# Presentation: 232518

## Modernization Blueprint 
Findings & Recommendations 
January 2006

- Findings & Recommendations
- January 2006

- XXXX Line of Business

## Agenda

- Drivers for the Modernization Blueprint
- Overview of the business focus area
- Recommendation Implementation Overview
- Blueprint Findings and Recommendations
- Next Steps
- Questions & Answer Session

## The drivers for the Modernization Blueprint

- Why Bother?

- Why Now?

## Value creation within the business focus area

- Provide a brief description of the business focus area and the business products and services critical to value creation

## Overview of the Modernization Blueprint recommendations

## Finding 1

_***Finding 1:***_*** This is where the finding text goes.***

## Finding 1: Specifics

_**Sub-Finding**_:  Details on Sub-finding.
_*Impact*_:  Impact of finding
_**Sub-Finding**_:  Details on Sub-finding.
_*Impact*_:  Impact of finding
_**Sub-Finding**_:  Details on Sub-finding.
_*Impact*_:  Impact of finding
_**Sub-Finding**_:  Details on Sub-finding.
_*Impact*_:  Impact of finding

**Notes:**
Lockbox:  FROM JOHN SCHMID at Treasury:
1- OSM has two paper lockboxes with Mellon Bank
2- MMS has an ACH lockbox collection with Mellon Bank
3- USFWS has a paper lockbox with JPMorgan Chase.
4- BOR has lockboxes with Citibank
5- USGS has a lockbox with Bank of America in Atlanta
- NPS has a TGA with Key Bank

FROM BP:  “The issue is that there is no standardization across bureaus.  A study for cost efficiency of using lockboxes across all of DOI needs to take place.  Cash would be available and on the customers account sooner then the current manual processes. “

Asset Accounting:  Asset accounting deals with creating the asset master record for finance versus for the whole enterprise.  In Finding 2 there is something called “Asset Maintenance” which is to have a single maintenance and management solution (MAXIMO) where that information is tracked and interfaced to SAP.

Financial Planning:  As originally planned, the financial planning (including project and personnel planning) and the systems currently supporting that functionality will not be replaced by FBMS during this initial release.  Only Budget Formulation will be considered for deployment within FBMS. The complete replacement of the current planning systems at the level of detail currently provided, however, is not planned at this time.  The level of complexity of those processes and systems would need to be evaluated through a detailed study which could be provided if desired, but is not currently within the scope of this engagement.  That study should address the need to bring the varied planning processes into a standardized process, which they are currently not.  During bureau deployments, the need for potential interfaces between these legacy systems and FBMS systems will be evaluated and decided upon.  The planning process and the current systems handling that process are essentially creating low level plans which are far below budgetary control and managing those plans on a day to day basis.  This process is performed very differently within each of the bureaus and involves varied elements, such as: complex labor calculations, agreements, partner information, project tasks, etc.  That level of detail, complexity, varied processes, and lack of a uniform end result will be best maintained in the current planning environment for the current release of FBMS and interfaced with the budget formulation and execution since there is little standardization.

The actual financial planning process will not occur in SAP, but will continue to occur in the current legacy systems.  Information will be interfaced between these legacy systems and the FBMS budget formulation and execution systems.

Continuing Resolution:  The continuing resolution process is outside of the norm for ERP centered financial management applications.  The Department has elected to solve this issue by using a process that requires the use of mass reversal of entries when the appropriation is finally received.  This approach works in theory and will likely work in practice, however it introduces, annually, a measure of risk and an opportunity where financial accuracy could be called into question. 

## Finding 1: Recommendations

_**Sub-Finding**_:  Recommendation for Sub-Finding
_*Benefit*_:  Benefit of recommendation
_**Sub-Finding**_:  Recommendation for Sub-Finding
_*Benefit*_:  Benefit of recommendation
_**Sub-Finding**_:  Recommendation for Sub-Finding
_*Benefit*_:  Benefit of recommendation
_**Sub-Finding**_:  Recommendation for Sub-Finding
_*Benefit*_:  Benefit of recommendation

**Notes:**
Lockbox:  FROM JOHN SCHMID at Treasury:
1- OSM has two paper lockboxes with Mellon Bank
2- MMS has an ACH lockbox collection with Mellon Bank
3- USFWS has a paper lockbox with JPMorgan Chase.
4- BOR has lockboxes with Citibank
5- USGS has a lockbox with Bank of America in Atlanta
- NPS has a TGA with Key Bank

FROM BP:  “The issue is that there is no standardization across bureaus.  A study for cost efficiency of using lockboxes across all of DOI needs to take place.  Cash would be available and on the customers account sooner then the current manual processes. “

Asset Accounting:  Asset accounting deals with creating the asset master record for finance versus for the whole enterprise.  In Finding 2 there is something called “Asset Maintenance” which is to have a single maintenance and management solution (MAXIMO) where that information is tracked and interfaced to SAP.

Financial Planning:  As originally planned, the financial planning (including project and personnel planning) and the systems currently supporting that functionality will not be replaced by FBMS during this initial release.  Only Budget Formulation will be considered for deployment within FBMS. The complete replacement of the current planning systems at the level of detail currently provided, however, is not planned at this time.  The level of complexity of those processes and systems would need to be evaluated through a detailed study which could be provided if desired, but is not currently within the scope of this engagement.  That study should address the need to bring the varied planning processes into a standardized process, which they are currently not.  During bureau deployments, the need for potential interfaces between these legacy systems and FBMS systems will be evaluated and decided upon.  The planning process and the current systems handling that process are essentially creating low level plans which are far below budgetary control and managing those plans on a day to day basis.  This process is performed very differently within each of the bureaus and involves varied elements, such as: complex labor calculations, agreements, partner information, project tasks, etc.  That level of detail, complexity, varied processes, and lack of a uniform end result will be best maintained in the current planning environment for the current release of FBMS and interfaced with the budget formulation and execution since there is little standardization.

The actual financial planning process will not occur in SAP, but will continue to occur in the current legacy systems.  Information will be interfaced between these legacy systems and the FBMS budget formulation and execution systems.

Continuing Resolution:  The continuing resolution process is outside of the norm for ERP centered financial management applications.  The Department has elected to solve this issue by using a process that requires the use of mass reversal of entries when the appropriation is finally received.  This approach works in theory and will likely work in practice, however it introduces, annually, a measure of risk and an opportunity where financial accuracy could be called into question. 

## Next Steps

## Questions?