1. Financial Systems Replacement Initiative Project Judith Freed Project Director November 6, 2009

2. Project Background KPMG reviewed financial systems in 1998 and determined that further enhancement of existing systems would be beneficial -- ISTIP KPMG reviewed financial systems in 1998 and determined that further enhancement of existing systems would be beneficial -- ISTIP Bearing Point reviewed financial systems in 2007 and determined that the strategy of incremental improvement to legacy systems is nearing end of useful life. Time for a move to an ERP or best of breed Bearing Point reviewed financial systems in 2007 and determined that the strategy of incremental improvement to legacy systems is nearing end of useful life. Time for a move to an ERP or best of breed

3. Current Systems Technology includes back-end legacy systems built in COBOL that have been heavily customized over the years Technology includes back-end legacy systems built in COBOL that have been heavily customized over the years Front-end web applications have been built on top of these legacy systems; some of these are now out of date technologies Front-end web applications have been built on top of these legacy systems; some of these are now out of date technologies System interfaces have helped to automate but have made the technology and the business more complicated System interfaces have helped to automate but have made the technology and the business more complicated

4. Project Proposal Financial Systems Replacement Project was presented to CITI in Fall 2007 by Sue Abeles with a $7.3M proposed budget and proposed schedule of 5 years for the planning phase Financial Systems Replacement Project was presented to CITI in Fall 2007 by Sue Abeles with a $7.3M proposed budget and proposed schedule of 5 years for the planning phase Life cycle replacement issue; legacy systems are 20 to 30 years old and difficult to maintain Life cycle replacement issue; legacy systems are 20 to 30 years old and difficult to maintain Received highest priority ranking among all projects presented Received highest priority ranking among all projects presented Planning was considered to be key issue to avoiding the usual pitfalls of ERP projects Planning was considered to be key issue to avoiding the usual pitfalls of ERP projects Opportunity for reengineering of business processes Opportunity for reengineering of business processes

5. Bearing Point view of Applications

6. More Current, More Detailed View of Applications

7. Project Start Project was given $700k for 2 years of funding beginning in FY08; additional funding allocated in July 2009 Project was given $700k for 2 years of funding beginning in FY08; additional funding allocated in July 2009 Project Director was hired November 2008 at 50% time; changed to 100% time October 2009 Project Director was hired November 2008 at 50% time; changed to 100% time October 2009 Project Control Document v. 3.0 presented in October to Executive Committee Project Control Document v. 3.0 presented in October to Executive Committee Current timeline 3 ½ years and budget $6.5M Current timeline 3 ½ years and budget $6.5M Presentation made to CAO/CFO at quarterly meeting in October Presentation made to CAO/CFO at quarterly meeting in October Staffing of core project team is just beginning with several positions posted in October Staffing of core project team is just beginning with several positions posted in October

8. Project Plan Staff project team with functional and technical subject matter experts Staff project team with functional and technical subject matter experts Form workgroups with campus departmental and central office representatives Form workgroups with campus departmental and central office representatives Document and verify current business processes from an end to end perspective Document and verify current business processes from an end to end perspective Document technical interfaces, issues, transaction volumes, costs and service quality Document technical interfaces, issues, transaction volumes, costs and service quality Determine key performance indicators as current measures of business processes Determine key performance indicators as current measures of business processes Assess campus readiness for change Assess campus readiness for change

9. Project Plan continued Review what other universities are doing or lessons learned from prior implementations Review what other universities are doing or lessons learned from prior implementations Look at offerings and direction of current solution vendors (SAP, Oracle/Peoplesoft, Kuali) Look at offerings and direction of current solution vendors (SAP, Oracle/Peoplesoft, Kuali) Determine infrastructure readiness for implementation and maintenance of new system Determine infrastructure readiness for implementation and maintenance of new system Keep campus engaged and informed Keep campus engaged and informed Provide cost/benefit alternatives and recommendations Provide cost/benefit alternatives and recommendations

10. Challenges We are the only UC that processes business transactions for other campuses (e.g., Merced UCOP, and possibly others) We are the only UC that processes business transactions for other campuses (e.g., Merced UCOP, and possibly others) Our transaction volume (13M annually) going through the General Ledger is the largest among UCs Our transaction volume (13M annually) going through the General Ledger is the largest among UCs We have concurrent replacement/reengineering projects for Payroll (with UCOP) and Research Administration (Huron) that will have an impact on the Financial Systems Replacement Initiative We have concurrent replacement/reengineering projects for Payroll (with UCOP) and Research Administration (Huron) that will have an impact on the Financial Systems Replacement Initiative DACSS and PAN-like requirements are unique, even among universities DACSS and PAN-like requirements are unique, even among universities

11. Next Steps Set up quarterly Executive Sponsors meetings Set up quarterly Executive Sponsors meetings Identify membership of Management Steering Committee and schedule meetings Identify membership of Management Steering Committee and schedule meetings Identify members for process workgroups, schedule meetings and begin documenting the current end to end business processes Identify members for process workgroups, schedule meetings and begin documenting the current end to end business processes Determine what shadow systems are currently being used and why they are needed Determine what shadow systems are currently being used and why they are needed Review processes, policies, and unmet campus needs and document requirements Review processes, policies, and unmet campus needs and document requirements Publish next version of Project Control Document Publish next version of Project Control Document

12. Processes to Review

13. Workgroup Participation Department Management Committee General Ledger Workgroup Procure to Pay Workgroup Budget Workgroup Receivables Workgroup Academic Personnel Administration Anderson School Arts and Architecture Acad Plan, Budget & Cap Pgms Dentistry External Affairs Geffen School of Medicine Graduate Division GSE & IS Law Letters and Science Library Medical Center Nursing Public Affairs Public Health Research Administration SEAS Student Affairs Theater, Film & Television UCLA Extension

14. Other Universities Colorado State Implemented Kuali July 2009 U of Michigan Peoplesoft (impl. 1996-2001) U of Washington FSNA ongoing – SAP or Kuali MITSAP U of Texas Oracle U of Arizona Kuali in January 2010 USC Joined Kuali in 2007 Ohio State Peoplesoft HarvardOracle/Peoplesoft PurdueSAP

15. Questions