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

2. 2 Today’s Topics Project status and activities – Kent Fourth IV&V Report – Peggy Change control – Peggy Measuring Progress – Gary Agency Reporting Needs and Sensitive Data – Gary Cutover Planning – Gary Agency Interactions, Service Center, Agency Readiness and Up Coming Agency Events – Connie

3. 3 SMART Perspective

4. 4 Project Timeline December January February March April May June July Pilot Training Stage 6 Interface Testing Testing Phase Business Process Workshops Agency Role Mapping Complete System Testing and Begin User Acceptance Testing Cutover Phase Continuity of Operations Exercise Load SMART and SHARP with Production Values Go-live for SMART & SHARP II Agency Report Development End User Training Close STARS

5. 5 Status of Testing System Testing started on-schedule All testing infrastructure (testing lab, scripts, defect tracking tool, processes) in place and functioning Cycle 0 – System Shakeout – complete Cycle 1 – Simple end-to-end processing – in progress (11/09 – 01/15) –141 scripts –55% complete and slightly ahead of schedule –SRS, STO and A&R participating in Cycle 1 testing –Tech team fixing defects Cycle 2 – Complex end-to-end processing – starts next week (12/16 – 02/15) Developing options for agency participation in User Acceptance Testing and will present at the January Steering Committee meeting

6. 6 Testing, testing, testing All designs for approved modifications complete All functional designs for approved reports complete Cycle 1 of System Testing on-schedule – 30% complete Completed workflow workshops Continuing work on cutover plan Beginning work on agency CAFR reports (KDOT, Lottery, KPERS, A&R) Continuing support for training development Project Status & Activities – Finance Team

7. 7 Preparing for agency role mapping exercise – used to define individuals’ security and training requirements Continue developing training materials – train-the-trainer begins in January Hired help desk manager and selected help desk software; developing support processes Continue holding monthly Change Agent Network meetings Continue publishing monthly newsletters Meet with agencies on an as-requested basis Project Status & Activities – Enterprise Readiness Team

8. 8 Fixing defects and making minor enhancements Building modifications – 75% complete Continuing technical designs for reports and building reports Building and maintaining environments Building datamarts and modifying ETLs for data warehouse Beginning planning for disaster recovery exercise Project Status & Activities – Tech Team

9. 9 A&R/DISC performing SHARP modifications – approximately 95% complete with Phase 2 – completing about 3 weeks behind schedule but no impact on Cycle 7 System Testing (i.e. integration testing) SHARP II Cycle 1 testing started Developing test scripts for Time and Labor (on-line time reporting and employee self-service in SHARP) Division of Budget working with IBARS vendor to develop modifications and interfaces; will load 2011 appropriation budgets into SMART from IBARS when finalized in May Project Status & Activities – Central Systems

10. 10 Continue holding monthly forums to address issues and communicate with agencies for interfaces and conversions Continue to review project plans to assess agencies’ progress and communicate identification of problems Washburn basic accounting course was well-received over 200 agency personnel participated representing over 60 agencies Data Warehouse Advisory Group 4 th meeting January 29 th to develop prototype agency dashboards for HR/payroll data Executing agency reporting strategy Develop strategy for securing sensitive data in DW Enrolling agencies in the Shared Service Center Met with six large agencies over past two weeks (KHPA, KDOT, SRS, KDHE, KDOR, KDWP) Detailed planning for Continuity of Operations exercise; DISC is taking the lead to coordinate Project Status & Activities – Miscellaneous

11. 11 4 th scheduled IV&V project review (Sys Test Labs – Denver) One week prep, one week on-site, one week to draft report Interviewed 21 project and 12 agency personnel Reviewed 41 documents (deliverables, risk log, issue log, project plan, status reports, requirements matrix, test scripts, etc.) Overall project health continues to be good Several recommendations provided: Project leadership should schedule more one-on-one sessions with key State agencies Closely monitor progress of Cycle 1 System Testing Closely coordinate cutover with new SHARP II hardware and remaining network upgrades Fourth IV&V Review, Findings and Recommendations

12. 12 Change orders approved since last Steering Committee meeting Change Control Two change requests over $50K since last meeting Credits of $187K for change orders since last meeting

13. 13 CR # 113 – Supplemental Support for State Development Team Contractually, State is responsible for performing a significant portion of the development work (mods, interfaces, conversions, reports) Most State developers are inexperienced in coding in PeopleSoft Despite training and coaching, productivity trends indicated the State was having problems meeting the schedule and that the State Tech Team’s workload exceeded the team’s capacity State Tech Team Manager requested two additional experienced development resources to recover the schedule and to stay on schedule CR is time and materials – not to exceed 1,000 hours or $131K – with Accenture providing two of their developers (familiar with the project and live in area) Checkpoints in mid-December and mid-January to assess progress and need Expect contract developers to “roll-off” by the end of January or mid-February

14. 14 CR # 94 – Limiting Access to Employee ID Limits access to Employee ID and other employee data (e.g. home address, phone #) to only employees within that agency Employee ID is a very sensitive piece of data since it is the User ID for SHARP employee self-service Without this mod, employee’s address, phone number, etc., will be accessible via search screens in SMART to potentially thousands of users Employee ID and/or personal information displayed in five modules across14 different pages Fixed-price estimate is $114K with State developers doing 20% of the work

15. 15 Change Control – Remaining Balance Balance of hours for customizations (including all customizations discussed today) Total Accenture hrs used = 17,249 (16,368 October) Total available contract hrs = 19,130 % Used = 90% (86% last month) % Remaining = 10% (1,881 hours)

16. 16 Proposed CR for Building and Maintaining a Copy of Test Environment Finance Team has requested an additional environment that would be a copy of the Test environment for identifying and fixing defects Need an environment that contains all configurations, config data and modifications Prefer not to use the Test environment: –could corrupt test data –will impact data warehouse data validation activities Boundaries/Expectations: –refreshed daily –built (mostly) by Accenture over the holidays due to limitations of the State Tech staff to be ready the 1 st week of January –available until beginning of April, then the hardware would be re-purposed to a training “sandbox” Estimated cost: –Build environment including scripts (140 hrs)= $28K –Ongoing maintenance (8hrs/wk for 15 wks)= $24K $52K

17. 17 Potential CR for Building and Maintaining a Training “Sandbox” Currently there are no plans to have an environment where end users can “practice” entering transactions after completing instructor lead training Practice environment has been requested by several large agencies Boundaries/Expectations: –Environment would be a copy of the Training environment and would contain a subset of configuration data but not agencies’ specific data –Trainees would practice common transactions such as requisitions, POs, receiving, vouchers, deposits, journals and inter-funds –Access would be only in the testing lab –Reactive support model –Sign-up for 1-2 hours in advance (for managing support) –No sensitive data would be used –Environment would be available from April through mid-June Estimated cost: –Build environment = $10K –Support (10 weeks, 30 hrs/wk, 50% State)= $30K –Contingency (additional support)= $10K $50K The proposed training “sandbox” would be in addition to an end user lab at “go-live” where agencies can enter real transactions into Production with stand-by support

18. 18 Measuring Progress All workstreams trending positive Expect Reports Build and Modifications Build to be in “yellow” status until January or February Scope Element 10/09 Status 12/11 StatusDetailed Status/Corrective Actions Test Scripts – All Cycles Green All test scripts (except several Time and Labor) complete. Configuration Data Entry GreenComplete Functional Design Reports YellowComplete All functional designs for all approved reports complete. Functional Design Modifications GreenComplete All functional designs for all approved mods are complete or in progress (for recently approved mods). Tech Design Modifications YellowGreen Tech Team is almost complete (93%) with technical designs for approved mods. Modifications Build RedYellow Team is approximately 70% complete with builds for mods. Several mods may not be ready at the beginning of the testing Cycle but will be ready prior to the end of the Cycle. Interface Build RedGreen Approved interfaces complete. Several additional interfaces (special requests) for specific agencies have been approved. Minor changes to interfaces on as-needed basis. Data Conversion Yellow Complete Complete. Reports Technical Design and Build Yellow Tech Team will be working on reports for next four months. Functional designs for all approved reports are complete. Training Phase 2 Green

19. 19 Test Sequence & Schedule Test StageStart Date Finish Date Jul 09 Aug 09 Sep 09 Oct 09 Nov 09 Dec 09 Jan 10 Feb 10 Mar 10 Apr 10 May 10 Jun 10 Unit Test7/1/0910/23/09 Assembly Test11/3/0911/30/09 * Conversion Test 10/30/094/16/10 System Test11/2/094/16/10 * Interface Test9/1/092/1/10 Performance Test 11/2/094/16/10 * User Acceptance Test 1/1/104/30/10 Disaster Recovery Test 2/1/104/16/10 Operational Readiness Test 4/1/106/11/10 Functional Team Dev. Team Interface Team Conversion Team Technical Team All Teams * - Indicates a test stage that requires agency participation

20. 20 System Test Cycles Ten testing cycles of increasing complexity. Test conditions and test scripts for each cycle CycleDescriptionCycleDescription 0Configuration5Complex End to End Processing w/ Converted Data 1Simple End to End Processing6Security 2Complex End to End Processing7Cross Functional Integration 3Conversion8Reporting 4Simple End to End Processing w/ Converted Data 9Exception Processing

21. 21 Interface and Conversion Timelines 2009 Oct/Nov/DecJan/Feb/MarchApril/May/June Online Data Entry Preparations Agency Conversion Data Cleansing Interface Testing Cycles Conversion Assembly Test Mock Conversion Testing (Mock 1, 2, 3) 2010 Cutover Activities Week 1 Activities Preparation Extract & send final data files

22. 22 Milestone Status: Stage 1: 16/21 agencies have completed their entire testing of Stage 1 interfaces 16/21 agencies have completed testing of INF01 6/6 agencies have completed testing of INF15 Stage 2: 1/25 agencies have completed their entire testing of Stage 2 interfaces 8/22 agencies have successfully loaded INF02 interface files 2/4 agencies have successfully loaded INF04 interface files 0/12 agencies have successfully loaded INF06 interface files 0/10 agencies have successfully loaded INF44 interface files Stage 3: 3/25 agencies have completed their entire testing of Stage 3 interfaces 10/23 agencies have successfully received an INF03 interface file Agency Interface Testing Status

23. 23 Agency Technical Events and Developments Continue holding Monthly Interface and Conversion Technical Meetings (today’s Conversion workshop covered Vendor Conversion for Interfacing Agencies) INF44 (deposits) interface workshop Extended interface testing: Stage 2 (inbound by 5 weeks) and Stage 3 (outbound by 3 weeks) to give agencies additional time to test and to compensate for modifications to INF44 (deposits) Lab environment for agencies (functional and technical) to log into the interface test instance of SMART and view interface transactions, make on-line corrections and begin learning troubleshoot techniques – specific Fridays beginning after the 1 st of the year Providing a semi-cleansed converted (from STARS) vendor file for loading into agency systems – approximately 250,000 vendors Developing a mini-batch schedule to cycle vendor interfaces, payments and deposits on a regular and frequent basis to simulate agency transaction processing

24. 24 Reporting Strategy & Approach Steps The Reporting Strategy and Approach is moving forward Step 1 – Agencies identify critical reports, Task ID 265 distributed Step 2 – Agencies compare agency identified reports to SMART report list and prioritize potential reporting gaps –2 nd due date is 12/11/09 –approximately 100 potential gaps identified by agencies so far; most from agencies that are de-commissioning financial systems Step 3 –Sunflower Project Team reviews critical and high-priority potential reporting gaps and determines how to resolve gaps – in progress –if an available report is very close to the agency’s needs, no gap exists –if no similar report is available, a gap exists and a report will have to be built: 1. by agencies’ Super Users from the Data Warehouse if data is available 2. by the Sunflower Project Team from Production The Sunflower Project Team will be contacting agencies after 01/01/10 to begin resolving reporting gaps

25. 25 Sensitive Financial Data in the Data Warehouse Based on survey results, agency requirements to secure sensitive data within their agency are diverse, e.g. Account/Object Code, Program/PCA, Dept ID, and vendor Configuring and maintaining security necessary to enable each agency to restrict agency employees from accessing specific, sensitive data elements (within their agency) is not feasible. Bottom line…. a simpler solution is needed to restrict access to sensitive data within an agency Solution: Agencies will restrict employee access to sensitive data using restricted queries/reports/dashboards developed by agency designated Power Users

26. 26 Data Warehouse Power Users Depending on the size of the agency, each agency will designate 1-3 Power Users Agency Power Users: –must have a solid understanding of the data origins and data structures –will develop queries/reports/dashboards for their agency –will have unrestricted access to agency data in the data warehouse –will be responsible for limiting access to sensitive data within their agency –will be the contact point in their agency for issues and concerns related to the data warehouse Central support (Data Warehouse Team or the Service Center) will be available to assist agency Power Users and other agency personnel with report development

27. 27 Cutover Planning Underway Detailed cutover calendar has been developed for all central systems (STARS, SOKI, SHARP, SMART) Highlights of cutover calendar will be shared with agencies at the next CAN meeting in January Template will be provided in January showing key central system dates and key activities affecting agencies Agencies will be requested to use this template to sync with agency cutover activities Agencies will be encouraged to hold monthly cutover meetings to coordinate their activities (business, tech, training, communications, etc.) Pam Fink is the State lead for cutover planning

28. 28 Meetings held with agencies: Department of Revenue SRS & State Hospitals Attorney General Department of Education Department of Commerce Legislature Department on Aging Legislative Post Audit University of Kansas Medical Center SMART Service Center Kick-Off Called several agencies to request asset conversion files Agency Interactions

29. 29 Held Kick-Off Meeting with potential Service Center Agencies on November 4, 2009 – following up with agencies that did not attend Service Center is not an all or nothing approach, agency can key some transactions online while using Service Center for less frequent transactions Service Center agencies can still inquire on their data online or through data warehouse even if they elect not to key online SMART Service Center

30. 30 SMART Service Center Current Commitments Agencies Fully Participating in Service Center Kansas Housing Resources Corp. Behavioral Sciences Regulatory Board Board of Optometry Examiners Kansas Commission on Peace Officer Standards & Training Legislative Post Audit Agencies Using Service Center for Selected Transactions Real Estate Commission Office of the Securities Commissioner Board of Accountancy Animal Health Department Office of Administrative Hearings Judicial Council

31. 31 Readiness Assessment #2 65 agencies responded to questions about readiness for SMART go-live Results help to: –Identify issues or risks across all agencies where additional attention is needed –Identify agencies requiring additional support Going forward… –Continue to respond honestly –This helps identify specific needs to address

32. 32 Readiness Assessment #2 Agency Concerns Agency concerns noted: –Receiving all training needed by go-live –Balancing training with current workload –Staff not understanding SMART concepts, processing, terms and chartfields –Lack of time to complete required tasks and lack of understanding on how to complete tasks –Lack of communication between functional and technical staff within agency –Can't make appropriate decisions for implementation strategy without seeing system –Managing all the tasks in a small agency

33. 33 Readiness Assessment #2 Agency Mitigation Steps Agency mitigation steps: –Complete Task ID 216, agency course attendance estimation –Plan in advance, can any agency work be completed in advance or after go-live to allow for training –Evaluate which courses are required before go-live –Evaluate if Service Center is an option for low volume transactions in small agencies –Reach out to the project and utilize project resources to receive additional information on tasks –Schedule regular meetings within your agency to communicate Does your agency have a newsletter or group e-mail to keep staff informed of key updates –Tasks are intended to provide the necessary background without screen shots or system access to complete the configuration –Project staff are available to answer questions and can schedule office hours if needed

34. 34 Readiness Assessment #3 - Readiness Assessment has been modified to simplify and improve the process, changes include: –Excel based format allowing agencies to keep a copy or print as needed –Pre-populated status based on what the Sunflower Project has recorded for your agency – where the status is correct, no response is required –Highlighted cells focusing on those questions that require an updated response –More comments fields to note additional details as needed –Incorporates task applicability (e.g., required, optional, not applicable) based on module usage listed on Agency Confirmation Document Due back by December 23rd!

35. 35 Agency Readiness Assessment Schedule PhaseAgency Readiness Assessment Distributed TestDecember/2010 February/2010 April/2010 DeployMay/2010 June/2010

36. 36 Upcoming Agency Events December 2009 12/10 – Monthly Interface Technical Meeting 12/17 – Monthly Conversion Technical Meeting NEW: Daily SMART Interface Testing Status Issues and Updates Conference Call Occurs every day Monday through Thursday from 10:00 to 10:30 A.M effective until March 16 th, 2010. January 2010 01/06, 12, 14 – Role Mapping Workshops (Offering a Remote Option only session on January 7, 2010. Remote Option also available during one session on January 14, 2010) 01/12 – Monthly Interface Technical Meeting 01/20 – Change Agent Network Meeting #8 01/27 - Train-the-Trainer Kickoff Meeting 01/27 – Monthly Conversion Technical Meeting

37. 37 Questions and Answers? For additional information on the project, please see the project website: http://da.ks.gov/smart

38. 38 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