Ending Contract Chaos Through Workflows and Approvals North Carolina A&T State University Anthony Grice, Director of Systems Development Martinique “Nikki” Williams, Director of Procurement Services Fayetteville Fort Bragg

Agenda Purpose of the Project Major Challenges and Project Goals Our Implementation - Demo What’s Next Questions

Major Challenges and Project Goals Paper laden No formal tracking mechanism Time - 15 or more days 99% -2nd party not fully executed documents No centralized repository Reduce/Eliminate Paper Full tracking mechanism Time – 5 days or less 100% - 2nd party fully executed documents Centralized repository

*Current Contract Review and Execution Process Vendor sends paper document to university department End-user sends document to Purchasing ( via eProcurement or other) Purchasing logs, reviews, modifies, scans, forwards paper document to Legal Office / 2nd party Legal Office scans, reviews, redlines paper document/negotiates with 2nd party Legal submits document to Office of VC of B&F for execution If not modified/modifications accepted If modified Purchasing logs, rescans reattach, returns document Contract issued to 2nd party (via eProcurement or other) *Workflow based on 2nd party contract

*Proposed Total Contract Manager Process Vendor sends electronic document to university department End-user submits the document and a request to management (dept. head/director/dean/vice chancellor via TCM Management reviews, approves/rejects request Purchasing creates contract, redlines, negotiates with 2nd party If approved Contract sent via DocuSign for electronic signature – university & 2nd party If not approved Fully executed contract sent back to TCM *Workflow based on 2nd party contract

Demonstration

What’s Next Approval of revised university contract policy Demonstrations Training – campus wide Go Live – May 2016

Questions