Military Command Software Center - MCS Personnel (Monitor MASS)

[Help Desk]

MCS Personnel (Monitor MASS) is available on the DWAN and is now used by 50,000 members across DND,  a deployed version NOMAD is now installed on all Ships with the capacity to synchronize the data when the bandwidth permits. The module for PER tracking will be expanded to the Reserve Force as well for FY 2014/15. Updates are available regularly now when you login to the application. Training is also available on DLN now, just do a search for MCS. Constructive criticism and suggestions for improvements are welcome.

 

[AmmoTech90]

Constructive criticism: Learn to post a poll with an unbiased question.

 

[dapaterson]

Has Monitor MASS ever undergone a formal privacy assessment, as is required for all Government of Canada software systems (http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=18308)?  If so, where can someone read it?

 

[Tibbson]

Such assessments are required before the C&A process can be completed in order to even have the software on the DIN. 

 

[DonaldMcL]

Why can't I vote on the fact the UI is terrible, is yet another system that requires constant updating, and is totally unneeded?

Hmm...

 

[Scott]

Why can't I vote on the fact the UI is terrible, is yet another system that requires constant updating, and is totally unneeded?

Hmm...

Because that would hurt somebody's feelings.

 

[Help Desk]

Why can't I vote on the fact the UI is terrible, is yet another system that requires constant updating, and is totally unneeded?

Hmm...

BobSlob

Can you elaborate your statement in ref to Quote "the UI is terrible” I have no idea what you are referring to.

As far as your statement that the System is totally unneeded, suggest you ask the Chief clerks how they love the program for submitting and processing Reserve Employment Opportunities  in the REO module within Monitor MASS and have it published the same day with a simple click on the mouse, ask the members who are looking for those opportunities how it is convenient to find Class A and  Class B employment in one central location both on the Intranet and Internet. Some of you may remember the old days where opportunities took up to one month before they were listed in Routine Orders across each individual Bases and finding opportunities that were still open was next to impossible.
Reserve employment opportunities Internet site:
http://armyapp.forces.gc.ca/reo-oer/LFC-CFT/default.aspx?lang=eng

Ask the Chief Clerks and Admin Staff also how they like the PER tracking system and what a time saver it is for them and how they can have a summary at their finger tips at all CoC level.

I think that the numbers speaks for themselves, if it was not needed why 90% of the members within DND are using it, think about it. I could give you hundred more example but I think you get the idea.

 

[cavalryman]

Such assessments are required before the C&A process can be completed in order to even have the software on the DIN.

They are indeed required for true corporate systems, but for skunkworks that have friends in the IM Group, many things can be 'overlooked'  :

 

[Good2Golf]

...Ask the Chief Clerks and Admin Staff also how they like the PER tracking system and what a time saver it is for them and how they can have a summary at their finger tips at all CoC level.

I think that the numbers speaks for themselves, if it was not needed why 90% of the members win this DND are using it, think about it. I could give you hundred more example but I think you get the idea.

Help Desk.  It's great that you believe in the product -- it has significant issues though, aside from having been developed from a bottom-up "add-on, followed by add-on, followed by add-on" approach with what many would describe as less than fully integrated into the DND/CAF enterprise IT governance space.  As others have said, MM has a rather unfriendly user interface.  Glad the CF-728 generation worked for you.  My unit did 728s faster with PDF forms.  As well, one shouldn't assume that CCs are fawning all over the program.  Can't say as though my CC or the majority of the clerks were as big fans as some make them out to be.  The CA has said it is the primary unit-level tool, so it was...but that doesn't mean it is the be all to end all.  Leave planning/coord is decent, but many would not call it "seamlessly integrated."  For it to be improved, my constructive comments would be that it needs to be integrated into a Departmentally-maged project framework with full oversight relative to all Departmental IT initiatives, not just something that started life as a good idea somewhere in the bowels of DLCSPM/DLCI and growing to be the patch-king of DND programs. 

As well, your statistics are a bit off...90% of which elements in the CAF?  So we have 55,556 people in the CAF?

Regards
G2G

 

[Help Desk]

Constructive criticism: Learn to post a poll with an unbiased question.

Thanks, I modified it and reset the vote to 0

 

[Help Desk]

Help Desk.  It's great that you believe in the product -- it has significant issues though, aside from having been developed from a bottom-up "add-on, followed by add-on, followed by add-on" approach with what many would describe as less than fully integrated into the DND/CAF enterprise IT governance space.  As others have said, MM has a rather unfriendly user interface.  Glad the CF-728 generation worked for you.  My unit did 728s faster with PDF forms.  As well, one shouldn't assume that CCs are fawning all over the program.  Can't say as though my CC or the majority of the clerks were as big fans as some make them out to be.  The CA has said it is the primary unit-level tool, so it was...but that doesn't mean it is the be all to end all.  Leave planning/coord is decent, but many would not call it "seamlessly integrated."  For it to be improved, my constructive comments would be that it needs to be integrated into a Departmentally-maged project framework with full oversight relative to all Departmental IT initiatives, not just something that started life as a good idea somewhere in the bowels of DLCSPM/DLCI and growing to be the patch-king of DND programs. 

As well, your statistics are a bit off...90% of which elements in the CAF?  So we have 55,556 people in the CAF?

Regards
G2G

G2G

A DND 728 for a Unit/Ship/Sqn can be generated in the PER tracking module with all all the information listed on the form (SN, Rank, Name, etc) regardless of the no of PERs and in the order required by DMCSS Ottawa in less time than it would take your Chief Clerk to type in the mailing address on a blank form. The big advantage beside the obvious time saver is that there is no typo and once the Send PERs is apply the PERs Summary for the Unit/Ship/Sqn is automatically update and available to the CoC and DMCSS for reporting purposes. Once DMCSS receive the shipment the status of each member's PER is changed to Received by DMCSS and there is no requirement for them to send back a copy to acknowledge receipt as it has been received electronically. The PER Tracking is mandatory for the RCN, C Army and this year all MILPERS COM and CMP Units/Orgs have been directed to use PER Tracking, the RCAF have left it optional, last FY 39,000 PERs were submitted through using the PER Tracking module.

 

[DAA]

Yup, I think your "statistical" numbers are slightly off.

I am a Chief Clerk, use MM strictly for the REO component and find the rest of the platform confusing, hard to navigate and therefore, pretty much useless (ie; it doesn't save me any time in my job and tends to create work).  And if "90%" of the CF are using this software, it's probably because someone in their CoC, has "ordered" them to do so.

Oh, big deal that it saves you from having to generate/print a 728!  You spent all this money for that?  Also, the PER tracking is not mandatory, we haven't been "ordered" to use it and we are not an RCAF Unit.  Even if they told me to use it, I wouldn't!

 

[donaldk]

I use it for some tracking of pers in my unit, which is helpful in a small unit where I don't have an RMS clerk to run queries in HRMS and calling BOR with petty inquiries would be a nuisance.

 

[Help Desk]

Yup, I think your "statistical" numbers are slightly off.

I am a Chief Clerk, use MM strictly for the REO component and find the rest of the platform confusing, hard to navigate and therefore, pretty much useless.  And if "90%" of the CF are using this software, it's probably because someone in their CoC, has "ordered" them to do so.

Oh, big deal that it saves you from having to generate/print a 728!  You spent all this money for that?

Did you know that the implementation of REO - Reserve Employment Opportunity module is saving 18 PY in the C Army alone since 2009, do the math. If you took a serious look at what our small team is providing for the CAF i.e. MCS Tasking CFTPO, MCS Ranges  (CFRIS), MCS Personnel (Monitor MASS), MCS Establishment, (establishment changes, CFFET, MACR), MEMS, Training Tracker,OJT/OJPR) Ship Management, Sea days, Jumps, Clinician's time, Activity Management, IBTS, Parade State, Readyness Summary, etc you would quickly realise that the service we provide is very much essential and it cost a fraction of what a corporate system would.

The PER tracking system return on investment was 10 folds in the very first year in 2012 in freeing Chief Clerk and Orderly Room / Admin Staff more time to provide support to their members rather than compiling statistics in excel spread sheets for the COC, think about that for a minute, isn't it what everyone has been asking for.

 

[turretmonster]

Sweet Gebbus, just stop the propaganda.

TM

 

[Good2Golf]

"return on investment was 10 folds (sic) in the first year"

Okay, I'll bite.  ROI for what 'investment'?  Vote 1 O&M resources? Vote 5 capital?  PYs? 

What was the baseline and what measures of performance and measures of effectiveness were used to end up with a determination of achieving a 10 fold "freeing" of CCs and OR staff?

18 PY savings?  So how many dedicated PYs were specifically supporting REO publication before MM?

No offence intended, but you are throwing around figures about how much Monitor Mass had improved things and frankly, having seen aspects of Departmental efficiencies (or lack thereof), I am somewhat skeptical that there are indeed all the savings of resources and much greater efficiencies that you purport.  MM is a tool, just as is HRMS, or RPSR, or DRMIS, etc...

:2c:

p.s.  You should add a "I have used Monitor Mass in the past and have found it not to be as useful as some make it out to be." option. 

 

[dapaterson]

Maybe HHQs need to stop asking for useless information.  Having computers generate useless information doesn't change its utility one bit.

As well, you still haven't answered the question about the Privacy Impact Assessment.  It's required - where is it?

Plus, any database operated by the government that contains personal information has certain rules and regulations pertaining to data retention and the right of individuals to access that data - is Monitor MASS and its associated applications compliant with those regulations?  Or is it a bunch of folks hacking away, ignoring the rules, and one bad data leak away from disaster?


(Have user access controls been improved?  I remember someone was able, with no audit trail to track them down, to go in and rename 1st and 2nd BNs PPCLI as "Princess Patricia's Canadian Mechanized Infantry".  If foundational data isn't safe from folks making changes and joking around, how can users be certain of data integrity?)

 

[AmmoTech90]

Did you know that the implementation of REO - Reserve Employment Opportunity module is saving 18 PY in the C Army alone since 2009, do the math.

The math is: 18 PY/6 years=3 people.  How many PY have been spent developing MM that could be employed in operational slots, be they 1st line unit pers or civvies in maintenance driving down the VOR rate?  How much money has been spent on contractors that could have been used for training?

 

[Help Desk]

The math is: 18 PY/6 years=3 people.  How many PY have been spent developing MM that could be employed in operational slots, be they 1st line unit pers or civvies in maintenance driving down the VOR rate?  How much money has been spent on contractors that could have been used for training?

It is not 18 PY for 6 years, it is 18 PY per year, most of those were personnel dedicated to drafttingREO messages, sending them thru the Message Center and publishing then in Routine Orders, that requirement was replaced by the automated publishing process. These figures were provided to us by the Area HQ back then.

 

[Help Desk]

Maybe HHQs need to stop asking for useless information.  Having computers generate useless information doesn't change its utility one bit.

As well, you still haven't answered the question about the Privacy Impact Assessment.  It's required - where is it?

Plus, any database operated by the government that contains personal information has certain rules and regulations pertaining to data retention and the right of individuals to access that data - is Monitor MASS and its associated applications compliant with those regulations?  Or is it a bunch of folks hacking away, ignoring the rules, and one bad data leak away from disaster?


(Have user access controls been improved?  I remember someone was able, with no audit trail to track them down, to go in and rename 1st and 2nd BNs PPCLI as "Princess Patricia's Canadian Mechanized Infantry".  If foundational data isn't safe from folks making changes and joking around, how can users be certain of data integrity?)

You will find the Privacy Impact Assessment on SharePoint

I am not even going to reply to your other questions as I find them unethical and degrading.