focus Group and Workshop Activities Top-Down Assessment Scope and Scale of State of Washington Courts Environment

Set the Stage Business Case The Why Problems and Opportunities Business Requirements The What (Business Requirements) The solution must: 1. ... 2. ... The What (Technology) Legacy Systems Data Exchange Define Solution Architecture JIS Local Systems External Systems Data Warehouse The How (Approach) Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Acquire Best-of-Breed and Integrate Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed Solution Alternatives Bottoms-Up Assessment Key areas of our Bottoms-up Assessment Washington Administrative Office of the Courts

JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 Project Integration Project Scope Project Time Project Cost Project Quality Project Human Resources Project Communication Project Risk Project Procurement For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 7 Project Team Engagement Manager Richard Flowerree Quality Review Brett Rugroden Project Manager Rosy Spraker Project Consultant Barry Goldberg Project Consultant Magnus Karlsson Subject Matter Experts (as required) Engagement Manager/Project Executive. Provides executive leadership and direction to the project team, including the

framework for project approach and deliverables. Has responsibility for success of the Gartner engagement, including review of deliverables. Coordinates with the clients project executive sponsor(s). Project Manager. Responsible for daytoday project operations, ensuring timely completion of work plan tasks and deliverables with the highest quality. Ensures that the appropriate Gartner resources are utilized in the most effective manner to meet client needs and commitments. Coordinates with the clients project manager or coordinator. Quality Reviewer. Ensures overall quality of deliverables and client satisfaction. Conducts internal review of key client deliverables with Gartner project team prior to delivery to client. Project Consultant. Works closely with client to complete work plan tasks and highquality deliverables. Conducts data collection and analysis, and assists in development of deliverables. Subject Matter Expert. Provides depth and breadth of expertise in specific areas to support the development of client deliverables. As appropriate, assists in facilitating client workshops to build consensus around specific strategy areas. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 8 JIS Business Case and Current Approach x Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 9 Compelling Business Cases Give Decision Makers All the Information They Need A business case provides a credible analysis that supports the decision to

proceed with or continue an initiative. Contains explicit linkages with program objectives/strategies. Requires stakeholder agreement, support and commitment. Business Case Table of Contents Executive summary Documents problems and opportunities that are to be addressed. Introduction and background Problem/opportunity definition Recommended solution/alternatives Benefit estimates/assumptions Cost estimates/assumptions Risk factors/mitigation Financial analyses Implementation approach/timeline

Includes measurable project objectives that are translated into program impacts. Assists in project prioritization and investment decisions. Guides project execution. Provides a framework by which project success and benefits delivered can be determined. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 10 Business Case Linkages Traceable Through the Solution The business case is driven by specific problems and opportunities experienced by Washington courts (Why). Business requirements must be supported by the

business case and represent What must be accomplished. The solution architecture must provide the technology components that meet business requirements. The solution alternatives provides a strategy for How the business needs will be met. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 Set the Stage Scope and Scale of State of Washington Courts Environment Business Case The Why Problems and Opportunities Business Requirements The What (Business Requirements) The solution must: 1. ... 2. ... The What (Technology) Legacy Systems Data Exchange Define Solution Architecture JIS Local Systems Solution Alternatives

External Systems Data Warehouse The How (Approach) Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Acquire Best-of-Breed and Integrate Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 11 Setting the Stage Court Environment Scope, Scale and Complexity Different courts have different processing emphasis, requirements and complexity. All courts emphasize case efficiency based on the heavy caseload. All courts have specific Legislature requirements for data confidentiality. There are different resource levels and system dependencies depending on district size within each court level. Courts in the three biggest counties have more resources and job specialization. Throughput efficiency and performance are critical for case processing in the large counties. Some large counties (King, Pierce) have departmental applications and IT staff. Resource and computing capacity are severely constrained in the smaller counties. Some may not even have computers. Participation in the JIS application can vary by court and county.

Customers can be broken down as follows: Tier I Full service Tier II A la carte Tier III Data exchange only (i.e., currently Seattle Municipal Court (SMC)) Pierce County and SMC* have their own systems and are not dependent on AOC for support. * Note that SMC and AOC are currently jointly planning how SMC can become part of JIS. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 12 Business Case Findings A business case was not originally articulated prior to the execution of the JIS Migration Project: The objective of the JIS Migration Project, as articulated in the JIS Strategic Plan and Migration Plan, was to support the efficient and effective operation of the Washington State courts through a strategic, enterprise-wide court information system No explicit linkages were defined between the business case and the value of specific business benefits to be achieved through each of the solution components (e.g., case management, calendaring, e-Citation, public e-Access, data exchange). No budgets were created for specific solution components (projects) that could be validated against business benefits to be achieved.

The business value of resolving problems and achieving opportunities was established by the JISC through the approval to proceed with the project. However, the process by which budgetary figures were derived appears to be the result of an evolutionary approach and likely does not truly reflect the value of the business benefits to be realized. No feasibility analysis was conducted to determine the practicality of achieving the JIS vision. This analysis would have included: Identification of business requirements and common needs among the courts. Validation of court support for change. Assessment of the availability and maturity of technology alternatives, etc. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 13 Business Case Findings (cont) Gartner reconstructed the business case based on business and project artifacts, interviews, and workshops: Gartner believes that the original business problems/opportunities that resulted in the decision to commence the JIS Migration Project remain high priority issues within the courts. The JIS Migration Project, as envisioned and scoped, would deliver significant business benefits if realized.

AOC has developed many of the infrastructure components and capabilities to host court technologies (i.e., high availability infrastructure and hosting capabilities). In Gartners opinion, the objectives of the JIS Migration Project, as scoped, are far too large to be realistic, measurable or achievable. Significant gaps in the business case remain since the value of specific business benefits to the courts are not known and the costs of the current approach are incalculable. Serious questions about the business value of the JIS Migration Project to the various courts and stakeholders remain. Business benefits have been described in terms of technology benefits (i.e., difficulty in maintaining legacy systems, platform independence, etc.). Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 14 Business Case Findings (cont) AOC clearly recognizes that both process change and execution capabilities must be addressed in order to deliver business benefits to the courts: Gartner concurs with the recommended changes that were discussed in the JIS Migration Tactical Plan, dated December 4, 2004. In particular: Definition of the decision criteria for initiation of JIS projects. Classification methods for new proposed work and the process by which JISAC approves plans. Focus on required, mission-critical projects.

Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 15 Business Case Findings (cont) The business problems defined for the JIS Migration Project have been defined in technology terms and did not adequately recognize court prerogatives. The Problem: Most courts perceive themselves to have procedures that are sufficiently unique that they necessitate unique automation needs. The various court applications were built on this premise and so now Washington has five systems, one for each jurisdiction. As the jurisdictions requested expanded capabilities and more integration with other court levels, the changes to five systems became unmanageable. The time required to complete this costly undertaking postpones the implementation date of new systems by several years. By this time, the technological state-of-the-art has advanced beyond the architecture of the courts system, and soon the procurement cycle must begin again. Some jurisdictions could not wait for the state system and began to either develop an entirely new application or had a vendor tailor its standard product to the courts requirements. AOC needed an efficient development and delivery schedule as well as fewer applications. This Affects: All court levels in the State of Washington and any agency that is supported by reports (automated or manual) and data exchanges. The Impact of Which Is: If features are not delivered to our clients, they will purchase applications to meet local needs and JIS will become a data warehouse as opposed to an information system. A Successful Solution Would: Produce features that would service our clients in a timely manner in an enterprise application. *As documented in the AOC Enterprise Application Architecture, Enterprise Application Vision Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation

Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 16 The Courts are Faced with a Number of Critical Issues The courts face three primary business problems: 1. Business needs within the various courts are not supported due to required functionality 2. Higher court workload and costs resulting from redundant data entry and manual inefficiencies 3. High cost and risk of ongoing maintenance and support of multiple, nonintegrated legacy applications The JIS Migration Project was Designed to Address Each Area Above. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 17 Limited Access to Information and Functionality 1. Business needs within the various courts are not supported due to required functionality The courts require enhanced or new functionality to continue to meet business requirements. Specific requirements vary by court but include: Case Management (All) Calendaring (All) Jury Management (Superior and Courts of Limited Jurisdiction (CLJ))

Probation (Juvenile and CLJ) Social Work (Juvenile Court) Statistic and Management Reporting (All) Process Universal Payments (Juvenile and CLJ) Store Electronic Documents (All) Data Exchange (All) Financial Management (All) Example: Changes to the Superior Court Management Information System (SCOMIS) are becoming a challenge as functional and data complexity increase beyond what the system was originally designed to handle. Many changes to the business rules of the system are required. Case management functionality is weak as the system only tracks one disposition per case and more are needed for Juvenile cases. The system also has limited calendaring / scheduling functionality and does not have receipting or imaging functionality. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 18 Redundant Data Entry 2. Higher court workload and costs resulting from redundant data entry and manual inefficiencies The ability to exchange data electronically (in real time where needed) will enhance court operations and reduce costs by: Reducing or eliminating the double (and sometimes triple) data entry required today. Improving data quality that would improve efficiency and reduce errors. Sharing data among courts to enable better decisions and improve sentencing.

Sharing data with other state and federal agencies, which is required and could help obtain federal funding. Enhanced data sharing will allow the State to streamline processes that are both people, paper and time intensive, resulting in more efficient operations as well as the potential for addition revenue for the State. Example: The ability to issue and process electronic tickets will save the courts and the State significant time and resources by reducing the current process of transcribing paper tickets into the system. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 19 High Cost and Risk of Ongoing Maintenance and Support 3. High cost and risk of ongoing maintenance and support of multiple, nonintegrated legacy applications Maintainability is becoming a challenge as case load, public access, and functional and data complexity increase beyond what the system was originally designed to handle. Several systems operate using outdated technology platforms. COBOL and Natural are both legacy development environments that are antiquated and need to be retired. Maintenance will become a bigger challenge resulting from retirement of experienced legacy support staff. It is difficult to attract or retain qualified IT staff with needed skills in outdated technologies. A number of critical resources are (or will soon be) able to retire.

AOC does not have a fully fleshed-out solution architecture or set of design standards for systems development resulting in a variety of system configurations and applied technologies, all of which make support for the current as well as future systems less than efficient. Example: The District and Municipal Court Information System (DISCIS)/JIS is a mainframe application that is COBOL, CICS and Natural based. With the imminent retirement of support staff, adequate support and maintenance will be at risk. Higher costs will be incurred to find replacement staff who will not have the AOCspecific business knowledge to meet current support levels. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 20 The Courts Can Realize Significant Future Benefits AOC has the opportunity to: 1. Provide the technology infrastructure to accommodate future business change and improvement a) Establish standards for data sharing and integration b) Enable common services that will future system consolidation 2. Improve public safety services through the identification of indicators and trends in criminal behavior (business intelligence) 3. Improved access to justice for the people of Washington a) Improved access to case information for judges b) Increased transparency and access to court information by people

The JIS Migration Project was Designed to Address Each Area Above. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 21 Provide the Infrastructure for Future Change 1. Provide the technology infrastructure to accommodate future business change and improvement AOC does not have a clear understanding of the specific functionality to be delivered to the various courts in terms of the overall JIS project. AOC has the opportunity to establish the infrastructure and strategic technology direction of Washington courts now and into the future. A fully fleshed-out solution architecture direction and definition would enable AOC to quickly assess specific technologies to support development and operational activities, required staffing and skills (including vendor support), and overall project budget and schedule impacts. Focus on integration and data architecture would provide both immediate and long-term benefits to the courts. The deployment, operations and maintenance of the infrastructure components necessary to host business applications and technologies would provide the courts with a professional and secure backbone upon which to build future capabilities. For example, common web services could be developed and built on common architecture standards and hosted on a common infrastructure. Example: The establishment of data standards would initially enable data sharing and integration, and eventually facilitate the consolidation of applications and systems of various courts if needed. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 22 Improve Public Safety Services to Citizens 2. Improve public safety services through the identification of indicators and trends in

criminal behavior (business intelligence) Availability of data combined with the use of business intelligence tools can enable courts to establish meaningful relationships and patterns that would not be readily apparent otherwise. For example, deep data mining and analysis can provide courts and local law enforcement with indicators and trends in criminal behavior at the case level and in aggregate. This information may provide the basis for changes in policies, enforcement and judgments that improve the delivery of public safety services. Example: Global access to standard, canned management reports would enable trend analysis and planning, which would result in better management decisions and improved efficiency and effectiveness. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 23 Improved Access to Justice 3. Improved access to justice for the people of Washington Improved access to case information for judges will: Provide judges with enhanced access to complete case files and histories. Expand information provided to judges (e.g., such as social, risk assessment). Increased transparency and access to court information by people will: Enhance oversight and accountability of the courts. Provide convenient access to the courts by the public (e.g., court calendars, juror reporting information). Example: Prospective jurors would have access to information on court calendars, reporting requirements and responsibilities. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040

September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 24 Measurable Business Objectives Examples Business Problem Measurable Objective Examples 1. Business needs within the various courts are not supported due to required functionality Provide critical information / data on demand in real-time. Provide needed management reports and operational statistics to help management and enhance court processes and functions. 2. Higher court workload and costs resulting from redundant data entry and manual inefficiencies Redirect X person-years (PY) to other functions as a result of streamlined processes and elimination of redundant efforts related to disconnected current systems. Increase timeliness of information by Y. Increase accuracy of data by X%. Ability to process electronic citations reducing processing times by X and costs by Y while colleting additional revenue Z.

Redirect X PY to other functions as a result of streamlined processes and elimination of redundant efforts related to disconnected current systems. Enhance customer satisfaction (to courts) by X% through more timely response to system functionality changes and enhancements. Eliminate X% of duplicate data sources. Prevent infrastructure costs increases by X%. 3. High cost and risk of ongoing maintenance and support of multiple, nonintegrated legacy applications Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 25 Business Case Findings (cont) The business problems/opportunities and measurable business objectives provide the business case foundation for financial and business benefit justifications of future JIS Projects. Gartner believes that the scope of the current JIS Migration Project is too large to financially justify and should be decomposed on an initiative by initiative basis (e.g., case management, calendaring, e-Citation, public e-Access, data exchange). JIS Migration Plan, as articulated, represents a strategy or vision, not an achievable project.

Each discrete project requires a separate budget, business requirements and financial justification. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 26 JIS Migration Project x Overview and Scope Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 27 Legacy Systems Overview The legacy applications targeting specific court levels were originally developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The applications included: SCOMIS (Superior Court Management Information System). JUVIS (Juvenile Information System) currently being transitioned to JCS. ACORDS (Appellate Court Records & Data System) has been replaced by a Web-based application. DISCIS (District and Municipal Court Information System) for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction. The four separate applications were all:

Mainframe applications. Written in COBOL, Natural Language. Originally designed using VSAM, ADABAS and eventually migrated to DB2. In addition to the four main applications, there are supplemental applications, for example: JRS (Judicial Receipting System), JABS (for Judges), Data Warehouse and Reporting. There are also significant number of local applications in use by the large courts. The legacy applications are maintained by the Legacy Maintenance group within the Information Services Division (ISD). Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 28 Legacy Systems Overview (cont) The Production Environment provides reasonable support for the legacy applications: The applications run on stable, scalable and proven mainframe technology. The applications generally provide less than 0.5 second average response time. Performance is maintained during peak hours from 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM (with an average of 13,000 transactions per hour).

The application supports a large number of transactions. While the legacy environment may be stable, ongoing maintenance of the legacy application is a concern: Maintainability is becoming a challenge as case load, public access, and functional and data complexity increase beyond what the system was originally designed to handle. It is getting increasingly difficult to recruit support for the dated technology. Maintenance will become a bigger challenge from retirement of experienced legacy support staff. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 29 JIS Migration The JIS Migration Project was defined in a plan authorized in 2000. Its main objectives include: Vertical, cross-jurisdiction integration of the court levels by common applications. Deployment of web-based technology, enhancing ease-of-use with friendly user-interfaces. Data Integration from application consolidation aimed at improving data quality and timeliness and reducing excessive data entry. The current JIS migration plan focuses on two major activities: Phase I Redesign/enhance and Re-host the functionality provided to the courts via the current suite of applications onto a contemporary platform with a set of core functionality for use by all courts while providing the ability to offer court-specific solutions where needed. This activity would also include the redesign and enhancement of the current DB2 database

to provide scalability to meet current and future business needs and to allow for increased data transparency and interchange between the courts and other State agencies. Phase II Following the implementation of the initial phase above, provide enhanced functionality that is currently not offered today to meet the ongoing needs of the courts. This would include functionality that supports Jury Management, Social Work, Data Exchange, Financial Management, Storing of Electronic Records, etc. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 30 JIS Migration Project Overview Since the migration project initiation in 2000, a number of projects have been implemented. The following applications were completed: ACORDS (Appellate Court Records & Data System) Rollout is complete. End-users are generally satisfied with the functionality; however, the system suffers from slow system performance. CAPS (Court Automated Proceeding System) was rolled out only to one court location. The perception is that the implemented functionality was not user-friendly and was timeconsuming to use. JCS (Juvenile & Corrections System) Production rollout is in progress. End-users are satisfied. Rollout to all juvenile courts is expected by April, 2006. Additionally, other completed initiatives include: Individual data exchanges between systems have been implemented. Significant infrastructure work has been completed. The current JIS architecture has been defined at the strategic level, but requires follow-through to fully flesh it out.

Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 31 JIS Migration Scope and Requirements KEY: Phase I and II Activities The following three slides summarize the analysis of court functionality and plans for JIS Migration: Functionality Courts Phase I Phase II Exceptions KEY: Phase II Major New Functionality Courts = Required Functions Based on group consensus during the Gartner Focus Group Session on 8 Sep 2005 Green = Required by all courts Yellow = Required by some courts Based on AOC Analyst Phase I Re-host/Enhance Current Functionality Based on group consensus during the Gartner Focus Group Session on 8 Sep 2005 Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 32

JIS Migration Scope and Requirements Phase I and II Activities Functionality Case/Event Functionality Case Courts Phase I Phase II Exceptions Case Processing Case Record Keeping and Management Case Initiation & Indexing Initiate Case Track Case Manage Case Assignment Case History Document / Notice Generation Send Notices Records Management Store Electronic Document Functionality Event Calendar Management Scheduling Courtroom Support Manage Resources Docketing of Event Processing Hearings Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 33 JIS Migration Scope and Requirements Phase I and II Activities (cont) Functionality Person Identify Person Manage Probation Case Monitoring & Enforcement Detention Social Work Courts

Phase I Phase II Exceptions Only Juvenile, CLJ Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Only Juvenile Courts Only Juvenile Courts Functionality Outcome Jury Management Manage Legal Decisions Support Judicial Decision Making Adjudication Disposition Case Close Take Court Minutes Execution Manage J&S Process DV Order Process Warrant Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 Only Superior, CLJ Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals; 2005 plan to significantly enhance Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 34 JIS Migration Scope Phase I and II Activities (cont) Functionality Financial Financial Management Collect Obligations Process Universal Payment Courts Phase I Phase II

Exceptions Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals Functionality Other Statistical & Management Reporting Provide E-Access to Public Data Exchange / Integration Manage Charges / Law Table Except Supreme Court, Court of Appeals System Security Plan to add single sign on (SSO) Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 35 AOC IT Execution Strategy Layered Project Governance JISC - stakeholder oversight AOC - executive oversight Project management oversight Software Development Approach Build using in-house resources supported by contractor subject matter experts Historical early adoption of new technology using big-bang approach

Current Agile development: Phased delivery of functionality Prototype solutions try before you buy Services and Infrastructure In-house hosting Full service available, but not mandatory Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 36 AOC IT Execution Strategy (cont) Technical Approach A single, integrated system providing 80% of the required core functionality with the ability to be easily customized to meet specific court business needs. Service Oriented Architecture Web-based application suite Externalize business rules A single enterprise database accessible by all applications to foster data transparency

and data exchange. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 37 AOC IT Execution Strategy (cont) JIS Migration Initiatives Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 38 AOC IT Execution Strategy (cont) Transition Plan Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 39 JIS Migration Project x Risk and Readiness Assessment (Bottoms Up) Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland.

All Rights Reserved. Page 40 JIS Migration Project Risk and Implementation Readiness Assessment The assessment encompasses an independent review and assessment of the risks associated with the development and deployment of the JIS Migration Project around following areas: Business Benefit, Budget and Schedule Risk, Operational Risk, Organizational Risk and External Risk. It further identifies and suggests mitigation strategies as well as provides recommendations to ensure that the project will meet schedule, scope, and budget requirements. Readiness and Risk Assessment Business Benefit Budget and Schedule Risk Operational Risk Organizational Risk External Risk Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 41 Project Risk and Implementation Readiness Assessment Assessment Methodology Rating Gartners risk and implementation assessment rating is based upon Project Management Institutes (PMI) standards. To highlight potential risks to the project for each project management knowledge area, Gartner uses a red light/yellow light/green light/blue light reporting strategy as documented below: Blue Light (Exceeding Project Schedule and Quality Standards): The approach exceeds Best Practices project standards. The approach has enhanced system delivery success. Green Light (Acceptable to Excellent, i.e., Low Risk): The approach meets or exceeds solid project management and systems development standards. To receive this ranking, the approach must present no significant risks to the project.

Yellow Light Light (Caution, i.e., Medium Risk): The approach is not clearly defined, and/or presents a risk to the project. Recommendations for risk areas assigned this rating are important to ensure optimal project operation. Red Light (Risk Alert, i.e., High Risk): The approach presents serious risks to the project and requires immediate attention. Recommendations for risk areas assigned this rating are essential for mitigating project risk. Recommendations Gartners recommendations for improvement and risk mitigation. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 42 Approach Risk and Implementation Readiness Assessment Focus Areas Project Assessent Foucs Areas Gartner Assessment Categories 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Benefits Specification Benefits Measure Project Scope Management Ongoing Support Planning Ongoing Cost Management Gap Management Project Oversight and Support Complexity Control Project Planning Vendor Management Project Management Project Resource Management Budget Management Requirements Definition and Development Customization Conversion Planning Conversion Execution Systems Integration Testing Systems Performance Testing User Testing Contingency Planning On-going IT Operations Support On-going Vendor Support Organizational Change User Involvement External Stakeholders Training Due Diligence Risk Management Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 JIS Migration Project Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 29 29Areas Areaswere wereAssessed Assessed and andEvaluated Evaluatedagainst against Industry IndustryBest BestPractices Practices For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 43 Implementation Readiness and Risk Assessment Interviews Conducted Technology and Delivery Focus Area Interviews (AOC Staff): Janet McLane AOC Administrator

Jeff Hall Executive Director, Board for Judicial Administration Richard Duchaine Director, Information Systems Division Manny Najarro Applications Department Manager, JIS Applications Gary Sutton Project Manager, Release Management Clifford Lee Project Manager, Release Management Teri Nielsen Business Analyst, Release Management Randy McKown Project Manager, Release Management Mark Oldenburg Business Analyst, Release Management Keri Thompson Business Analyst, Release Management Dirk Marier Business Analyst, Release Management Dennis Longnecker Manager, Infrastructure/Server Group Celeste Maris Project Manager, Legacy Maintenance

Charlene Stevenson Project Manager, JCS Project Beth Taylor Business Analyst, JCS Project Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 44 Implementation Readiness and Risk Assessment Interviews Conducted (cont) Technology and Delivery Focus Area Interviews (cont): Dan Sawka Development Manager, Development Ramsey Radwan Director, Management Services Division Dale Soost Project Manager, Legacy Maintenance Eric Kruger Project Manager, JCS Project Mike Rohrbach Lead Developer, Development Ann Dillon User Interface Designer, Development Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland.

All Rights Reserved. Page 45 Implementation Readiness and Risk Assessment Interviews Conducted (cont) Court Focused Interviews: Siri Woods County Clerk, Chelan County Superior Court Rena Hollis County Clerk, Skamania County Superior Court N.F. Jackson Family Commissioner/Administrator/Clerk, Whatcom County Superior Court Judge C. Kenneth Grosse Appellate Courts Justice Bobbe J. Bridge Supreme Court Barb Miner Director and Superior Court Clerk, King County Superior Court Cathy Grindle Director of Court Technology, King County District Court Judge Elaine Houghton Court of Appeals, Div. II Judge Clifford "Kip" Stilz Thurston County District Court, Courts of Limited Jurisdiction Bruce Eklund Juvenile Court Administrator, Snohomish County Juvenile Court Judge Michael Trickey King County Superior Court

Judge Thomas J. Wynne Snohomish County Superior Court Dave Ponzoha Court Clerk / Administrator, Court of Appeals, Div. II Bill Holmes Juvenile Court Administrator, Kittitas County Superior Court Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 46 Implementation Readiness and Risk Assessment Documentation Reviewed JIS Strategic Plan JIS Migration Plan Policy Edition JIS Application Vision and Features JIS Migration Project Management Methodology JIS Migration Project Strategy Overview JIS Migration Tactical Plan

JIS Migration, The Road Ahead JIS Organizational Assessment JIS Architecture Assessment JIS Requirements JIS Software Development Lifecycle JISC Retreat, Final Handout Data Exchange Development Plan AOC Build Standards AOC Development Test Best Practices AOC Offsite Vendor Requirements AOC Coding Standards User Interface (UI) Standards plus others Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005

For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 47 Overall Risk and Readiness Assessment Findings Overall the Project is Rated RED High Risk. Rationale for the rating includes: There is no clear vision (charter), case for action or project plan in place (and signed off by key stakeholders) that defines the business benefits (in terms of the functionality to be delivered to the specific court levels, the technology improvements to be gained or the metrics by which to measure the systems success to be achieved through business functionality delivered or process improvement to be provided) by the JIS Migration Project. AOC does not have a fully fleshed-out architecture for the proposed JIS system, making it difficult to assess overall system complexity, resource requirements (for development as well as ongoing support), project schedule impacts (development and implementation), as well as overall budget requirements. AOC project management and software development processes and methodologies (although improving in some areas) are not mature and lack the depth needed to ensure the success of such a complex undertaking as the new JIS. Requirements capture, assessment, management and tracking processes need to be improved significantly. Testing and systems requirements validation processes need to be improved. Staff training and awareness of key software development and testing tools to be used on the project is lacking. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland.

All Rights Reserved. Page 48 Overall Risk and Readiness Assessment Findings (cont) Rationale for the rating (cont): Overall project governance needs to be strengthened at all levels. The JISC is encouraged to be more proactive and a driving force around: Defining high-level business requirements. Establishing the value of business benefits expected. Prioritizing the functionality to be delivered to the various court levels (phasing). Requiring budget and tracking cost for the individual solution components. Requiring a linkage between business benefit value received and the cost for each solution component. In addition, the JISC needs to facilitate and drive consensus among the various courts, counties and agencies involved in the project. AOC management needs to take a more hands on role in regularly assessing project status, helping to address key issues, providing mentorship and clearly articulating the vision and progress the project is making. At the grass-roots level it is not clear what the new JIS encompasses either from a technology standpoint or business value to be delivered. The team lacks direction and focus. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts

JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 49 Overall Risk and Readiness Assessment Findings (cont) Rationale for the rating (cont): Critical resources needed for the project are either not available, or do not have the necessary experience and skill level required, including: Program Management System and Application Architect Database Architect Systems Security Architect The courts (due to business workload and resource constraints) are hard pressed to provide the needed resources to support the project, and this situation appears unlikely to change. The courts will need to provide support in a variety of critical areas on the project including: Requirements definition and review (system functionality, business value metrics, delivery priority, etc.). In process project reviews and the assessment of key deliverables. User Acceptance Testing.

Turn Over to Production Planning. Post Implementation Assessment and Support. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 50 Overall Risk and Readiness Assessment Ratings Overall the project is rated RED High Risk. There were 13 Red High Risk areas identified. There were 16 Yellow Medium Risk areas identified. There were no Green Low Risk areas identified. There were no areas Blue Exceeding Project Schedule and Quality Standards identified. JIS Migration Project Assessment Focus Area Summary Overall Project Business Benefit Risk Budget and Schedule Risk Operational Risk Organizational Risk Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 External Risk

For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 51 Readiness Assessment - Project Scorecard Areas of Potential Risk Implementation Risk Assessment Business Benefit Risk 1. Business Specification 2. Benefits Measurement 3. Value Management 4.Planning for Future Systems Operational Costs 5. Project Cost Management 6. Systems Performance Management 7.Project Prioritization 8.Complexitiy Management Budget & Schedule Risk 9. Estimation Quality 10. Contractual 11. Project Management 12. Project Resources 13. Budget Management 14. Scope Management High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk Comments There is no clear vision (charter), case for action or project plan in place (that has been signed off by key stakeholders) that defines the business benefits (in terms of the functionality to be delivered to the specific court levels, the technology improvem ents to be gained or the metrics by which to measure the system s success to be achieved through delivery) of the JIS Migration Project. AOC does not have a fully fleshed-out architecture for the proposed JIS system making it difficult to assess overall system com plexity, resource requirem ents (for development as well as ongoing support), project schedule impacts (development and im plementation), as

well as overall budget requirements. Critical resources needed for the project are either not available, or do not have the necessary experience and skill level required, including: - Program/Project Management - System and Application Architect - Database Architect - Systems Security Architect Exceeds Standards See Specific Findings for detailed findings and recommendations in each risk area Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 52 Readiness Assessment - Project Scorecard (cont) Areas of Potential Risk Implementation Risk Assessment Operational Risk 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Customization Conversion Planning Conversion Execution Integration Test Planning Performance Test Planning User Testing Contingency Planning IT Operations Support Vendor Support Planning Organizational and External Risk

Comments - AOC project management and software developm ent processes and methodologies (although improving in some areas) are not m ature and lack the depth for such a complex undertaking as the new JIS. - Requirem ents capture, assessment, management and tracking needs to be improved significantly. Requirem ents validation takes to long. - Testing and systems requirements validation needs to be improved. AOC does not test to requirements. - Staff training and awareness of key s oftware development and testing tools to be used on the project is lacking. NOTE THE YELLOW RATINGS FOR AREAS 10, 15-29 WILL MIGRATE TO RED UNLESS ADDRESSED IN THE NEAR TERM (I.E., IN THE NEXT 120 DAYS). 24. Organizational Change Management 25. User Involvement 26. External Stakeholders 27. Training 28. Due Diligence 29. Risk Management Process High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk Exceeds Standards See Specific Findings for detailed findings and recommendations in each risk area Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 53 JIS Migration Project x Risk and Readiness Assessment (Top-Down)

Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 54 Top-Down Assessment Linkages are Broken The business case was not explicitly defined prior to project execution. Requirements are not linked to specific business benefits. The scope of the JIS Migration Project is not sufficiently bounded to ensure delivery success. There is no fully fleshed out solution architecture that is linked to Business Requirements. Without sufficient linkages that are traceable back to strategy, the current execution approach results in chaos and overcommitment. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 Set the Stage

Scope and Scale of State of Washington Courts Environment Business Case The Why Problems and Opportunities Business Requirements The What (Business Requirements) The solution must: 1. ... 2. ... The What (Technology) Legacy Systems Data Exchange Define Solution Architecture JIS Local Systems Solution Alternatives External Systems Data Warehouse The How (Approach) Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Acquire Best-of-Breed and Integrate Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 55 Bottom Line There are unmet business needs within the court system. The business problems and opportunities that resulted in the original JIS Migration Project

represent real business needs. Some of the current initiatives and solutions would meet these defined needs if they could be executed successfully. However, no business case can be articulated for the entirety of the JIS Migration Plan, which is a strategy and is comprised of multiple IT initiatives that require separate and distinct justifications (e.g., case management, calendaring, e-Citation, public e-Access, data exchange). While AOC has made progress towards an enterprise JIS, Gartners assessment indicates that the program risk of failure is high. It is not clear if AOC will be able to deliver a finished project within the specified timeframes and within the budget. Issues associated with definition of scope, prioritization, and execution of those initiatives have introduced risk to project success and full benefit realization of the JIS Migration Project. The strategy of building an enterprise system is not consistent with similar initiatives other states. The need for a single enterprise solution to solve the problems of separate courts may not be feasible and would require a very strong governance, which is not present today. Gartner analyzed alternatives and developed a Recommended Roadmap that is designed to maximize benefits to the courts going forward. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 56 JIS Migration Projectx Alternatives Analysis Strategy and Execution Washington Administrative Office of the Courts

JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 57 Formulation of Alternatives A Process to Bridge Gaps and Reduce Risks In defining the alternatives, Gartner believes that AOC needs to focus its activities on Strategy first and then Execution: Strategy Alternatives Alternative I: Continue As Is But Improve Execution Alternative II: Reconsider Strategy and Approach Execution Alternatives Alternative A: Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Alternative B: Acquire Best-of-Breed Solutions and Integrate Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange*, Then Best-of-Breed *Note: The Data Exchange referenced in this alternative includes a broader scope than the existing JIS Data Exchange initiative. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 58

Strategy Alternative Analysis Alternative I: Continue As Is But Improve Execution Continue As Is But Improve Execution per Bottoms Up Assessment This alternative consists of the following key actions: Continue current in process applications development and enhancement activities. Enhance the current Governance and Project Oversight Processes: JISC (Consensus Building, Expectations Management, Executive Oversight) AOC (Project Assessment and Corrective Action Reviews, Delivery Assurance) Establish comprehensive processes and provide in-depth training in: Project Management Project Financial Managment and Reporting Vendor Managment Software Development Lifecycle Methodology (including tools) Acquire the critical skills needed to enhance execution delivery success: JIS Program Manager (experienced in the management and delivery of complex systems)

Applications Architect Database Architect Security Architect Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 59 Strategy Alternative Analysis Alternative II: Reconsider Strategy and Approach Reconsider Strategy and Approach This alternative consists of the following key actions: Applications Development Consider pausing all discretionary applications development and enhancement activities. Do not initiate any new applications development or major enhancement activities until the subsequent actions have been completed. Governance Take aggressive action to plan for the new JIS by strengthening the governance processes that will foster consensus building and drive accountability: Gain consensus from all key stakeholders on the business objectives and benefits for the system.

JISC: Project Prioritization, Business Case Approval, Consensus Building, Expectation Management, Executive Oversight. AOC: Project Assessment and Corrective Action Reviews, Delivery Assurance. All: Document and track the measurable business value to be provided through each release to drive accountability. Functionality to be delivered (and its phasing). Data exchange capability and scope. Organizational Role Determine the role that the AOC will fulfill in the delivery of solutions to the courts: Full Service Provider Applications Developer Systems Integrator Internal Service Company (ISCo) Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 60 Strategy Alternative Analysis (cont) Alternative II: Reconsider Strategy and Approach Key actions (cont)

Business Needs and Value of Business Benefits Define the success metrics and business value that the new system(s) will bring to the courts and State agencies. Vet the business case with all key stakeholders and incorporate feedback. Based on the above, prioritize the development and delivery of JIS functionality based on business needs and the value of the benefits to be delivered. Use this as the roadmap for the development of a fully fleshed-out JIS solution architecture and delivery strategy. Finally, document the delivery strategy and measurable business and operational improvement metrics into an overall project vision and charter to guide the project, set priorities, and focus delivery activities. Overall Solution Architecture of the new JIS Define and develop a fully fleshed-out solution architecture and detailed development and implementation plan for the new JIS. Assess recent systems development successes and how they should be integrated into the overall JIS solution architecture (e.g., JCS). Application Architecture (including interfaces). Functional Specification (including use cases). Database Architecture. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 61

Strategy Alternative Analysis (cont) Alternative II: Reconsider Strategy and Approach Key actions (cont) Analysis and Selection of Execution Alternatives Identify components for statewide or local implementation. Assess buy vs. build options. Commercial COTS components (e.g., case management, jury management, financial systems). Other state and county solutions (e.g., LINX from Pierce County). Project Prioritization and Phasing Redefine the JIS Migration as a program with a series of interrelated projects. Develop a detailed project plan and work breakdown structure. Develop a detailed project budget. Identify vendor support requirements. Execution Capability and Resources Acquire critical skills needed for enhance execution delivery: JIS Program Manager (experienced in the management and delivery of complex systems) Applications Architect Database Architect Security Architect

Develop and enhance internal processes and provide in-depth training to ensure the projects success (e.g., Project Management, Software Development Lifecycle, Financial Management, Vendor Management). Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 62 Strategy Alternative Analysis Results Alternative I: Continue As Is But Improve Execution Continue current in process applications development and enhancement activities. Enhance the current governance and project oversight processes and acquire critical skills needed for enhance execution delivery. PROS CONS Limits the schedule and delivery impact to ongoing Does not address all issues. Spreads out needed changes over time, thus mitigating projects. Provides incremented delivery enhancement capabilities to in process activities depending on their state in the project lifecycle. Provides a framework for the overall improvement in delivery success for projects that have not started. Spreads the impact of significant process and organizational changes over time. Lessons overall organizational and customer impacts. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 their impact.

Does not provide the focus needed to ensure success. Does not address the key issues impacting the current JIS project including: Lack of an overall solution architecture. Clear vision and detailed project plan that documents critical project milestones, deliveries and events. Lack of an in-depth phased implementation plan that ties delivered functionality to measurable benefits to the courts. For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 63 Strategy Alternative Analysis Results (cont) Alternative II: Reconsider Strategy and Approach Consider pausing discretionary applications development and enhancement activities. Do not initiate any new applications development or major enhancement activities until the following has been completed: establish robust governance, determine organizational role, define the value of business benefits, vet each business case with all key stakeholders, fully develop an overall solution architecture and detailed plan, identify components for statewide or local implementation, redefine the JIS program, establish comprehensive delivery processes and acquire needed critical skills. PROS CONS Allows the organization to step back and identify its best Impacts current delivery commitments and timeframes. strategy to move forward to ensure delivery success. Provides a clear vision and roadmap that establishes both delivery team goals and objectives, as well as setting customer expectations. Provides the organizational focus and visibility needed to address both programmatic and process improvement issues currently impacting the JIS project - specifically in the areas of executive oversight and governance, project

management and software development. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 64 Strategy Alternative Analysis Evaluation Criteria Gartner used the following criteria to quantitatively assess each strategy. Business Value - degree to which the solution is strategically aligned with the courts business strategy and how well it addresses key functional requirements. Return-on-Investment - measure of the cost/benefit of the solution, taking into account the initial and ongoing costs, the avoided cost of imminent enhancements and upgrades, and the expected financial benefits to the organization. Schedule Impact - measure of how quickly the proposed strategy can be implemented to provide full business value to the courts (all modules implemented). Budget measure of the impact to the current budget in terms of being able to accomplish the required tasks within the limits of the currently approved budget. Customer Satisfaction degree to which the solution addresses the business needs of the courts and is delivered on time and within budget. Delivery Risk - high-level assessment of the financial, technical, organizational, operational and project management risks associated with implementing the proposed strategy. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040

September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 65 Strategy Alternative Assessment Results Summary Summary of Assessment Results The table below provides a summary of Gartners assessment of the Strategy Alternatives. The key for this table corresponds to the color scheme shown below. An interpretation of these results is presented in the next slide. Business Value STRATEGY ALTERNATIVE Continue As Is But Improve Execution Reconsider Strategy and Approach KEY: Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 l l Weak Scheudle Impact ROI l l l l l Moderate l

Budget Impact Customer Satisfaction l l l l Strong Delivery Risk l l l For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 66 Strategy Recommendation Gartner recommends AOC adopt Alternative II: Reconsider Strategy and Approach. This approach provides the greatest long-term benefit to AOC and the courts in terms of an enhanced and predictable delivery process that provides needed business value to the courts. In the long term, the risks associated with this option are lower than those for Alternative I. This alternative provides a clear vision and roadmap that establishes clear delivery team goals and objectives, as well as setting customer expectations. It provides the organizational focus and visibility needed to address both programmatic and process improvement issues currently impacting the JIS project. Specifically in the areas of executive oversight and governance, project management and software development. General comments on Gartners assessment of Alternative I: Alternative I does not address the critical issues impacting the current JIS project, including: Lack of a fully fleshed-out solution architecture.

Lack of a clear vision and detailed project plan that documents critical project milestones, deliverables and key events. Lack of an in-depth, phased implementation plan that ties delivered functionality to measurable benefits to the courts. In addition, Alternative I spreads out needed changes over time, thus diluting their impact, and does not provide the organizational focus needed to ensure success. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 67 JIS Migration Project x Execution Alternatives Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 68 Analysis of Execution Alternatives Once Strategy Alternatives have been addressed, then Execution Alternatives can be addressed. Gartner considered the following critical areas when developing potential Execution Alternative candidates: Buy vs. Build Options Sourcing (in-house, staff augmentation, vs. outsource)

Single System vs. Court-specific Systems Big Bang vs. Phased Implementation Gartner identified three execution alternatives to evaluate as potential options for the JIS Migration Project: Alternative A: Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Alternative B: Acquire Best-of-Breed Solutions and Integrate Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 69 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative A: Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Phased in-house application development approach as currently envisioned This alternative consists of: An approach that continues to build the application in-house supported by contractor subject matter experts. A single integrated system providing 80% of the required core functionality with the ability to be easily customized to meet specific Court business needs. Service Oriented Architecture Web-based applications architecture Externalize business rules A single enterprise database accessible by all applications to foster data transparency and data exchange.

Acquisition Strategy Develop the detailed Application Architecture for the system. Develop the detailed Functional Specification for the system. Define the Enterprise Database Architecture. Assess recent systems development successes and how they should be integrated into the overall JIS solution architecture. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 70 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative A: Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS (cont) Implementation/Rollout Strategy Define the business benefits (in terms of the functionality to be delivered to the specific court levels, the technology improvements to be gained and the metrics by which to measure the systems success to be achieved through business functionality delivered or process improvement to be provided) by the JIS Migration Project. Define phased (prioritization) implementation plan to deliver the functionality to the various court levels and State agencies. Rollout with in-house resources supplemented with contractor staff as required. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts.

2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 71 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative B: Acquire Best-of-Breed Solutions and Integrate Integration of best-of-breed (BOB) solutions to provide the required JIS functionality This alternative integrates several best-of-breed applications (e.g., Case Management, Jury Managment, Financial) as well as selected current in-house applications using a Business Process Management engine or an Integration Broker to provide the required JIS systems functionality and data integration. Acquisition Strategy Assess the use of: Commercial off the shelf (COTS) solutions (e.g., Case Management, Jury Management, Financial). Other existing state or county solutions (e.g., LINX). Current in-house applications. Assess build vs. buy options for the above. Assess all-court vs. court-specific approaches for each solution (e.g., functionality can be implemented for all courts, for like courts, or for individual courts where it makes sense). Develop the detailed Application and Infrastructure Standards for the courts. Develop the detailed Functional Specification for the system. Define the Enterprise Database Architecture. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040

September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 72 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative B: Acquire Best-of-Breed Solutions and Integrate (cont) Implementation/Rollout Strategy Define the business benefits (in terms of the functionality to be delivered to the specific court levels, the technology improvements to be gained and the metrics by which to measure the system(s) success to be achieved through business functionality delivered or process improvement to be provided) by the JIS Migration Project. Define phased (prioritization) implementation plan to deliver the functionality to the various court levels and State agencies. Assess implementation options: In-house Hire Systems Integrator(s) Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 73 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed Initial development and operation of a statewide JIS data integration infrastructure and offer best-of-breed solution services

This alternative consists of: Continuing to be the preferred solution provider for the vast majority of courts. Initially focusing on the design and development of a statewide data integration infrastructure. Performing operation and maintenance of the data infrastructure. Continuing to maintain the infrastructure and legacy systems and offer best-of-breed solution services using an Internal Service Company (ISCo) Model, thus providing various court levels throughout the State the greatest flexibility. Acquisition Strategy Assess the use of: Commercial off the shelf solutions (e.g., data integration infrastructure components). Other existing state or county solutions. Current in-house initiatives (e.g., Data Exchange Project). Assess build vs. buy options for the above. Develop the detailed Data Exchange Architecture and Integration Standards. Define the Enterprise Database Architecture. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland.

All Rights Reserved. Page 74 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed ISCo Transformation Cost Center AOC Customer Focus Internal Service Company (ISCo) ProcessBased Silos Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 IT Focus Th eI S Ma t ur it y Pa th Solution Provider Business Recovery Services Service-focused, Business Recovery Services Application Services competitive pricing, Application Services supply creator Infrastructure Services

Infrastructure Services Messaging Services Messaging Services Change Mgmt. Asset Mgmt. Application Development Proactive, Total Cost of Ownershipoptimized App. Data DistribTelecom DevelCenter uted opment Reactive, budgetdriven, resourceconstrained, acts like a perpetual backlog For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 75 Execution Alternative Analysis Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed Implementation/Rollout Strategy Define the business benefits (in terms of the data exchange functionality to be delivered to the specific court levels, the technology improvements to be gained and the metrics by which to measure the system(s) success to be achieved through data exchange functionality delivered or process improvement to be provided) by the Data Exchange Project. Define phased (prioritization) implementation plan to deliver the data exchange functionality to the various court levels and State agencies. Move to an Internal Service Company (ISCo) delivery model for providing best-of-breed solution services and maintenance support for the courts. Any court that chooses to acquire and support their own systems must comply with AOC data integration requirements. Assess implementation options: In-house

Hire Systems Integrator(s) Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 76 Execution Alternative Analysis Results Alternative A: Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS The COBOL and Natural applications are moved to a contemporary Web-based platform using a Service Oriented Architecture and Java. PROS CONS Existing applications are well known to the current AOC The issue of retiring staff who understand the current IT staff. They have a high degree of expertise in them not readily available on the street. Current system has been in place for a number of years and can adequately meet most of the Courts basic requirements. code and applications will remain. Limited additional enhancements and functionality to be gained from the investment. No gain in business process automation functionality to improve productivity until Phase II. Users of the system are familiar with the use, navigation, features, and limitations of the current environment. Development teams should be able to deliver the requested enhancements once the governance, programmatic and key architectural designs have been developed.

Data maintained by the system would be better integrated and the quality of data improved when moved to normalized tables. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 77 Execution Alternative Analysis Results Alternative B: Acquire Best-of-Breed Solutions and Integrate Integrates several best-of-breed applications (e.g., Case Management, Jury Management, Financial, etc.) and selected in-house applications using a Business Process Management Engine or an Integration Broker. PROS CONS Architecture provides the basic foundation for integrating Designing a well functioning integration hub and process available off the shelf functionality. management engine can be a technically complex task. By integrating the COTS products, existing solutions from Relative costs of the solution may be high due to the other States or counties, and existing JIS code into the new solution architecture, the AOC can incrementally add functionality and migrate towards the target environment. By definition, this solution provides access to the best available functionality available in the market place. Solution provides the courts with the ability to automate many of its manual work processes and eliminate redundant data entry. higher investments in best-of-breed technologies. Underlying technology for integration of best-of-breed technologies requires significant technical expertise and experience with contemporary architectures.

Performance tuning in this environment is a challenging task, and the AOC will need to develop competencies in managing and tuning the best-of-breed applications. Solution provides a solid foundation with internal and external systems. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 78 Execution Alternative Analysis Results Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed AOC will continue to be the preferred solution provider for the vast majority of courts. Initially focus on development and maintenance of a statewide data exchange architecture and standards for all courts and State agencies to use. Continue to provide maintenance and operation services and offer best-of-breed solution services using an Internal Service Company (ISCo) Model. Any court that chooses to acquire and support their own systems must comply with AOC data integration requirements. PROS CONS Delivers value for the highest priority requirements first. Reduces overall risk. Provides individual courts with flexibility to customize to Increases funding model complexity (cannot lose sight of their own specific process or alternatively develop specialized solution(s) for grouping of courts. Allows courts to leverage commercial off the shelf products. Allows courts to source development using a competitive model.

Eliminates AOC as a bottleneck. necessary funding for legacy maintenance and core functionality). May increase overall cost. Increases focus on integration capabilities which are not present today. Although overall risk is reduced, new/different risks will be introduced. Movement to a diversified application environment increases complexity of data exchange. Provides common repository for sharing court data. Allows courts to use existing tools for scheduling, etc. Reduces issues concerned around size and performance. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 79 Execution Alternative Analysis Evaluation Criteria Gartner used the following criteria to quantitatively assess each strategy. Business Value - degree to which the solution is strategically aligned with the courts business strategy and how well it addresses key functional requirements. Total Cost of Ownership - magnitude of cost for system design, implementation and oversight + ongoing maintenance and support. Return-on-Investment - measure of the cost/benefit of the solution, taking into account the initial and ongoing costs, the avoided cost of imminent enhancements and upgrades, and the expected financial benefits to the organization.

Technical Fit - degree to which the solution addresses critical technical requirements, including those related to technical architecture, system stability and reliability and security and technical disaster recovery. Maintainability - measure of the solutions scalability, adaptability and extensibility (i.e., how readily the system can be modified to accommodate changes in statute, policy, processes, etc.). Schedule - measure of how quickly the proposed strategy can be implemented to provide full business value to the courts (all modules implemented). Risk - high-level assessment of the financial, technical, organizational, operational and project management risks associated with implementing the proposed strategy. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 80 Execution Alternative Assessment Results Summary Summary of Assessment Results The table below provides a summary of Gartners assessment of the Execution Alternatives. The key for this table is shown below. An interpretation of these results is presented in the next slide. ALTERNATIVE APPROACH Re-Architect / Re-Host the Legacy JIS Acquire Best-of-Breed Solutions and Integrate Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed Business Value l l l

KEY: Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 Weak Technical Fit TCO ROI l l l l l l l Moderate l Maintainability l l l Strong l l l Schedule l l l Risk l

l l l For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 81 Execution Recommendation Consider after Strategic Recommendations have been addressed Gartner recommends adoption of Execution Alternative C: Initially Focus on Data Exchange, Then Best-of-Breed. This Execution Alternative leverages the existing data exchange project, and will provide the highest relative business value and ROI to the State. Risks associated with this option are lower than for other approaches - and can be mitigated through the execution of an effective risk management plan. This approach additionally provides the greatest flexibility to the courts regarding specific solutions for local court operations. General comments on Gartners assessment of other approaches: Re-architecting the JIS on a contemporary technology platform and database does not offer the State a ROI that is comparable to other approaches. Costs and timeline cannot be as well defined in advance as other options, application development cannot occur rapidly enough to remedy imminent problems with the current platform and transition of technical staff, and maintainability will present future challenges. The availability of viable off-the-shelf applications which provide core case management system and supporting functions (e.g., document management, electronic filing, etc.) built on current technical platforms enables the best-of-breed approach to provide a higher business value and ROI to the State than re-architecting the JIS internally. However, without an initial focus on data exchange, this approach limits the value to the courts. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 82 Execution Recommendations (cont) High-Level Execution Strategies Execution Options Statewide

implementation of one shared system Statewide implementation of functions shared by like courts Local implementations Advantages Disadvantages Fewer exchange points reduces complexity of data exchange environment Consistency in processes Lower cost to manage Significant complexity in obtaining consensus on system features and design Complexity in the coordination of implementation tasks Greater level of effort required to coordinate maintenance activities Appropriate For Statistical reporting External

interfaces Public Access, including e-Filing Case management (includes most elements of case, event, person, outcome and financial functions) No interfaces required for vertical movement of a case Systems can be implemented and tailored to meet the common needs of each like court Consistency in process among the participating courts Moderate complexity in obtaining consensus on system features and design, implementation coordination and maintenance activities Multiple exchange points with statewide systems

Interfaces required for integration including vertical movement of cases The greatest number of exchange points with statewide systems Case management Interfaces required for vertical movement of cases Document management Potentially highest cost approach Jury management Systems can be implemented and tailored to meet the specific needs of each court or jurisdiction Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 83 x Recommended Roadmap

Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 84 Recommended Roadmap First 120 Days On Going Focus Strategic Strategic Focus Focus Execution ExecutionFocus Focus (Reconsider Strategy and Approach) (Reconsider Strategy and Approach) (Focus (Focuson onData DataExchange) Exchange) Establish a robust Governance and Project Oversight Process. Continue to be the preferred solution provider for the vast majority of courts. Determine the role that the AOC will fulfill in the delivery of solutions to the courts.

Focus on the design and development of a statewide data integration infrastructure. Define the success metrics and business value that each initiative will bring to the courts. Vet each business case with all key stakeholders. Define and fully develop an overall solution architecture and detailed plan for the new JIS. Identify components for statewide or local implementation and analyze buy vs. build for each. Redefine the JIS Migration as a program with a series of interrelated, prioritized projects, each with a budget and detailed project plan. Establish comprehensive delivery processes and acquire needed critical skills. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 Develop detailed Data Exchange Architecture. Assess Buy vs. Build Alternatives. Develop Integration Standards. Define the Enterprise Database Architecture.

Defined Phased Implementation Plan. Focus on the operation and maintenance of the data infrastructure by AOC. Move to an Internal Service Company (ISCo) delivery model providing best-of-breed solution services and maintenance support for the courts. Any court that chooses to acquire and support their own systems must comply with AOC data integration requirements. For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 85 Next Steps The next steps include: Incorporate feedback into Gartners initial findings. Gather information from other states about their strategy and execution approaches. Determine State of Washington JIS Strategy and flesh out the details. Finalize and execute Roadmap. Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland.

All Rights Reserved. Page 86 x Comments Questions or Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 87 Engagement Manager Richard Flowerree Office: 619-542-4815 Mobile: 619-517-1500 email: [email protected] Project Manager Rosy Spraker Office: 808-206-9405 Mobile: 808-388-0818 email: [email protected] Gartner Washington Administrative Office of the Courts JIS Strategy Review and Validation JISC Initial Findings Presentation Engagement 221051040 September 30, 2005 For internal use of the Washington Administrative Office of the Courts. 2005 Gartner, Inc. and/or Gartner Holdings Ireland. All Rights Reserved. Page 88

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • NGS All Hands 2.5.2010

    NGS All Hands 2.5.2010

    Estimates of coordinates at specific 5 year intervals, based on historic time-dependent coordinates and the IFVM2022 …and the Geoid Monitoring Service (GeMS), for non-geometric quantities. Beginning with 2020.00. Each "snapshot" will be published 2-3 years after the reference epoch
  • MATH 331: Partial Differential Equations

    MATH 331: Partial Differential Equations

    Arial Default Design MATH 331: Partial Differential Equations Course Topics Course Learning Outcomes Attendance, Proofs, Textbook, MATLAB Office Hours and Contact Assignments, Quizzes, Project Exams Grading Criteria Academic Integrity
  • AZF Ammonium Nitrate Explosion

    AZF Ammonium Nitrate Explosion

    Explosion occurred at the Azote Fertilisant Plant (AZF) in Toulouse, France on September 21st, 2001. The explosion caused 30 fatalities. The plant was owned by the Total Group (an oil and gas company) The explosion occurred in a storage tank...
  • Dig These Dragons: Evolution and Diversification of Dinosaurs

    Dig These Dragons: Evolution and Diversification of Dinosaurs

    Dig These Dragons: Evolution and Diversification of Dinosaurs Saurischian (Allosaurus) Ornithischian (Stegosaurus) Hip Structure Dinosaur Saurischians Theropods (all meat eaters) Sauropods (all plant eaters) Ornithischians Ornithopods (e.g. Hadrosaurs; duck-billed dinosaurs) Stegosaurs ("plated" dinosaurs) Ornithischians Ceratopsians (horned dinosaurs) Ornithischians Ankylosaurs (armoured...
  • Low Level Rules of Conduct (ROC)

    Low Level Rules of Conduct (ROC)

    NavLog (AF form 70) Stick diagram - ensure you check it over for changes. 8 ½ x 11 OAD. 8 ½ x 11 LZ Diagram. ACEOI upside down and backwards (when available) VT-35 Low Level Standards(Planning - Smart pack)
  • Bienvenidos PADRES Y SENIORS!

    Bienvenidos PADRES Y SENIORS!

    Pueden venir el sábado para recuperar horas pero cuesta $8 y tienen que pagar el jueves anterior antes del mediodía . Obligaciones para graduacion. Deudas que afectan graduación: ... Texas Application for State Financial Aid. Not U.S. Citizen or permanent...
  • De Buorrem en har bewenners eartiids en no

    De Buorrem en har bewenners eartiids en no

    Rob Bearda en Klasina vd Valk. Rob werkt nog een half jaar als . docent Techniek in het voortgezet . onderwijs in Franeker. Na dat half ... De snoek is vast van Harm Julianus die jaren in eensnoekebek reed. Hoekwoning...
  • 1. Entrance Hymn: This is the Day Chorus:

    1. Entrance Hymn: This is the Day Chorus:

    Tony Chestnut C C C C Tony Chestnut knows I love him G G C C Tony knows, Tony knows. C C C C Tony Chestnut knows I love him. G G C That's what Tony knows. C Maj =...