Key Questions

Is the project on track to satisfy the customer's business objectives?Yes

Is the project on track to achieve the objectives in the approved timeframe?Uncertain

Is the project on track to achieve the objectives within the approved budget?Uncertain

Project Overall Health

Comments

Red

The Project Overall Health rating is assessed as Red in December 2025 due to the current assessment of focus areas. -- Time Management continued Red: Escalated for immediate corrective action. All remaining Milestones were due to finish by December 31, 2025, and many continue in progress. -- Quality changed from Yellow to Red: Escalated for immediate corrective action. The backlog of defects, combined with build and testing delays is impacting EUST 3 preparation. -- Cost, continued Yellow: Caution, risks/issues exist. Federal funding requested in APDU for FFY 2026 is not yet approved. -- Resources changed from Green to Yellow: Caution, risks/issues exist. There are consulting contracts which will expire in 2026, unless approved by ACF. -- Transition Readiness changed from Red to Yellow: Caution, risks/issues exist. The Board of Directors approved the new Production Simulation environment and approach in lieu of a V1 Production Pilot. -- Governance, Scope, Risks/Issues, continued Green: Satisfactory, no corrective action necessary. • The ACF provided provisional approval of the FFY 2026 APDU pending submission of clarifications. The CDSS sent the clarifications to ACF on December 31. • In lieu of the previously planned Pilot, the Board approved a Production Simulation approach for V1 readiness. An As-Needed APDU is being prepared to request additional funding needed. • Product delivery continues with 16 milestones complete (blue), 3 on track (green), 14 at risk (Yellow), 3 behind (Red), and 1 TBD. • The system scope includes core product development, infrastructure, interfaces, shared services, data conversion, scenario testing, rework based on user feedback, and design blueprints. • In December, no new high-priority issues or risks were opened. 1 issue and 1 risk were closed, decreasing the the total to 10 high-priority issues. • In the project’s December 2025 Project Status Report (PSR) submission to the CDT, OTSI updated responses from “Yes” to “Uncertain” for the Key Questions: -- “Is the project on track to achieve the objectives in the approved timeframe?” -- “Is the project on track to achieve the objectives within the approved budget?”

Focus Area/Rating	Comments
Governance Green	The Governance rating continued Green in December 2025. The scope and character of authority for decision-making are documented, with governance bodies meeting regularly. • The last approval document, SPR 6, approved in May 2023, updated the project’s delivery approach and resources. Since approved, the following updates have been made: -- New Build Drop (BD) plan approved on September 18, adding two additional BDs and time extension to finish Legal Action and Service Delivery Tracking functionality. -- A feature-set Build Drop (BD) plan was approved on May 28, 2025. -- A Holistic Design approach was approved on June 10, 2024. -- The project schedule was re-baselined on July 3, 2024. -- The Financial Analysis Worksheets (FAW) were updated in April 2025 to support a FY 2025-26 BCP. One-time costs increased by 1%. • The ACF provided provisional approval of the FFY 2026 APDU pending submission of clarifications. The CDSS sent the clarifications to ACF on December 31. -- The APDU was resubmitted to the ACF on October 17 requesting baseline funding approval. -- It was originally submitted to the ACF CB for review on July 31, 2025, and withdrawn on September 11 to provide additional contract-related information per ACF request. -- The original submission included costs for V1 Pilot, Sandbox, and Process Automation which are not delineated in the last approved FAW. • In December, the Board unanimously approved the new Production Simulation approach. An As-Needed APDU is being prepared. • Four decisions were made via the Decision-Making Framework in December: -- 572: SF Core Platform and other CARES component- SCA Engines and rules need to be revised. -- 573: Build Drop 5 Deployment Postponed to December 11. Accepted on December 4. Level 3 – Senior Leadership -- 574: County Forms Framework - For CARES V1. In Review. Decision needed by January 9, 2026. In Review. Level 3 – Senior Leadership -- 575: CARES-Live 2.8.35.. • Nine (9) project-internal change requests were submitted in December. • Constituent engagement includes regular communications to constituents including Pilot Announcement, Progress & Engagement Summary, Explorer Newsletter, Staff Survey, and Data Dictionary update. • ACF Monthly Report on User Engagement & Adoption – December report with key accomplishments and stakeholder topics was prepared and submitted. -- Finalized high-level plans for EUST 3 Admin Console and General Training. -- Completed Cycles 1–5 of Practices Validation and Data Validation with counties, CDSS, and Tribes with California Title IV-E Agreements. -- Continued Biweekly Binti County Coordination Meetings, aligning all 43 Binti counties on the updated data mapping and validation approach. -- A total of 14 communications were sent to stakeholders and users • Per an SPR 6 approval condition, the project utilizes Earned Value Metrics (EVM) to monitor project health. The Total V1 Scope is measured in Function Point Equivalents (FPE). The FPE value of 88,041 continued since November.
Time Management Red	In December, the Time Management Focus Area rating continued Red: Escalated for immediate corrective action. • Current delivery velocity, testing readiness, and defect trends indicate increasing schedule risk. Without a material increase in throughput or a contingency plan, EUST 3 readiness is at risk. • The project is responding to 3 high-priority issues related to Time Management: -- RI-350: PaaS SI misalignment creating bottlenecks. -- RI-341: Impact from scope delays in Build Drops 1,2, and 3. -- RI-360: Sprint velocity is inadequate to achieve the SPR 6 milestone schedule. • IV&V observations continue without resolution, including: -- 1.5.23: Sprint Cadence and Sprint Length Inconsistent. -- 1.5.24: Sprint Planning and Prioritization Efficiency. -- 1.5.25: Underperforming Sprint Velocity and Team Overcommitment. -- 1.6.12.2: PaaS Team Misalignment creating bottlenecks. • 16 (no change from last month) of 37 product and interface milestones have completed the Service Delivery Life Cycle (SDLC) stage and will be tested and validated in EUST 3. All product milestones and interfaces have been mapped to EUST testing/validation cycles. -- EUST 1 finished May 2024. All 3 milestones are SDLC complete (blue). -- EUST 2 finished April 2025. All 9 milestones are SDLC complete (blue). -- All 21 EUST 3 milestones were due to finish on December 31, 2025. Currently, 3 are SDLC complete (blue), 3 are on track (green), 14 are at risk (yellow), 3 are overdue (Red). -- Of the 4 EUST 3 Reporting milestones that will be tested, 2 are at risk (yellow), 1 is overdue (Red), and 1 postponed. • The EUST 3 Build Drop (BD) plan is sequenced using service area feature-sets and milestones with goal of achieving SIT Done. As of December end: -- Of the total 2,495 stories across all build drop cycles, 1,529 (61%) have not yet achieved Joint Review or Done status. -- 338 stories are in a blocked status. • Sprint metrics are varied between the State PMO and PaaS SI. IPO recommends increasing use of Jira canned dashboards and reports to show real-time data. As of October end: -- State PMO monitors overall Sprint metrics for inclusion in the monthly PSR. Overall Sprint Velocity (percentage of user stories completed versus committed) is 25.05 (BD1) = 24%, 25.06 (BD2) = 33%, 25.07 (BD3) = 40%, 25.08 (BD4) = 36%, 25.09 (BD5) = 22%, 25.10 = 12%. -- PaaS SI Sprint Commitment and Closure reports focused on Build and SIT metrics. Application Functionality and Component (e.g., Salesforce, Interfaces, DocGen, DocuEdge, and Security) Velocity is 25.05 = 57%, 25.06 = 88%, 25.07 = 58%, 25.08 = 79%, 25.09 = 49%, 25.10 = unavailable. • The monthly PSR is reporting “uncertain” that project objectives will be achieved within the approved timeframe. • The project maintains adequate control of the (Microsoft Project) V1 Schedule. State and Contractors’ staff collaborate and meet weekly with a standing agenda. Changes to Finish Dates require approval by the Project Director. • The project's performance in achieving the remediated and re-baselined project schedule is reported by PaaS SI to be on track. -- As of December end, PaaS SI schedule variance metrics show the overall project is on track at 72% (+4% from last month) and complete, with 436 Overdue (238 more than last month) and 518 Behind Schedule (482 more than last month). -- IPO notes a variance of -14% between percentage of work completed (72%) and the elapsed state business days planned for V1 work (86%). However, the schedule is duration-based and not effort-driven. I.e., the amount of work remaining may take more or less effort than the work completed to date. • As per an SPR approval condition, the Project is using EVM to gauge performance. The Schedule Performance Index (SPI) increased to 0.968 as of December 15, indicating the project is on schedule with a variance of less than 5% from the target of 1.0.
Cost & Contract Management Yellow	The Cost & Contract Management rating continued to be Yellow in December 2025. • The monthly PSR is reporting “uncertain” that project objectives will be achieved within the approved budget. • The resubmitted FFY 2026 APDU requests funding approval only for baseline costs. Provisional approval was provided by ACF in December. -- The original submission included costs for V1 Production Pilot, Sandbox, and Process Automation estimated at $79.5 million, plus additional contract costs. -- In December, the Board of Directors approved a Production Simulation readiness approach for V1, estimated at $86.9 million. These costs are not delineated in the last approved FAW, and could trigger a condition for a new SPR. • ACF confirmed via email on July 14, that CCWIS claiming status is restored with a Federal Financial Participation (FFP) ratio of 73.5% Federal; 26.5% State; and retroactive to FFY 2024. • The Total Project Costs approved with SPR 6 are $1,711,011,443 with One-Time Costs of $1,228,909,579, Continuing Costs of $301,567,793, and Future Operations Costs of $180,534,071. -- Total One-Time Cumulative Expenditures are reported as $614,368,597 – 22% less than the planned $788,245,199 Total Cumulative One-Time Budget planned for at this time. -- Current Year Cumulative Expenditures increased in December from $114,981,474 to $124,302,106 resulting from payment of contractors’ invoices. • State funding requested in a Spring Finance Letter (SFY) 2025-26 BCP was approved in the budget signed by the Governor on June 27, 2025. • As per an approval condition, the Project is using EVM to gauge performance. -- The 1.198 CPI reported as of December 15 is consistent with expenditures less than budgeted. The variance from the target 1.0 continues greater than 10% but is less than the peak CPI of 1.378 in August. • There are currently 14 services contracts for delivery of the CWS-CARES solution. -- 7 procurements are planned or in progress. -- 7 contract amendments are in progress. • Contract amendment negotiations for key contracts specified in SPR 6 are complete and pending ACF approval. -- Deloitte (PaaS SI): The amendment increases the total value from $273,514,765 to $326,519,306. -- Deloitte (Implementation services): The amendment increases the total value from $35,819,365 to $158,318,055. -- KPMG (PVS): The amendment increases the total value from $80,239,017 to $90,413,910. -- OnCore (CDI): The amendment increases the total value from $132,338,965 to $167,048,731.81.
Scope Management Green	The Scope Management rating continued to be Green in December 2025. • SPR 6 approval condition #1 is satisfied. The PMO continues to provide monthly extracts of the CARES Version 1 (V1) product scope. -- A scope extract for December was unavailable due to current Time Management conditions. -- The December V1 Scope Extract prepared by the project shows V1 is organized by the Extended User Scenario Testing (EUST) cycles and consists of 4,091 (-53 from last month) User Stories categorized into 37 Milestones (plus Rework, Forms, and Shared Services), 128 Building Blocks, and 500 Epics. -- 2,636 (64% of total) user stories are done. -- 735 (41%) of 1,803 user stories for EUST 3 are done. -- The CDT expects the total number of epics and user stories to continue fluctuating as V1 SDLC and user feedback activities progress. • There are eight external interfaces in scope. Four are SDLC complete, and four are in progress. • There are five major IT systems used by one or more counties that data conversion activities are in progress for. -- Data conversion cycles continue. Cycle 6 is in progress. Cycles 7-9 will be full mock data conversion validation. • Development of 448 Statewide forms continues in progress. As of December end, 240 are Done, 208 are In Progress, and others will be reevaluated. • Development of 2,339 County-specific forms continues in progress. A dedicated county development environment is available and utilized.
Resources Yellow	The Resources rating changed to Yellow in December 2025 and will be reassessed pending FFY 2026 APDU disposition. -- Key consulting contracts that provide specialized, skilled contract staff supporting the project will expire in 2026 and would impact implementation and readiness activities leading to Go-Live. • The approved FY 2025-26 project budget allocates 126 positions, an increase of three positions above FY 2024-25. • The project’s overall position vacancy percentage continued at 4% in December, within the Project’s goal of 10%. • Total primary vendor resources maintained at 726 staff overall to improve delivery of product functionality by December 2025, including: -- PaaS SI – 405 (no change) -- CDI – 162 (+3) -- PVS – 48 (nc) -- Implementation – 101 (-3) -- QA/Testing – 10 (nc) • State and Vendor Resources have the tools and time necessary to complete tasks as assigned and demonstrate a detailed level of understanding to fulfill their assigned roles. • IPO is monitoring contract condition, as related to the FFY 2026 APDU and pending As-Needed APDU. Several contracts (e.g., Implementation, PM) will expire in 2026.
Quality Red	The Quality rating escalated to Red in December 2025. • EUST 3 Preparation activities are impacted by build and testing delays, and this could impede EUST 3 execution and the county users’ experience. • The project is responding to 5 high-priority issues related to Quality. -- RI-357 (High Issue): Lack of Non-Production Test Data for LIS/FAS Integration. -- RI-354 (High Issue): Non-Adherence to Best Practices in APEX Custom Code Management. -- RI-345 (High Issue): Insufficient QA capacity to support Build Drop volumes. -- RI-342 (High Issue): Issues identified by Salesforce Code Quality Review. -- RI-339 (High Issue): Automation Regression Test (ART) execution failures are poor and not showing an improvement or improving trend. • IV&V observations continue without resolution, including: -- 1.4.3.1: The CARES PaaS application currently contains hardcoded business rules. -- 1.5.4.1: Hardcoded Business Rules Limiting Maintainability, Agility, and Compliance. -- 1.6.1: Salesforce Apex Code Quality Reviews. -- 1.6.10: Lack of monitoring for Salesforce Governor Limits. • The PaaS SI maintains an internal Jira dashboard to monitor Test Execution in SIT for EUST 3 Build Drops. Overall, Pass rate for BD1-5 is 99%. -- 99 open EUST 3 defects are greater than (>) 10 days, 64 are 6-10 days old, and 33 are less than 5 days old. • Usability Testing for Build Drops 1-3 finished in November. 8 counties participated, 339 unique feedback items. BD4 began on December 8 and scheduled to finish on December 19. It continues in progress as of month end. • The quantity of bugs/defects identified during System Integration Testing (SIT) and Quality Assurance (QA) phases increased. -- 8,903 (485 more than last month) defects in System Integration Test (SIT) and 4,431 (+606) defects in QA. -- 1,105 (15 less than last month) Open defects with 133 prioritized as Critical, 177 High, 601 Medium, and 194 Low. 103 defects are Fixed, in Joint Review. -- 293 (63% of Total) Open Development Fixes. • Rework identified from user feedback indicates that some functionality may not fully meet user expectations, requirements, or usability standards. A V1 Scope extract that provides updates for rework also. -- As of December, 641 (84%) of the total 767 Rework user stories are Done. • ADA testing continues with 477 of 550 business processes complete. 43 Salesforce defects open. 33 PaaS defects open.
Risk And Issues Green	The Risks and Issues rating continued Green in December 2025. Risk and issue management is mature, with all items recorded and updated in the Risks and Issues Jira Backlog. • The CWS-CARES team is managing 46 open project-level risks and issues, including 10 high-priority issues. 44 are more than 90-days old, including 10 high-priority issues. -- RI-357 (High Issue): Lack of Non-Production Test Data for LIS/FAS Integration. -- RI-354 (High Issue): Non-Adherence to Best Practices in APEX Custom Code Management. -- RI-350 (High Issue): PaaS SI misalignment creating bottlenecks. -- RI-345 (High Issue): Insufficient QA capacity to support Build Drop volumes. -- RI-342 (High Issue): Issues identified by Salesforce Code Quality Review. -- RI-341 (High Issue): Impact from scope delays in Build Drops 1,2, and 3. -- RI-339 (High Issue): Automation Regression Test (ART) execution failures are poor and not showing an improvement. -- RI-327 (High Issue): Long processing time for Micro-conversion may impact Cutover and Pilot planning and implementation. -- RI-321 (High Issue): Insufficient time and resources to complete the development of County forms needed for CARES V1 Go-Live. -- RI-260 (High Issue): Sprint velocity is inadequate to achieve approved SPR 6 milestone schedule. • Breakdown of active Risks and Issues: -- Issues: 24 (10 High, 9 Medium, 5 are Low) -- Risks: 22 (0 High, 11 Medium, 11 Low)
Transition Readiness Yellow	The Transition Readiness rating changed from Red to Yellow in December 2025. -- On December 18, the Board of Directors approved the CARES V1 Path Forward, endorsing the Production Simulation environment and approach. -- An As-Needed APDU is being prepared to request the additional funding needed. • The project is responding to 2 high-priority issues related to Transition Readiness. -- RI-327 (High Issue) Long processing time for Micro-conversion may impact Cutover and Pilot planning and implementation. -- RI-321 (High Issue) Insufficient time and resources to complete the development of County forms needed for CARES V1 Go-Live. • Overdue Go-Live Readiness tasks continued to increase. -- County-Specific Forms: 6 of 2,288 forms are complete. -- County-Specific Reports: 0 of 1941of Business Objects to Tableau Reports are complete. -- 43 counties remain overdue in data template feedback, data volume estimates, and sample data provision. • Development of training materials is focused on EUST3 scenarios. Admin Console 65% complete, Navigation 100%, Screening Intake 65%, Case Mgmt. 65%, Courts 55%, Adoption 60%, Close Case 80%, Resource Family 30%, Reporting 10%, RFA 10%
Conditions For Approval Green	The SPR 6 Approval Letter stipulates that the project must adhere to the following conditions (abridged language below): 1. Complete an elaboration of the Product Backlog to clarify program needs further and establish the inventory of functions and features required to complete the project. -- a) Satisfied – V1 product scope (Epics) must be elaborated into requirements (Stories) not later than October 31, 2024. IPO reviewed the materials in November 2024 and determined it satisfies the condition. As per CDT request, the project is also providing: 1) Tabular data that demonstrates completion progress and adjustments in total stories by milestone in future Project Status Report (PSR) and Quarterly Project Report (QPR) submissions to the CDT, commencing with the PSR due in December 2024. 2) The PSR and QPR reports include tabular data specifically on the details and progress of the "Rework" milestone stories, including identification of the original source milestone (e.g., 157 Rework milestone stories are sourced from "Milestone 03: Screening"). -- b) Satisfied – “V1 reporting and V2 Epics must be elaborated into Stories not later than February 28, 2025”. On February 28, 2025, the project submitted to the CDT materials intended to satisfy condition #1b. IPO reviewed the materials in March and determined that it satisfies the condition. CDT acknowledges that the V2 Baseline scope information must be kept "procurement confidential" now. The project is requested to provide the CDT: 1) An updated version of the V2 scope at the Epic/Scenario level immediately after the V2 PaaS SI contractor procurement is completed. (Date TBD) 2) An updated version of the V2 scope elaborated to the Story level immediately upon completion of V2 Business Requirements activities. (Date TBD) 2. Conduct annual Development Progress Demonstration for stakeholders and CDT during the first quarter of each Calendar year. -- Satisfied. The most recent annual demonstrations were held on April 4, 2024, and May 7, 2025. 3. Commence Earned Value Management (EVM) reporting in the monthly Project Status Reports (PSR) and Quarterly Project Reports (QPR) submissions beginning in October 2023. -- Satisfied. The Project began reporting EVM in October 2023. The Project continues to refine the approach and calculations using Function Point Equivalents. 4. Provide a Board of Directors-approved V1 Pilot Plan to the CDT upon completion of the SPR 6 Major Milestone in September 2023. -- Satisfied. The Project Director obtained Board of Directors approval on September 28, 2023, for the initial Pilot Plan version to satisfy the CDT SPR 6 approval condition. -- Board approval is conditional, stipulating that all future iterations be returned for approval. 5. The Independent Advisor (IA) consultant must assess the efficacy of the project’s constituent engagement, communications, and adoption model and provide a report that includes improvement recommendations to project leadership, the CalHHS, and the CDT by March 31, 2024. -- Satisfied. Per IPO request, the findings and recommendations were presented to executive stakeholders on June 3, 2024. 6. Provide an updated Vendor Management Plan that includes a revised Work Order Authorization (WOA) process that aligns with the PaaS SI and PVS vendor contract amendments described in SPR 6 before the amendments are executed. -- Satisfied. In August 2023, the CDT IPO team reviewed the new WOA Management Plan with updated WOA templates. -- Per IPO request, the WOA Management Plan was updated in October 2023 to include recurring activities, deliverables, and org readiness details for Implementation WOAs. 7. The CWS-CARES project must submit a new SPR if one or more of the following occurs: a) Estimated One-Time Cost increases by $15 million. b) Estimated Project End Date extends by three months. c) Product scope or requirements vary by 10 percent. d) Service Delivery Lifecycle (SDLC) undergoes major changes, as determined by the CDT. -- Condition has not been triggered
Corrective Action Green	Not currently applicable

• Special Project Report 6 (pdf)
• Special Project Report 5 (pdf)
• Special Project Report 4 (pdf)
• Special Project Report 3 (pdf)
• Special Project Report 2 (pdf)
• Special Project Report 1 (pdf)