San Francisco County Grand Jury • 1995-1996

Information Technology Services in San Francisco Government Prepared by San Francisco Civil Grand Jury

10 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 3 findings

F1
EIPSC has failed in its mission to craft a citywide master plan for information technology; failed to provide leadership to advance a citywide agenda for technology; and failed to adequately address the needs of smaller city departments. The weaknesses of EIPSC have likewise been identified in the KPGM-Peat Marwick "Strategic Plan for Information Technology" (1996), a consultant's report crafting a roadmap for future direction of the city's information technology systems and services.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
A new position of Chief Information Officer (CIO) should be created to provide strategic planning and leadership for information technology as it pertains to conducting the city's business. This executive level position should be appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors. A candidate for this position must possess relevant training and expertise. The CIO should serve at the pleasure of the Mayor.
F2
The Civil Grand Jury Survey (see Appendix A) revealed the following: Only half of the respondents used some kind of Quality Assurance process. ISD has adequately documented the Change Control Management Process describing how changes are introduced to the computer production environment. The Source Material Migration Process (ISD Quality Assurance documentation) was found to be incomplete as of March 1996. The Job Control Language Migration Procedures and Control Card Migrations were missing from the city's mainframe operations manual. ISD has been ineffective in transferring technology to smaller city departments.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The CIO should serve as the Department Head of a new Department of Information Technology (DIT). Those functions now assigned to the Department of Electricity and Telecommunications (DET), the Electronic Information Processing Steering Committee (EIPSC), and the Information Services Division (ISD) would be transferred to DIT.
F3
The Civil Grand Jury survey (see Appendix A) reveals a few disturbing results: - 35% reported no specific written job classifications; - 48% reported no job performance criteria; - 40% reported no specific written job descriptions; - 57% reported no tracking of hours spent on IS projects. Many smaller city departments, particularly those totally dependent on the General Fund, have no information technology personnel on staff. The Civil Grand Jury Survey (see Appendix A) collected comments from smaller city departments that indicate an imperative need for rethinking how the city allocates computer staffing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
As an initial project, DIT should have an information management audit conducted of all city departments to determine needs for citywide planning and budgeting as related to information technology goals. CITY CONTROLLER Summary In order to assess the next direction for technology in city government, better accounting and inventory must be prepared for strategic decision making. The City Controller, as the city's chief fiscal officer and auditor, does not currently maintain adequate records or budget information concerning city computer assets. Historically, the City Controller has relied on EIPSC's three- year master plan documents to serve as a register of departmental ownership of computer equipment and software. However, this component of the master plans has not been maintained, nor required, for several years. The inability of the city to collect an inventory of what computer assets it owns is a serious problem. Without such an inventory, the city cannot know if theft occurs or how to plan for upgrading equipment. The city's annual budget request process does not adequately address how much is spent on computer technology. The City Controller is unable to determine how much of the General Fund is appropriated to computer technology due to inadequate accounting procedures.

Additional Recommendations 11

These recommendations are not explicitly linked to specific findings.