Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for being here this afternoon. This afternoon, we are hearing from the Department for Children and Families, Agency for Digital Services, the Office of Child Youth and Family Advocate, about the CCWIS system, which I think is one of the funnest IT names that has, the Child Welfare Information System. And so what we like to do first is so you all know who you're speaking with, we'll do introductions first. I'm Theresa Wood. I'm Chair of House Human Services, and I live in Waterbury and also serve Bolton, Fuel Score and Huntington.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: I'm representative Kathleen James, and I live in Manchester. And my district is Bennington 4.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Good morning. That's great. Scott Campbell, vice chair of, whatever it is, energy and digital infrastructure, I'm from Saint Johnsbury.

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: Anne Donahue, ranking member of human services. I speak in Northfield and also serve Berlin.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Laura Sibilia, energy and digital infrastructure, Windham.

[Rep. Dara Torre, Clerk]: Dara Torre. I live in Moretown, and I represent Washington too.

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: Good afternoon. Richard Bailey, Lamoille too, includes Belvedere, Johnson, Hyde Park, and Wilkins, two member district, and I serve on the energy committee.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: And then when is your Bennington?

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: Good afternoon, Dan Noyes, represent Wilkite, High Park, Johnson and Belvedere, with my seatmate directly across from you.

[Rep. Esme Cole]: Hi there. Essex Cole of Hartford.

[Rep. Doug Bishop]: Doug Bishop of Colchester.

[Rep. Jubilee McGill]: Hey. I'm Julie McGill from Bridgeport, and I also represent Middlebury, New Haven, and Weybridge.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: I'm Hassan Eastis from Guilford. I also represent Vernon. Hi. Good afternoon. Erica McGuire. I represent Morrow and City.

[Rep. Ray Garofano]: Hi. I'm Ray ofano, I live in Essex. I also represent a small part of Essex Junction and I serve on human services.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Great, thank you. And the floor is yours. We're anxious to hear really an update on what's going on with CCWIS. Also to hear about sort of the challenges that have been presented in IT systems in the last several weeks and learning about how that impacts the safety of children, access for staff, the ability of people to be able to respond in emergencies, and things like that. So what are your backup systems and sort of the whole ball of wax? I realize it's a lot and it's kind of like looking at development and looking at where we're at and where we're going at the same time as we need to understand better what you deal with now on a day in and day out basis and the implications of that for the safety of children and youth and how technology can support us, but also fail us at times and how we respond in that way. So the floor is yours. Thank you.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Going to start with

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: the speaker.

[Rep. Jubilee McGill]: Was there a microphone?

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Yeah, I was just going to say it is difficult to hear you. I

[Rep. Jubilee McGill]: see there's a microphone stand. Yeah, there's microphones here. I'll project more. Okay, thank you. I'll start

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: first talking about the SSNIS outage that happened recently. So on December 15, the state encountered a three day outage of social services management information system that we call SSMIS, disrupting statewide user access to the technical stability issue. SSMIS is the primary data entry and collection system inside the Family Services Division, and it captures information such as demographic information, placement data, case related data, and SS MIS serves as the foundational infrastructure of FSDNet and that's utilized by FSD for managing data, case notes, and critical information about the children, youth, and families we serve.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Could you say that again? The relationship between those two?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Sure. Actually, kind of have a neat way of saying Yes.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: There are two separate systems. SSMAS feeds up to FSD Net. So SSMAS is 43 years old. FSD Net is a young millennial, around 25 years. And so the data from SSMIS can go up. The data from FSD Net, though, does not go down into SSMIS. It's not bidirectional in that way. It only flows one way. And so we hold in SSMAS the majority of our child protection data and information. And then FSDNet is a little bit more case management like, and that is where we capture our case notes. So a case is set up in SSMIS. Once it's set up there, it then becomes visible in FSDNet for staff. And so that's where they can go and enter their case notes. We also capture our intake and investigation information in FSD Net, primarily in FSD Net. So that is when we're receiving a call of abuse or neglect that's coming into the hotline, that is entered into FSDNet, and the cases worked from there.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: And so during the outage, it one, both?

[Rep. Esme Cole]: Yeah, a little bit of both.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: So SSMIS was what went down and that was, it didn't go down on its own. The decision was made to sort of take it offline before it went off on its own. And so we saw it coming and we were able to act in a way to really prevent potentially an even more unplanned outage by turning it off for users. And then it became unavailable at that time, and we wasn't able to continue working. And FSDNet also then was unavailable for a few days, for three days. So when SSWAS goes down, we can only access intake information in FSDNet is what we learned from that.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: Reps Filiya, did you have

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: your hand up?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: I did.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: Okay, go, and then I have a question.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Who made the decision to take the system down because it looked like it was coming good?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Yeah, it was an ABS and FST decision. So we work very close with the agency of digital services developers. We work, I think, more with them than some other FSD staff at times because it is so critical that we really are understanding the systems together. So we, as in family services, had heard from staff the week before that the system was working a little slow. That's not out of the norm. So then people began to monitor it. And then it was the beginning of the following week when it was sort of people were unable to even enter information. Stopped working, really. People could get into it, but they couldn't do their jobs in it. They couldn't enter the data. They couldn't look for the data because it was performing so slow. And so it was at that time that ABS and FSD said, Okay, we need to turn it off before it turns off on its own and we don't know how to get back to it.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Do you notify anyone when that happened?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Yes, we notify staff. We notify the commissioner. We notify all Family Service staff. ADS, I know that their leadership team was involved in that. I know our business office team was really involved as well. I think there's a lot of reimbursements that run through SSMIS, and it's part of the reason we are trying to move in the direction of a newer system because it's really challenging to continue to process foster and adoptive payments successfully through our system. It takes a lot of manual work. People working really hard, having a lot of action for what they're doing to keep that part of it running.

[Rep. Esme Cole]: It also holds a lot

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: of our

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: federal funding mechanisms. So when children are in custody, there are certain things that make them eligible to receive financial funding from our federal government that then offsets the state cost. And what we know about SSMIS and what we've known for years is that it really struggles to get eligibility correct. And there are a lot of humans manually doing the work in family services, in the business office, and in the agency of digital services weekly, really, to make sure that every payment is running as it should, to make sure that we're not inaccurately drawing federal funding down because the mechanism didn't turn itself off when it should have. And we have people who actually are just looking for those things to make sure that we are as close to compliant as they can. But the current system doesn't make that easy.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Thank you, Madam Chair. Have more questions,

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: as you know, but I'll hold them.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: Okay. We'll get back to you. I had a similar question about notification. Just to reiterate, when it looks like you're facing a system outage like this, do you reach out proactively and say, we need to shut the system down, we're thinking of shutting the system down? And if so, how much warning do folks

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: have? Well,

[Rep. Kathleen James]: I guess all of the above.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Staff usually are the ones that will reach out and tell us, as Carly described, when things are starting to look Yeah. We need to actually shut it down. So notify staff because that really puts them on notice that we may need to do a lot more manual input of information or manual really not even input but gathering of information so that once the system is back on you can put it on put it back into the system but it's in this particular instance I think about foster parents parents because we're very concerned about if the shutdown would impact them getting their payments on time. A lot of staff of ADS as well as FSD worked many hours overtime, was over holidays to make sure that would be able to get the payments out to them on time so had it been that we weren't going to be able to work from smoking like we need to switch to a manual process we would have done that even to make sure that we got the payments out to them But since we were able to do it and we would be able to do so, we didn't feel it would be necessary to notify them since they were going to get their payments at the expected time. Question.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: So, as I understand it, you noticed the system was running slower and slower, more slowly and slowly, so that's when you decided to shut it down. And how often does this happen?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Not too often. So the last time there was an outage, an SSMIS outage, was 2021.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Same kind of symptoms?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: I was on maternity leave at that time, so I'm less familiar with the answer now, so I'll be transparent about that. Not the same exact issue. And I think that was part of some of what took, I think, a lot of work within ADS is that SSMIS is so old, it actually is really difficult to predict or to know all of the issues. So they have a lot of plans, ADS, around what happens and what to do if this issue arises. But the one that happened this time was not one that's happened before and not one that I think was anticipated. So I think that was a little different the last time as well. But again, it's sort of a grain of sand. Like, that's somewhere one thing can take it But so I think 2021, and then before that, 2016.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Oh, so it's got that frequent. It's regular, but not frequent.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Right. And I think what I have noticed in the time that I've been here is the time between the averages is shrinking. And that's not the direction we really want to go in. Only like 2016 to 2021, a few more years. 2021 to 2025, that's already shorter. And so being data minded, I'm starting to see that trend and thinking, Okay, where are we looking next?

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Yeah. One last question. And the FSD net was not affected except that it relies on the SSMIS for the initial data entry. Is that right?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: FSD was also down for three days. So the FSD Net was unavailable in terms of case notes because there were no cases to tie it to because SSMIS is down, right? So it means that the foundation of a case to be open and available within SSMIS before it can then be visible in FSDNet. Because all that casework is connected directly to SSMIS, that came down as well, except for intakes. That information is separate. So we really did have information. All of our investigation information was still available, which was really helpful. And ABS worked incredibly hard and continues to, but especially in those first few days, to get us to a place where we had access to more data. And they were able to pull data from before the outage and load it into FSDNet. So even though we were still working on SSMIS, we, within the first few days, did have access back to the majority of case information that our district staff are using day in and day out.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: I'd like to add too to what a colleague was talking about in terms of access to information. I know that in the recent article, it implied that we did not have any knowledge where our kids may have been in the system due to the outage, and that's not quite correct. We still know where our kids are that are in custody, but it would be at the district level, so it would not be as easy as looking on the computer and trying to figure out where we were. We would have to contact the district office who still maintains paper files to say this kid is in this home so it would be extra steps and not as quick but we still absolutely did have knowledge where our unit went. So

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: is there any, I guess I'm presuming that there's some sort of routine maintenance of these systems. So do they get taken down on a scheduled basis in order to do any kind of routine maintenance?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: No. And this is where I know we have some problems with ABS. So if I a different cancer, or if you have more to add, please jump in. But my understanding is that this wasn't anything Vermont. This is a hosted platform or hosted server. And so it was an update that came not from Vermont, but from the company that hosts the server itself. It is a routine one. But I think it is that update that sends through something out within the server. But I'll defer to ATS for a more technical explanation.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Sounds like I threw it back out or something.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Yeah. So I'm just Are the folks from ADS gonna chime in on your own? Are you gonna talk separately, or do you want to take questions now?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I'm just

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: trying to understand a little bit. So and then just please identify yourself for the record when you when you answer. But I'm trying to understand. So it's a purchase arrangement. This system is a vendor that we utilize. And so they're still, quote unquote, supporting the system by doing updates. The update So did that update happen to all states using that system? And did it Or was it just like, were they just updating the Vermont contract? And did that outage occur for other places? Or was it something in our system that caused our system to react to the update in the way it did?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Sorry. Can you speak up a little bit? I'll try. I'm the deputy secretary at agency digital services. Oh.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: No, that's

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: not going

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: to help. That's the

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: TV guy. So,

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: this was number one, and it stems from an incompatibility between underlying technology and the sustained climate. So when we think about the complexity of these systems that are 40 plus years old, There are things that are updated appropriately things that cause breakage when they get updated. Right. So I think in this case there was incompatibility between something pretty old and something a little bit newer and when the decision was made to take the system down our teams both DCF and ABS worked really hard to make sure that the current environment was stabilized and also looking ahead to hopefully a more modern solution down the road, be prepared to cut over to that when it's time. There was a lot of work behind the scenes to be able to do that and to DCF's credit, their continuity of operations, they enacted really, really quickly and allowed us to do the back end work to make those updates. And we have some pretty good ideas about how we're going to handle this and we'll be prepared for when a newer version of the child welfare system comes online, we'll be ready to do that more effectively, if that makes sense.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Yeah, it does. I appreciate that answer. So did you know that the update was coming when the vendor did they just push it out?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I don't know the answer to that. I don't think it's not a scheduled thing. It's more of our ability to easily make the updates but not knowing when those incompatibilities are going to arise always because of the What we are doing now is having a really deep dive to, all right, we know that these are fragile systems, we know that we need to maintain them in particular ways, but how do we also create that forward looking view where we're not going to do something just to do it or go down the wrong path and try to identify what we know of it but not actually identify the problem before it's too soon. It's too soon sometimes, you need a little bit of time and that's when we ended up taking the three days

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: to understand what the root

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: cause was, then we could

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: cut over to the server.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: And we have one other question over here, but I just So would we ever make a decision not to do an update because it's gonna have the potential to impact us in a negative way that we already know is unforeseen. Would And that cause any unintended consequences if we made decisions not to do an update because of the age of the underlying system?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I think there's always risk in determining not to. And also determining to I think it needs to be a conversation between agencies to make sure best decision possible to the state but also to the provider to serve. I think it's a subjective opinion, it's more like gathering information to make sure that we're making the best decision and also not looking at what we've done in the past but also looking ahead to make this better for the future.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Thank you. Representative Noyes.

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: Thank

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: you so much. Just quickly, so if I get this right, the software is old, but we're contracting with a company that provides the hardware. Is that just as old as the software?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: No. So we have we're, well first, so we're actually in the cloud, it's not really an on premise case solution or that component of it. The SSMI system is something that we've had in place for

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Andrea, could I ask you to move up closer to the microphone? People who are listening online can't hear you. Thank you, representative Sibilia.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Thank

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: you. So this hardware is in the cloud, it's a computer running this software. It's a contracted service, probably up to date, but the software is old. Okay, and they're able to run this on modern, safe equipment, this older program? I'm wondering how secure it is or how secure Do you feel it's secure?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Do you have anything to answer? Yeah, my

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: sense is, and this is maybe the one, think of it as maybe the one reason, One good thing about SSMIS is that in some ways it is very safe, where I think you're trying to get it maybe hacking into the system. That type of thing is actually very, very hard because of how old this is and because of the different ways that the users access.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: It is

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: the one good thing about us. Not that we should keep it for that reason, but I think it is sort of that's been my understanding. I think that's right.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: That's my is that the older systems are build horses, otherwise wouldn't still be using them. And they're very difficult to predict, unfortunately. That doesn't mean it can't happen. So that's why we monitor the servers and make sure that whatever is happening, we're aware of. From a security lens, we're aware of what's going on out there.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: We have a rep Campbell and then Sibilia.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: My question is about the future and avoiding shutdowns in the future. So apparently, was triggered by an update by the vendor that's supplying SSMIS. Can we prevail upon them to notify us when an update is happening so that we're at least prepared for the possibility that there might be an incompatibility and that that might require you to shut it down again?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: The answer is yes. You'd probably be looking back at the original contract. I think typically updates or cadence of updates is captured in a contract with an editor, how frequently they might be. So I think it would be possible if you have to look back at it. I think at least some of the folks within ADS that I've coordinated with over the last month or so have had a similar question. And so I think that it is very much on the minds of all of us to start looking more into that, to say, Okay, can we get a little bit of a prediction?

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Well, certainly as a matter of contract, but also as a matter of courtesy.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Thanks. Yep. Regarding federal funding and the percentage of federal funding, we know that that is changing. And I'd like to know how the state is planning to mitigate the risk of those changes to the state and federal percentages for the federal funding sources.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Are you speaking specifically about the federal funding versus CEWIS?

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: We

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: have not received word that that's changing unless that has changed in the last few days. But we were just actually in a call earlier this week on Tuesday with our federal team from the Children's Bureau for the first time since April, talking about CCWIS funding in our systems. And at that time, there was still the fifty-fifty match.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: So I believe this is happening for ID and E. And so if that happens for this system, how does the state plan to address that?

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I'm sorry, we can't hear you. Sorry.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I wanted to translate.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: I'm aware that it's happened with IE and E. And I guess my question is actually for ADS to help here. If this happens with this system, that matching funds, or if this is happening, how are we dealing? A percentage.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Right, so ABS wouldn't necessarily we wouldn't secure the funds for this initiative, but we would work with DCF to prioritize any changes that needed to happen. I don't know if there's any indication that funds are going to be decreased. That's what

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: I'm hearing. At this point, I haven't heard anything about the change,

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: but we would have

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: to talk to our leadership to see what we could do, because absolutely see this as a real it's important to us.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: We have Reptory and then Southworth.

[Rep. Dara Torre, Clerk]: I'm sure. So if we did have a better heads up in the future, what kind of protocol changes would you make in preparation?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: So I think if we did have a heads up and we knew the system would still have to come down, really, I think I should actually say that FSDNet is not always impacted in the same way. We do have scheduled SSMIS downtime where we have been working for a couple of months with ADS to make a change and it's ready to go out and the system has to come down for that change to go out. So when that happens, we plan ahead and we always are really working closely with our centralized intake team, so the team that is working 20 fourseven, who's working after hours. While we know we always try to do the outages and the downtime after hours, so it's least impactful for our staff as a whole, there are a group of people who work around the clock, who are out in the field, no matter what time it is. And so we always coordinate with them to say, Okay, when can you do this? What day and time that is going to be better for your team? We know it's not a Friday or a Monday. What can I do there? So we really began, I think, by planning with those folks who would be most impacted. And that includes our administrative staff. I mean, I have to really thank them, the FSD administrative staff. They have been instrumental in this work over the last month plus as the ones who are the heaviest users of the systems. And so we're always engaging with them. We can use case note alerts. So FSDNet does have a case note alert system where you can put an alert. So the first thing you see when you open up a case in that electronic system is that alert. And that's actually what we were doing in terms of placement changes once FSDNet became available. If there is a placement change, please put that as an alert so we can see it there at a statewide level, not at just the district level. Then, though, it really shifts to spreadsheets. I mean, a lot of our tracking, even with the functioning system happens in spreadsheets. And so we're used to them, which I think is helpful. It allows us to jump in pretty quickly. And actually, that's what we were looking to do if we anticipated the outage going to be longer, where we would use a shared spreadsheet so that statewide staff would be entering into it. And certain statewide staff, especially that after hours team would have access to it. They would know the most important things that were happening that day and the days ahead so that if something were to happen after hours, they would still have that information. So it does shift to spreadsheets.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: When we are doing these upgrades, is there a test environment that that is happening in where you can test and see what's happening?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Yes, yes. So we have our primary server. We have a test server. And then there are also some backup servers. I don't know the exact number of those. But yes, we do have a separate testing site where when we are putting a new change into the system, that work happens on that test site. The testing happens on the test site, and then it gets moved into the production site.

[Rep. Kathleen James]: Representative Southworth.

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: So along those lines, is there way to get an advanced approach from the vendor so that you have the update to work in sandbox environments so that you can determine if there's going to

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: be an issue for deployment?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: I think the hope is yes, and I think that's where we'll have to look back at the contract. I think what I'm learning as we go through the SEVIS procurement is that everything goes into contracting, potentially even including who gets a notice of those planned updates. And so I think absolutely, we'd be reaching out to the current vendor to say, Okay, when are these? Can you share them? If not, we'd be looking at the contract, I think, to make an amendment to say, Okay, we actually, as a user of this product, we want to know more about it. I believe we have a couple of paths forward just in terms of knowing ahead of time when these outages are coming, but I haven't looked into that further, so I just wanted to be clear about that.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: So I realized we started asking questions, Deputy Commissioner, but I think maybe before you finished your comments. Would you like to continue your comments? Of course, we'll still ask questions.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Actually, a lot of the questions picked up on what was in the comments. If there are additional questions, I think you could go ahead.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Okay, good. We have one with representative noise and others, I'm sure over here. But I'm going to take chair's prerogative and ask mine first. So would you describe for me the impact on children and youth safety? So I know that's sort of like the thing that is the top priority. So can you describe for me how you ensured that people had the information that they needed in order to assure the safety of the children and youth in the department's custody?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: So thank you for that question, because that is really at the forefront your concern. As Carl described, making sure the admins all got involved, they had a huge spreadsheet that was accessible division wide so if there were changes people could see where a kid might be or see what was going on and that information was definitely available to our CIS coaches because things could happen on that overnight shift so it was making sure anything that you could have had that's critical that you would have been able to look on the computer for, we made sure there was a way for that to be accessible on the spreadsheet.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Yeah, we jumped, I think, even before the spreadsheet into emailing. So we said, hey, if there is a change on a case, then I think safety was really held primarily at the district level. The staff in each district, they know their cases, they know their families, they have the paper file. Again, it's maybe the second good thing about SSMIS is that it does force us to have paper files in district offices. Again, not a reason to stick with it because that is a huge burden to the system, but we were able to really hold safety at the district level and then be asked, Okay, if there is a change, if a child has entered custody during this time, those first couple of days, if a placement has changed, if there's been any safety issues, please email that to the centralized intake team so that they are aware of it again in an after hours situation. And then we were able to evolve to the spreadsheet, which we didn't end up having to fully engage. We had some staff already tracking some things on their own, again, at the district level. And this would have been that really dumping everything in. But that was the same day that the ADS was able to get the backup server working. And so we still had the spreadsheet on standby. Folks were aware you could use it as needed. But really, we were able to, I think, pretty quickly start using emails as a way to alert and track of any changes.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Thank you. We have Representative noise and representative Donaghue. And then I think we should move also to then updates about where we're at with CCWIS and the vision forward.

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: That's what my question is about, so I can hold it off to that.

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: Okay, mine as well.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Great segue then. There's

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Yes. Sorry, Madam Chair. No, go ahead. Representative Sibilia.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: I don't know if there's an answer for this question now, but it's one that I've been asking ADS in various roles. And it's really around notification of the other branches. When is that appropriate? And it seems to me, and I would be very open to hearing an explanation as to why not, but it seems to me that an outage of this consequence, the legislature, or at least the committees of jurisdiction and the judicial branch perhaps, should be notified. And again, I don't know if that's a question to be answered today or not, but it is a question that we have to answer. I'm not sure that the communication going around these outages, around cyber incidents, etcetera, well, I'm sure that it's not actually ideal. So is there anything you are prepared to say about notification to the branches in terms of protocol from ADS? Because then we read about it in the press first.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I understand where you're coming from. I think from our perspective at this point in time, it depends on the outage and the nature of the outage. If it's a SSMIS business focused service. I don't think it would be appropriate that ADS would notify other branches. But I haven't spoken to the secretary about this topic. So I'm gonna stop there before I get myself in the hot water. But I feel like the communication between us should be solid and then I do think I understand what your comments about reading about it in the digger or some other media sources first is not ideal.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: I mean, I think the communication between the two agencies is imperative. You are both members of one branch of government. And our job is oversight as a co equal branch. And so that's really the question. I don't know what the appropriate line is, but it's really something that we have to answer.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Thanks for your time.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: You're welcome. You have my coming back.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: No, no. Thank you, Representative Sibilia, because I actually raised the same question with the secretary's office. I felt like we should have been notified of this prior to reading it.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: I'll just add to that. I think we've all sort of maybe named the same thing, that this is a really good opportunity to evolve our systems in those ways, right? Some of those notifications, we are having daily contact with the commissioner in terms of updates around that. We were also sharing information, not really every week, but I would say almost every week with the governor's office through the weekly governor report. And so I think that maybe it was not contained in the article, but there was a lot of information sharing happening. But I think, again, this is an opportunity to identify other places where that can be shared and by who, right? Whose responsibility when and how do we want to make sure we're doing it in a way that's not similar with regard to foster parents. It's not causing panic when there doesn't need to be. But I do think that there will be other paths forward. I appreciate sort of the thinking around that, how to do it right.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Definitely hear your opinion. What she's saying is even though we're connected and discussing it, she might look at this as some of the PCF issue that we may need to be voicing out, and I'll absolutely be talking to our interim commissioner because I understand the point that you all are concerned and want to be made aware, and that there is a balance between not inundating you with this very fragile system, hiccups and coughs, but it's important that you know there's a serious outage.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: So I think, respectfully, I would like to say that it goes beyond wanting to be made aware. We are elected to do a job, which is to provide oversight as a co equal branch of government. Again, I will say, I don't know what the notification level is that is appropriate, that allows us to do our job, but we've got to figure that out. We've got to figure that out.

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: Thank you. Real quick.

[Rep. Esme Cole]: Oh, thought you'd

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Mr. Morrow represented.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Yeah, sorry.

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: This is based on this current system. So I serve on the board of a local hospital, and they hire someone to try to break into the system, which we get reports on, do you do that?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I can't tell you that. We have a number of ways that we test.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Okay, for sure. Yeah.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Have some very sophisticated security people that have ways to do that.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Thank you. I understand the sensitivity of that question. Okay, so could we move forward and could you give us an update on the development of the new system, where we're at, any implications for changing federal revenue?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Wanted

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: to ask, well, why would it be so difficult to just put the chairs of both committees on that note you're sending to the governor?

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: So could you give us an update on where we're at, what the timeline is, what are the resources that we know there's some resources. We've dedicated some resources here. You all have dedicated resources. What are the potential implications of federal changes for matching, if there are any? And how far out are we looking to have something that is going to be usable by your department?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Well, we are definitely making progress as well. The Carly's team, they're still on the core team, and they've been looking at

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: vendors. Yes,

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: because we are in an active procurement, there's very little that we can say about where exactly we're at with the CCWIS work. I may defer, and if Andrew, it's nudging me, it's because I'm about to say something that could impact the procurement. So I just wanted to be transparent about that piece. But we spent most of the second part of last year, 2025, really deep in the weeds of vendor review, bid review. We had our request for proposal out last spring. We received bids back in May and have participated in some demonstrations with vendors and are getting close to vendor selection. So that is the high level where we're at, is that we do anticipate, ideally within the next month having a vendor selected, saying this is the vendor that we are going with. From there, we dive into contracting. And a lot of prep work is already happening. So I think something that CEWA support team is always trying to do is save time. And so any prep work that can be done ahead of the next phase, we are doing it. And so we've already been prepping for contracting, knowing that that is a significant lift, both time and energy. And so I think that is where we'll be going next. And then we will be, I think it's hard to say an exact timeline, and so I never want to box us into that. I think many vendors will quote one to three years, depending on what you're doing. We are looking to replace our entire systems, not just one module. And so we know that that's going to take a bit longer. And I think something that is a little unique with Vermont is that we are also starting our modernization further back than any other state or jurisdiction that has gone through CCWIS. So many states actually, while we are at SSMIS, they're at a SACWIS system. There's a system in between SSMIS and CCWIS that Vermont did not move forward with, but most other states did. That's why we have the oldest child welfare data collection system in The United States. And so that comes along with other challenges, such as how much harder we have to work to then get to that newer system. So we just anticipate it will take us a little bit longer because we are starting from a place of being much further back. And then I think also ongoing resources at every level that is going to impact it. But I would say my heart of hearts, two to five years, depending on all of those different caveats, on ongoing funding, depending on resource availability, and just depending on how hopefully we can continue to move through the different processes. So

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I guess I'm going to ask the money question. So RFPs went out. You're in the negotiation process somehow with selecting a vendor. Do you have sufficient resources between what's been allocated already and what may be in the governor's budget this year. I'm not sure what is there. Is there a gap in resources necessary, I guess, is what I'm asking? Because I would hate to get partway through a process and say, oh, we've run out of money. We're only going to do this part. We're not going to do the whole thing and not complete it. And I always know also that there are unforeseen costs that generally there are things that need to be added to this and whether it's on the state side or on the vendor side. So if I were just to ask you, the collective you, for a percentage of known costs at this point in time that you feel you have covered, you at 100% or something less than that?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Should be between thirty and forty, but you have to then add in a 50% patch. So, if you do have a gap, would, our ideal process would be to purchase our system in whole, but if we need to, because of funding being drawn out, we would go ahead and purchase it on a modular basis, but that is actually more expensive.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: So, okay. We didn't get to ask all the questions in our committee about your budget yet, and I know it's the FSD role and DCF role to obtain the resources. So we will dive more into that as well. But I think other people have some questions. Now I saw representative Donahue, Garofano, and then

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: I think Sibilia. So I have a question. But before that, I want to jump to what was just said, because I was kind of really taken aback. Because we've been working on increasing allocations, sort of adding money and knowing it was going to be matched federally. And I thought we were at around 30,000,000 in allocations at this point based on about four or five years' worth plus the federal match. Hearing seven doesn't jive.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: I don't believe we're up for more than 10%. So

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: we have roughly $15,000,000 including the federal match. So whatever a state can raise, the federal match that. We've raised and set aside roughly 7,000,000 through different legislative appropriations and have been able to, would be able to draw down that same amount, bringing us, that brings us to 15,000,000, but we haven't, never had the 30.

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: Okay. I I I mean, we'll have to ask our fiscal folks because we, in two budgets in a row, put in the 7 to match to 15, which is where I have the 30. It wasn't one time. It was twice. So I'll have to follow-up.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: News to us. Think we didn't We

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: have been that close.

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: No. Well, our processes are, maybe the Senate killed it and we didn't realize.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I think it's only once. I think it was just last year.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: I was gonna say, think we did get, in the last couple of years, at one time, another 11. And then I believe last year, some of the funds that had originally been carry forward funds, which could have been swept Pardon me, did. Yeah. Had been through carry forward funds. And so we were having to every year really justify holding them. And so I think one of the things that also happened last year is that some of that, maybe a million, was moved from carry forward into specific CBIS allocated, no longer potentially swept away. So again, wasn't necessarily adding it. It was providing more protections for those funds, which I incredibly appreciated. Yes.

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: Thanks. Then my prior question is just about the capacities that are being sought in, that were in the RFP and so forth, because we've received some concerns from the Office of Youth and Family that there are some critical information components that were not included that they're very concerned about. And I'm wondering to what extent they were brought into the conversation of what the critical capacities should be and whether you're aware of those gaps. And I'm sorry that I didn't think of this question in advance to bring I can't tell you right now what they were, but are you aware of those? Is there a remedy?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Yes, and off the top of my head, I also can't remember exactly what they were. Know we meet We have a twice a month meeting with Matthew and Lauren from the OCYFA. The last few months has been a little less, craziness, holidays and different things. But we are in really close contact with them in that way. And so I think something that can be a little confusing is that not everything has to go into the RFP. So it's really sort of the bones that we're putting in the RFP. And then boards of work and a lot of the stuff that the Office of Youth and Family Advocate bring up really happen in some of the past stages. Once we are in the meat of it, seats rolled up, and that is when we bring even more stakeholders in. And so the requirements that were included in the RFP were created with stakeholder involvement. Some of that happened several years ago when we had tried the last time to get CBIS through. And then were updated with the same subject matter experts, the folks in the districts, then the community staff. But really the next phase after this is when we're bringing folks even more into it and saying, Okay, we have the bones, but we need you to help us sort of build the means around them.

[Rep. Anne Donahue, Ranking Member]: So that should be resolvable, those concerns. Yes. Thank you. Yes.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Okay. Then we have representative Sibilia and then representative Noyes and representative Garifano. And then we're going to move to the Office of Child Youth and Family Advocate. So thank you.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Sure, I think Brooke Carafana was

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Was she before you?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: She's my desk.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: All right. She was

[Rep. Dara Torre, Clerk]: kind of related to Thank you. I'm just wondering about And Erica, you brought this up a little bit about whole package versus modular. And given the timelines that we've heard, I have some concerns about, like, by the time we finish this, it might be kind of out of date already if we're buying one big package. So I'm wondering if you have all with ABS, collaboration with ABS, have done any work to You said it was more expensive. I get those concerns, but pros and cons to modular versus whole package. And then additionally, some of the comments that we just made about some of the work that's gonna go into the contract that the Office of Child Advocate is recommending. I have some concerns that just making sure those don't add to the cost. Like, if you don't have them in the, you know, I work in state government. A lot of times, if you don't have it in the RFP, the vendor is gonna come back and say, Well, now you want this, this, and this. It's gonna cost more money. So just making sure that you're prioritizing those critical components that are being recommended on the outset, you're not surprised by the so if you can speak to that a little bit, I would appreciate that.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: I'll start, Richard, a discussion about modular versus buying the whole thing. We have regular meetings with the ADS project managers and core team and there's been a lot of talk about pros and cons, they really have weighed those out. I don't get into the technical parts of it, but from what the subject matter experts have explained, at this point, given how so many states have already gotten their CEWS or pathway there, their advice is, if possible, to do the whole thing at once. But it's something that we'll continue to revisit, but that's the explanation that I've been told.

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: I think another concern is the instability of SSMIS. And so we're here because of an update of a newer system really threw our old system out. And so I think we've had a lot of conversation around what would it look like to try to start clicking these newer modules onto this system that's really living along, that requires humans on weekends and on holidays to log in and make sure that foster care reimbursement is accurate, to make sure that the system automatically changed a determination for federal funding the correct way so that we're not driving down it. So I think there's just worry around, could the system even really hold any of that? And if we were to do it in a modular way, would we even be able to support some of those payrolls that run through it, support some of those eligibility determinations that run through it, or would we actually be creating bigger problems. I think connected to that is in order to fix that, that fundamental reason that we first started this journey many, many years ago, which is to to make sure that we are accurately drawing down federal funding and that we are getting the most that we can so that we can have the best outcomes. In order to fix that, we have to fix the majority of the system. You can't start with eligibility and the finance because so much of it touches every point in a case. So until you update all of those others, you're not actually going to hit your end goal of being able to more accurately access federal and state funding and frequency for outcomes.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Okay, Representative Sibilia. So my question is, have you all included a request for funding for this project in your budget this year?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Not in this budget sidebunk.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: Did you want to say anything more about that?

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I don't recall that I don't believe that it was addressed in BAA either in terms of any carry forward for FY twenty six. Representative noise, and then we're going to Nope. Representative noise is next. Sure, okay. You have one quick question after that? Okay.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Just a

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: quick question. So you're talking about building onto the existing system, maybe to limp it along a little bit or maybe start all over again. So could this be state and take their data out and put our data in there?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: We're getting as close to that as we can. Honestly, we work really close with other states and we have for many years now to try to learn all the lessons that we can ahead of time. Vermont is part of a collaborative where actually you can share your code, your CCWIS system code in an online platform for folks who opt in so that those other states and jurisdictions can access it. And we are part of that. And so we are really trying to avoid reinventing a wheel. But I think what we also want to be really careful of is making sure that you can have a system that can be remonetized. Because one of the risks of copying a system or even going away with what you may appear minimum viable product, an MVP, is that it kind of gets you at what you're paying for. And then what that's going to look like for our folks who are using it is that it's actually a system that doesn't work. It doesn't feel like Vermont, we can't make the changes we need so that it fits how our court system runs, so it fits how our case planning is. And again, we're just working against the system. So I think we're trying to find the middle ground of that, of we're smarter, not harder, but make sure that we get something that does feel like it is a robust product and not like we're trying to make something completely different work for us. I'd like

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: to just also add that the security aspects of what you're talking about and the data privacy pieces are more complex underneath of those shared systems. That would be another complicated factor. Scott?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Yeah. I'm

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: trying to remember what this is called. Question for Andrea. ADS has a has a sort of a project, a separate large project, sort of like a fund, but a but a I can't remember what it's called.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Modernization fund?

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: I is that it?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Is that it? Yeah. I think

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: that is it, actually. And there were half a dozen projects in in that in that fund. Is this one of them? Or No. Okay.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Checking with my PWR. Okay. This one was not in that, and it's fully allocated to my ambition.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Yeah. That's where I was where my source. So I guess I wonder it's a big project and obviously critical to a large part of services that the state government provides. Should it be in that fund?

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Question. I think this funding cycle is

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Sorry. Could

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: you identify yourself? Sorry.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Yeah. You might have to come up.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: It can't go into the IAT fund. If it's federally funded, it has to

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: be what they call a clean dollar, which has to be from a general fund.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: That's why it wasn't included

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: in that.

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: I the IAT is the same thing, it's outside.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: I see. Thank you. I

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: like a simple answer.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: Yeah. That's good. Thank

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: you. Any final comments that the three of you want to make before we move to the Office of Child Youth and Family Advocate?

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Thank

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: you. Thank you very much. Alrighty. Did we lose Lauren?

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Yes, I believe she's got.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Okay. Okay,

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: I can speak for myself.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Welcome, Matthew.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: Hello. I believe I'm in the waiting room.

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: And we do have your

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Yeah, I just sent an updated one to Laurie.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Oh, you sent an updated one. Ago,

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: But it's essentially the same.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Okay.

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: Thank you, Laurie.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: That's right, you got the gist of it getting it to her in advance, That's very good. I did notice.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Right, so I wanted to start by addressing a couple of I'm sorry, I'm Matthew Bernstein.

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: I am a child youth and family advocate

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: from the state of Vermont, and my slides have some more information about our office because

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: some of you might be new

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: and it's a slightly different form for us. Some of you are not new to our office. And with me was Lauren Pigbee, the deputy advocate. She has a time pressure,

[Rep. Richard Bailey]: so I think she had to depart, which

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: is unfortunate because she, having worked for DCF in the past, has a lot of information about what it's like to use these systems. But I will do my best to communicate what she's taught me. I wanted to address a couple of questions off the top. I think the most important one is the one that representative Donahue raised about reporting mechanisms in the new CCWIS, whether they are in there or not. And the most crucial elements to that are something that I know this HHS cares greatly about, and those requirements are in 33 BSA 3,206, and I will read it to you. The department, being DCF, shall notify the office, our office, of all incidents of actual physical injury to children or youth in the custody of the commissioner or at significant risk of such harm, and instances of restraint or seclusion of any child or youth in the custody of the commissioner. Neither of those elements were in the RFP that was submitted. And while I agree that the RFP is not the contract, do think that we can't I think folks in this room know more than I do about the relationship there, but I think we cannot understate the extent to which the RFP does control what's in the final project and does relate to cost as representative of Dara Torre. And I do think also you know, I think that the problem here is that these are big systems and this contracting process can be burdensome. There's a lot to keep track of. That said, I think it's a clear signal about whether those requirements that I just read, which are in statute, are important to the department's new data system. If they're not in the RFP, I think that's a clear indicator to me that they are not central to the system. And I think that's a problem, I think largely because at least House Human Services, you all put these in here for a reason, and we have some really important data, the first ever data on restraints and seclusions, for example, that we have never had this data before, and now we have we're beginning to have data on youth safety as related to those. So I think that's really concerning. The other thing I just wanted to touch on really quick is I think and I am no expert. I'm no technical expert, but I but I have spent a lot of time trying to think about these systems. I think there's there's some confusion about what this current system is. And here's my understanding and others in the room can speak up if this is not right. I just want to clarify, I do not my understanding is there is no vendor running SSMIS. SSMIS is hosted on Azure, which is a cloud platform, right? It's server farms everywhere. We have local servers as DCF and ADS talked about. But that's essentially it. There's no system we've bought. It is our system. SSMIS, old and clunky as it is. There's no vendor between that is doing SSMIS for us. I can pause there and I don't know if they're still on the road.

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: Is accurate?

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: Yes, we have a couple AWS developers who are able to do that on this FIS.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Okay. So I just think that's important to understand for multiple reasons. I think it gets to the fragility of the current system. It also gets us some assets, which maybe now I jump should into the slideshow, but it gets us some assets of this system. Believe it or not, they are real assets of our current system. And I think we are potentially making a mistake by saying we have to jettison this whole thing and replace it with a whole new system. And so maybe I'll just, if anyone has questions on any of that, But otherwise, I'll think I'll go into the slideshow. All right, so here's just kind of, oopsie, sorry. Here's what I wanted to cover today. I just wanted to make sure we understand the scope of this outage. And then I kind of wanted to jump into the bigger picture. Why these data systems important period? Hold doom. How we might approach them differently and then some recommendations better. So here's the introduction to our office, our office. We are two people. We are an independent You've lost 50% of the office now on Zoom, unfortunately. We're an independent nonpartisan state office, sorry, that engages in individual and systemic advocacy on behalf of children, youth and families served by DCF, primarily those in the child welfare and justice. We are charged with examining systems as a whole and articulating youth centered systemic reforms that also benefit government. And we are charged with providing systemic information concerning child, youth and family welfare to the public, the governor, state agencies, legislators, and others as necessary. This one is crucial because the fact that you know about this outage at all, and this is not to toot our own horn because this actually is a really challenging part of my job, but we decided to come forward with this information and call a reporter and tell them about what happened. If we hadn't done that, then you all wouldn't know about this. So all of that is just to say, if, you know, I have to make this call as to whether this is this is worthy of shining a public light on and, you know, because we have close relationships with, you know, Carly and Erica and and others in the department, that is challenging. But the last bullet point here sort of provides a useful standard to me in making that decision. The OC YFA may publicly disclose any patterns of conduct or repeated incidents if likely to mitigate a risk posed to the health, safety and welfare. It's framed as a child or youth, but I think certainly many children and youth is encompassed by that. So that's very much oversimplifying our office. I just read another part of it, which is that we get reports of child safety issues and we present public information about them. But we are styled as an ombuds office sort of. I'm an advocate, not an ombuds, which I like, because we advocate, our primary duty is to children, youth, and families. But as this second bullet says, we believe that what's better for children, youth, and families is also better for government. I think this digital systems issue is a primary example of that. Are you raising your hand? I'm just going to grab my mic.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I'm sorry.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: I don't

[Carly [last name unknown], CCWIS/Systems Lead, DCF Family Services Division]: see it.

[Rep. Esme Cole]: Yeah, I don't know if now is appropriate time to ask questions, but I've thinking about how the information was conveyed through the article and how the public became aware and how we all became aware as well. It seems like perhaps your office was not satisfied with the backup tracking system. So the district offices spreadsheets that we've heard about in previous testimony. So maybe

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: more

[Rep. Esme Cole]: on that, if you could. Yeah.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Yeah, I will say we've been working collaboratively. We've been pushing DCF and ADS, I would say it's fair to say, but we have also been working collaboratively with them on this for over two years. And one of the main things we have done is we pushed them before this RFP came out to do this differently. I'll kind of get to that, but it's long story short, do it in smaller chunks, to do it using agile methodology instead of waterfall, which we can talk about, to essentially hire some developers at a fixed price to dynamically improve the current system as opposed to jettisoning the current system and replacing it with a new one. We were unsuccessful in convincing them to do it that way. Since then, we connected them with a national nonprofit called United States Digital Response, who did a workshop about the pain points of the current system, which was great. And so I think the answer to your question is, I don't wanna say that the folks in this room are not working hard on this. I think they really are. This is not, and maybe this is actually a good segue into this next slide. This is about systems, not people. And people make up systems, of course. But I think this particular data system is really emblematic of is that we have an antiquated way, to be honest, of approaching revamping our digital systems. And when vulnerable children, youth, and families are at the core of that, children for whom the state is the legal parent, It highlights kind of how critical that is and what happens if we don't do that. And that's what this is. It's not that the folks in the room haven't done X, Y, or Z. It's that we need to think about this differently. And so that's asking a lot. That's asking a lot because these are really entrenched systems. But I think we have to go big because that's the only way we're going to do this.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Can I just interrupt just a moment? Because I think that the question was, because you went public and felt the need to go public about this, did that indicate that you were not satisfied with the backup systems that DCF had in place, the manual systems, if you will, that they had in place to protect children and youth?

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Thank you. And sorry if I'm rambling, not answering question. I think the bottom line, Madam Chair, is that it indicates that three days is too much for a total system outage, essentially. I don't know the way you're framing the question as, you know, it's not the way I would like to answer it. I guess I would just like to say, I don't know. We think we thought that this was too big of an issue not to come forward on, if that satisfies the question.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Do you feel like children and youth were at risk?

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: 100%. And we can get to that. So just a couple of screenshots here because another function of our offices, have direct access to these systems, read only. As you see, user Matthew Bernstein, this is what I saw when I logged in. This was December 18. I do think that the three days was the total outage of SSMIS. However, the effects persisted 01/20/2026. And actually I looked this morning and this notice is still up on this site. And so actually I want to come back to that but to to again to try to answer your question Madam Chair. Here's some more information. I think the third bullet point here is really the crucial one. And this is what I was hoping Lauren, I'd be your deputy advocate, could talk about. The situation, as I see it, is during those three days, we were in a position where had there been a particular kind of crisis for a child, youth, or family, it truly was a life or death. It was a matter of life and death. And the people who were trying, doing their best, right? Again, this is about the frontline folks who were working incredibly hard on us, but they did not have the tools they needed at their fingertips. They would not have had the necessary information to potentially save the life of a child. And again, Lauren is great on this, but a couple of examples of that, like allergy information, who is the medical decision maker? If you just think of your own children or loved ones, you think, like, would it satisfy you to be, to not have access to critical information about them for three days, right? This is a hard thing to understand because the state is the legal parent here and it's a system. But I think that that's the way to think about it. The especially after hours part here is also critical because while districts hold safety information, as my colleague said earlier, after hours, and my understanding is partly so that DCF workers can get a break, which I think we can all agree is incredibly important, right? It's a very hard job. So frontline workers can be off duty at some point. After hours, this central CIES, which stands for Central Invest Thank you. Centralized Intake and Emergency Services. I just thought of that. Thank you all. They hold the critical safety information. They're on call. And so for them, might not have the frontline relationships with the children that the workers do, right? And so that's, I think, the answer to the question of why we felt like we had to come forward and why this is a critical safety issue. And so there's a lot of other sort of additional effects, but to me, that's the core of it.

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: I'll pause there. I don't know

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: if anyone has any questions.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I think no.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Great. Think water. Okay, so now this is this part is now I'm shifting kind of, and this is this is sort of why these systems are so important and and it connects kind of our current systems to what we're building, whatever we're gonna build as the next generation. So for families, children, youth, and families who are our primary constituency, they are looking to DCF and others, including our office, to use data, to have access to data that is relevant and that helps us build better systems to support children, youth and families. And there's some examples in the second bullet here. Keeping children with kin, which is again, is mutually agreed upon goal between DCF families and our office. If a child has to be removed from their house due to a safety issue, from their home due to a safety issue, keeping them with kin is the next best option. All agree that we should construct preventative juvenile justice and youth justice services in communities as opposed to children sliding into having to be in congregate care or locked settings. And we want to reduce our reliance on those congregate care settings. And so to all of those things that are just examples, data is critical. And our annual report, which is just so close to being ready, has lot of information about how well DCF has done in recent years on a part of this, on their front end to reduce the number of children coming into care. And so without modern systems, they cannot continue those initiatives. And similarly, our constituency doesn't their call for more supportive upstream services. So now we're shifting to why these systems are so important to workers. And I think this is where our interests really align. The first bullet point has a quote from a national study, which is cited at the end. 20 to 35, this is about child welfare social workers in particular, 20 to 35% of a caseworker's time is spent on direct contact with their clients. The remainder is spent on administrative duties, right? And in Vermont, that means largely based on SSMIS and FST net. In 2023, our office put out a survey for DCF folks and we talked to a lot of people and heard some information from that. In 2023, DCF, this was actually not even a whole year. This was like January 1 to November 15. Four hundred hours just on the maintenance side of things. This is not like federal reporting or tracking data or data entry. This is just working with the current system to sort of engage in all of the scotch tape necessary to knit together these systems that make up our present child welfare data systems. That's one point eight hours a day on just to sort of keep these systems going, which we all agree are obsolete. And that can have significant effects. This is again, this is a quote from that same article. Burned out caseworkers can create data errors and deliver subpar service due to inadequate investigations and inconsistent case monitoring. In addition to the detrimental cost this creates for foster youth, burnout can also harm agencies, creating other costs such as high turnover, lower staff morale, and lower productivity. I cannot emphasize enough how much money we are spending by not creating a better system. We are spending millions and millions of dollars in the name of the new system costing too much, I guess, is the reason for inaction, we are spending millions and millions of dollars to prop up a system that is barely functional. So it costs more to keep this current outdated system than it does to make a better one. And so it's hard to understand why we still have this system. You know, I can't help but think that that the children at the core of this deserve better, and I can't help but think that they're low privilege and their inability to come in here and sit here and say to you, I've had a negative experience in foster care or I don't like it when I'm restrained or secluded or I would like to return to my parents or etc. I love my DCF worker, but I would still like to go home. They can't sit here and tell you that, and I think that this has been going on for decades that we don't have a new system, and I think it's really unacceptable. I still don't think this is a major priority. Think what you've heard today, it's still not a major priority. We heard the mention of SACWIS. That was ten, fifteen years ago. There was a 90% federal match to do SACWIS. Right now we have a 50% federal match, so that means the state would have had to pay for 10%

[Rep. Laura Sibilia]: of that system.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: And for some reason we didn't do it. I was not around here then. It's not to cast aspersions on anyone in the room. But this continues not to be a priority. It's just fair to say. And then I'm not going to read through all of these, but we did this worker survey. One thing one comment I'll highlight is maybe the first one. There's been talk for years that SSMIS will be replaced, which has led to many newer workers not becoming as familiar as more seasoned workers were forced to back in the day when it was the only system available. I think that concept is pervasive here and still we're hearing, oh, we don't want to fix this current system because this new one is coming on. And I just wanted to highlight that was the case three years ago. I think it's been the case a long time that people are sort of saying, well, there's no sense in learning this clunky outdated system because we're gonna have a new one at some point. I'll let you read these in your spare time, but I think it's a bit of Groundhog Day twenty twenty six. So to zoom back out again, you know, what what we're calling for is really like a fundamental reexamination of why do we have these systems. We're building this new system, and you hear about contracting, but what I think is missing is what our system do? And if, as we heard earlier, if we're not tracking restraints and seclusions, if we're not tracking runaway youth, or at least if those things are in the RFP, then I think, again, I don't think we've answered this first bullet here. What are the goals of our system effective? Because I think obviously child safety is the first goal. But anyway, I think whatever we decide our goals are, the second bullet is how are we achieving those goals? And then the third is how do we adjust our practice and not? Each of these has to have a key performance indicator KPI if you're in the business. Without this clarity, as the last bullet point says, I think we won't If we bring in this new system, which is gonna make things better, I still don't think we, it will, it's the analogy I think of is like this. If I told you, you need to write a novel and you said to me, have WordPad on my computer, it's terrible for word processing. And I said, Don't worry, I have Microsoft Word or I have Google Docs for you or I have this fancy new AI program. You're like, Great, but how do I write a novel? That doesn't answer the question of what you're doing with this system. So I still think we moved from this system is clunky into don't worry, the new system is gonna fix things. I think the particular way in which we're doing the new system really gives me pause as to whether that's actually true.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I ask a question? Please. It'll give you a chance to make me take a drink or something. So I think you make a really good point in your first bullet. So what will be the information that we will be able to glean out of the system other than counting the number of placements a child's had or knowing where they are right today or knowing if they're allergic to something. I think about the broader systemic goals that we would want to see in our child welfare system. So for instance, the reduction in seclusion and restraint being used, or the time out of family home compared. And so I guess I just wanted to emphasize that I think that I'm hoping system that does do what it is that you have there in that first bullet, that we can ask those systemic questions and know if we're setting this as a goal, how are we going to measure it and where are we going to get the data to measure it from? And sort of not just a name, date and serial number. You know what I mean? And

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: I should say I appreciate that, Sharon. I should say, I don't want to imply that DCF has no clue what they are for or what they do. I think there's a lot of expertise there. I mentioned earlier, this particular initiative on the front end, like they have done this work, they have shown they can do it. What I'm saying is the data systems have to mirror it. So I'm not saying you said that, I want to clarify that. Yeah. It's hard to balance the negativity and the positivity because I do have the utmost respect for the hard work that DCF is doing. Again, however, I actually looked at it occurred to me as I was writing this slideshow to look at DCF's key performance indicators, which are like the state, us and ours. I will say ours are not great and we're working to improve them. We have our own data system coming online. And I noticed that FSD, well, not FSD, that there are some performance programs and indicators for barge, for juvenile, for youth justice, restorative justice. I did not see any for child welfare at all. There's a lot for EST, Economic Services, and I think that that does have a lot to do with this system, although I, of course, I don't know. But it's interesting that they don't have any up there. It doesn't mean something one way or another, but it's a curious I think that process for our office has been challenging because it's like, yeah, what are we measuring and how do we know if we're doing a good job? And that's a continued process. And I think I'd be happy to see anything up there. But I think the fact that there's nothing is really interesting. The other thing I just wanna say-

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: I just wanna say, Rep. Noise has a question. Yep, and Rep. Bishop as well.

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: Thank you. So just reading your goals, and I think about our ability to provide the reports necessary to draw down the maximum amount of federal dollars is also something that we should really be thinking about because that would be really helpful we can see in our budgets that were presented earlier today.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Thank you. Yes, I think the ripple effects, that's sort of what I'm trying to get to, is the ripple effects of not doing the system. They're to families, they're to workers, and I think you make a great point that I probably should have put on here, which is our ability to draw down more federal dollars. It's kind of an exponential chain reaction for not having these systems. And actually, in addition, we have given money back. I think we have to separate that. I think we all agree we need a new system. I think we do want to talk about how and what it looks like. But in terms of

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: Representative Bishop?

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: At the start of your presentation,

[Rep. Doug Bishop]: you have a quote from Jennifer Balka. She wrote Recoding America, which I read, understood some of it. Really getting to more of what my colleagues on the other side of the table are doing day in and day out. But you also referenced in what I remember seeing in that book is the approach of agile versus waterfall Mhmm. For projects. There was also, in that book, she discussed having a product manager versus a project manager. And I don't know if that's familiar to you, and is that something you've discussed with DCF as far as an approach in moving this forward?

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Yeah, thank you for the question. It's a good question. I think that book is fantastic and really changed my thinking. And I think one thing that came out of it was just how old systems are everywhere. And I think it shifted my thinking from thinking, woah, our system is so old, oh my gosh, to, oh, wow, this is actually a common problem that software developers deal with all the time. It doesn't mean it's easy. But in terms of your specific question, talked a lot about agile versus waterfall in the past and can talk about product manager versus project manager. I think those details are important but I think getting stuck on them now I think I've learned is I don't want to come up here and say all we need to do is agile or all we need to have is a product manager, not a project manager, and that will remedy this. So I think there's many ways of doing it. Don't you know, like you could do it using waterfall, which essentially the difference in waterfall and agile is agile this is my layperson's understanding, but, you know, waterfall is you can do an RFP where you say everything you want the system to do and then the vendor said we could do this, this, and this and then they go out and build that blueprint. It's over simplified. Agile is you pay a team who you pay them There's actually a market price for this, a scrum team. It's $2,000,000 a year and I believe that's a team of five. This is a generally accepted price in the industry. And that team, the RFP doesn't say, here's what we want the system to look like. It's not a blueprint. It's here are our goals for the child welfare system. And here's some things we know we wanted to do, but here's some other things we're not sure and we want your insight. You meet with them, everyone weighs in, and I think this is where input from stakeholders is critical. And I will say, I respectfully disagree with DCF's assessment of stakeholder input. I do not think there's been sufficient front end input, especially from families, especially from impacted people about this system. I believe they've talked to workers and all of that. Believe they've talked to families. I just don't think there's been sufficient input at this stage. I think later after the RFP, I don't say it's too late, but I think it has a lot less influence. So an agile team takes what you want to do. They take all of that input. They go away. They do a development. They do a test run. They come back. They show it to you. You say, I love this, this and this, but that. I think we'd want it to kind of more do this, then they go away and come back, etcetera. And I think that it doesn't have

[Erica [last name unknown], Deputy Commissioner, DCF Family Services Division]: to be agile, it could be hybrid.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: You could do it with waterfall and smaller chunks. But I think that mentality, A, it gets us away from saying, Oh, well, we have 10,000,000 or 20,000,000 or $30,000,000 now, and once we get to 50,000,000 we get a new system. Into, We need $2,000,000 a year to really take our current system and make it better and to make it something that's user centered and everything. Already, so you just do some math, 2,000,000 times ten, twenty million, ten years. That to me, again, it's oversimplified, it's an estimate. But that to me is a lot better than saying, once we get this much money or once then this module will be brought It's less like future casting and more, let's get on this right now. Let's use the resources we have. Let's dive right at the heart of the matter, and let's jump into iterating our current system and making it better. And eventually, you make a system that is completely modern. Because there are pain points no matter what, transitioning from an old system. There's gonna be, if we do a whole system replacement at some point, there's gonna be the old module and the new module. So like the new system will be in use and the old system will be in use and they'll be doing what they're doing now. And also having to learn the new system. That's to some extent inevitable. But I do think that an iterative system making things better in smaller chunks really matters. And that's where we come back to this slide. This is from a study I believe of government contracts. And essentially what this is, is like the likelihood of success, the bigger the project gets, the likelihood of success. And it's pretty clear or should be pretty clear here, the smaller the project, the more likely it is successful. And they measured success I actually don't 100% remember. They measured it by achieving the core functionality that was outlined in the RFP or the blueprint for this project. So I'm almost done here. I think this sort of shores up what we're saying. A goal based plan, as I said, The urgency of this outage, I think our use for completely overhauling and fixing SSMIS using the methodology I just described. Even if we are going to do CCWIS in the exact way that we have planned right now, I think fixing SSMIS is essential. And actually the other thing I didn't highlight here is I think one of the reasons why it's important to understand the way this system works is that this is a layered system. And the reason why too, think it's important to understand there's no vendor in the middle is this. If you look at this screenshot, so look, you can look at this screenshot. Okay, it looks really old 1990s. It's easy to believe that. If you look at this screenshot, this is a much more modern system. And I know graphics aren't everything, but the ROM system, I don't want to go into a rabbit hole, but what FSDNET and SSMIS really are, there's these layers of ancient systems, if you will. I don't know if there's a geological sense of it. SSMIS is sort of the foundation. That's the 1980s DOS system that failed. And I believe it failed my understanding is, and again, others in the room know more, but I believe it failed because there was an upgrade to Azure, this modern system, the Microsoft hosting platform that then broke our antiquated But SSMIS, plugs into FSD net. It also plugs into something called report catalog, which is another modern layer on top. And it also plugs into this ROM system, which supports some of their federal reporting requirements. The other thing I skipped over was the substantiation system went essentially entirely down during this outage. And that's because the SSMIS feeds into the child protection registry, which is a list of people who have been substantiated for abuse and neglect. But if I go to get a job, I mean, as you know, representative quite well, if go to get a job in a childcare, they're gonna have me sign this form that says, we're going to run your name to the job protection registry to see if you've ever been substantiated for abuse and neglect. And I sign it and I say great and then they take the form and then they run it through this system which is not SSMIS but SSMIS is critical, feeds information to it. And during these three days that system was not functioning. I don't know what the notification was like to employers about that. I don't know the full effects of that. I don't know if there were checks, if employers tried to check during that time. But I think the consequences of not having access to that system should be pretty obvious to everybody. We do not want folks who have been substantiated for abuse and neglect working with children and vulnerable adults. I think we can all agree on that. I truly don't know. I truly don't know. There may have been no effects. I haven't heard whether there are or there are not. But that's the important thing to understand about this system. And I think if we patched SSMIS, sorry, patch is

[Rep. Dan Noyes]: not the right word. If we overhauled, if

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: we fixed SSMIS, it would not be CCWIS, but it would make a huge difference. And I don't know about the technical requirements of that, but in an imaginary world where you could swap out SSMIS for a modern system that fed the same inputs to those other systems, I think that would be a huge improvement. I don't think it would be that expensive.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: So we have a question, Representative Campbell, I'm just going to encourage you so that we get to your recommendations One more slide. I see that. And we are running close on time. So I just wanted to make sure that you get to be able to say your recommendations. Rep. Scott Campbell.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Yes. Thank you, chair. So I've got Reverend Bishop, for bringing up Jennifer Falcon's book, which I also read and found very compelling. And a couple of things that I took away from that. One was we're not only We shouldn't be thinking of it just as IT. What trying to design here is systems. And the systems really ought to be paper systems that we're then automating with IT. We're designing an IT system that is sort of a new whiz bang thing that's going to fix up, as you say, Scott. It's not the program. It's what are the goals? What are we trying to do? So that's one thing. And the other thing is that the most effective way, as your slide about how much things cost and what the success rate is, the process that makes this work is the process that websites use for improving websites all the time. It's an iterative process. You don't just fix something once and then walk away. It has to be continuous. It's a continuous process. And Anyway, that's That's the process I hope we would learn is going to yield the best results for improving IT. And it's astounding the amount of money we spend in state government on IT. And one of the ways that we can get a handle on that is by recognizing that we do this every day with a little bit of money instead of $30,000,000 one shot. So anyway, I just wanted to reinforce that point because

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: it's I'll really be brief, but two quick things. I totally agree. One, another thing Jennifer Palka points out is that digital systems are policy.

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: Yes.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Well, that's a law, and it sounds great. But if it can't be implemented digitally or if it's implemented differently digitally, then that's kind of the law. I'm a lawyer. The law is the law, but if it's not implemented, if it's not digitally implemented, sometimes that's what becomes the de facto law. Second, I will try to remember what my second point is. Maybe it was about iterating and it's on this slide, maybe it will

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: come back

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: to me.

[Andrea [last name unknown], Deputy Secretary, Agency of Digital Services]: So

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: maybe it was this one. Those big contractors, I cannot comment on any particular contractor, but I can say it's not just a bit bigger the process, the most likely they fail. But a lot of big contractors and big projects have a really bad track record. By bad, mean litigious, ultimately, nonfunctional and litigious. And I think this reality of it's not in the contract, so it's going to cost more to do x, y, z. I think we all know that's really true. And it's not to say that that will happen in this project. I don't know who these vendors are either any more than you do. But I have read a lot of news stories and there's one cited here. And this integrated eligibility piece is also kind of tricky because I like business and I understand that companies need to make money and want to make money. And I think it's quite clear that there is a lot of money in integrated eligibility and that something like CWIS is also for a company might be part of a bigger initiative to get the whole integrated eligibility contract or to have additional contracts going forward or to do one module and then more. But that can be really problematic. The bigger we get and the more we try to integrate things, that increases the chances of failure as well. And so I think we should be wary of saying, well, it's more efficient to have the same company do integrated eligibility, etcetera. One thing I've really learned from national experts on this is what you see on these slides, us owning all of the parts, owning. And what owning also means is being able to get your data out. Because we need to be able to, if things aren't going well, fire a vendor and be able to get our data out and transfer it. Again, it's not easy. It's not like cut and paste, but it has to be functional that we can get our data out and go with a different vendor. And if you're saying, well, this is all going to be integrated. It's all going be one vendor. This one vendor will be doing all these modules. You're at risk of locking with one vendor. And then if things don't go well, extracting yourself is complicated. Just to interrupt,

[Rep. R. Scott Campbell, Vice Chair]: by data, you mean not just the data, but the coding, what the scaffolding that everything hangs on.

[Matthew Bernstein, Child, Youth and Family Advocate]: Right. And I will say that for Seaways, there are I've seen some of the basic templates and language. The state is supposed to own all of this, but there are also some major loopholes that sometimes they allow companies, sometimes they claim proprietary usage and those loopholes can be tricky. So then maybe the last thing I wanna say is, I think it sounds to folks fantastical to think that we could actually keep our current system and improve upon it. But I think, again, I talked to the national experts. The fact that I'll come back to the Azure thing. The fact that it's hosted on Azure, these are the two things that I most understood about what our assets are. This is our system. It's not run by another vendor. Is run by DCF and ADS, and that has its downsides as we've heard, and as this outage shows, but there are also real assets to that. And it's hosted on Azure, which is Microsoft. It is another company. But from what I understand, contracting out that part of it, the web hosting, this is an industry standard. This is what most systems do. I think a lot of the state's digital infrastructure is hosted on Azure or AWS. And so that combination, we own the system and it's hosted on this modern platform, means that even though we have these antiquated systems, we could rebuild them and we could do something better and that would be a lot cheaper and a lot more functional. So I appreciate everybody's time. Here are some sites and here's our contact information. Thank you for I know I can talk fast and get animated, so I appreciate your attention. Thank you for keeping me on track, but no.

[Rep. Theresa Wood, Chair, House Human Services]: It's all good. Thank you. And thank you also for always keeping the welfare of children, youth, and families at the forefront of what you're talking about, even when we're talking about broader systems issues, as well as things that seem sometimes to some people as mundane as IT systems that can have a big impact. So thank you. And thank you to all of the witnesses. Some of them had to leave, but please extend our thanks to them as well. And for us, that's done on human services side.