Enterprise Resource Planning Project Update

Transcription

1 Enterprise Resource Planning Project Update GGAF May 31, Project Purpose Project approved and funded in FY 2017 Budget Conduct a needs assessment for finance and human resources functions Provide a selection strategy One solution or two? Hosted on premise or in the cloud? Product tier 1 or tier 2? Select an integrated enterprise resource planning system Facilitate change management in the organization 2 1

2 We are here Project Timeline 3 Background Information Phase 0: Project Management Establish Charter and project plan Establish Steering Committee Phase 1: Needs Assessment and Strategy Technology review Business process review Key findings Selection strategy 4 2

3 Needs Assessment Key Findings Incode lacks modern ERP func onality No true HR system/module implemented Incode s limita ons force use of side systems Lack of integration between City systems & Incode modules Chart of Accounts does not meet City needs Limited access to real me data Lack of training & system access Lack of user friendly / flexible reporting 5 Selection Strategy Options # Op on Descrip on 1. On Premise Procure hardware and software for a new ERP system deployed in the city s environment on premise. 2. Private Cloud Procure software for a new ERP environment and deploy in the vendor s environment via a private cloud. 3. Public Cloud Subscribe and implement an ERP Public Cloud solu on. 6 3

4 ERP Marketplace Most vendors currently offer both on premise and cloud products that will meet our needs Most major vendors are consolidating their product lines to meet public and private sector needs Plante forecasts vendors will begin tapering off on premise solutions and move more to cloud Cloud vendors are likely to bid aggressively to break into the government/mid size organization client market Tier 1 products will exceed our needs and likely be too large, complex and expensive for successful implementation and support Most Tier 1.5 and 2 products will offer a fully integrated ERP that will meet our needs (versus best in breed) 7 Recommendation: One System, Private or Public Cloud, Tier 1.5 or 2 Advantages No purchase of infrastructure Fewer FTEs needed to support system/infrastructure Scalable with growth Extremely secure Upgrades required Minimal to no customization Disadvantages Less control over system updates Ownership of data, future migrations may be difficult Higher ongoing costs Integrations with other existing systems may be more difficult and expensive 8 4

5 Initial Cost Estimates Basic Assumptions across all scenarios: Used real cost proposals and contract data from Plante Moran clients of similar size and complexity Third party implementation project manager Implementation will take 18 months Inflation of license/support fees 3% per year 3 new FTEs needed for ongoing support of selected system Project Contingency: 25% of one time costs 9 Initial Cost Estimates Differences between on premise and cloud Hardware costs for on premise Ongoing software license fees for cloud Tier 1 systems ( high scenario ) take more effort from staff and third party to implement due to complexity Tier 1 system price likely out of range of Georgetown 10 5

6 Initial Cost Estimates: First Year 11 Initial Cost Estimates: Remaining and Total Cost of Ownership 12 6

7 FY 2018 Budget Request Includes total one time costs (18 months) Debt funded with 7 year amortization Includes 3 FTEs for system support Funded through IT and Joint Services allocation models Includes one year of subscription fees Funded through IT allocation model Excludes existing FTE effort Assumes costs of Private Cloud High Scenario as a middle point among the range for budget purposes Competitive procurement will leave option open to private or public cloud 13 FY 2018 Budget Request $3.5M 14 7

8 Estimated Annual Ongoing Costs FY 2019 and beyond Current annual costs of Incode $380,000 New annual estimated ongoing costs $850,000 Ongoing budget need approximately $470,000 Estimate only. Final amount will depend on multiple variables, including savings on other smaller systems that may get replaced besides Incode 15 Next Steps Council Feedback mid June Finalize RFP late June Release RFP July Review Responses August Conduct due diligence activities Sept Oct Select system and vendor November Develop implementation strategy