Report 2010-102 Recommendation 4 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 #4 To: Administrative Office of the Courts

To better manage costs of future IT projects, the AOC should disclose costs that other entities will likely incur to the extent it can reasonably do so.

Annual Follow-Up Agency Response From October 2012

The AOC has two artifacts for ensuring that all relevant costs of an effort are considered, the business case and the project assessment form, both of 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) that 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 are currently envisioned, given the current budget environment, upcoming applicable maintenance and operations (M&O) efforts and future projects will be required to adhere to the SDLC.

The Business Case and Project Assessment Form templates are embedded below.

Both the business case, development of which supports the Judicial Council-approved recommendations for AOC realignment, and the project assessment form, include a comprehensive list of cost categories, including hardware, software, data center, and contract services, one-time vs. ongoing costs, and costs likely to be incurred by entities external to the AOC, such as the superior courts, justice partners, and law enforcement agencies. For example, this might include expenses related to time required of internal staff, potential software and hardware costs if available, and contracting vendors for design, development or testing.

  • Completion Date: October 2012

California State Auditor's Assessment of Annual Follow-Up Status: Fully Implemented


All Recommendations in 2010-102

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