Project Budgeting: Design Considerations for PeopleSoft ERP Implementations

1
Project BudgetingDesign Considerations for
PeopleSoft ERP Implementations

• State of Delaware
• Bill Willis, Ralph Prettyman,
• Brian Valeski, Sacha Nelson, Xiaofei Ni

2
Agenda

• Introduction
• Purpose
• Background
• GL Chartfield Structure
• Projects Structure
• Costing Structure
• Coupled Model Architecture
• Decoupled Model Architecture
• Model Implications
• Additional Design Considerations
• Question and Answers

3
Introduction

• Disclaimer
• The topics discussed today presume working
  familiarity with PeopleSoft Commitment Control
  and PeopleSoft Project Costing functionality.
• The information presented here represents the
  thinking of the Delaware ERP Project Costing Team
  with regard to DOT challenges, not necessarily
  the thinking of DelDOT itself.

4
Purpose

• Objectives of this presentation are
• To provide a framework to assess how to best
  support DOT business processes using PeopleSoft
  functionality.
• To provide a common vocabulary to assess design
  strategies.
• To initiate a roundtable discussion in order to
  peer review conclusions

5
Background Delaware ERP

• Currently Delaware ERP is in the Requirements
  phase
• Statewide Implementation
• Go-Live Feb. 09.
• PeopleSoft 8.9

6
Modules To Be Implemented

• Delaware is implementing 13 modules and upgrading
  HCM from 8.8 to 8.9

First State Financials (PeopleSoft Financials)
13 modules
Asset Management
General Ledger
Billing
Grants Management
Cash Management
Payables
Commitment Control
Project Costing
Contracts
Purchasing
eProcurement
Receivables
Expenses
PHRST (PeopleSoft Human Capital Resource
Management)
Benefits
Payroll
Human Resources
Time Labor
7
Module Integration
Purchasing
Budgets
eProcurement
Inventory
General Ledger
Payables
Commitment Control
Project Costing
Expenses
3rd Party Applications Ex Primavera,
MS Projects
Time Labor
Receivables
Payroll (PHRST)
Asset Mgmt
Contracts
Grants
Billing
Project Costing Integration with other PS
Applications
8
Background - Proposed GL Chartfields
9
Background - Delaware Project/Activity Structure
10
Background - Delaware Project/Activity Structure
11
Background - Additional Information

• Currently, Delaware ERP is implementing the
  following
• Single GL Business Unit (Strong Controller
  Model)
• 5 GL Commitment Control Ledger Groups (in
  addition to Project Budgets)
• Operating (Appropriation)
• Appropriated Special Funds (ASF)
• Non Appropriated Special Funds (NSF)
• Appropriation Type
• Lower Level Budgets

12
Background - Proposed Projects Chartfields
13
Model Architecture

• Coupled Approach
• Operating/Project Budgets Linked
• Operating/Project Budgets share key and
  translation chartfields
• i.e Appropriation, Fund, Account, etc.
• Dual Control Structure
• Yearly View

14
Model Architecture - Coupled
15
Model Architecture

• De-Coupled Approach
• Operating/Project Budgets not linked
• Operating/Project Budgets do not share key and
  translation chartfields
• Operating Budgets enforce control on key GL
  chartfields
• Project/Activity/Lower Level Budgets enforce
  control at the Project level
• Project View

16
Model Architecture - Decoupled
17
Model Implications

• Coupled Approach focuses on yearly appropriation
  (yearly view) Statutory Intent
• Decoupled Approach focuses on a project
  life-cycle Managerial Intent

18
Key Questions

• What is the GL architecture?
• Number of GL business units
• Ruleset/Keys and Translations
• Are you implementing/using Grants?
• What is your organization relationship with
  Department of Accounting/OMB?
• What type of control structure are you
  implementing for Projects Budgets?
• What type of splitting are you using?

19
Discussion
Questions and Answers
Questions and Answers