Page 1 of 11

Project Audit & Review Checklist

Ite m 1 1.1 1.2 Attribute Project Planning Does the project have a formal Project Plan? Are the key elements of a Project Plan present? a. Project Definition & Scope? b. Project Objectives? c. Cost !enefit Analysis? ". Staffin# $e%&irements? e. 'ime (ine? f. $isk Analysis? #. Critical S&ccess Criteria )if *e meet these+ *e,ve met o&r #oals? .ave all stakehol"ers been i"entifie"? 0s a Stakehol"er 1ana#ement plan in place? .ave project acco&ntabilities & responsibilities been clearly "efine"? .ave the scope+ objectives+ costs+ benefits an" impacts been comm&nicate" to all involve" an" or impacte" stakehol"ers an" *ork #ro&ps? a4 .ave all involve" stakehol"ers an" *ork #ro&ps committe" to the project? b4 .ave all necessary approvals been obtaine"? .as a project Comm&nications Plan been "evelope"? Are f&n"in# an" staffin# reso&rce estimates s&fficiently "etaile" an" "oc&mente" for &se in plannin# an" trackin# the project? Does a "oc&mente" project or#ani8ational policy & plan )i.e. #overnance mo"el4 e9ist? .ave a"e%&ate reso&rces been provi"e" by mana#ement to ens&re project s&ccess? 0s c&rrent scope of the project s&bstantially "ifferent than that ori#inally "efine" in the approve" project plan? .as the approach an" "evelopment strate#y of the project been "efine"+ "oc&mente" an" accepte" by the appropriate stakehol"ers? .ave project mana#ement stan"ar"s an" proce"&res been establishe" an" "oc&mente"? 0s there a Steerin# Committee in place? 0s the Steerin# Committee active in project oversi#ht? Are there proce"&res in place to effectively mana#e inter"epen"encies *ith other projects systems? Assessmen t

1.1./ 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.1: 1.11 1.12 1.11.1/ 1.12 1.13

Page 1 of 11

Page 2 of 11

Ite m 2 2.1

Attribute Project Management .ave the key elements of a coherent project mana#ement strate#y been establishe"? a. Project trackin# plan & metho"olo#y b. Project stat&s reportin# str&ct&re & process c. Chan#e 1ana#ement plan & trackin# ". 0ss&es 1ana#ement process & trackin# plan e. $isk 1ana#ement Plan f. Soft*are ;&ality Ass&rance #. Soft*are Confi#&ration 1ana#ement Project Scheduling & Tracking .as a str&ct&re" approach been &se" to break *ork effort into mana#eable components? Are team members involve" in the "evelopment of activity & task "ecomposition? Are in"ivi"&al tasks of reasonable "&ration )6</: hrs4? Are milestone "eliverables effectively tracke" an" compare" to project plan? Does the "etaile" project plan i"entify in"ivi"&al responsibilities for the ne9t /<3 *eeks? .ave activity relationships an" inter"epen"encies *ithin tasks been a"e%&ately i"entifie"? Are tar#et "ates establishe" for each milestone "eliverable? Are corrective actions taken *hen act&al res&lts are s&bstantially "ifferent from "etaile" project plan? Describe. Are chan#es in "eliverable commitments a#ree" to by all affecte" #ro&ps & in"ivi"&als? 0s the or#ani8ation str&ct&re for both trackin# & controllin# project activities *ork pro"&cts & costs )effort+ sche"&le & b&"#et4 *ell "efine" an" assi#ne" to a specific in"ivi"&al? Are meas&rements an" fee"back mechanisms incorporate" in trackin# *ork effort & refinin# *ork estimatin# techni%&es? .ave proce"&res for i"entifyin# variances from estimates & a"j&stin# the "etaile" *ork pro#ram been establishe"? 0s project)s4 *ork procee"in# in accor"ance *ith the ori#inal project sche"&le? 0f not+ have all project "elays been a"e%&ately acco&nte" for+ comm&nicate" to all stakehol"ers an" a"j&stments ma"e in overall project sche"&le? 0s there #eneral a#reement & acceptance of the c&rrent stat&s an" pro#ress of the project? 0s P=$' Critical Path or e%&ivalent metho"olo#y bein# &se"? Can yo& see the critical path on the plan? 0s an in"&stry reco#ni8e" mechani8e" s&pport tool)s4 bein# &se" for project sche"&lin# & trackin#?

Assessmen t

2.2 2.2. 1 2.2. 2 2.2. 2.2. / 2.2. 2 2.2. 3 2.2. 5 2.2. 6 2.2. 7 2.2. 1: 2.2. 11 2.2. 12 2.2. 12.2. 1/ 2.2. 12 2.2. 13 2.2. 15

Page 2 of 11

Page 3 of 11

Ite m 2.2. 16 2. 2.-. 1

Attribute 0s it possible to track all classes of project *ork )e.#. sche"&le"+ &n>sche"&le"+ "efect repair+ etc.4? Can yo& compare *ork "one to the baseline? Project Status Re!orting 0s project stat&s revie*e" *ith senior mana#ement at appropriate intervals? ?hat are they? a. Overall stat&s b. Project performance )achievements & milestones4 c. Open iss&es ". $isks e. Action items f. Cost & time performance a#ainst plan #. ;&ality metrics h. Client involvement Are internal project stat&s meetin#s hel" at reasonable intervals? Are s&b>project revie*s hel" at reasonable intervals? .ave a"e%&ate proce"&res been p&t in place for project coor"ination an" stat&s reportin# across project bo&n"aries )ie. inter"epen"ent soft*are "evelopment amon# interfacin# systems4? Do project teams & team members report on stat&s activities pro#ress? Project #stimating Are m&ltiple estimation metho"s bein# employe"? Are c&rrent project time & reso&rce estimates reasonable base" on the c&rrent project sta#e? Are act&als compare" a#ainst estimates to analy8e an" correct variances? Are soft*are metrics formally capt&re"+ analy8e" an" &se" as a basis for other project estimates? 0s the PPO estimatin# metho"olo#y bein# &se" an" follo*e"? Do the estimatin# techni%&es incl&"e any of the follo*in# feat&res@ a. $an#e" estimates? b. Sensitivity analysis? c. $isk ratin#? ". ;&ality Ass&rance overhea"s? e. Contin#ency? Are project team members involve" in "etaile" estimatin# an" sche"&lin#? Are stakehol"ers a*are an" s&pportive of the principles an" practices of mo"ern soft*are estimation? Risk Management ?as an ori#inal risk assessment complete"?

Assessmen t

2.-. 2 2.-. 2.-. / 2.-. 2 2." 2./. 1 2./. 2 2./. 2./. / 2./. 2 2./. 3

2./. 5 2./. 6 2.$ 2.2. 1

Page 3 of 11

Page 4 of 11

Ite m 2.2. 2 2.2. 2.2. / -.1 -.2 . -.-. 1 -.-. 2 -.-. -.-. /

Attribute 0s there a process in place to monitor project risks? .as provision been ma"e to reassess project risks at vario&s project sta#es? .ave all &nresolve" risks been "oc&mente"? .ave all &nimplemente" risk strate#ies been escalate" to an iss&es lo#? %ualit& Management Does the project have a A;&ality C&lt&reB? 0s there a ;&ality Plan coverin# all Policies+ C&i"elines an" Proce"&res? %ualit& Assurance .as an overall %ualit& Assurance Plan been "evelope" for the project? 'oes the !lan address ke& !roject elements( a. Project Plannin#? b. Project 1ana#ement? c. Soft*are ;&ality Ass&rance )S;A4 Does the S;A process provi"e objective verification of a"herence to applicable stan"ar"s+ proce"&res & re%&irements? Are all key components of an S;A plan present? a. S;A Plan b. Soft*are Confi#&ration 1ana#ement )SC14 c. Soft*are "evelopment stan"ar"s & metho"s ". 1etho"olo#y e. 'estin# Stan"ar"s & 1etho"olo#y f. Data Architect&re Stan"ar"s #. Data Damin# Conventions h. 'echnolo#y Architect&re i. Soft*are 1etrics Are the res&lts of S;A revie*s provi"e" to affecte" #ro&ps & in"ivi"&als? Are a"e%&ate reso&rces provi"e" for the S;A f&nction? Are S;A reso&rces e9perience"? Are the S;A processes in place an" bein# effectively &se"? 0s there a set of proce"&res "efinin# the scope+ proce"&res an" "eliverables "efinin# ;&ality Control? Are %&ality metrics "efine"? 0s there a set of proce"&res to capt&re+ analy8e an" act on %&ality metrics? So*tware Con*iguration Management +SCM, .as SC1 been implemente" for this project? .as an in"&stry reco#ni8e" SC1 soft*are version mana#ement & control tool been implemente"?

Assessmen t

-.-. 2 -.-. 3 -.-. 5 -./ -.2 -.3 .) -.5. 1 -.5. 2

Page 4 of 11

Page 5 of 11

Ite m -.5. -.5. / -.5. 2 -.5. 3 ".".1 /.1. 1 ".2 /.2. 1 /.2. 2 /.2. ". /.-. 1 /.-. 2 /.-. $.2.1 2.2 2.-

Attribute 0s SC1 version mana#ement an" control effectively linke" *ith the testin# f&nction to ens&re inte#ration an" re#ression testin# have been performe"? .as an a&tomate" Chan#e 1ana#ement tool been implemente"? 0s the SC1 f&nction a"e%&ately staffe"? 0s the 'estin# Coor"ination f&nction separate from the "evelopment staff? Management Procedures .endor Management 0s there a formal set of proce"&res )for stat&s reportin#+ contract ne#otiation & revie*+ time invoice reconciliation+ etc.4 s&pportin# Een"or 1ana#ement? /ssues Management 0s there a formal set of proce"&res s&pportin# 0ss&es 1ana#ement? 0s there any form of a&tomate" s&pport for 0ss&es 1ana#ement? Are iss&es raise"+ assesse"+ actione"+ an" resolve" in a timely an" efficient manner? Stakeholder Management 0s there a formal set of proce"&res s&pportin# Stakehol"er 1ana#ement? 0s it stan"ar" practice to formally commit stakehol"ers to the project via a#reements? Does a comprehensive set of Stakehol"er A#reements e9ist? Do *e have statements "elineatin# *hat each stakehol"er has a#ree" to "o? Resourcing Are all reso&rce ass&mptions "oc&mente"? Does the project team have the skills necessary to s&ccessf&lly complete c&rrent project)s4 an" s&pport the application? .ave arran#ements been ma"e to obtain special e9pertise or competence by cons&ltin# or referencin#@ a. Similar projects? b. P&blishe" materials? c. Personnel *ith e9pertise? ". O&tsi"e e9perts? .ave the personnel *ith the necessary skills an" competence been i"entifie" an" has a#reement for their participation in the project been reache" *ith the appropriate mana#ement? 0s there a project or#ani8ation chart sho*in# the reportin# relationships an" responsibilities for each position? .as a proper project *ork location been establishe" that *ill allo* the team to *ork to#ether *ith &ser personnel? Does the "etaile" *ork plan match the comple9ity of tasks *ith the capabilities of personnel?

Assessmen t

2./ 2.2 2.3 2.5

Page 5 of 11

Page 6 of 11

Ite m 2.6 2.7 2.1:

Attribute .as allo*ance been ma"e for vacations+ holi"ays+ trainin# )learnin# time for each team member4+ staff promotions & staff t&rnovers? .as a"e%&ate time for orientation & trainin# of project staff been provi"e" for in relation to technical nat&re of the Application an" the e9perience levels of project personnel? .as appropriate allo*ance been ma"e for the effect of the learnin# c&rve on all personnel joinin# the project *ho "o not have the re%&ire" prior in"&stry+ f&nctional & technical e9pertise? Are the appropriate 0' reso&rces a"e%&ate to meet planne" commitments? Are eno&#h systems & &ser personnel assi#ne" to the project? Are the people assi#ne" to the project s&fficiently %&alifie"? Are project mana#ers participatin# in the project a"e%&ately to kno* its tr&e stat&s first han"? a. 0s a %&alifie" person s&fficiently involve" in each critical area? b. Are comm&nication lines *orkin#? 0s a senior systems "epartment representative allocate" to each &ser "epartment to provi"e liaison an" s&pport? Does the project have both a b&siness team lea"er an" a technical team lea"er? Do the project team have a #oo" &n"erstan"in# of the e9istin# an" or propose" har"*are soft*are environments? Are project lea"ers committe" to this project f&ll time? Are project team members committe" f&ll>time? 0s the Pro"&ction S&pport f&nction a"e%&ately reso&rce"? 0s the Pro"&ction S&pport f&nction reso&rce" f&ll>time? 0s there a pro"&ction s&pport plan+ *ith a plan for transition from "evelopment to pro"&ction? 1sers 0s &ser involvement a"e%&ate? Are the people assi#ne" to the project s&fficiently %&alifie"? 0s there a formal Service (evel A#reement )S(A4 *ith the appropriate client "epartments? 'oes the S2A de*ine3 a. 'he Project Application Scope? b. 'he objectives of the A#reement? c. 'he b&siness areas to be s&pporte"? ". 'he systems applications to be s&pporte"? e. 'he basis for costs an" char#es? f. 'he e9tent of &ser participation? #. 'he fre%&ency of pro#ress reportin# < i.e. *eekly+ bi>*eekly+ monthly+ etc.? h. 'he form of the final report? i. 'he *ork plan)s4? Are the project team members locate" locally to the &sers?

Assessmen t

2.11 2.12 2.12.1/

2.12

2.13 2.15 2.16 2.17 2.2: 0.3.1 3.2 3.3./

3.2

Page 6 of 11

Page 7 of 11

Ite m 3.3

Attribute .as the provision been ma"e for trainin# staff+ incl&"in#@ a. Formal trainin# relate" to the project? b. On the job trainin#? c. Formal trainin# not relate" to the project? ". Een"or trainin#? Are &sers a"e%&ately traine" an" are all trainin# re%&irements fille"? 'evelo!ment A!!roach Methodologies 0s a reco#ni8e" "evelopment metho")s4 been follo*e"? 0f more than one metho" has been implemente"+ "oes a "oc&mente" process e9ist for effective inte#ration bet*een amon# metho"s? 0s the selecte" metho" appropriate for the Application+ 'echnical an" Data Architect&res? CAS# Are CAS= tools bein# &se"? Does the CAS= Ainte#ration strate#yB incl&"e a process for reverse inte#ration )i.e. &p"atin# the analysis tool if a chan#e is ma"e at the "esi#n level4? Are str&ct&re" re%&irements & "esi#n revie*s an" or *alkthro&#hs in &se? Are "etaile" "esi#n an" co"e inspections in &se? Anal&sis & 'esign Are re%&irements & "esi#n stan"ar"s in place? Are specifications clearly traceable from physical "esi#n to lo#ical re%&irements? Are the re%&irements an" "esi#n metho"s s&itable for the type of application & environment? Do the "esi#n specification "oc&ments reference@ a. P&rpose scope? b. Clossary of terms? c. $e%&irements specifications? ". 1o"&lar "ecomposition "ia#rams? e. 'echnical environment specification? f. Constraints? #. 'estin# & Data Conversion strate#y? 'evelo!ment4Construction Are co"in# stan"ar"s in place? 0s there a clearly "oc&mente" relationship bet*een lo#ical )concept&al4 "esi#n an" technical "esi#n? 0s "esi#n an" co"e re>&se s&pporte"? Are pro#ram control proce"&res in place?

Assessmen t

3.5 ).).1 5.1. 1 5.1. 2 5.1. ).2 5.2. 1 5.2. 2 5.5./ ).$ 5.2. 1 5.2. 2 5.2. 5.2. /

).0 5.3. 1 5.3. 2 5.3. 5.3. /

Page 7 of 11

Page 8 of 11

Ite m 5.3. 2 5.3. 3 ).) 5.5. 1

Attribute Are there proce"&res to #overn &nit test cases+ con"itions+ e9pecte" res&lts+ lo#s & si#n>offs? Do a"e%&ate "evelopment an" test environments e9ist? Testing ?hich of the follo*in# test phases are covere" by the metho"olo#y@ a. Gnit 'estin#? b. System 'estin#? c. 0nte#ration 'estin#? ". Gser Acceptance 'estin#? 0s a test strate#y in place? Do "etaile" test plans cases e9ist? Are all necessary ;&ality Control proce"&res in place? 0s there an a&"it trail of all tests an" res&lts? Are effective testin# tools incorporate"? 0s a"e%&ate allo*ance ma"e for re#ression testin#? 0s a"e%&ate allo*ance ma"e for "efect repair both before an" after implementation? ?ill the follo*in# components of systems testin# be carrie" o&t@ a. Comm&nications? b. Eol&me? c. Stress? ". $ecovery? e. Gsability? f. Operations? #. =nvironment? h. Sec&rity? i. =fficiency performance? A!!lication Architecture Are object>base" "esi#n an" layere" architect&re principles bein# employe"? Does the application conform to reco#ni8e" in"&stry architect&re stan"ar"s? 0s the application bein# implemente" &sin# client server architect&re? 0s b&siness process re>en#ineerin# bein# &n"ertaken in parallel *ith an" or as part of this project? Are there limitations to b&siness operation fle9ibility "&e to the chosen Application Architect&re? Are application interfaces "esi#ne" in s&ch a *ay as to facilitate maintenance an" chan#e?

Assessmen t

5.5. 2 5.5. 5.5. / 5.5. 2 5.5. 3 5.5. 5 5.5. 6 5.5. 7

5.6.1 6.2 6.6./ 6.2 6.3

Page 8 of 11

Page 9 of 11

Ite m 6.5 5.5 6.6. 1 6.6. 2 6.7.1 7.2 7.7./ 7.2 7.3 7.5 7.6 7.7

Attribute Does the Application Architect&re s&pport information nee"s at all levels of &ser operations )Strate#ic 'actical Operational4? Client 4 Server Are there "esi#n limitations *hich are impactin# service "elivery an" or performance? 0s the c&rrent architect&re scalable? 'ata Architecture and Standards 0s the project operatin# &n"er a formal set of "ata architect&re stan"ar"s? Does a formal "ata architect&re an" mo"el e9ist for the application? .as a f&lly attrib&te" "ata mo"el been "evelope" for the application? .as the "ata mo"el been inte#rate" *ith the other &ser an" system vie*s of the "ata? 0s an in"&stry reco#ni8e" mechani8e" tool bein# &se" to s&pport the "ata mo"ellin# area? .as a set of "ata namin# conventions an" or stan"ar"s been establishe"? 0s an active "ata "ictionary in place? 0s the "ata "ictionary f&lly inte#rate" *ith the "evelopment metho"? .as the D!1S been optimi8e" to s&pport any of the follo*in#@ a. O('P? b. Decision S&pport =0S? c. Data ?areho&sin#? 0s the D!1S cost effective a#ainst e9pectations as "efine" in the !&siness Case? 0s the D!1S portable across tar#et platforms? Does D!1S ven"or s&pport meet formal a#reements an" or e9pectations? 0s there )or has there been4 si#nificant interr&ptions to "evelopment or s&pport activities "&e to D!1S behavior? Does or *ill the D!1S s&pport e9tensibility appropriate for c&rrent an" f&t&re b&siness nee"s? 0s there a clear &p#ra"e path to f&t&re Phases of the D!1S? 0f an alternative D!1S is bein# consi"ere"+ is there a proven conversion path? 0s the D!1S consistent *ith stan"ar" operatin# environment )SO=4? 0s the D!1S re#ar"e" as AState>of>the>ArtB? Technical Architecture 0s the choice of har"*are platform consistent *ith the Stan"ar" Operatin# =nvironment )SO=4? 0s the soft*are environment consistent *ith SO=? 0s the "evelopment lan#&a#e platform>in"epen"ent?

Assessmen t

7.1: 7.11 7.12 7.17.1/ 7.12 7.13 7.15 7.16 1-. 1:.1 1:.2 1:.-

Page 9 of 11

Page 10 of 11

Ite m 1:./ 1:.2 1:.3 1:.5 1:.6 1:.7 1:.1 : 1:.1 1 1:.1 2 1:.1 11. 11.1 11.2 11.11./ 11.2 11.3 11.5 11.6 11.7 12. 12.1 12.2 12.12./ 12.2 12.3 12.5 12.6

Attribute 0s the mi9t&re of technolo#ies proven+ stable an" easily s&pportable? 0s 'CP 0P or other in"&stry reco#ni8e" application interface stan"ar" bein# employe"? Does the &ser interface employ CG0 representation? 0s the application soft*are cost effective a#ainst e9pectations as "efine" in the !&siness Case? 0s the application soft*are portable across tar#et platforms? Does the application soft*are ven"or)s4 s&pport meet formal a#reements an" or e9pectations? 0s there )or has there been4 si#nificant interr&ptions to "evelopment or s&pport activities "&e to application soft*are behavior? Does or *ill the application soft*are s&pport e9tensibility appropriate for c&rrent an" f&t&re b&siness nee"s? 0s there a clear &p#ra"e path to f&t&re Phases of the application soft*are? 0s the soft*are re#ar"e" as AState>of>the>ArtB? Plat*orms .as the cost effectiveness of the platforms been meas&re" & compare" a#ainst estimates in the !&siness Case? 0s there a"e%&ate project>base" technical s&pport? 0s there a"e%&ate ven"or>base" technical s&pport? Do the platforms meet reliability re%&irements? Does the mi9t&re of platforms s&pport portability of soft*are an" D!1S? Do the platforms represent AState>of>the ArtB? Are the platforms consi"ere" efficient in transaction processin# an" "ata stora#e? Are the platforms the SO=? Do Service (evel A#reements e9ist for Platform ).ar"*are4 S&pport? 7etworks & Communications .as the cost effectiveness of the net*orks been meas&re" & compare" a#ainst estimates in the !&siness Case? 0s there a"e%&ate project>base" technical s&pport? 0s there a"e%&ate ven"or>base" technical s&pport? Do the net*orks meet reliability re%&irements? Do the net*orks represent AState>of>the ArtB? Do the net*orks s&pport b&siness nee"s in terms of ban"*i"th? Are all components of the net*orks in accor"ance *ith the SO=? Do Service (evel A#reements e9ist for Det*ork S&pport?

Assessmen t

Page 10 of 11

Page 11 of 11

Ite m 1 . 1-.1 1-.2

Attribute Production & 8!erations Su!!ort Do a"e%&ate operations proce"&res e9ist? Are operations s&pport meas&res in place for@ a. O('P b. 0n%&iries & Decision S&pport c. Gtilities & back>&ps Do formal & "oc&mente" proce"&res e9ist for@ a. Gser )sec&rity4 maintenance? b. Acceptance of applications to Pro"&ction S&pport? 0s the Pro"&ction S&pport )Application 1aintenance4 f&nction *ell "efine"? Are any of the follo*in# types of maintenance carrie" o&t on a planne" basis@ a. Perfective maintenance b. Preventative maintenance c. A"aptive maintenance Are Service (evel A#reements in place bet*een the S&pport F&nctions an" the &ser "epartments? 0s pro"&ction problem resol&tion s&pporte" by@ a. Formal an" a#ree" proce"&res? b. Acc&rate time & cost estimatin#? c. Prioriti8ation? ". 'rackin#? e. $eportin#? Are 1aintenance 1etrics "efine" an" in place? )'hese metrics may incl&"e@ "efect ratesH problems per no. of &sersH "efects per mo"&le systemH "efects per F&nction PointH mean time to repair "efectH mean cost to repair "efect4 0s there an improvement pro#ram in place? Are .elp>"esk f&nctions *ell>"efine"+ efficient an" a"e%&ately reso&rce"?

Assessmen t

1-.1-./ 1-.2

1-.3 1-.5

1-.6

1-.7 1-.1 :

Page 11 of 11