http://www.jsonline.com/bym/tech/0114survey.asp

[My comments are in brackets, and are aimed at the reporter and the readers of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which has its own Y2K online forum.]

Survey finds state behind in Y2K work

Analysis shows Wisconsin among bottom 10 states in fixing computer glitch

By Amy Rinard of the Journal Sentinel staff

January 14, 1999

Madison -- A national survey shows Wisconsin lagging behind nearly all other states in having fixed year 2000 glitches in state computer systems.

[A link to the survey would have been nice. I've seen it. I will try to post it soon.]

But state officials say they are pleased with the progress Wisconsin agencies have made in identifying and fixing year 2000 computer problems, and they contend the survey does not accurately reflect the amount of work completed.

[Just what I expect them to say.]

The survey by the National Association of State Information Resource Executives shows Wisconsin among the bottom 10 states in having completed work on making sure their computers won't fail on Jan. 1, 2000.

[Doesn't sound very good. Are you listening, Badgerland?]

The survey shows that Wisconsin had completed 21% of the work needed to eliminate Y2K problems. Ten states reported that they were at least 70% complete, with Pennsylvania leading the nation at 99%.

[21% is not good, indeed. Pennsylvania, by the way, stated they were 99% completed in September of 1998. That last 1% must be the tricky part.]

Nebraska, Minnesota, Kentucky, Mississippi and Oklahoma were among the states that did the most work on preparing for 2000. Rhode Island, Oregon, Arkansas, Georgia and Alaska were among the states that had completed the least amount of Y2K work.

[More specific info would be appreciated.]

The survey results were based on the answers to questionnaires filled out by top technology officials in every state. The questions were posted on a Web site in May 1998 and then expanded Dec. 4. The period of data collection closed Dec. 15.

[Again, a link would be nice.]

Wisconsin officials say the results were questionable.

[Of course they do.]

"I don't think it's a meaningful survey at all," said state Sen. Bob Jauch (D-Poplar), co-chairman of a legislative information technology committee who also heads a Y2K committee of the National Association of State Legislatures. "I'm very confident there's no reason for anyone to panic. I think we're managing the issue quite well. I know we're not in the bottom tier of states on this."

[Give us facts, not opinions, Mr. Jauch.]

Linda Seemeyer, executive assistant at the Wisconsin Department of Administration who heads the state's efforts to get state computer systems ready for the year 2000, also was skeptical of the survey's conclusions.

She said some states may have exaggerated how far along they are in dealing with the problem. Wisconsin didn't do that, she said.

[Interesting. OK, let's assume Wisconsin was honest. 21% completed? With less than a year to go? Does that inspire confidence that the remaining 79% can be fixed and tested in the time remaining? And what about non-mission-critical systems?]

"I don't know as I believe what some of those folks reported," she said of officials in other states who filled out the survey questionnaires. "There's a little hyperbole out there, and we weren't doing it. We made a decision that we were going to answer the questions really honestly."

[OK. I believe you. This is good news? And you are right to question what other states reported. Pennsylvania should have finished months ago. Why isn't that getting any press? Their claim of 99% compliance sure got press.]

Seemeyer also noted that the survey questions were vague and that there were no definitions of some steps in the Y2K remediation process, such as testing. She said Wisconsin has rigorous testing standards.

[That's a major problem. Compliance means different things to different people. No standards. And self-reporting can not be trusted. What about third-party verification? Why do reporters refuse to ask the tough questions?]

State governments across the country are scrambling to ensure that their "mission critical" computer systems, including those affecting financial and personnel systems, do not fail or malfunction because computer programs are unable to recognize "00" as 2000.

[Scrambling seems the appropriate word.]

The state Department of Administration has set up a "time machine" for testing computer operations for Y2K glitches in which programs run for weeks and months as if it were already 2000.

"We try to run the programs in a real environment over a period of time to see what happens under different scenarios," Seemeyer said. "I am just so skeptical that some of the states reporting they are 98% or 99% finished testing have actually done this."

[I am skeptical as well. So much remains to be fixed that testing will suffer. Yet thorough end-to-end testing is very time-consuming. Claims of progress in remediation are meaningless unless there has been thorough testing. Yet reporters don't get this, either.]

Seemeyer said it is nearly impossible to make comparisons between states because each one has different problems, different plans and different standards for completion.

[Again, this makes it very difficult for John Q. Public, or legislators, or anyone, for that matter, reach any kind of conclusion. This doesn't stop legislators from reaching the conclusion that "all will be well", however. And John Q. Public is buying it. For now.]

The survey results also do not reflect the state's most recent progress, she said.

[Then tell us the progress.]

Many Wisconsin agencies had a Dec. 31 deadline for completing certain steps in the Y2K remediation process. A report on whether agencies met their deadlines and a detailed progress report will be presented to Jauch's committee next month.

[Expect the numbers to jump miraculously. Unless the honesty continues.]

Steve Kolodney, who headed the Y2K study for the National Association of State Information Resource Executives, also cautioned against ranking states based on the survey.

"It's all self-reported, and we asked states to be as honest as possible," said Kolodney, who is Washington state's director of the Department of Information Services. "But an apple here may mean an orange there. My 21% is different than your 21% or your 70%. Every state does it differently and manages it differently."

[So again, statistics seem rather useless. But it's all we can go on.]

Kolodney also noted there may be some exaggerated reporting in the survey, saying the numbers "are probably pretty good for about half or two-thirds of the states."

[It's January of '99. One-third to one-half of the states are probably NOT pretty good, based on this statement. That's the best spin that can be put on the picture. Sounds pretty grim to me.] The survey was an attempt to get a general, unscientific picture of what states are doing so that information could be forwarded to John Koskinen, the head of the President's Council on the Year 2000 Conversion.

[Who will put a positive spin on it, certainly better than Mr. Kolodney. Koskinen is the ultimate "spin doctor".]

The National Association of State Information Resource Executives purposely did not rank the states based on the survey responses, Kolodney said, because of the variables. The Journal Sentinel ranked the states based on the survey results.

[I've seen the survey. The results are indeed all over the map. I will post the website once I locate it. Any Yourdonites know it?]

-- Steve Hartsman (hartsman@ticon.net), January 15, 1999

Answers

Hey Steve;

If your so dang worried about Y2K remediation then why don't go out and take a COBOL class? Or maybe you ARE one of the famed remediators and you have so much time on your hands that you can afford to post anti-survey spins of your own. Either way, it's a hell of a waste of time, but I bet Gary North appreciates your help building his shoddy reputation from partial reports six months ahead of the required schedule and lack of factual ~anything~.

-- President for the Remediation of Gary North Fans (Y2Kcompliant@AirForce1.com), January 15, 1999.

Appreciate the news Steve.

Dicey, huh! Pay attention to Linda, maybe even phone her?

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 15, 1999.