WASHINGTON

DC – Five Michigan Counties were lauded in the 2015 Digital Counties Survey for

understanding the transformational value of technology and making the

investments needed to improve services and efficiency across all facets of their

organizations.

The winners

include:

Population

of 500,000 or more – Oakland County (3)

Population

of 250,000 to 499,999 – Ottawa County (6)

Population

150,000 to 249,999 – Berrien County (5), Jackson County (10)

Population

up to 150,000 – Allegan County (1)

The five

were among 54 cited by the Center for Digital Government, sister organization

to Government Technology, as the most innovative and pioneering counties in the

nation.

“Counties

are continually becoming more sophisticated in their approach to

technology-based service delivery,” said Todd Sander, executive director of the

Center for Digital Government. “We see this not only through the investment

choices they are making in systems and tools, but also in their adding

professional staff with specific expertise in security, data management and

innovation. It is a constant challenge for government to keep up with the pace

of technological change and of public expectation. This year’s survey clearly

demonstrates that counties are up to that challenge, and they are actively

embracing new technology that will help them make better decisions and operate

more efficiently.”

This year’s

survey, the 13th annual, revealed leading counties, as well as trends that span

the nation. Respondents reported which technologies and innovations they

believed would see more of next year, and the top 10 were:

Cybersecurity

Hire and

retain competent IT personnel

Mobility/mobile

applications

Open

government/ transparency/open data

Disaster

recovery/continuity of operations

Budget and

cost control

Virtualization:

server, desktop/client, storage, applications

Shared

services

Portal/

e-government

Cloud

computing

New concepts

are beginning to take hold in county government too. More than half of

respondents said they were considering Internet of Everything (IoE)

technologies in their strategic plans. Twelve percent reported having a chief

privacy officer on staff, 7 percent reported having a chief innovation officer,

5 percent a chief digital officer, 3 percent a chief performance officer, and 8

percent reported having a chief data officer. Business intelligence and data

analytics systems are in use by more than one-quarter of respondents, with

another 29 percent reporting plans to begin using those technologies in the

next two years.

While

innovative, counties are also slow in moving to the cloud, the survey showed.

More than half of respondents reported that between 0 and 10 percent of their

systems had been moved to the cloud, and another 25 percent reported that

between 10 and 20 percent had been moved to the cloud. Many counties are stuck

managing legacy systems that won’t ever be migrated to the cloud. A third of

respondents reported that more than half their systems won’t make the leap to

the cloud.

Cloud or no,

this year’s winners found ways to make the most of their limited resources.

Judges were impressed by projects around the areas of open data and

transparency, cybersecurity, procurement, content resource management,

emergency preparedness and business continuity, programs that support

environmental tenants, and performance monitoring.

Allegan

County took first place in the less than 150,000 population category for its

involvement in a three-county procurement consortium, 27 online services

including an online GIS data library, a centralized social media portal, and a

dashboard that includes budget reports and key performance indicators.

The

procurement system, which was developed by Kent County and which is also used

by Ottawa County benefits the participants in several ways, said Robert Sarro,

county administrator of Allegan County.

“The more we

work together, the more purchasing opportunities there are and the better

vendor base we get from having the three counties together,” Sarro explained.

The online

system uses a reverse auction process that also saves the county time and

lowers bids, he said. Procurement can sometimes take up to 90 days, but because

their system only deals with non-custom orders, everything is simplified and

vendors can try to outbid each other and finish the process quickly.

“For

example, if we were hiring an architect for a project, we would want to

interview that architect, we would want to do background checks, and this is

really a commitment up front. When you post that bid package, you’re

essentially committing to award it to the lowest bidder,” Sarro said. “It has

taken processes which, in the past, could take easily 90 days to do, and we can

do it now in three days, sometimes the same day.”

Allegan

County didn’t develop the procurement system, but identifying those kinds of

opportunities is the difference between success and mediocrity. Always looking

for opportunities is what has enabled the county IT office to flourish as it

has, Sarro said, adding that in Allegan, staff members call it their Continuous

Improvement program. It’s why they entered an unofficial partnership with

Haworth, a global furniture company with headquarters in the county.

“It’s about

sharing information and training with each other. They have shared resources

with us in the way of trainers and implementers to come help us build our

continuous improvement culture. It’s about just continuing to improve and, as

such, it’s really building transparency in the organization so we can really

see everything that’s going on,” he said. “It’s kind of a unique thing for

county government to do, to join up with a corporate partner to see where can

we fit the things that are working for them in their corporate world and where

we can learn from some of those things, but not necessarily duplicate it, but

take that things that fit in a government environment.”

To read the

full report, click on http://www.govtech.com/dc/articles/Digital-Counties-Survey-2015-Results.html