State of Kansas Statewide Financial Management System Pre-Implementation Project Steering Committee Meeting January 11, 2008

2 Meeting Agenda  Update FMS Activities  Discussion of Gartner Report – Key Findings, Response/Action Items  Steering Committee Agenda – February 2008

3 Update of FMS Activities Agency visits and documentation of agency systems are approximately 95% complete Request for Proposal (RFP) Document is approximately 85% complete; remaining elements are: –Complete cost proposal worksheets –Incorporate scope requirements from central agencies and program agency visits (interfaces, data conversions, central reports) –Validate and integrate agency-specific requirements from agency visits –Incorporate final decisions on FMS scope (to be decided at next Steering Committee meeting)

4 Gartner Report – Key Findings, Recommendations and Action Items Five critical risk areas identified: 1.Project Vision 2.Project Funding 3.Project Governance Structure and Communication 4.Project Workforce 5.Procurement of Software and Systems Integration Services

5 Project Vision  Summary of Findings: “The State should develop a plan to define its financial management vision; project sponsors should consider proactively reaching out to state agencies to determine their financial management vision” “Significant decisions have yet to be made (chart of accounts, process standardization, changes in policies and responsibilities)”  Response/Action Items: Met w/ 22 agencies and discussed shared vision of moving as many financial/admin functions into the FMS and de-commissioning legacy systems so agencies can focus resource on programmatic systems Discussed balanced implementation strategy to utilize central system to enforce central policies and budget control while enabling agencies to configure some parts of the system specifically for their agencies, e.g. workflow and budget thresholds  What should be the FMS Project vision?

6 Project Funding  Finding: “The FMS project is not fully funded (as of November 2007). The current funding approach does, however, provide the project sponsors with the ability to fully fund the project at their discretion.”  Response/Action Items: The funding strategy has been identified.

7 Project Governance Structure and Communication  Findings: “The planned FMS governance structure (i.e. Steering Committee, Project Management Office, Sponsor Group, etc.) is based on best practices – the State has done well in establishing this structure.” “However, mature governance process definition and effective governance process execution across all governing bodies are not yet in place.”  Response/Action Items: The governance structure is evolving and will be formalized over the next 3-6 months well in time for implementation and will identify “decision rights”, i.e. who provides recommendations and who owns what decisions. The specific role of the Steering Committee and its processes for making decisions and making recommendations (to the Sponsor Group) needs to be better defined.  What do you envision as the role of the Steering Committee?

8 Project Workforce  Findings: “The FMS project team had difficulty identifying personnel that have a strong combination of functional knowledge, large scale implementation experience, excellent communication skills and a desire to participate in an implementation.” “The FMS project does not have an actionable strategy for leveraging agency resources.”  Response/Action Items: The FMS project team has not been aggressive enough in requesting the “best and brightest” personnel from agencies. The FMS project recognizes that agencies need time and resources (budget) to backfill positions vacated by their “best and brightest”. Over the next days the FMS project team will make filling project positions (team leads and subject matter experts) a high priority.  What staffing contributions should Steering Committee member agencies and other agencies make to the Project?

9 Procurement of Software and Systems Integration Services  Finding: “It will be difficult for the RFP for implementation of software and services to appropriately define the appropriate project scope, implementation approach and level of effort for the services required to successfully execute the project because the number of agencies have expressed that they have not validated the requirements and scope/approach that was decided upon during the Needs Assessment.”  Response/Action Items: During agency visits the FMS project team requested that agency personnel review the requirements. Since the response to this request was less than desired, a comprehensive review of requirements with key agency stakeholders will be performed during the next 30 days. A procurement strategy and approach for FMS software and systems integration services was a key part of the Needs Assessment. STA, a leader in the field of sourcing FMS software and implementation services, developed the project scope/approach in close collaboration with the State and under the auspices of the Steering Committee.

10 Steering Committee Agenda – February 2008  Present results of agency visits and disposition of agency systems  Make final decision/recommendation on FMS project scope After this decision, the RFP can be quickly completed and sent out to the vendor community  Other agenda items?