(510) 286-2932        jyoung@boxerlaw.com

Our Blog

CHWSC has now posted online a report about EAMS, the workers’ compensation electronic case management system.

As most stakeholders know, it’s not a happy report. The assessment, done by Renee Taylor Consulting, Inc., identifies many areas which need improvement.

Problems with Delotitte’s management of the project and Curam and FileNet software problems are detailed in the report.

Here is a link to the report, titled “Electronic Adjudication Management System Information technology Needs Assessment Report Deliverable” which was summarized yesterday in a presentation by Ms. Taylor at the CHSWC meeting in Oakland:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/chswc/Reports/201 … Report.pdf

Rather than crying over spilled milk, Christine Baker at the DIR and Rosa Moran at DWC will be looking for ways to improve EAMS.

But for those who wish to “drill deeper” into all of this and what happened on this controversial project, it’s interesting to look at the comments profferred by Deloitte in rebuttal.

A July 27,2011 letter sent by Stephan Long of Deloitte’s Ranch Cordova office has now been posted on the DWC website along with comments on the EAMS report offered by the California Applicants Attorneys Association.
Included with Long’s later is a copy of a “Participation Management” list for a 3/1/07 meeting at the DIR office in Oakland, presumably documenting those who were involved in the the early EAMS planning.

Long concludes his rebuttal of the Taylor report by claiming:
“RTC’s report acknowledges the value EAMS provides to many stakeholders and recognizes that “[t]he problems EAMS has experienced are typical of large-system implementation efforts and can be addressed with additional resources, improved scanners, and increased training.”
We stand firmly behind our EAMS work and know that collaboration with our client has enabled California to improve access to information and DWC’s processing of workers’ compensation cases. Deloitte met every requirement of the RFP; we involved a broad base of stakeholders; we used leading, industry-standard products; and we completed our work under warranty.
It is common for end users to desire enhancements and upgrades once they begin using a system on a daily basis. While some EAMS users would now like the system to do more than it was designed to do, the lack of such additional functions does not mean that the system’s original requirements were not satisfied. Unfortunately, no comprehensive maintenance and operations organization – typical for a system the size of EAMS – was put in place by DIR OIS to address issues after the warranty period.
We respectfully request that Deloitte be given the opportunity to be interviewed by RTC and that the final EAMS IT Needs Assessment Report correct the misstatements in the draft report. We will make our team available at RTC’s convenience to answer any questions and to provide detailed information to support the facts outlined above. We are prepared to do everything we can to help RTC’s final report present an accurate and complete view of EAMS before you vote to endorse its contents.”

Here is a link to the public comments on the EAMS report, which include the comments by Long on behalf of Deloitte:
http://www.dir.ca.gov/chswc/Reports/201 … Report.pdf

Unfortunately for Deloitte, Renee Taylor Consulting’s report appears to be sufficiently thorough and convincing.

As consultants, one would expect that Deloitte would have documented concerns that it had about the adequacy and functionality of the EAMS system being designed for a multibillion dollar workers comp system with thousands of varied users. I’m not aware of any memos that have surfaced documenting that Deloitte expressed those types of concerns.

In any event, the EAMS project will never be a project that Deloitte wants to brag about.

Here is the CHSWC statement on the EAMS report:
“The Commission on Health and Safety and Workers’ Compensation (CHSWC) approved the “EAMS Needs Assessment” report for final release and posting together with the written public comments that the Commission received during the comment period.

The Division of Workers’ Compensation (DWC) and Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) monitor the administration of workers’ compensation claims and provide administrative and judicial services to assist in resolving disputes that arise in connection with claims. DWC procured an Electronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS) in August 2008.

The “EAMS Needs Assessment” report describes the findings of an independent review in order to assess the gaps between the original requirements for EAMS and the system’s demonstrated capabilities, and provides forward recommendations for closing those gaps. This report was prepared using stakeholder interviews and document reviews.

CHSWC is charged with examining the health and safety and workers’ compensation systems in California and recommending administrative or legislative modifications to improve their operation. The Commission was established to conduct a continuing examination of the workers’ compensation system and of the state’s activities to prevent industrial injuries and occupational illnesses and to examine those programs in other states.”

Stay tuned.

Julius Young
www.workerscompzone.com
www.boxerlaw.com

Category: Understanding the CA WC system

Julius Young

Comments are closed.