Statewide Financial System Update - Steering Committee Meeting

1. Steering Committee MeetingSunflower ProjectStatewide Financial Management System Update December 12, 2008

2. Today’s Topics • Project status – Kent • Change Control – Peggy • Project risks – Peggy • Agency activities and issues – Gary • Set-off replacement – Gary • Labor distribution analysis – Gary

3. The 1st Six Months of the Project Mid-April mid-March Oct 6th mid-January mid- November mid-October Begin FMS Team Training Begin Conference Room Pilots Project Kick-off Build-out of Data Center Including SHARP II Interface Standards Complete and Published to Agencies Analysis Complete for COA, KDOT, SRS and Treasurer Systems

4. Project Team • All State positions filled except for 5 positions for a total of 44 team members • Accenture has ramped up to approximately 25 consultants on-site • Team chemistry is very good – several team building events have helped – but real team building is being catalyzed by the challenge and the importance of the project • Teams have self-organized in terms of roles and division of responsibilities • State functional team members are rapidly gaining knowledge of the PeopleSoft software and Accenture’s methodology and making strong contributions to their teams

5. Team Training is Wrapping Up • Functional courses completed • General Ledger • A/P & Purchasing • A/R Billing • Query • Asset Management • Grants • Expenses • Numerous courses for technical team • Final functional courses • e-Procurement • Project Costing and Contracts • Technical training will be on-going for the next six months

6. Conference Room Pilots (CRPs) • Identifies gaps between Kansas’ desired future business processes and requirements against the processes directly supported by PeopleSoft • Concluded December 11th – 66 CRPs have been conducted • Good agency participation – 42agencies attended one or more sessions • Not without problems (space was tight for early sessions, agencies want more agency-specific attention which will come later) • Identified gaps in the software which are being addressed in the following manner: • Eliminate the requirement (little relevance and impact) • Work-around • Modification

7. Foundation Decisions • Determining number of GL business units • Extensive analysis being performed • Impacts amount of work required to modify SHARP • Impacts what data agencies see in drop down menus • May impact “PCA” chartfield • Consulted other states, STA, Oracle and no clear consensus opinion – each approach has pros and cons • Will determine tentative approach by end of January and finalize decision by end of February or early-March

8. Data Center Hardware & Build-out • Beginning build-out of data center for Development and Testing environments • Initial set of servers have arrived (DEV, TST) • DISC is in the process of installing servers • After physical installation DISC will pull wires, install operating systems and tie servers into the network • Environments scheduled to be available by early-February

9. Miscellaneous Project Activities • Surveys out to agencies for reporting needs, QA capabilities, labor distribution (non-core agencies) • Request for detailed project plans for interfacing agencies and agencies that are de-commissioning systems – due December 15th • “Visioning” session to be held with Director of Division of Purchases (12/18) to develop long-term strategy for rolling out additional purchasing-related functionality • Final draft of Security Assessment Plan complete • Five (5) deliverables (paid and non-paid) submitted to date – all due dates have been met • Twenty (20) deliverables due in January!

10. Miscellaneous Project Activities • Parking lot for scope elements and requirements not included in the July 2010 “go-live” • Working on KITO quarterly submittal • Preparing for IV&V review • First bi-monthly newsletter will be published this month • Contest for naming the system… over 100 entries… results to be announced soon….

11. Change Control – Enhancements & Mods • Held first meetings to discuss software gaps (from CRPs) • Process starts with review of requirements (20 - 200 requirements per module) in CRPs by functional team and agency participants • Examples of potential mods from Purchasing CRP sessions • Delivered software does not provide the ability to include the distributor name and number in catalogs • Agencies do not currently track distributor information and see no need to capture this information • Resolution: remove requirement • Delivered software does not provide fields to maintain information on recycled content and percentage • Agencies are required to report on recycled materials • Resolution: small modification to create indicator and quantity of recycled content • Delivered software can only store 254 character description for contracts/catalogs • Specific agency has this capability in their current purchasing system • Resolution: work-around by using available field

12. Authority for Change Requests

13. Change Control Log • Changes to the Contract and/or Statement of Work • Minor wording changes and clarifications • Minor change for use of different software for developing training material

14. Top 10 Project Risks • Availability of DPS/A&R/DISC resources may cause delays in accomplishing required development of SHARP II • State functional team members may not acquire required level of knowledge to support users post “go-live” • Agency requirements may be more extensive and specialized than expected • Lack of (agency) volunteers to train end-users • DISC networking group is in the midst of a major upgrade

15. Top 10 Project Risks • High workload for State team members could result in turnover • Lack of “trickle down” communication within agencies • Availability of end-users to attend training • Large and/or high-impact agencies not ready for go-live • Inadequate (agency) SMEs to assist/learn agency-specific configurations

16. Agency Activities and Issues • Briefed Regents Controllers on project status, chart of accounts changes and other central business process changes – follow-up ½ day meeting planned for mid-January • Briefed RITC (Regents IT leadership) on project status, request for project plans, QA assessment • DOL to discuss agency path forward – depends on labor distribution decision • Veterans’ Affairs to discuss integration of new financial system with STARS and FMS • SRS regular meetings for FARMS and Central Cashier • State Treasurer for replacement of Treasurer systems

17. Set-off • During negotiation Accenture proposed to replace Set-off using PS customization – approx $500K fixed price cost seemed very pricey and proposed solution (developed within PeopleSoft) would probably have been klugey • Based on above, Set-off replacement was removed from the Accenture contract/SOW • Set-off replacement system was built using 3rd party contractor for approx $90K in two months; system is being deployed this month • SOW includes provision for Accenture to draft a change order for configuring FMS to interact with Set-off and to design required interfaces • Interfaces between Set-off and FMS will be developed and tested by Treasurer’s Office • Strategy will result in approximate $300K savings to the State and provide a better solution (cheaper, better, faster) than the original course of action

18. Labor Distribution Analysis • Drafting analysis document • Major sections include: • Background – originally targeted agencies and why this is important to them as well as results from surveying other agencies • Presentation of alternatives and pros/cons of each alternative (including impact on agencies of no central labor distribution solution) • Recommended alternative • Estimated project costs: • Software • Implementation services (Accenture & State) • Estimated post “go-live” operational roles (A&R, DPS, DISC) and required FTEs to support central labor distribution solution • Estimated post “go-live” operational roles and required FTEs in agencies • Will provide Steering Committee members copy of draft analysis on 01/05/09 • Will present analysis and recommendation to Steering Committee on January 9th

19. Questions and Answers For additional information on the project, please see the project website: http://www.da.ks.gov/ar/fms/ ?