1. Steering Committee Meeting Sunflower Project Statewide Financial Management System Update September 11, 2009

2. 2 Today’s Topics Project status and activities – Kent IV&V Report – Peggy Change control – Peggy Agency Interactions, Timelines & Upcoming Events – Gary Agency Reporting Strategy and Approach – Gary Measuring Progress – Gary Remaining Issues and Challenges – Gary

3. 3 Project Timeline August September October November December January February March Configure System, Develop Mods Develop Reports, Build and Test Interfaces, Run Data Conversions Begin System Testing Agency Role Mapping Build Phase Test Phase Business Process Workshops Interface Testing Begin User Acceptance Testing

4. 4 Completing: defining and loading configuration values change requests for remaining software mods data conversion templates security role definitions functional designs for modifications Continuing: functional designs for reports formulating preliminary cutover plan support for training development and BPWs Project Status & Activities – Finance Team

5. 5 Completed demos to facilitate agency decisions on de- commissioning systems (KDOR, SRS, KWP, Aging) Monitoring progress of agencies and completion of assignments Five agencies are of concern; meeting with agencies’ leadership to resolve Conducted 12 of 18 business process workshops with agencies Developing training materials Continuing to recruit trainers, facilitators and facilities Evaluating help desk software and developing support processes Project Status & Activities – Enterprise Readiness Team

6. 6 Developing technical designs and coding mods Developing remaining interfaces (mostly internal) Developing technical designs and coding reports Building and maintaining environments Implementing data warehouse including security based on requirements provided by functional team and agencies Beginning work on disaster recovery plan – will be working closely with DISC and A&R Project Status & Activities – Tech Team

7. 7 A&R/DISC performing modifications to SHARP including data conversion – saving State approximately $200K Working with IBARS vendor to design modifications to support new chart of accounts Developing options for SHARP performance testing Project Status & Activities – Central Systems

8. 8 Monthly forums to address issues and communicate with agencies for interfaces and conversions Continuing to review project plans to assess agencies’ progress and communicate early identification of problems Provided three briefings to DoA personnel Finalizing logistics with Washburn for remedial accounting course for agency personnel Determining the funding mechanism to support the services provided by the Service Center State “all hands” meeting held on August 28 th Project Status & Activities – Miscellaneous

9. 9 3 rd scheduled IV&V project review (Sys Test Labs – Denver) One week prep, one week on-site, one week to draft report Interviewed 32 project and non-project personnel Reviewed 35 documents (deliverables, risk log, issue log, project plan, status reports, requirements matrix, test scripts, etc.) Overall project health rated as “very good” Several recommendations provided: Finalize status of remaining requirements prior to testing (7 out of 3,056 need to be to be approved and 72 out of 3,056 waiting approval) Need to freeze agency-specific requirements Improve configuration management plan for code migrations IV&V Review, Findings and Recommendations

10. 10 Change orders approved since last Steering Committee meeting Change Control No change requests over $50K since last meeting Credits of $124K for change orders since last meeting

11. 11 Change Control – Remaining Balance Balance of hours for customizations (including all customizations discussed today) Total Accenture hrs used = 16,407 (15,806 July) Total available contract hrs = 19,130 % Used = 86% (83% last month) % Remaining = 14% (2,723 hours)

12. 12 CRReq’d Estimated Cost Interfund Process – creating groups for notificationsYes < $30K Travel and Expense – payment methodYes$10K Travel and Expense - decentralizing Travel and Expense set up for traveler and approvalYes$40K Data Warehouse SHARP HR/Payroll dataYesTBD Financial dataYesTBD Note: May need additional CRs to address new or previously unidentified requirements that don’t surface until testing Change Control – Remaining CRs

13. 13 Meetings held with agencies: Health Policy Authority Department of Revenue State Treasurer KU and KUMC (separately) Regents (collectively) SRS & State Hospitals Wildlife and Parks Corrections KPERS and many others Agency Interactions

14. 14 Conversion and Interface Timelines 2009 Apr/May/JunJul/Aug/SepOct/Nov/Dec Agency Interface/System Modifications Connectivity Testing Conversion Build and Unit Test Conversion Assembly Test Mock 1 Conversion Test Extract Conversion Data Conversion Data Cleansing Interface Testing Cycles

15. 15 Upcoming Events September Monthly Conversion Technical Meeting Business Process Workshops Change Agent Network Meeting #5 – 09/30 Data Warehouse Advisory Group – 09/26 October Monthly Interface Technical Meeting

16. 16 Agency Reporting Strategy & Approach Objective: Identify and resolve critical agency reporting gaps Background Over 150 reports will be available for agency use at go-live However, some agencies may have reports or data feeds that will not be fully replaced by the new reports Developed an approach to address and resolve go-live agency reporting gaps Piloting this approach with several large agencies (SRS, KDOR, DOL) prior to rolling out Statewide

17. 17 Step 1 – Agencies list reports that are critical to perform the agency’s Day 1, go-live business processes Step 2 – Agencies compare reports identified in Step 1 with list of reports available in SMART and identify reporting gaps Step 3 – Sunflower Project Team reviews agencies’ high priority reporting gaps to determine if: A delivered report meets the reporting need If a report can be built by the agency in the data warehouse If a report is not available in the data warehouse and will need to be developed by the Project Team Team will document their determination for each reporting gap and return the information to the agency Note: Medium and low priority reporting gaps will be addressed after go-live using a process to be determined Agency Reporting Strategy & Approach

18. 18 If a report can be built by the agency in the data warehouse: Agency identifies at least one agency person to build and test these reports prior to go-live Agency report developer attends mandatory training on the data warehouse and the reporting tool Agency report developer will have access to a report development lab to create and test their reports Agency must have sufficient data in the system to develop their reports (interface testing, conversion, on-line entry) Agency develops lower priority reports after go-live Agency Reporting Strategy & Approach

19. 19 Measuring Progress Tech Team (Accenture and State) are working OT No impact on key milestones or the “go-live” date Scope Element 07/09 Status 09/09 StatusDetailed Status/Corrective Actions Test Scripts Cycles 1 and 2 Yellow Complete Configuration Data Entry GreenYellow Finance Team is approximately 60% complete vs. 80% planned. Finance Team is dedicating time to complete remaining tasks over next 2 weeks. Functional Design Reports Yellow Finance Team is approximately 50% complete vs. 80% planned. Finance Team continuing to work on report designs, but focus is on mod designs due to impact on testing. Additional reports added to queue (not included in stats). Report design and development will be an on-going challenge. Functional Design Modifications Green Finance Team has been focusing on designs for mods for past 1.5 months – 95% complete vs. 98% planned. This activity was falling behind schedule since last SC meeting but corrective action was taken to regain the schedule. Interface Design Phase 1 GreenComplete Interface Design Phase 2 RedYellow Tech Team is approximately 75% complete vs. 85% planned. Data Conversion Yellow Tech Team is approximately 35% complete vs. 82% planned. There are 9 conversion programs: 3 in review, 5 in development, 1 not started. Testing schedule is staggered to accommodate staggered development Business Process Workshops Green Training Phase 1 GreenComplete Training Phase 2 Green

20. 20 Remaining Issues and Challenges Technical resources barely adequate to complete remaining development work in scheduled timeframe –Accenture brining on additional technical resources –State re-assigning team member from coordinator role to developer role –Making minor changes to testing schedule to accommodate late mods Finance Team continues to be stretched and will remain very busy for next 6-8 months In general, most agencies continue to be good partners – complete assignments, provide feedback and attend meetings and workshops –Small number of agencies consume inordinate amount of time –Review status reports each month and follow-up on issues –Large interfacing agencies (KDOT, SRS, KDOR and KHPA) are making good progress on system modifications and interface development –Approximately 50% of agencies are behind schedule in asset conversions Continue to retain 2 months of schedule contingency for disaster recovery testing and operational readiness testing

21. 21 Recently Resolved Issues and Challenges Data warehouse team lacked project management, technical resources and functional support Corrective actions taken over past two months: –Replaced key consultant –Brought in a senior manager and developed detailed project plan –Reviewed resource requirements –Adding additional data modeler and Business Intelligence consultant –State coordinating scope definition and security requirements

22. 22 Questions and Answers? For additional information on the project, please see the project website: http://da.ks.gov/smart

23. 23 Authority for Change Requests Change Request AuthorityCost ImpactScope ImpactImpact on PS Code Base Schedule ImpactAgency ImpactLaw, Reg, Policy Impact Level 1 Executive SponsorsTBD Any change affecting the “Go-live” date TBDAny changes affecting laws, regulations or other non-A&R policies Level 2 Steering CommitteeChanges over $50K “Significant” impact on project scope (+/-) TBDRecommends changes to Executive Sponsors Level 3 FMS Mgmt Team (CCB)Changes under $50K “Moderate” impact on project scope (+/-) All mods approved by FMS Mgmt Team Any change affecting KITO milestones or other key (internal management) milestones Any decisions/ changes “adversely” affecting agencies Any changes affecting A&R policies and procedures Level 4 Managers All changes affecting cost (+/-) approved by FMS Mgmt Team “Minor” impact on project scope (+/-) “Minor” impact on project activities that do not adversely impact a milestone Configuration decisions benefiting agencies that do not impact cost or do not impact a milestone