Presented by: Ann C. Crislip & Craig A. McIntosh

1. Completing the Procurement Cycle Electronic Settlement - E-Invoicing Presented by: Ann C. Crislip & Craig A. McIntosh Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Tuesday March 23, 2010

2. Agenda • Background • Challenges and objectives that drove e-Invoicing • Collaboration of vendors and clients • e-Invoicing development • Review functionality • Review key controls • Benefits of e-invoicing • Review of technology • Demonstration of life before and after e-Invoicing

3. Background • Banner since 1992 • A/P is centralized • A/P -- Finance Division • 2 staff members and 1 manager • 43,000 total invoices annually Average 154/day • 9,000 invoices against PO’s annually Average 25/day

4. E-Procurement Implementation • 2000 Selected SciQuest/Higher Markets Modules: • Spend Director (private shopping environment) • Requisition Manager • Order Manager • Settlement Manager • 2001 Phase 1 Rollout • Spend Director – Punch-out catalogs for key spend areas • 2005 Phase 2 Rollout • Non-Catalog Requisitions • Integration with ERP financial system • 2009 Phase 3 Rollout • Settlement Manager

5. Challenges • Manual Process • Delays in processing receiving • Delays in payments to vendors • Working in 2 Systems - Banner and SciQuest • PO in SciQuest – Invoice in Banner • Inability for campus to review actual invoice • 3-Way Matching in Banner • Duplicate Data Entry for Receiving We needed a sophisticated solution!

6. Objectives Change The Process ! ! ! • Provide better information to campus • Put the invoice in the hands of the campus purchaser • Provide on-line source document – invoice • Reduce the number of steps involved in making payments • Eliminate duplicate effort • Maintain key controls How were we going to accomplish our objectives?

7. Collaboration The E-Invoicing Solution Was Born

8. How Did We Get Here? • In 2007 discussions began between SciQuest, SunGard and customers about integrating invoices • In January 2008 the integration approach and scope was finalized • 4 Pilot customers by March 2008 Pilot Project Deployment to Customers Envisioning of Solution • Design Complete – August 2008 • Customers Live • February 2009 – Virginia Polytechnic Institute • April 2009 – Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute • June 2009 – East Tennessee State University • November 2009 – Texas Tech University • In Process Projects • UNC System • East Carolina University • Miami University • University of Illinois • Continue to evaluate improvement opportunities

9. Flexibility

10. Process Rensselaer Method Assigned Banner Document Number Campus Enters into SciQuest using Settlement Manager Invoice comes in mail to campus or via email A/P Opens Invoice in SciQuest A/P Opens Invoice in Banner Dual Monitors on the A/P desks

11. A/P Verification • Banner • SciQuest Banner Document # Open Attachment – Invoice – for Verification

12. A/P Folders • You can determine folders that work for your business processes. • Urgent Invoices • Non-Urgent Invoices • Exceptions • Invoice Sent to Purchasing Agent • Invoice Returned from Purchasing Agent

13. Key Controls • Fields that Rensselaer has chosen to hide so campus users cannot change them • The FOAPAL • Addresses • Payment Due Date • Supplier Invoice Numbers cannot be duplicated • Urgent, Partial, Final indicator • Invoices are fed from SciQuest into Banner. An invoice submitted is subject to all Banner business rules and edits as though the invoice had been entered directly into Banner

14. Key Controls (continued) • The invoice is created in Banner as INCOMPLETE • A/P has to verify, make necessary changes and then complete the invoice in Banner • A/P then APPROVES the invoice in SciQuest • If the invoice fails any Banner business rules the invoice will not be created in Banner and an error message is sent to designated central office personnel

15. Invoice Exceptions • A/P has the ability to correct an invoice or ‘reject’ with a comment • Requisition routes back to the originator • Invoice amount credits back to the original PO • If A/P corrects the invoice it re-queues the document for submission to Banner • The originator will receive an e-mail with a link directly to the invoice

16. Process Virginia Tech and Texas Tech Method Feeds into Banner Invoice electronically transmitted directly from vendor

17. Process • East Tennessee State University • A/P processes invoices in SciQuest • Campus completes receiving • 3-way match in Banner • Accepting cXML invoices electronically from 3 vendors • A combination of RPI, Virginia Tech and Texas Tech’s methods

18. Managing Dates • In Banner there are 3 required dates to process an invoice • Invoice Date • Payment Due Date • Transaction Date

19. Configuration SciQuest Has Three Configuration Options 1) If any of the dates are missing the invoice will not be sent to Banner and it will reject 2) If any of the dates are missing the system will insert the system date and send to Banner 3) If there is an invoice date and transaction date but payment due date is missing then the logic to derive the payment due date from the Banner vendor master payment terms will be applied

20. Pros for Rensselaer Receiving eliminated The 3-way match was eliminated The invoice in SciQuest is fed into Banner in real-time Invoices will be visible to campus and purchasing Eliminates campus guesswork Reduced processing time Eliminates A/P filing and document management Eliminates lost invoices Faster document retrieval for audits and other requests Invoice history in SciQuest provides good information to campus History provides workflow data such as who and when an invoice was submitted Overall reduction in paperwork Cons for Rensselaer Campus may not have equipment to scan invoices Pros and Cons

21. What Can It Do For You? • Eliminate receiving • Automate the PO invoicing process • Reduce processing time • Reduce settlement errors • Reduce the cost of payables processing • Enhance critical controls • Eliminate the need to work in two systems • Electronic invoice filing

22. Non-PO Invoices • Non-PO Invoices are entered by campus into SciQuest and A/P manually enters them into Banner • Next phase is to work with SciQuest and SunGard to build the interface for Non-PO Invoices

23. Technology Considerations Hardware and software components to support messaging Between systems Sungard • Integration for e-Procurement (formally known as LDI) v 1.3.2 (now v8.0.0.2) • Web Services – e-Invoicing v 7.3.0.4 (now v8.3) • Finance v 7.3 (now v8.3) • General v 7.4 (now v8.2) SciQuest • Invoice Adapter Rensselaer • SSL Certificate Inserting technology into the process helps ensure compliance with internal controls • Custom Workflows • Approvals

24. SciQuest for Banner Finance Integration For eProcurement SciQuest Banner Finance Invoice Adapter Invoice Web Services • Standard adapters for Banner Finance co-developed by SciQuest and SunGard • Standard Integrations: Integration for e-Procurement • Single Sign-On: Luminus or LDAP • Budget Authorization • Purchase Order • Synchronizations: Supplier, FOAPAL, Commodity, Address • Invoice adapter and web services • Hardware and middleware software installed at customer site

25. Requisition – PO – Invoice Flow - RPI Approvals PO Pymt Financial Approvals Hosted Catalogs Invoices Flip to eInvoice or Enter Inv. Login Via Single Sign-On Create & Transmit to Supplier PO & Inv (2 Way Match) EH&S Approvals Create Req. SciQuest Punchout Catalogs Custom Approvals Adapter LDI or Web Service LDI LDI LDI Banner Web Service API API PO & Inv (2 Way Match) Create PO Synchonizations: FOAPAL, Ship-to, Vendor, Commodity Invoice Budget Check Banner Check Encumber Funds

26. Summary

27. Thank You! Ann C. Crislip Craig A. McIntoshRensselaer Polytechnic Institute