HB 316-STANDARDIZED IMPROVEMENT TRACKING SYSTEM  11:23:44 AM CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 316, "An Act providing for a standardized improvement tracking system for state agencies." 11:24:03 AM REPRESENTATIVE CLAMAN moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 137, [labeled 32-LS1076\B, Wallace, 3/17/22], as the working document. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS objected. 11:24:21 AM REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN, prime sponsor of HB 316, explained that the original version of the bill was too strident, as it would have effectually created a tracker for "everything," which was not the intent. He stated the proposed committee substitute for HB 316 ("Version B") would capture the actual intent of tracking "higher criticality" action items. He deferred to Mr. Harvey to provide an explanation of changes. 11:25:33 AM MATTHEW HARVEY, Staff, Representative James Kaufman, Alaska State Legislature, on behalf of Representative Kaufman, prime sponsor, explained that the main changes included: prioritizing the critical few improvement items and progressing only these critical items; condensing the tracking requirements for improvement items; publicizing the annual report regarding use of the system; and clean up language. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS removed his objection. There being no further objection, Version B was adopted as the working document. 11:28:00 AM REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN believed that the fiscal note was made in reference to the original version of the bill, which explained the large scope and indeterminant amount. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether there had been any dialogue with the executive branch about the magnitude of the fiscal note for Version B. MR. HARVEY indicated that the sponsor's office intended to meet with the Office of Management & Budget (OMB) now that Version B was before the committee. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether there had been any engagement with the University of Alaska. REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN shared his understanding that the university already had an improvement system in place. 11:30:15 AM MR. HARVEY confirmed that the university already had a system in place. He said that if the bill were to pass, the system would be put into a standardized format across all agencies. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked whether any other states had implemented a similar tracking system. MR. HARVEY suggested that a project management office in Washington, which focused on improvement projects, had a similar system. Additionally, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) had a robust action tracker for audit findings and findings based on other reports and publications. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS asked Mr. Harvey to define "higher criticality" with the inclusion of real-world examples. MR. HARVEY referenced audit findings from the Legislative Budget & Audit Committee (LB&A) and how they could be organized under the proposed system. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS opined that the system's application to state agencies was of higher significance than legislative audits. 11:35:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN clarified that the intent was to create utilities that enabled organizations to improve. He characterized the State of Alaska as a multi-billion-dollar operation that could use a few more quality management processes. CHAIR KREISS-TOMKINS announced that HB 316 would be held over.