Information Technology Strategic Execution Plan …laschoolboard.org/sites/default/files/03-10-20...the transition into Kindergarten in MiSiS. • Household Hub (HHH) to unify student-parent

Information Technology Strategic Execution Plan Amendments

Project Definitions and Associated Actions

Attachment A – BOE #284-19/20

Program: My Integrated Student Information System (MiSiS)

Project: One Enrollment

Budget: $8,802,832 Bond Funds (96%) and $372,500 General Funds (4%)

Introduction

The One Enrollment project will build a streamlined “One Enrollment” registration portal that will enable parents and guardians to submit initial student enrollment information. One Enrollment will allow parents and guardians to enter enrollment data for new

students and verify data for existing students. The portal will be integrated with MiSiS to capture existing data in order to eliminate some data entry from parents and school

staff. Therefore, it will reduce annual enrollment paperwork efforts that are currently required at all L.A. Unified schools, in addition to the need to print and assemble enrollment packets at schools.

Currently, MiSiS supports the registration and enrollment of approximately 500,000

students attending LAUSD schools. Existing students are registered into next years’ grade at the same school through a process called Next Year Enrollment (NYE). Unified

Enrollment (UE) supports the application process to Choices Schools and is able to capture initial registration data for approximately 80,000 of these students. These preliminary records are then sent (via interface) to MiSiS to complete enrollment and

scheduling at the approved and confirmed schools. Substantial effort is required by parents and schools to complete and process the paperwork. The enrollment process

requires parents completing up to 19 forms and school staff entering all that data into MiSiS. A subset of this process is done year after year for each student and requires

significant filling out, keying, and data cleanup, etc. The One Enrollment portal will be integrated with:

• Unified Enrollment (UE) to transition existing student applicant data to the

Choices accepted school.

• Early Education Student Information System (EESIS) for student data to support

the transition into Kindergarten in MiSiS.

• Household Hub (HHH) to unify student-parent accounts and reduce efforts for

parents to connect all their children.

• Parent Portal/LA Unified Mobile App for account authentication and parent

email consolidation.

Refining these efforts into a single “system of record” will eliminate collecting information from numerous systems, reduce parent efforts to rewrite similar information among a menu of enrollment forms, reduce school staff workload, improve overall data

quality, and simplify the electronic transferring of student data. Lastly, Pupil Services is responsible for student enrollment and is the key business owner driving policy for




enrollment and process changes to accommodate the new One Enrollment process. The project has already been through the EPMO review and prioritization process by

the Instructional Governance Committee, Business Governance Committee, and Executive Governance Committee.

Scope

• Build an online portal for registration and enrollment for parents and guardians

and integrate it with MiSiS for emergency card information and enrollment

information.

• Integrate with Household Hub (HHH) to unify student-parent accounts within

Parent Portal for account authentication and parent email consolidation.

• Interface One Enrollment with Resident School Identifier (RSI) to validate and

verify residential school boundary. Enable pre-registration of Early Education students into feeder elementary schools by interfacing EESIS with MiSiS.

• Revise enrollment policy according to new online enrollment registration and

integrate Student Health and Human Services (SHHS), Office of Data and

Accountability (ODA), Information Technology Division (ITD), Early Childhood Education, and District Operations for policy creation, review, and approval.

• Integrate parent information into a single system of record included in the

Household Hub (HHH).

• Integrate EESIS information into MiSiS. Allow data capture of new student data

into One Enrollment to support online data capture into EESIS.

• Consolidate Parent Accounts Across All Systems.

• Automate Student Permits.

Expected Outcomes

• Improve data quality and consistency for all parents and students.

• Improve reporting of student data workflow.

• Reduce data entry by L.A. Unified staff.

• Integrate parent information.

• Decrease parents’ time at the school to correct student enrollment information.

• Reduction in forms to be filled out by parents.

• Reduction in number of times parents’ need to correct prefilled data.

• Reduce the number of packets that are prepared for enrollment every year thus

reducing staff efforts to assemble them and the associated paper costs.

• Reduction in paperwork and paper costs to enroll a student.

• More staff time to address other school opening tasks.

• Improve transition of Early Education students into K-12 schools.




• Create a common look and feel for all parent-facing applications.

Budget and Schedule

Project cost is estimated at $9,175,332 and will be completed by the end of 2021. The

project deliverables are outlined below with estimated time of effort. Upon project approval, the project plan will be refined to a detailed project schedule.

ONE ENROLLMENT PROJECT

TIMELINE

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

Bond Oversight Committee 333 S. Beaudry Avenue, 23rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017Phone: 213. 241.5183Fax: 213.241.8354www.laschools.org/bond

Rachel Greene, Chair Tenth District PTSA Bevin Ashenmiller, Vice-Chair LAUSD Student Parent Karen Krygier, Secretary L.A. City Controller’s Office Araceli Sandoval-Gonzalez, Executive Committee Early Education Coalition Joseph P. Buchman – Legal Counsel Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Lori Raineri and Keith Weaver – Oversight Consultants Government Financial Strategies

Tracy Bartley 31st District PTSA Jeffrey Fischbach CA Tax Reform Assn. Melanie Freeland American Institute of Architects Margaret Fuentes LAUSD Student Parent Greg Good L.A. City Mayor’s Office Chris Hannan L.A. Co. Federation of Labor AFL-CIO Michael Keeley CA Charter School Association

Scott Pansky L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce Dolores Sobalvarro AARP Guy Zelenski L.A. Co. Auditor-Controller’s Office Celia Ayala (Alternate) Early Education Coalition Connie Yee (Alternate) L.A. Co. Auditor-Controller’s Office Jose Zambrano (Alternate) Tenth District PTSA (Vacant) Assoc. General Contractors of CA Timothy Popejoy Bond Oversight Administrator Perla Zitle BOC Staff

RESOLUTION 2020-5

BOARD REPORT NO. 284-19/20

AMENDMENT TO THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIVISION

STRATEGIC EXECUTION PLAN TO APPROVE THE ONE ENROLLMENT

PROJECT

WHEREAS, District Staff proposes that the Board of Education amend the Information

Technology Division (ITD) Strategic Execution Plan (SEP) to approve the definitions,

allocate funds, and take the associated action(s) for the One Enrollment project as described

in attached Board Report No. 284-19/20.

WHEREAS, District Staff proposes the following actions:

• Move $8,802,832 from the “Upgrade and Equip with 21st Century Technology” SUP

category of need to the “Technology Infrastructure & Systems Upgrades” SUP

category of need.

• Allocate $8,802,832 bond funding to complete the One Enrollment Project.

• Approve execution of the One Enrollment project.

WHEREAS, the SUP includes a spending target to address “Technology Infrastructure and

System Upgrades”; and

WHEREAS, the One Enrollment project will build an online student registration and enrollment

portal for parents and guardians; and

RESOLUTION 2020-5

AMENDMENT TO THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIVISION STRATEGIC

EXECUTION PLAN TO APPROVE THE ONE ENROLLMENT PROJECT

Bond Oversight Committee 333 S. Beaudry Avenue, 23rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017Phone: 213.241.5183Fax: 213.241.8354www.laschools.org/bond

Page | 2

WHEREAS, District Staff anticipates that the proposed SEP amendment will facilitate

implementation of the ITD SEP, and therefore, it will not adversely affect the District’s ability to

successfully complete the ITD SEP.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. The School Construction Citizens’ Bond Oversight Committee

recommends that the Board of Education adopt amendment of the

Information Technology Division Strategic Execution Plan to approve the

One Enrollment project listed above as described in Board Report 284-

19/20, a copy of which is attached hereto in the form it was presented to the

BOC and is incorporated herein by reference.

2. This resolution shall be transmitted to the Los Angeles Unified School

District Board of Education and posted on the Bond Oversight Committee’s

website.

3. The District is directed to track the above recommendation and to report on

the adoption, rejection, or pending status of the recommendations as

provided in section 6.2 of the Charter and Memorandum of Understanding

between the Bond Oversight Committee and the District.

NOT ADOPTED on February 27, 2020, by the following vote:

AYES: 0 ABSTENTIONS: 4

NAYS: 7 ABSENCES: 3

Rachel Greene

Chair

Bevin Ashenmiller

Vice-Chair

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BOND CITIZENS’ OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

Bond Oversight Committee 333 S. Beaudry Avenue, 23rd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90017Phone: 213. 241.5183Fax: 213.241.8354www.laschools.org/bond

Rachel Greene, Chair Tenth District PTSA Bevin Ashenmiller, Vice-Chair LAUSD Student Parent Karen Krygier, Secretary L.A. City Controller’s Office Araceli Sandoval-Gonzalez, Executive Committee Early Education Coalition Joseph P. Buchman – Legal Counsel Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Lori Raineri and Keith Weaver – Oversight Consultants Government Financial Strategies

Tracy Bartley 31st District PTSA Jeffrey Fischbach CA Tax Reform Assn. Melanie Freeland American Institute of Architects Margaret Fuentes LAUSD Student Parent Greg Good L.A. City Mayor’s Office Chris Hannan L.A. Co. Federation of Labor AFL-CIO Michael Keeley CA Charter School Association

Scott Pansky L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce Dolores Sobalvarro AARP Guy Zelenski L.A. Co. Auditor-Controller’s Office Celia Ayala (Alternate) Early Education Coalition Connie Yee (Alternate) L.A. Co. Auditor-Controller’s Office Jose Zambrano (Alternate) Tenth District PTSA (Vacant) Assoc. General Contractors of CA Timothy Popejoy Bond Oversight Administrator Perla Zitle BOC Staff

March 2, 2020

Dr. Richard Vladovic, Board President

Austin Beutner, Superintendent

Los Angeles Unified School District

333 S. Beaudry Avenue, 24th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90017

RE: BOC Consideration of ITD SEP Amendment for the One Enrollment Project

Dear Dr. Vladovic and Superintendent Beutner,

At its February 27, 2020 meeting, the Bond Oversight Committee (BOC) considered

recommendation of a proposal to allocate $8,802,832 of bond funds for the One Enrollment Project

(Board Report No. 284-19/20). The Committee did not adopt Resolution No. 2020-5

recommending the project. Eight votes were needed to adopt the resolution recommending

approval of the project.1 The resolution did not pass, by a vote of zero ayes, seven nays, and four

abstentions, with three members absent (0-7-4-3).

The purpose of this letter is to express the critical concerns stated by the Committee during

consideration of the project.2 The Committee recognizes that the Board of Education may still

consider and approve the project.3 However, it should be noted that the Committee deliberately

chose to vote directly on the resolution recommending the project, and the majority of members

1 Recommendations to the District to approve or disapprove a project must be approved by a majority of the active members of

the Committee. There are 14 active members - thus approval of a project recommendation requires eight votes. Section 4.2.2,

LAUSD School Construction Bond Citizens’ Oversight Committee, Charter and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)

(amended 4/18/2017). 2 This letter serves as the BOC’s communication regarding its findings and recommendations to the District and public regarding

this project. Section 2.2 MOU. 3 We recognize that once the BOC has had the opportunity to consider a project, the Board of Education may act on the project,

with or without a BOC finding or recommendation. Section 7.6 MOU.


P a g e | 2

present voted no. No member voted to recommend the project. The four members who abstained

largely made the observation that there was not a convincing amount of information available to

the BOC to support the project. It is rare for a proposed project to not garner a majority or even a

single BOC vote in support – the last similar outcome of a vote was for the proposed Empowered

Learners project in May 2018, which failed 0-10-1-3. The District at that time chose to withdraw

the project.

One Enrollment Project

The stated purpose of the project was to build an online student registration and enrollment portal

for parents and guardian of LAUSD students. The project objectives would be to reduce

enrollment time, improve data records and reporting, provide more school staff time for other

duties, and to improve transition of Early Education students into K-12 schools. The project

proposed allocating approximately $8.8M in bond funds and $372,500 in general funds to

implement the project. The project schedule would include a pilot phase scheduled to begin for

the start of the 2020-2021 school year. The project would be completed by the end of 2021.

BOC Concerns

During consideration of the project, BOC members expressed many concerns and posed a

significant number of questions to District staff. Below is a summary of the major issues identified

by members.

1. Permissibility of Bond Fund Expenditures for this Project

The mission of the BOC is to oversee the permissible and prudent expenditure of funds for the

construction, repair and modernization of LAUSD schools. The question of “permissibility” goes

to whether it is legally permissible for bond funds to be expended for the proposed project. Any

legal analysis begins with whether the California Constitution, state law, and then the bond

measure language allows this type of project to be eligible for bond funds.

Both the California Constitution and the California Education Code states that no bond funds shall

be used for any teacher or administrative salaries or other school operating expenses.4 The

Citizens’ Oversight Committee is specifically charged with overseeing this restriction. Several

members questioned whether the automation of a student enrollment process was a bond fund

eligible expenditure. Student enrollment could be characterized as a ministerial business function

of the District – a function now completely funded by general funds and treated as part of the

District’s and schools’ operating expenses.

District staff responded to this use of bond funds question (and other BOC questions) in a memo

from Soheil Katal, CIO, dated February 21, 2020 to the BOC (see attached). The response to

question #1 provided an explanation from the Bond Compliance Unit (BCU) as to why the project

would be eligible for bond funding. No reference was made to constitutional, state law or bond

measure language. The District’s memo also stated that the District’s Office of the General

Counsel (OGC) was still reviewing the project and that the BOC would receive further

confirmation in advance of its February 27 meeting. The OGC provided no additional substantive

information to the BOC.

4 California Constitution, Article XIII A Section 1(b)(3) and the Strict Accountability in Local School Construction Bonds Act of

2000, Education Code Section 15278(b).


P a g e | 3

Reference was made in the memo to two BCU criteria for determining project bond fund

eligibility: 1) delivery of a new functionality, feature or system, and 2) providing a benefit to

students. These obtuse criteria are no basis for a legal or project funding analysis as they have no

nexus to relevant law and governing regulations on this topic. They are also ambiguous and

general. Further, the District’s memo only stated a conclusion – there was no analysis that even

applied these criteria to the factual scope and potential benefits of the project.

Applying a general criterion of “benefit to students,” members wondered whether automation of

enrollment inures more to the benefit of District administration than students. An analogy was

made to the District’s payroll system which was determined by the District to not be a bond

fundable project.

In conclusion, the Committee found the District’s response to this issue unclear as to what

permissibility analysis the District had performed, and whether the criteria described for this

determination were appropriate and correctly applied given the facts of the project.

2. Lack of Clarity Regarding Purpose and Value of the Project

The Committee, by design, includes many parent representatives. During the project discussion,

many members expressed their frustration and confusion with all of the current District technology

applications available to parents and families for different purposes. These include the LAUSD

App, the Parent Portal, Unified Enrollment and Schoology. Questions arose regarding how the

enrollment project would be incorporated into or with current systems. District staff explained

that in the future, all of these functions would be consolidated and integrated, and understood it

was confusing. One of the Committee members commented that ITD has so many projects

currently under development that it was unclear how the many projects would be integrated and

be completed in a uniform and seamless way as described by District staff.

Several parents described that they could currently download and fill in the various enrollment

forms posted on the Parent Community Services Branch website.5 Thus, it was unclear what the

benefit would be to parents of “online” enrollment.

According to District staff, development of an online enrollment process would not completely

eliminate the need for parents or guardians to deliver to the school, in person, the required

documentation for age verification, residence verification, immunization verification and any other

relevant affidavits. One potential problem of online enrollment is the greater risk of fraud. For

instance, if some of these verifications could be submitted online, parents or guardians may have

incentive to submit more easily forged forms to avoid compliance or risk of adverse scrutiny.

The District was asked whether any risk assessment had been conducted, perhaps as part of the

EPMO process, regarding the risk of forged immunization records. Falsified records could allow

students who were not vaccinated to expose other students to risks of disease. The response was

that the District had not conducted such an assessment.

It might be common for parents to complain about the enrollment process, but BOC members

suggested that the District should maintain the safeguards afforded by in person visits to the

schools by parents and guardians including valid confirmation of the above verifications.

5 https://achieve.lausd.net/Page/9244.

https://achieve.lausd.net/Page/9244


P a g e | 4

3. Failure to Recognize Potential District Policy and Fiscal Impacts

BOC members inquired as to what policy changes would be necessary to implement online

enrollment. The District’s February 21 memo stated one policy would require revisions: REF

6554-2018-2019 Opening Day Procedures: Supplemental Guide and Updates. However, the

response included no proposed policy revisions. It was stated at the BOC meeting that the policy

would be revised in the future, after project approval. This response fails to recognize the depth

of issues raised and the larger implications of potential changes to this and other District policies

that would be necessary to implement the project.

For example, what are the risks of online enrollment allowing the submission of critical student

information through digital means? As mentioned in the prior section of this letter, falsification

of immunization records is one possibility. In addition, the question arises as to the possible under-

reporting or reluctance of parents and guardians to “self-identify” student needs related to social,

housing, economic, physical, medical or other needs and circumstances. Parents and guardians

may be hesitant to identify these needs online – fearing they might be compromised or revealed to

parties beyond the school site and those District offices that provide services to students with

various special needs. It may also be advantageous for parents and guardians to discuss their

student’s needs and circumstances in person with District and school staff to explore options for

support and then subsequently submit student information in a way that optimizes the potential for

appropriate support and resource allocation to the school and the student.

A direct consequence of an under-reporting or failure to identify student needs would be the

District’s loss of revenues otherwise provided by federal, state and local agency funds that support

resources to address special needs. Thus, this potential problem could have severe negative

consequences for students and the District’s fiscal ability to provide necessary resources to

students.

The District has provided no risk analysis related to these potential policy impacts because no

proposed amendments to policy have been drafted or proposed by District staff. BOC members

observed that proposed amendments to policy and potential impacts should be considered as part

of an EPMO process.

4. Issues of Parent Digital Access and Equity

Several Committee members inquired as to how an online enrollment system would benefit

households and parents who had limited or no access to the internet. District staff stated that school

staff would still be available to assist families with enrollment. It was proposed that kiosks could

be installed at schools to provide parents with online access and that staff would be available to

assist them. BOC members asked whether this would be any different than the current assistance

provided in person at school sites to assist parents. The answer appeared to be no, which again

highlighted the question as to what benefit the enrollment system would really provide to school

students and parents and guardians.

5. Bond Fund Priorities

This project requested $8.8M of the $85M in remaining SUP funds for ITD – just over ten percent

of the remaining budget. The Committee expressed continuing concerns about the lack of a plan

for the use and prioritization of the remaining ITD bond funds. Many priorities and needs are


P a g e | 5

evident. For instance, the District has a predictable cycle for the need to replace classroom

computing devices – every three to five years. The BOC recently recommended $4M for the

expenditure of bond funds to provide Testing Devices. Will any of the remaining bond funds be

set aside for this purpose? The Committee members will continue to ask ITD for a list of its

priorities and a long and short-term strategic plan whenever new ITD projects are proposed.

6. Limited Impact of Enterprise Management Review and Risk Assessment (EPMO)

The Committee has encouraged and acknowledged the efforts of the District to establish an

Enterprise Program Management Office (EPMO).6 At the January 23, 2020 regular BOC meeting,

District staff made a presentation entitled “Enterprise Project Governance.” The presentation

listed the benefits of the EPMO process to include: Prioritization and approval of high value

projects, consistency in the approval process, and early risk detection and escalation.

The District’s February 21 memo to the BOC describes the role of the EPMO process in the One

Enrollment Project. It states that “the One Enrollment project received conditional approval from

the Executive Governance Committee (EGC) to move forward while project details were being

discussed.” It also stated ITD worked collaboratively with project sponsors and the project was

reviewed by IT Project Management Office, the Governance Committees, the EPMO office and

the EGC “to ensure value for the District.”

It appears any benefits of the EPMO process for the One Enrollment project were extremely

limited. The project appears to have been rushed through a review process, without the process

having even been completed prior to bringing the project to the BOC for consideration. The

fundamental question of whether it was clearly bond fund eligible seemed to have not been fully

vetted by the District. In addition, if the EPMO process includes a risk assessment at an enterprise

level, this would suggest that a work process analysis of the enrollment process with parents and

guardians had been completed and the impacts and risks to the end users had been identified and

determined to be favorable in the balance.

The EPMO process is still in its early stages of implementation. BOC members expressed

concerns that even at this early stage, the project had not completed the EPMO process with a

resulting outcome. For example, it would be helpful for the EPMO process to result in a written

work product that enumerates its analysis of operational and IT impacts, plans for implementation

and scope development, resource utilization, operational and budget impacts, project risks and

other factors and conclusions that led to a project’s approval. BOC staff has seen “Enterprise

Justification” memos produced by ITD staff, but these are not shared publicly with the Committee

and they are usually presented in preliminary draft form in internal meetings. It is not clear if these

memos are the basis for consideration by the EGC.

7. Phasing of Project

District staff indicated that the project would be initiated with a pilot phase, scheduled to be started

for the beginning of the 2020-2021 school year. The Committee inquired as to why this project

could not be presented and approved in phases – i.e. why not ask for initial funding to complete a

pilot phase, and then come back to the Committee and the Board of Education with a proven and

tested project design and plan for implementation? An observation was made about IT projects

6 The formation of the office and further development was recognized in The Progress Report of the BOC

Information Technology Task Force (#4), dated August 22, 2019.


P a g e | 6

that had failed, where a large project budget was approved upfront and then the untested project

approach and scope of the project failed to deliver as anticipated.

8. Financial Analysis and Project Budget Impacts

Committee members had many questions regarding the financial analysis of the project. It was

unclear what would be actual savings versus opportunity costs avoided, and what the actual cost

of the project would be over time. Further, it appeared that actual costs (estimated at $2M per

year) exceeded the actual savings to be realized (estimated at $786,000 per year), resulting in a

negative impact to the General Fund, which contradicted the idea that this project would generate

savings. One member asked that the District consider including a debt-service analysis as part of

technology project proposals as well. Generally, the Committee found this part of the project

presentation convoluted. A positive return on investment is not required for project approval; nor

is it a sole measure of a project’s merits. However, the impact should be calculated and clearly

presented. Again, this part of the project presentation would have benefited from greater scrutiny

by an enterprise review process.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments on this project.

Sincerely,

/Rachel Greene/

Rachel Greene, Chair

Attachment: Memo to Bond Oversight Committee Members, from Soheil Katal, dated February

21, 2020 regarding One Enrollment Project – Response to BOC February 14, 2020 Letter.

cc: Members, Board of Education

Members, Bond Oversight Committee

Megan Reilly, Deputy Superintendent

Soheil Katal, Chief Information Officer

David Hart, Chief Financial Officer

David Holmquist, General Counsel

Jefferson Crain, Executive Officer of the Board

Joseph Buchman, BOC Counsel

Timothy Popejoy, BOC Administrator

Lori Raineri, Oversight Consultant

INTEROFFICE CORRESPONDENCE `Los Angeles Unified School District

Information Technology Division

TO: Bond Oversight Committee Members DATE: February 21, 2020 Timothy Popejoy, BOC Administrator FROM: Soheil Katal Interim Chief Information Officer SUBJECT: ONE ENROLLMENT PROJECT – RESPONSE TO BOC FEBRUARY 14,

2020 LETTER The following are responses to the BOC memo dated February 14, 2020 entitled One Enrollment Project.

1. Please provide the justification for the use of bond funds for this project enumerating the specific criteria used for determining bond eligibility and confirm that District counsel and the Bond Compliance staff have reviewed the determination.

Historically, ITD has leveraged bond proceeds, after receiving bond eligibility confirmation from the Bond Compliance Unit (BCU) and Office of General Counsel (OGC) and approval from the Board of Education, to implement both capital (infrastructure) and application projects that 1) deliver a new functionality, feature or system and 2) provide a benefit to students. The One Enrollment project delivers a major, new functionality, i.e. entry of enrollment data by parents, which benefits District students. The BCU has thoroughly reviewed the project and confirmed that it is eligible to use bond proceeds. OGC review is in progress and confirmation will be received within the next few days, in advance of the February 27, 2020 BOC meeting.

2. Please explain why the project was presented to the BOC at the Agenda Setting Meeting

prior to being reviewed and approved by the Executive Governance Committee in accordance with the EPMO process (is there a need for urgency and if so, why)?

In advance of the BOC Agenda Setting meeting, the One Enrollment project received conditional approval from the Executive Governance Committee (EGC) to move forward, while project details were being discussed. ITD has worked collaboratively with project sponsors to move the project through the District’s project governance and review process. This has included review by the IT Project Management Office, the Governance Committees, the Enterprise Project Management Office (EPMO) and the EGC to ensure value for the District. The plan was to present this project at the February BOC meeting to incorporate a pilot for the start of the 2020-2021 school year and gain valuable insight to inform the full implementation of the project.

3. Once complete, will LAUSD have ownership of the project, or will LAUSD be licensing the project from a third-party vendor?

One Enrollment will take advantage of pre-existing platforms/products and internal development. The final solution will be owned by LAUSD.

4. What is the project’s estimated useful life?

The estimated useful life is 10 years.

5. Please clarify the basis for the estimated Return on Investment (ROI). Please provide the appendix to the Enterprise Project Justification referred to as Appendix I – “One Enrollment: ROI Analysis”. BOC staff acknowledges that a positive ROI is not required for every project, but that a calculation is required by the EPMO process.

Please see attachment Appendix I - One Enrollment: ROI Analysis.

6. Please provide the baseline metrics for which the Key Performance Indicators will be

measured against for success.

Potential key success metrics for the One Enrollment project include:

Metric Measure

Parent involvement on Parent Portal Number of opened accounts

Parent communication Number of valid parents email (increased ability to easily communicate with parents) Frequency of email notifications and parent logins

Increase online enrollment Number of student enrollments through the system

Reduction in preprinted forms Number of forms printed Printing and paper costs

Reduction in number of enrollment forms entered by schools

Number of parents submitting hard copy enrollment packets

Reduction in mailing Cost Spending on direct mail to parents

7. Are there any District policies that will require amendment for the project to become operational?

The main policy will require revisions:

• REF 6554 - 2018-2019 Opening Day Procedures: Supplemental Guide and Updates

8. The draft ITD Strategic Plan shared with BOC staff in May 2019 describes some of the

proposed One Enrollment project benefits and functions as part of Unified Enrollment. Please elaborate on how these two systems are different and/or how they would be integrated.

The Unified Enrollment system enables parents to search for Choices programs, submit an online application, and select the program for their student(s) once accepted. For new enrollees, parents will still need to complete paper enrollment forms manually. Parents must submit the forms at the schools and school staff must enter the enrollment information in MISIS. The One Enrollment system will integrate with Unified Enrollment and will enable parents to complete the enrollment forms online. Parents must still visit schools to submit the required verification paperwork.

Attachment: Appendix I – “One Enrollment: ROI Analysis”

c: Pedro Salcido

Megan Reilly

Mary Lu Camacho

David Holmquist

David Hart

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTInformation Technology Division

1

Proposed IT Strategic Execution Plan Amendment to Add One Enrollment Project

Brd Rpt 284-19/20

Soheil Katal, Chief Information OfficerBoard Meeting March 10, 2020


2

▪ Build an online portal for parents/guardians to enroll new studentsor update the annually disseminated forms while introducing muchneeded efficiencies.

▪ Integrate Early Education Student Information System (EESIS)student data to support the transition to Kindergarten in MiSiS.

▪ Refine to a single system of record for parent information in orderfor all systems to maintain a single instance of parent information.

▪ Significantly reduce printing and manual completion of annual forms.

▪ Estimated completion is 18 months from approval date for $9.175M.

▪ District is exploring policies and processes that need to be updated.

Proposed New Project – Executive Summary


3

Enrollment – Current process

Parents are provided with an enrollment packet that consists of 19 forms and documents

Several forms are disseminated and updated every year

School staff reviews forms for accuracy and completion

School staff enters and verifies data into MISIS

Estimated One Enrollment Timeline

4

Proposed One Enrollment – Budget


5

Funding Sources:• The One Enrollment project will be funded through a combination of Bond and

General Fund.• Upon completion of the project, an estimated 20% or $2M of ongoing General

Fund is needed for maintenance and future enhancements.

Project Estimated Phase Completion

Bond General Fund

TOTAL

One Enrollment portal 18 months after project approval

$8,802,832 $ 372,500 $9,175,332

TOTAL $8,802,832 $372,500 $9,175,332

Benefits/Return on Value (ROV)


6

❖ Create efficiencies for school support Staff

❖ Parent data will be maintained in only one system of record and streamlines access to student data

❖ Data captured to monitor entire enrollment process

❖ Reduce paper/printing cost and the carbon footprint

❖ Decrease delay between students enrolling and receiving services

❖ Reduce time it takes for parents to complete enrollment packets

❖ Improve data accuracy

❖ Reduce mailing costs

❖ Greater online communication and pathways to parent engagement

❖ Reduce annual paperwork efforts for required enrollment forms

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTInformation Technology Division-

7

Return On Investment/Value

Once One Enrollment has been fully implemented there will be an estimated annual savings of $3.5M*

$9.175M total implementation cost / $3.5M annual cost savings = 2.7 to 3.7 years to achieve ROI

*This is not taking into to account the Return On Value (ROV) regarding related services that would benefit from One Enrollment. This estimate will vary based on the adoption rate of One Enrollment and ROV.

*Details of the $5.5M current annual estimated cost is included in Attachment D – One Enrollment Appendix I DRAFT-ROI Analysis.

$5.5M Current Annual Estimated Cost - $2M One Enrollment Annual Maintenance = $3.5M


8

Questions

Documents

Information Technology Strategic Execution Plan …laschoolboard.org/sites/default/files/03-10-20...the transition into Kindergarten in MiSiS. • Household Hub (HHH) to unify student-parent