Training and Reference Guide For Assessment Documents

2014 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved.
AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property.
AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only) Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement.
Training and Reference Guide
for Assessment Documents

Version Date: 06/04/14
Slide # Description

3 Agenda
4 Deployment Assessment Team
5 Team Functional Roles
6 Deployment Handoff Package (HoP) Definition
7 Getting Started
8 Initiation Phase - Process Overview
9 Charter Certification
10-11 Certification Turned BAU
12 HoP Full Checklist
13 MiniHoP Checklist
14-16 1.0 Deployment Program Charter
17-18 2.0 Deployment RACI
19 3.0 Deployment Document Locations (URLs)
20-23 4.0 Deployment Volumes
24-25 5.0 Deployment Risk Management List
2014 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property.
Slide Content
Slide # Description

26 6.0 Deployment Dependencies &
Constraints Lists
27-28 7.0 Deployment Issues Log
29-30 8.0 High Level End-to-End Process Flow
31 9.0 Workplan
32 10.0 Status
33 Lessons Learned and Addendum
34 Informational
35-38 Deployment Program Change Request (CR)
39 Revision Log
40 Unified Collection Application (UCA)
41-42 Work Management Standards
43 HoP Definitions
44 Q&A
45 Questions that the HoP Should Answer
Assessment Team Roles
Assessment Process
Assessment Documentation Content
Additional Information
Agenda
Cross Organizational Team Members
e2e Front Door Representatives:
Sam Nance (sn291j) Area Manager e2e National Team
Wes Podsada (wp6493) National Front Door Team Facilitator
Anthony Boyd (tb2399) Central Region Front Door Team Rep
Kathi Falko (ke775m) Northeast Region Front Door Team Rep
Gene Kackley (gk1411) Southeast Region Front Door Team Rep
Suzanne Valdez (sl2485) West Region Front Door Team Rep

IPMO Portfolio Management Team:
Kathryn Plage (kp243s) Area Manager Assessment Team
Philip Ferrer (pf8540) Portfolio PM
Pauline Finnell (pf438s) Portfolio PM
Eric Johnson (ej9058) Portfolio PM
Kelly Vachlin (km7170) Portfolio PM
David McConnell (dm715w) Portfolio PM
Ensure all required Program/Project artifacts are created using a standard format and assist clients
where necessary prior to execution.
Objective
Assessment Team
Purpose
Vet all requests.
Manage the Assessment and Issues Lists.
Supply standard Charter and HoP artifacts.
Provide consultant services in support of the Charter and HoP creation.
Ensure completeness and acceptance of Charters and HoPs for Deployments.
Accept or request rework of artifacts.
Partner with Program/Project Managers and provide training.
Provide metrics and volumes to leadership.
e2e Front Door
Provide regular communication to
Regional e2e Director and Area Managers.
Review Program Charters and HoP
artifacts for completeness.
Work with the Portfolio Team to close
Assessment process gaps and maintain
Quality Control of the Assessment
process.
Portfolio Team
Provide regular communication to the AVPs
and National PMO Directors.
Work with Leadership on assignment of
Deployment Program Managers.
Establish metrics, volumes and target
schedules.
Provide consultation and support of the
Charters and HoPs.
Own standard templates.

Team Functional Roles
Past
No Handoff Package
New Process
Handoff Package
Cloudy handoffs: No clearly defined set of
documents for a Deployment Program Manager to
provide to the Project Manager.
Standard set of deployment documents that
contain the level of detail and quality required to
execute at the program and project levels.
Inconsistency: No clearly defined deliverables
for transitioning processes, guides or tools from
one organization or team to another.
Consistent set of defined deliverables that
facilitate the creation and delivery of a HoP.
Lacks Measurability: No clear way to ensure
that Deployment Program Managers have fulfilled
their responsibilities to the Project Manager.
Measurable metrics on deliverables (Quality
Control).
A Handoff Package is a unified collection of documents for any Program that will require PM
support. It standardizes the information requested from all Programs and contains all available
Program and Project level information.
Definition
Handoff Package (HoP) Definition
Contact the Portfolio Team when ready to submit the Program. Best Practice is to submit a DRAFT Charter in parallel
with the submission of your Program.
Send Inquiries to Assessment Team mailbox ASSESSMENT_TEAM.
Getting Started
1. A Requestor submits a Program or Project via email to a Portfolio Team
member using the ASSESSMENT_TEAM mailbox.

2. The Portfolio Team contacts requestor and supplies link to Charter, HoP and
Training Guide.
3. The DRAFT Charter is added to the HoP Charter Repository and accepted by
the Portfolio Team for completeness.
4. Portfolio Team requests a Deployment Program Manager (DPM) assignment
for the program.
5. Front Door Team notifies Area Managers of the Charter for an upcoming
Program or Project.
6. The Portfolio Team representative takes the role of consultant through HoP
acceptance.

7. The DPM presents completed HoP first to the Assessment Team, then the Area
Managers and obtains acceptance for execution.

Submit Program Request to
Assessment Database or A List
1.0 Deployment Program Charter
2.0 Deployment RACI
3.0 Deployment Document Locations
4.0 Deployment Volumes
5.0 Deployment Risk Management List
6.0 Deployment Dependencies/Constraints
7.0 Deployment Issues Log
8.0 Deployment End-to-End Process Flow
9.0 Deployment Workplan
10.0 Deployment Status

Additional Material
Lessons Learned
Addendum
Informational
GMOP/SMOP
AOTS Change Management
WMS Standards
Gate Approval required
Deployment Artifacts
Contact
Portfolio
Team
Program Submission
and supply DRAFT
Charter
Submit Charter
or HoP for
Review
Review and
Acceptance
by PM Org.
Execute
Initiating Phase Process Overview

All Certification programs require a Certification DRAFT Charter and will be reviewed by the Assessment Team.

The Assessment Front Door Team will notify the Area Managers of accepted Certification DRAFT Charters.

Certification Acceptance will be used to denote acceptance by the Assessment Team of DRAFT Charters for
Programs that are currently in the Certification process.

Future continued deployment will require a HoP to be created for the Deployment Phase.

All the HoP artifacts will be completed by the Deployment Program Manager and the Program will be reviewed
and completely accepted moving it to Program Deployment and a Closed status within the Assessment Team.

URL: Link to Assessment Training Guide
Charter - Certification
The HoP is given to the Deployment Project Managers to provide key information for their projects.
Level of artifact completeness will vary depending on when Deployment begins.
Certifications require artifact 1.0
Certification and Deployment Program Managers will work together to determine documents required in support of the
program.
Certification turned BAU Programs will require Full HoP.
Certification Turned BAU
Phase 0 Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5
Ideation Initiation Planning Execution Closure
DG2 DG5 DG0
DG4
DG3
DG1
DG6
The Deployment Program Manager is assigned at M0.
The Deployment Program Manager will approve the applicable Certification Project Artifacts and is accountable for the
creation of the Deployment Artifacts (HoP).
In order to get through DG4, the Handoff Package must be accepted by the Assessment Team.
This will require the Deployment Program Manager to work with the Certification Project Manager to complete the
Deployment Artifacts.

Assignment
DPM
NTD Draft
Program
Charter
HoP
accepted by
Assessment
Team
Certification Turned BAU
Handoff Package Contents
Applicable Certification Project Artifacts:
Mob. Eng. Deployment Guide - Only for
new equipment/service
Business Process Materials (i.e.):
Methods Of Procedures (MOP)
End to End Process Flows
Job Aids
Issues and Lessons Learned
Implementation Guide
Documented Drive/Call Test Plan
Deployment Artifacts: (HoP)
Deployment Program Charter
Deployment Team RACI
Deployment Documentation Location
Deployment Volumes
Deployment Risk Management
Deployment Dependencies & Constraints
Deployment Issues Management
Deployment End to End Process Flow
Deployment Work plan (i.e., PMATT)
Deployment Status
Work Management Standards
Certification Project Management leads the
creation
Deployment Program Management leads the
creation
2.0 Deployment RACI
6.0 Deployment Dependencies/Constraints
8.0 Deployment End to End Process Flow
10.0 Deployment Status
- Lessons Learned
- Addendum - Additional Certification Project Artifacts (as required)
- Informational

Presentations: First review is with the Assessment Team. Notification will be sent to confirm acceptance.
Final review is with the Area Managers. Notification will be sent to confirm acceptance.
HoP - Full Checklist

2.0 Deployment RACI
- Lessons Learned
- Addendum
- Informational

Presentations: First review is with the Assessment Team. Notification will be sent to confirm acceptance.
Final review is with the Area Managers. Notification will be sent to confirm acceptance.
MiniHoP Checklist
The Project Charter is an approved document issued by the Sponsor to formally authorize the initiation of a
Program/Project and to apply resources to acquire support to the workplan and its milestones/activities.
Program Name on the artifact must mirror the ID# and NAME on the Assessment List.
The Scope of the Program includes major deliverables and a detailed description of the work involved. It provides
a documented basis for making decisions and for ensuring a common understanding among the stakeholders.

Note: Artifacts are subject to change through Quality Control improvements. Please visit the Portfolio Team website for the most current template versions
Scope: Summary of work that needs to be accomplished to deliver the product, service or result
FFA/Certification PMATT Number(s), if available:
BAU PMATT Number(s), if available:
Start scope summary here.
Short Description:
Identify type of work being requested RAN/Core/Transport/Rehome/Other and then
new/upgrade/modification

Start short description here.
Program Sponsor (Director), Certification PM, Deployment PM, other Program
Representatives: * All fields required
Organization Title Role Contact Name ATTUID Phone Number
Program Sponsor
Deployment PM

1.0 Deployment Program Charter (continued)
Business Need: The What, Why and How
Benefit (The What)

Triggers - reason for deployment (The Why)

Summary of High Level Implementation Milestones (The How)
PM Support:
Complexity/Intensity (Highlight one): Low (<10 hours per week) / Medium / High (>21 hours per week)
Identify if a Freeze or Maintenance Window work is required.

Identify the tool the PM(s) will be expected to use for Reporting/Tracking.

Summarize high level expectations / key tasks (also add to RACI)
Volumes: An estimate of quantities / workload
What are the volumes per quarter / per region / per market / per vendor / network elements
Schedule: The targeted start and end dates.
Targeted start date -
Targeted end date -
Approximating the Complexity/Intensity requirement in the PM Support section allows managers to better address
resource leveling.
Volumes should be within +/- 10% of the total.

1.0 Deployment Program Charter (continued)
Budget:
Confirm if a budget is required. Yes / No
Confirm budget approval from the sponsor. Yes / No
Confirm if a separate budget for call testing is required. Yes / No
Confirm if a separate budget is needed for any validation/optimization requirements. Yes / No
Confirm if a separate budget is required for CTAC or other external resource requirements. Yes / No
There are a few programs (such as IP Reclamation and some Core expansions) that are approved but only
require IWOS and AOTS tickets. In the Confirm if a budget is required section, answer NO and provide a
comment to explain in these instances.
Budget allocation is not budget approval. Documented AVP approval is required to proceed if the budget is
not approved.
Many programs require a separate budget for call testing, such as RAN programs.
The Sponsor that works with the Engineers and Vendors can verify if a separate budget is needed for
additional validation/optimization requirements.
Confirm with the Design Engineer if a separate budget is required for CTAC or other external resource
requirements.

2.0 Deployment RACI
This artifact serves a dual purpose as a contact list and a responsibility matrix.
Key milestones/deliverables in the left column, responsible teams in the top row (orange) with specific owners
below (blue) to include name and UID.
Add only key milestones/deliverables as this is a high level document (should match high level workplan 9.0).
The Deployment Project Manager column will contain expectations of the supporting PM Organization.

R Responsible - The individual who completes the activity, responsible for executing the task. Can be shared.
A Accountable - The individual who must sign off (Approve) on work before it is effective. The individual who has final yes or no
authority.
C Consulted - The SME who has information and/or capability necessary to complete the work. Two way communication with PM.
I Informed - The individual who must be notified of results after a decision or action, but need not be consulted. One way
communication.
Owning
Organization
Sponsor
Deployment
Program
Manager
Planning
Design
Engineer
MSC/MGW
Planning
Design
Engineer
RNC
Planning
Design
Engineer
SGSN/MME
Integration
Engineer
MPC
Deployment
Project
Manager
Assigned
Contact:
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Market
PM(s)
Approved by:
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Name
ATTUID
Key milestone /
deliverable

Key milestone /
deliverable

Key milestone /
deliverable

Project Leadership

D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r

S
m
a
l
l

C
e
l
l
s

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r

E
P
C

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

D
i
r
e
c
t
o
r

L
a
b

N
T
D

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

S
p
o
n
s
o
r

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

S
o
l
u
t
i
o
n

O
w
n
e
r

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

S
o
l
u
t
i
o
n

A
r
c
h
i
t
e
c
t

N
T
D

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

M
a
n
a
g
e
r

-

I
P
M
O

N
T
D

P
r
o
g
r
a
m

m
a
n
a
g
e
r

-

I
P
M
O

E
P
C

P
r
o
j
e
c
t

M
a
n
a
g
e
r

T
e
c
h
n
i
c
a
l

L
e
a
d

L
a
b

N
e
t
w
o
r
k

P
l
a
n
n
i
n
g

N
e
t
w
o
r
k

D
e
s
i
g
n

N
e
t
w
o
r
k

I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

Assigned Names
Rob
Wick
Jeewan
Rama
saroop
David
Orloff
Andrew
Wood
Mark
Sundt
Steven
Harvey
Paul
Karam
George
Guthrie
Mark
Maggio
Raja
Gopalan
Cisco Nexius Cisco
Initiate Phase Activities
DG0 Proposal Approval I I I R A R I I
Plan Phase Activities
M1 Scope Baselined C C C A C I I I I I
DG1 - Checklist Complete S A A R S I S S S I
DG1 - Project Initiation Approval
Review
I I I S S S A S S I
DG2 Requirements and Funding
Approval
S S S S S S A S S S
DG2 Gold Standard Approval S S S S S S A S S I I I I
M5 Release Commit I I I I R C A I I I I I I
M6 Design Complete S S S S S S A S S S I I I
Execute Phase Activities
M7 Lab Entry - Execute Testing I I I I S S A I I R S S I
DG3 Review - Lab Exit S S S S S S A S S S S S I
DG4 Production Readiness
Review/Approval
I I I S S S A S S S S S S
DG5 Ready for Service I I I S S S A S S S S S S
Close Phase Activities
DG6 Project Closeout I I I S S S A S S S S S S
2.0 Deployment RACI (Example)
Example is missing ATTUIDs
Certification example since there is an S. May want BAU example.
This artifact captures key documents associated with the Program/Project. Document information will change but
they should have a common location.

The document name will be listed in the left column while the URL is listed in the right column.

PM organizations may need to request access to applications (SOLAR, PMATT, etc.).
3.0 Deployment Document Locations (URLs)
Please add key documents below with URL locations. Documents could change
but locations should not.
URL Location(s)
Handoff Package Draft/Approved HoP location.
https://e-bussolutions.web.att.com/sites/Ne2eI/plage/SitePages/Home.aspx
GMOP (REQUIRED)
URL

Lessons Learned/Best Practices - see Database for more details
http://ebiz.sbc.com/cpo-admin/mmtp/LLindex.cfm
Add Document Name
URL
Add Document Name
URL
This artifact captures volumes associated with the Program/Project.

There is no standard template/format associated with this artifact. The tables shown in the HoP template are
examples only. The examples will need to be removed and replaced with Program / Project specific information.

The margin of error for the volumes will not be greater than +/- 10%. Refer back to your sponsor or organization
if in doubt.

The volume data will be broken out by Quarter / Region / Market / Vendor. The break out needs to include any
network elements affected.

Volumes should have a margin of error of +/- 10%. Change control is not required if your volumes are within the percentage of the program total.
Volume must minimally contain information per vendor/ per region/ per market(s).
4.0 Deployment Volumes (CORE) (Example 1 of 3)
Vendor Region/Market 2014 2015
AZ/NM (1900 UMTS) 0 523
IL/WI (1900 AWS) 0 42
MNP (850 UMTS) 109 272
OH/WPA (incl. 1900 UMTS only areas) 0 785
WABA (850 UMTS) 0 964
MI/IN (incl. 1900 UMTS only areas) 0 581
MO/KS 0 682
Redmond Test Bed 0 26
109 3,875
Carolinas (1900 UMTS) 0 1,377
GA (incl. 1900 UMTS only areas) 0 1,174
IL/WI (incl. 1900 UMTS only areas) 92 991
NTX (850 UMTS) 0 913
TNKY (incl. 1900 UMTS only areas) 0 580
VA/WVA (1900 UMTS) 0 385
MI/IN 0 198
Cupertino Test Bed 0 46
Austin Test Bed 0 36
92 5,700
201 9,575
201
9,776
Cumulative Total
ALU
ALU Total
Ericsson
Ericsson Total
Grand Total
4.0 Deployment Volumes (RAN) (Example 2 of 3)
Clusters Sites Clusters Sites Clusters Sites Clusters Sites
Midwest 68 1,539 6 130 33 533 109 2,204
Ericsso IL/WI 18 376 4 111 7 87 29 574
ALU MI/IN 21 351 1 9 18 316 41 677
Ericsso MNP 9 522 - - - - 9 522
Ericsso OH/WPA 20 290 1 10 8 130 30 431
Northeast 35 3,882 - - 7 1,704 42 5,586
ALU EPA/SNJ/DE 40 1,239 - - - - 4 1,239
ALU NEW ENG 20 611 - - - - 20 611
ALU NYC/NNJ 2 767 - - 6 1,697 8 2,464
Ericsso VA/WV 2 9 - - 1 7 3 16
ALU WA/BA 7 1,256 - - - - 7 1,256
Southeast 62 1,733 10 561 37 767 130 3,579
ALU AL/MS 9 113 1 1 16 374 35 602
ALU CAROLINAS 3 13 - - - - 3 13
ALU GA 31 601 6 360 8 299 52 1,288
ALU LA - - 1 11 8 88 14 475
Ericsso NFL 10 834 2 189 - - 12 1,023
Ericsso SFL 2 64 - - - - 2 64
Ericsso TN/KY 7 108 - - 5 6 12 114
Southwest 73 1,593 4 36 80 1,187 191 3,311
Ericsso AR/OK 25 275 3 30 31 248 86 939
Ericsso MO/KS 43 725 1 6 37 363 81 1,094
Ericsso NTX 1 7 - - - - 8 116
Ericsso STX 4 586 - - 12 576 16 1,162
West 33 5,235 10 10 1 18 48 5,326
Ericsso AZ/NM 1 1 - - - - 1 1
Ericsso HI 1 129 - - 1 18 2 147
Ericsso LSAG 2 293 - - - - 2 293
ALU NCAL 12 2,617 - - - - 14 2,651
ALU PNW 9 516 10 10 - - 19 526
ALU RMR 3 134 - - - - 4 155
ALU SD/LV 5 1,545 - - - - 6 1,552
Grand Total 271 13,982 30 737 158 4,209 520 20,006
OEM
Vendor
Active Cancel Complete Total
RMR
FFA FFA Certification Turned BAU
FFA LOCATIONS Columbia, MD Hazelwood, MO Rochelle Park, NJ Decatur, GA Lake Mary, FL Carrolton, TX Santa Clara, CA Santa Anna, CA
SEGW NODES
CLMAMDORDMZSR01 NWTPMOABDMZSR01 RCPKNJ02DMZSR01
ATLNGAAC19WF
01
LKMRFLMF01WF01
CRTNTX35DMZSR0
1
SNTDCAUJDMZS
R01
SNAPCAHHDMZSR01
CLMAMDORDMZSR02 NWTPMOABDMZSR02 RCPKNJ02DMZSR02
ATLNGAAC19WF
02
LKMRFLMF01WF02
CRTNTX35DMZSR0
2
SNTDCAUJDMZS
R02
SNAPCAHHDMZSR02
DEPENDENCIES
13.3 LTE FFA 1W 13.3 LTE FFA 1W 13.3 LTE FFA 5W
13.3 LTE FFA 5W
DHCPv6 - NVP
Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP Platform DHCPv6 - NVP Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP
Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP
Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP
Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP
Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP Platform
DHCPv6 - NVP Platform
TEAM ROLE AND
RESPONSIBILITIES

IPMO SmallCells Paul Karam Paul Karam Paul Karam Paul Karam Paul Karam Paul Karam Paul Karam Paul Karam
SeGW EPC PM Mark Maggio Mark Maggio Mark Maggio Mark Maggio Mark Maggio Mark Maggio Mark Maggio Mark Maggio
SeGW Lab Manager Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan Raja Gopalan
POC FFA Columbia RDC Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ? Ron Routh ?
PM FFA Site - Columbia RDC
Jennifer Miner-
Overeem
Jennifer Miner- Overeem
Equipment Design Engineer -
Columbia RDC
Allen Boecker Allen Boecker Allen Boecker Allen Boecker Allen Boecker Allen Boecker Allen Boecker Allen Boecker
e2e Project Manager NA NA
Maintenance
Window
Maintenance Window Maintenance Window
Maintenance
Window
Maintenance
Window
Maintenance Window
EQUIPMENTS AND
CONNECTIVITY

Third SAMI Blade Availability YES YES NO NO NO NO NO NO
FFA REQUIREMENTS
Exit from AT&T lab NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
4.0 Deployment Volumes (Certification) (Example 3 of 3)
This artifact will capture any high level risks associated with the Program/Project.
This artifact should never be blank.
A risk is any event that can have negative impacts to cost, schedule, volumes or execution.

#
Date
Opened
Risk Title Risk Description Owner
Risk
Level
H-M-L
Date
Resolved
Comments / Updates
1. 2/2/2525
Network
Design Error
Design specifications are focused on ATM
circuits and must include IP technology.
Jane
Doe
H TBD
030025. Design Engineering review
corrected designs and approved final
changes.
2.

3.

Note: Please remove examples and replace with Program / Project specifics.
#
Date
Opened
Risk Title Risk Description Owner
Risk
Level
H-M-L
Comments / Updates
1
xx/xx/xx Network Design Error
Design specifications are focused on ATM
circuits and must include IP technology.
NA H
030025. Design Engineering review corrected designs and approved
final changes.
2. xx/xx/xx
MME Decom delay
could impact SGSNs
w/S4 growth
Decommission existing MKVI+ MMEs and
repurpose them as new Ericsson SGSN with
S4 interfaces.
NA H
- MME Decom work plan was created. x/xx/xx- Santa Clara LT0-
LT3 have completed traffic offload.
- Santa Ana LT0/LT1/LT3 have completed traffic offload. Santa Ana
LT2 still pending eNBs removal.
- Santa Clara LT0-LT3 were powered down.
3.
xx/xx/xx VoLTE E911
E911 Devices: Samsung Wilson and Jade
devices do not support E911 at this time. The
E911 team will start FFA with a very limited
pool of Qualcomm prototype devices until
Samsung devices are made available. The
prototype devices have been experiencing a
high failure rate.
NA H Escalation in process to avoid jeopardy.
4.
xx/xx/xx
Transmitting RET CIQ
Template information
to Ericsson
The IWOS ticket completion information
currently doesnt provide the RET / SIAD
Username and Password information.
National RAN
IPMO / Edge
to Edge RAN
M
National support of forward logistics has been removed due to
leadership and business requirement. Market equipment
engineering has completed all EPL order entries 9/20, now in
review for accuracy.
5.
xx/xx/xx
Transmitting RET CIQ
Template information
to Ericsson
The IWOS ticket completion information
currently doesnt provide the RET / SIAD
Username and Password information.
National RAN
IPMO / Edge
to Edge RAN
M
National RAN IPMO will drive additional communications and
explore options for mitigating this risk.

5.0 Deployment Risk Management List (Example)
6.0 Deployment Dependency & Constraints List
This artifact captures dependencies and/or constraints associated with the Program/Project.
A dependency is a logical relationship between activities where a predecessor task(s) must first be completed
before starting the next activity(s).
Dependencies
#
Date
Opened
Dependency Title Dependency Description Assigned to Date Resolved Comments / Updates
2/2/2525 Software
Software patch 7.7.2.3 must
be applied to MSC.
John Doe XX/XX/XX
1.

A constraint can be any related factor that limits or reduces the progress to a Program/Project or Process.
Constraints
#
Date
Opened
Constraint Title Constraint Description Assigned to Date Resolved Comments / Updates
2/2/2525 Market Resources
Resource assignments
expected to be full and may
delay forward progress during
1Q20xx..
John Doe XX/XX/XX
1.

This artifact will capture any issues associated with the Program/Project.
This artifact should never be blank.
Issue Any unresolved situation within a program or project which requires a solution between stakeholders.
Issues do not impact Programs unless matters are left unresolved.

# Issue Title Issue Description Assigned to
Target Resolution
Date
Comments / Updates Actual Resolution Date
1.
Budget
Budget is allocated but
not yet approved by
the sponsor.
John Doe XX/XX/XX
12/01/25 - Meetings with sponsor to review budget is ongoing
thus no decision to date for final budget approval.
XX/XX/XX
2.

3.

# Issue Title Issue Description Assigned to
Target Resolution
Date
Comments / Updates
Actual Resolution
Date
1.
Solar
Supporting organization do not use
or have access to Solar
Jane Doe xx/xx/xx
07/07/25 A temporary SharePoint site will be
created for the project durations to allow access to
key documents.
xx/xx/xx
2.
Budget
Budget is allocated but not yet
approved by the sponsor.
John Doe xx/xx/xx
12/01/25 - Meetings with sponsor to review budget
is ongoing thus no decision to date for final budget
approval.
xx/xx/xx
3.
CASPR
Support
Ensuring alignment of Edge to Edge National RAN IPMO
xx/xx/xx
9/4/2013 final E2E acceptance was reached via final
AVP and Director level approval. For the initial run
National RAN IPMO will support CASPR updates and
E2E will support National RAN IPMO with the
required tracking templates and data points needed
to updated CASPR.

xx/xx/xx
4.
Database of
Record
Identifying and acquiring support for
integration of the Ericsson
Modernization Program with a
system capable of supporting the
volume and tied to existing
processes.
National RAN IPMO
xx/xx/xx
National RAN IPMO investigated 4 systems and
interviewed functional teams and IT SMEs regarding
the following options;
1.) PMATT as 1
st
option for the program/projects
2.) PACE as 2
nd

3.) Spreadsheets Immediately eliminated
4.) iPlan / CASPR

Cross-functional agreement was in support of
CASPR. 9/4/2013 final E2E acceptance was reached
via final AVP and Director level approval. For the
initial run National RAN IPMO will support CASPR
updates and E2E will support National RAN IPMO
with the required tracking templates and data points
needed to updated CASPR.

xx/xx/xx
7.0 Deployment Issues Log (Example)
IPv6 eNB Market Governance
IPv6 Team provides 3 month look-ahead to Markets
Markets projected to be dual stacked
MSN North
Market eNB Deployment Factories
eTe Market PMs (28)
eTe Market Deconflictors
2014 Greenfield eNB Deployment
Schedule
Markets projected to be ready for eNB
conversions
I
P
v
6

e
N
B

M
a
r
k
e
t

G
o
v
e
r
n
a
n
c
e

Phase 3 OAM & Transport-Layer & eNB
Conversions
IPv4 Reclamation (Proposal)
Markets with elements from MSN North
that are Dual Stacked can begin Greenfield
Deployments with IPv6 addresses
Markets with elements from MSN North
that are Dual Stacked will have eNBs
converted, led by IPv6 Program Team
After eNB conversions are completed by
market, IPv4 Reclamation team will be
notified to return IPv4 addresses from
CSBH to IPv4 pool
8.0 High Level End-to-End Process Flow (Example 1 of 2)
This artifact must contain the process flow specifically associated with this Program or Project.
There is no standard template/format associated with this artifact, however, we recommend a basic high-level
drawing or text with each step.
Open IWOS
with TP&E

Include BGCF Form, COST
Report, GMLC Form
911 Market Eng
IWOS
Validate 911 TGs,
Update BGCF Form
with 911 TGs
(1 day)

TP&E
Granite,
Etc.
Optional
IWOS
B
5.0 6.0
Fill Out BGCF Form
(PSAP Agency,
911 RNs)
911 Market Eng
4.0
A
911RNs:
PSAP Id (R) - GMLC
Vendor Id
ESRK Range or PH
0 TN (R)
911RN Type (R)
ESRK or 10D
LATA (O)
MGCF MSC (R)
MGCF MSC PC (O)
Note: ESRK ranges
may be split across
MGCF MSCs or
defined in more
than one MGCF
MSC

911 Routes (Network
Topology):
CA/Switch CLLI (R)
E911 TG Route Name (R)
SR CLLI (R)
TG Type, Dir, Series
PSAP ID (s) (R)

PSAP Agency:
PSAP Id (R) - GMLC
Vendor Id
PSAP Type (R) Intrado
vs. TCS
PSAP Name (R) - GMLC
PSAP Name
PSAP Phase (R) 0 or
1-2
FCC Id (O)
PSAP City, State, County
(R) - per FCC Registry if
applicable
PSAP FIPS (O)
SR CLLI (R) and other
optional SR info

Validate 911 TGs,
ESRKs for PSAP
8.0 High Level End-to-End Process Flow (Example 2 of 2)
Core Example only
9.0 Workplan
A high level Workplan must first be created and completed before the HoP can be approved and handed to the
supporting Project Management organization.
For RAN or other non-CORE Programs/Projects, the Workplan can be developed using CASPR, Excel or MS Project
(or another approved tool).
CORE Programs/Projects will use PMATT. The Deployment Program Manager will be responsible to create a PMATT
project. Please make sure you give this task enough lead time as it can take 3-6 weeks to complete. If requesting
Maintenance Window PM support ONLY, no PMATT projects will be issued.
For all Workplans, specify where Market PM support ends (which milestone)

10.0 Status
Identify how National updates will be managed.
Summarize the expectations of how updates will flow between the Regions/Markets and the DPM.
What are the required fields for reporting key milestones/deliverables (from workplan).
Identify which tool(s) will need to be used:
Preference is an IT supported application so reports can be auto generated.
Will there be any special access requirements?
If applicable, provide links.

Lessons Learned
Mike Watson Directive.
Standard practice in Project Management.
Helps in reducing costs and other impacts.
Value Add - The causes of variances, the reasoning behind the corrective action chosen and other types of lessons
learned from quality control need to be documented so they become part of the historical database for both the
project and the performing organization
Intervals:
The program/project leads will determine review intervals for lessons learned and best practices and will communicate these
valuable inputs with the whole team
PMCOE is highly recommended by IPM:
For convenience and access by all users, AT&T created the PMCOE Lessons Learned Database to capture and show project
lessons learned

Addendum
Include high level diagrams or other value added documents needed for the HoP review
Informational
GMOP (Required for HoP acceptance)/SMOP (Not required for HoP acceptance).
BAU Projects will have MOPs created by the supporting organization(s) before project execution begins
Certification turned BAU Projects should provide a GMOP to the Deployment Program Manager per Certification
Process
If applicable, add URLs to communications slide and add contacts to the RACI artifact
Contact ATS at (866) 849-9453 for MOP approvals/updates. Utilizing the ATS phone menu select the correct
vendor and product to the appropriate ATS contact that will assist

AOTS Change Management Request.
Solutions:
Use a standard approach to creating CMR tickets in AOTS
Identify the team responsible for initiation of the CMR
Follow a standard process for CMR creation using Job Aids provided
Identify all work groups that need to execute a task for the CMR
Refer to CMR Creation folder
e2e Organization - AOTS/CMR Requirement
e2e PMO will open task shell CMRs when it is e2e PMO managing the activity and AOTS system is conditioned to accept shell
CMRs
e2e PMO will not open CMRs for work that other organizations are initiating/managing
The team owning the maintenance window work is responsible for opening the CMR and following standard AOTS technical
collision facilitation procedures
Please refer to the CMR Matrix for Category Type & Item (CTI) information or contact the Portfolio Team for further assistance

How to get a hold of the Assessment Team: ASSESSMENT_TEAM <g26074@att.com
Note: Artifacts are subject to change through Quality Control improvements. Please visit the Portfolio Team website for the most current template versions
Deployment Program Change Request (CR)
The Assessment CR artifact serves as a formal proposal to change approved Handoff Package deliverables.
Contact the Assessment Team with any concerns or questions
Approved HoP Name: Name of previously approved HoP affected by this Change Request (CR).
Approved HoP Number: Program number of previously approved HoP.
PMATT Number(s) - FFA / Certification or BAU (If applicable)
Description of Change:
Describe the significant changes to the previously approved HoP.
Program Sponsor (Director/AM), Certification PM, Deployment PM, other Program
Representatives: * All fields required
Organization Title Role Contact Name ATTUID Phone Number
Program Sponsor
Deployment PM

Deployment Program Change Request (continued)
Reason for Change: The What, Why and How
Benefit of the change (The What)

Triggers - Reason for the Change (The Why)

Any changes to the High Level Implementation Milestones (The How)
Impact: Describe who / what is being impacted, e.g. Organizations, Systems, Processes

Impact Analysis: Detail the Impact in its Appropriate Section within this CR
Is there a Scope Impact?
Is there a Resource Impact?
Is there a Volume Impact?
Is there a Schedule Impact?
Is there a Cost Impact?
Artifacts Affected: List all the artifacts affected by this change Charter, RACI, Volumes, etc

Risk: List any Risks if this Change is not Implemented

PM Support:
Complexity/Intensity (Highlight one): Low (<10 hours per week) / Medium / High (>21 hours per week)
Identify if this CR changes the Freeze or Maintenance Window requirement.

Identify if this CR will change the tool the PM(s) will be expected to use for Reporting/Tracking.

Detail any changes to the high level expectations / key tasks (also adjust the RACI)
Volumes: Identify any Changes to the Volumes
Previously approved volumes per quarter / per region / per market / per vendor / network elements

Revised volumes (Based on this CR) per quarter / per region / per market / per vendor / network elements

Summary of volume changes per quarter / per region / per market / per vendor / network elements
Schedule: The targeted start date for the Changes to take effect.
Also include if targeted start and end dates for the program changed from previously approved HoP
Targeted start date for changes -

Previously approved HoP targeted start date -
Revised targeted start date (Due to this CR) -

Previously approved HoP targeted end date -
Revised targeted end date (Due to this CR) -
Budget: Budget questions are for requested change
Confirm if a budget is required due to this CR. Yes / No / N/A
Confirm budget approval from the sponsor for this CR. Yes / No / N/A
Confirm if a separate budget for call testing is required due to this CR. Yes / No / N/A
Confirm if a separate budget is needed for any validation/optimization requirements due to this CR. Yes / No /
N/A
Confirm if a separate budget is required for CTAC or other external resource requirements due to this CR. Yes /
No / N/A
Comments: (Optional)

Assessment Team recommendations will be either:
New HoP Required / Approved Change to Existing HoP / Denied
Revision Log
Revision
Number
Revision
Date
Description of Changes Author
1 4/8/14 Updated Slide 15 1.0 Program Charter Added questions to section PM Support.
Also added version date to title slide rather than document title.
Kelly Vachlin
2 4/30/14 Updated to add Artifact 10.0. Added GMOP requirement to Artifact 3.0 and
Informational Page
Kelly Vachlin
3 5/22/14 Added elements from previously used Job Aids to round out the document. Kelly Vachlin.
There is a Revision Log at the end of the Charter, HoP and Training guide.
Used to track the Version history of each of the documents.

Unified
Data
The Unified Tracker allows us to
View: Find and display work associated with a
project
Assign: Associate project tasks with a tracker
Modify: Add, modify or remove associated work
Prioritize: Add priorities to specific tasks to enhance
business focus
Annotate: Add notes based on key project
communications and actions
Project Type RNC Project CLLI: TACNWADNCRAR24 RNC CLLI: TACNWADNCRAR24 MME CLLI: PTLDOR62LT0 SGSN CLLI: TACNWADNSGSN04 MSN CLLI: PTLDOR62G12 MSC CLLI: ELSSTXAECRBR14 MME Pool: SGSN Pool: Group Filter:
RNC Project
Row# Task ID Task Name (Second section of WOTitle) RNC Requestor RNC Receiver L e v e l - R N CParent Task ID- RNC
R N C - N e w E r i c s s o n
Tracking System Element/s Associated with Requested Action Title/Summary Format (Copy and paste into IWOS title, CTS summary or email) D e s i g n / A s s i g n
I n s t a l l / C o n f i g u r e
A c t i v a t e / T u r n u p
T e s t
D i s c o n n e c t
E r i c c s o nA L UA T MI P
15 RIM10 RNC Install Master RNC Planner RNC Planner 1 None 1 IWOS TACNWADNCRAR24: RIM10: RNC Install Master: X X X X
16 CLL10 CLLI PC Assignment RNC Planner NSD SS7 2 RIM10 2 IWOS RNC or MME or SGSN TACNWADNCRAR24: CLL10: CLLI PC Assignment: X X X X X X
17 CCC10 Verify Collector Circuit Capacity RNC Planner CPDO 2 RIM10 3 IWOS Collector Circuit TACNWADNCRAR24: CCC10: Verify Collector Circuit Capacity: WA/OR X X X X X
18 PRO10 Probe Assessment/Expansion RNC Planner RNC Planner Probe Specialist 2 RIM10 4 IWOS Probe TACNWADNCRAR24: PRO10: Probe Assessment/Expansion: X X X X X
19 PRO20 Probe IP Assign RNC Planner IP Engineering 2 RIM10 5 IWOS Probe TACNWADNCRAR24: PRO20: Probe IP Assign: X X X X X
20 PRO30 Probe IP Configuration IP Engineering Layer 3 Ops 3 PRO20 6 IWOS Router TACNWADNCRAR24: PRO30: Probe IP Configuration: X X X X X
21 OAM25 OAMNodeB Assignment RNC Planner L2CM 2 RIM10 7 IWOS OAM, NodeB TACNWADNCRAR24: OAM25: OAMNodeB Assignment: X X X X
23 OAM30 OAMNodeB IP Assignment L2CM IP Engineering 3 OAM25 8 IWOS OAM, NodeB TACNWADNCRAR24: OAM30: OAMNodeB IP Assignment: X X X X
Vendor Network Technology Actions Requested Show All
WMS Job Aid
UCA Application
Program or
Project
Manager
By closely adhering to the IWOS standards, a higher level of UCA
efficiency can be obtained, through faster ticket to project and
record association
iPlan PMATT IWOS AOTS
AOTS-M
(CTS)
The Unified Collection Application (UCA)
One tool that gathers data from iPLAN, PMATT, IWOS, AOTS, AOTS-M (CTS).
Tool automates project TRACKING and REPORTING by Leveraging the Work Management Standards.
Contact Portfolio Team for training (Group or individual).
Each task is
assigned a
unique ID
Clear and
concise
task name
Level in the
parent/child
hierarchy
Parent
Task ID
Key project
information
entered by
the planner
Auto-populated
Standard Title (paste
into work order or
change request)
Requestor
& Receiver
of work
Sequence that
work is initiated
Tracking
system (e.g.
IWOS, CTS
etc)
Work Management Standards
Job aid is designed to standardize format of each task and associated Work Order, Change Request or Ticket.

Row # Task ID
Task Name
(Second section of WO Title)
Tracking
System
Element/s Associated
with Requested Action
Title/Summary Format
(Copy and paste into IWOS title, CTS summary or email)
15 RIM10 RNC Install Master IWOS TACNWADNCRAR24: RIM10: RNC Install Master:
16 CLL10 CLLI PC Assignment IWOS RNC or MME or SGSN TACNWADNCRAR24: CLL10: CLLI PC Assignment:
17 CCC10 Verify Collector Circuit Capacity IWOS Collector Circuit TACNWADNCRAR24: CCC10: Verify Collector Circuit Capacity: WA/OR
14 Character CLLI
Task ID
(3 Alpha, 2 Numeric)
Task Name
Freeform Description
Colon & Space
TACNWADNCRAR24: RIM10: RNC Install Master: 3820 RNC08 MASTER TICKET
Work
Management
Standards
IWOS
Work
Order
A standard title/summary is automatically created by the job aid and is
pasted into the work request by the planner
Work Management Standards (Continued)
The standard work order/ticket title format is automatically created by the standards document.
Request Submitted
Client has submitted their program/project and it has been added to the Assessment List
National Deployment Program Manager assignment starts now
Program Charter Accepted
Acceptance of initial document including Program Brief, Scope, Business Need, Schedule and Budget
Handoff Package In Client Development
Handoff Package (HoP) artifacts are being developed by the client
Draft HoP can be shared with Assessment Team
Handoff Package Under Review (pending accepted)
Program/project artifacts are under review by the Assessment Front Door Team
Upon completion of the review, the HoP will be either be accepted or returned, requiring client rework
Rework requires submission of missing key information in the artifacts
Handoff Package Conditionally Accepted
Some HoP artifacts need to be elaborated upon; Deployment Program Manager will resubmit an updated HoP
The program/project can move forward and begin execution by the supporting Organization
Handoff Package Closed
Formal Closeout Letter Received with Documentation

HoP Package Status Definitions
Q&A
2014 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. AT&T and the AT&T logo are trademarks of AT&T Intellectual Property. AT&T Proprietary (Internal Use Only) Not for use or
disclosure outside the AT&T companies except under written agreement.
Why do we not have time to do it right,
yet always make time to do it again?
Obtained inputs from supporting organizations:

1. Who is the Client Sponsor (AVP or Director Level only)?
2. Has the Scope been baselined and approved by the sponsor?
3. Has the Program/Project budget been approved by the sponsor?
4. Are there any additional budget requirements which may include:
- Call testing; CTAC certification; External Resources; Validation or Optimization?
5. RACI - who are the key contacts and what are their responsibilities?
6. Target Dates - what are the initial targeted start and end dates?
7. Volumes - what are the volumes per vendor, per Region, per Market, elements impacted, if applicable?
8. After the HoP is accepted will the SMOP/GMOP be approved by ATS and ready for project execution?
9. There are always risks, dependencies and issues. Have you engaged your SMEs and recorded them?
10. Are the program tools the same as those used by the PM Organization?
11. HoP will not be accepted without a workplan. Is this available?
12. Are there any impacts to the Maintenance Window?

Questions the HoP Should Answer
Thank you.
Please forward any recommendations to

ASSESSMENT_TEAM - g26074@att.com

Training and Reference Guide For Assessment Documents

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Training and Reference Guide For Assessment Documents

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

2014 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen