Case management systems enable the flow of “cases” from initiation to closure. Within handling of a “case” there are necessarily:
- Information joins and restrictions.
- Audit and control processes (across workflows).
- Dynamically routing abilities for a case.
- Goals/outcomes achieved and stored.
- Collections and attributions of information.
The variance in Case Management requirements across government inhibits an ability to pursue a single, centralised Case Management solution, or a universally applicable pattern; unique Case Management needs will dictate solution selection, design, and implementation.
Understand alignment to Case Management Archetypes (primary stakeholder and usage)
Agency function, such as investigation, service delivery, or compliance, can be of value in identifying potential options - although overarching capability may not necessarily align to the practical requirements of each new specific Case Management proposal, understanding comparable implementations by agencies of similar scale/complexity/tasking can assist in determining comparability to previous investment.
Across government, Case Management systems exist for workflows that cater to several types of stakeholder interactions, including interactions between government entities, with private corporations, and with individuals. Specific use cases can be broadly categorised into the following archetypes:
- Contract Management
- Investigation Management
- Service Management
- Human Resources Management
- Complaints Management
- Compliance Management
- Claims Management
Understanding the use case requirements and thus system focus allows comparability to previous investment across government, and thus potential avenues for reuse. Designs aligned to this Capability on the Australian Government Architecture are specifically classified by archetype to provide clarity.
Within these archetypes there may be variances, including of complexity and data type, that will influence the selection of an existing system (or components thereof) for reuse or the design of a new system.
Develop a comprehensive understanding of non-functional requirements and considerations
Whether by legislation or for practical reasons, there are specific non-functional needs that require upfront consideration; any system that does not meet these needs would immediately be deemed unfit for the purpose and ruled out of consideration. These needs may include (but are not limited to):
- Auditability requirements of cases processes and/or outcomes.
- Privacy requirements of individuals, organisations, processes, or intellectual property.
- Security needs, particularly if the system contains sensitive or personally identifying data or is otherwise likely a target for threat actors.
- Availability/redundancy, especially in the case of systems supporting round-the-clock needs such as medical or emergency services activities.
There are three dimensions of scale to consider; case/data volume, frequency of case interaction, and size of userbase. Understanding of system scale is key to comparability with previous investment across government, including considerations of:
- Case/data volume - The total amount of data that needs to be maintained in both accessible and archive states.
- Frequency of case interaction – How often cases are created, updated, and accessed, including an annual average (generally consistent flow of cases to manage throughout a 12-month period) alongside understanding of peaks and troughs (significant spikes due to external factors, such as financial, fiscal or political cycles).
- Size of the user base – The number of users of the system and their access requirements.
Check for existing re-useable Case Management designs before engaging in new development processes
Many instances of Case Management solutions and platforms exist across government, one or more of which may be suitable for reuse through the instantiation of new instances of existing cloud implementations, or the leveraging of existing designs, either entirely or via utilisation of a component or components.
These designs may be discovered through the AGA, through direct contact with Agencies with comparable use cases, via existing Whole of Government arrangements, or by way of inter-government Memorandums of Understanding (MoU).
Build for Reuse
Where specific requirements have been defined and assessed against previous investment, and reuse has not been determined viable, agencies should provide evidence of which systems across government have been investigated and demonstrate how any new investment may be extensible and operationalised for reuse.
Implementing a Case Management system aligned to modern demands and with a focus on future needs and standards is critical for reducing risk, increasing efficiency, and supporting consistent management of cases across government.
Any new system should be designed with a modular and scalable architecture, allowing for future extension and integration into other agency structures. Emphasizing interoperability and standardisation in technologies and data formats ensures adaptability across different agencies. Additionally, user-friendly interfaces and comprehensive documentation should be incorporated to facilitate ease of implementation and use. This will allow for a streamlining of processes, promote consistency, and foster consistency across entities.
Lower development and maintenance complexity of Case Management solutions
Case Management solutions can be implemented through low-code/no-code platform solutions that orchestrate a human-centred functionality to rapidly define, test, integrate, and present complex processes and rulesets in a modular and repeatable manner with minimal use of programming languages and an abstraction from the code itself.
Contemporary Case Management solutions adopting low-code/no-code can benefit from the removal of layers between an analyst’s expertise and the materialised solution. Direct
engagement between the analyst and the platform can assist with optimising the end-to-end Case Management process or better integrating the needs of a stakeholder. Benefits of this approach include rapid development, a better-understood and more refined business process and enhanced stakeholder satisfaction.
Agencies will ensure that their selected solution is supportable, affordable, secure, and fit-for-purpose, and should consider the suitability of low-code/no-code solutions prior to development or adoption of a monolithic platform. This includes checking the contractual arrangements, MoU currency, and AGA Design state.
Understand the existing technology environment
The Commonwealth digital landscape is vast with significant differentiation across agencies in terms of technology environments including extent of cloud adoption, legacy reliance, infrastructure design, age of systems, and long-term ICT strategy. The alignment of technological environmental demands with those of preceding designs, and understanding the similarities and differences across technology environments, facilitates comparison to previous investment across government, enabling reuse.
Reuse and reuse potential are also enhanced through achieving greater uniformity in data structures, specifically where data is organised and stored in a consistent manner, and uniformity in integration protocols is developed and maintained.
Several currently utilised Case Management platforms have been identified in the Designs section below. Specific platform types are provided to assist agencies with a starting point in their investigations.