january 28, 2020 · gary ricks office of corporation counsel legal counsel approval of minutes:...

January 28, 2020

Information Technology Board Meeting: Agenda

Meeting Details:

Date: January 28, 2020 Time: 9:30 AM Location: 200 E Washington St, Meeting Room 260 Chairman: Mr. Joseph O’Connor CIO: Mr. Ken L. Clark

Roll Call:

Previous IT Board Meeting Minutes:

1. Approval of the November 26, 2019 Meeting Minutes: Chairman Joseph O'Connor

2. Approval of the December 17, 2019 Working Board Memo: Chairman Joseph O'Connor

Status Updates:

3. ISA Report: Mr. Ken Clark

4. MBE/WBE/VBE/DOBE: Mr. Ed Klaunig

Action Items:

5. Resolution 20-01: Interim CIO Appointment and Signature Approval Authority, Chairman Joseph O'Connor

6. Resolution 20-02: Enhanced Access Review Committee Appointments, Mr. Elliott Patrick

7. Resolution 20-03: Approval of Technology Strategic Plan, Mr. Elliott Patrick

8. Resolution 20-04: Third Party Hardware and Software Policy, Mr. Elliott Patrick

9. Resolution 20-05: Information Technology Contract Review and Approval Policy, Mr. Elliott Patrick

10. Resolution 20-06: Berkone, Inc., Mr. Elliott Patrick

11. Resolution 20-07: KSM Consulting LLC, Mr. Daniel Rieger

12. Resolution 20-08: Kronos, Mr. Elliott Patrick

13. Resolution 20-09: Fady Qaddoura Recognition of Service, Chairman Joseph O'Connor

14. Resolution 20-10: Ken Clark Recognition of Service, Chairman Joseph O'Connor

Information Technology Board Meeting: Agenda

Discussion Items:

15. Annual Survey: Ms. Abbey Brands

Meeting Adjournment

Information Technology Board Meeting: Minutes

Meeting Details:

Date: November 26, 2019 Time: 9:30 AM -12:00 PM Location: City-County Building, Room 260

Chairman: Mr. Joseph O’Connor

CIO: Mr. Ken L. Clark

Information Technology Board Members - Present:

Mr. Joseph O’Connor Marion County Assessor Chairman/Voting Member

Chief Louis Dezelan Marion County Sheriff Proxy Voting Member

Myla Eldridge Marion County Clerk Voting Member

Claudia Fuentes Marion County Treasurer Voting Member

Holli Harrington City-County Council Appointee Voting Member

Judge James Osborn Marion County Courts Voting Member

Chief Kevin Wethington Public Safety Communications Voting Member

Ken L. Clark Information Services Agency CIO

Gary Ricks Office of Corporation Counsel Legal Counsel

Approval of Minutes:

Approval of the September 24, 2019 IT Board Minutes Ms. Myla Eldridge made a motion to approve the September 24, 2019 IT Board Minutes and the motion was seconded by Chief Louis Dezelan. The motion passed unanimously.

IT Board Business:

No IT Board business was presented at the November 26, 2019 meeting.

ISA Report:

Mr. Ken L. Clark, CIO, presented the November 2019 ISA Report. Report is available for viewing in the November 26, 2019 IT Board Packet online at: https://citybase-cms-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/e4d4819213054f0097357bf346ccf6d5.pdf.

https://citybase-cms-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/e4d4819213054f0097357bf346ccf6d5.pdf

https://citybase-cms-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/e4d4819213054f0097357bf346ccf6d5.pdf

Information Technology Board Meeting: Minutes

Action Items:

Resolution 19-35: Resolution to Approve Additional Expenditure with Cincinnati Bell Technology Solutions, Inc. for Avaya Maintenance and Support ISA recommended approval from the IT Board to continue the maintenance and support of the Avaya systems and to spend an additional amount not to exceed Two Hundred Forty-Two Thousand Four Hundred Nine Dollars and Four Cents ($242,409.04); for a revised total amount not to exceed Six Hundred Forty-One Thousand Six Hundred Seven Dollars and Zero Cents ($641,607.00). Chief Kevin Wethington made a motion to approve Resolution 19-35. The motion was seconded by Chief Louis Dezelan and the motion passed unanimously. Resolution 19-36: Resolution to Approve Additional Expenditure with Service Express, Inc. ISA recommended approval of additional expenditure for SEI hardware maintenance in an additional amount not to exceed Two Hundred Sixty Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($260,000.00); for a revised total amount not to exceed Six Hundred Thirty-Five Thousand Seven Hundred Seven Dollars and Zero Cents ($635,707.00). Ms. Myla Eldridge made a motion to approve Resolution 19-36. The motion was seconded by Ms. Holli Harrington and the motion passed unanimously. Resolution 19-37: Resolution to Authorize Expenditure with Proofpoint, Inc. ISA recommended contracting with Proofpoint, Inc. for spam filter, virus protection and related email services, in an amount not to exceed Four Hundred Forty-One Thousand Seven Hundred Sixty-Three Dollars and Eighty-Eight Cents ($441,763.88).

Chief Louis Dezelan made a motion to approve Resolution 19-37. The motion was seconded by Ms. Myla Eldridge and the motion passed unanimously. Resolution 19-38: Resolution to Approve Additional Expenditure with Clawson Communications, Inc. for Wiring Services ISA recommended approval from the IT Board to continue with Clawson for additional wiring and related services and to spend an additional amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($250,000.00); for a revised total amount not to exceed Three Million Four Hundred Fifty-Seven Thousand Fifty-Seven Dollars and Thirty-Two Cents ($3,457,057.32). Chief Kevin Wethington made a motion to approve Resolution 19-38. The motion was seconded by Ms. Myla Eldridge and the motion passed unanimously.

Discussion Items:

Mr. Elliott Patrick provided a transition update for the current infrastructure services vendor, Bell Techlogix. There being no further business to discuss, Chief Louis Dezelan made a motion for adjournment and the meeting was concluded.

The next scheduled IT Board Meeting is January 28, 2019

200 E. Washington Street, Suite 1942 Indianapolis, IN 46204-3327 Phone 317-327-3100

MEMORANDA OF MEETING

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BOARD WORKING BOARD December 17, 2019

City County Building, Meeting Room 260 9:30 AM

Members in Attendance: Chairman Joseph O’Connor, Judge James Osborn, Mr. Fady Qaddoura, Chief Kevin Wethington, Chief Louis Dezelan Also in attendance: Mr. Ken Clark, ISA CIO; Mr. Elliott Patrick, ISA COO; Mr. Gary Ricks, OCC. The Marion County Information Technology Board (“IT Board”) conducted a Working Board Session on Tuesday, December 17th at 9:30 AM. The meeting took place in Meeting Room 260 of the City-County Building, located at 200 E. Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana, 46204.

Discussion Items:

2020 Strategic Plan

No votes were taken. The meeting concluded at 12:00 PM.

Joseph O’ Connor IT Board Chairman

Claudia Fuentes IT Board Secretary

ISA Board ReportJanuary 28, 2020

Enterprise Projects

Project Phase Target Status

eCommerce Processing Transition Complete 12/31/2019

Indy Performs Dashboard & Data Warehouse Pilot Complete 12/31/2019

Indy 3.0: Public Meeting Management Pilot Executing 1/31/2020

Indy 3.0: Digital Contract Processing – Implementation Executing 3/2/2020

Data Center Migration Executing 04/30/2020

Intranet (Gateway) Sites Migration Executing 04/30/2020

Windows 10 Rollout Executing 3/31/2020

Kronos Timekeeping Expansion – MCSO Executing 4/30/2020

Unified Communications Implementation On hold TBD

Indy 3.0: AP Automation – Implementation On hold TBD

PC Refresh Catch-up Planning TBD

Vendor Service Level Agreements

November Service Level Agreements

Bell Techlogix Number of SLAs SLAs Achieved

Service Desk 12 10

Deskside 12 12

Data Center/ Network 12 9

Daniel Associates, Inc. Number of SLAs SLAs Achieved

Application Enhancement Services 3 3

Application Maintenance & Support 4 4

*November & December 2019 were transition months for Bell Techlogix.

SLAs were reported, but not enforced during this time.

Vendor Service Level Agreements

December Service Level Agreements

Bell Techlogix Number of SLAs SLAs Achieved

Service Desk 12 11

Deskside 12 11

Data Center/ Network 12 11

Daniel Associates, Inc. Number of SLAs SLAs Achieved

Application Enhancement Services 3 3

Application Maintenance & Support 4 4

*November & December 2019 were transition months for Bell Techlogix.

SLAs were reported, but not enforced during this time.

Customer Satisfaction

95% 92% 94% 94% 97% 96% 95% 97% 93% 92% 95% 96%90%

91%

92%

93%

94%

95%

96%

97%

98%

99%

100%

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Customer Satisfaction Score2019

Financial Management

2019 ISA YTD Expenses by Character Character 2019 Budget YTD Spend Encumbered Total $ Total % Remaining Budget

Character 1: Personnel $2,817,512 $2,753,930 $0 $2,753,930 97.74% $63,582

Character 2: Supplies $90,500 $72,571 $506 $73,077 80.75% $17,423

Character 3: Services $27,165,520 $20,683,272 $6,333,750 $27,017,022 99.45% $148,498

Character 4: Capital $200,000 $12,053 $57,568 $69,621 34.81% $130,379

Total $30,273,532 $23,521,826 $6,391,824 $29,913,650 98.81% $359,882

$0

$5,000,000

$10,000,000

$15,000,000

$20,000,000

$25,000,000

$30,000,000

$35,000,000

Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Character 1

Character 2

Character 3

Character 4

Total Budget

Financial Management

2019 ISA YTD Revenue by Source

Revenue Source Budget Billed % Billed Collected % Collected

Internal Chargeback $30,840,427 $29,814,312 97% $29,634,035 99%

External Chargeback $473,198 $746,715 158% $1,014,294 136%

Miscellaneous $0 $0 N/A $43,564 N/A

Total $31,313,625 $30,561,027 $30,691,893

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Budgeted Revenue Accounts Receivable Collected

2019 Minority, Women, Veteran & Disabled-Owned Business Enterprise

Information Technology Board

January 28, 2020

Ed Klaunig, Chief Financial Officer

Notes

Only MBE, WBE, VBE and DOBE’s on the City’s certified vendor list are being counted towards this calculation. All MBE, WBE, VBE and DOBE’s not on the list are encouraged to obtain City certification.

ISA thanks our core vendor-partners: Bell Techlogix and Daniels Associates, Inc. for their efforts supporting this initiative.

Certification

City State/Fed

Esource Resources IT Staffing/Consulting MBE/VBE MBE/SDVOSB

Vespa Group IT Consulting VBE SDVOSB

Commercial Office Environments Office Furniture WBE WBE

Rite Quality Office Supplies Office Furniture/Supplies N/A MBE

Events: OMWBD Year End Forum on December 11th at the Central Library.

Vendors:

XBE Outreach

MBE/WBE/VBE/DOBEStatistics for 4th Quarter (2019)

Total Char 2-3-4 Spending: $4,701,321

Eligible Char 2-3-4 Spending: $2,659,895

XBE Spending: $1,012,177

XBE % of Eligible Spending: 38.05% (Goal: 27%)

# of Vendors Total Spent Percent Goal Variance

MBE 3 $69,450 2.61% 15% -12. 39%

WBE 4 $877,174 32.98% 8% 24.98%

VBE 1 $65,553 2.46% 3% -0.54%

DOBE 0 $0 0% 1% -1%

MBE/WBE/VBE/DOBEStatistics for YTD 4th Quarter (2019)

Total Char 2-3-4 Spending: $24,267,051

Eligible Char 2-3-4 Spending: $13,201,874

XBE Spending: $5,644,304

XBE % of Eligible Spending: 42.75% (Goal: 27%)

# of Vendors Total Spent Percent Goal Variance

MBE 3 $465,523 3.53% 15% -11.47%

WBE 7 $4,846,605 36.71% 8% 28.71%

VBE 1 $332,176 2.52% 3% -0.48%

DOBE 0 $0 0% 1% -1%

MBE_WBE_VBE _DOBE Report - Qtr 4 2019

Vendor $ Sub-Contract Vendor MBE_Amt WBE_Amt VBE_Amt DOBE_Amt

ATOs

$0 $0 $0 $0

Smart I.T. Staffing $30,493 $0 $0 $0

Sondhi Solutions $35,456 $0 $0 $0

Vespa Group LLC $0 $0 $10,560 $0

$986,390

Bell Techlogix

$0 $0 $0 $0

Netlogx $0 $12,000 $0 $0

$456,540

Corvee, Inc. d/b/a Dixon Phone Place

$0 $1,635 $0 $0

$1,635

Daniels Associates, Inc.

$0 $801,944 $0 $0


$922,516

Guidesoft, Inc dba Knowledge Services

$0 $57,811 $0 $0


$57,811

KSM Consulting

$0 $0 $0 $0

Guilford Group $3,500 $0 $0 $0


$64,222

Matrix Integration

$0 $3,784 $0 $0

$3,784

Z-Eligible Vendors With Zero XBE Spend

$0 $0 $0 $0

$166,997

Total: $2,659,895 $69,450 $877,174 $65,553

2.61% 32.98% 2.46%

Minority Owned Business - MBE = 15%

Women Owned Business - WBE = 8%

Veteran Owned Business - VBE = 3%

Disability Owned Business - DOBE = 1%

$0

0.00%

MBE_WBE_VBE _DOBE Report - YTD Qtr 4 2019


ATOs

$0 $0 $0 $0

Smart I.T. Staffing $135,338 $0 $0 $0



$5,037,834

Bell Techlogix

$0 $0 $0 $0

Netlogx $0 $12,000 $0 $0

$456,540

Briljent LLC

$0 $47,685 $0 $0

$47,685

Commercial Office Environments Inc.

$0 $2,490 $0 $0

$2,490

Corvee, Inc. d/b/a Dixon Phone Place

$0 $11,485 $0 $0


$11,486

Daniels Associates, Inc.

$0 $4,468,839 $0 $0


Vespa Group LLC $0 $0 $271,013 $0

$5,392,266

Guidesoft, Inc dba Knowledge Services

$0 $296,092 $0 $0

$296,092

Guilford Group LLC

$107,170 $0 $0 $0

$107,170

KSM Consulting

$0 $0 $0 $0

Guilford Group $3,500 $0 $0 $0


$340,921

Matrix Integration

$0 $8,014 $0 $0

$8,014


Z-Eligible Vendors With Zero XBE Spend

$0 $0 $0 $0

$1,501,376

Total: $13,201,874 $465,523 $4,846,605 $332,176

3.53% 36.71% 2.52%

Minority Owned Business - MBE = 15%

Women Owned Business - WBE = 8%

Veteran Owned Business - VBE = 3%

Disability Owned Business - DOBE = 1%

$0

0.00%


RESOLUTION 20-01

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY BOARD

Resolution to Appoint Interim Chief Information Officer of the Information Services Agency and Authorize Signature Authority to Approve Information

Technology Contracts WHEREAS, the Information Technology Board (“IT Board”) shall employ or retain by a personal service contract a Chief Information Officer (“CIO”) as stated in Section 281-221 of the revised code of the Consolidated City and County (the “Code”); and WHEREAS, the CIO shall have such qualification and experience as set by the IT Board; and WHEREAS, the IT Board appoints Mr. Elliott Patrick as the Interim CIO; and WHEREAS, the Interim CIO shall manage and supervise the Information Services Agency (“ISA”); and WHEREAS, the Interim CIO shall be responsible for the planning, organization and management of ISA, in accordance with the organization plans and policies approved by the IT Board; and WHEREAS, the IT Board authorizes the Interim CIO to perform all specific duties listed in Section 281-222 of the Code; and WHEREAS, Section 281-212(a)(3) of the Code empowers the IT Board to review, approve and administer major information technology contracts; and WHEREAS, the IT Board's written approval is necessary before any subject agency executes a contract for IT goods or services pursuant to Section 281-223 of the Code; and WHEREAS, the IT Board is authorized by Section 281-212(a)(14) of the Code to delegate any of its functions to the CIO. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the IT Board appoints Elliott Patrick as the Interim CIO and authorizes Elliott Patrick to act on behalf of the IT Board and the ISA, effective February 1, 2020, and to perform the duties of the CIO in accordance with this Resolution and the Code; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the IT Board authorizes the Interim CIO to approve IT contracts executed by ISA or subject agencies with a total not to exceed amount under Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00), without IT Board approval; and


BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the IT Board grants the Interim CIO all authority previously granted to any previous CIO or Interim CIO. _______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board January 28, 2020


RESOLUTION 20-02


Resolution to Reaffirm the Appointed Members of the Enhanced Access Review Committee

WHEREAS, Section 285-306 of Code of Consolidated City of Indianapolis/Marion County (“Code”) empowers the chairperson of the Information Technology Board (“IT Board”) to appoint members to the Enhanced Access Review Committee (“Committee”) and requires the IT Board to approve such appointments, and

WHEREAS, the Code permits the IT Board to appoint an indefinite number of members to an indefinite term; and

WHEREAS, the Board wishes to continue the practice of appointing members who represent many offices and viewpoints within City-County government.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the chairperson hereby appoints and the IT Board hereby approves the appointment of the following individuals as members of the Committee, effective immediately:

Joseph O’Connor, Marion County Assessor, proxy Tara Acton-Shaver Julie Voorhies, Marion County Auditor, proxy Michele Pero Claudia Fuentes, Marion County Treasurer, proxy Joshua Peters Myla Eldridge, Marion County Clerk of the Courts, proxy Russell Hollis Brett Wineinger, Office of Finance and Management Geneva Roembke, Information Services Agency Katherine Sweeney Bell, Marion County Recorder

Courtney Bennett, Department of Business and Neighborhood Services

The IT Board appoints Geneva Roembke as the chairperson of the Committee. All members shall serve until replaced or removed as a member by vote of the IT Board.

The IT Board further directs the Chief Information Officer to assign Information Services Agency (“ISA”) staff to attend the monthly Committee meetings to advise the Committee on the ISA’s perspective on enhanced access issues.

_______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board January 28, 2020


RESOLUTION 20-03


Resolution to Approve Technology Strategic Plan

WHEREAS, the Information Services Agency (“ISA”) Chief Information Officer (“CIO”), has the power and duty pursuant to Section 281-222 of the Revised Code of Indianapolis and Marion County:

• To coordinate the preparation of a master plan for IT Operations.

WHEREAS, ISA has presented its master plan (attached).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the IT Board approves the attached master plan set forth by ISA to be effective January 29, 2020.


2020 - 2024

IT Strategic Plan2020 - 2023

As of January 2020

To provide our partners with exceptional technology services

To lead government transformation through collaborative partnerships and modern technology

Service Provider + Trusted Advisor

Collaborative Driver

VISION

MISSION

Technology Strategic Plan | 1

VALUES

GUIDING PRINCIPLES

Advance internal and external partnerships

Maintain our fundamental focus, while promoting enterprise growth

Revere the responsibility of tax payer dollars

Focus on opportunities for equitable government service

Preserve the security and stability of our environment

The following values serve as the standard by which ISA operates. These are key tenants for the way we interact and serve our partners.

The following guiding principles allow ISA to navigate and prioritize projects and initiatives, regardless of size or scope.

Expand access to government services

Capture legally-mandated revenue

Increase efficiency and reduce the cost of operations

Foster health and safety in our community

Comply with relevant legal regulations and standards


CY 2020 CY 2021 CY 2022 CY 2023

Building Enterprise

Architecture

Advance Digital

Workplace

Expand Constituent

Service

Enhance Data

Capabilities

Process Automation Pilot Process Automation Implementation

Business ArchitectureTechnical Architecture

Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity

Partner IT Roadmap

Identity & Access Management

Enterprise Security Program

Enterprise Phone SystemVideo Conferencing

AP AutomationCall Center

Enterprise Content Collaboration

Remote Work Program

Kiosk PilotEnterprise Workflow Management

Business PortalMulti-Channel Service Platforms

Satellite Sites

Data Dashboard ProgramIntelligence-led Policing

Data ArchitectureData Warehouse Program

Document Management Program

Transparency Portal


Project Roadmap


RESOLUTION 20-04


Resolution to Approve Third-Party Hardware and Software Policy

WHEREAS, the Information Technology Board ("IT Board") has the following powers and duties

pursuant to Section 281-212 of the Revised Code of Indianapolis and Marion County:

• To establish and revise information technology guidelines, standards and benchmark processes for subject agencies and other users;

• To develop, maintain and communicate IT services policy and administrative procedures for users; and

WHEREAS, the Information Services Agency ("ISA") has drafted a Third-Party Hardware and

Software Policy (attached).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the IT Board approves the attached Third-Party Hardware and Software Policy set forth by ISA to be effective January 29, 2020. _______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board

January 28, 2020

Information Services Agency IT Policies:

Third Party Hardware and Software Policy

2

DRAFT - for review and discussion only

Third Party Hardware and Software Policy

Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................... 3

Scope ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Policy ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Definitions ................................................................................................................................ 3

Roles and Responsibilities ..................................................................................................... 3

Exceptions ...................................................................................................................................................... 5

Disclaimer ....................................................................................................................................................... 5

Policy Approval .............................................................................................................................................. 5

Appendix: Application Technology Standards ........................................................................................... 6

3


Third-party Hardware and Software Policy

Purpose This policy outlines the authorization, implementation and use of all third-party hardware and software in the

City of Indianapolis and Marion County Information technology environment. As defined in sections 281-223

and 281-233 of the Revised Code of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis and Marion County, the

Information Services Agency (ISA) is responsible for software licensing compliance, hardware and software

purchases, and custom software applications on all City/County workstations.

To reduce risk to the enterprise, ISA mandates that all software and hardware be properly vetted for

compatibility with the City/County technology environment to ensure proper installation, functionality and

support. The unlicensed use, copying and sale of computer software, or use of personal software licenses

for business use, is illegal. ISA prohibits any use of software that violates the manufacturer’s license

agreement and/or warranty.

Scope This policy applies to all third-party software and hardware purchased, leased, accessed or installed by

subject agencies.

Policy

Definitions • Copyright – The legal rights of an author under federal law to control the reproduction, distribution,

adaption, and performance of their hardware/software. The copying of a copyrighted work without

the permission of its author may subject the copier to both civil and criminal penalties.

• Custom Software – Software created for a customer that is tailored to that customer’s specific

requirements.

• License – A legally binding agreement in which one party grants another party certain rights and

privileges of use.

• Off-the-shelf – Software that is available for purchase, not specially designed or custom-made.

• Piracy – An individual or organization reproducing and/or using unlicensed copies of software for

operations. This extends to the use of software beyond contractually allotted license counts.

• Subject Agencies – Any and all agencies, officers, offices, boards, commissions, divisions and

departments of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis & Marion County which receive information

technology services from ISA.

• Third-party Hardware – Hardware provided by organizations other than ISA.

• Third-party Software – Programs provided by organizations other than ISA.

• User – Any and all subject agencies as defined herein and any and all other entities which use the

services of ISA.

Roles and Responsibilities

ISA, along with each agency, department and vendor, has responsibilities to adhere to when implementing

a third-party solution. By adhering to these responsibilities, we ensure solutions that fit the business needs

4


of agencies and departments, and the technology requirements of our IT environment while also satisfying

contractual obligations.

Agency/Department Responsibilities

City/County agencies and departments are to contact ISA for assistance in any evaluation of new

hardware/software, whether custom developed or off-the-shelf, which needs to be installed and used in the

City/County enterprise. By partnering with ISA to consult all software and hardware purchases or upgrade

requests, City/County agencies and departments will receive assistance from ISA when implementing any

third-party software/hardware. City/County agencies and departments should provide licensing information

for the purpose of tracking by ISA. Furthermore, it is important users share information as appropriate that

may be useful in combating the improper use of computer hardware/software. Doing so, mitigates legal risk

to the end-users, agencies, departments and ISA.

ISA Responsibilities

It is the overall responsibility of ISA to maintain the security and efficiency of the City/County IT

environment. When possible, ISA will ensure all hardware/software purchases and requests are routed

through the proper City/County purchasing procedures and implemented under the change management

procedure. When a new third-party solution is being implemented, ISA will coordinate the review, testing

and certification of the use of the third-party hardware/software in the City/County enterprise. All third-party

solutions will include a licensed and functional test environment. For custom solutions, ISA will provide

current standards for custom-developed software at start of project (see appendix).

ISA works diligently to prevent any computer software piracy. This includes maintaining all software

licenses, as well as an accurate inventory of software currently loaded on all PC’s or available for

deployment. ISA also maintains controls to ensure computing hardware, software and systems are all within

compliance with copyrights and licensing restrictions.

Vendor Responsibility

Any vendor implementing a solution in the City/County enterprise must adhere to the processes and

standards defined by ISA, specifically application development standards (see appendix). All

documentation, including design, installation, support and maintenance documents regarding the third-party

or custom software, must be provided. All necessary system requirements, to include required system rights

or privileges, memory allocation and disk space usage for shared servers, client workstations, and network,

must also be provided in a reasonable amount of time prior to implementation.

Upon implementation, vendors will coordinate all needs and activities with ISA and the respective agency or

department through approved ISA change management procedures. All application support and

maintenance will be coordinated and supervised by ISA. Vendors will ensure all applications maintain

updated compatibility with the current operating system and infrastructure standards within the City/County

environment. This includes all web-based applications supporting the most recent version of the default

Microsoft Windows internet browser.

When applicable, ISA will request vendors supply end-user documentation and an application support

service level agreement. Doing so, ensures efficient usability, support and maintenance of the third-party

solution.

5


IT Board Responsibility

It is the responsibility of the Information Technology Board to ensure budget proposals relating to new third-

party software or hardware acquisitions include adequate resources for the purchase of sufficient computer

software, hardware, maintenance and support to meet those needs. The Board may delegate these

responsibilities to the Chief Information Officer at their discretion.

Exceptions ISA Management has the authority to allow exceptions in rare and compelling cases. City/County agencies

and departments should seek exceptions through their ISA Business Services Consultant. Exceptions may

only be granted by the Chief Information Officer. If an exception is requested and denied,

agencies/departments may appeal the decision as outlined in section 281-224 of the Revised Code of the

Consolidated City of Indianapolis and Marion County. Please contact the ISA Chief Information Officer to

initiate this process. The Application Technology Standards in the appendix of this policy may change

without IT Board approval to allow ISA to maintain support levels and an updated technology environment.

Disclaimer This policy is subject to change without notice. A current and complete list of ISA policies are maintained on

the ISA Intranet site.

Policy Approval

Per Indianapolis Marion County Municipal Code Sec. 281-212.11, the City of Indianapolis/Marion County IT Board has the power and authority to promulgate rules and regulations for the efficient administration of its policies and procedures for users. This policy has been reviewed and approved by the IT Board and will be enforced as of the effective date by the Chief Information Officer. It is the responsibility of all City/County IT users to be in compliance with this policy at all times.

Policy Sign-off

IT Board Chair, Joseph O’Connor Chief Information Officer, Ken Clark

Date Date

6


Appendix: Application Technology Standards

Project Management

Scrum Framework

Agile methodology

Daily Stand-up Status

Programming Languages

.Net Framework 4.5+

Visual Studio 2015

C#.net

Programming Tools

Jquery

Entity Framework 6+

ASP.Net Razor Syntax

Bootstrap responsive design

Microsoft Unity Dependency Injection

Unit of Work

Repository Pattern

Automapper

Log4Net

WCF

Web API

JSON

AJAX

MVC design pattern

Subversion version control

AngularJS

Programming Technologies

Cloud Compatible

Crystal Reports

Microsoft Unit Testing framework

Database

SQL 2016

7


SQL 2017

SQL 2019

User Interface

Internet Explorer 10 or higher

Firefox 3.6 or higher

Chrome 12 or higher

HTML 5 and responsive design to work on any device

Operating System

Microsoft Windows Server 2016

Microsoft Windows Server 2019


RESOLUTION 20-05


Resolution to Approve Information Technology Contract Review and Approval Policy

WHEREAS, the Information Technology Board ("IT Board") has the following powers and duties

pursuant to Section 281-212 of the Revised Code of Indianapolis and Marion County:

• To establish and revise information technology guidelines, standards and benchmark processes for subject agencies and other users;

• To develop, maintain and communicate IT services policy and administrative procedures for users; and

WHEREAS, the Information Services Agency (“ISA”) has drafted an Information Technology Contract

Review and Approval Policy (attached) which shall replace the previous IT Governance Policy

approved in Resolution 13-10 on February 26, 2013.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the IT Board approves the attached Information Technology Contract Review and Approval Policy set forth by ISA to be effective January 29, 2020, which shall replace the previous IT Governance Policy approved in Resolution 13-10 on February 26, 2013. _______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board

January 28, 2020

Information Services Agency IT Policies:

IT Contract Review and Approval Policy

2

Effective Date: 1/28/2020 Revised Date: 1/22/2020


Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................... 3

Scope ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Policy ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Definitions ..................................................................................................................................................... 3

Information Technology Board Authority ...................................................................................................... 3

IT Contract Approval ..................................................................................................................................... 4

Procedure........................................................................................................................................................ 5

Prior to Contracting ....................................................................................................................................... 5

Legal Review ................................................................................................................................................ 5

Policy Compliance ........................................................................................................................................ 6

Exceptions .................................................................................................................................................... 6

Appeal Process ............................................................................................................................................ 6

Disclaimer ....................................................................................................................................................... 7

Policy Approval .............................................................................................................................................. 7

3



Purpose This policy outlines the review and approval process for all Information Technology contracts throughout the

Consolidated City of Indianapolis & Marion County.

The Marion County Information Technology Board, and by extension the Chief Information Officer (CIO)

and the Information Services Agency (ISA) are responsible for reviewing all IT contracts prior to execution.

Review by the IT Board and ISA ensures that:

• Software and hardware meet the standards of City/County environment.

• Systems are not introduced to the City/County environment which will harm the integrity of systems, data and/or users.

• Legal language in the contract adequately protects the City/County, its data and its users.

• Subject Agencies are advised by ISA of industry best practices for information technology legal terms and conditions.

Scope This policy applies to all IT contracts both originating from the Information Services Agency as well as

Subject Agencies (see Definitions), regardless of whether they are on the City/County network managed by

ISA.

Policy

Definitions • IT – All aspects of information technology. This includes software and hardware (whether on

City/County network or not). It also includes website domains, data processing and related services

as well as telecommunications. However, it does not include specialized scientific or medical

equipment, unless that equipment has a piece of hardware or software which will require

management by ISA.

• Revised Code – The Revised Code of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis & Marion County.

• Subject Agencies – Any and all agencies, officers, offices, boards, commissions, divisions and

departments of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis & Marion County which receive information

technology services from ISA (this excludes those listed in the Exceptions section of this policy).

Information Technology Board Authority

The IT Board is comprised of individuals who represent city departments, county agencies, and the

judicial branch of county government as well as appointed citizens from the community who are also IT

professionals. The IT Board meets regularly (at the discretion of the chairperson) to review and evaluate

4


technology resolutions and projects undertaken by the enterprise. The IT Board is responsible for the

cost-effective provision of quality information systems and services including telecommunications.

IT Board - Powers and Duties Pursuant to Section 281 of the Revised Code, the IT Board has the following powers and duties (See Article

II section 281- 212 of the Information Technology Board article for a complete list).

• Review, approve and administer major IT contracts and make recommendations concerning all

information budgets;

• Approve all operating systems, contracts and expenditures for IT services, equipment purchase,

rent or lease, consultants, management or technical personnel, studies, programs and IT materials

or supplies for any and all users.

IT Contract Approval

Delegation of Authority to the Chief Information Officer While the IT Board has the power and duty to approve all operating systems, contracts and expenditures for

IT Services, the IT Board may delegate to the current or interim CIO to approve contracts on the IT Board’s

behalf, based on criteria established by the IT Board. This is typically achieved through an IT Board

Resolution. This delegation authority is made pursuant to Section 281-212(a)(14) of the Revised Code.

If a Subject Agency has a question about whether a contract needs CIO or IT Board approval, please reach

out to the ISA BSC and/or ISA Contracts and Legal Counsel to receive proper guidance. Additionally, if the

Subject Agency needs the contract executed expeditiously, they shall notify the ISA BSC and ISA Contracts

and Legal Counsel to assist in quick review of potential contract.

When the CIO approves an IT contract, the CIO is signing that the contract: 1) meets the standards of the

City/County IT environment; 2) contains proper IT terms, or the Subject Agency has been advised of the

risk in not putting those terms in the contract, and the Subject Agency assumes the risk; and 3) does not

present unnecessary risk to the security of City/County data and IT systems.

Contract Approval Limits Whenever a new CIO or Interim CIO is named, the IT Board may approve a resolution delegating signature

authority for IT Contracts below a certain dollar amount, or other criteria so deemed appropriate. A copy of

the current CIO delegation authority can be obtained from the ISA BSC or ISA Contracts and Legal

Counsel. All contracts executed by the CIO through this delegation are reported to the IT Board at every IT

Board meeting.

Signature Line

All IT contracts must include a signature line for the CIO, which reads as follows, using the name of the

current or interim CIO.

Approved by the Information Services Agency

By: _____________________________________

Jane Doe, Chief Information Officer

5


Subject Agencies must have their IT contracts reviewed by the Office of Corporation Counsel (OCC), in

collaboration with ISA’s counsel, prior to gathering signatures from the vendor and agency head,

department director, and/or relevant board.

There are many factors which can impact the integrity and security of City/County data, persons, and

property, which must be vetted by OCC and ISA prior to signature.

Procedure

Prior to Contracting Prior to selecting a solution, Subject Agencies must work with their ISA Business Services Consultant

(BSC) and the Purchasing division of the City of Indianapolis to ensure they find a solution to fit their need,

adhering to all relevant procurement practices.

Business Services Review Subject Agencies are required to work with their ISA BSC to identify their technological needs and find the

appropriate solution.

A BSC can help determine the following:

• If a solution already exists in the enterprise to meet the need.

• What types of standards the solution must meet in order to ensure compatibility.

• To what extent the ISA team can aid in configuration, implementation and on-going support, and to

what extent the Subject Agency will need to seek out a third party to provide these services.

• Where the data resides, and what kind of data already exists.

Competition IT contracts are subject to the same competition guidelines and procurement requirements set forth by the

Office of Finance and Management – Purchasing Division. Regardless of the funding source, grant or

otherwise, this IT Contract Review and Approval policy will continue to apply and need to be followed.

Legal Review All draft IT contracts should be reviewed by both an OCC attorney and ISA’s counsel prior to the vendor

signing the contract.

The purpose of this review is to ensure the terms and conditions of the contract adequately protect the

City/County. ISA can advise the Subject Agency on best practices regarding terms and conditions, project

scope, and service level agreements, where appropriate. ISA counsel review will ensure the contract

properly addresses the following, where appropriate:

• Ownership and treatment of confidential or sensitive information, including “Personal Information”

such as social security numbers, driver’s license numbers, credit card numbers, financial account

numbers, etc.

• Ownership and use of City/County data, including where the data is stored and the standards for

handling different types of data.

• Intellectual Property rights.

6


• Data center security requirements and data breach notifications.

• Insurance coverage for Technology Errors and Omissions and Data Breach/Cyber Liability

Subject Agencies should reach out to OCC and ISA at least three (3) months prior to target date of contract

execution or renewal to allow enough time for review, questions and the signature process. This time period

also allows for unforeseen workloads of legal counsel and ISA BSCs.

Additional time should be afforded if the IT Contract requires IT Board approval (dollar amount of IT contract

is above the CIO delegation authority) or involves complicated terms and conditions. Because the IT Board

meets at the Chairperson’s discretion and not necessarily every month, an additional two (2) months of

review may be required depending on contract complexity and the date of the next scheduled IT Board

meeting. Communication with an agency or department’s BSC, OCC counsel and ISA counsel is the key to

reducing delays and extended contract execution timelines.

Policy Compliance If a Subject Agency has failed to seek and obtain the proper review and approval before purchasing IT

goods and services, ISA may either 1) remove and or disconnect from the network any unapproved

hardware or software or 2) seek IT Board authorization to void the contract.

IT contracts not signed by the CIO are typically sent to ISA once they reach OFM – Purchasing Division.

This will lead to delays in contract processing for Subject Agencies as the contract will still need to be

subject to the reviews and approvals outlined in this policy.

Exceptions Within section 141-101(b) of the Revised Code, some organizations are exempt from this policy. These

currently include the City-County Council, Circuit Court and Marion Superior Court. Additionally, Public

Safety Communications is also exempt as laid out in Indiana Code 36-8-15 et seq. This Chapter authorizes

the creation of a board and provides that board with the authority and power to do a variety of things,

including entering into any contract it deems necessary to fulfill its statutory mission and duties. As this

power is authorized by state statute, a local ordinance cannot preempt a state law.

Although these entities are exceptions to this policy, they are both strongly encouraged and invited to follow

the processes laid out in this policy.

Appeal Process The CIO has the authority to defer any contract to the IT Board for review, regardless of the criteria

established in the IT Board’s delegation of authority. In the event the CIO refuses to sign a Subject

Agency’s IT contract, the Subject Agency may bring their contract before the IT Board for their approval. In

the event the IT Board does not approve the contract, the Subject Agency may appeal, per Section 281-224

of the Revised Code.

All resolutions for Subject Agencies are drafted such that even after the IT Board’s approval, they are still

subject to the CIO’s approval. In the event the IT Board approves, but the CIO refuses to sign, the Subject

Agency may then bring the contract again before the IT Board for their approval of the terms. If the IT Board

does not approve the contract, the Subject Agency may appeal, per Section 281-224 of the Revised Code.

7


Disclaimer This policy is subject to change without notice. A current and complete list of ISA policies are maintained on

the ISA Intranet site.

Policy Approval

Per Indianapolis Marion County Municipal Code Sec. 281-212.11, the City of Indianapolis/Marion County IT Board has the power and authority to promulgate rules and regulations for the efficient administration of its policies and procedures for users. This policy has been reviewed and approved by the IT Board and will be enforced as of the effective date by the Chief Information Officer. It is the responsibility of all City/County IT users to be in compliance with this policy at all times.

Policy Sign-off

IT Board Chair, Joseph O’Connor Chief Information Officer, Ken Clark

Date Date


RESOLUTION 20-06


Resolution to Authorize Additional Expenditure with BerkOne, Inc for Kofax License andMaintenance and Support

WHEREAS, Section 281-212(a)(3) of the Revised Code of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis and Marion County empowers the Information Technology Board (“IT Board”) to review, approve and administer major information technology contracts; and

WHEREAS, the Information Services Agency (“ISA”) currently contracts with BerkOne, Inc. (“BerkOne”) for licenses and maintenance and support of Kofax; and

WHEREAS, ISA has reviewed the business need for the continued use of Kofax; and

WHEREAS, ISA requests approval from the IT Board to spend an additional amount not to exceed

Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($253,000.00) for a revised total amount

not to exceed One Million Three Hundred Eleven Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty-Eight Dollars and

Three Cents ($1,311,838.03) through March 31, 2022.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the IT Board authorizes the Chief Information Officer to execute all reasonable and necessary documents on behalf of ISA with BerkOne for Kofax licenses, maintenance and support, and related services in an amount not to exceed Two Hundred Fifty-Three Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($253,000.00) for a revised total amount not to exceed One Million Three Hundred Eleven Thousand Eight Hundred Thirty-Eight Dollars and Three Cents ($1,311,838.03).

_______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board

January 28, 2020


RESOLUTION 20-07


Resolution to Approve Additional Expenditure with KSM Consulting, LLC.

WHEREAS, Section 281-212(a)(3) of the Revised Code of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis and Marion County (“Revised Code”) empowers the Information Technology Board (“IT Board”) to review, approve and administer major information technology contracts; and WHEREAS, the Information Services Agency (“ISA”) currently contracts with KSM Consulting, LLC (“KSMC”) for Business Intelligence implementation, training, and related services; and WHEREAS, ISA has reviewed the business need for addition implementation, training and related services from KSMC; and WHEREAS, ISA is recommending approval of additional expenditure for KSMC in an additional amount not to exceed Six Hundred Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($600,000.00), for a revised total amount not to exceed One Million Dollars and Zero Cents ($1,000,000.00). NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the IT Board authorizes the Chief Information Officer to execute all reasonable and necessary agreements and related documents on behalf of ISA for KSMC in an additional amount not to exceed Six Hundred Thousand Dollars and Zero Cents ($600,000.00), for a revised total amount not to exceed One Million Dollars and Zero Cents ($1,000,000.00). _______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board January 28, 2020


RESOLUTION 20-08


Resolution to Approve Additional Expenditure with Kronos, Inc.

WHEREAS, Section 281-212(a)(3) of the Revised Code of the Consolidated City of Indianapolis and Marion County empowers the Information Technology Board (“IT Board”) to review, approve and administer major information technology contracts; and WHEREAS, the Information Services Agency (“ISA”) currently contracts with Kronos, Inc. (“Kronos”)

for time keeping software licenses and related products and services; and

WHEREAS, ISA has reviewed the business need for Kronos; and

WHEREAS, ISA requests approval from the IT Board to spend an additional amount not to exceed

Six Hundred Forty-Seven Thousand Forty-Five Dollars and Zero Cents ($647,045.00) for a revised

total amount not to exceed Three Million Five Hundred Eighty-Two Thousand Seventy-Seven Dollars

and Zero Cents ($3,582,077.00).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the IT Board authorizes the Chief Information Officer to execute all reasonable and necessary documents on behalf of ISA with Kronos for time keeping software licenses and related products and services in an amount not to exceed Six Hundred Forty-Seven Thousand Forty-Five Dollars and Zero Cents ($647,045.00) for a revised total amount not to exceed Three Million Five Hundred Eighty-Two Thousand Seventy-Seven Dollars and Zero Cents ($3,582,077.00). _______________________________ _______________________________ Joseph O’Connor, Chairman Claudia O. Fuentes, Secretary Information Technology Board Information Technology Board January 28, 2020


RESOLUTION 20-09


Resolution to Recognize Controller Fady Qaddoura for his service to the

Information Technology Board

WHEREAS, Controller Fady Qaddoura has served on the Information Technology Board from January 2016 through December 2019; and WHEREAS, Mr. Qaddoura has provided invaluable insights and guidance through his experience in information technology and finance; and WHEREAS, Mr. Qaddoura has served commendably as a board member on the Information Technology Board; and

WHEREAS, the Information Technology Board would like to offer thanks for his contribution and guidance over the past four (4) years.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Information Technology Board extends recognition and appreciation to Mr. Qaddoura for his outstanding service to the City of Indianapolis and Marion County as a valued member of the Information Technology Board.



RESOLUTION 20-10


Resolution to Recognize Chief Information Officer Ken Clark for his service to the

Information Services Agency

WHEREAS, Ken Clark joined the Information Services Agency in May 2013; and has served as the Chief Information Officer since January 2016; and

WHEREAS, Mr. Clark, through his passion for service and his dedication his fellow public servants has effectively led the Information Services Agency through several important initiatives which have improved the government experience of citizens and City/County employees alike, including but not limited to:

- Improving IT Chargebacks, making them more intuitive and transparent for ISA partners. - Establishing a public safety IT depot at the 911 Dispatch Center, allowing first responders to

spend less time resolving technology issues and more time serving their community. - Assessing and modernizing City/County network infrastructure. - Expanding Wi-Fi to the City-County building for employees and for the public at Lugar Plaza. - Re-establishing IT Functional Groups and an overall governance process to give agencies

and departments a forum to discuss technology issues and solutions across their common, shared operations.

- Developing the award-winning Shift Indy initiative and Indy.gov website, which along with Pay.Indy.Gov and Data.Indy.Gov has made government services more accessible to Marion County citizens.

- Negotiated the migration of the City-County data center to be co-located with the State of Indiana, including the transition to a hyperconverged infrastructure.

- Oversaw the launch of a data management initiative for the City-County, including the implementation of a data warehouse and dashboard program.

- Raised ISA to its highest ever customer satisfaction score of 92% from 73% when he assumed the role of CIO, signifying the transformation of ISA from IT service provider to trusted advisor.

WHEREAS, Mr. Clark has brought experience, integrity and a strong sense of commitment to ensure the success of the Information Services Agency thereby serving the City of Indianapolis and Marion County as well as its citizens; and

WHEREAS, Mr. Clark has served the Information Services Agency admirably and with responsible stewardship; and


NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Information Technology Board extends recognition and appreciation to Mr. Clark for his outstanding service to the City of Indianapolis and Marion County and Chief Information Officer.


2019 Customer Satisfaction Survey

January 28, 2020

2019 Customer Satisfaction Survey

• Provided 11/1/19 – 12/6/19 (Five Weeks)

• 415 Completed Responses

• 523 Total Responses

Answer Choices Responses

Management (Agency & Department Heads, Deputies and C-Level Leadership) 16.25% 85

Supervisors 18.36% 96

Staff Members 65.39% 342

Answered 100.00% 523

Management Questions

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly

Disagree% Sat2019

% Sat2018

% Sat 2017

% Sat2016

% Sat 2015

I am made aware of the strategic direction of ISA and its impact

on my agency or department.33% 47% 14% 6% 80% 73% 77% 78% 47%

I have a voice in prioritizing what projects ISA focuses their efforts

on.28% 41% 20% 11% 69% 54% 59% 61% 24%

The desktop/laptop refresh program is a great value for my

agency or department.22% 67% 8% 3% 89% 84% 89% 79% 72%

The IT charge back process helps me understand the IT costs of

my agency or department.17% 64% 17% 2% 81% 79% 68% 71% 38%

The IT charge back process allows for IT solutions in a fair and

equitable manner for my agency or department.11% 72% 16% 2% 83% 73% 67% 64% 38%

The services provided by my Business Services Consultant (BSC)

are essential to the operations of my agency or department.56% 33% 8% 3% 89% 87% 77% 84% 57%

ISA provides a good value for the services they provide. 28% 59% 11% 2% 88% 77% 75% 78% 46%

ISA understands the needs of my agency or department. 31% 58% 11% 0% 89% 79% 66% 73% 42%

Management Questions

I am made awareof the strategicdirection of ISA

and its impact onmy agency ordepartment.

I have a voice inprioritizing what

projects ISAfocuses their

efforts on.

The desktop/laptoprefresh program isa great value for

my agency ordepartment.

The IT chargeback process helpsme understand the

IT costs of myagency or

department.

The IT chargeback processallows for IT

solutions in a fairand equitablemanner for my

agency ordepartment.

The servicesprovided by my

Business ServicesConsultant (BSC)

are essential to theoperations of my


ISA provides agood value for the

services theyprovide.

ISA understandsthe needs of my


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree

All Participant Questions


Disagree% Sat2019

% Sat2018

% Sat 2017

% Sat2016

% Sat 2015

ISA is organized in a way that makes it easy for me to get

what I need.32% 56% 10% 2% 88% 87% 85% 81% 71%

ISA is knowledgeable of, educates me about, and

provides access to emerging technologies.28% 54% 16% 3% 82% 83% 78% 71% 63%

The public-facing website meets the business needs of

my agency or department26% 60% 11% 3% 86% 83% 82% 74% 73%

I receive timely and appropriate communication from ISA. 43% 49% 7% 2% 91% 93% 89% 88% 79%


ISA is organized in a way thatmakes it easy for me to get what I

need.

ISA is knowledgeable of, educatesme about, and provides access to

emerging technologies.

The public-facing website meetsthe business needs of my agency

or department

I receive timely and appropriatecommunication from ISA.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%




Disagree% Sat2019

% Sat2018

% Sat 2017

% Sat2016

% Sat 2015

When I call the ISA Service Desk (x3075 or 317-327-3075), I am

satisfied with the service I receive.44% 47% 7% 2% 91% 91% 91% 89% 83%

When I email the ISA Service Desk ([email protected]), I am

satisfied with the service I receive.39% 52% 8% 1% 90% 92% 91% 89% 80%

When I open a ticket using the ISA Service Desk Portal

(RequestIT) I am satisfied with the service I receive.41% 49% 7% 3% 90% 90% 91% 88% 79%

When I contact the ISA Service Desk outside of normal business

hours, I am satisfied with the service I receive.42% 47% 8% 3% 89% 90% 88% 87% 78%

The technical knowledge of the ISA Service Desk staff is

adequate for my needs.38% 53% 7% 2% 91% 89% 88% 86% 78%

The ISA Service Desk staff is able to understand my needs and

solve my problem upon my first request (No Repeat Tickets).36% 48% 13% 2% 85% 85% 84% 80% 69%


When I call the ISAService Desk (x3075 or

317-327-3075), I amsatisfied with the service I

receive.

When I email the ISAService Desk

([email protected]), Iam satisfied with the

service I receive.

When I open a ticketusing the ISA Service

Desk Portal (RequestIT•),I am satisfied with the

service I receive.

When I contact the ISAService Desk outside ofnormal business hours, I

am satisfied with theservice I receive.

The technical knowledgeof the ISA Service Deskstaff is adequate for my

needs.

The ISA Service Deskstaff is able to understandmy needs and solve myproblem upon my firstrequest (No Repeat

Tickets).

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%




Disagree% Sat2019

% Sat2018 % Sat 2017 % Sat

2016 % Sat 2015

The desktop/laptop provided by ISA meets the

needs of my job functions.32% 56% 8% 4% 88% 86% 91% 89% 83%

Applications on my City/County device are well

maintained and supported.30% 56% 12% 2% 86% 88% 91% 89% 80%

The network speed and performance is adequate

to perform my job functions.28% 56% 13% 3% 84% 80% 91% 88% 79%

I have adequate file storage options for my job

functions (H:Drive, S:Drive, etc.).38% 58% 4% 0% 96% 95% 88% 87% 78%


The desktop/laptop provided by ISAmeets the needs of my job functions.

Applications on my City/Countydevice are well maintained and

supported.

The network speed and performanceis adequate to perform my job

functions.

I have adequate file storage optionsfor my job functions (H:Drive, S:Drive,

etc.).

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%




Disagree% Sat2019

% Sat2018

% Sat 2017

% Sat2016

% Sat 2015

When working away from my desk, the City/County Wi-Fi (not

public) supports my job function.28% 57% 11% 4% 85% 76% - - -

When working away from my desk, I can easily access my

critical applications and documents.25% 54% 18% 4% 78% 74% - - -

When working away from my desk, I can appropriately

communicate with my team.31% 62% 7% 1% 93% 93% - - -

When working away from my desk, Remote.indy.gov allows me

to easily access necessary tools for my job function.28% 54% 14% 3% 82% 76% 78% 68% 72%

The provided public Wi-Fi is adequate for my visitor's needs. 24% 50% 16% 10% 74% 70% - - -


When working away from mydesk, the City/County Wi-Fi(not public) supports my job

function.

When working away from mydesk, I can easily access my

critical applications anddocuments.

When working away from mydesk, I can appropriately

communicate with my team.

When working away from mydesk, Remote.indy.gov allows

me to easily accessnecessary tools for my job

function.

The provided public Wi-Fi isadequate for my visitor's

needs.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%


Open Feedback: Dissatisfied Users

• “Sometimes it is cumbersome or not possible to add apps or even, for example, print when I do work at home. Would also like a more user friendly interface for remote access.”

• “I have not been able to connect to the IMC network since starting my position.”

• “When you have to call ISA they usually can't fix the problem and your complaint has to be forwarded to someone that can fix the problem which can take a while and it results in a loss of productivity especially for those that work in the field.”

• “Hard to find information.” [Indy.gov website]

Open Feedback: Satisfied Users

• “Everyone who I've contacted has been immensely helpful &

kind, especially Ian. I think ISA does good work.”

• “Friendly and Funny Staff! Love that constant attention to

detail!”

• “Website for sure! The process of editing and updating the

website is MILES ahead of where we were at the beginning

of administration.”

• “Consistency is the name of the game. I have no complaints

at all with the ISA team and their level of service to us.”

Overall Satisfaction

92% of the respondents are overall “Satisfied” or

“Very Satisfied” with the services provided by ISA

2018: 90%2017: 89%2016: 84% 2015: 73%

Very Satisfied Satisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Answer Choices Responses

Very Satisfied 37% 155

Satisfied 55% 226

Dissatisfied 7% 28

Very Dissatisfied 1% 6

ISA CONTRACT REPORT <$250,000

2020

Date

Approved Dept. Description Vendor

Annual $

Amount

Total $

Amount

MBE/

WBE Notes

1/10/2020 ISA UPS maintenance and support Vertiv Corporation $8,860.00 $69,004.45 Services

1/21/2020 ISA Phone replacement parts Dixon Phone Place, Inc. $60,000.00 $205,004.85 Hardware

1/23/2020 MPO One year of access to data sets Caliper Corporation $11,250.00 $11,250.00 Licenses

2020

january 28, 2020 · gary ricks office of corporation counsel legal counsel approval of minutes:...

Documents