Financial Management System Needs Assessment Validation State of Kansas Financial Management System Needs Assessment Validation Focus Group Kick-Off Meeting October 9, 2006

Meeting Agenda Introductions Project Governance Project Overview Key Activities Requirements Validation Business Case Analysis Upcoming Activities Questions

STA Company Profile Statewide ERP/eProcurement Systems State of Arkansas State of Tennessee State of Nebraska State of Texas Commonwealth of Kentucky State of Minnesota State of Wisconsin State of Texas State of Nevada

Project Governance Organizational Structure Our starting position Steering Committee – Recognize Steering Committee members present We are currently evaluating adding several non-voting members from outside of state government; SMEs/Advisors – Let us know if you have suggestions Org chart will evolve Purpose is to illustrate the cross-department involvement and commitment required Different types of roles will be needed for success

Project Sponsors Membership Duane Goossen Secretary of Administration Carol Foreman Deputy Secretary of Administration Denise Moore Executive Branch Chief Information Technology Officer

Project Sponsors Roles & Responsibilities Actively champion the project Establish and cultivate legislative sponsors Provide executive level support Steering Committee and Project Team guidance Monitor project progress Provide clear direction Ensure that the FMS initiative is aligned with the State’s strategic goals and objectives Empower the team Steering Committee and the Project Team Assist with issue resolution Resolve issues in a timely manner per the project issue escalation policy Assist in removing obstacles Secure required resources Ensure funding/staff necessary to achieve project objectives

Steering Committee Membership Chair - Carol Foreman, Deputy Secretary of Administration Mary Blubaugh, Board of Nursing Alan Conroy, Legislative Research Department Gary Daniels, Department of Social & Rehabilitation Services Elaine Frisbie, Department of Administration; Division of Budget Kathy Greenlee, Department on Aging Mike Hayden, Department of Wildlife and Parks Lynn Jenkins, State Treasurer Deb Miller, Department of Transportation Reginald Robinson, Board of Regents Howard Schwartz, Judicial Administrator Joan Wagnon, Department of Revenue Roger Werholz, Department of Corrections

Steering Committee Roles & Responsibilities Actively participate in Steering Committee meetings Remove obstacles to project success Actively champion the project Communicate project status within respective agencies Review and provide input to final report December 11 – December 14

Requirements Focus Group Membership – 25 State Agencies Department on Aging Department of Agriculture Corporation Commission Kansas Health Policy Authority Department of Administration Department of Health and Environment Department of Transportation Kansas Highway Patrol Department of Labor Department of Commerce Juvenile Justice Authority Kansas Public Employees Retirement System Kansas State University Legislative Research Department Kansas Lottery Board of Nursing Department of Corrections Department of Corrections – Correctional Industries Department of Revenue Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services Department of Education State Treasurer Judicial Branch University of Kansas Medical Center Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks

Requirements Focus Group Roles & Responsibilities Review draft baseline system requirements prior to work sessions and come prepared to participate Participate in all assigned requirements validation work sessions and provide quality feedback to ensure requirements properly reflect State of Kansas business needs Serve as an “ambassador” for state agencies not in attendance. Participate in final review of requirements during Agency Outreach sessions

Project Overview What is ERP? FMS? Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) – A comprehensive suite of integrated modules delivered by a single software vendor that provides end-to-end support for statewide administrative services For purposes of this study, we will use the term ‘Financial Management System’ (FMS) rather than ERP since the scope of the project includes financials and procurement only – due to current / future investment in the SHARP system FMS is a proposed solution that provides functionality similar to STARS, SOKI, Central Setoff System, and other agency administrative systems, but in a fully integrated manner

Project Overview Why FMS? Satisfy the needs of the agencies Eliminate the proliferation of stand-alone agency systems Avoid the cost associated with new agency administrative systems Avoid the cost associated with maintenance/upgrades of current systems Significantly improve the quality, quantity, and timeliness of information Effective decision-making Efficient and accurate research capabilities Enhanced ad hoc reporting and inquiry functionality Streamline processing and control of electronic “documents” through workflow management Facilitates document routing, review and approval

Project Overview Why FMS? Streamline and simplify State’s business processes Financial Budgeting Procurement Other administrative operations Improve operational efficiency Commercially-available FMS systems include many features representing best management practices Support Web-enabled self-service State employees Vendors conducting business with the State

Project Overview Why FMS? Replace existing disparate systems Costly to maintain Difficult to administer Automate and integrate State’s financial accounting, procurement, asset management, and other administrative business processes within a single database Provide single point of entry Eliminate duplicate points of data entry Eliminate duplicate databases Simplify reconciliation Reduce/eliminate paper documents Reduce paper and handling costs (e.g., vouchers) Simplify record retention and audit compliance

Project Overview Why FMS? Take advantage of technology enablers Web-enablement Graphical user interface Single integrated relational database Real-time processing Increased functionality based on best business practices Modular integration Integration with desktop “office suite” software Sophisticated reporting and query capabilities Audit trail / “drill-down” capabilities Workflow management and electronic approvals Flexible chart of accounts

Key Activities FMS Needs Assessment Update the system requirements for a new integrated FMS Update the business case analysis associated with implementing a new FMS Determine whether there is a compelling business case for procuring/implementing an integrated statewide FMS Submit recommendations regarding: Organizational best practices Implementation best practices

Key Activities Timeline FMS Needs Assessment Update Validate Functional / Technical Requirements Project Start-Up Validate the Business Case Sept Oct Dec Nov Summary project schedule From the BAFO document that meets their revised project timeline Business Case Analysis Report Updated Needs Assessment Organization / Implementation Best Practices Key Deliverables

Project Overview Proposed FMS Functional Scope PROCUREMENT Solicitations (RFx) Catalog Procurement Reverse Auctions Inventory Management Commodity Management Vendor Management CORE FINANCIAL General Ledger / Budgetary Control Accounts Payable Accounts Receivable & Cash Receipting Cash Management Cost Allocation Grant Accounting Project Accounting Asset Management HR / PAYROLL Automated Interfaces to/from SHARP Common Database BUDGET DEVELOPMENT INTEGRATION Appropriation Budget

Project Scope Update / Validate FMS Requirements Functional and Technical Requirements Development Process Requirements from 2001 Needs Assessment Study Baseline Draft Final Project Team Focus End User Community Requirements Requirements Requirements Group STA Requirements Toolkit

System Requirements Validation – Guidelines Focus on what the system must do – not how. The system design will be completed after product selection. Emphasize process change in lieu of software modifications to protect software warranties and facilitate future system upgrades. Develop the system requirements at a level of detail required to differentiate among available products Provide one requirement, not multiple requirements, per line item Document each requirement in such a way as to support proper validation

System Requirements Validation – Objectives Included in Request for Proposal and used as a checklist against which to evaluate vendor offerings Made part of the contract entered into with the selected vendor(s) Monitored during implementation to ensure all requirements were met and that work was not performed to develop functionality that did not support the documented requirements

System Requirements Validation – Organization Functional Requirements General Ledger and Budgetary Control Asset Management Accounts Payable Accounts Receivable and Cash Receipting Cash Management Cost Accounting / Allocation / Activity Based Costing Grant Accounting Project Accounting Purchasing Inventory Management Budget Development

System Requirements Validation – Organization General and Technical Requirements Technical & Architectural Requirements System Performance Security System Navigation and User Friendliness System Management Automated Workflow & Electronic Approvals Reporting and Data Warehouse Data Conversion Requirements More data converted, greater expense and risk to State Determine data conversion vs. data archive needs

System Requirements Validation – Organization Interfacing Systems Target Systems Interface Description Direction of Transmission Data Transmitted Triggering Event Frequency of Interface Type of Interface Level of complexity

System Requirements Validation – Sample Requirements

System Requirements Validation – Vendor Response Codes SF = Standard functionality NR = Provided in Next Release MI = Minor Modification MA = Major Modification to Source Code Required RQ = Provided through Reporting or Query Tool CD = Custom Development TP = Third Party Software Required NA = Cannot Meet Requirement

Upcoming Activities Validate Functional &Technical Requirements October 2 – November 21 Obtain Stakeholder Input and Approval November 30 – December 7 Conduct Agency Outreach Sessions December 7 – December 14 Updated Needs Assessment December 11

Ongoing Project Information http://da.ks.gov/ar/fms/

Questions?