Data Migration Assessment

DATE: 24.09.2015

Table of Content
1 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 2
1.1 Scope of Work ........................................................................................................ 2
1.2 Approach for Data Migration Assessment .............................................................. 2
1.3 Key Findings ........................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Consequences ........................................................................................................ 6
1.5 Recommendations .................................................................................................. 6
2 Scope of Work .............................................................................................................. 7
2.1 Methodology for Data Migration Assessment ......................................................... 7
2.2 Limitations .............................................................................................................. 8
3 Approach and Methodology .......................................................................................... 9
3.1 Approach ................................................................................................................ 9
3.2 Data Migration Fundamentals ................................................................................. 9
3.3 Methodology ......................................................................................................... 10
4 Chronology of Events ................................................................................................. 11
5 Findings and Consequences ...................................................................................... 13
5.1 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Analysis Phase ........................................ 13
5.1.1 Key Findings .................................................................................................. 13
5.2 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Design Phase .......................................... 15
5.2.1 Key Findings .................................................................................................. 15
5.3 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Build ........................................................ 16
5.4 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Testing ..................................................... 16
5.4.1 Key Findings .................................................................................................. 17
5.5 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration for Production .......................................... 19
5.5.1 Key Findings .................................................................................................. 19
6 Appendix..................................................................................................................... 21
6.1 Documents Examined ........................................................................................... 21
6.2 List of Meetings..................................................................................................... 24

1|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

1 Executive Summary
1.1 Scope of Work
The scope of this Data Migration Assessment was to review the process that was
performed for the migration of claim and treatment data for the EFI Programme. It
therefore includes assessing key tasks in the analysis, design and testing of the data
migration. Accenture has reviewed the timeline, methodology and sequence of events
from the start of the data migration effort in 2009 until the EFI+DMI System went into
operation in September 2013.
This report is based on review of the documents listed in Appendix 6.1 from the data
migration process for the EFI Programme. The purpose of the review has not been to
consider who is responsible for the decisions taken during the project execution. The
report does therefore not include a legal review of the contractual obligations in the EFI
and DMI contracts and the report can thus not be used to conclude whether or to what
extent any of the parties involved in the project execution can be held legally responsible
for their involvement in the project.
The assessment is made based on our experience and on assumption that the
conclusions in the assessment are representative also for the data migration documents
that have not been reviewed.

1.2 Approach for Data Migration Assessment

The assessment has been conducted by examining key documents and conducting
interviews with key people involved in the data migration for the EFI Programme. The
documents reviewed and the interviews conducted are listed in Appendix 6.1.
The examination of documents started with the original requirements for data migration
and ended with a report describing the deficiencies in data in the EFI+DMI System after
go-live. Interviews were conducted in order to clarify facts in the documents reviewed.
Accenture’s Delivery Methodology for Data Migration was used as a reference for
generally accepted IT industry normal practices of data migration projects. For each stage
of the methodology, we have assessed the facts as evidenced by the documents reviewed
versus a normal practice approach.
Accenture did review the documents listed in Appendix 6.1, which cover:

 Original Requirements for data migration

 Strategy and planning documents
 Status reports
 Meeting notes
 E-mail correspondence, including attachments
 Results from our EFI Technical Analysis

2|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

Accenture did not review:

 Detailed design documentation, e.g. field mappings or program logic
 Test case documents
 Contract documents not specifically related to data migration

1.3 Key Findings

Accenture’s assessment has identified the following:
Scope, Planning and Management of Data Migration
A comparison of the strategy and planning documents for data migration with the status
reports from the migration trials revealed that:

 Not all the entry/exit criteria for the migration trials, as stated in the conversion plan,
were adhered to during the execution of the data migration trials
 The end-to-end testing of EFI and DMI with the migrated data was not completed

Data Cleansing
Cleansing of source data with deficiencies prior to migration is a vital task according to the
methodology. Although there was a clean-up list defined and the data cleansing activity
was tracked, we found that:

 Status green had been reported although there were a number of unfinished
activities listed
 The data cleansing still did not prevent data with e.g. incorrect amounts from being
migrated

Data Migration Testing

Accenture’s Methodology for Data Migration calls for repeated migration trials of all the
relevant data until the migration trials are successful - before migrating data to production.
Our analysis of the conversion plan, the summary status reports from the migration trials
and post migration status reports found that:

 None of the data migration trials (PK1, PK2, PK3, PK4) were on a full scale (100%
of source system data) – the most extensive migration trial, PK4, was limited to
~49% the amount of data in the production migration
 The summary status reports for each of the migration trials (PK1, PK3, PK4)
reported that the trials were completed, although there were listed remaining
defects that were still to be fixed
 As the EFI Modtag Fordring (MF) component, as well as EFI+DMI, were under
development and testing during the migration trials, it is a fact that neither the
application used for migration (MF) nor the target System (EFI+DMI) were tested in
their final state with the migrated data. The testing was therefore inconclusive and

3|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

invalid, as it was done on earlier versions of MF, EFI and DMI than the versions
used during the production conversion and production
 Only limited testing of the migrated data was performed in a test phase (pilot)
between PK4 and go-live. The end-to-end testing of EFI with the migrated data that
was described in the conversion plan was not performed

Deployment / Go-live
A review of the summary status report from the last migration trial PK4, revealed that:

 The scope of PK4 had been reduced and had not covered 100% of all data to be
converted. Only ~49% of source data was attempted converted in PK4
 The exit criteria for PK4 had been reduced compared to those listed for PK2 in the
conversion plan. PK4 would not have passed the exit criteria if they had been used
as specified in the conversion plan
 The summary status report from PK4 still concluded with a recommendation that
PK4 be approved and that the project could continue to the production migration,
“with prioritized risk reduction actions and defect corrections”
 The steering committee of the EFI Programme made the go-live decision following
the PK4 summary status report recommendation

4|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

Figure 1 Accenture Data Migration Methodology and highlighted shortcomings in the EFI migration
project.

In Summary
The diagram above illustrates the major tasks of data migration according to Accenture’s
Methodology for Data Migration. The callouts in yellow indicate where our findings from the
data migration of EFI and DMI deviated from the methodology’s approach.
The evidence is clear that
 Less than half of the combined body of data in all source systems were ever
included in migration trials prior to the production conversion.
 The validation of incoming data was not sufficient to prevent incorrect claims being
migrated
 The migrated data was not tested end-to-end with the EFI+DMI system before the
production migration
These facts are the most important deficiencies of the data migration project and
constituted a high level of risk that the data migration would not be successful.

5|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

1.4 Consequences
The consequences of the EFI data migration were:

 Data was migrated into the EFI+DMI System that could not be processed correctly
by the system. As the EFI+DMI system had not been thoroughly tested with the
migrated data it could not be expected that it would be able to process the migrated
data correctly
 The EFI+DMI System was designed to handle data without deficiencies and Modtag
Fordring did not include sufficient data validation to ensure that only correct and
complete data was entered into EFI. For instance claims were placed on treatments
where the claim type – treatment combination is not allowed
 As of 2 years post go-live it has not been possible to enable much of the disabled
automated functionality originally intended in EFI, due to a variety of functionality
and data related issues which are still not fixed, e.g. incorrect expiration dates on
claims

1.5 Recommendations

In order to recover large portions of the affected data, with a view at one point to continue
operation with new systems, a data cleansing exercise should be performed to detect and
correct data issues introduced by the data migration or subsequent operation. The data
cleansing should be aligned with other functional and technical changes being planned,
and will require more focus on clear requirements and testing. The data cleansing will be
complex and lengthy, and is likely to be able to resolve only a portion of the known data
issues.

6|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

2 Scope of Work
The scope of this data migration assessment was to review the process that was
performed for the migration of claims and treatments data for the EFI Programme. It
therefore includes assessing key tasks in the analysis, design and testing of the data
migration. Accenture has reviewed the timeline, methodology and sequence of events
from the start of the data migration effort in 2009 until the EFI+DMI System went into
operation in September 2013.

2.1 Methodology for Data Migration Assessment

The assessment has been conducted by examining key documents and conducting
interviews with key people involved in the data migration for the EFI Programme. The
documents reviewed and the interviews conducted are listed in Appendix 6.1.
The examination of documents started with the original contracted requirements for data
migration and ended with a report describing the deficiencies in data in EFI after go-live
The interviews were conducted in order to clarify facts in the documents reviewed.
Accenture did review the documents listed in Appendix 6.1, which cover:

 Contract documents concerning the data migration

 Strategy and planning documents
 Status reports
 Meeting notes
 E-mail correspondence, including attachments
 Results from our EFI Technical Analysis Report and Technical Report

Accenture did not review:

 Detailed design documentation, e.g. field mappings or program logic

 Test case documents
 Contract documents not specifically related to data migration

Accenture’s assessment of the data migration process documents:

 Started with the documents made available to us from the EFI Programme at the
start of the assessment
 We have requested and obtained a number of additional documents based on
document references found in the first documents we reviewed
 Our examination of documents has not been exhaustive, but focused on obtaining a
logical sequence of documents describing the EFI data migration from start to end

7|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

The main focus of this data migration assessment were:

 To assess the production data migration that was done in Aug/Sep 2013 to migrate
claims and treatments from the source systems into EFI and DMI before EFI and
DMI were put into production in Sep 2013
 To examine the critical tasks that were performed in preparing for the data
migration, including the validation of the data migration through testing

2.2 Limitations
The scope of this data migration assessment was to review the process that was
performed for the migration of claims and treatments data for the EFI Programme. It
therefore includes assessing key tasks in the analysis, design and testing of the data
migration. Accenture has reviewed the timeline, methodology and sequence of events
from the start of the data migration effort in 2009 until the EFI+DMI System went into
operation in September 2013.
This report is based on review of the documents listed in Appendix 6.1 from the data
migration process for the EFI Programme. The purpose of the review has not been to
consider who is responsible for the decisions taken during the project execution. The
report does therefore not include a legal review of the contractual obligations in the EFI
and DMI contracts and the report can thus not be used to conclude whether or to what
extent any of the parties involved in the project execution can be held legally responsible
for their involvement in the project.
The report is made based on our experience and assumption that the conclusions in the
report are representative also for the data migration documents that have not been
reviewed.

8|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

3 Approach and Methodology

3.1 Approach
Accenture’s approach for this assessment was:
 Review of the documentation as listed in the Appendix
 Accenture’s Delivery Methodology for Data Migration was used as a baseline of the
tasks that should be performed in a data migration process and for which we looked
for documented evidence that had been done
 For each stage of the methodology we have assessed the facts as evidenced by
the documents reviewed
 Develop a preliminary report with findings, including references to the documents
reviewed
 Conduct interviews with key individuals who had been involved in the data migration
process, as listed in the Appendix, to answer key questions and to ensure that
essential relevant documentation had been located and reviewed
 Review all findings with stakeholders

3.2 Data Migration Fundamentals

This section briefly describes the fundamentals of data migration.

Data are the valuable business records, which are the reason for a business to exist. Data
migration involves movement and transformation of data from a source system and format
into a format that another system can process. Typically, the target system includes
different functionality or changed processes that require changes to the data. Data from
legacy source systems usually requires a clean-up effort (e.g. correcting addresses, de-
duplicating), which usually is performed in the legacy source systems prior to migration.
The data to be migrated is then extracted from the source system and mapped and
transformed, as needed, into the required format that can be loaded into the target system.
With large amounts of data to be migrated, the extraction, transformation and loading
requires use and configuration of ETL software or custom coded software to be built for
the job. This migration software must be thoroughly tested prior to performing the data
migration.
Because of the variations normally found in source data and the complexity of mapping
and transformation, the migration effort usually requires a number of trial runs before
everything works – for all the data, this is called migration trials.
The ultimate goal of data migration is to ensure that the target system will be able to
process the migrated data correctly. This requires that:

 The target system must first have completed testing with prepared (controlled) test
data, this is a prerequisite for the following step
 Then the target system must be tested with the migrated data to validate that it is in
fact capable of processing the migrated data correctly

9|Page
DATE: 24.09.2015

The testing described in the previous paragraph is normally a test of all relevant business
scenarios from start to finish; normally referred to as “case based testing” or “end-to-end
testing”.
The term “data conversion” is often used instead of and interchangeably with “data
migration”.

3.3 Methodology

Accenture’s Delivery Methodology (ADM) for Data Migration is used as a reference for
generally accepted industry practices of data migration.
The methodology is organised into a five-step process with a standard set of tasks to be
performed.

A: Data Migration Analysis

A1: Identify and agree on data migration requirements, approach and responsibilities.
Systematic breakdown of high-level requirements into detailed requirements that
are traced back to the high-level requirements, in the form of a Requirements
Traceability Matrix
A2: Define the scope of data to be migrated, and migration rules. Data profiling of
100% of the data to be migrated, to assess data quality, volume and number of
variants
A3: Define and agree on any data clean-up to be performed, prior to migration
A4: Define the total migration approach, which includes all relevant aspects of the data
migration (all data sources, all variants). Decide on single migration (big bang),
phased or incremental approach

B: Data Migration Design

B1: Design how each item of data is to be mapped and migrated from source to target
B2: Design how the migration will be validated through testing
B3: Define non-functional aspects (i.e. performance / available time window for the full
migration to be processed)

C: Data Migration Build

C1: Build and test the migration programs
D: Data Migration Testing
D1: Testing of the new system with prepared test data (precondition for the next steps)
D2: Repeated trial migrations, until all data migration procedures and jobs are working
as intended for all the data to be migrated
D3: Testing of the new system processes (end-to-end) with the migrated data

E: Data Migration
E1: Go-live decision
E2: Final migration run
E3: Production controls, to confirm that the migration has been successful in the
production environment.

10 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

4 Chronology of Events
Based on our review of all the documentation and interviews listed in the Appendix we
have drawn the following high-level timeline for the data migration of the EFI Programme
from start to finish.

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

ID Task Name
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1 Migration Strategy (EFI)

2 Migration Trial 1 (PK1)

Migration Strategy for EFI+DMI

3
(no documented strategy found)

4 Migration Build

5 Migration baseline documentation

6 Migration Trial 2 (PK2)

7 Migration Trial 3 (PK3)

8 Migration Trial 4 (PK4)

9 Production Migration

10 Data Validation

11 Go Live Decision

Figure 2 EFI Data Migration Timeline

Based on Accenture experience with comparable projects, we have the following

comments to the timeline:
The initial migration trial seems short, only ~ 2 months. With a data migration of this scale,
approx. 6-12 months would have been expected for the initial task, as it should involve
profiling of all the data to be migrated, definition of migration rules etc.
With a data migration of this scale, we would have expected ~10 data migration trials.
Each of these would have the following characteristics:

 Would be full scale, including all the data to be migrated

 The final 2-4 data migration trials would be essentially identical to the production
migration, in order to fine-tune the migration approach before the production
migration
 According to Accenture’s data migration methodology, the final task is “Confirm
migrated data”, as data validation is done as an integral part of the data migration
trials, not as a separate activity afterwards

11 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

In a data migration project of this scale, according to Accenture’s methodology and

experience, the timeline and activities would have been more in line with what is indicated
below.

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

ID Task Name
Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

1 Migration Strategy & Analysis

2 Migration Design

3 Migration Build

4 Migration Trial 1

5 Migration Trial 2

6 Migration Trial 3

7 Migration Trial 4

8 Migration Trial 5 (end to end w app)

9 Migration Trial 6 (end to end w app)

10 Migration Trial 7 (end to end w app)

11 Migration Trial 8 (identical to live)

12 Production Migration

Figure 3 Expected Data Migration Timeline

According to the Data Migration Methodology, the total data migration effort would run in
parallel with systems development for most of the duration of the project.
However, we normally would have recommended a more concentrated project effort to
reduce the timeline to e.g. 2 – 2½ years in order to reduce the risk of scope changes
during the migration.
The remainder of the document deals with the assessment of the data migration work that
was done, as evidenced by the documents reviewed and the interviews conducted. The
report has been structured according to the phases of the Data Migration Methodology.

12 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

5 Findings and Consequences

5.1 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Analysis Phase
This section describes Accenture's assessment of the analysis phase of the EFI data
migration project. We identified the following documents as the most relevant for the
assessment of the analysis phase:
Ref.# Category (used Document title
for sorting)
2 Contract L21 Underbilag - EFI Konvertering.doc
3 Strategy Konvereteringsstrategi v1.2.pdf
4 Plan Konverteringsplan EFI v09 CSC KONV
7 PK2 Opsamlingsskema for test PK2.docx
9 PK2 2013 02 01 Oprydningsliste til IU
10 PK3 05 b KFL_Prøvprøvekonvertering 3 afrapportering v0_2
[DOK32828717] (10064235_1).DOCX
17 PK4 16 Prøvekonvertering 4 afrapportering v0_3 [DOK31571202]
(10064294_1).DOCX
34 Production Produktionskonvertering afrapportering v0_8
conversion (00000002).docx
46 Production Bilag B - Tværgående konverteringsmangler (9573038_2)
conversion (2).docx
Table 1 Overview over Relevant Documents for Assessment of Analysis Phase

Information in the documents listed above was compared to what is to be expected in the
analysis phase of a data migration project, based on ADM for data migration.
Our assessment focused on answering the following key questions:

 Were the requirements [1] sufficient to define the scope of work?

 Was there a documented data migration approach, and was this appropriate to
manage the work?
 Was all the data and variants to be migrated identified and analysed during the
analysis phase? And was the need for data cleansing appropriately addressed?

5.1.1 Key Findings

Data Migration Requirements
Based on our review of the original requirements for data migration the EFI Programme,
as listed in [1], Section 1.2, it is our observation that these were few and high-level.
According to interview 3, the only detailing of requirements that was made are in the form
of mapping rules which are documented in Excel documents per treatment type and in the

13 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

Informatica portal, plus specified data formats that the source system owners were to
deliver data in to the migration team.
It is our evaluation that the detailing of the original requirements [1] were lacking the
hierarchical breakdown structure which is required for defining all the tests that are
necessary in order to validate the full data migration effort.

Data Conversion Strategy and Planning

Based on our review of the data conversion strategy [3], data conversion plan [4] the
production migration report [34], our observations are that:

 The initial conversion strategy only covered EFI

 Separate data conversion strategy documents for EFI and DMI had been developed
prior to EFI and DMI being gathered into one organization [34], Section 1.1. (Our
document review has not identified the data conversion strategy document for DMI)
 There was a change to the conversion strategy [34], Section 1.1 after PK1: “SKAT
wanted to introduce the principle of taking the debts directly from the claimants” (our
translation). The strategy document [3] was not updated with the modified strategy,
but it was reflected in the conversion plan [4]
 The data conversion plan describes an overall time plan for data migration trials,
organization of the data migration effort and entry and exit criteria for the data
migration trials
 It is our evaluation that although the strategy document was not updated, the
planning document [4] for the migration trials was updated and contained the basic
high-level information required for managing the migration trials

Analysis of All Data and Variants to be Migrated

According to interview 3, data profiling had only been done on external data, not SKAT
data.
It is our evaluation that:
 Not all data and variants that were to be migrated were identified in the migration
trial PK1, before subsequent migration trials were executed. According to [30] PK1
was insufficient because the data in KMD-IND lacked the details that was wanted in
EFI (split of claims in main claim and sub-claims (interest, fees)).
 None of the migration trials PK2, PK3, PK4 were on 100% of the data, as the
number of source systems and the volume of the data that was included increased
for every trial, but PK4 still didn’t cover all the data to be migrated

14 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

Need for Data Cleansing of the Source Systems

A data clean-up list [9] was defined, but according to interview 3 this covered only SKAT
internal data. Data clean-up status was tracked [9], but although a number of areas were
marked as green there were still unfinished clean-up tasks listed.
It is our evaluation that data cleansing of the source systems was insufficient or not done,
because e.g. fields with incorrect values were migrated to EFI+DMI, according to [46].

5.2 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Design Phase

This section describes Accenture’s assessment of the design phase of the EFI data
migration project. We identified the following documents as the most relevant for the
assessment of the design phase:
Ref.# Category (used Document title
for sorting)
34 Production Produktionskonvertering afrapportering v0_8
conversion (00000002).docx
46 Production Bilag B - Tværgående konverteringsmangler (9573038_2)
conversion (2).docx
57 Accenture Technical Report.docx
deliverable
Table 2 Most Relevant Documents for Assessment of Design Phase

Information in the documents listed above was compared to what is to be expected in the
design phase of a data migration project, based on ADM for Data Migration.
Our assessment focused on answering the following key questions:

 Did the data migration design documents include the necessary controls to secure
that only quality data was migrated – and all non-conforming data written to error
logs?
 What data controls were designed into Modtag Fordring, the part of EFI through
which the vast majority of claims were migrated? (Modtag Fordring is the interface
through which claimants submit their claims to EFI+DMI)

5.2.1 Key Findings

Based on our examination of the documents it is observed that the design documentation
has not been sufficient to prevent invalid data from being inserted into EFI because it was
discovered, after the production migration that crucial details were missing such as
decisions for salary deductions [46].
According to the final report [34], Section 1.1, claims were migrated using the Modtag
Fordring application, where it was temporarily allowed to accept historic claims as part of
the migration. Treatments (indsatser) were migrated using the ETL tool Informatica.
This is consistent with statements from interview 3, where the Konsortium stated that
claims were migrated using the Modtag Fordring interface, where an exception flag had

15 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

been added to the Web service message to Modtag Fordring to also accept historic
claims.
Validation in MF is based on a number of things [see Technical Report]:

 WSDL and/or XSD validation on the enterprise service bus (ESB)

 Matrix configurations, which are rules matrices for e.g. which claimants are allowed
to submit which types of claims
 Administrator configuration, which is based on super user configuration of the
system via the user interface. E.g. selecting which fields are on different types of
claims, and whether they are mandatory

Accenture have shown in our Technical Report [57], that Modtag Fordring does not include
validations to ensure that only valid claims can enter the system. E.g. when MF was used
to load claims in the migration, claims were accepted and put on a treatment for which the
claim type was not justified. There is no sanity checking on key fields, e.g. to ensuring that
dates are in a proper time sequence for the claim to be in a valid state, and the amount of
debt is not sanity checked [46].

5.3 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Build

No specific comments.

5.4 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration Testing

This section describes Accenture’s assessment of the testing of the EFI data migration
project. We identified the following documents as the most relevant for the assessment of
the testing that was done:
Ref.# Category (used Document title
for sorting)
3 Strategy Konvereteringsstrategi v1.2.pdf
4 Plan Konverteringsplan EFI v09 CSC KONV
5 PK1 Prøvekonvertering 1 afrapportering 19012012
7 PK2 Opsamlingsskema for test PK2.docx
10 PK3 05 b KFL_Prøvprøvekonvertering 3 afrapportering v0_2
[DOK32828717] (10064235_1).DOCX

12 FKT 2013-04-13 FKT reduktion og færdiggørelse.docx

17 PK4 16 Prøvekonvertering 4 afrapportering v0_3 [DOK31571202]

(10064294_1).DOCX
34 Production Produktionskonvertering afrapportering v0_8
conversion (00000002).docx

16 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

46 Production Bilag B - Tværgående konverteringsmangler (9573038_2)

conversion (2).docx
Table 3 Relevant Documents for Assessment of Testing

Information in the documents listed above was compared to what is to be expected in the
testing of a data migration project, based on ADM for Data Migration.
Our assessment focused on answering the following key questions:

 Was the pre-condition on a stable, tested EFI+DMI System met?

 Did the migration trials cover 100% of the data to be migrated, and did the trials
continue until they were successful?
 Had the system passed end-to-end testing with the migrated data?

5.4.1 Key Findings

Testing with Prepared Test Data
It is our observation from the trial migration reports PK1, PK3 and PK4 that EFI+DMI and
Modtag Fordring were not thoroughly tested and were not stable during the migration
trials.
It is our evaluation that since the target system was not stable and tested during the
migration trials, the validation of data migration that was performed during each of the
trials were inconclusive in terms of what would work in the production system.

Migration Trials
None of the migration trials PK1, PK2 (we have not seen this report, however it is stated
[10] that this was the case), PK3 and PK4 represented a complete data migration trial,
hence, there was no full migration trial performed prior to the production data migration.
Mapping rules for treatments were adjusted after each migration trial, also after PK4 [3].
In the final migration trial - PK4, the following was the result as stated in [17]:
 ~9.3 million out of ~19.1 million claims attempted to be migrated (49% of total
claims)
 EFI rejected a significant number of claims, for multiple reasons including a lack of
AKR functionality (customers that could not be reconciled with CPR or CVR)
 The balances in EFI and DMI did not reconcile, post migration
 There was a high probability that EFI would automatically mail 600,000 debtors
immediately
 Payment ability (BeBB) calculations were not usable
 Assignment of automatic treatments were not usable
o As a direct result of this testing, most automated functionality was disabled
before go-live (the “pilotspor” was used instead)
 A number of remaining defects were listed

17 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

The summary status reports for each of the migration trials (PK1, PK3, PK4) [5, 10, 17]
reported that the trials were completed, although there were listed remaining defects that
were still to be fixed. (The summary status report for PK2 has not been identified).

Testing with the Migrated Data

Based on our examination, testing on migrated data was written into the conversion
strategy [3], Section 13.3.2, and [4], Section 4: “A regression test on migrated data, where
selected test cases from test of functionality (FKT) is applied on migrated data, in order to
validate that migrated data supports the EFI-functionality. The final regression test is to
validate that migrated data will function in EFI-processes” (our translation).
End-to-end testing of EFI+DMI with migrated data had not been completed prior to go-live,
hence it had not been proven that EFI+DMI were able to process the migrated data
correctly from being received through Modtag Fordring and processed through all the
variations of treatments and claimants.
According to interview 4, the migration team only checked that the migrated data had been
imported correctly into EFI, by checking the fields using EFI screens. This is not according
to the conversion strategy or the conversion plan, where it is stated that an end-to-end test
with migrated data was to be performed.
According to [34], Section 1.3.1: “It was only in the pilot that it has been possible to do
functional testing of migrated data. Functional testing was performed to a limited degree in
the Pilot” (our translation). The pilot test was a test between PK4 and the go-live.
Based on a review of a letter [12], there was a decision by the EFI project manager to limit
the amount of functional testing in order to meet the September 1 st 2013 deadline for go-
live. Although scope reduction is a common thing to do in order to meet a set go-live date,
it is Accenture’s evaluation that two very risky decisions were taken:

 Retesting of fixed defects were not to be done before go-live. This is extremely risky
as the need to retest defect corrections is common practice in any testing effort
(regression test).
 Reduction of the end-to-end testing was to be compensated by a pilot and “other
relevant activities”, but there is no description of what kind of activities that were
intended to compensate for the lack of sufficient testing.

The evidence is clear on the fact that less than half of the combined body of data in all
source systems were ever included in migration trials prior to the production migration.
That and the fact that the migrated data was not tested end-to-end in EFI+DMI are the
single most important deficiencies of the data migration project.
There is no way to predict how data will behave in a system if it has not been tested
sufficiently, i.e. through testing end-to-end business processes on an amount of data
which represents all the data variants that will come from the source systems.

18 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

5.5 Assessment of the EFI Data Migration for Production

This section describes Accenture’s assessment of the EFI production data migration. We
identified the following documents as the most relevant for the assessment of the
production migration:

Ref.# Category (used Document title

for sorting)
4 Plan Konverteringsplan EFI v09 CSC KONV
5 PK1 Prøvekonvertering 1 afrapportering 19012012
8 PK2 07 Konverteringsstyregruppe møde 20130301 opd
[DOK31571146] (10064259_1).PPTX
10 PK3 05 b KFL_Prøvprøvekonvertering 3 afrapportering v0_2
[DOK32828717] (10064235_1).DOCX
17 PK4 16 Prøvekonvertering 4 afrapportering v0_3 [DOK31571202]
(10064294_1).DOCX
18 PK4 31 Afrapportering PK4 [DOK31571099] (10064402_1).PPTX
24 PK4 09 Referat EFI_DMI konvertering 20130523 [DOK31571247]
(10064262_1).DOCX
28 Production bilag 1 - mail fra SKAT af 12 09 2011
conversion
29 Production Bilag 2 - mail fra SKAT af 09 05 2012
conversion
34 Production Produktionskonvertering afrapportering v0_8
conversion (00000002).docx
46 Production Bilag B - Tværgående konverteringsmangler (9573038_2)
conversion (2).docx
Table 4 Relevant Documents for Assessment of Production Migration

Information in the documents listed above was compared to what is to be expected in the
production migration phase of a data migration project, based on ADM for Data migration.
Our assessment focused on answering the following key questions:

 On what basis was the go-live decision made?

 Was the final data migration run successful?

5.5.1 Key Findings

Go-live Decision
The conversion plan [4] Section 5, 6 and 7 defined exit criteria for migration trials. The
commonly accepted and sole purpose of defining exit criteria is that unless these criteria
are met, the activity is not to be regarded as completed. Based on our examination of the

19 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

PK4 summary status report [17] it is observed that a complete migration trial of data from
all sources was not completed, because Udbetaling Danmark (UDK) was not participating.
Based on our examination of the trial migration reports from PK1, PK3 and PK4 [5, 10, 17]
and the summary status report from the production conversion [34] it is our observation
that:
None of the 4 migration trials tested a full load of data from all sources
The exceptions (data migration defects) listed in PK3 and PK4 were not managed to a
conclusion before moving on to the next trial migration. Overall status green was set for
each of the migration trials despite the fact that there were remaining deficiencies and
when the identified exceptions had been assigned to be fixed, without waiting till after the
exceptions had been fixed and retested.
Despite the above shortcomings, the status report from PK4 [17], Section 7.1.1.2:
concluded with: “It is recommended to finalize and approve migration trial 4 and it is
recommended that the production migration can be performed on the current basis plus
risk evaluated and prioritized defect corrections and changes” (our translation).
It is our evaluation that the conversion team should not have recommended to the steering
group of the EFI Programme that the data migration could proceed to the production
migration. Each of the deficiencies listed above should have mandated a clear no-go
decision, according to Accenture’s Data Migration Methodology.

Final Migration Run

The status report from the production migration [34] lists a substantial number of defects
that were detected during go-live:

 Claims from DMO with incorrect liability

 Transports with incorrect payment period
 Missing expiration dates from DMO
 Errors in calculation of payment ability
 Expiration dates for RIS claims erroneous due to PEF rules in DMI

Accenture has done profiling of the migrated data in EFI and DMI which shows that the
length of time since a payment was last received on migrated claims is so long that in our
opinion they are effectively not being collected.
It was the decision of the project’s steering group [28, 29] to move claims into EFI where it
was known that subsequent manual tasks were necessary in order to process the claims
correctly.

20 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

6 Appendix
6.1 Documents Examined
The following table lists the documentation examined for the data migration assessment.
All documents in the list have been examined and where it is especially relevant to
explicitly reference a document, and sections of a document, this has been done in the
text of the report.

Ref. Category Document title

# (used for
sorting)
Original
1 requirement 1. EFI 02 Leverandørens kravopfyldelse S v1_00
s
2 Contract L21 Underbilag - EFI Konvertering.doc
3 Strategy Konvereteringsstrategi v1.2.pdf
4 Plan Konverteringsplan EFI v09 CSC KONV
5 PK1 Prøvekonvertering 1 afrapportering 19012012
33 Imødegåelse af trusler mod EFI go-live i maj 2013 klh
6 PK2
[DOK31571118] (10064405_1).PPTX
7 PK2 Opsamlingsskema for test PK2.docx
07 Konverteringsstyregruppe møde 20130301 opd
8 PK2
[DOK31571146] (10064259_1).PPTX
9 PK2 2013 02 01 Oprydningsliste til IU
05 b KFL_Prøvprøvekonvertering 3 afrapportering v0_2
10 PK3
[DOK32828717] (10064235_1).DOCX
01 EFI stg 010313 ekstra PK oplæg v2 [DOK31571111]
11 PK3
(10064047_1).PPTX
12 FKT 2013-04-13 FKT reduktion og færdiggørelse.docx

13 FKT Kopi af ANH FKT oplæg uge 16og17 v3.xlsx

14 FKT 130411 ANH FKT oplæg uge 16og17.xlsx
15 FKT 130627 Stormøde-2013-06-26.docx
11 Konverteringsstyregruppe møde 20130606 [DOK31571161]
16 PK4
(10064265_1).PPTX
16 Prøvekonvertering 4 afrapportering v0_3 [DOK31571202]
17 PK4
(10064294_1).DOCX
18 PK4 31 Afrapportering PK4 [DOK31571099] (10064402_1).PPTX
32 Drejebog PK4 gennemløb_0_4 (DOK31571107)
19 PK4
(10064404_1).XLSX

21 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

08 Konverteringsstyregruppe møde 20130523 [DOK31571158]

20 PK4
(10064261_1).PPTX
21 PK4 Konverteringsstyregruppe møde 20130523.pptx
12 Referat EFI_DMI konvertering 20130606 [DOK31571250]
22 PK4
(10064267_1).DOCX
04 Referat EFI_DMI konvertering 20130508 [DOK31571245]
23 PK4
(10064063_1).DOCX
09 Referat EFI_DMI konvertering 20130523 [DOK31571247]
24 PK4
(10064262_1).DOCX
10 Konverteringsstyregruppe møde 20130530 [DOK31571160]
25 PK4
(10064263_1).PPTX
Production Trusler mod opstart og ibrugtagning af EFI - oktober 2013 til
26
conversion udlevering
Production
27 Imødegåelse af trusler mod EFI go-live i september 2013 030513
conversion
Production
28 bilag 1 - mail fra SKAT af 12 09 2011
conversion
Production
29 Bilag 2 - mail fra SKAT af 09 05 2012
conversion
Production
30 Bilag 3 - MF_TEST_resultat_12 12 2011
conversion
Production
31 Brev til SKAT 13 03 2015 - Konvertering
conversion
Production
32 Afstemningsrapport EFI produktionskonverterig Notat.docx
conversion
Production
33 Produktionskonvertering afrapportering v0_3x.docx
conversion
Production
34 Produktionskonvertering afrapportering v0_8 (00000002).docx
conversion
Production
35 VS Idriftsættelse - forberedelse af konvertering mm.msg
conversion
Production 02 BEO_KonverteringsPostscripts [DOK33148644]
36
conversion (10064052_1).DOCX
Production 03 Konvertering Post-Skript BOB V. 1.1 170912 [DOK33148599]
37
conversion (10064057_1).DOCX
Production 15 Idriftsættelsesstg 04072013 defect status slides
38
conversion [DOK31572104] (10064288_1).PPTX
Production 17 Referat EFI_DMI idriftsættelse 20130704 [DOK31572096]
39
conversion (10064325_1).DOCX
Production 28 EFI DMI - Hovedtidsplan opstart - 131119 v3 [DOK29323931]
40
conversion (10064396_1).PPTX
Production 34 Idriftsættelsesstyregruppe etablering v02 juli 2013
41
conversion [DOK31572115] (10064408_1).PPTX

22 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

Production
42 20121106 Verdensbillede.pptx
conversion
Production 14 b 2012 01 19 Teknisk konvertering referat eftermiddag
43
conversion [DOK32937719] (10064278_1).DOCX
Production 14 b Teknisk konverteringsproces rev maj12 [DOK32937725]
44
conversion (10064283_1).DOCX
Production
45 EFI DMI prodkonvertering afrapportering v01.pptx
conversion
Production Bilag B - Tværgående konverteringsmangler (9573038_2)
46
conversion (2).docx
Production
47 Dag til dag Cutover plan - EFI 10 06 13.xlsx
conversion
Production
48 Processer i lukkeperioden EFI (3).docx
conversion
Production
49 Kopi af ANH FKT oplæg uge 16og17 v3
conversion
Production
50 2013-04-13 FKT reduktion og færdiggørelse
conversion
Production 130926 SKMI0168S PA EFI-statusrapportering - SKAT
51
conversion systemmodernisering fase 2 v3 2
Production 130730 31juli_UdfordringerttilLøsningnu_ved
52
conversion samletchefgruppe_forretning_teknik_projekt-pb.xlsx
Production
53 130612 EFI Review - Mgmt præsentation - v1 0 - 130607
conversion
Production
54 121126 Imødegåelse af trusler mod EFI go-live i maj 2013pptx
conversion
Production 130503 Imødegåelse af trusler mod EFI go-live i september 2013
55
conversion 030513
Production
56 Bilag_2_EFI leverancer
conversion
Accenture
57 Technical Report.docx
deliverable
58 Other BEBB Kunde.docx
59 Other REV Diverse planer for EFI.msg
06 b Fordringer_analyse_konklusion_v1_41_kommenteret[1]
60 Other
[DOK33853557] (10064248_1).DOCX
61 Other 27 b liste_man_tina (DOK31482432) (10064392_1).XLSX
27 b
62 Other mapningstabel_henlaeggelser_v08_2013_06_21_efter_prod_kon
v (DOK31482431) (10064395_1).XLSX
63 Other 130610 Oplæg til workshop 110412 V4.pptx
131001 Copy of 130926 SKMI0168S PA EFI-statusrapportering -
64 Other
SKAT systemmodernisering fase 2 v3 2.xls
Ministry of
65 Bilag_2_EFI leverancer (00000002).pdf
Finance
Table 5 Documents Examined

23 | P a g e
DATE: 24.09.2015

6.2 List of Meetings

The following interviews were conducted with stakeholders in the EFI data migration
project:

Interview 1

Interview 2
Interview 3
Interview 4
Table 6 List of Meetings

24 | P a g e