IV&V vendor testifies on Michigan’s myUI project; committee presses on reports, costs and schedule

LANSING — CSG Government Solutions, the independent verification and validation (IV&V) vendor for Michigan’s myUI unemployment insurance replacement project, told the House Appropriations Subcommittee on General Government that its regular reports identify schedule and data-conversion risks but that the firm does not have authority to force state or vendor action.

"We submit our reports to DTMB and UIA leadership, and it is up to them to share those reports with Deloitte," IV&V project manager Robin Sosin said during the committee’s June hearing. "To the best of our knowledge, Deloitte has been receiving our reports since 2024."

Why it matters: The committee pressed whether the independent reviewer is providing adequate oversight after state project leaders and the vendor carried out a replanning effort that changed the project baseline. Members also sought clarity about whether cost increases tied to replanning were being treated as overruns that require formal red flags.

CSG client executive Becky Rozier told members the firm has raised risks "from day 1" but emphasized IV&V cannot require implementation of its recommendations. "We don't have authority to have the state or the vendor implement any recommendations that we've put forth," Rozier said, adding that CSG documents observations, potential impacts and suggested mitigations in its monthly IV&V reports.

Several legislators asked how much the state pays the IV&V vendor. Rozier said CSG’s contract is about $1 million per year. Representative Maddock expressed frustration over the project's progress, calling the effort "a complete catastrophe" and asking that the committee be included in future communications between the state, DTMB, and Deloitte. Rozier and Sosin agreed to provide the committee the IV&V reports going forward, while noting routine emails would not necessarily be forwarded.

Committee members also questioned whether IV&V had "red flagged" cost overruns. CSG said it has discussed budget issues in prior reports but did not open an observation specifically flagging recent replanning-related budget increases because the replanning produced a new budget baseline that the vendor then evaluates in context. "When they've modified that contract to include a greater budget, then that becomes the new budget baseline," Rozier said.

Technical and process concerns raised by CSG included Deloitte’s use of a Microsoft-based UFAX platform that "didn't perform as expected," and a finding that the project’s quality management plan was not robust enough to show how Deloitte controlled internal quality. CSG said the state project manager has requested Deloitte’s internal quality-audit reports and that CSG recently received Deloitte’s internal quality checklist to better understand how deliverables are double-checked before delivery.

CSG identified the project's primary open high risks as schedule and data conversion. The firm said Deloitte delivered a replanned schedule and that DTMB, UIA and Deloitte were working to close gaps; CSG said those meetings aimed to finalize the schedule "by the end of next week." Sosin described IV&V’s process as collecting documentation, attending working sessions and interviewing DTMB, UIA and Deloitte staff to form factual observations and mitigation approaches.

The subcommittee recorded one formal action at the meeting: Representative Maddock moved to approve the minutes of the June 5, 2025 meeting; with no objections the minutes were approved.

What’s next: Committee members instructed CSG to provide IV&V reports to the subcommittee going forward. No new formal vote or policy action on the myUI contract or project budget was taken during the hearing; the committee adjourned after questioning concluded.