Global Business Services © 2006 IBM Corporation ENCOMPASS: Project Module Work Group 3/15/07 Meeting 1:00pm – 3:00pm Conference Room 14

© 2006 IBM Corporation 2 Basic Project Management and Reporting Principles  One Standard Project Module Approach for the Entire State  All Chartfields will be used for consistent purposes by the Entire State.  Project Module Reporting in Encompass will support the: –Generation of Schedules to Support State Financial and CAFR Reporting Requirements; –Accumulation of Capital Asset and Infrastructure Costs to Support State Financial and CAFR Reporting Requirements –Generation of the Schedule of expenses and Federal Awards and Schedules to Support OMB A-133 Reporting Requirements; –Generation of Federal Financial Reporting Schedules and Supporting Documentation; and –Generation of Federal Cash Drawdown Calculations and Supporting Documentation  Commitment Control will be Required to be Assigned at the Fund, Project and Funding Source Levels.

© 2006 IBM Corporation 3 Goals of the Project Reporting Work Group  Finalize the Configuration of the Project Module Approach in Compliance with the Basic Project Management and Reporting Principles.  Provide Feedback on the Proposed Project Module Approach.  Discuss potential Issues to the Proposed Approach based upon Project Management and Reporting Requirements for your Agency.  As a Group, identify Solutions to these potential Issues.

© 2006 IBM Corporation 4 Meeting Agenda  Complete the Review of the Potential Issue Matrix: –Remaining Issues (E8 – E24)  Open Issues to Finalize: –Activity/Source Type Reporting vs. Account-Based Tree Reporting –Use of Analysis Types vs. Statistic Codes for Budgetary Tracking and Federal Reporting of Local Match, Maintenance of Effort, In-Kind Contributions, and External Subrecipient Program Income.

Global Business Services © 2006 IBM Corporation Complete the Review of the Potential Issues Matrix

© 2006 IBM Corporation 6 Any Other Issues: E8  Issue: –Is the current Project Module Approach able to support integration with the Time & Labor, Accounts Receivable and Billing Modules?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –The Project Module Approach should be compatible with the T&E, A/R and Billing Modules. –Do agencies that use these modules have any concerns related to the integration of these modules? –The exports from GEAC Payroll will be identical to what agencies currently receive.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed?

© 2006 IBM Corporation 7 Any Other Issues: E9  Issue: –Who is responsible for the maintenance of the State, Federal and Local Percentage splits.  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –This process is still to be defined, though would expect this function to either be conducted centrally or with central oversight.  Issue Status: –Issue on Hold

© 2006 IBM Corporation 8 Any Other Issues: E10  Issue: –Similar to using Functional and Distributional Activities, is it possible in the Funds Distribution Process to use Functional and Distributional Categories and SubCategories?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –Issue was addressed last meeting that Source Category and Source SubCategory will be consistently assigned through the Funds Distribution Process. The Source Category will correspond to the Funding Source and the Source SubCategory will allow the agency to track Funding Source related information at a lower level of detail than the Funding Source.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 9 Any Other Issues: E11  Issue: –Need to see illustrative examples of the new Project Approach to fully understand the process.  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –As noted in previous meetings, we will be presenting a Conference Room Pilot type session where we will demonstrate the Proposed Project Module Approach.  Issue Status: –Issue for Future Mock-up

© 2006 IBM Corporation 10 Any Other Issues: E12  Issue: –Is a budget required for every activity?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –No, a commitment control budget by activity is not required unless the Federal Grantor requires commitment control at the activity level (i.e., the grant has a spending cap (dollar or percentage) on administration, equipment or training).  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 11 Any Other Issues: E13  Issue: –If we are authorized to use an amount of subrecipient dollars from another state agency, but these funds only become available as individual local projects are identified would there be a parent-child relationship for the individual local projects as they are approved? Is there a better approach?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –There would be one Project established for the subrecipient to correspond to the last twelve digits of the Project ID of the Granting Agency. While the appropriations would be transferred into the subrecipient agency’s federal fund, these dollars would not be allotted until the local projects are approved.  Issue Status: –Open Issue

© 2006 IBM Corporation 12 Any Other Issues: E14  Issue: –Where will the cash come from to fund the Federal Fund when they are budgeted at the time of the Letter of Credit?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –In the new system, Budget Authority will not be directly tied to transfers of cash as it is in GEAC.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 13 Any Other Issues: E15  Issue: –For cases where we expect the funds to provide additional funding, will there be a possibility to have a waiver to intentionally overspend federal funds in a program?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –Generally, the project commitment control budget will be established based upon the current grant award levels. In situations where additional funds will be made available, you would work with your budget analyst or a central function to have the project budget increased.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 14 Any Other Issues: E16  Issue: –Is what we are putting in the Project User Field 5 the same as what the G/L calls Incident?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –After a transaction undergoes the Funds Distribution Process, the original Functional Activity will be populated into Project User Field 5. –The Incident will be a special chartfield that is used to track short-term state-wide efforts, such as Hurricane Katrina Support.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 15 Any Other Issues: E17  Issue: –What is the difference between Functional and Distributional Activity?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –The Functional Activity is entered at the time of the transaction and represents the required categories for the Federal Budget Tracking (if required) and Federal Reporting. –The Distributional Activity is assigned during the Funds Distribution Process, this activity is related to the type of funding source and is used for Federal Billing.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 16 Any Other Issues: E18  Issue: –Will Grant Revenue still be tracked by Project Number and a distinct federal object code?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –Grant Revenue will need to be assigned by Project and Activity (Federal Reimbursement, Program Revenue, etc.).  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 17 Any Other Issues: E19  Issue: –Will an agency have the ability to override project budget errors?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –While the exact process has not yet been defined, the budget analysts will be involved in the approval process for budget revisions and addressing budget errors.  Issue Status: –Issue on Hold

© 2006 IBM Corporation 18 Any Other Issues: E20  Issue: –What is the difference between the Distributional Activity and the Resource Category? Why are both needed?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –The Resource Category chartfield value will directly correspond to the Funding Source value. –The Distributional Activity is required for the Billing Module and is related to the Funding Source, but may not be the exact corresponding value. –The INDOT modification to be utilized for the Funds Distribution Process utilizes both fields in the process.  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 19 Any Other Issues: E21  Issue: –If the Resource Category is the funding source, and we had four funding sources as dedicated match for a grant would each grant disbursement have five lines in the Project Resource Table?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –An initial one line transaction with the analysis type of “ACT” would be entered in the Project Resource Table –After the Funds Distribution Process runs, the additional five lines would be generated in the Project Resource Table with an analysis type of “FND”  Issue Status: –Issue Closed

© 2006 IBM Corporation 20 Any Other Issues: E22  Issue: –How will the Project Module support Indirect Cost Allocations?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –For Indirect Cost Allocations that apply an Indirect Cost Rate will have a Percentage Mark-up applied during the Funds Distribution Process to reflect the Indirect Costs. –For Indirect Cost Allocations that actually allocate physical cost pools to calculate the Indirect Costs to be applied, the same Allocation Process discussed for Payroll could also be utilized here.  Issue Status: –Issue for Future Mock-up

© 2006 IBM Corporation 21 Any Other Issues: E23  Issue: –For Grants that must retain any Interest Income earned to be reported as Program Income, how will this be supported in the Current Approach?  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –Cash will be recorded at the Project level. There will be a designations at the Fund and Project level to signify if a fund and project should retain its own interest.  Issue Status: –Issue for Mock-up

© 2006 IBM Corporation 22 Any Other Issues: E24  Issue: –Who is responsible for the setup of Projects and related Chartfields for Go-Live and On-going.  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –The Encompass Team will be working with agencies for the mapping of their existing Chartfield Values; including the Basic Chartfields and the Project Chartfields and definition of new required Basic and Project Chartfields. –More information on the Mapping will be provided in the future? –Projects and Other Chartfields are expected to be assigned centrally after Go-Live.  Issue Status: –Issue on Hold

Global Business Services © 2006 IBM Corporation Open Issues to Finalize

© 2006 IBM Corporation 24 Activity Based Reporting vs. Account Based Trees  Question: Where we need Expenses by Natural Classification (Salaries, Contractual Services, etc.) for Federal Reporting can we Setup Trees by Account vs. capturing this information in Activity or Source Type?  Proposed Approach: Federal Reporting will be Prepared from the Project Module based upon Project, Activity, Resource Type, Source Category, Source SubCategory and Analysis Type.  Potential Issue Raised: –Need Consistency in Project Reporting State-wide. –By setting up a Tree on the Account, the data entry clerk is not required to know for a purchase for a specific grant if it should be “equipment”, “supplies” or “other”. –Redundancy in data entry in Object and Activity/Resource Type.

© 2006 IBM Corporation 25 Use of Analysis Type vs. Statistic Codes  Issue: –Use of Analysis Types vs. Statistic Codes for Budgetary Tracking and Federal Reporting of Local Match, Maintenance of Effort, In-Kind Contributions, and External Subrecipient Program Income.  Proposed Approach/Resolution: –Utilize Different Analysis Types for tracking each of these types of activities and their related budgets, where applicable.  Open Questions: –Could Statistic Codes be used to capture this information in the Project Module instead of separate Analysis Types. –What are the Pro’s and Con’s of each of these two approaches?

Global Business Services © 2006 IBM Corporation Additional Issues or Questions?

© 2006 IBM Corporation 27 Capital/Construction Issue Parking Lot  Will there be a difference in handling based on whether it is new construction or rehab/repair?  Will each CR&R project have it's own fund or will they be smooshed together into one fund or some grouping of funds?  Will each one (whether line item or administratively approved) have to be separate projects? If they don't have to be, can they be?

Global Business Services © 2006 IBM Corporation Next Meeting: 3/21/07 10:00am – Noon Conference Room 17 Begin Process to Confirm and Validate Issues

© 2006 IBM Corporation 29 Project Module Work Group Meeting Schedule  3/21/07 10:00am – Noon / Conference Room 17  3/28/07 10:00am – Noon / Conference Room 2  Future Meetings to be Scheduled as Necessary

© 2006 IBM Corporation 30 Contact Information  ENCOMPASS Website –  Project Reporting Work Group Webpage  ENCOMPASS Address  Reference to Version 8.9 Peoplebooks – –Commitment Control Peoplebook –Project Costing Peoplebook We welcome your feedback/questions/comments