Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Section
Column
width78%

While objectivity is difficult to achieve, the project scorecard process is intended to be as close to reflecting common and agreed upon assessment criteria as possible. The 1 to 5 ranking values are defined as follows:

 
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

Strategic Value

Anchor
scorecard_strategic_value
scorecard_strategic_value

An indication of how the project addresses the goals of the entire University, UCI campus, or requesting unit.

1

The project addresses no specific strategic goals at any organizational level.

2Strategic goals are defined but the project does not support them.
3Project supports strategic goals for the functional unit.
4Project supports campus wide strategic goals.
5Project supports campus wide and UC system wide strategic goals.
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

User Priority & Commitment

Anchor
scorecard_user_priority
scorecard_user_priority

An indication of how critical the project is to a department and the project's benefit to to constituents. Includes a measure of the functional unit's engagement and resource allocation for leadership, planning, analysis, testing, etc.

1

Functional unit is not ready to commit required resources to implement the project.

2Functional unit is generally aware of resource requirements but has not yet identified resources required to implement.
3Functional unit fully understands the resource requirements but is not yet able to commit resources.
4Functional unit is ready to implement and has identified required resources but is not yet able to commit due to other priorities.
5Project is one of the functional unit's highest priorities. Unit is committed to implementing the project and resources have been identified.
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

Criticality

Anchor
scorecard_criticality
scorecard_criticality

A value representing the overall criticality of the project to campus mission. Legal requirements and mandates can drive criticality since these are often accompanied by penalties for noncompliance.

1

Project is not critical to business functions.

2Work arounds exist, making this project less critical to business.
3If project is not done, high financial costs will be incurred but business can still be conducted with alternative solutions or manual work arounds.
4If project is not done, other high value projects will slip or will need to be cancelled, or an interruption of service will occur.
5If project is not done, the campus will be at risk of litigation, out of compliance with mandates, or incur high financial penalties.
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

Risk Mitigation

Anchor
scorecard_risk_mitigation
scorecard_risk_mitigation

A value representing the overall impact on mitigation of risk factors. When determining risk avoidance, the probability of threats, the vulnerability of the system to those threats, and the impact if the threat occurs, should all be considered.

1

No obvious reduction of risk.

2Minor, but measurable reduction of risk.
3Moderate reduction of risk.
4Significant reduction of risk.
5Nearly complete elimination of risk.
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

Impact & Visibility

Anchor
scorecard_impact
scorecard_impact

The relative size of the population that will be impacted by the project. When counting users, students, faculty, and staff are all included.

1

1 to 25 users will be impacted slightly with minor or no improvements to operations.

21 to 25 users ill be impacted but with significant improvements to operations.
325 to 1,000 users will be impacted.
41,000 to 5,000 users impacted.
55,000 or more users impacted.
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

Savings & Efficiency

Anchor
scorecard_savings
scorecard_savings

The relative value of the project in terms of actual revenue or indirect costs in the form of staff work hours or other efficiencies.

1

No measurable cost savings or revenue gains, or the project will result in additional costs that will not be offset.

2Cost savings or efficiencies are possible but difficult to quantify and not included in proposal. 
3Project clearly creates savings, improves efficiencies or increases revenue but only down the line and measures may not be very accurate.
4Project saves significant monies, creates measurable efficiencies, or generates revenue for a functional unit.
5Project saves significant monies, creates measurable efficiencies, or generates revenue for the campus or university.
Table plus
columnStyleswidth:25px,width:800px

Readiness to Move Forward

Anchor
scorecard_readiness
scorecard_readiness

The readiness of OIT and the functional unit in terms of active project leadership, available in-house technical expertise, momentum, support, community buy-in, project plan completeness, potential for success, etc.

1

Project cannot be scheduled due to poorly understood requirements or missing specifications.

2All technical issues are understood but planning is not complete and resource requirements are unknown.
3Planning is complete and project could be scheduled but funding or staff have not yet been identified in either OIT or the functional unit.
4All resources are available but the project cannot be started for other reasons.
5All required resources are available in OIT and the functional unit and the project is ready to proceed.

Column
width2%
 
Column
width20%
Include Page
OIT Project Navigation Pane
OIT Project Navigation Pane