Project Charter - Template given
|
|
<Ironwood Pharmaceuticals |
<Ironwood Pharmaceuticals
<Srinivasa Shiva Theja Yadlapalli>
<02/12/2019>
<Kevin Durfee - PMO>
<Implementing Veeva QMS at Ironwood Pharmaceuticals >
Project Charter
Revision <1.0>
PMGT 699 Project Charter v.1 April 2018 (Adapted from Document Code: PMBOK4.1.3.1)
List of Changes
|
Date |
Revision |
Description |
Author |
|
<02/12/2019> |
<1.0> |
Publication for use |
<Shiva Yadlapalli> |
Table of Contents 1. General Provisions 5 2. Terms, Notations, Abbreviations 5 3. Project Purpose 5 4. Measurable Project Goals and Objectives 6 5. High-level Project Description and Boundaries 6 6. High-Level Requirements 6 7. Overall Project Risk 7 8. High Level Constraints and Assumptions 7 9. Summary Milestone Schedule 8 10. Key Project Deliverables 8 11. Preapproved Financial Resources 9 12. Key Stakeholder List 9 13. Project Approval Requirements 9 Appendixes 10
This document refers to the project "<Implementing Veeva QMS at Ironwood Pharmaceuticals >", which is implemented by the organization "<Ironwood Pharmaceuticals".
The Project Charter formulates the practical requirements and documents the high-level description of the product, service or other deliverable that should meet these requirements and will be result of the project.
The Project Charter is issued and signed by the Initiator or Sponsor of the project and formally legitimized the existence of the project. It provides the Project Manager with the authority to use the organizational assets in the project operations.
The approved Project Charter formally initiates the project.
If the project consists of several phases, the Charter can be updated to verify or improve the decisions taken during the previous iteration of the Project Charter development. In such a case the Charter is re-issued and signed as amended.
Terms, Notations, Abbreviations
|
Term/Abbreviation |
Definition |
|
GxP |
Good (Lab, Document, Clinical) Practices |
|
QMS |
Quality Management System |
|
OOS/OOT |
Out-of-Specifications |
|
UAT |
User Acceptance Testing |
|
QA |
Quality Assurance |
The purpose of this project is to Implement Veeva QMS in Ironwood pharmaceuticals. The implementation will focus on replacing the existing SOLABS QMS in Ironwood pharmaceuticals with. Also, the computer system validation process will replace the paper system in pharmaceuticals with a new computer system. Veeva QMS implementation seeks to improve reliability, accuracy, and performance consistency of handling quality related methods within Ironwood pharmaceuticals. Quality Management System is essential for maintaining the quality of the medical devices and drugs and compliance with the pharmaceuticals guidelines.
The Implementation shall contain the following modules;
· Change Control (CC)
· OOS/OOT
· Product Complaints
· Deviations
· Audit
The above mentioned modules help Ironwood Pharmaceuticals in;
· Managing Deviations within the controlled environment with a detailed Audit trail report for each step
· Manage Product Complaints in a unique designed process specific for Ironwood Pharmaceuticals
· Reduce Report handling time by in-built reporting capability that allows generating reports instantaneously
· Manage Audits by allowing auditors to download and review Audit responses and help complete signatures via web.
· Manage any change within the company using change controls and eliminate paper performed procedure and wet-signatures.
Measurable Project Goals and Objectives
The QA Document Management group at Ironwood currently manages the lifecycle of approximately 800 GXP controlled documents and manages the training profile of approximately 150 employees resulting in approximately 3500 training records/incidences on an average each year. The current process is not electronic; therefore, the approval of documentation is performed manually (on paper). This requires extensive administrative overhead due to the compilation and distribution of paper records.
Through this implementation the company looks to:
· Facilitate document approval.
· Reduce document revision and approval time.
· Improve document management practices.
· Streamline, enhance and simplify document revision and approval of documentation.
· Reduce time spent archiving and retrieving documents and training records.
· Standardize training records management and recording of training activities electronically.
· Better control the "daily" monitoring of compliance in order to be ready for audits at all time.
· Improve communication between participants in the approval chain.
· Create a participative environment for revision and approval.
High-level Project Description and Boundaries
The project focuses on the implementation of Veeva QMS at Ironwood pharmaceutical. Pharmaceutical and other medicine-related industries are increasingly becoming modernize and continue to implement new technologies; thus, there is an increasing need to ensure that these technologies accurate and safe to be used by companies with complying to Regulatory agencies. Several computer systems are being implemented by pharmaceutical companies to ease the process of designing, manufacturing, and distribution of medical devices and drugs. Some of the new software in the pharmaceutical industry includes a Quality management system. The implementation of the project is scheduled to take six months. Veeva QMS will replace the existing system, which has become outdated and inefficient in the current environment.
The implementation of Veeva QMS must fulfill the following requirements:
· All agreed project documentation has been delivered and approved.
· Super User Training has been successfully completed
· Setup
· Define users and parameters.
· Define roles and company structure details.
· Manage and populate users and roles information.
· Setup System Configuration parameters.
· Define Document Types and Attributes
· Configure PDF Rendering Settings
· Define Document Workflow Templates
· Document
· Create official/controlled documents through a formal revision and approval process.
· Archive controlled documents and retrieve them as needed.
· Formally request changes to controlled documents through an official revision and approval process.
· Modify controlled documents through a formally established electronic procedure.
· Publish official/controlled documents.
· Easily retrieve archived controlled documents.
· Provide access to the last approved and official version of a controlled document.
· Attach electronic signatures to controlled documents of those participating in the revision/approval chain.
· Training
· Prepare training curriculums, each one including several training activities.
· Assign and track training activities for different resources.
· Define and maintain training requirements per job function.
· Create and record training activities related to controlled documents.
· Apps: Document Control (Standard with installation)
· Request the creation or modification of a document.
· Assign responsibilities and deadlines.
· Approve requests electronically.
· Track status of a request electronically.
|
Risk |
Description |
Impact |
Probability |
Mitigation Plan |
|
Resource Availability |
Lack of resource due to sickness, Holidays, etc. |
Medium |
Low |
Having back-up person to the assigned resource.
Appropriate Planning |
|
Completion of Project in six months |
If deviations are observed and not enough time to complete the implementation |
High |
Medium |
Having reserve days for testing and also managing deviations ahead. |
High Level Constraints and Assumptions
Constraints:
· Constraint 1: The key users and stakeholders should learn to use the system before it is fully operational
· Constraint 2: training will cover all aspects of the systems, including safety and maintenance
· Constraint 3: system may contain unidentified pitfalls; therefore, the project should be tested before implementation. Also, the project is expected to be completed within six months
Assumptions
· Assumption 1: The main assumption in this implementation plan is that there is a challenge in the communication between different departments. It also assumes that departments would offer administrative support for the development and implementation of the project
· Assumption 2: A Project Manager is assigned to the Project on Ironwood's side
· Assumption 3: Veeva QMS infrastructure requirements are met
· Assumption 4: Installation of Veeva QMS will be performed remotely
|
No. |
Milestone |
Responsible Party |
Date |
|
1. |
Kick off Meeting |
Ironwood and Veeva |
August 2019 |
|
2. |
Veeva QMS Installation |
Veeva |
October 2019 |
|
3. |
Process Installation |
Veeva |
September 2019 |
|
4. |
Training of Super-Users |
Veeva and Ironwood |
September 2019 |
|
5. |
End of Migration Activities |
Veeva and Ironwood |
November 2019 |
|
6. |
End of Validation Activities |
Ironwood |
December 2019 |
|
7. |
Go Live in Production |
Veeva |
January 2020 |
|
8. |
Project Closure |
Veeva |
January 2020 |
|
Deliverables |
Available |
Acceptance Criteria |
|
Project Charter* |
August 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Project Plan* |
August 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Project Management Plan* |
September 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Project Status Reports* |
Every Week |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Project Change Request* |
October 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Project Closure* |
January 2020 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Veeva QMS Software Configuration* |
November 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Client Environmental Compatibility Assessment* |
November 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Veeva QMS Installation and Configuration* |
December 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
User Requirements Specification* |
December 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Testing Protocol* |
December 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Test Scripts* |
December 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Requirements Traceability Matrix* |
December 2019 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
|
Validation Summary Report* |
January 2020 |
Approved by BO, IT and QA |
*Note – All deliverable dates are currently adjusted to the month available and refer Project Plan for more accurate details on date availability for individual document.
Pre-approved Financial Resources
|
|
2019 |
2020 |
2021 |
Totals |
|
Professional Services |
$45,275 |
$3,425 |
N/A |
$48,700 |
|
Veeva QMS Software Validation Package |
$25,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
$25,000 |
|
Annual Support and Maintenance Fees |
$21,000 |
$36,000 |
$36,000 |
$93,000 |
|
Hosting Setup |
$7,500 |
N/A |
N/A |
$7,500 |
|
Interface |
$5,000 |
N/A |
N/A |
$5,000 |
|
Total |
$103,775 |
$39,425 |
$36,000 |
$179,200 |
|
|
<Implementing Veeva QMS at Ironwood Pharmaceuticals > |
Revision: <1.0> |
|
|
Project Charter |
Date: 02/12/2019 |
|
Full Name |
Position/Organization |
Role in the Project |
Telephone/E-mail |
|
Kevin Durfee |
Director, IT Systems |
Project Sponsor |
kdurfee@ironwoodpharma.com |
|
Lisa Jazon |
Senior Manager, Quality and Compliance |
Business Owner |
ljazon@ironwoodpharma.com |
|
Syed Rahim |
Senor Manager, IT R&D systems |
IT Owner |
srahim@ironwoodpharma.com |
|
Joe Murphy |
QA, Quality Systems |
Quality Representative |
Jmurphy@ironwoodpharma.com |
Project acceptance will be performed by Ironwood's designated employees, through the approval of the
project's deliverables listed in Section 10 of this document.
Final project acceptance will be performed through the approval of the Project Closure (PC-SOL-001) by the Project Sponsor, Project Owner and the Project Manager at Ironwood.
The criteria for deliverable's evaluation and approval will be:
· Compliance with contract between Veeva and Ironwood.
· Compliance with the Project Purpose defined in this document (Section 3).
· Fulfillment of project requirements defined in Section 6 of this document.
· Compliance with 21 CFR Part 11 FDA regulations.
· Achievement of the specified results for all test/validation activities.
· Conformity with Veeva Quality Standards and Ironwood Computer System Validation SOPs
Syed Rahim will be acting as a Project Manager from Ironwood Side and is responsible for following;
· Monitor and review the project's health at regular Steering Committee meetings
· Keep the project scope under control as emergent issues force changes to be considered
· Reconcile differences in opinion and approach, and resolve disputes arising from them
· Provide those directly involved in the project with guidance on project business issues, especially issues which would compromise the success of the project
· Project's feasibility, business plan and achievement of outcomes.
(Next Page)
Signed/Project sponsor(s) or charter approving authority
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/A