Transcript Roadmap Program WSDOT FACT meeting

Washington State
Roadmap Program–
Roadmap for Next Biennium
Information Processing Managers Association
Chelan, Washington
October 14, 2008
Agenda
•
What is the Roadmap?
•
Where we’ve been and what’s
happening now?
•
What we know today.
2
What is the Roadmap
Program?
Sets the future direction for state finance and
administration
• Solves today’s common business
problems
• Takes an enterprise approach
• Transforms policies, processes,
systems and data
• Increases citizen’s visibility into the
day-to-day workings of their
government
3
Enterprise Journey
1999 Information
Architecture Blueprint
2002-03 Enterprise
Strategies Committee
2002 Personnel Service Reform Act
2003 HR Feasibility Study
2003-04 HR and Financial
Benchmarking studies
Feb. 2007 Core Financials Feasibility
Study Complete
2003 HRMS Begins
2004 Roadmap Project begins
2007 Roadmap Program
Office Established
2008 Positioning Activities
Well Underway
4
Where we’ve been
and what’s happening now
April 2004 – to date
Milestone 1
–
–
–
Project and scope
Common business problems & opportunities
High-level business case
Milestone 2
–
Solutions Framework
–
Agency urgent business needs strategy
Milestone 3
–
–
Business process modeling
Integration architecture strategy
Milestone 4
–
Feasibility study
Milestone 5
–
Positioning Activities
5
Milestone 1
Scope
Roadmap Business Process Scope Model
Last Update: 5-30-07
This document will change as more business processes are modeled
Strategic
Planning and
Budgeting
Forecasting
Population
Forecasting
(Out of Scope)
Economic
Forecasting
(Out of Scope)
Expenditure
and Agency
Revenue
Forecasting
Strategic Plan &
Budget
Development
Statewide
Strategic
Planning
Agency
Strategic
Planning
Develop and
Submit Agency
Budget
Requests
Financial
Analysis &
Modeling
Performance
Measurement
Decision
Support
Risk
Management
Project
Management
Cost
Accounting
Grant
Management
Asset
Management
Vendor
RelationshipMa
nagement
Vendor
Solicitation
Management
Order
Management
Contract
Management
Strategic Plan &
Budget
Approval
Strategic Plan &
Budget
Implementation
Statewide
Management
Reporting
Statewide Risk
Management
(Out of scope?)
Project
Accounting
Maintain Cost
Allocation Plan
Manage Grants
Capital Asset
Accounting
Vendor
Information
Management
Identify
Purchase
Requirements
Order Goods
and Services
Manage
Contracts
Manage Goods
& Services
Payables
Manage Chart
of Accounts
Develop &
Propose
Statewide
Budget
Validate
Strategic Plan &
Performance
Measures
Agency
Management
Reporting
Claims (Tort)
Management
Capital Project
Monitoring &
Oversight
Manage Fully
Loaded Costing
Find/Award
Grant
Asset Lifecycle
Management
Vendor
Outreach
Management
Manage Bids
Receive Goods
and Services
Manage Terms
Manage General
Ledger
Legislative
Budget
Development &
Enactment
Develop &
Submit
Allotments &
Performance
Measures
Solicit Bids
Accept Goods
and Services
Manage
Non-Goods &
Services
Payables
Manage
Expense
Reimburse-ment
Manage Funds
Governor
Signature/ Veto
Review &
Approve
Allotments &
Performance
Measures
Performance &
Budget
Monitoring
Local
Governance
Self-Insurance
Management
Capital Project
Management
(Out of scope?)
Loss Prevention
Risk Financing
Agency Risk
Management
Assess Risks &
Liabilities
Determine
Acceptable
Residual Risks
Manage for
Catastrophic &
Ancillary Risks
Implement Loss
Prevention
Activities
Transportation
Project
Management
Non-Trans
Project
Management
Non-Capital
Project
Management
(Out of scope?)
Manage Billable
Services
Manage Grant
Post-Award
Close Out Grant
Management
Subgrant
Establish
Subgrant
Program
Solicit Subgrant
Recipients
Award Subgrant
Manage
Subgrant PostAward
Fleet
Management
Facilities
Management
Evaluate
Proposals
Award
Infrastructure
Management
Real Estate
Management
Develop
Contract
Monitor
Contract
Close Contract
GL Accounting
and Financial
Reporting
Payables
Accounting
Publish
Financial
Position
Manage Other
Non-Vendor
Payment
Publish
Statewide
Financial
Statements
Manage
Encumbrances
Publish Agency
Financial
Statement
Technology
Asset
Management
Consumable
Inventory
Management
Close Out
Subgrant
Track & Manage
Adverse
Outcomes
Key
Process
Major group of
business processes
Function
Component of a
business group
Activity
Task within a function
6
Milestone 2
Urgent Business Needs
Systems approval process evaluation
criteria:
• Use an existing central system
• Be flexible in meeting your
agency needs
• Modify a central system
• Extend a central system
• Partner to create new,
shared solution
7
Milestone 3
Business Process Modeling
Objectives:
• Reach concurrence on future business processes and data
• Establish value proposition and measures
• Identify business policy issues and recommendations
Approach:
• “As-is” models to understand what we do today and why
• “Could-be” models based on industry best practices and
lessons learned from other states
– Identify where core business processes can be common
and where they must be unique
• Value proposition
• Bold ideas for change
8
Milestone 4
Core Financials Feasibility Study–Results
• Identified two viable options
– Leverage the state’s existing suite
of financial systems and
– Leverage the state’s current
investment in SAP
Roadmap Feasibility Study
OFM Accounting Division
February 12 , 2007
• Recognized certain things must be
done before moving to a core
financial system
– Identified twelve Positioning
Activities to prepare the state for
the future
– Positioning Activities will benefit
the state, regardless of next steps
9
Where We are Today
• Positioning Activities
– 3 are Complete
– 7 are Ongoing
– 2 are Pending
Positioning Activities
1
Upgrade the Human Resource Management System (on-going)
2
Further define the enterprise and state direction (on-going)
3
Review the Roadmap governance structure (complete)
4
Complete a chart of accounts review and common data definition analysis (complete)
5
Review state procurement rules, policies and procedures (on-going)
6
Continue providing leadership and necessary project oversight (on-going)
7
Move agencies toward established standards and approaches (on-going)
8
Examine and document existing interface/integration processes or issues (complete)
9
Implement a strong Change Management Program (pending)
10
Incorporate lessons learned from other states and the HRMS (on-going)
11
Establish an Enterprise Program Office (on-going)
12
Develop detailed requirements (pending)
11
Positioning Activities–
Complete
3
Review the Roadmap governance structure
4
Complete chart of accounts review and common data definition
analysis
8
Examine and document existing interface/integration processes or
issues
12
Positioning Activity #3
Roadmap
Executive Sponsors
Steering Committee
Members
Linda Bremer, GA
Denise Doty, DOC
Bill Ford, WSDOT
Marcus Glasper, DOR
Pat Kohler, LCB
Stan Marshburn, DSHS
Viji Murali, WSU
Eva Santos, DOP
Bill Wegeleben, GOV
Executive Sponsors
Gary Robinson, DIS
Wolfgang Opitz, OFM
Roadmap
Steering Committee
Roadmap
Program Director
Sadie Rodriguez-Hawkins
Roadmap
Advisory
Group
Program Management Office
Roadmap Advisory Group members
CFOs and CIO representatives from 38
agencies, including higher education
13
Positioning Activity #4
Key findings and recommendations from the
Enterprise Data Definition/Chart of Accounts Review
• Identified and documented the value of 23 unmet enterprise information
needs.
• The state needs to standardize business vocabulary to meet the increasing
demand for more consistent enterprise data.
• The structure of the chart of accounts is not a barrier to obtaining chart-ofaccounts related enterprise information. Therefore, changes to the structure
of the chart of accounts are not necessary or recommended.
• Some unmet enterprise information needs can only be met through new
enterprise systems.
• Other enterprise needs can be met by optimizing the existing chart of
accounts.
• New tools and better standards are sufficient to meeting enterprise data
needs; improved data integration is also a key to success.
• Data integration is made easier through increased business process and data
standardization.
• The state needs multi-year work plan identifying all the project tasks,
resources, dependencies, and timelines would help mitigate the impact to
agencies and ensure success.
14
Positioning Activity #8
Central Accounting Systems Interface Inventory
Better management of our interface inventory and a greater
capacity to determine the impact of policy, data, business process
and system changes on our users.
Findings:
•
Agencies use OFM financial data extensively
•
ADDS use is deeper and wider than expected
•
The chart of accounts is deeply embedded in agency systems
•
The Financial ToolBox (FTBx) is considered mission critical by many
agencies
•
Most of the systems supported by OFM data are used only by state
employees
•
While our systems have been government-facing for decades, the
situation is changing to one that is more outward- or citizen-facing
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/roadmap/casii/CASII_final_report.pdf
Positioning Activities–
Ongoing
1
Upgrade the Human Resource Management System
2
Further define the enterprise and state direction
5
Review state procurement rules, policies and procedures
6
Continue providing leadership and necessary project oversight
7
Move agencies toward established standards and approaches
10
Incorporate lessons learned from other states and the HRMS
11
Establish an Enterprise Program Office
16
Positioning Activities–
Pending
9
12
Implement a strong Change Management Program
Develop detailed requirements
17
What we know today
Problem and/or opportunity
• In the past, Washington State has taken a
decentralized governance approach. For example:
– Many laws, policies, processes, systems and data support
agency-unique missions and initiatives
– Minimal enterprise requirements provide agencies with
flexibility
• However, we are also exploring the benefits of an
enterprise approach to achieve:
–
–
–
–
Better information, better decisions, better results
More efficient and effective government
Better customer and business relationships
Optimized return on investment
18
What we know today
• OFM is required by law (RCW 43.88.160(1)) to
provide a modern and complete accounting
system for use by all agencies
– Some tools the state uses to support decision
makers are out-of-date, hard to maintain and
fragmented.
• The public expects government to employ modern
management practices and demonstrate and
report on results
• The state has a duty to capture the information
and data necessary to continue managing
Washington efficiently and effectively.
19
What we know today
• Comprehensive and sustainable data
integration is necessary to take advantage
of the state’s data and information
• Improved system integration requires
state level data definition standards
• An effective governance structure is
necessary to set clear and practical
standards for data and common processes
20
Future Milestones
• The Roadmap Steering Committee will:
– Adopt an implementation plan for modernizing the core financial
systems and a budget proposal
• The Roadmap Program will:
– Conduct a project to determine how SAP can best
accommodate existing and future SAP implementations in state
government
– Develop a state standard for SAP master data definitions
– Develop a blueprint for sequencing the components of the core
financial systems to be modernized whether they are SAP or nonSAP products
• The Office of Financial Management will:
– Assist in the development of the ISB Enterprise Architecture
Committee’s initiatives.
– Propose data definitions for financial systems for which OFM is the
owner of the system of record
21
Contact information
Roadmap website:
http://www.ofm.wa.gov/roadmap/default.asp
Sadie Rodriguez-Hawkins
Roadmap Program Director
– [email protected]
– 360.664.7650
Kathy Rosmond
Roadmap Program Coordinator
– [email protected]
– 360.664.7771
22
Questions?
23