MyFloridaMarketPlace MyFloridaMarketPlace Change Review Board (CRB) Teleconference July 8, 2008, 3:00 pm EDT The toll free number is: (888) Conference Code:

Page - 2 Agenda  Welcome / Introduction  Review: Prioritized Change Requests  Reporting and Survey  Agency Training & Request for Facilities  Wrap-Up!

Page - 3 Agenda  Welcome / Introduction  Review: Prioritized Change Requests  Reporting and Survey  Agency Training & Request for Facilities  Wrap-Up!

Page - 4 Review Prioritized Change Requests Estimate Analysis 496CR 42 Add accounting details to Analysis 376CR 36 Make the Encumbrance number and the DO number the same 200CR 40 IR Remove Accounting Validation on Rejected IRs DoneCR 37 Mass Edit Purchasing Codes Hour Estimate Change Request

Page - 5 Review: Prioritized CRs  CR 37: Mass Edit Purchasing Codes (Buyer Code) - Completed  CR 46: Method of Procurement Updates - Completed  Please note that the team did modify the initial design which stated that the Method of Procurement (MOP) would not carry over on copied requisitions  The design was changed to allow the MOP to carry over on copied requisitions  The addition of the MOPs were implemented with CR 37

Page - 6 Review: Prioritized CRs CR 37 & 46 con’t  Combining these changes resulted in a cost savings of approximately 24 “change request” hours  Since MFMP was already engaged in a change affecting the MOP, the effort to add this has been reduced by the estimated 24 hours  These new codes were available May 29, 2008, in MFMP

Page - 7 Review: Prioritized CRs  CR 40: Invoice Reconciliation Accounting Validation  Current Challenge: Currently if a customer is rejecting an IR, all of the accounting must be validated to get the IR in ‘Rejected’ status. Additionally, if a customer is disputing a line item, you also must validate the accounting before continuing. This creates additional work and time to a simple process. Agencies are requesting the following changes:  (1) when rejecting an IR, do not require that the accounting be validated, and;  (2) when disputing a line item, do not require that the accounting be validated.  Proposed Solution: Changes will be made so that accounting fields are not validated when a line item is disputed. These same changes will also impact the validation logic for a rejected IR (since the reject action disputes all line items). If a customer later selects to cancel a rejection or accept a previously disputed line item, then the accounting fields will required to be valid.

Page - 8 Review: Prioritized CRs  CR 36: Make the encumbrance number the direct order (DO) number  Current Challenge: Currently, the system assigns an encumbrance number just before an encumbered requisition is sent to FLAIR. Once the requisition is fully approved, a direct order (DO) number is assigned. As a result, there are two identifiers for an encumbered requisition and order: (1) a DO number or MA number and (2) an encumbrance number. In FLAIR, the encumbrance number is used for research. The DO or MA number is sent to the vendor and used in MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP) but is not maintained in FLAIR.  Proposed Solution: Encumbrance numbers are required to be six characters. Once this change request is implemented, the first encumbrance number assigned must be greater than the last DO number assigned (that is currently expected to be greater than ) so that DO numbers will not be duplicated. Once the encumbrance number reaches , alpha characters will be assigned (for example: A00000, A00001, A00002, ….).  When the encumbered requisition is fully approved and an order is generated, a DO number will be assigned starting with “DO” and then appended with the encumbrance number.  Encumbered and unencumbered requisitions will use the same incremental counter to reduce the frequency of creating duplicate DO numbers.

Page - 9 Review: Prioritized CRs  CR 42: Add Accounting Fields to Analysis  Current Challenge: Agencies are requesting to have searchable accounting data fields added in Analysis. Finance and Accounting need analysis reports to utilize fields such as object code, organization code and the category that requisitions and invoices are coded in order to track spending history and to accurately track the agency’s budget allotments.  Proposed Solution: Changes will be made so specific accounting fields are exported into Analysis for requisitions, purchase orders and invoices. Several fields will be available upon the implementation of this change request. Customers will have the ability to run reports in Analysis with the above accounting fields displayed on the page, row or column. Organization codeExpansion optionObject CodeBudget Entity CategoryCategory Year State Program Standard Grant Grant YearContractContract YearProject ID

Page - 10 Agenda  Welcome / Introduction  Review: Prioritized Change Requests  Reporting and Survey  Agency Training & Request for Facilities  Wrap-Up!

Page - 11 Reporting and Survey  Reporting tools that exist:  Secure Website Reports  Analysis  Customized Agency Reports (Report Requests)  Online (System) Searches  Focus: to identify a single, optimal reporting solution for all Buyer customers  Purchasing,  F&A,  End users

Page - 12 Reporting and Survey Research completed to determine where we are:  Project Charter  Gap Analysis  Reporting Survey  Alternative Analysis

Page - 13 Reporting and Survey  Project Charter  Purpose: to identify a single, optimal reporting solution for all Buyer customers (Purchasing, F&A, end users)  Approach:  to conduct research on current reporting environment  to identify current reporting “gaps”  to identify reporting alternatives/solutions

Page - 14 Reporting and Survey Gap Analysis  Purpose: to communicate functional requirements that are currently not resident in the MFMP reporting environment  Areas must be addressed in the optimal reporting environment  17 gaps identified  Gaps are categorized by severity  High  Medium  Low

Page - 15 Reporting and Survey Gap Analysis, cont. Identified gaps include:  Lack of agency awareness of reporting tools available (recommend: provide reporting training)  Reporting Job Aid out-of-date (recommend: update it! And create any supporting guide cards)  Lack of customer proficiency with using CSV files (recommend: create tutorials for obtaining CSV data, manipulating CSV data, etc.)  DMS/MFMP lack of true understanding of reporting needs from buyer customers (recommend: Reporting Survey!)

Page - 16 Reporting and Survey  Reporting Survey  We intend to conduct a customer satisfaction survey, focus on reporting, in order to  Measure the degree of customer satisfaction with reporting tools  Measure frequency of use of reporting services by MFMP customers  Use this information to improve these services  Help identify specific needs to be addressed in the reporting training  Intended audience: those employees who should have working knowledge of these reports -Purchasing -F&A -End users  Intended rollout: August 2008

Page - 17 Reporting and Survey Alternative Analysis  Identified 6 alternatives to best meet reporting needs, including:  SPSS  Enhancement of current state  enhancement of SPURSView  FIS  Provide rationale to remain in current state (status quo)  Provide alternatives with recommendation, evaluation criteria with key findings, cost assessment, planning assumptions, and next steps to implement

Page - 18 Agenda  Welcome / Introduction  Review: Prioritized Change Requests  Reporting and Survey  Agency Training & Request for Facilities  Wrap-Up!

Page - 19 Agency Training & Request for Facilities  The DMS MFMP Team created training sessions that were conducted in May and June, 2008  MFMP Training sessions included:  New Requester (2 days) 5 sessions  Invoicing (1 day) 3 sessions  Analysis (1 day)2 sessions  The classes were filled within the first week of registration and the average attendance was 80%

Page - 20 Agency Training & Request for Facilities  The team is now planning next fiscal year’s training activities. We have sent requests to several agencies requesting to use facilities at these statewide locations:  Tampa – 08/08  Ft. Lauderdale – 10/08  Jacksonville – 11/08  Orlando – 01/09  Pensacola – 03/09  Ft. Myers – 04/09  Miami – 05/09  Facilities need to have computer stations (one for each participant) in addition to an instructor station with an LCD projector  Facilities must also allow state employees from various agencies to participate

Page - 21 Agency Training & Request for Facilities  Local training will continue monthly in Tallahassee, beginning August, 2008  New registrations for all locations will be posted to the toolkit soon and a communication will be sent out

Page - 22 Agenda  Welcome / Introduction  Review: Prioritized Change Requests  Reporting and Survey  Agency Training & Request for Facilities  Wrap-Up!

Page - 23 Wrap Up!  Questions/Comments  Next CRB Meeting – September 2008  Contact Us 