Workplan

Introduction

The Digital Bridge Trust Fund Act, HR 4477, introduced by Rep. Edolphus Towns of New York on May 17, 2000, aims to increase skills and career opportunities in information and technology and related fields for individuals in underserved communities and Native Americans.  The workshop team will serve as consultants to the Board of Trustees of the Digital Trust Fund Act to develop an implementation plan for the allocation of assistance mandated in Sec. 133 of the bill.

Resources

Group members

The workshop team is comprised of twelve Information Technology (IT) Consultants (Maria Bustria, Tammy Draut, Hirofumi Kawakita, Maki Kobayashi, Ying Lin, Nirmala Patni, Jennifer Sly, Kristin Sullivan, Joy Wang, Bernard Wee, and Thaomee Xiong) and one faculty adviser (Professor Deborah Ward).  Each team member brings both training from Columbia University’s Master of Public Administration (MPA) program and significant professional experience.  Professor Deborah Ward, the faculty adviser, is a member of the MPA program faculty and Research Fellow for The Center of Urban Research and Policy at SIPA.

Member Responsibilities

Project Manager:  Jennifer Sly

Responsible for coordinating the execution and delivery of the multiple tasks necessary to fulfill the team’s mission, the project manager is accountable for the following:

• Chairing all meetings of the project group
• Ensuring that outputs are completed on schedule and delivered to the management group, faculty and other relevant workgroups.
• Group coordination; eliciting cooperation through cheerleading; obtaining needed assistance.
• Assigning students to project teams and selecting project and deputy managers.
• Developing the project design and workplan.
• Submission of the project’s final report.
• Selecting and guiding task leaders.
• Convening dress rehearsals for all briefings and inviting an appropriate outside “reviewer” to listen and give feedback.
• Ensuring group understanding of responsibilities, and dealing with group conflict and motivation difficulties.
• Liaison with faculty advisor.

Deputy Manager:  Nirmala Patni

Assisting the project manager in her coordination efforts, the deputy manager is responsible for the following:

• Chairing meetings in the event of project manager’s absence.
• Drafting the project’s progress reports for group review and approval of the project manager.
• Organizing the literature search.
• Assigning students to project teams and selecting project and deputy managers.
• Assisting in the development of the project workplan.
• Raising and addressing coordination issues for the project manager.
• Developing agendas and tracking action items for the group meetings.
• Managing plan logistics.
• Advising task leaders on information collection and analysis and group dynamics problems.
• Proposing new group management techniques.

Task Manager

One team member is designated as the point person for a particular deliverable.  Specifically, the task manager is responsible for the following:

• Managing the completion of assigned outputs.
• Reporting group progress to the project manager.
• Participating in the conduct of specific tasks and determining when and what advice and information is needed and how to get it.

Task Group Members

In addition to a task manger, each deliverable will also be assigned one or more team members to participate in the completion of the designated task.  Each group member is responsible for the following:

• Adhering to deadlines
• Participating fully in accomplishing all assigned duties.

All members will provide input in the three critical areas: the program design, midterm briefing, and final report.  In addition, all members are encouraged to provide input to task groups other than those to which they are assigned, and may be assigned to additional task groups when the need arises.

Faculty Advisor: Deborah Ward

The faculty advisor serves as a valuable resource in terms of management and programmatic experience.  In particular, she is responsible for:

·        Reviewing all drafts and final versions of deliverables to ensure quality.

·        Evaluating the performance and professionalism of group members and providing feedback on quality of group member’s work.

·        Providing general advice and direction on the content of the analysis, research sources and group management techniques.

·        Playing the hypothetical role of client for the project and defining broad goals.

Deliverables/Tasks

Overview

The following is a breakdown of the twelve deliverables/tasks mandated by the Administration.  The task managers will develop a more detailed completion schedule and strategy for each task.  Due to the interconnected nature of deliverables, this workplan contains a considerable amount of detail so that it may serve an additional purpose as a checklist for managers.

Task 1:  Workplan

The workplan is an organizational tool designed to clarify the nature of each talks assosciated with the project.  It will include all relevant completion information, including the following: descriptions of deliverable; the designated task manager and group members; the final administrative deadline; key deadlines for internal review and updates for simultaneous projects; a list of needed inputs and required outputs; and a visual representation of the time line.  The workplan is a preliminary document and is subject to changes as work progresses, needs change, and client input is received.  In particular, the times associated with given dates should be revised as task mangers create detailed completion strategies.

Task Manager:  Jennifer Sly

Task Group:  Nirmala Patni and all task managers

Administrative Deadline:  Wednesday, September 13, 2000, 1 pm

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Task managers’ relevant sections of the workplan regarding their particular task.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions regarding entire document

Outputs Required:

·        Two drafts of the workplan, one for Task Managers and one for the faculty advisor.

·        Final version of the workplan, including graphic representation.

Task 2: Legislative Summary

The legislative summary is a synopsis of the key provisions of The Digital Bridge Trust Fund Act, HR 4477. It provides a title-by-title, section-by-section overview of the principal findings in the bill, thereby enabling the team to become fully acquainted with the question at hand. 

Task Manager: Nirmala Patni

Task Group: Tammy Draut, Thaomee Xiong

Administrative Deadline: September 20, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Project Manager’s comments and revisions.

·        Faculty Advisor’s comments and revisions.

·        Group members’ comments and revisions.

Outputs Required:

·        Outline and preliminary findings of the Bill.

·        Drafts of summary for task managers of literature review and issue analysis and political background task group as well as project manager

·        Final draft for faculty advisor.

·        Final version of legislative summary with copies for each team member.

·        Draft of chapter for final report

Task 3: Literature Review

The literature review provides the team with the necessary secondary research and resources from which the team can draw pertinent data and information.  In addressing the Digital Bridge Trust Fund Act, H.R. 4477, it is necessary to review the important literature surrounding this act including; background data concerning the digital divide issue, ideas of solution and implementation, and commentary analysis on the legislation itself.  The literature review will present a full perspective on the proposal; that is, commentary from those for and against the legislation based on what the proposal includes or lacks, and on its parameters for implementation.  The literature review and annotated bibliography will include relevant articles, reports, and contact information  (names, phone numbers, web sites) of government agencies, trade associations, advocacy organizations, and other organizations involved and affected by the legislation. 

Task Manager: Maria Bustria

Task Group: Hirofumi Kawakita, Ying Liu, and Kristin Sullivan

Administrative Deadline:  September 20, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Preliminary draft of legislative summary.

·        Project manager’s comments and revisions of first draft.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions of second draft.

·        Group member’s comments and revisions.

Outputs Required:

·        Drafts of summary for task manager of Issue and Political Background.

·        Final summary draft to faculty advisor.

·        Final version of literature review and annotated bibliography with copies for each

·        team member.

·        Draft of bibliography for the final report.

Task 4:  Issue and Political Background

The goal of the Issue and Political Background will be to provide a comprehensive understanding of the issues surrounding The Digital Bridge Trust Fund Act (HR 4477).  The analysis will outline the key players, central supporters and opponents, and core problems/concerns involved in the issue commonly known as the “digital divide.” Collectively, this information will help focus the group’s strategic development and implementation of The Digital Bridge Act.

Task Manager: Tammy Draut

Task Group: Bernard Wee, Joy Wang and Maki Kobayashi

Administrative Deadline: September 27, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Outline and preliminary findings

·        Drafts and final versions of legislative summary and literature review

·        Project manager’s comments and revisions of first draft

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions of second draft

·        Group member’s comments and revisions

Outputs Required:

·        Outline and preliminary findings for program design task managers and project managers

·        Preliminary drafts of background for task mangers of program design task groups as well as project manager

·        Draft of briefing book

Task 5: Program Design

The program design team will be divided into the three subgroups of Option I, Option II, and Criteria.  Option I and II will develop two independent program designs.  Each program will take into account the issue and political background of this project and present an adequate rationale for designing the option.  Project managers will coordinate the tasks of the team members.  The Task manager of each team is responsible for creating consensus, assigning responsibilities to group members and completing the group task. The Criteria team will develop an evaluation plan for the program options.  It will then share its preliminary ideas with the Option teams so that the Option teams are aware of how their programs will be evaluated.  Once this is clarified, the three teams will work together to create a final program option.  The program design will be used as the basis of the midterm briefing as well as all future work by the workshop team.

Task Manager: Maki Kobayashi

Task Group: Hirofumi Kawakita, Bernard Wee, and Kristin Sullivan

Task Manager: Joy Wang

Task Group: Nirmala Patni, Tammy Draut and Ying Liu

Task Manager: Thaomee Xiong

Task Group: Maria Bustria and Jennifer Sly

Administrative Deadline: October 4, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Preliminary outline and findings from issue and political background task group.

·        Drafts and final versions of issue and political background, and final versions of literature review and legislative analysis.

·        Project managers’ comments and revisions regarding memo and briefing book drafts.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions regarding final draft of memo and briefing book.

·        Workshop team’s comments following initial discussion of options.

Outputs Required:

·        Draft of each option and criteria for evaluation.

·        Draft of memo detailing final option and criteria used in the selection process.

·        Draft of briefing book.

·        Final version of option memo.

·        Briefing for workshop group using briefing books.

·        Draft of chapter for final report.

Task 6: Midterm Briefing

The midterm briefing is the formal presentation of the workshop team’s results.  The briefing will be ten minutes in length and will cover the following topics: the public policy problem being addressed, our implementation strategy and graphically represent aspect of our design.

Task Manager:  Nirmala Patni,

Task Group:  Maria Bustria, Maki Kobayashi and Thaomee Xiong

Administrative Deadline: October 4, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Drafts and finals versions of program design report and final versions of legislative summary and issue and political background.

·        Project manager’s comments regarding briefing rehearsal and revisions of first draft of briefing book.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions of second draft of briefing book and briefing rehearsal.

·        Group member’s comments and revisions of briefing book and briefing rehearsal

Outputs Required:

·        Draft of briefing book

·        Final version of briefing book

·        Draft of chapter for final report

Task 7: Organization and Staffing Plan

The program design provides the framework within which the organization and staffing plan will be developed. The plan should outline the practical steps necessary for implementing that design and the exact organizational structure that would be created. Some attention should be given to clarifying the rationale for choosing one structure over other options. In addition, this plan will need to include clear charts of the structure that is being replaced, the one being created and some description of the various staff positions required by the plan. The organization and staffing plan is both a clarification of the program design and a necessary breakdown for the budget and revenue plan. Thus, a significant interaction should occur between these two groups. The performance management and TQM analysis team will also incorporate details from this plan in their analysis. The master calendar will be generated, in part, from this organization and staffing plan.

Task Manager:  Ying Liu

Task Group:  Joy Wang and ThaoMee Xiong

Administrative Deadline: October 18, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Drafts and final copies of program design.

·        Project manager’s comments and revisions of memo drafts and briefing books.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions of final memo drafts and briefing books.

·        Workshop team’s comments.

Outputs Required:

·        Two drafts of memo. First draft to be given to project manager and all subsequent    

task managers.

·        Second and final draft to be given to faculty advisor.

·        Draft of briefing book.

·        Final revision of the memo.

·        Briefing delivered to workshop team with briefing book.

·        Draft of chapter for final report.

Task 8: Budget and Revenue Plan

Section 3 of HR 4477 already stipulates how $1,246,300,000 should be allocated among nine broad areas.  Since HR 4477 is a spending program, the budget will detail (1) when the funds will be appropriated and (2) how the appropriations will be spent according to the staffing plan and program design.

Task Manager: Bernard Wee

Task Group: Hirofumi Kawakita and Maria Bustria

Administrative Deadline: October 18, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Program design.

·        Organization and staffing plan.

·        US Census 1990.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments, with appropriate revisions made.

Outputs Required:

·        Draft briefing book and memo.

·        Briefing practice with team.

·        Final briefing book and memo.

Task 9: Performance Management and TQM Analysis

Analyzing the implementation strategies using performance management theory and TQM concepts will ensure that the legislation’s policy objectives are met.  This particular piece of legislation requires detailed consideration of performance measurement techniques and ways of improving operating efficiency.  This group will need to determine the best measurement techniques, collection methods, reporting systems, and feedback mechanisms.  This is likely to involve analyzing the program design in addition to the more traditional analysis of the organizational structure and budget plan.  The structures established by the management analysis will be incorporated in the master calendar and detailed in the final briefing.

Task Manager:  Hirofumi Kawakita

Task Group:  Kristin Sullivan and Ying Liu

Administrative Deadline: October 25, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

• Drafts and final copies of program design, organizational plan and budget plans.
• Project manager’s comments and revisions of memo drafts and briefing books.
• Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions of final memo drafts and briefing books.
• Work Team comments.

Outputs Required:

·        Two drafts of memo.  First draft to be given to project manager and all subsequent task managers.  Second and final draft to be given to faculty advisor.

·        Draft of briefing book.

·        Final version of the memo.

·        Briefing delivered to workshop team with briefing book.

·        Draft of chapter for final report.

Task 10: Master Calendar

The master calendar is intended to provide a comprehensive timeline for implementing all aspects of the program design.  Determined directly from the organizational plan, budget plan, and performance management analysis, the master calendar will aid in achieving all program objectives.  The nature of this bill requires that the master calendar provide a clear visual representation of the timeframe in which The Digital Bridge Trust Fund programs will be established, when federal monies will be distributed, and who will perform the tasks involved.

Task Manager:  Kristin Sullivan

Task Group:  Maki Kobayashi and Jennifer Sly

Administrative Deadline: November 1, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Drafts and final copies of Program Design, Organizational and Staffing Plan, Budget and Revenue Plan, and Performance Management and TQM Analysis.

·        Input from project manager and revisions of calendar drafts.

·        Input from faculty advisor and revisions of calendar drafts.

·        Input from task managers/workshop team and revisions of calendar drafts.

Outputs Required:

·        Draft of calendar for faculty advisor.

·        Draft of calendar for project manager.

·        Draft of calendar for final briefing task manager.

·        Final version of calendar.

·        Calendar briefing delivered to workshop team.

·        Draft of calendar for final report.

Task 11: Final Briefings

The final briefing is a concise and selective summary of the outputs produced throughout the semester and should last no longer than twenty minutes with questions following.  The emphasis will be on highlighting the logical flow of tasks and the rationale for the team’s implementation strategies and other conclusions reached by the group.  The briefing should be drawn from the final report and all earlier tasks.

Task Manager:  Jennifer Sly

Task Group:  Joy Wang

Administrative Deadline: November 15, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        Drafts and final versions of all team output.

·        Project manager’s comments and revisions regarding draft of briefing book and rehearsal of presentation.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments and revisions regarding second draft of briefing book and rehersal of presentation.

·        Workshop team’s comments.

Outputs Required:

·        Draft of briefing book.

·        Final version of briefing book.

·        Draft of chapter for final report.

Task 12: Final Report

More than just an updated collation of the semester’s deliverables, the final report will also be a document of advocacy: Given the legislative boundaries, this is the best plan to achieve the stated policy goals, and these are the reasons.  The final report will also describe some alternatives that the team considered but rejected.

Task Manager:  Bernard Wee

Task Group: Tammy Draut and Nirmala Patni

Administrative Deadline: December 1, 2000

Internal Deadlines:

Inputs Needed:

·        All deliverables, updated to reflect recent developments in implementation plan.

·        All deliverables, edited for coherence to a single implementation vision.

·        Faculty advisor’s comments, with appropriate amendments made.

·        Team’s comments, with appropriate amendments made.

Outputs Required:

·        Revisions of deliverables, with amendments made.

·        Draft of complete report, in time for final briefing.

·        First draft.

·        Final report.