Building and Implementing the Phoenix Pay System
Expensive IT project became a failure Phoenix project (development of states pay system) was an incomprehensible failure of project management and oversight. Phoenix executives prioritized certain aspects, such as schedule and budget, over other critical ones, such as functionality and security. Phoenix executives did not understand the importance of warnings that the Miramichi Pay Centre, departments and agencies, and the new system were not ready. They did not provide complete and accurate information to deputy ministers and associate deputy ministers of departments and agencies, including the Deputy Minister of Public Services and Procurement, when briefing them on Phoenix readiness for implementation.
Full description

OMB and Agencies Need to Focus Continued Attention on Implementing Reform Law
How to invest efficiently in IT IT investments are large and growing position in annual budgets. Historically, they have frequently failed, incurred cost overruns and schedule slippages, or contributed little to mission-related outcomes. GAO recommendations focus on the oversight and execution of the data center consolidation initiative, the accuracy and reliability of the IT Dashboard, and incremental development policies.
Full description

The Shared Services Centre
The necessary environment for the efficient management of the Shared Service Center is lacking The department's administration of the Shared Services Centre (SSC) has been effective for sharing resources between the departments and delivering selected back-office services to a small client base. However, the governance arrangements established to oversight the SSC have not positioned it well for the future and the departments have not yet determined if the arrangement is efficient and resulting in savings. ANAO found instances where the advisory board of SSC was not consulted or involved in decisions relating to the strategic direction, financial arrangements and expenditure priorities. Information reported to the board did not focus on areas of strategic importance and the quality and completeness of this information could be improved. The mechanisms established for setting out responsibilities and obligations and ensuring transparency for services delivered by the SSC was weak. Service standards and levels were not fixed and can change. The delineation of responsibilities between the SSC and its clients was not clear and there was no commitment by the SSC to certify the quality of its control framework.
Full description