Report 2010-102 Recommendation 1 Responses

Report 2010-102: Administrative Office of the Courts: The Statewide Case Management Project Faces Significant Challenges Due to Poor Project Management (Release Date: February 2011)

Recommendation #1 To: Administrative Office of the Courts

To better manage costs of future IT projects, the AOC should estimate costs at the inception of projects.

Agency Response*

The AOC has two artifacts for estimating costs at the inception of a project, the Business Case and the Project Assessment Form, both which have been developed as part of the Enterprise Methodology and Process (EMP) program. A key component of the EMP program is development and implementation of a standard Solution Development Life Cycle (SDLC). SDLC describes a phase-by-phase methodology for projects categorized as medium or large, including standards, processes, and artifacts. While no new projects in either category, medium, or large, are currently envisioned in the current budget climate, upcoming applicable maintenance and operations (M&O) efforts and future projects will be required to adhere to the SDLC.

The primary purpose of development of a business case, in support of Judicial Council-approved recommendations for AOC realignment, is to provide a financial justification for undertaking a project, entailing cost analyses for a recommended solution and for alternatives that were explored as well. Costs are broken out into several categories (hardware, software, etc.), as well as project vs. ongoing costs. A copy of the business case template is attached.

The purpose of the Project Assessment Form is to gather high-level information about a request to categorize the project as small, medium, or large, based on estimated level of effort, duration, and cost. Costs are broken out into several categories (hardware, software, etc.), application vs. infrastructure, and project vs. ongoing. A copy of the Project Assessment Form is included below.

  • Response Type†: Annual Follow Up
  • Completion Date: July 2011
  • Response Date: October 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Status: Fully Implemented


All Recommendations in 2010-102

†Response Type refers to the interval in which the auditee is providing the State Auditor with their status in implementing recommendations made in an audit report. Auditees must submit a response regarding their progress in implementing recommendations from our reports at three intervals from the release of the report: 60 days, six months, and one year or subsequent to one year.

*Agency responses received after June 2013 are posted verbatim.


Report type

Report type
















© 2013, California State Auditor | Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Download Adobe PDF Reader