Intragovernmental Transactions

Working Group (ITWG)

March 13, 2018
Page 2 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Today’s Agenda

• Survey Results (Alex Abshire)

• Introduction of Office Hours (Keith Jarboe)

• Data Flow for Agreements (Keith)

- GT&C

- Orders

• Performance Updates (Wes Vincent)

- Data Flow

- Data element changes

• Streamlining Government Invoicing (Matt Conrad)

• Survey Questions (Alex)
Page 3 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Tentative ITWG Schedule

 Nov 14 – Performance Transaction 

 Jan 9 – Release 2.1 Preparation

 Mar 13 – Streamlining Government Invoicing

Planned Dates

April 10

May 8

June 12

2-3 pm ET

Future Topics

Multiple Advance Payments

Refunds and Adjustments
Page 4 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Survey Results

• Order Data Standards

– Unit of Measurement

• Demand for ANSI standard is significant

• G-Invoicing will support both ANSI and ISO standards with a 3-

character UOM

• Adding UOM Description to help translate between ANSI and ISO 

• Performance Transaction

– Agency support for Performance transaction still strong

– Some agencies want to ease into this requirement due to 

challenges obtaining data

– Other agencies want tighter rules relatively quickly, leading to:

• No invoicing without notice of Delivery

• No payment without Receipt or Acceptance
Page 5 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

G-Invoicing Office Hours

• Provide Federal Program Agency (FPA) Stakeholders an 

opportunity to discuss onboarding and adoption topics with 

the G-Invoicing team 

• 60 minute sessions held semi-monthly (1st and 3rd 

Tuesday); the first session is April 3rd, 2018

• Any FPA may sign up for office hours through the “Training 

and Events” Fiscal Service Page

• FPAs are asked to submit their questions in advanced to 

igt@fiscal.treasury.gov

• FPAs should bring the key stakeholders responsible for GInvoicing implementation within their agency and include 

participation from their primary IGT Buy/Sell trading partners
Page 6 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

General Terms and Conditions

• Requesting or Servicing Agency may initiate GT&C

• GT&C agreements are created and approved through a user interface in G-Invoicing

• Full automation is available beyond the GT&C agreement

– Agencies choose which systems they prefer to integrate

• Attachments are optional and available for either partner to view or pull

• Requesting Agency must reference approved GT&C when creating Order (on next slide)

- This can be pulled into agency system (Pull GT&C, shown here)

- Or user can copy/paste (not shown)

Summary of Mandatory Data Elements 

by Category (33 elements required)

GT&C Identifier (3)

Requesting Agency Identifier (2)

Servicing Agency Identifier (2)

Shared Agreement Terms (7)

Preparer and Approver Identifiers (19)

(40 other data elements are opt/derived)
Page 7 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Orders

• If an Agency desires full automation with their 

current systems, the following functions must be supported: 

1. Push an Order to G-Invoicing, covering new, approved, 

rejected, modified or closed Orders

2. Pull a list of Order changes and a specific Order from G-Inv.

• G-Invoicing will contain data to support ATB entries, but will 

not replace GTAS reporting

Summary of Mandatory Data Elements 

by Category (79 elements required)

GT&C and Order Identifiers (3)

General Order Information (16)

Requesting Agency Order Details (22) 

Servicing Agency Order Details (10)

Preparer, Contact and Approver IDs (28)

(128 other data elements are opt/derived)
Page 8 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Performance

Mandatory Data Elements by 

Category (9 elements required)

Transaction Identifiers (3)

Performance Information (6)

(3 other data elements derived)

• If an Agency desires full automation with their 

current systems, the following functions will need to be supported: 

1. Push a Performance transaction to G-Invoicing, for any new or modified records

2. Pull a list of Performance changes from G-Invoicing

• Types of Performance are based on EDI 856 standards

- Servicing Agency: 011-Shipped, 017-Estimated Delivery, 035-Delivered

- Requesting Agency: 050-Received, 201-Acceptance
Page 9 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Performance Data Standards

Proposed Data Elements ANSI X12-856 Data Element Mapping

Name Description Required Name Ref ID Data Type Min/Max Description Restriction

Performance 

Transaction 

Identifier

Uniquely identifies the performance 

transaction.

Derived N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Derived by system for new 

transactions, required for changes or 

deletions.

Included in Pull response. 

Required for modify/delete.

Transaction 

Type

Identifies the type of performance recorded 

(e.g., Delivery, Receipt).

Required Date/Time Qualifier DTM01 374 AlphaNum 3,3 Code specifying type of date or time, 

or both date and time.

011 - Shipped

017 - Estimated Delivery

035 - Delivered

050 - Received

201 - Acceptance

Performance 

Date

The date on which the performance took 

place.

Required Date DTM02 373 Date + Time 10,10 The date on which the performance 

took place.

YYYY-MM-DD

Order Number Identifying number for Purchase Order 

assigned by G-Invoicing at the time of Order 

creation by the Buyer.

Required Purchase Order 

Number

PRF01 324 AlphaNum 1,20 Identifying number for Purchase 

Order.

Line Number The Order Line number is generated in GInvoicing, and incremented for each line 

added to the Order.

Required Assigned 

Identification

LIN01 350 Number 1,5 The line number associated with the 

document.

Schedule 

Number

The sequential sub-line structure below an 

Order Line Number. It contains the detailed 

financial and shipping info.

Required Assigned 

Identification

SLN01 350 Number 1,5 Identifies the sequential sub-line 

structure below an Order Line.

Quantity Buyer-Represents quantity Received or 

Accepted. Seller-Represents quantity Shipped 

or Delivered.

Required Number of Units 

Shipped

SN102 382 Number 1,12 Numeric value of units shipped in 

manufacturer's shipping units for a 

line item or transaction set.

Unit Of 

Measure

Units in which a value is being expressed. Required Unit or Basis for 

Measurement Code

SN106 355 AlphaNum 2,3 Code specifying the units in which a 

value is being expressed, or manner in 

which a measurement has been taken.

ANSI and ISO Units of 

Measure are supported.

UOM 

Description

The description of the Unit of Measure code. Derived

Price The cost of each unit on an order line. Required Unit Price SLN06 212 Number 1,23 Price per unit of product, service, 

commodity, etc.

User ID Identifies the system or human user that is 

exchanging data with G-Invoicing.

Derived N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Derived by system. Audit info. Not included in 

data exchange.

Transaction 

Date

The date and time the performance 

transaction was received by G-Invoicing.

Derived N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Derived by system. Audit info. Not included in 

data exchange.
Page 10 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Invoices – Original Plans

• Multiple advances process not shown

• Emphasis on Invoice approval prior to fund transfer

• Reliance on, and relationship with, Performance 

information not yet complete defined

• Adjustment process not shown

Mandatory Data Elements (24)

Servicing Agency Invoice (11)

Servicing Agency Line (9)

Requesting Agency Approval (4)
Page 11 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Invoices – New Plans

• Payments, Collections, Advances 

and Adjustments continue to 

flow through IPAC

• Most IPAC transactions 

will reference Orders in 

G-Invoicing

Additional IPAC Mandatory Data Elements (4)

Order Identifiers (3) ... i.e., order, line & schedule

Capitalization Indicator (1)
Page 12 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

• Servicing Agencies do not need to provide Invoices to G-Invoicing

– Continue existing interfacing with IPAC but include references to G-Invoicing Order

– This may be more granular than your IPAC transactions are today

• Requesting Agencies do not need to implement Invoice approval process

– Future controls governing payment/collection will be negotiated on each Order

– As negotiated, Performance events may need to occur prior to transfer of funds

• No concern over delayed Invoice approval holding up payments

• Eases Onboarding

– Fewer changes to Agency Systems and ERP Vendor Offerings

• Agencies are already interfacing 80% of required Invoice data with IPAC

– Duplicate transactions less likely during agency onboarding period

– Adjustments and Advances go through IPAC as they do today

• Disadvantages

– Removes Invoice workflow

– Assumption that agencies can leverage existing interface to IPAC

Invoices – Impact on Agencies
Page 13 L EAD ∙ T RANSFORM ∙ D ELIVER

Survey Questions for Today

1. Does your agency agree that replacement or modification of performance 

transactions is the best way to correct errant entries?

2. Does your agency agree with the four data elements (i.e., transaction ID, UOM 

description, User ID transaction date) added to the Performance data standards?

3. Does your agency agree in principle that adding a handful of required data 

elements to IPAC will adequately replace sending the same invoice data to Ginvoicing?

4. What (if any) are the obstacles you see for your agency in implementing this new 

streamlined approach to Government Invoicing?

5. Do you see this new approach as being better or worse than the original plan? 

Please explain the advantages/disadvantages for your agency.