Regional Tech Services Evaluation

TITLE
Regional
Technology
Service Delivery
Evaluation
Summary Report
MISA PrairiesMISA PrairiesMISA PrairiesMISA Prairies
April 10, 2015April 10, 2015April 10, 2015April 10, 2015
TANTUS Solutions Group, Inc.
101, 10722 – 103 Avenue NW
Edmonton, AB T5J 5G7

Regional Technology Service Delivery
Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
©TANTUS Solutions Group Inc. 2015
www.tantus.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 3
METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................................... 4
TOOLS ...................................................................................................................................... 6
PARTICIPANTS......................................................................................................................... 9
FINDINGS.................................................................................................................................10
RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................................................................16
APPENDIX A: PRIORITIZED LIST OF AREAS OF INTEREST ................................................24
APPENDIX B: CARD SORT RESULTS ....................................................................................26

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
©Tantus Solutions Group Inc. 2015
1 | P a g e tantus.com
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides a summary of the Regional Technology Service Delivery Evaluation
project that was conducted with participation from 37 individuals representing 29
municipalities from across Alberta. The project was funded under the Alberta Community
Partnership Program from the Government of Alberta managed by Alberta Municipal
Affairs and managed by members of the Municipal Information Services Association
(MISA) Prairies Chapter members in Alberta through the City of Lethbridge. The mandate
has been to identify opportunities for municipalities to collaborate on the delivery of
technology services in their municipalities with the joint goals of reducing cost and
increasing service.
We facilitated two scoping workshops and several rounds of data collection. The data sets
from 20 participants were collated to create matrices that identified areas of priority,
service delivery strength and weakness and readiness to scale operations to other
municipalities. Reports were provided to individual municipalities outlining their matrices
and their ‘fit’ in the overall opportunity areas.
A suite of tools were created to help the resulting opportunity groups further explore and
plan for collaborative opportunities. The Governance Tools included a Governance Charter
template, a Requirements Specifications template, a Service Sharing Costing Model
template and a Service Level Agreement Template.
From this project several findings and recommendations emerged in the areas of
collaboration, procurement and knowledge sharing to the participating municipalities and
to MISA in their leadership role. We recommend the following:
Recommendation 1: Further engage municipal business areas in the collaboration
discussions.
Recommendation 2: Explore collaboration in many levels and under both Network
and Hub and Spoke models.
Recommendation 3: Collaborate on the top 6 prime opportunities areas: "CLASS"
Replacement, Electronic Council, Financial Systems (ERP), Asset Management,
Permitting Systems and Disaster Recovery Space Shortage
Recommendation 4: Use the appropriate Governance Tools required by the
Governance Charter and Implementation Plan.
Recommendation 5: Continue to share procurement documents and further group
buying opportunities.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Recommendation 6: Leverage procurement through group buying sources, such as
the Government of Alberta or related Associations.
Recommendation 7: MISA should continue their leadership under this initiative and
encourage participation in the next phase of this initiative.
Recommendation 8: Explore ways to engage smaller, non-MISA member,
municipalities to participate.
Recommendation 9: Act as a portal for knowledge sharing.
Recommendation 10: Develop standard definitions around a standard municipal
service delivery model.
Recommendation 11: Foster sub-communities of action based on IT Professionals’
roles.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
INTRODUCTION
Alberta municipalities collaborate with each
other. Where through joint fire protection
agreements or cost sharing on recreational
facilities, this has been the case since the
inception of the province and continues today.
Over the past decades, there has been a view
by many that untapped opportunities are
available to enhance this history of
collaboration with technology.
This report provides a summary of the
Evaluation project that was conducted with
participation from 37 individuals representing
29 municipalities from across Alberta. The
project was funded under the Alberta Community Partnership Program from the
Government of Alberta managed by Alberta Municipal Affairs and managed by members of
the Municipal Information Services Association (MISA) Prairies Chapter members in
Alberta through the City of Lethbridge. The mandate has been to identify opportunities for
municipalities to collaborate on the delivery of technology services in their municipalities
with the joint goals of reducing cost and increasing service.
To aid in the collection of sensitive data, a commitment was made to the representatives
that individual municipal data would only be provide back to the providing organization
and thus, a series of reports have been issued from this project. Municipalities have been
provided with a summary of their provided data with average responses from other
participants. They also receive an Opportunity Report outlining where the data suggested
that they had opportunities to improve service through partnering and areas where they
should consider offering service to others based on their unique strengths and capabilities.
Also provided, was a suite of Governance Tools intended to support resulting collaboration
groups from this project.
This report provides an overview of the methodology employed in the project and a
summary of the delivered tools and templates. As well, it provides some overall findings on
the state of technological collaboration among municipalities in the province, seen through
the lenses of the workshop interactions and the data provided. Further, we provide several
recommendations to municipalities, to the provincial government and to MISA on ways to
continue the momentum of this project and further enhance municipal collaboration in
general.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
METHODOLOGY
We began by reviewing the terms of reference with the MISA project team to ensure that
we had a mutual understanding of the deliverables and the timelines for the project,
followed by the gathering of additional background material or pertinent studies that have
been completed.
To establish and introduce the project, a Kickoff Workshop in Calgary was held with all
stakeholders. The workshop included an overview of the project approach, the time and
participatory investment expected from the participating municipality representatives,
their role on the project, a review of the project schedule and a draft workshop schedule.
In addition, we conducted the first data gathering session and, through the use a
Knowledge Café, created a set of Governance Principles that drove the Governance
Processes required in the future. We also conducted a preliminary services scope definition
exercise define potential opportunity areas for regional service delivery, and captured a
detailed participant list for the project.
Based on the preliminary services scope, we then created a diagnostic tool for distribution
to the stakeholders for completion. This tool was focussed on a business driven approach
that captured information including current satisfaction, infrastructure, business
technology, strategy and planning, IT organization information and awareness of regional
service delivery opportunities.
Using our Microsoft Excel based tool to capture the information, we distributed the
material to the stakeholders for completion, supported with a privately accessed
instructional YouTube video, survey instructions, three scheduled conference calls, and
unlimited one-on-one telephone support. Based on our experience collecting large volumes
of highly structured data from municipalities, this was the most efficient approach to
gather this amount of complex information across the large number of participating
agencies and geographies.
Once the information was received, we collated it,
conducted the preliminary Opportunity Assessment,
and created a matrix that identified areas in which
municipalities were successful at delivering services
and areas in which they struggled. Through this
discussion, the data challenges were addressed and a
second round of data capture was endorsed. The
second round resulted in a more complete data set
with 20 participants providing completed workbooks.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
This matrix also provided a services pairing that will drive the future work on opportunities
for service rationalization and cross agency sharing.
We then created tools for the municipalities to organize and govern the opportunity groups
they identified. We created a generic Implementation Plan, a generic Governance Charter
template, Requirement Specifications, a Service Sharing Cost model, and a generic Service
Level Agreement template.
Next, we conducted workshops for the participating municipalities in northern and
southern Alberta to provide a face to face venue for the ratification and finalization of the
information and to validate the opportunities.
Using the Services Opportunity Matrix, we then established Opportunity Working Groups
that will be formalized by the proposed members.
Finally, we created the final report containing the findings and recommendations, along
with a presentation to stakeholders.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
TOOLS
DATA COLLECTION WORKBOOK
The data collection workbook was an important tool in gathering complex information. The
workbook contained 13 tabs dedicated to the following highly prioritized business areas and
their respective areas of emphasis:
• Recreation – “CLASS” Replacement
• Information management, content – Records Management
• Infrastructure – Asset Management
• Land Planning & Development – Permitting Systems
• Asset Access – Physical Credentialing Access
• Financial Management – Financial Systems (ERP)
• Cemeteries – Inventory and Records Management
• Professional support – PMO Tools, Operations, and Governance
• Integrated Service Delivery – 311/E311 211/E211
• Parks – Geographic Information Systems
• Council – Electronic Council
• Business Intelligence – Reporting, Queries, Analysis, Forecasting and Modelling
• Server-Storage – Disaster Recovery Space Storage
The areas required a representative from each municipality to identify and expand on a
number of details. These included the degree of priority for that business area, the
transaction volume managed on a yearly basis, and purchasing, operating, and staff costs.
Furthermore, the workbook included questions pertaining to any existing IT applications
that support the business area, the budget for replacement, the degree to which the current
system meets the business requirements, product details, system installation, replacement,
upgrade details, and the degree of system integration.
The completed workbooks were then returned to Tantus for further analysis. They
contributed to the creation of the individual municipal reports and the opportunity area
reports.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
GOVERNANCE TOOLS
This project’s purpose is to identify
opportunity groups for application sharing
or joint development, and as a result, will
require an implementation plan to outline
and guide the next steps for those
opportunity groups. The nature of the
implementation plan and the creation of
the Governance Charter will decide the
required tools to drive the process.
Implementation Plan Approach
The implementation plan is based on a stage-gate approach. As an effective project
management technique, an initiative or project is divided into phases that are
separated by gates. At each gate, continuation of the project is approved by a
manager or a governance committee, and is based on the amount of sufficient
information available at the time. This may include details of economic viability,
operational feasibility, and risk analysis.
Governance Charter Template
As the initial step of the implementation plan, we created a Governance Charter
template for the opportunity group. The charter should drive and define the required
scope, principles, and the tools necessary for the chosen approach. More specifically,
it should identify the purpose of the opportunity group, the governance organization
structure to support the decision making process, the relationships and authority,
roles and responsibilities, and the governance model.
Requirements Specifications
Once commitment of participants is obtained and the first stage-gate is surpassed,
the next step in the process is to develop high level requirements with members of
the opportunity group. These members can then identify if their current system can
be considered as a viable candidate to meet the requirements. Once all candidate
systems are identified, a gap analysis can be completed to determine the fit of the
viable options.
Service Sharing Costing Model
These viable options can then be evaluated using the service sharing costing model,
a tool that outlines the potential costs, benefits, and net present value of an

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
opportunity area for the next five years. Once the opportunity area and potential
participating municipalities are selected, the tool can then calculate potential costs
and benefits through the perspective of a municipality or as a whole. Furthermore,
to assist with budgeting, the tool can display a breakdown of incremental costs and
benefits to allow municipalities a better understanding of their position in terms of
additional costs or savings.
The costs are broken into system investment costs and ongoing operational costs.
The system investments costs include costs required for the actual set up and
configuration of an application sharing piece, including licensing, design, hardware,
and network updates. Ongoing operational costs account for the impact on business
processes around the system, including business technology support costs, business
staff effort, performance measurement effort, change management efforts, and
system reinvestment payments. The potential benefits include ongoing staff savings,
system operation savings, licensing savings, and system reinvestment payment
revenue.
After using this tool to evaluate the viable options, the best option can then be
identified. Participants in the opportunity group require a motion from their
respective councils to continue their participation into the next stage.
Generic Service Level Agreement Template
Once a target system is chosen and opportunity group participants are approved, the
chosen system is prepared to support a shared services model. A project charter and
plan is developed, defining the steps for the chosen option. Implementation can
begin once the charter gains approval, in which Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
are then developed. The purpose of the SLA template is to ensure that
municipalities have the proper elements and commitments in place to provide
consistent IT service support and delivery to the customer.
Summary of Deliverables & Functions
Deliverable Purpose
Governance Charter Template To drive and define the required scope, principles,
and the tools necessary for the chosen approach.
Requirements Specifications To evaluate the current system and consider if it
is a viable candidate to meet the requirements.
Service Sharing Costing Model To evaluate the viable options.
Service Level Agreement Template To ensure that municipalities had the proper
elements and commitments in place to provide
consistent IT service support and delivery to the
customer.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
PARTICIPANTS
The project involved the participation of 37 representatives from the following 29
municipalities:
• City of Airdrie
• City of Brooks
• City of Calgary
• City of Edmonton (withdrew)
• City of Fort Saskatchewan (withdrew)
• City of Grande Prairie
• City of Leduc
• City of Lethbridge
• City of Lloydminster
• City of Medicine Hat
• City of Red Deer
• City of St. Albert
• County of Grande Prairie
• County of Vermillion River
• Leduc County
• Lethbridge County
• Mountain View County
• Municipal District of Bonnyville
• Municipal District of Lesser Slave Lake
• Parkland County
• Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo
• Strathcona County
• Sturgeon County
• Town of Banff
• Town of Canmore
• Town of High River
• Town of Okotoks
• Town of Strathmore
• Town of Taber
The Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC) and Alberta Urban
Municipalities Association (AUMA) provided observers to the project.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
FINDINGS
COLLABORATION
Finding 1: Participants had differing perceptions of collaboration.
Following the data collection process, it became clear that participating municipalities held
different perspectives on the nature of collaboration, resulting in barriers to achieving
comprehensive and accurate data.
The above chart illustrates a spectrum of collaboration, in which the various levels of
cooperation range from simply sharing tools and templates, to complete joint development
and application sharing. The data collection process revealed the current state of municipal
collaboration in Alberta to be closer to the far left of the spectrum.
Municipalities were more inclined to limit the extent of their collaboration to the sharing of
tools and templates. There is almost universal agreement on the value of sharing templates
and documents such as RFPs and needs assessments to better leverage the format
structure and content. The preliminary services scope identified a number of IT services
that may provide an opportunity for group purchasing. The group exhibited a significant
interest in determining a means to pursue these.
The economies of scale available by having municipalities who have already made
significant investments in business support systems offer service to other municipalities in
need. Several larger municipalities have already made investments and were open to this
approach as a means to recoup this and better leverage the capacity of the system. A
certain degree of hesitation was also voiced by participants regarding joint application
development, citing implementation challenges and the need for consistent business
processes.
Sharing of Tools
and Templates
Group
Purchasing
Service
Provider/Client
Joint Development
Application Sharing

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Finding 2: Some municipalities are generally averse to sharing data
Many of the participants exhibited a concern with sharing documented information, which
was a stark contrast to the openness of the workshop sessions. This may come from the
nature of ongoing competition among municipalities for funding and the political nature of
municipal work. Historically, municipalities have often had to compete for grant dollars
from other orders of government in a ‘zero sum game’ that by necessity requires ‘winners’
and ‘losers’ for funding. The availability of collaboration based grants and the advent of
municipal partnering has mitigated this to some degree but a legacy remains.
Also the closeness of municipal operations to the governance layer of the organizations
often puts a great deal of scrutiny on performance. This project’s methodology required a
self-assessment of areas of strengths and limitations. Some participants were very
concerned about how documenting the performance of their municipality relative to others
would be portrayed and with whom this information would be shared. This may explain the
contradiction with the sharing in the workshop sessions. Allowances have been made in the
project to maintain the confidence of individual information provided.
Finding 3: Different models are possible for collaboration – ‘Hub and Spoke’ vs. ‘Network’
Historically, municipalities have been asked (or mandated) to participate in collaborative
approaches to application sharing. Two notable examples of this are the Municipal
Infrastructure Management System (MIMS) project and Munishare. Both of these
initiatives have brought benefit through economies of scale to many smaller municipalities
in Alberta. We would consider these to be Hub and Spoke models where one large system
supports a number of transactionally smaller entities. As stated, there have been benefits
under this approach but require a certain level of homogeneity among services and work
processes. This requirement has limited participation by municipalities that do not wish to
change their way of business, either due to their own uniqueness or resistance to change.
We feel that there is an opportunity for another approach, a Network model, in which
similar municipalities can partner in
clusters to gain advantage. This
similarity may be in size, work processes
or services and provides a greater
possibility for share. While the gains
may be less for the participants in terms
of overall economies of scale, the overall
participation in such programs should
provide substantial benefit over working
alone.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
DATA COLLECTION
Finding 4: Lack of consistent terminology
IT professionals and business professionals speak an entirely different language and use
different terminology. When faced with the project’s business driven approach, the
inconsistent terminology between both parties resulted in confusion for participants when
completing surveys, ultimately impacting the data collection results. For example, we were
looking for information regarding the inventorying and tracking of infrastructure. We
meant in the broad municipal context of assets – roads, buildings, water and wastewater
systems. Many of the IT professionals interpreted this to mean IT infrastructure – servers,
fiber optic cables, etc.
Finding 5: Other barriers to data retrieval and sharing
Municipalities do not collect the same types of information on assets or performance and
they do not organize it or store it in the same manner. The greatest challenge to this project
was not the willingness to contribute. It was the time required to find the information
required to conduct a valid analysis. Many participants, with the best of intentions,
struggled with locating the required data within their organizations. Some of this challenge
was the need to engage operational departments, who while saw the benefits of this
exercise, found it difficult to find time to understand the nuance of the data requested or
search for it in their records. Especially difficult to collect was cost information intended to
provide transactional cost benchmarks for each opportunity areas. Not only were original
purchase records difficult to find but allocation of staffing costs and operational costs for
systems and processes was challenging.
AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY
Finding 6: There are a number of business areas for application collaboration
During the September 23rd stakeholder kick-off workshop, we conducted a Services
Prioritization exercise to identify opportunities for municipal partners to work together in
service delivery to enhance services and/or reduce cost. The analysis of the broad scope of
municipal activities allowed for a shortened list of service areas that represented the areas
of greatest need and/or greatest opportunity.
Using a ‘dotmocracy’ facilitation approach, each representative was allowed ten votes to
mark the ten most prioritized business areas for their municipality. These votes were then
tallied for each category to produce a complete list of the highest to lowest prioritized
categories across all municipalities, in which potential areas of opportunity were identified.
A summary of the results is provided in Appendix A: Prioritized List of Areas of Interest.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
The top 13 areas for application sharing or joint development were:
Category Emphasis
‘Dotmocracy’
Votes
Recreation "CLASS" Replacement 21
Information
Management
Document Management 19
Infrastructure Asset Management 19
Land Planning &
Development
Permitting Systems 19
Asset Access Physical Credentialing Access 16
Financial
Management
Financial Systems (ERP) 14
Cemeteries
Inventory and Records
Management
12
Professional
Support
PMO Tools, Operations and
Governance
12
Integrated Service
Delivery
311/E311 211/E211 10
Parks
Geographic Information
Systems
9
Council Electronic Council 9
Business
Intelligence
Reporting, Queries, Analysis,
Forecasting and Modelling
8
Server/Storage
Disaster Recovery Space
Shortage
7
Finding 7: IT Professionals in municipalities engage in their work in several distinct roles
During the December 3rd ratification workshop, representatives discussed a number of high
ranking items from the ‘Dotmocracy’ exercise on September 23rd that were not believed to
be application sharing-related. The exercise allowed for combining items and collating into
specific roles to create a shared understanding and provide a basis for addressing them
moving forward.
The card sorting exercise allowed representatives to brainstorm and group the business
areas into four specific roles that they play in their organization: Partner, Owner, Enabler
and Leader. These were defined as follows:
PartnerPartnerPartnerPartner – the IT function in the organization partners with other areas to plan, evaluate
and deploy non-business specific solutions and practices. These solutions may include
email, productivity software, internet browsers, etc. IT’s role is that of being a subject
matter expert that can contribute to the overall discussion about corporate direction and
included the following business areas: information management (content), asset access,
corporate policy development, professional support, corporate leadership, and
communications.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
OwnerOwnerOwnerOwner – this role characterizes the IT function’s specific domain around information
technology hardware, infrastructure and architecture and included the following business
areas: security, cloud (emerging trend), telecom, economic development, and server/storage.
This role imply good stewardship of the municipalities investment and the thoughtful
interactions with business areas to understand business needs and communicate
limitations or impact associated with various infrastructure choices.
EnablerEnablerEnablerEnabler – IT professionals have a role in providing their expertise to aid in the planning,
purchase and implementation of business specific solutions and included the following
business areas: recreation, information management, infrastructure, land planning &
development, financial management, program and service planning & monitoring,
cemeteries, professional support, integrated service delivery, geographic information
systems, and council. Here they can provide guidance or act on behalf of the business area
to gather needs requirements, assess fit with architecture and long term plans, and ensure
technical robustness of products via
questioning potential vendors.
LeaderLeaderLeaderLeader – There are some areas in the
municipalities it is critical that the IT
professional take a leadership role, either
because of their other responsibilities,
experience or technical expertise. This role
was described to include IT planning,
applications management, IT governance and
business intelligence.
See Appendix B - Card Sort Results for the
detailed categorizations.
Finding 8: The participants expressed significant interest in group purchasing
opportunities.
Almost all business areas were identified as areas of interest for group purchasing
opportunities. During the discussions, many challenges were expressed, ranging from
impacts on the vendor community to potential legal issues of having a lead purchaser.
While work will need to be done for validate these kinds of potential risks, the group
pointed out that there was a spectrum of group purchasing options. These included sharing
of procurement documents, participating in standing offer arrangements available from
other orders of government and the municipal associations, and including clauses in RFPs
which opens response pricing to other municipalities. All in all, this was felt to be an area of
high potential value to the participants.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Here is the list of group purchasing opportunities:
Group Purchasing
Votes Category Emphasis
21 Recreation "CLASS" Replacement
21 Information Management, Content Records Management
20 Security Technical Security
19 Information Management Document Management
19 Infrastructure Asset Management
19 Land Planning & Development Permitting Systems
19 Cloud (Emerging Trend) Migration to Cloud Solutions
19 Telecom Migration to VOIP/SIP
16 Asset Access Physical Credentialing Access
15 IT Strategy Planning Visioning, Lifecycle Costing and Strategy Best Practice
14 Financial Management Financial Systems (ERP)
13
Program & Service Planning &
Monitoring
Electronic payments/POS
12 Cemeteries Inventory and Records Management
12 Professional Support PMO Tools, Operations and Governance
12 Applications Management Best Practices, Tools and Resources
11
IT Governance (Operations
Management)
Policy and Procedure Sharing
10 Integrated Service Delivery 311/E311 211/E211
9 Geographic Information Systems Parks
9 Council Electronic Council
8 Business Intelligence Reporting, Queries, Analysis, Forecasting and Modelling
8 Uncategorized Destruction of IT “stuff”
7 Server/Storage Disaster Recovery Space Shortage

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
RECOMMENDATIONS
We provide the following recommendations based upon the previously outlined findings to
continue the momentum of this project and continue to enhance municipal collaboration, in
general.
RECOMMENDATIONS TO MUNICIPALITIES
OPPORTUNITIES
Recommendation 1: Further engage municipal business areas in the collaboration
discussions.
Due to the broad scope of this initiative,
individual municipal business areas such as
recreation or planning were consciously
excluded from workshop discussions. Their
input was gathered by municipal
representatives and contributed through the
data collection workbooks. As the opportunity
groups, recommended in this report are
established. It will be critical for them to be
involved first-hand in further development of
the opportunities. This will build on the Partner
role defined by the participating IT
professionals in the card sort exercise of the
project and reported in greater detail in
Recommendation 7.
As well, because of the limited involvement of business areas and senior leadership, the
emerging trends of cloud based applications and business intelligence should be further
explored. While not necessarily a critical priority at the moment, these topics are growing
in importance and could provide fertile ground for collaboration in the near future.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Recommendation 2: Explore collaboration in many levels and under both Network and
Hub and Spoke models.
Municipalities should continue to move toward the right side of the collaboration spectrum,
which would open up more opportunities for them gain savings and improve service
delivery.
There are three factors that are involved in trust and collaboration between parties: repute,
reciprocity and altruism. In the case of repute, parties share because they believe that it
will reflect positively on their intelligence and knowledge. In the case of reciprocity, parties
share in order to benefit in return. Lastly, in the case of altruism, parties share because
they believe it is an honourable act. All three factors are held by a trust that, regardless,
parties will reciprocate. Overall, because trust is built through shared experience,
opportunity groups
represent an effective
means to building a
degree of this trust.
Moreover, municipalities
should take advantage of
a network model
approach to more
effectively accommodate
the needs of each
municipality. A network
model would be more
effective for
municipalities to share
via networks, allowing
municipalities the access
to systems more suitable for their needs.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Recommendation 3: Collaborate on the top 6 prime opportunities.
Municipalities should engage in discussion for possible collaboration on the top two or three
opportunities identified in their individual analysis. Each group will require a champion to
initiate proceeding. Based on the data provided in the workbooks we have identified 6 areas
with the greatest potential for inter-municipal collaboration. These were selected based on
the number of municipalities that indicated that there were service improvements possible,
the priority in their municipality and their system’s readiness for collaboration.
Emergent Opportunity Groups
Category Emphasis Description
Recreation "CLASS" Replacement
One of the highest priority areas for the group was
around recreation program registration. The
current leader in the municipal market is Class
software by Activenetwork. The urgency of this
discussion is based on Activenetwork’s decision to
move to a web based solution that will charge by
transaction. There are a number of perceived
challenges to this option, leading to a need for
exploration. The current solution includes
functionality around facility booking,
memberships, program registration, point of sale
transactions, Internet registration, external
interfaces, interactive voice recognition, and
participant information system integration.
Council Electronic Council
Information technology is rapidly changing the
practice of Council management. Electronic
briefings, agendas and minutes have raised the
demand for systems that manage Council
operations. Also, some of the technologies
currently in use can encourage broad stakeholder
engagement through web broadcasts of Council
meetings.
Financial Management
Financial Systems
(ERP)
Participants have noted that long established,
stand-alone financial systems are giving way to
more robust enterprise resource planning (ERP)
systems that provide a broader view of the
financial aspects of municipal management. The
appearance of more appropriate systems, both in
terms of price and functionality for the municipal
market, have appeared and are changing many of
the practices in mid-sized and smaller
municipalities. It also appears that early
implementations of ERP systems are nearing the
end of their lifecycle.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Infrastructure Asset Management
The move to require Tangible Capital Asset (TCA)
accounting in municipalities spurred the need for
better asset management systems. The major
benefits of better asset management systems is
that they lead to better planning, better
preventative maintenance and better purchasing
decisions. Moreover, the large and growing
breadth and sophistication of municipal assets has
enhanced the need for tracking–not just for roads
and facilities but for vehicles and other non-fixed
assets as well (i.e. computer hardware,
equipment, furniture, etc.)
Land Planning &
Development
Permitting Systems
Development and building permits are among the
highest volume interactions that municipalities
have with their citizens. Permitting systems and
managing accompanying inspections have been a
focus of automation for several decades. The
emergence of GIS and electronic drawings across
industry are drastically changing the requirements
for municipal systems. Compounding this has
been a shortening of the growth cycle in the
province allowing less time for municipalities to
‘catch up’ with applications or upgrades between
peak demand periods.
Server/Storage
Disaster Recovery
Space Shortage
‘Cloud’ storage has become a hot topic of
conversation among all businesses, and
municipalities are no exception. Local government
has some unique challenges with regard to record
retention, privacy and security but some have
started to explore partnerships among
municipalities for off-site disaster recovery and
back up.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Recommendation 4: Use the appropriate Governance Tools required by the Governance
Charter and Implementation Plan.
The Governance Tools develop in this project provide a path
forward for the groups looking to pursue these opportunities.
The package is based on a ‘stage-gate’ model that manages the
risk of participation. After each of the 3 defined stages, there is
a proposed gate that will require the entities to test whether or
not there is value for their municipality to proceed. This
approach, combined with the strong emphasis on governance,
will allow participants to know exactly what their roles and
responsibilities are and will limit effort should the remainder
of the group choose a path that is not fitting with the needs of
the individual participant.
After deciding on the implementation plan approach, the
creation of the Governance Charter will allow municipalities to select and use the most
appropriate Governance Tools for implementation. Municipalities should adapt the tools
that will allow them to achieve the desired result, and apply these in the prime opportunity
pilots.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
PROCUREMENT
Recommendation 5: Continue to share
procurement documents and further group
buying opportunities.
Many of the MISA members have been using
the MISA website, http://www.misa-asim.ca/,
as a repository for procurement documents
with the intent to share their efforts and
reduce the work required for others with
similar needs. We recommend that
municipalities continue to use these services
with the caveat that such documents
(Request for Proposals, Request for
Information, etc.) be used as a base and
customized by the member to the individual needs or the particular purchase.
Recommendation 6: Leverage procurement through group buying sources, such as the
Government of Alberta or related Associations.
Alberta municipalities qualify to purchase under the group purchasing agreements of the
Government of Alberta. There are many classes of purchase under these agreements that
municipalities should explore to reduce cost and standardize hardware and software where
possible. Municipalities should contact Service Alberta – Procurement Services to explore
opportunities.
As well, all Alberta municipalities are members of either (or both) the Alberta Association
of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC) or the Alberta Urban Municipalities
Association (AUMA). Both organizations have well established buying groups that may
provide opportunities for savings and standardization.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
RECOMMENDATIONS TO MISA
COLLABORATION
Recommendation 7: MISA should continue their leadership under this initiative and
encourage participation in the next phase of this initiative.
MISA members have been the driving force for this project. They should continue to display
this leadership by championing the next phase of this initiative. The next logical step to
garner the benefits of this project is to solicit champions for each of the opportunity areas
recommended in Recommendation 3. MISA should use its network and influence to garner
the efforts individual municipalities to take on this champion role. As well, MISA should
explore other grant funding to mitigate the cost of participation in the establishment of
these opportunity groups.
Recommendation 8: Explore ways to engage smaller, non-MISA member, municipalities
to participate.
Most of the MISA members in Alberta and the participants in this project came from
municipalities with population above 10,000. Efforts should be made to engage smaller
communities. The data suggested that the economies of scale model not only can provide
lower transactional costs for the provision of municipal services, but also often provide
systems that support greater service levels as well. These opportunities should be provided
to the smaller jurisdictions for participant, though cost and time required for participation
may be a barrier.
KNOWLEDGE SHARING
Recommendation 9: Act as a portal for knowledge sharing.
MISA Prairies should continue to influence the national organization of MISA of the
benefits of the use of their web site as a resource for collaboration. This can, not only be for
explicit document exchange but also means can be explored to share tacit knowledge and
networks. This will support the group purchasing aspects identified by participants and all
of the roles identified in Finding 7.
Recommendation 10: Develop standard definitions around a standard municipal service
delivery model.
One of MISA’s critical roles is providing standard language among IT professionals on how
they describe municipal services. MISA should continue to work with business area
partners to define a standard model to describe the delivery of municipal services. Such a
standard lexicon would have been invaluable in this project and would provide great
benefits in definition needs requirements moving forward.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
Recommendation 11: Foster sub-communities of action based on the IT Professionals’
roles defined in Finding 7.
Many of the areas of potential inter-municipal collaboration are not bound by application
sharing or joint development. Policy, standards, and special topics to expand expertise are
of critical value to Alberta municipalities and MISA is in a unique role to support these
collaborative opportunities, either on their own or in partnership with other organizations.
The chart below outlines the roles described in Finding 7 and some examples of means for
expanding knowledge sharing and collaboration.
Roles
Corporate Practice
(Partners)
IT Infrastructure
(Owners)
Business
Applications
(Enablers)
IT Practice (Lead)
The IT functions in the
organization partners with
other areas to plan
evaluate and deploy non-
business specific solutions
and practices. These
solutions may include
email, productivity
software, internet
browsers, etc. IT’s role is
that of being a subject
matter expert that can
contribute to the overall
discussion about corporate
direction and included the
following business areas:
information management
(content), asset access,
corporate policy
development, professional
support, corporate
leadership, and
communications.
This role characterizes the
IT function’s specific
domain around
information technology
hardware, infrastructure
and architecture and
included the following
business areas: security,
cloud (emerging trend),
telecom, economic
development, and
server/storage. This role
imply good stewardship of
the municipalities
investment and the
thoughtful interactions
with business areas to
understand business
needs and communicate
limitations or impact
associated with various
infrastructure choices.
IT professionals have a
role in providing their
expertise to aid in the
planning, purchase and
implementation of
business specific solutions
and included the following
business areas:
recreation, information
management,
infrastructure, land
planning & development,
financial management,
program and service
planning & monitoring,
cemeteries, professional
support, integrated service
delivery, geographic
information systems, and
council. Here they can
provide guidance or act on
behalf of the business area
to gather needs
requirements, assess fit
with architecture and long
term plans, and ensure
technical robustness of
products via questioning
potential vendors.
There are some areas in
the municipalities it is
critical that the IT
professional take a
leadership role, either
because of their other
responsibilities, experience
or technical expertise. This
role was described to
include IT planning,
applications management,
IT governance and
business intelligence.
MISA should look to collect
first hand descriptions of
best practices in the role
of corporate partner. Such
narratives will give insight
into others of how they
can continue to add value
to the overall strategic
conversation of the
municipality.
MISA should consider
offering conference
opportunities to discuss
the strengths and
weaknesses of cloud-
based solutions.
• Strategic value of
hosting vs. cloud
• Implications of US
hosting (Patriot Act)
MISA members should
look for opportunities to
present at non-IT
conferences of other
business area association,
such as the Alberta Parks
and Recreation Association
to foster understanding
and conversation among
IT and business
professionals.
MISA should continue to
solicit for the sharing of
policy and standards
documents among
municipalities to enhance
understanding in the
technical aspects of the
Lead role.

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
APPENDIX A: PRIORITIZED LIST OF AREAS OF INTEREST
Application Sharing or Joint DevelopmentApplication Sharing or Joint DevelopmentApplication Sharing or Joint DevelopmentApplication Sharing or Joint Development – indicates that we feel that there is an
opportunity for municipalities to share systems, contract to one another or jointly develop a
system for the delivery of this service. These will be the basis for further data gathering.
Community of PracticeCommunity of PracticeCommunity of PracticeCommunity of Practice – indicates opportunities for municipalities to develop some form of
group for the further exploration of these issues and a means to share best practices,
lessons learned, policy, procedure or tools. These will be passed on to MISA for further
exploration.
Group PurchasingGroup PurchasingGroup PurchasingGroup Purchasing – indicates opportunities for group purchasing to help in pricing offered
to municipalities. Opportunities may be available under current buying arrangements with
the municipal associations or through the Government of Alberta standing offer
agreements.
Votes Category Emphasis
Opportunity
Application
Sharing or
Joint
Development
Community
of Practice
Group
Purchasing
21 Recreation "CLASS" Replacement ✔ ✔ ✔
21
Information
Management,
Content
Records Management ✔ ✔
20 Security Technical Security ✔ ✔
19
Information
Management
Document Management ✔ ✔ ✔
19 Infrastructure Asset Management ✔ ✔ ✔
19
Land Planning &
Development
Permitting Systems ✔ ✔ ✔
19
Cloud (Emerging
Trend)
Migration to Cloud Solutions ✔ ✔
19 Telecom Migration to VOIP/SIP ✔ ✔
16 Asset Access Physical Credentialing Access ✔ ✔ ✔
15
Economic
Development
High Speed Fibre Strategy ✔
15
IT Strategy Planning
(New Category)
Visioning, Lifecycle Costing
and Strategy Best Practice
✔ ✔
14
Financial
Management
Financial Systems (ERP) ✔ ✔ ✔
14
Corp Policy
Development
Policy Sharing and
Collaborative Development
✔
13
Program & Service
Planning &
Monitoring
Electronic payments/POS ✔ ✔

Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
12 Cemeteries
Inventory and Records
Management
✔ ✔ ✔
12 Professional Support
PMO Tools, Operations and
Governance
✔ ✔ ✔
12
Applications
Management
Best Practices, Tools and
Resources
✔ ✔
11
IT Governance
(Operations
Management)
Policy and Procedure Sharing ✔ ✔
10
Integrated Service
Delivery
311/E311 211/E211 ✔ ✔ ✔
10 Corp Leadership Styles and Best Practices ✔
9 Parks
Geographic Information
Systems
✔ ✔ ✔
9 Council Electronic Council ✔ ✔ ✔
9 Communications
Best Practices, Tools and
Templates
✔
8 Business Intelligence
Reporting, Queries, Analysis,
Forecasting and Modelling
✔ ✔ ✔
8 Uncategorized Destruction of IT “stuff” ✔ ✔
7 Server/Storage
Disaster Recovery Space
Shortage
✔ ✔ ✔
7
Economic
Development
SMART City Initiative ✔

Regional Technology Service Delivery Evaluation
MISA Prairies
Summary Report
Confidential
APPENDIX B: CARD SORT RESULTS
Communities of Action
Corporate Practice
(Partners)
IT Infrastructure
(Owners)
Business Applications
(Enablers)
IT Practice (Lead)
Information
Management,
Content
Records
Management
Security
Technical
Security
Recreation
"CLASS"
Replacement
IT Strategy
Planning (New
Category)
Visioning, Lifecycle
Costing and
Strategy Best
Practice
Asset Access
Physical
Credentialing
Access
Cloud
(Emerging
Trend)
Migration to
Cloud
Solutions
Information
Management
Document
Management
Applications
Management
Best Practices,
Tools and
Resources
Corp Policy
Development
Policy Sharing
and
Collaborative
Development
Telecom
Migration to
VOIP/SIP
Infrastructure Asset Management
IT Governance
(Operations
Management)
Policy and
Procedure Sharing
Professional
Support
PMO Tools,
Operations and
Governance
Economic
Development
High Speed
Fibre Strategy
Land Planning &
Development
Permitting Systems
Business
Intelligence
Reporting,
Queries, Analysis,
Forecasting and
Modelling
Corp
Leadership
Styles and Best
Practices
Server/Storage
Disaster
Recovery
Space
Shortage
Financial
Management
Financial Systems
(ERP)
Uncategorized
Destruction of IT
“stuff”
Communicatio
ns
Best Practices,
Tools and
Templates
Program & Service
Planning &
Monitoring
Electronic
payments/POS
Economic
Development
SMART City
Initiative
Cemeteries
Inventory and
Records
Management
Professional
Support
PMO Tools,
Operations and
Governance
Integrated Service
Delivery
311/E311
211/E211
Geographic
Information
Systems
Parks
Council Electronic Council

Regional Tech Services Evaluation

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Regional Tech Services Evaluation

Similar to Regional Tech Services Evaluation (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Regional Tech Services Evaluation