Oregon Benefits Online

Scope to System Comparison

1

What We DidThe Oregon Benefits Online (OBO) Scope

Identification work group conducted a high level analysis of the Oracle system built for OBO using the Master Scope document.

Compared each line of the Master Scope document to the demonstrated system to evaluate alignment.

The comparison was focused on the needs of the business.

The comparison was completed and findings were determined based on demonstrations of the OBO system.

Completed the analysis ahead of schedule.

2

What We Did Not DoHands-on testing.

Any technical analysis of the underlying foundation.

Prioritize any scope items beyond the already identified Future Phases section.

3

CategoriesUsability – The general intuitiveness,

workflow, navigation and ease of data entry.

User Interface – The look and feel of the OBO system.

Verbiage/Content – Displays accurate information, wording, phrasing and correct placement.

Functionality – Does what it is supposed to do in order to meet the business need.

4

FindingsOur analysis concluded the OBO system did

not meet the Master Scope and it appears extensive customization would need to occur.

Issuing benefits timely will be at risk due to the communication inconsistencies within the Customer Portal.

Workload and accuracy will be negatively impacted due to the usability deficiencies within the OBO system.

Extensive staff training and business process re-engineering would have to occur to use the “out of the box” OBO system.

5

Findings

6

Findings

7

Findings

8

ProposalsThe Scope to System Comparison Workgroup

recommends that DHS should not implement the OBO system as is.

Additionally:

Stop all project activity

Create a thorough project roadmap

Determine future needs of the business

Gather requirements

Research systems that would meet the needs

Once these are done – reinitialize the project

The recommendation is to not spend the time and money to do a time estimate for OBO system completion because of lack of agreed upon requirements.

9

D i s c u s s i o n

10