Sunflower Project Steering Committee Meeting Update - March 13, 2009

1. Steering Committee MeetingSunflower ProjectStatewide Financial Management System Update March 13, 2009

2. Today’s Topics • Project status and activities – Kent • Project decisions – Kent • Change control – Peggy • Agency visits and interactions – Gary • Data warehouse and reporting – Gary

3. Project Timeline “Go-live” only 1 Year Away! January February March April May June July Change Agent Launch End Design Phase & Begin Build Phase 1st Set of Environments Available End Analyze Phase & Begin Design Phase Agencies Begin Working on Interfaces and Systems Configuration Workshops Configure System, Develop Mods Develop Reports, Build Interfaces, Run Data Conversions Interface Standards Complete and Published to Agencies

4. Project Status and Activities • Building out phase 2 of the Project Plan which includes activities for Build, Test and Deploy phases; submitted to KITO • Working on Design phase deliverables • All major milestones are on-schedule or ahead of schedule: • All Analyze phase deliverables accepted • Interface standards • Configuration design • Reporting strategy finalized and developing list of prioritized reports and queries

5. Project Status and Activities • Training plan under development – developing roles and associated training curriculums • Developed and presented options for the Post Go-live support organization • Personal Learning Plans being developed for State project team members

6. Project Decisions - Security • Initial security configuration involves defining roles and assigning individuals to roles • Security administration involves adding/removing individuals to and from established roles due to personnel changes and reorgs • Three options considered for security administration: • Centralized – security administered by central support org via agency requests • De-centralized – agencies administer their own security • Hybrid – select agencies administer their own security

7. Project Decisions - Security • Decision made by Sponsors and project leadership to use centralized security model to reduce the impact on agencies and maintain central control at “go-live” • Consider delegating limited aspects of security to select agencies at a future time • Survey sent to agencies: • Most large agencies favored de-centralized security • Smaller agencies do not want to be responsible for security admin • Workflow administration is closely linked to security and will also be centralized

8. Project Decisions – General Ledger Business Unit • Configuration of G/L Business Unit is a cornerstone project decision • Two options: • One G/L business unit for all agencies • Assign each agency its own business unit • A single G/L business unit primarily benefits A&R by decreasing system maintenance and statewide reporting

9. Project Decisions – General Ledger Business Unit • Benefits to agencies of multiple business units are increased usability and flexibility: • Agencies will only see their agencies’ values in dropdowns for chartfields, e.g. Departments, Funds, Program(s), Projects, Locations and Agency Use • Agencies will be able to define their own chartfield edits • Agencies will be able to maintain their own allocations in the future if it is decided to de-centralize this function • A&R/DOB will be able maintain control of central business processes such as changing statewide chartfield values, appropriations, approvals of interfunds, transfers, opening and closing of accounting periods • Using multiple G/L business units meets the intent of a key • Sunflower Project objective: • Strike a balance between central policies, business process standardization, best practices and • decentralization – enabling agencies to configure some elements of the system specifically for • their agencies, i.e. workflow routing, budget thresholds, and attempt to address the concerns • and needs of large and small agencies alike.

10. Pending Project Decisions • Finalize chart of accounts • Method for interfund processing • Method for end-of-year encumbering

11. Change Control Change orders approved since last Steering Committee meeting

12. Change Control • Request approval for proposed change orders greater than $50K • Deposit Approval • Scope: modifies deposit control page to include controls for agency and STO to require that deposits be approved before the funds are available to agencies to spend • Requirements: • AR 012.000 – System provides the ability to accommodate workflow for deposit approvals. • AR 135.050 – System provides the ability to record the receipt amount to the correct account upon entry of the receipt transaction. The date elements include: name/ID of agency approver. • AR 141.000 – System provides the ability for on-line review of all items in a receipt batch before the batch is posted. • AR 152.000 – System provides the ability for daily approval and clearance processes for previously unidentified receipts held in clearing accounts. • Impact of not approving the change: deposits will be budget checked and funds will be available for spending before the agencies or STO has verified the actual deposit • Cost: $138K fixed-price

13. Change Control • Request approval for proposed change orders greater than $50K: • Deposit Release Page • Scope: creates a new deposit control page that displays a sum of all deposits approved by STO for a specified date which have not been released. An approval for this daily deposit group will be provided and only the deposits included on the approved daily deposit page will be made available for budget check. • Requirements: • AR 245.00: The system allows for the State Treasurer to approve all balanced deposits for a specified date before the deposits are budget checked. • Impact of not approving the change: deposits will be budget checked and funds will be available for spending before STO has verified the actual money against the deposit • Cost: $58K fixed-price

14. Change Control • Request approval for proposed change orders greater than $50K: • Asset Management Contract • Scope: there is not a method to review or attach service agreements (maintenance contracts) to specific assets. This change request creates a new page that is similar to the Asset Warranty page but would utilize the data entered for Maintenance Contract Terms. • Requirements: • AM 181.00: System provides the ability to associate a service agreement to a specific asset. • Impact of not approving the change: there will be no systematic way to relate an asset to the service agreement. This limits the functionality of the service/maintenance processes. • Cost: $91K fixed-price

15. Change Control • Balance of hours for mods and enhancements • Total Accenture hrs = 7,065 (including 3 above) • Total Available hrs = 19,130 • % Used = 37% • % Remaining = 63%

16. Change Control • Analyze replacing the Warrant Tracking System operated and maintained by the State Treasurer Office (STO) • System is obsolete and needs to be replaced/rebuilt • Three options: • STO re-build warrant tracking system • Perform warrant tracking in SMART (requires mods); STO maintains control of the business process • Outsource warrant tracking to UMB • Replace all agency satellite warrant writing systems except DOR • Time and materials change request for assessment (4 weeks)

17. 2nd Change Agent Meeting Agenda • Brief Project Status Update and Current Events • Data Warehouse and Reporting Strategy • Status of Time and Labor • Upcoming Workshops • Chart of Accounts Update • Agency Task List Review • Training Updates • March 26th 9-11 @ the Topeka and Shawnee County Public Library

18. Agency Visits and Interactions • Meetings held to finalize scope: • DOL • Wildlife and Parks • Adjutant General • DISC • DFM • SOS • KDHE • Lottery • JJA • KPERS • KDOT

19. Reporting Strategy • Reports in SMART are for information you need TODAY • Most reporting will be in the Data Warehouse • SMART and SHARP data together • Information in the Data Warehouse is NOT real time • One day behind SMART and SHARP • Data Warehouse on July 1, 2010 • Only new SMART data • Some SHARP employee data • Data Warehouse after July 1, 2010 • Minimum of 10 years data will collect over time • Prior History for STARS and SOKI available in STARS Ad Hoc

20. Data Access and ReportingProduction • Online Reports • and • PeopleSoft Query • Need information today • Already developed • View only • Download to a file SMART

21. Data Access and ReportingData Warehouse Data Warehouse Data Warehouse Reporting SMART Human Resource Data Marts Financials Data Marts SHARP Transformed Data Data Marts are a functional grouping of data used for reporting.

22. Data Access and ReportingData Warehouse • Oracle BI Answers • Simple – Drag/Drop Fields onto Report • Complex – Filters, Formulas, Format, Prompts, Sort Order • Results – Pivot Tables, Dashboards, Plain Text • Drill-down to details • Oracle BI Publisher • Highly formatted • Report layout using familiar tools (e.g. Word, Adobe) • Data from BI Answers • Oracle BI Dashboards • Intuitive • Personalized • Drill-down to details • My Dashboard – Data Warehouse Home Page

23. Data WarehouseMy Dashboard Example

24. Data WarehouseDashboards • The first screen in data warehouse is “My Dashboard” • Some dashboards will be built before “Go-Live” • RP204: Introduction to Business Intelligence Reporting: • Set “My Dashboard” preferences • View a Dashboard • Download a Dashboard • Print a Dashboard • Email a Dashboard • RP301: Ad Hoc Business Intelligence Reporting: • Create and Modify Dashboards

25. Data WarehouseBI Answers • Content is organized by Subject Area • What you see depends upon your security access • Queries or Reports are referred to as Requests • Some BI Answers Requests will be built before “Go-Live” • RP204: Introduction to Business Intelligence Reporting: • View, Download, Print, Email a Request • RP301: Ad Hoc Business Intelligence Reporting: • Create and Modify Requests • Sort, subtotal, filter, format, create prompts, and add formulas to a Requests • Create views of results including, Dashboards, pivot tables, plain and formatted text

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

27. Authority for Change Requests