LBNL Budget System Proposal

1
LBNL Budget System Proposal

• Finance Network
• October 14, 2004

2
Topics

• Historical Background
• Budget System Assessment Process
• Scope of Budgeting at LBNL
• Desired Functionality Common Themes
• Possible Solutions
• Recommendation
• Implementation Strategy
• Return on Investment
• Next Steps

3
Historical Background

• 1996-1997 FMS implementation project
• One goal was the implementation of PeopleSoft
  Budgets.
• Determined that PeopleSoft Budgets was not
  capable of meeting LBNLs needs.
• Could not handle LBNLs complex burden and
  overhead structures.
• Overly rigid model for the dynamic nature of
  project budgeting at LBNL.

4
Historical Background

• 1998-1999 Budget System RFP
• Goal Identify a commercially available budget
  system.
• Determined that none satisfied the Laboratorys
  requirements.
• Lab management recommended the development of an
  in-house system.

5
Historical Background

• 2000 Janus system
• Development plan - phased release approach.
• Used by many for project budget formulation and
  execution.
• Addresses only a portion of original Budget
  system requirements.
• 2000-2001 Funding database project
• Requirements developed by FSD, Divisions, and
  ISS.
• Development put on hold by FSD and ISS to focus
  on higher priorities.

6
Historical Background

• 2003 Major areas of budgeting functionality
  continued to lack automation and integration with
  the Laboratorys enterprise financial management
  and reporting systems. (and still do today.)

7
Budget System Assessment

• In 2003-2004, a Budget System Assessment was
  performed to
• Reexamine the Laboratorys multifaceted business
  requirements in the budgeting area
• Study the available solutions and
• Make recommendations regarding the best course of
  action for providing the Laboratory with a
  comprehensive, integrated budget system.
• The ultimate goal will be to implement a
  comprehensive, integrated budget system which
  standardizes Lab-wide budgeting processes,
  improves reporting and controls, and reduces the
  use of redundant systems.

8
Budget System Assessment Team

• Chuck Axthelm
• Margretta Campbell
• Lauretta Corsair
• Bridget Haverty
• Executive sponsors
• Jeffrey Fernandez

• Gita Meckel
• Anne Moore
• Rich Nosek
• Ivy Tran
• Anil Moré

9
Budget System Assessment Process

• Review existing requirements documentation.
• Conduct interviews with Laboratory Management and
  staff to analyze current LBNL processes and
  requirements.
• Assess the PeopleSoft 8.8 Budgeting module.
• Assess budgeting solutions in use at other DOE
  Laboratories.
• Assess fit/gap with existing and future LBNL
  systems.
• Develop a recommendation for Management review.

10
What is budgeting, anyway?
11
Scope of Budgeting at LBNL
12
Scope of Budgeting at LBNL
13
Scope of Budgeting at LBNL
14
Scope of Budgeting at LBNL
15
Current System Capabilities (Janus)
16
Desired Functionality Common Themes

• Timely funding information
• Institutional planning information
• The Spend Forecast (formerly known as the
  Management Report
• Resource (Labor) Planning
• System Integration
• Excel interfaces
• Quick Budget Tool

17
Desired Functionality Common Themes

• What-if analysis capability
• Budget vs. actuals reporting
• Non-Project-Tree rollups
• More reporting, and more flexible reporting

18
PeopleSofts Budgeting System

• Investigated the latest version (8.8)
• Still not capable of meeting LBNLs needs
• Cannot handle LBNLs complex burden and overhead
  structures.
• Overly rigid model for the dynamic nature of
  project budgeting at LBNL.

19
Other DOE Laboratories Solutions

• Based on information gathered at the annual FMSIC
  and Budget Officers conferences, the team
  investigated the following Laboratories systems
  
• Lawrence Livermore National Laboratorys FACTS
  system (based on commercial software from
  Comshare)
• Pacific Northwest National Laboratorys FRx
  system (commercial software from Microsoft)
• Brookhaven National Laboratorys Budget and
  Forecasting System, written in-house using the
  PeopleSoft development tool set.

20
Fit / Gap Analysis
21
LBNLs Janus System
22
LLNLs FACTS System
23
PNNLs FRx System
24
Brookhavens System
25
Recommendation

• Implement Brookhavens System at LBNL.
• Advantages
• Best fit to LBNL requirements.
• Encompasses funds control and institutional
  planning functionalities.
• Easily integrated with our PeopleSoft FMS.
• Familiar look and feel.
• Easily supportable technology.
• Its free.

26
Implementation Strategy
27
Current LBNL System Configuration
28
Implement ePME
29
Implement Funds Control Functionality
30
Integrate Funds Control with BLIS
31
Deploy New Reporting and Analytics
32
Implement Local Project Planning Functionality
33
Interface Janus to the New System
34
Provide a Quick Price Tool
35
Provide Standard Excel Interfaces
36
Implement Institutional Planning Functionality
37
Extend Reporting and Analytics
38
Provide Excel Download Capability
39
Integrate Planning Information with BLIS
40
Provide Additional System Integration
41
Future -- Refine ePME
42
Future -- Phase Out Janus
43
Return on Investment

• Timely funding information
• This will be made possible via the BNL systems
  funds control functionality.
• Institutional planning information
• The Spend Forecast (formerly known as the
  Management Report)
• These will be facilitated by the BNL systems
  institutional planning functionality.

44
Return on Investment

• Resource (Labor) Planning
• This is a specific strength of the BNL system.
• System Integration
• System integration will be addressed at many
  points during the implementation. Integration
  with our other institutional systems will be
  further facilitated by the BNL systems
  PeopleSoft architecture.

45
Return on Investment

• Excel interfaces
• This will be directly addressed through the
  planned standard Excel interfaces, the Quick
  Price Tool, and the standard Excel download
  formats.
• Quick Budget Tool
• This will be specifically provided in the
  implementation.

46
Return on Investment

• What-if analysis capability
• Integration with Excel will offer tremendous
  flexibility in this area for local planning
  purposes. Having an institutional planning
  system will facilitate what-if analysis at the
  institutional level.
• Budget vs. actuals reporting
• This will be addressed as we add new reporting
  options and flexibility.

47
Return on Investment

• Non-Project-Tree rollups
• This is really a reporting issue, and will be
  addressed as such. New trees to support
  alternative hierarchies will be developed and
  managed via the PeopleSoft tool set.
• More reporting, and more flexible reporting
• Enhanced reporting will be a major focus. Ad-hoc
  end-user reporting will be facilitated through
  the use of the Cognos reporting tool set.

48
Next Steps

• Get approval (and some incremental funding) from
  the Enterprise Computing Steering Committee
  (ECSC).
• The implementation schedule will depend on
  Management priorities, funding, and resource
  availability.
• Obtain a copy of the system from BNL for
  demonstration and prototyping purposes.
• When resources are available, begin work.

49
?.