Kuali Assessment Recap of rSmart Group’s UH Visit(03/17 – 03/20/2008)
General Assessment • KFS will be a good fit for UH to replace FMIS, benefits include • Modern technology environment • Workflow (electronic routing & approval of docs) • Electronic transaction documents • Ability to attach scanned documents to electronic transactions • Transactions can be imported from Excel spreadsheets • Financial information can be downloaded to Excel spreadsheets • Essentially real-time knowledge, 24x7, of balances including pending entries awaiting approval in Workflow
Observations • Chart of Accounts: • KFS & FMIS have similar COA structures • KFS features sub-accounts & sub-object codes • Allow for more user flexibility • KFS only has 1 ledger (GL vs GL & SL) • Both have account attributes • KFS also has object code attributes (supports more flexible transaction processing)
Observations • Purchasing: • UH has a decentralized purchasing business model • Limited central vendor negotiated volume pricing • Most institutions of similar size & complexity follow a centralized purchasing business model • Recommend the University analyze & assess if a centralized purchasing model will provide better service and lower costs.
Observations • Budgets: • UH does not require budgets be entered at the account level for general state appropriated funds • This is very unusual for an institution the size & complexity of the UH • Reduces the value of reports because there is no budget-to-actual metrics.
Observations • Organizational Structures: • Organizational structure inconsistencies among budget, financial, and HR org structures • Results in reporting difficulties, e.g., need for xwalk tables
Observations • Labor (Payroll) Encumbrances: • UH does not encumber payroll at the account level • Results in a reduction in the value of accounting reports.
Observations • RCUH: • RCUH provides HR, payroll, & procurement services for sponsored programs using a separate accounting system with daily electronic feeds to FMIS; altho, some transactions are processed directly by UH applications. • Result is 2-systems supporting sponsored programs with different user interfaces. • Adds complexity for users & will make it more difficult to implement labor (payroll) encumbrances.
Observations • InfoEd: • UH plans on implementing InfoEd shortly • Recommend UH also monitor the Kuali Research Administration (KRA) project which will have similar pre-award features to InfoEd & a seamless interface with KFS. • KRA is still 2-years from full-implementation.
Observations • Potential Gaps/Challenges: • Purchasing • RCUH’s separate financial & HR/Payroll systems • Security