2018 Supplemental Operating Budget Request...Department of Enterprise Services 2018 Supplemental...

2018 Supplemental

Operating Budget

Request

Department of Enterprise Services 2018 Supplemental Operating Budget Request 2 | P a g e


Transmittal Letter


Contents Transmittal Letter ......................................................................................................................................... 3

Recommendation Summary ......................................................................................................................... 7

Recommendation at Agency Level ............................................................................................................ 9

Decision Packages ....................................................................................................................................... 11

Decision Package Summary .................................................................................................................... 13

Maintenance Level Decision Packages ................................................................................................... 15

SBCC Technical Adjustment of Expenditure Authority ....................................................................... 15

Increase Fund 422 Expenditure Authority .......................................................................................... 19

1063 Common Space Furniture Fixtures and Equipment ................................................................... 23

Performance Level Decision Packages .................................................................................................... 29

Campus Physical Security and Safety .................................................................................................. 29

Additional Information................................................................................................................................ 41

Summarized Revenues ............................................................................................................................ 43

Information Technology Related Decision Package Documents ............................................................ 45

Electronic Decision Package Confirmation ............................................................................................. 47


Recommendation Summary Recommendation Summary ......................................................................................................................... 7

Recommendation at Agency Level ............................................................................................................ 9


Recommendation at Agency Level


Decision Packages Decision Packages ....................................................................................................................................... 11

Decision Package Summary .................................................................................................................... 13

Maintenance Level Decision Packages ................................................................................................... 15

SBCC Technical Adjustment of Expenditure Authority ....................................................................... 15

Increase Fund 422 Expenditure Authority .......................................................................................... 19

1063 Common Space Furniture Fixtures and Equipment ................................................................... 23

Performance Level Decision Packages .................................................................................................... 29

Campus Physical Security and Safety .................................................................................................. 29


Decision Package Summary


Maintenance Level Decision Packages

SBCC Technical Adjustment of Expenditure Authority

2017 Supplemental Budget Decision Package

Agency: 179 Department of Enterprise Services

Decision Package Code/Title: M2-AL DES SBCC Technical Adjustment of Expenditure Authority

Budget Period: 2017 - 19

Budget Level: Maintenance Level 2

Agency Recommendation Summary Text: The Department of Enterprise Services (DES) is requesting a technical correction to adjust the biennial appropriation and expenditure authority for the State Building Code Council. Fiscal Summary: Decision package total dollar and FTE cost/savings by year, by fund, for 4 years. Additional fiscal details are required below.

Operating Expenditures FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Fund 084-1 38,000 38,000

Total Cost 38,000 38,000

Package Description

The State Building Code Council (SBCC) establishes the minimum building, mechanical, fire, plumbing and energy code requirements necessary to promote the health, safety and welfare of the people of the State of Washington by reviewing, developing and adopting the state building code.

The State Building Code Council is funded by fees associated with building permits issued in the State of Washington. Revenue collected is deposited into the Building Code Council Account (Fund 084). The Building Code Council Account is a special revenue fund, which is appropriated by the Legislature.

DES is requesting that the expenditure authority and appropriation authority for fund 084 be increased to $1.132 million a biennium, or $566,000 a year. This increase of $38,000 a year will align expenditures with forecasted revenue and cash.

Base Budget: If the proposal is an expansion or alteration of a current program or service, provide information on the resources now devoted to the program or service. Please include annual expenditures and FTEs by fund and activity (or provide working models or backup materials containing this information).


This proposal does not involve an expansion or alteration to the operations of the State Building Code Council. Increased appropriation authority, and the associated increase to the Fund 084 expenditure authority, will allow the SBCC to maintain its current staffing levels and program service levels. Decision Package expenditure, FTE and revenue assumptions, calculations and details: Agencies must clearly articulate the workload or policy assumptions used in calculating expenditure and revenue changes proposed. This proposal does not include any expenditure or revenue changes.

Decision Package Justification and Impacts

What specific performance outcomes does the agency expect? Describe and quantify the specific performance outcomes the agency expects as a result of this funding change. Performance Measure detail: This decision package is a technical correction to align expenditure authority with revenues. There are no performance outcomes associated with approval of this decision package. Fully describe and quantify expected impacts on state residents and specific populations served.

If this technical corrections is not made the SBCC would be required to reduce staffing levels. A reduction in staffing levels would impact the council’s ability to maintain service levels associated with building and fire codes which would have a negative impact on the residents of Washington State.


What are other important connections or impacts related to this proposal? Please complete the following table and provide detailed explanations or information below:

Impact(s) To: Identify / Explanation

Regional/County impacts? No Identify:

Other local gov’t impacts? Yes

Identify: Failure to increase the appropriation and expenditure authority will adversely impact the resources available to provide assistance to local government’s ability to enforce state building and fire codes.

Tribal gov’t impacts? No

Identify:

Other state agency impacts? No

Identify:

Responds to specific task force, report, mandate or exec order?

No

Identify:

Does request contain a compensation change?

No

Identify:

Does request require a change to a collective bargaining agreement?

No

Identify:

Facility/workplace needs or impacts?

No

Identify:

Capital Budget Impacts? No

Identify:

Is change required to existing statutes, rules or contracts?

No

Identify:

Is the request related to or a result of litigation?

No

Identify lawsuit (please consult with Attorney General’s Office):

Is the request related to Puget Sound recovery?

No

If yes, see budget instructions Section 14.4 for additional instructions

Identify other important connections

Please provide a detailed discussion of connections/impacts identified above. What alternatives were explored by the agency and why was this option chosen?


What are the consequences of not funding this request? If this request is not funded the SBCC would be required to reduce staffing levels. Reductions in staffing levels will adversely impact the council’s ability to keep building and fire codes current, which would impact the safety of the people of Washington State. How has or can the agency address the issue or need in its current appropriation level? Over the last several years the SBCC has reduced staffing levels by more than half. If this request is not funded a further reduction in staff would be necessary, which would have a significant impact on the SBCC’s ability to meet their core mission. Other supporting materials: Please attach or reference any other supporting materials or information that will help analysts and policymakers understand and prioritize your request. Information technology: Does this Decision Package include funding for any IT-related costs, including hardware, software, services (including cloud-based services), contracts or IT staff?

☒ No

☐ Yes Continue to IT Addendum below and follow the directions on the bottom of the addendum to meet requirements for OCIO review.)

http://ofm.wa.gov/budget/default.asp


Increase Fund 422 Expenditure Authority


Agency: 179 Department of Enterprise Services

Decision Package Code/Title: M2-AM- Increase Fund 422 Expenditure Authority

Budget Period: 2017 - 19


Agency Recommendation Summary Text:

The Department of Enterprise Services (DES) is requesting a technical correction to increase the expenditure authority for the Enterprise Services Account (Fund 422). No additional funding is being requested. Fiscal Summary: Decision package total dollar and FTE cost/savings by year and fund for 4 years. Additional fiscal details are required below.


Fund 422-6 20,000,000 20,000,000

Total Cost 20,000,000 20,000,000

Package Description

This decision package increases expenditure authority in the Enterprise Services Account (Fund 422) by $40M/biennium to align with available revenues. No additional funding is being requested. Base Budget: If the proposal is an expansion or alteration of a current program or service, provide information on the resources now devoted to the program or service. Please include annual expenditures and FTEs by fund and activity (or provide working models or backup materials containing this information). This proposal does not involve an expansion or alteration to the operations of programs resourced through fund 422. No additional funding is being requested. This is merely a technical correction to align expenditure authority to actual revenues.


Decision Package expenditure, FTE and revenue assumptions, calculations and details: Agencies must clearly articulate the workload or policy assumptions used in calculating expenditure and revenue changes proposed. The table below reflects a list of decisions made within the 2017 Legislative Session and program projections for the 17-19 biennium that are impacting the expenditure authority.


What specific performance outcomes does the agency expect? Describe and quantify the specific performance outcomes the agency expects as a result of this funding change. Performance Measure detail: This decision package is a technical correction to align expenditure authority with revenues. There are no performance outcomes associated with approval of this decision package.


Fully describe and quantify expected impacts on state residents and specific populations served. If this technical correction is not made, DES will be required to understate the actual costs of

providing services in Fund 422.

What are other important connections or impacts related to this proposal? Please complete the following

table and provide detailed explanations or information below:



Other local gov’t impacts? No

Identify:


Identify:

Other state agency impacts? No

Identify:


No

Identify:


No

Identify:


No

Identify:


No

Identify:


Identify:


No

Identify:


No



No




Please provide a detailed discussion of connections/impacts identified above. What alternatives were explored by the agency and why was this option chosen? What are the consequences of not funding this request? If the Fund 422 expenditure authority for the 2017 – 2019 biennium is not increased to match the anticipated operating costs for the biennium DES will be required to understate the actual costs in Fund 422 in order to comply with system limitations set within The Allotment System (TALS). How has or can the agency address the issue or need in its current appropriation level? Because the 2017 – 2019 operating budgets of the programs resourced through Fund 422 exceeded the available expenditure authority DES has no alternative but to understate the biennial operating budget for Fund 422 in the allotment system. Other supporting materials: Please attach or reference any other supporting materials or information that will help analysts and policymakers understand and prioritize your request. Information technology: Does this Decision Package include funding for any IT-related costs, including hardware, software, services (including cloud-based services), contracts or IT staff?

☒ No




1063 Common Space Furniture Fixtures and Equipment


Agency: Department of Enterprise Services

Decision Package Code/Title: M2-AN-1063 Common Space Furniture Fixtures and Equipment

Budget Period: 17-19


Agency Recommendation Summary Text: The Department of Enterprise Services (DES) is requesting funding for furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) for the common spaces of the new office building located at 106 11th Avenue (formerly known as the 1063 Block Replacement Project). The building was designed with very few tenant specific conference spaces and instead focused on a common conference room structure with the intent to maximize building space, functionality, reduce costs and create efficiencies. If funding to equip and furnish the common conference rooms is not provided, tenants will not have the functioning space necessary to conduct their daily business. Fiscal Summary: Decision package total dollar and FTE cost/savings by year, by fund, for 3 years. Additional fiscal details are required below.


Fund 001 $0 $1,560,000 $0

Total Cost $1,560,000 $0 $0

Staffing FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

FTEs 0 0 0

Revenue FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

$0 $0 $0

Object of Expenditure FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Obj. J $0 $1,560,000 $0

Package Description:

DES is requesting an appropriation in the amount of $1,560,000 to purchase furniture, fixtures and equipment (FF&E) for the common spaces of the new office building located at 106 11th Avenue.

The 1063 Block Replacement Project was designed using a shared conference room approach. Having shared conference rooms is more cost effective than having individual conference spaces for


each of the six tenants. The shared space approach provides tenants with more flexibility as business needs continue to evolve as well as saves the state money since resources are pooled. As the building owner, DES is responsible to furnish these shared common spaces of the building.

DES is requesting funding to furnish and equip the common spaces of the building. This request represents the minimal amount of funding necessary to ensure the building is fully functional. DES and tenant agencies worked in collaboration with contractors to limit the scope, and scale of the FF&E needed in order to reduce the overall costs to furnish and equip the common spaces of the building. Items to purchase include:

Audio Visual (AV) equipment for the 30 common conference rooms throughout the building, which includes the 3-way dividable conference room on the ground floor.

Common space furniture, such as tables and chairs for informal meeting spaces, waiting areas, and outdoor spaces.

Conference room tables and chairs

Breakroom furniture

Funding to support this purchase was included in the Governor’s 17-19 Capital Budget Proposal, the House of Representatives 17-19 Capital Budget Proposal and Senate Bill 5981. Since a capital budget has not yet been enacted, this leaves DES without the necessary funding to fulfill its obligation to provide tenants a fully functional building that meets their diverse business needs. Examples of tenant business needs include:

Washington State Patrol’s need for a large conference room with audio visual capabilities to hold their monthly staff meetings.

The Office of Financial Management requirement of a conference space with multiple audio visual options for their Results Washington team.

The Office of the State Treasurer’s need for spaces that can be used for training.

Base Budget: If the proposal is an expansion or alteration of a current program or service, provide information on the resources now devoted to the program or service. Please include annual expenditures and FTEs by fund and activity (or provide working models or backup materials containing this information). This onetime request for FF&E funding is necessary to provide tenants with fully functional conference rooms and other common spaces and will not have ongoing impacts.


Decision Package expenditure, FTE and revenue assumptions, calculations and details: Agencies must clearly articulate the workload or policy assumptions used in calculating expenditure and revenue changes proposed.

Based on estimates, DES is requesting $1,560,000 for common space FF&E. Estimates include:

Item Amount

Furniture $480,000

Fixtures $100,000

IT/AV Equipment $980,000


What specific performance outcomes does the agency expect? Describe and quantify the specific performance outcomes the agency expects as a result of this funding change. Performance Measure detail: Efficient, Effective and Accountable Government

This request represents the minimal amount of funding necessary to ensure the building is fully functional. DES and tenant agencies worked in collaboration with contractors to limit the scope, and scale of the FF&E needed in order to reduce the overall costs to furnish and equip the common spaces of the building. Fully describe and quantify expected impacts on state residents and specific populations served.

Common space furniture, fixtures and equipment are necessary to ensure the tenants have a fully functional building in which they can conduct daily business operations to fulfill their agency missions and serve the people of Washington State. Shared resources are more cost efficient and effective than each agency having their own separate spaces and FF&E. Building tenants include: Washington State Patrol, Office of Financial Management, Office of the State Treasurer, Legislative Evaluation & Accountability Program, Legislative Support Center, and Joint Legislative Audit & Review Committee.


What are other important connections or impacts related to this proposal? Please complete the following table and provide detailed explanations or information below:



Other local gov’t impacts? No

Identify:


Identify:

Other state agency impacts? Yes

Identify: Tenants of the building include: Washington State Patrol, Office of Financial Management, Office of the State Treasurer, Legislative Evaluation & Accountability Program ,Legislative Support Center, and Joint Legislative Audit & Review Committee


No

Identify:


No

Identify:


No

Identify:


Yes

Identify: Common space furniture, fixtures and equipment are necessary to meet tenant requirements.


Identify:


No

Identify:


No



No



Please provide a detailed discussion of connections/impacts identified above.


What alternatives were explored by the agency and why was this option chosen? Funding was requested, and included, in the Governor’s 17-19 Capital Budget Proposal. Funding was also included in House and Senate versions of the capital budgets that did not pass. Without the enactment of a 17-19 Capital Budget, DES is requesting funding in the supplemental operating budget. This request represents the minimal amount of funding necessary to ensure the building is fully functional. DES and tenant agencies worked in collaboration with contractors to limit the scope, and scale of the FF&E needed in order to reduce the overall costs to furnish and equip the common spaces of the building. What are the consequences of not funding this request? The building was designed with very few tenant specific conference spaces and instead focused on a common conference room structure with the intent to maximize building space, functionality, reduce costs and create efficiencies. If funding to equip and furnish the common conference rooms is not provided, tenants will not have the functioning space necessary to conduct their daily business. How has or can the agency address the issue or need in its current appropriation level? Other supporting materials: Please attach or reference any other supporting materials or information that will help analysts and policymakers understand and prioritize your request. DES does not receive appropriations, but receives revenue from other state agencies to whom services are provided. In the case of the request for FF&E funding for the 1063 Block Replacement Project, funding was provided to DES in versions 17-19 capital budgets and other tenant agencies received funding for their shares of FF&E in the 17-19 operating budget. Information technology: Does this Decision Package include funding for any IT-related costs, including hardware, software, services (including cloud-based services), contracts or IT staff?

☒ No




Performance Level Decision Packages

Campus Physical Security and Safety


Agency: 179 – Department of Enterprise Services Decision Package Code/Title: PL-AP Campus Physical Security and Safety Budget Period: 2017-2019 Biennium 2018 Supplemental Budget Level: PL – Performance Level Agency Recommendation Summary Text: Due to the identified deficiencies and lack of resources in campus security, the Department of Enterprise Services (DES) seeks to expand law enforcement presence, increase security staffing and implement a crisis communication tool to improve campus security. Fiscal Summary: Decision package total dollar and FTE cost/savings by year, by fund, for 3 years. Additional fiscal details are required below.

Operating Expenditures

FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019

Fund 422-6 2,073,000 2,074,000

Fund 045-6 9,000 9,000

Total Cost 2,082,000 2,083,000

Staffing FY 2019 FY 2019

FTEs 3.0 3.0

Revenue FY 2019 FY 2019

Fund 422-6 2,073,000 2,074,000

Fund 045-6 9,000 9,000

Object of Expenditure FY 2019 FY 2019

Obj. A 250,000 250,000

Obj. B 49,000 49,000

Obj. E 1,510,000 1,511,000

Obj. T 273,000 273,000


Package Description

DES is responsible for the custody and control of the 468-acre Capitol Campus buildings and

grounds. This includes responsibilities for campus emergency management and campus security

coordination. Existing security services include management of the campus security infrastructure

(hard key and card key access control systems, video surveillance system, panic alert systems, etc.) as

well as contracting for the law enforcement services provided by the Washington State Patrol.

This operating request corrects gaps in security systems and processes identified in collaboration with the Capitol Campus security partners to include the House of Representatives Security, Senate Security, Supreme Court Security and the Washington State Patrol Capitol Campus detachment. In addition, DES submitted a separate Capital Budget request. The requests are not interdependent; they each independently provide for greater security on the Capitol Campus. The Capital request titled Campus Physical Security & Safety Improvements focuses on the following:

Independent expert study of campus security that will provide a framework and prioritized recommendations for improvements to campus security.

Installation of a Distributed Antennae Systems (DAS) on the campus where radios and cell phones are not functional, placing law enforcement, employees, and visitors at risk.

Replacement of 147 ineffective analog video surveillance cameras with digital surveillance cameras in support of law enforcement and campus security operations

Overall, security partners, tenants and other stakeholders are expressing growing concern about Capitol Campus physical security and safety as active threat responses rise throughout the nation and on the Olympia campus. Funding this request will improve safety and security on the Capitol Campus, reduce risks to people and places, increase responsiveness to security incidents and events, support Capitol Campus security planning and improve planning and coordination between all security partners. This request focuses on five primary operational security gaps:

1. Need for 24/7 coverage by the WSP on the Capitol Campus.

2. Additional resources needed to maintain, manage, respond timely and analyze data in the access/card key control system.

3. Additional resources needed to maintain, manage, respond timely and analyze data in the

camera/surveillance system.

4. Capitol Campus Emergency Management & Security Coordinator. A single point of contact providing response coordination to disasters on the Capitol Campus and coordination with Capitol Campus security partners as they respond to unforeseen events and incidents.

5. Implementation of a crisis communication tool.

Base Budget: If the proposal is an expansion or alteration of a current program or service, provide information on the resources now devoted to the program or service. Please include


annual expenditures and FTEs by fund and activity (or provide working models or backup materials containing this information). Resources currently devoted to each of the five operational security gaps included in this request are as follows: 1. The WSP Capitol Campus detachment provides 22 hours of coverage per day on the 468 acre

Capitol Campus. This request will fully fund the 24/7 coverage necessary to ensure there is a presence of law enforcement at all times. Current staffing consists of 8 troopers and 1 sergeant. This request will increase staffing levels to 13 troopers and 2 sergeants. The current staffing level for the campus detachment jeopardizes the safety of the troopers and others on the campus.

Campus security responsibilities and nationwide threats on campuses have increased, but the staffing level for the campus detachment has remained the same since 2005, making it nearly impossible to provide adequate safety and security for the campus. With current staffing levels, it is not uncommon to have one trooper stretched across the 468-acre campus.

The responsibilities for this detachment have become significantly more complicated and demanding over the last 12 years.

The opioid epidemic has increased the workload of troopers at the parks as they respond to unresponsive people in crisis.

Staffing levels for the detachment often require scheduling one trooper to a shift. Several incidents have occurred on the campus where troopers, working alone, were met with physical violence.

Increased aggressive protest/demonstrations place an extensive demand on resources in both planning and execution to provide adequate safety services, manage crowd size and potential criminal activity.

The number, frequency, and severity of threats against officials and employees on campus have increased. Each case requires additional demand on staff to investigate, analyze, and document for potential prosecution.

Nationally, an increased number of active threat incidents have forced the need for active threat and workplace violence training for campus employees. This training and outreach program did not exist under past contractual agreements.

Troopers are receiving increased number of requests to assist DES with calls for service such as setting up barricades, locking/unlocking park restrooms during the weekends or for special events, and additional security services for private/special events.


The table below identifies the current WSP cost of providing services for 2017-19, and what the new cost of service will be with the 24/7 enforcement coverage. Please see the attached document titled (Campus Sec WSP 24 7 9617) for more detail regarding the cost of services:

2. DES is not adequately staffed to manage and maintain the Capitol Campus card key systems. The card key team consists of three staff responsible for managing and maintaining the hardware and software for the campus building access control systems. The team is not meeting the expectations of card key customers and the Capitol Campus security partners related to card issuance, card deactivation, access level changes, audits, reporting, timely building lockdowns and investigation support due to inadequate staffing.

Failure to complete daily operational duties increases the risk for unauthorized facility access, untimely lockdown of facilities, and continued failure to provide the cark key services campus security partners and card key customers expect.

The table below demonstrates DES’s current staffing level and program support as compared to other entities who operate card key systems. DES is the only entity in the table who owns and maintains the system.


The table below identifies the current staffing and expenditures, and what those levels will be with the addition of this decision package:

3. DES is not adequately staffed to manage and maintain the camera program. The camera

program is managed by one camera technician who performs a variety of duties to include: ensure the system is operational, install and maintain field devices, archive video, audit and report system configurations, monitor camera usage, and technical support to campus security partners. It is not uncommon for WSP and the campus security partners to have to wait for services to be completed while the camera technician completes emergency requests for operational surveillance activities, investigative support (analyzing and archiving video), and public records requests.

Understaffing this critically important position increases the risk for delays in responding to emergency incidents, system failures, lost video, and delays in the installation or repair of cameras and camera components. For example: On August 25th a body was found in Sylvester Park. WSP requested surveillance footage of the area to aid in their investigation, however, the camera technician was unavailable, delaying the timeliness of providing investigative support.

The table below demonstrates DES current staffing levels and program support as compared to other entities who operate security systems. DES is the only entity in the table who owns and maintains the system.


The following table identifies the current staffing and expenditures, and what those levels will be with the addition of this decision package:

4. DES does not currently have a position responsible for response coordination related to

disasters and security incidents on the Capitol Campus. This creates significant risk for inefficient deployment of resources, confusion in the execution of duties at the agency level and delayed response time to disasters. The Emergency Management and Security Coordinator will be responsible for developing a Campus Emergency Coordination and Security Plan in partnership with our security partners and agency security, risk and emergency managers. The position will serve as a single point of contact providing response coordination to disasters on the Capitol Campus and coordination and support to the Capitol Campus security partners in response to Campus security incidents.

5. The Capitol Campus does not have a crisis communication tool that can be relied upon to

consistently and timely disseminate or broadcast messages to campus tenants, alerting them to an emergency. DES currently utilizes GovDelivery for emergency management notifications and it has been inefficient and ineffective. GovDelivery is designed to connect people to programs and services through an email subscription service, it was not designed or intended to


be a communication crisis tool. Significant delays occur between development, transmission and receipt of the messages, wasting valuable time for campus tenants and visitors to prepare, plan or respond to the emergency.

This request will implement a crisis communication tool, similar to what is commonly used by large colleges and corporate campuses as well as by state, federal and municipal governments. This system will allow DES to improve the communication infrastructure and execute public notifications related to public emergencies and security incidents throughout the campus facilities.

The crisis communication tool will speed and simplify message creation and delivery using a variety of messaging tools, improve coordination with first responders, increase messaging efficiencies, provide instant updates, integrate with ID badge technology, and allow employees to report incidents to 911 or campus security partners directly from an app on their phone.

The estimated cost for the tool would range from an annual fee of $95,000 and up for the tier one notification and an annual fee of $65,000 and up for the tier-two notification. The reoccurring annual cost would be $160,000 per year. A tier one notification deployment is distributed to more than 6,000 Capitol Campus occupants, and a tier-two would be deployed to 40,000 employees, contractors, etc., located off the Capitol Campus.

Date and Incident Count of Messages

Sent

Minutes to

Deliver

Messages

% of Messages

Delivered by

Minutes

3 16%

5 28%

10 63%

30 100%

3 20%

5 31%

10 63%

30 100%

3 17%

5 31%

10 67%

30 100%

3 7%

5 13%

10 24%

30 76%

60 100%

November 9, 2016 OPD

on East Campus45,839

Statistics of GOV Delivery Messaging of recent major

Capitol Campus Incidents

August 1, 2017 NRB

Person of Interest52,514

July 12, 2017 Active

Threat51,630

June 23, 2017 Police

Activity50,964


Decision Package expenditure, FTE and revenue assumptions, calculations and details: Agencies must clearly articulate the workload or policy assumptions used in calculating expenditure and revenue changes proposed.


What specific performance outcomes does the agency expect? Describe and quantify the specific performance outcomes the agency expects as a result of this funding change. The goal of these efforts is to reduce risk to people on the Capitol Campus including employees, the public and responders, reduce risk of damage to assets, and to improve response times as well as support of security partners’ ability to prepare for and respond to emergencies on the Capitol Campus.

Performance Measure detail: Fully describe and quantify expected impacts on state residents and specific populations served. Overall, security partners, tenants and other stakeholders are expressing growing concern about Capitol Campus physical security and safety as active threat responses rise throughout the nation and on the Olympia campus. Funding this request will improve safety and security on the Capitol Campus, reduce risks to people and places, increase responsiveness to security incidents and events,


support Capitol Campus security planning and improve planning and coordination between all security partners. What are other important connections or impacts related to this proposal? Please complete the following table and provide detailed explanations or information below:


Regional/County impacts?

No Identify:

Other local gov’t impacts? Yes

Identify: City of Olympia, federal government including Homeland Security


Identify:

Other state agency impacts?

Yes

Identify: Clients and their customers and public visitors to the Capitol Campus


Yes

Identify: The Governor’s Executive Order on State Agency Risk Management, Executive Order 16-06, requires agencies to address loss prevention and safety.


No

Identify:


No

Identify:


Yes

Identify: The safety and security of campus employees, visitors, and assets will be significantly improved through the proposed improvements to the campus security program.


Identify:


Yes

Identify: The WSP campus security contract would need to be amended.


No




No



X

Please provide a detailed discussion of connections/impacts identified above. What alternatives were explored by the agency and why was this option chosen? Alternatives to providing security to the Capital Campus have been explored over the years. Alternatives explored include: Alternative 1 – Do Nothing If the decision is to do nothing, the campus will continue to be vulnerable in the 5 primary functions identified by DES and the Capitol Campus security partners:

There is currently a period daily where there is no WSP presence on the Campus.

In emergent situations, we are not and will not be staffed at the levels necessary to reprogram card readers and keys timely to ensure appropriate levels of lock down during an emergency event. Nor will we be able to provide the analysis of the card system to inform better practices in the future.

In emergent situations, we are not and will not be staffed at the level necessary to respond to our security partners needs in a timely fashion.

Response coordination for disasters as well as security incident coordination will continue to be disjointed, fragmented and inefficient, putting our security partners, first responders, building tenants and visitors to the Capitol Campus at risk during a natural disaster or security event. Our ability to effectively plan, develop standards, provide training, and coordinate campus wide emergency management and security exercises will also continue to be limited.

Executive Order 16-06, State Agency Risk Management, outlines best practices to be adopted by agencies for Enterprise Risk Management. Currently DES cannot support several of these best practices. Funding these items will allow DES to adopt and support best practices as they relate to Capital Campus emergency management and security.

Alternative 2 – Fund and implement the gaps in security systems and processes identified by the Capitol Campus security partners

24/7 coverage by the WSP for the Capitol Campus

Additional resources needed to maintain, manage, respond timely and analyze data in the access/card key control system implemented on the Capitol Campus.

Additional resources needed to maintain, manage, respond timely and analyze data in the camera/surveillance system on the capitol campus.


Capital Campus Emergency Management & Security Coordinator. A single point of contact to ensure that all partners are up to date on planning, training and responding to unforeseen events and incidents.

Implementation of a crisis communication tool. What are the consequences of not funding this request? Campus security operations as well as aging and obsolete systems will continue to fail. Some security partners and tenants may use their own funding sources to pay for increased individual agency security, which will increase the gaps in coordination, create more confusion increasing response times by WSP, campus security partners and other first responders. In addition, the following will occur:

Continued issues with apprehension of criminal acts and ability to prosecute due to lack of quality video.

Continued lack of situational awareness. Employees and visitors of the campus will receive late notifications of security and emergency incidents.

Continued lack of proper response times to security threats.

Agencies will continue to spend additional money to independently address their security needs (technology and operations), which will fracture the system that our security partners use. This creates additional state expenses as well as inefficiencies.

The safety and security of campus tenants and visitors will remain at current risk levels. How has or can the agency address the issue or need in its current appropriation level? At the current funding level, DES has not been able to adequately support Capital Campus security and emergency management.

Other supporting materials: Please attach or reference any other supporting materials or

information that will help analysts and policymakers understand and prioritize your request.

List Attachments:

Capital Budget Request Information technology: Does this Decision Package include funding for any IT-related costs, including hardware, software, services (including cloud-based services), contracts or IT staff?

☒ No




Additional Information Additional Information................................................................................................................................ 41

Summarized Revenues ............................................................................................................................ 43

Information Technology Related Decision Package Documents ............................................................ 45

Electronic Decision Package Confirmation ............................................................................................. 47


Summarized Revenues


Information Technology Related Decision Package Documents

None


Electronic Decision Package Confirmation

ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL CONFIRMATION FORM

Agency Number: 179

Agency Name: Department of Enterprise Services

Agencies are required to provide electronic access to each decision package in their budget request as part

of the submittal process. Confirm Option 1 or 2 below:

Option 1:

This agency posts all decision packages for our 2017-19 budget request to our public facing website

at the following URL:

URL: http://

Option 2:

This agency does not post decision packages and has forwarded copies via e-mail to

[email protected].

These decision packages conform to our agency’s ADA accessibility compliance standards.

Agency Contact: Annette Meyer, Chief Financial Officer

Contact Phone: (360) 407-9222

Contact E-mail: [email protected]

Date: October 9, 2017

mailto:[email protected]

2018 Supplemental Operating Budget Request...Department of Enterprise Services 2018 Supplemental...

Documents

Transcript of 2018 Supplemental Operating Budget Request...Department of Enterprise Services 2018 Supplemental...