CAUBO

1. CAUBO Imaging: Document Management & Workflow June 26, 2007 - Charlottetown, P.E.I.

2. Panelists • Germain Tremblay, Director Finance & Awards Administration, NSERC/SSHRC • Ken Chasse, Barrister & Solicitor - eVida Group • Mary Anne Rait, System Administrator, Financial Services, Ryerson University • Peter Gee, Assistant Director, Financial Services, Ryerson University

3. AGENDA • Introductions • Ryerson Journey (Gee) • Imaging System – Overview & Demonstration (Rait) • Document Management and Workflows -NSERC SSHRC Comments (Tremblay) • Imaging & Electronic Records – The Legal Issues (Chasse)

4. Background - What’s Happening? • 1980 - European Commission predicted that by Year 2000, 50% of all business documents would be delivered electronically • YES - For memos & informal communications. • NO - For financial documents.

5. Background - Purchase to Pay (P2P) • Despite increasing interest & adoption of solutions to automate Purchasing, AP & AR processes, enterprises of all sizes are burdened by PAPER. • Institute of Accounts Payable Professionals (IAPP) - on average 13% of invoices received are electronic. • Gartner Research • 90% of invoices are paper based. • 80% of B2B payments in North America are made by cheque.

6. Background - AP Benchmarking Average AP Department in a $1 Billion Company • Corrects 5% of supplier invoices because of errors, • Has 12 FT staff for every manager, • Utilizes 2 applications/systems for AP, • Uses WEB technology primarily for Requisitioning, • Processes 250,000 invoices annually, • Average time to process an invoice is 12 days, • 1 in 5 invoices has a problem that delays processing and increases administrative costs (can be 50%), • 25% of invoices are paid late.

7. Basic Truism • Less paper and more e-invoicing is a characteristic of a world class company (Hackett Value Grid) • Why ?? Electronic workflow for invoice review and approval provides • Access to timely and accurate financial information • Cost savings • Improved vendor relationships • Asked which medium they trusted more, 52% of AP departments thought electronic data was likely more reliable. This is a judgment on the ease of processing

8. Demand for P2P AutomationSource: 2007 Institute of Management & Administration (IOMA) AP Benchmark Study • 41% of AP departments planning to add e-invoicing capabilities in 2007 – Doubles since 2005 • Over 70% of companies already use e-payments or are planning to use them in 2007. However less than 25% of all B2B invoices are paid electronically. • 36% plan to add invoice imaging

9. Initiatives to Eliminate Paper • EDI: moderately successful in industries where they are used to exchanging invoice and purchase order data. Lack of standards and cost of participation have hindered wider adoption. • Purchasing Card Programs: VERY successful for petty cash type transactions as is usually limited to transactions below $1500 because of post. Invoice data from vendors is often lacking. • Document Management and Workflow

10. Invoice Imaging – The Reality • Imaging and Workflow now seen as the most useful technologies (Hackett Group - 2005) • NO silver bullet - imaging technology does not instantly get rid of the paper – need to consider business process. • OCR is a technology that captures invoice data with reduced manual correction. Then you can • Validate data against information already in the ERP • Automatically scrub the data with identifiable problems like missing/wrong PO number. • Deliver cleansed data to the ERP for scheduled payment processing • Deliver images to archives for referencing

11. Ryerson University • Students: • 23,000 full time, • 1000 graduate students • 65,000 continuing education registrations • Financial Systems: • Financial: Oracle eBusiness V11.5.10, • Document Management: 170 Systems Markview V5.5, • Other Systems • PeopleSoft - Student Administration • Ruffalo Cody – Alumni & Fundraising • Highline - Human Resources/Payroll

12. Audit and Acceptance Issues • Requirements for retention of original documents is established federally by CRA, provincially by Ministry of Finance and internally by Records Management (Archives) policy • In Canada, Ontario and numerous other provinces there is already a number of precedences and regulatory bills/interpretations that exist as it pertains to imaging. • REAL ISSUE - Acceptance of imaging concept is not standardized across all levels of federal and provincial government and agencies. Has not really been considered by many ministries and agencies. • Corporate - Seek internal corporate approvals for approach, then establish policy, procedures and compliance standards and GO FORWARD date of new policy.

13. Overview of Ryerson Timelines • 170 Systems Contract Signed - April 30, 2004 • 170 System Development – May to September 2004 • System walk through – September 2004 • TEST Install – September 2004 • Preliminary UAT Testing – October 2004 • User Training – October/November 2004 (ongoing) • Final UAT Testing – November 2004 • TEST Migration to Development – November 2004 • Production GO LIVE - December 06, 2004 • Destruction Research November 2004 • Attempts to obtain Formal Acceptance Approvals February 2005 • Markview System Upgrade - November 2006 • eVida Certificate of Compliance - December 2006 • Destruction of Originals – scheduled for June 15, 2007

14. Acceptance of Imaged Documents Basic Principle If the original paper documentation still exists, then electronic document images are merely copies Catalyst: • Tri-Council grant review occurred at same time as Imaging Go LIVE. • CIDA grant monitoring visit (Feb 2005), • Initial reactions indicated some audit discomfort. Recognized better further explore these uncharted waters. • Chose key agencies to obtain written acceptance - NSERC, SSHRC, CHIR, CIDA, AUCC, HRSDC, CFI, MEDT

15. Acceptance of Imaged Documents • Dilemma: • A negative response from any single organization could effectively negate the positive responses received from others by effectively not allowing the University to fully introduce and leverage the imaging capabilities. Manuel of Good Practices (November 2003) • NSERC, SSHRC, CAS (Common Administrative Service) • Section 2.3 of manual referenced: • Digitizing of Vouchers - UQAM • Digitization of Invoices for Authorization – University of Victoria

16. Existing Canadian InitiativesUQAM Approach • Additional space (and boxes) was needed to store vouchers for the 7 years required under federal legislation. • Process was cumbersome - introduced digitization to retain copies of vouchers. • UQAM obtained necessary authorization from provincial and federal governments. • AFTER - Once vouchers verified and payment authorized, digitize each voucher and save for future consultation and/or printing.

17. Existing Canadian Initiatives University of Victoria Approach • BEFORE - AP digitize invoices received and send digitized invoice by e-mail to person placing the order. • Individual views invoice on screen, ensures it matches goods or services received. Account holder authorizes invoice payment by returning invoice to AP by e-mail. • Process ensures the recipient actually receives the invoice for authorization, the e-mail being proof, and makes it easy to send reminders to those who forget to authorize the payment.

18. Compliance RequirementsCompilation of Responses • Certification by an independent organization that the Ryerson Document Management & Imaging system complies with Canadian General standards Board (CGSB) standards • CGSB 72.11-2000 - Microfilm and Electronic Images as Documentary Evidence, • CAN/CGSB 72.34-2005 - Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence. • Certificate of Image Authorization – statement from senior management that university relies upon electronic record keeping in the “usual and ordinary course of business. • Imaging Policy - Electronic Imaging and Document Management (May 17, 2006) approved and issued in accordance with university policy. • Imaging Procedure manual - Formal procedure entitled “Electronic Images Procedure” draft was August 2, 2006. eVida suggestions were incorporated into Final approved procedures.

19. Elements of Compliance • Management Authorization & Accountability • Usual & ordinary course of business • Approval by senior management • Documentation • Sufficiently detailed procedures manual • Evident to all parties and followed – communication, training • Reliability • Authenticity (of records & documents) • Integrity (of the electronic system)

20. Compliance Report Requirementss • Ryerson Wanted • Independent organizationto verify compliance with CGSB –eVida Group. • Organization that understood records management, the legal issues as it pertains to document imaging AND assigned individuals with impeccable qualifications and credentials. • Formal Letter of Compliance. • Detailed report with GAP analysis and recommendations on areas that MUST be strengthened.

21. Compliance Report Results • EVida report contained • eVida Letter of Compliance - statement that Ryerson’s process of converting financial records under the 170 Systems Markview product met national standards: • CGSB 72.11-2000 - Microfilm and Electronic Images as Documentary Evidence. • CGSB 72.34-2005 - Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence • Certification statement that analysis was made in comparison with the National Standards of Canada (CGSB standards). The current system was examined with a view to converting paper records to electronic images, and maintaining all electronic images and associated bibliographic and biographical records, as authentic, reliable and accurate records. • Detailed analysis report (as of October 31, 2006) with specific areas requiring attention in both our electronic and paper records. Provided recommendations that could further help in maintenance of our process to meet the evidentiary process on the management of records.

22. Compliance Report (eVida Group) • All conversions from paper to images since inception of the 170 MarkView System subjected to a quality assurance program to verify the acceptable quality of images and recording data in accordance with the requirements of the CGSB national standards. • For converted paper records, such proof would include evidence that the electronic records have reliably captured their source records. This permits the university to maintain only one set of records (electronic) as the primary source of information and evidence, and allow disposal of paper records once fully captured by the 170 MarkView System. • IT audit policy to include examination of electronic records as per national standards as a further enforcement of control over the management of records. Introduce audit functions to supplement internal quality assurance procedures to verify process is conducted as per university policy and procedures. • Records Management (Archive) policies should be altered to reflect new electronic records management practices. • Key documents (Policy & Procedures) needs to be in place to demonstrate the electronic record system integrity, authenticity of the records, and trustworthiness of your process. • Scanning operators, AP and other document process review staff trained in regards to “system integrity” requirements of management records.

23. Canadian General Standards Board (CGSB) CGSB - 10 Points of Evidence Judging the Integrity of an Electronic Records system. Handout

24. Ryerson Documentation that Supportedthe Recommendation for Destruction of Documents • Electronic Imaging: Certification & Recommendations (March 2007 -Gee) • Aird & Berlis Legal Opinion: Legality, Enforceability & Admissibility of Imaged documents (June 2005 – Brooks • eVida Group Certification of Compliance with National Standards of Canada (December 2006) • Electronic Records as Audit Evidence memo: Richard C. Kennedy, A/Chief Internal Auditor & Asst. Deputy Minister, Ontario (March 2007),

25. Overview of Support Documentationfor the Recommendation for Destruction of Documents Continued • eVida Group - Review of Ryerson Financial Record: Certification of Compliance on eRecords of Financial system (Mark View) measured against CGSB Standards, • eVida Group - Consultant Biographical & Qualifications, • Imaging Policy • Imaging Procedures manual • Certificate of Image authorization by senior Management- “usual & ordinary course of business”. • IN PROCESS – Alignment of Records Management & Archives policy

26. Statutory & Legal References • Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) – Keeping Records (Canada - RC4409), • Books & Records Retention/Destruction (Canada – IC78-10R3), • CGSB 72-11-93 Microfilm & Electronic Images as Documentary Evidence • CGSB 72-34-2005 Electronic Records as Documentary Evidence • Personal Information Protection & Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA – Canada Bill C6) • Evidence Act (Ontario) • Canada Evidence Act (Canada) • Electronic Commerce Act (Ontario – Bill 88 2000) • Records disposition Authority No. 96/023 – Records Relating to Electronic Imaging, • Archives Ontario – Information Bulletin #6 Electronic Records systems – Recorded Information Management (RIM) Requirements.

27. Imaging SystemOverview & Demonstration Mary Anne Rait

28. Ryerson MarkView Solution • Accounts Payable – workflows to handle: • Non PO Invoice Entry – invoices received with no quoted PO # • PO Invoice Entry • Pre-Approved Invoice – invoice received in Financial Services previously manually authorized • Previously Entered – rush invoices • Invoice Gateway – decentralized entry process which is validated before imported into Financial System • Internet Expense – online expense submission

29. Ryerson MarkView Solution • Accounts Receivable & Purchasing • Automated creation of ‘virtual’ (or rendered) invoices and automatic faxing and e-mail capabilities • Creation of document sets – attaching supporting documentation and identification of documents that must be sent to the customer/supplier • General Ledger • Ability to attached scanned documents to an actual, budget or encumbrance journals • Ability to associate an image that previously exists within 170 MarkView to an actual, budget or encumbrance journals

30. Ryerson MarkView Solution • Records Management • To scan, index, and search documents not associated with Oracle Transactions, including: Insurance, Financial Reports, Contracts, Completed Forms, & Budget documents

31. Benefits on Imaging • Quicker & More Efficient Document Processing • Easy Universal Access • E-Mail Notifications • User “To Do” Lists (Web Inbox) • Reassignment of Responsibility when users go on vacation/sabbatical etc

32. Benefits Cont’d • Enhanced Loss Prevention • Enhanced Security • Central Electronic Storage, Reduced Filing, Space & Equipment Needs • Time Saving • Enhanced document tracking through the use of workflow

33. Benefits Cont’d • Queue monitoring - Graphic & detail, • Tightly integrated - Oracle eBusiness suite, • Audit reports & Quality Verification queues, • Simplifies year end accruals.

34. Security • Drilldown from Oracle GL is limited to only those documents that the user can view from their responsibilities. • User have no access to inquiry from Payables or Receivable modules. • Documents scanned in are always maintained in Markview. • Recycle queue maintains a history of documents that were deemed to be duplicates or not required.

35. Challenges • Upfront effort required to ensure scope of project is as complete as possible, leave nothing to assumptions. • Communication – communicate well in advance to Users AND continue to update users with changes to processes. • Know your Users – identify the various key Users with regards to skill set and previous experience with organizational systems • Processes – review and modify processes. Document and communicate changes. • Approvals and compliance with standards in order to destroy original paper documents.

36. DEMO I AP entry and linking of record to image

37. Demo II Document tracking capabilities

38. Document Management and WorkflowsCAUBO Conference – June 26, 2007 Germain Tremblay, Director, Finance and Awards Administration Division, NSERC/SSHRC

39. Outline • Expectations – Imaging • Control Framework • Authorization • Supporting Documentation • Verification • Retention

40. Agencies’ Requirements • Whether a process is paper based or electronic, agencies have a number of requirements regarding the management of research funding as specified in the: • Memorandum of Understanding (MOU); and • Tri-Agency Financial Administration Guide.

41. Imaging • Agencies’ expectations in terms of imaging practices: • Follow industry standards • CGSB; • Scanning should be part of usual and ordinary activities of the business; • A control system and procedures are established and documented; and • Images are of acceptable quality and are legible.

42. Imaging • A system of inspection and quality control is established. • Ensure that adequate controls are in place that safeguard the accuracy, security and integrity of the data: • Access controls; • Input and output controls; and • Tampering controls. • Electronic records must provide a proper trail from the source document (whether paper or electronic) to the summarized financial accounts. Source: CRA, IC05-1 on Electronic Record Keeping, June 2005

43. Control Framework As outlined in the MOU, the institution should have in place: • policies and procedures: • roles and responsibilities defined • procedures established and documented; and • A framework approved by a governing board.

44. Control Framework A good control framework will ensure that: • all expenses are authorized by the PI, or his or her delegate; • delegation of spending authority is done in writing (must be kept on file and verified); and • In addition, for travel expenses • One over one approval

45. Control Framework Supporting document requirements: • Original documentation must be kept in support of the expense: • Purchase order, invoice, hiring contract, JV, travel claims, original receipts, etc. • Missing receipts should be documented and approved by the PI. • Proper documentation in place before expense is paid. • For review purposes, original documentation is required.

46. Control Framework The institution must have a process in place to ensure that: • all expenses are reviewed for compliance and eligibility (must be someone other than PI); • the review can be performed before the expense is paid, or after; and • the review can be performed on a sampling basis.

47. Control Framework Document Retention: • Originals must be retained for seven years after the expense has occurred. • Originals should be kept in a central location.

48. Imaging and Electronic Records – The Legal IssuesBy: Ken Chasse, LL.BBarrister & SolicitorMember of the Law Society of Upper Canada and Law Society of British ColumbiaCAUBO Conference, Charlottetown, P.E.IJune 26, 2007

49. Industry WatchConfidence Level on Legal SubmissionSource: 2007 AIIM Survey

50. Validation of Electronic Records Management Program with Legal Requirements