Summary
Over the past decade state and local governments have increasingly used information technology to support government operations. Many have developed intergovernmental information systems that perform only one business function or satisfy one program need. The result is a growing number of individual systems for government to government (G2G) business relationships at the state and local levels.
This project seeks to create an Internet Gateway (or a single point of passage) to test and evaluate mechanisms for G2G business relationships among state and local government organizations in New York State.
The prototype will channel three separate G2G business processes involving state agencies and a number of local governments through one common access point. The project is designed to test whether such a gateway would provide state, county, and municipal governments with greater efficiency, higher quality data, and more consistent and coordinated services. Throughout the project, the Center will examine the policy, management, technology, and financial factors that influence the development of the prototype.
Publications & Results
Reports and Working Papers (4)
Constructing the New York State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype: A Technical View
Fri, 01 Apr 2005 >Download PDF
Fri, 01 Apr 2005 >Download PDF
This report describes the technical development of the New York State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype. Each phase is highlighted including prototype design, development, testing, and support. It concludes with lessons learned and considerations for future development.
The New York State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype Project: Current Practice Research
Thu, 01 Jul 2004 >Download PDF
Thu, 01 Jul 2004 >Download PDF
In the fall of 2002, the Center for Technology in Government (CTG) at the University at Albany conducted current practice research to identify and examine existing government to government (G2G) portal projects.
Bridging the Enterprise: Lessons from the New York State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype
Sat, 01 May 2004 >Download PDF
Sat, 01 May 2004 >Download PDF
This project report details the Gateway Prototype project from conceptualization and development to findings and recommendations. The Prototype was developed to create a single point of contact among state and local governments to test and evaluate mechanisms for government-to-government (G2G) business relationships.
This online demonstration shows the features and functions of the New York State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype. The Prototype was built to identify, demonstrate, and evaluate key factors associated with the design, development, and deployment of a single point of contact for G2G work among state and local governments in New York State.
Results
Lessons in Intergovernmental IT Governance
December 2004 > Download PDF
CTG is a member of the national Partnership for Intergovernmental Innovation (Pi2). In July 2004, the State-Local Gateway project was presented at a Pi2 workshop on intergovernmental IT governance. The workshop report, Lessons in Intergovernmental IT Governance, was prepared by CTG Director Sharon Dawes and includes a presentation given by Program Manager Meghan Cook. It highlights leadership, culture, stakeholders, and stewardship as elements of effective intergovernmental work.
Interim Results
Ideal Characteristics, Benefits, and Barriers Associated with a State-Local Internet Gateway
Although the State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype Project is not a full system, the thinking is to work towards a vision of an ideal Gateway for G2G business relationships. Two exploratory discussion meetings were held in September and November 2002 with over 20 state and local representatives to discuss the ideal characteristics, benefits, and barriers associated with developing a perfect State-Local Internet Gateway for New York State. The following information was generated by this group (which has since been identified as the Advisory Committee):
Governance and Strategy
- State and local organizations jointly govern the Gateway. The governing structure includes fair representation of state, county, and municipal stakeholders. It features open communication channels, participatory decision processes, and trouble-shooting and problem-solving mechanisms for resolving differences.
- Decisions are driven by real business needs. Each application addresses the information, management, and process needs associated with a significant business function that is useful to all relevant state and local organizations. Each application offers value right from the start-up phase, even with less than full participation of all state and local agencies.
- The Gateway is affordable to all interested participants.The costs associated with adopting and using the gateway are not prohibitive to any state agency, county, or municipality.
- The Gateway is financially solvent. The gateway is designed to offset initial investments and ongoing costs by future cost reductions to all participants.
- Security policies protect the Gateway from threats and misuse. Policies are in place that protect the Gateway from external threats and limit access and use according to roles associated with specific functional requirements.
Content
- All data are high quality, accurate, and authentic. All data are cleansed, and data sources and metadata are available to check for "fitness for use" as well as authenticity.
- Information and applications are dynamic and current. The resources and functions of the Gateway are constantly updated to provide new or improved information, tools, and services.
- Content is modular, flexible, versatile, and open to improvement. The information and applications that are part of the gateway follow a standard set of conventions and are continually evaluated for usability and improvement under a variety of local conditions. New business-driven information resources and applications are added regularly.
Design and Usability
- The Gateway is easy to use for people with varying levels of skill. The gateway is transparent and simple to use with a common vocabulary, single sign-on, and low technical skills required for users. It is accompanied by solid training programs and support mechanisms.
- Applications are responsive to the needs of users. Applications are designed from the user or customer point of view and provide on-line help, and immediate, real time confirmation of the success of a transaction.
- The Gateway is highly reliable and available to all state and local users. Useful connectivity is available to all participants, including basic infrastructure from desktop equipment and software to network speed and bandwidth.
- Security technologies protect it from both internal and external threats. All standard security measures are in place to protect the infrastructure, transactions, and data from internal abuse and external threats.
- The overall design is modular, flexible, versatile, and open to improvement. The design is fully envisioned, but built in a modular fashion that delivers both early and long-term benefits and does not require the full participation of all state and local agencies to operate successfully. The gateway follows an evolutionary development strategy where ongoing evaluation leads to continual improvement.
- Takes advantage of existing efforts. Where existing projects or applications that address shared processes and business needs already exist, they are extended into the gateway or modified as needed.
Benefits
- Efficiency - It will save time and money and reduce the manual workload by achieving economies of scale. It will allow for the creative use of funds already allocated in budgets. It will be built as much as possible on existing IT and communication systems. It will also promote quicker dissemination of information at all levels of government.
- Improved Coordination and Consistency - Shared processes, common data definitions, and more logical programmatic connections would support better coordination between the state and local levels, more consistency in program design, and a more consistent level and quality of service delivery.
- Data Quality and Access - Well-defined, consistent, complete, accurate, and shared data will allow the re-use of the same information to satisfy multiple demands and support greater data integration and use for multiple users. Improved data management will reduce costs and promote wider responsibility for information stewardship across the government.
Barriers
- Cost - There are serious concerns about the size of the initial and ongoing costs of a gateway and who will pay for what.
- Challenges of Complexity - Multiple and conflicting state business rules and practices prevent needed coordination across multiple partners. Because so many programs are federally defined, these rules and practices are not always within the state's authority to change. In addition, the diversity of local governments is very wide and their capabilities and practices are far from uniform from place to place. Finally, many legacy systems are in place that cannot be replaced or significantly changed in the near future.
- Politics - Support for a State-Local Internet Gateway will have to compete for support among many other governmental priorities and there will be difficulty maintaining political support across the election cycles of so many agencies and jurisdictions. Concerns about turf, control, and management combine with questions about who will have authority to do what. Agencies may resist opening their data sources to new uses or users.
State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype Project Working Assumptions for the Project and Team
*This list is a work-in-progress and will be updated periodically by the Prototype Development Team.
- We aim to build, test, and evaluate a prototype Gateway for G2G business transactions. Phase One is to identify and document the content and structure. Phase Two is to build, test, and evaluate the prototype.
- Phase one of the project is to define the prototype. We define a "prototype" as a system built for a proof of concept. It is not a full-scale system or even a pilot. A prototype essentially identifies, demonstrates, and evaluates the key management, policy, technology and costs implications. A prototype is also built to identify the value proposition all participants.
- In order for the prototype to generate enough useful results, it must demonstrate how multiple organizations at different levels of government work together. It must also demonstrate how different kinds and sizes of local governments in different parts of the state would participate.
- In order for the prototype to generate enough useful results, it must also focus on at least two different business processes in two different domains.
- We will strive to have 2-3 state agencies and about 6-10 local governments to actively participate in the design and testing of the prototype as part of the prototyping team
- We define "local" as including counties, cities, towns, and villages. We refer to cities, towns, and villages collectively as "municipalities."
- State, county, and municipal participants are all critical to the success of the project. Design decisions will take their different needs and capabilities into account.
- State and local agencies will be both customers and suppliers of information and services to the gateway; neither is exclusively the customer of the other.
- CTG will take responsibility for selecting and coordinating corporate partners to take part in the prototyping effort.
- CTG will take responsibility for leading and managing both phases of the project.
- In order to remove barriers to participation in the prototype, CTG will take responsibility for identifying and applying for funding for local government involvement in phase two.
- The organizations involved in the prototype design and test will need to meet face-to-face on a regular basis, as well as communicate electronically.
- A larger group of interested state and local organizations will serve as an advisory committee and will do most of its business via email.
- The project will investigate existing portal-type projects and include information gathered by the NYS Office for Technology's (OFT) "Bridge the Gap" analysis in the investigation.
- The State-Local Internet gateway Prototype Project will investigate and document the full cost structure of developing and implementing the prototype.
Press Releases & News Stories
Press Releases
Thu, 20 May 2004
Mon, 06 Oct 2003
Tue, 22 Jul 2003
News Stories
Open Forum, Volume 16, Numbers 7/8, July/August 2003, pp 7-8
Partners
Government Partners
Prototype Development Team
- Broome County, New York
- Essex County, New York
- Monroe County, New York
- Ontario County, New York
- City of Canandaiga, New York
- City of Rochester, New York
- City of White Plains, New York
- Town of Bethlehem, New York
- Town of Binghamton, New York
- Town of Canadice, New York
- Town of Colonie, New York
- Town of Gardiner, New York
- Town of Union, New York
Corporate Partners
Academic Partners
- David Landsbergen, Chair, Doctoral Studies Committee, Ohio State University
Center for Technology in Government
- Sharon S. Dawes, Project Director
- Meghan Cook, Project Manager
- Dubravka Juraga, Research Associate
- Chris Pagano, Project Associate
- Ben Schwartz, Graduate Assistant
- Derek Werthmuller, Director of Technology Services
Advisory Committee
Joe Aiello
Consultant, Digital Towpath - Niagara Mohawk
Gregory Benson, Jr.
Executive Director, NYS Forum for Information Resource Management
Thomas R. Bodden
Manager, Research & Information, Association of Towns of State of New York
Tim Bortree
Chief Information Officer,Monroe County
Carmella T. Carnevale
Technology Enterprise Accounts Manager, NYS Office for Technology
Sydney Cresswell
Director, Intergovernmental Solutions Program, University at Albany/SUNY
Dolores Dybas
Director, Information Systems, NYS Department of Agriculture & Markets
Patricia Favreau
Town Clerk, Town of Berne
Carole Francis
Statewide Applied Technology Advisor, NYS Office of the State Comptroller
Michele Hasso
Project Coordinator, NYS Office of the State Comptroller
Ed Hemminger
Chief Information Officer, Ontario County
Julie Holcomb
City Clerk, City of Ithaca
Geof Huth
Manager, Records Service Development, NYS Archives
Alan Kowlowitz
Public Technology Analyst, NYS Office for Technology
David Landsbergen
Chair - Doctoral Studies Committee, Ohio State University
Julie Leeper
Assistant Director of Strategic Policies, Acquisitions & E-Commerce, NYS Office for Technology
Robert Lilly
Director, Information Systems, Essex County
Carolyn May
Director, Community Development & Corporate Giving, Niagara Mohawk
Kim McKinney
Director of Information Technology, Broome County
Charlie Murphy
Assistant Secretary of State for Community Development, Department of State
Kathleen Newkirk
Town Clerk, Town of Bethlehem
Gene Pezdek
Director of Information Services, NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
Karen Prescott
AT&T
Thomas Ruller
Associate Programmer Analyst, State Education Department
Bruce Sauter
Chief Information Officer, NYS Office of Real Property Services
Laurie Savage
Assistant to the First Deputy Secretary of State, Department of State
Wendy Scheening
Manager, Information Systems, NYS Department of Agriculture & Markets
Gregory Smith
Chief Information Officer Division of Local Government, Services and Economic Development
NYS Office of the State Comptroller
John Woodward
County Clerk, Schenectady County
Participants
State Agencies
- Mary Lou Acheson, Senior Computer Operator
- Patricia Arthur, Clerk I
- Roberta Brooks, Principal Clerk
- Jeffry Huse, Assistant Director of Animal Industry
- Wendy Scheening, Manager, Information Systems
- Colleen Benson, Real Property Analyst III
- Sally Cooney, Real Property Analyst IV
- Tom Rutnik, Associate Computer Programmer Analyst
- Bruce Sauter, Chief Information Officer
- Joan Darcy, Sr. Programmer & Computer Analyst
- Michele Hasso, Project Coordinator
- Carole Francis, Statewide applied Technology Advisor
- Gregory Smith, Chief Information Officer
Local Governments
- Tim Bortree, Chief Information Officer, Monroe County
- Richard Brown, Director of Development and Planning, City of Canandaigua
- Carolee Conklin, City Clerk, City of Rochester
- Diane Conroy-LaCivita, Deputy Town Clerk, Town of Colonie
- Bonnie Drake, Town Clerk/Tax Collector, Town of Canadice
- Barbara Fiala, County Clerk of Broome, Broome County
- Ed Hemminger, Chief Information Officer,Ontario County
- Robert Lilly, Director, Information Systems, Essex County
- John H. McDonald, Town Assessor, Town of Union
- Kim McKinney, Director of Information Technology,Broome County
- Anne McPherson,Deputy City Clerk,City of White Plains
- Michelle Mosher, Town Clerk/Tax Collector, Town of Gardiner
- Kathleen Newkirk, Town Clerk, Town of Bethlehem
- Susan Pufky, Assistant Director, Real Property Tax Service, Broome County
- Laura Kay Wharmby, Clerk/Treasurer, City of Canandaigua
- Judy Zurenda, Town Clerk, Town of Binghamton
CGI Information Systems & Management Consultants, Inc.
- Ashish Advani, Consultant
- Duane Benson, Technical Architect
- Bill Cunningham, Business Development Director
- Lorna Ganong, Director of Consulting Services
- Ed McGinley, Consultant
- Afzal Mohammed, Senior Consultant
- Brian Peek, Senior Consultant
- Mandy Prezioso, Senior Consultant
Keane, Inc.
- Bob Bush, Senior Consultant
- Christopher Desany, Technical Architect
- Joann Dunham, NYS Program Manager
- Teresa Gillooley, Project Officer
Microsoft Corporation
- Bill Branch, Client Executive, NYS
Funding Sources
This project is funded by a portion of CTG's New York State budget allocation.
Original
Scope of Work
The State-Local Internet Gateway Prototype Project seeks to create an Internet Gateway (or a single point of passage) to test and evaluate mechanisms for G2G business relationships among state and local government organizations in New York State.
The prototype will channel three separate G2G business processes from three state agencies through one common place. The project is designed to test whether such a gateway would provide state, county, and municipal governments with greater efficiency, higher quality data, and more consistent and coordinated services. Throughout the project, the Center will examine the policy, management, technology, and financial factors that influence the development of the prototype.
The project will be completed in two phases. Phase One will include the generation of a set of characteristics, benefits, and barriers to achieving an "ideal" State-Local Internet Gateway in New York State. In addition, CTG will lead an investigation into similar projects in New York State and elsewhere.
Finally, several state agencies and local governments will form a prototyping team to define the structure and content of the prototype.
More specifically, Phase One deliverables are as follows:
- Analysis of existing efforts in NYS that link state agencies and local governments in a G2G relationship.
- Documentation and analysis of the policy, management, technology, financial and other factors that influence the development of a State-Local Internet Gateway in at least one other state.
- Definition of a structure, or architecture, for a State-Local Internet Gateway in New York.
- Definition of the information and transaction content to be included in the prototype.
- A proposal for moving into Phase Two of the project, including garnering corporate partner support, and seeking funding for local government involvement for Phase Two of the project.
The following is the approximate time frame for each phase:
- Phase One will continue until Spring 2003
- Phase Two will commence in Spring 2003 and end in Summer 2004
Related Web Sites
The Intergovernmental Solutions Program
http://www.albany.edu/igsp/A partnership between the University at Albany's Rockefeller College of Public Affairs & Policy and New York State to develop a professional learning community focused on intergovernmental effectiveness. Program goals are to capture and share knowledge about how successful intergovernmental work occurs.
Partnership for Intergovernmental Innovation (PI2)
http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentId=8739& contentType=GSA_OVERVIEWThis intergovernmental innovation group of federal, state, and county government officials was formed in 1999 to provide intergovernmental innovators a resource to overcome barriers in process, policy, and regulation, and to serve as a platform for discussion and collective action.
Office of Intergovernmental Solutions
http://www.gsa.gov/Portal/gsa/ep/contentView.do?contentId=12662& contentType=GSA_BASICThe Office of Intergovernmental Solutions is part of the US General Services Administration. It aims to build a community of intergovernmental managers to identify, analyze, and help solve major issues affecting electronic governments in the 21st century. This Web site is a place where government officials can go to learn about practices in other governments to find sources of information and experts in related initiatives.
Contact Information
Center for Technology in Government
University at Albany, SUNY
187 Wolf Road, Suite 301
Albany, NY 12205
(518) 442-3892 (phone)
(518) 442-3886 (fax)
University at Albany, SUNY
187 Wolf Road, Suite 301
Albany, NY 12205
(518) 442-3892 (phone)
(518) 442-3886 (fax)
Meghan E. Cook
Project Manager
(518) 442-3892