# Presentation: 281714

## 
Tribal Systems Status

- Tribal Systems Status

## Joseph BodmerSenior IT Specialist, OCSE

Karen BurkeDirector, Lummi Nation CSE

**Karen Burke****Director, Lummi Nation CSE**

**Today’s Speakers**

## Consultation began in November 2000 on proposed regulations.   
Part of this consultation process included discussion of automation-related issues in Tribal programs. 
Systems-related topics included: 
Systems design, development, and implementation
Use of states’ ACSES through intergovernmental agreements
Office automation
Process and activities for planning for new Tribal systems

- Part of this consultation process included discussion of automation-related issues in Tribal programs.
- Systems-related topics included:
- Systems design, development, and implementation
- Use of states’ ACSES through intergovernmental agreements
- Office automation
- Process and activities for planning for new Tribal systems

**Introduction**

## In 2001, OCSE  formed the Tribal Child Support Enforcement Systems (TCSES) Workgroup.   
The Workgroup is composed of a representative from each “interim tribal program grantee”.   
The TCSES Workgroup began work with the first of four meetings in Chicago in August of 2002 – remaining three meetings in October through December of that year: 
October in Tampa, Florida; 
November in Herndon, Virginia, 
December in Albuquerque, New Mexico

- The Workgroup is composed of a representative from each “interim tribal program grantee”.
- The TCSES Workgroup began work with the first of four meetings in Chicago in August of 2002 – remaining three meetings in October through December of that year:
- October in Tampa, Florida;
- November in Herndon, Virginia,
- December in Albuquerque, New Mexico

**1****st**** Systems Workgroup**

## Federal policies and regulations on States 
Industry standards for complex automated systems 
Impacts of limited resources, organization, and geography cost and functionality of systems 
Federal roles and responsibilities 
Functional requirements (at a very high-level) 
Executive commitment, sovereignty, security, model systems, interfaces, certification, cost and funding.

- Industry standards for complex automated systems
- Impacts of limited resources, organization, and geography cost and functionality of systems
- Federal roles and responsibilities
- Functional requirements (at a very high-level)
- Executive commitment, sovereignty, security, model systems, interfaces, certification, cost and funding.

**1****st**** Systems Workgroup**

## The interim rule authorized Federal funding in all phases of automation and computer systems lifecycle.  This included:  planning, design, development, test, installation, operations and maintenance.

OCSE reconvenes the Tribal Child Support Enforcement Systems Workgroup in March 2004 for a second series of meetings.  The Workgroup met in: 
   April in Milwaukee, Wisconsin; 
   May in Washington, DC; 
   July in Denver, Colorado; 
   August in Seattle, Washington

- OCSE reconvenes the Tribal Child Support Enforcement Systems Workgroup in March 2004 for a second series of meetings.  The Workgroup met in:
-    April in Milwaukee, Wisconsin;
-    May in Washington, DC;
-    July in Denver, Colorado;
-    August in Seattle, Washington

**2**** ****nd**** Systems Workgroup**

## Grant applications for Tribal automated systems 
Tribal systems planning process 
Federal reviews, audits, and how systems certification, including self-certification, might come into play 
Technical Assistance, from Federal resources and from Tribe-to-Tribe 
Prior Federal review and approval process of funded procurements 
Defined a minimum set of functional requirements for a base model tribal system

- Tribal systems planning process
- Federal reviews, audits, and how systems certification, including self-certification, might come into play
- Technical Assistance, from Federal resources and from Tribe-to-Tribe
- Prior Federal review and approval process of funded procurements
- Defined a minimum set of functional requirements for a *base model tribal system*

**2****nd**** Systems Workgroup**

## Also called the “Model Tribal Child Support Enforcement System Design Committee.”  
The Design Committee, using the “Essentials” document as a foundation, has been working to define the data elements and their definitions, business rules, functional system requirements, and workflows.  
The Design Committee is guiding OCSE in the first step in building a “Model” TCSES.  This includes creating the initial design documentation: 
Requirements Definition Document (Nov ’05)
Software Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)
System Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)
General System Design (Dec ’05)

- The Design Committee, using the “Essentials” document as a foundation, has been working to define the data elements and their definitions, business rules, functional system requirements, and workflows.
- The Design Committee is guiding OCSE in the first step in building a “Model” TCSES.  This includes creating the initial design documentation:
**Requirements Definition Document (Nov ’05)**
**Software Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)**
**System Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)**
**General System Design (Dec ’05)**

**3****rd**** Systems Workgroup**

## Development of the “Model” Tribal Child Support Enforcement System is dependent on a number of factors:
Federal budget constraints
Procurement issues
Other risks and unforeseen 
Timeline for development of the Model TCSES:
Dec ’05 – completion of General System Design, including                  all requirements definition activities
Jan ’07 – completion of software development
Feb ’07 – start of Tribal-sponsored “Pilot Test”
June ’07 – general availability of the Model TCSES

- Federal budget constraints
- Procurement issues
- Other risks and unforeseen
- Timeline for development of the Model TCSES:
- Dec ’05 – completion of General System Design, including                  all requirements definition activities
- Jan ’07 – completion of software development
- Feb ’07 – start of Tribal-sponsored “Pilot Test”
- June ’07 – general availability of the Model TCSES

**“****Model” Tribal System**

## From The 1st Workgroup
Meeting Minutes
Final Workgroup Report

From The 2nd Workgroup
Meeting Minutes
Final Workgroup Report 
Tribal System Requirements “Essentials” Document
From The 3rd  Workgroup
Meeting Minutes
Final Workgroup Report
Software Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)
System Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)
General System Design (Nov ’05)

- Meeting Minutes
- Final Workgroup Report
- From The 2nd Workgroup
- Meeting Minutes
- Final Workgroup Report
- Tribal System Requirements *“Essentials”* Document
- From The 3rd  Workgroup
- Meeting Minutes
- Final Workgroup Report
- Software Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)
- System Requirements Specification Document (Nov ’05)
- General System Design (Nov ’05)

**Workgroup Products**

## Workgroup Members

| Policy, Tribal, and Systems Division Staff of OCSE |
| --- |
| Chickasaw Nation |
| Sisseton-Wahpeton  |
| Puyallup  |
| Navajo Nation |
| Lac du Flambeau |
| Port Gamble S'Klallam  |
| Menominee Nation |
| Tanana Chiefs Conference |
| Lummi Nation |
| Forest County Potawatomi |

## Federal Follow-up

- 1.  Provide sample of an APD with appropriate level(s) of detail, for consideration as a template Tribal Planning APD;
- 2.  Provide feedback from OCSE’s policy group on defining issues surrounding software development:
- What is (and is not) software development?
- Define development versus maintenance.
- Define office automation (versus development).
- What dollar threshold for software development would require an Tribal APD?
- What dollar threshold for a system transfer would require an Tribal APD?
- What dollar threshold for a cost overrun would require an Tribal APD update?

## Federal Follow-up

- 3.  Initial grantees’ concern that they are being penalized for being the initial grantees.  They would be expected to build systems with 80% FFP, while new Tribes, with the lessons learned and transfer systems available from the first tribal grantees, would receive a 90% match for three years.
- 4.  Ensure continued collaboration through Tribal Systems Workgroup on Model Tribal System efforts.
- 5.  Question – when will the Model TCSES be built?
- 6.  Work to ensure that any future Tribal Title IV-D systems regulation language is self-explanatory and self-contained.
- 7.  Ensure Tribes are not “locked-in” to the “Model TCSES”.

## What’s Allowed Today?

- The final rule issued in March 2004 specifies five areas where Federal funding is available for automation and computer systems.
*Reference: 309.145(h)(1-5):*
- Planning efforts in a new or replacement system
- Operation and maintenance of an existing system
- Office automation
- Intergovernmental agreements with other states and tribes to use their automated system
- Other automation and automated systems costs as may be identified by the Secretary of HHS in the future

## Office Automation?

**ACTION TRANSMITTAL** OCSE **AT-05-02**
**DATE: **January 19, 2005
**SUBJECT: **Systems and Financial Policy Questions and Responses to Miscellaneous Issues regarding Provision of 45 CFR part 309, the Tribal Child Support Enforcement Program Final Rule.
- The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) has received numerous inquiries from Tribes, Tribal organizations and states regarding interpretations of its provisions. The purpose of this Action Transmittal (AT) is to inform Tribes, Tribal organizations and states of OCSE’s policy responses to these inquiries.
**This AT is presented in a Question and Answer format, with automated systems–related Q&A’s numbered 26-33.  One Q&A in particular is relevant to today’s discussion: Q&A #28 – provides a definition of *****Office Automation*****.****  **

## Office Automation?

**Neither regulations at 45 CFR Part 95, nor the Title IV-D child support program regulations at 45 CFR 300-309 provide any definition of *****office automation*****.  Action Transmittal AT-05-02 now provides a definition.**
***Office automation***** supports routine administrative functions, it is not a child support system or other “program specific” application system.**
***Office automation***** might include the word processing capabilities needed to enable the child support enforcement system (the actual ADP system) to produce summons and petitions.  **
***Office automation***** might also describe the creation of certain reports or accounting spreadsheets that serve to streamline an otherwise wholly manual business function through the use of *****macros***** to merge data and text into a usable management productivity tool. **

## Office Automation?

***Office automation***** can include the following:**
**Personal computers and workstations**** **
**Networking and application (web, IIS, directory, etc.,) servers**** **
**Telecommunications and network wiring to connect the computers in a unified network environment**** **
**Network Operating Systems (NOS) and workstation and personal computer operating system software, such as Microsoft Windows XP© or Red Hat Linux©**** **
**Office productivity software, such as Microsoft Office©, Microsoft Project© or WordPerfect©**** **
**Electronic mail and Internet access services, such as T-1, DSL, or 56K dial-up (e.g., AOL© and Earthlink©.)**

## What’s Not Allowed Today?

**Development of automated data processing systems**** is not an allowable activity under the Final Rule.  OCSE is working with current grantees on what Tribal IV-D systems may look like.  **
**Proprietary application software.****  Systems marketed as child support systems.  This includes both child support systems “leased” for a monthly or annual fee, and those for which a Tribe does not receive full ownership that allows it to grant the Federal government a right-in-license to use and authorize others (Tribes) to use for government purposes. **
**“****Application Frameworks”,**** software products that can be used to build child support systems.  Examples include Curam, Harmony, SAP, Siebel, etc., as well as ****integrated application development environment software,**** such a Visual Studio, Borland’s JBuilder, etc.**

## Tribal Child Support Enforcement Systems(TCSES) WorkgroupThe Model TCSESWorkflow Examples

## Slide 20

## Slide 21

## Slide 22

## Slide 23

## Slide 24

## Slide 25

## Slide 26

## Slide 27

## Slide 28

## Slide 29

## Slide 30

## Slide 31

## Slide 32

## Slide 33

## Slide 34

## Slide 35

## Slide 36

## Slide 37

## Slide 38

## Slide 39

## Slide 40

## Questions ??