Solution Pathway Series. Applying Microsoft tools to support the full life cycle of Grants Management

Transcription

1 Solution Pathway Series Applying Microsoft tools to support the full life cycle of Grants Management

2 About Eperformance An e-government solutions company Specializing in Grant Management solutions and software tools Dedicated to the needs of the Public Sector 2

3 Grants & Contributions Management Canadian Government Landscape Significant and Growing Policy Instrument World-wide $ 1 Trillion - Canada $30B 3 Source: Independent Blue Ribbon Panel on G&C

4 Government Funding Programs 4 A trillion dollars granted annually Tens of thousands of granting agencies Billions spent on IM/IT support Many challenges to overcome Enterprise Grant Management (EGM) identified as an emerging market Canada $40B European Union $405B Australia $26B USA $400B ERP Vendors Program Management Vendors Client Relationship Management Vendors 2006

5 IBRP Findings and Recommendations Independent Blue Ribbon Panel (BRP) Dec, 2006 Administration of G&Cs is unnecessarily complex and costly Process is plagued by unnecessary delays Reporting burden excessive Need a simpler regime with clearer objectives and more realistic ways of measuring success Better accountability requires a more realistic set of rules Need better, more efficient ways of managing risk Recommendation Streamlined Application Process fewer steps, common forms, electronic technologies 5

6 Stakeholder Groups Financial Stakeholders Program Delivery Stakeholders Financial Staff Financial Processes Financial System GAAP & FAA Compliant Interface Program Management System Program Delivery Process Program Staff Reference: US Joint Financial Management Improvement Plan

7 G&C Automation Challenges Many automation project fail because: Lack of Standard process Too much change - user change fatigue Too expensive (due to monolithic vs component based) Lack of Flexibility Lack of Senior Management Support Reference: Project Management Institute 2008 Conference Whitepaper: Project Management Opportunities with Large Scale G*C Automation Projects

8 G&C Automation Lessons Learned Committed IT Governance and Corporate Executive Sponsorship Particularly as it relates to initiatives to standardize and adopt better practices. A Grant and Contribution Center of Expertise To provide a G&C business sponsor and effective knowledge transfer through common services such as G&C policy directives, training, and secretariat services. Establishing a Common Program Delivery Framework Through the Center of Expertise work toward standardization of process, forms, contract terms and conditions, and performance frameworks as examples of common program delivery practices. Project Terminology for G&C Common business language is the starting point in providing for an enterprise view of information to satisfy departmental reporting requirements. Component-based approach with progressive program implementation With a component-based technology framework in place, programs can be deployed as incremental components, one program at a time, thereby minimizing risk to cost and schedule, while harnessing quick wins and lessons learned.

9 Functional Requirements Key Concept 12 Points of Configurability User Defined Risk & Performance Framework Multiple Unique Funding Case-flows Configurable Business Rules User Defined Business Roles User Defined Eligibility Criteria User Defined Assessment & Scoring Templates User Defined Submission Forms Configurable Agreement Terms conditions and Schedules Configurable User Interface Revisable Documentation Extensible Data Repository Data Analysis and User Defined Reports From experience... The dirty dozen!! 9

10 7 Common Case Management Process Streams Departmental G&C Reference Model Business Reference Model 8As of Program Delivery Arrange Announce Apply Assess Award Administer Achieve Audit Client Management Submission Management Decision Management Selection Management Performance Management Risk Management and Audit Financial Management Case Management 10

11 Post-Agreement Pre-Agreement Common G&C Activity Framework Announce Advertise Target Publish Program Info Apply Enquiries Expression of Interest Full Submissions to program Other submissions to program Assess Evaluate submissions Work-up (proj summary) External peer review Score & Rank Decision Arrange Program Identification Program Design Common Processes Client management Decision management Selection management Performance management Risk management Financial management Award Inform Applicant Negotiate Generate Agreements Amend Agreements Audit Recipient Audits (Re) Payment Adjustment Program audit & evaluation Achieve Benefits Phase Post Project monitoring Re-payments Administer Work Phase Claims Processing & Payment Project Monitoring Closure Recovery 11

12 Structured Forms & Data Map 2006

13 A Technique for Form & Data Planning 13 Pre-plan forms and data for the complete program delivery life cycle Create a Structured Forms and Data Map Standardize submission and tracking forms across programs 2006

14 Re-usable Forms and Form sections Form Library Expression of Interest Detailed Proposal Progress Claim Form User Defined 14

15 Benefits of Standard Forms 15 Planning ahead minimizes gotchas at the reporting stage. Logical grouping of data minimizes the impact of change. Minimum models exist and may be used as a starting point. Enhance applicant experience and reduce red tape IBRP Supports horizontal investment by department IBRP

16 Challenges for the Chief Information Officer (CIO) CIO and Finance have not been able to deliver program management solutions CIO under pressure to reduce duplicate technology investment in G&C programs Programs need to collaborate on requirements to assist the CIO in building, or purchasing, re-usable software Configurable, officer-friendly software will be key to G&C technology acceptance by programs. 2006

17 Current State of Automation DB Application A Program A Program Data ERP (SAP, Oracle, etc) GMS (custom) Program B DB Application B Financial Data Consolidated Data Program Data DB Application C Program C Finance IT Program Data Program Delivery 2006 Stakeholders

18 Evolving Automation Model Program A ERP Software (SAP, Oracle, etc) G&C Software Officer Tools Officer Tools Program B Financial Data Standard Accounting Interface Common Program Data Officer Tools Program C Finance IT & Program Delivery Common Reference Model G&C Centre of Excellence 2006 Stakeholders

19 Typical G&C Service Component Model Interactive Submission Service (online submission form exchange with clients) Officer Submission Assessment (Assessing and selecting projects) Program Administration (Case Management) (tracking the decisions, activity, progress, risk, and performance of clients and projects) Award and Finance (pre-award budgeting and forecasts, commitments generating agreements and tracking amendments post-award budget tracking and cash flow management) Corporate Finance Interface (transactions for budget, commit, pay, re-pay, PAYE) G&C Information Repository & Reporting Services 2006

20 G&C Technology Trends Government In House build ERP Vendors extending software products to support G&C Program Management SAP, Oracle, AMA Still unproven in the market Looking for Early Adopters clients Program-management-specific product vendors emerging Grantium, Quest, Easygrants Program delivery functionality Can support Departmental scale implementation Government off the shelf software (GOTS) emerging to promote shared reuse of tools (CIHR, GCIMS) CRM (Client Relationship Management) tools Flexible, scalable, and functional Can include G&C accelerator modules Rich integration with officer desktop 20

21 Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4 Grant Management Solution Overview 21

22 Technology Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4 Windows Platform ( SQL 2005) VGO Eservices Accelerator esubmission Portal Form Pack Science and Innovation VGO Program Office Accelerator Form Pack Contribution Program Form Pack - External Reviewer

23 SMART Program Case Study 24

24 Case Study: Canadian Manufacturers & Exporters (CME) SMART Program to support productivity improvement projects by Ontario manufacturers Government of Ontario awarded $25,000,000 to CME to run program, including administration Program Design Workshops across Ontario to promote program and encourage adoption of techniques such as LEAN manufacturing (~$1M) Project Funding: Up to $50,000 (or 50% of project costs) awarded to qualified applicants with project starting quickly (total funding ~$20M available) Assessment Funding: up to $6,000 for on-site productivity assessments by qualified service providers (~$1.5M available) Online diagnostics to provide preliminary assessments of opportunities for productivity improvement (no cost to company)

25 Challenges for CME s SMART Program Demand by government for quick turnaround: target 45 days from submission to notification Expectation of high demand for program, and requirements for high levels of accountability Expert Review Conflict of Interest checks Limited budget to pay for admin staff: need for as much automation as was cost-effective Need to involve external groups in program delivery process to vouch for 100s of small companies Need for quick ramp up: Program Design not approved until July 2008 Applications to be accepted starting October Avoid paper based processes IBRP Survey: 63% of program managers say standard approach not possible OAG Report: Program admin costs 5% Recipient admin costs 30%.

26 Opportunities for CME s SMART Program Program designed to leverage technology, rather than technology being limited by legacy processes Paperless processes Integrated case management Comprehensive Information Architecture starting with Application Forms supports all phases of program, including reporting Assessment: Award: Administration: Achievement: Audit: Selection Management Contracting and Financial Management Financial and Risk Management Performance Management Risk Management

27 The Project Bloodstone Solutions developed program design and scoped requirements CME procured off-the-shelf grants management solution Microsoft Dynamics CRM 4 Based Grants Management eservices and Program Office accelerators Hosted Solution Provider: Eperformance Inc. Rapid deployment Bloodstone provided business analysis, acted as voice of the customer Eperformance configured Application forms and Program Office Funding program went live on-schedule (4 weeks from project start) Since October 2008, 330+ submissions plus 100+ still to be submitted Application processing requires only 3 program staff, plus ~20 expert reviewers and 100+ referees who vouch for the applicants Processing time not yet at 45 day target, but additional reports will enable closer control over service levels (and partner performance!)

28 The SMART Solution Hosted Service CME VGO TOPOLOGY Central VGO server to provide Grant management. CME VGO Secure VPN INTERNET CME HQ Secure VPN SMART Program Administration Access to all VGO and esubmission features through Internet Browser. Eperformance Data Centre Eperformance HQ Technical Support Staff Secure VPN Appicants/ Recipients Expert Reviewers Referees Access to all VGO features through Internet Browser. Access to all VGO features through Internet Browser. Access esubmission Portal through Internet Browser. 29

29 Outcomes CME is able to focus on the efficacy and performance of the SMART Program not on technology Speed, simplicity and flexibility of Eperformance solution extended to other program components Qualified Service Provider applications and selection process Assessment Funding applications and selection process Diagnostic questionnaires and reporting Allows for Common View of the client (per IBRP) Next steps Roll-out of online Progress Report, Expense Claim, Final Report forms will enable completely paperless program management

30 CME Demonstration 31

31 Key Project Success Factors Hosted Solution allowed for rapid deployment System flexibility was able to accommodate businessdriven changes to processes and requirements Stuff happens Program Design leveraged best practice G&C Reference Model Web-based service allowed CME to augment its team with external referees and reviewers Comprehensive information architecture ( standard forms and data ) contributed to quick ramp-up and continues to make evolving reporting requirements easy to manage.

32 Conclusion Questions and answers

33 Complimentary Readiness Assessment Consultation Session Overview of a common Grant management framework Pain point analysis Diagnostic assessment Solution recommendation Delivered by senior specialists in Program Management Grant Automation 35