Blank Ach Risk Assessment Form by dnz10890

VIEWS: 274 PAGES: 86

More Info
									MMARS Liaison Meeting
     February 1, 2007
       10:00 – 12:00
•   Welcome
•   PayInfo Implementation
•   MMARS Upgrade
•   Security During Transition
•   New Training Events
•   Internal Control Preview
•   Discounts
•   Benchmarking Update
•   Close/Open Preview
•   Federal Grants Update
•   E-Payments Update
  PayInfo Implementation

• 30 Pay Periods

• “Unofficial W-2”

• 58 Departments Using PayInfo
     MMARS Upgrade
  –Users can now search by Employee ID.

  –Users can now process adjustments against
  Labor History records that were previously
  adjusted through a LARQ that spanned
  multiple pay periods.

  –PRLDE documents will now only contain
  lines with MMARS errors that must be
        MMARS Upgrade
• Contracts
  – The system will no longer edit against closed lines.
  – The Actual Amount in the header will be corrected .
• Payments
  – The PRC will now edit to prevent payment quantity
    from exceeding quantity on encumbrances.
• Receivables
  – Fix will update the existing finance charge line amount,
     rather than continue to create a new one...
  Security During
Department Head Certification
Designation of Security Officer
New Security Officers
  Small Group Meetings
Security Officers
Request Listing of Users
     Security Officers
• Review Roles

• Review Signature Authorization
  Signature Authorization

• Review Current Authorizations
• Assign by Functional Area
• Document Further Restrictions
• All Requests by E-Mail
Review Security Policy
      on Web
    New Training Events
• HR/CMS (Payroll)
  – March 21
  – April 26
  – May 30

• HR/CMS CIW (Payroll)
  – May 16
  – June 20
       New Training Events

• Internal Controls
   – March 28
   – April 25
   – May 23
   – June 13
          New Training Events
For New Managers:
• State Finance: An Executive Overview
  –   February 20
  –   March 6
  –   March 20
  –   April 3
  –   April 24
  –   May 15
  –   June 5
   Closing /Opening 2007-2008

• General Sessions

• C/O Basics For New Staff

• Fiscal Fair TBA (mid May)
Internal Control Preview
     Internal Control At A Glance
•   Internal Control Legislation (1989)
•   Awareness of Internal Controls (1990 – present)
•   Procurement Reform (1996)
•   Annual Internal Control Questionnaire (2000)
•   Implementation of New Accounting System (2004)
•   OSC – Quality Assurance Bureau (2005)
•   Internal Control Guide Update (2007)
      Internal Control Preview
• Internal Control Guide
• Training
• Business Standards
  –   Chapter 647 of the Acts of 1989
  –   COSO
  –   Yellow Book
  –   SAS 112
  –   Sarbanes - Oxley
        Business Standards
    Chapter 647 of the Acts of 1989
• An Act to Improve Internal Controls at State
  – Internal Control Standards
  – Management Responsibilities – Internal Control
     • Written internal control plan
     • Annual review or as conditions warrant
     • Implement audit recommendations
  – Reporting unaccounted for variances, losses,
    and theft of funds or property to SAO
            Business Standards

• Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
  the Treadway Commission (COSO)
• Generally Accepted Government Auditing
  Standards (GAGAS) or Yellow Book
• Statement on Auditing Standard (SAS)
  No. 112, Communicating Internal Control Related
  Matters Identified in an Audit
• Internal Control – Integrated Framework
  –   Control Environment
  –   Risk Assessment
  –   Control Activities
  –   Information & Communication
  –   Monitoring
• Enterprise Risk Management – Integrated
         ERM Framework
• The ERM framework requires an entity
  to view risk from two perspectives:

  – Entity Level
  – Business Unit Level
There are eight interrelated components
    The Eight Components of ERM
•   Internal Environment
•   Objective Setting
•   Event Identification
•   Risk Assessment
•   Risk Response
•   Control Activities
•   Information and Communication
•   Monitoring
      Components of ERM
      Internal Environment

• The internal environment is the
  tone of an organization which,
  among other things, determines an
  organization’s “risk culture” and
  provides the basis for its internal
       Components of ERM
        Objective Setting

• Objective setting is a critical
  process that supports an
  organization’s mission
          Components of ERM
          Event Identification
• Event identification associates internal and
  external events that impact an organization
  achieving its objectives.

• Events that may have a negative impact
  represent risks while those that may have a
  positive impact represent opportunities.
        Components of ERM
          Risk Assessment
• The risk assessment allows an
  organization to understand the extent
  to which potential events may impact

• A risk should be assessed from both the
  likelihood of it happening and the
  impact if it does happen.
         Components of ERM
           Risk Response
• The risk response evaluates options to an
  identified risk and determines the course of
• Options
   – Accept the risk and monitor it
   – Avoid the risk by eliminating it
   – Reduce the risk by implementing controls
   – Share the risk with another entity
         Components of ERM
          Control Activities
• An organization’s control activities
  include policies and procedures,
  directives, etc.

• They occur throughout the
  organization at all levels and functions
       Components of ERM
  Information and Communication

• Information and communication is the
  identification and dissemination of pertinent
  information in a form and timeframe that
  enables people to carry out their

• Communication occurs in all directions –
  flowing down, across, and up the
        Components of ERM

• Monitoring the effectiveness of
  components include ongoing activities
  and/or separate evaluations and
  making modifications as necessary.
• Departments must ensure that the correct
  Master Agreement (MA) is referenced
• A vendor may exist on multiple MAs
• Discount terms on each MA could be
  – Departments must verify the discount terms and
    reference the correct MA
             Discount Terms
• Verify that encumbrance discount terms are
  inferred from the MA
• Vendor line discount terms = commodity
  line discount terms
  – If discount terms are different, blank out those
    on the commodity line and revalidate
    encumbrance to bring in correct terms from the
    vendor line
         Discounts Terms
• Each modification of MA affects
  existing encumbrances

• Review OSD updates
  – Modify encumbrances to reflect new
    discount terms
Common Encumbrance
Wrong Vendor Line Referenced in
   Header Reference Section

                    It should have been
                        Vendor Line 6
Vendor discount terms updated

Commodity discount terms not updated

To update the commodity line section correctly, blank out
discount terms and revalidate document again – this will
infer the terms from the vendor section of the
              Key Fields
•   Service To Date
•   Vendor Invoice Date
•   Scheduled Payment Date
•   Discount Terms
           Other Key Dates
• PRC Date of Record (Date Submitted)

• Disbursement Date – AD/EFT Date of
  Record Plus One Day
       Discount Countdown
Later of Vendor Invoice Date or Service To
      Discount Countdown
Contract 10% in 10 Days, 5% in 15 Days,
  CT 10% on 9 Days, 5% in 14 Days
Vendor Invoice Date Greater Than
        Service To Date
        Vendor Invoice Date
• The Vendor Invoice Date IS NOT:
  – The date of the order
  – The date invoice prepared by vendor
  – The date invoice mailed
  – The date goods and services delivered
    (This is the Service To date).
• The Vendor Invoice Date IS:
  – The date invoice received and date
    stamped by department!
• Enter invoice stamped date as invoice date
• For goods, Service From and Service To
  dates should be same
• For services, Service From and Service To
  dates are the dates services were rendered
• Let MMARS calculate Scheduled Payment
• Check data entry
Commonwealth Finance
          Commonwealth Benchmark
    Finance Benchmark was all inclusive
•   All agencies and departments were encouraged to
    participate in the Benchmark for Massachusetts’s financial
         • Ultimately 92 agencies and departments

• The time period from which data was collected was FY 2006
  (July 1, 2005 thru June 30, 2006)

• Best practices and FTEs were produced as of June 30 2006

• The Commonwealth was compared to Hackett’s Large
  Consolidated database
 Hackett’s finance benchmark focuses on eight
  process groups that are discretely defined
                                  Compliance and Risk                                   Management and
      Transactional                  Management             Budgeting and Analysis       Administration

 Cash Disbursements             Treasury Management  Budget Preparation            Finance Function
   Accounts Payable                                    and Reporting                  Management
   Travel and Expenses            Cash Management
                                   Capital and Risk           Long Term               Function Oversight
   Program Payables
                                    Management                  Forecasting             Personnel
 Revenue Cycle                                                Annual/Bi-Annual         Management
   Credit                       Compliance                    budgeting               Policy and Procedures
   Customer billing                                           Budget and               Oversight
   Collections                   Management
   Cash Application               Regulatory Compliance       Performance
                                    and Auditing                Reporting
 Accounting and External          Process Certification
  Reporting                                                  Business analysis
   Fixed Assets                                               Department/Program
   Interfund/Interdepartment                                   Analysis
   General Ledger
   Project Grant and Cost
   External Reporting

** Detailed definitions were provided for each process grouping.
                                            The Comm of MA has achieved 1st quartile in
                                             effectiveness with opportunities to improve
                                                              efficiency Key Effectiveness drivers:                   + Standards exist for data definitions and coding
                                                                                                                      + Customers can access account info via the web
                                                                                                                      + Integration of strategy, tactics, and budgeting
                                                               Hackett Value Grid                                     + Credit sales are collected within terms
                                           High                                                                       + High automatic posting remittance match rate
                                                                                    1Q                                + High return rate on invested funds
                                                  Comm of MA                                                          + Formal documented strategic plan
                                                                                                                      + Performance reports are forward looking
                                                                                                                      + Greater error rates in payables and billing
Finance has the right structure in place

                                                                                                                      - Role of Finance in strategy is a facilitator
                                                                                                                 1Q   - No balanced scorecards
                                                                                                                      - Less analytical focus on proactive decision
          to provide value

                                                                                                                      - Less staff focus on business analysis

                                                                                                                      Key Efficiency drivers:
                                                                                                                      + General Accounting cost as % of operating
                                                                                                                      + Analysts spend more time analyzing information
                                                                                                                      + Transactional application integration
                                                                                                                      + Fixed asset application integration
                                                                                                                      - Total number of FTEs
                                                                                                                      - Days to close and report
                                                                                                                      - Days to complete the budget
                                                                                                                      - Greater cycle times in payables and receivables
                                           Low                                                              High      - Number of secondary process applications
                                                                  Finance Efficiency                                  - Cash disbursements automated
                                                                                                                      - Cash Disbursement Transactions per FTE
                                                           How efficiently is Finance meeting business                - Cash Disbursements cots % of operating budget
                                                                              demands                                 - Cash disbursement cost per transaction
                                                                                                                      - Revenue Cycle cost % of operating budget
     Transactional cycle times exceed the
    Median and World Class in all categories
                          Transactional cycle times – in days
             Cash disbursements                                 Accounts receivable
            Comm of MA                        Median                         World Class

                         General accounting: days to close & report

15           10
                                               3                                      3
5            10
                                               5                                      5
         Comm of MA                          Median                           World Class
                   Days to close                                  Days to report
The Cash Disbursements process is highly fragmented
    resulting in unfavorable performance metrics
    Cash Disbursements cost as a % of
                                                             Cost per transaction (invoices/T&E reports)
       Revenue/operating budget
0.16%                                                       $10.00        $8.68                4 x Unit Cost Delta
0.10%                                                        $6.00
0.08%                                                                                  $4.08
0.04%                                                        $2.00
0.00%                                                        $0.00
        Comm of MA       Median        World Class               Comm of MA          Median               World Class

              Transactions per FTE                     Percent cash disbursement transactions automated
20,000                               18,886                60%
15,000                   12,573                            40%

10,000           8,087                                     30%

    0                                                      0%
                                                           Commonwealth of Massachusetts       Median     World Class
         Comm of MA       Median         World Class
             The highly fragmented Cash
           Disbursements process should be
       considered a candidate for shared services
                                                      Cash Disbursements
                                  Total Comm. of MA      Accounts Payable Travel & Expenses
Data Collection Locations in
                   Process              143                    79                64

      Total FTEs in Process             633.8                 574.8              59.0

  Data Collection Locations
            with FTEs =< 10             126                    63                63
           % of Total Locations         88%                    80%               98%
Accounts payable error rates are
positively below the Median and
  comparable to World Class
           Percent AP invoice errors





           Commonwealth of Massachusetts
           World Class
    Low automation is driving greater staffing and process
     costs, effectiveness is impacted by high billing errors
           Revenue Cycle cost as a % of                             Revenue Cycle FTEs
            Revenue/operating budget
0.20%                                              800.0

0.05%                                                0.0
                                                      Comm of MA             Median           World Class
        Comm of MA      Median       World Class
Percent customer bills processed electronically                Occurrence of billing errors

   0%                                                      Comm of MA      Median        World Class
     Comm of MA         Median       World Class
      Although considered easy, the budget process takes longer to
           complete and has more line items than World Class
         Days to complete the budget                   Percent of customers that describe the budget
                                                             process as convenient and easy
0            50         100         150          200
                                                              Comm of MA       Median     World Class
      Comm of MA        Median         World Class

      % of operation managers using online                         Number of line items in budget
             budgeting application
60%                                                        250

50%                                                        200

40%                                                        150
30%                                                        100
20%                                                        50
10%                                                         0
 0%                                                              Comm of MA      Median       World Class
             Commonwealth of Massachusetts
             World Class
 Comm of MA’s average labor rates are 19%
lower than World Class and may be masking
            overall inefficiency
         Average fully loaded labor rates
                       $77,798   $79,345


          Comm of MA    Median    World Class
How do I compare? Maybe I am doing well,
But where is there an opportunity to improve?
   Do you think Tiger cares whether he makes progress on these measures?
STANDARD STATS                             Rank                    Additional Stats

Driving Distance              302.6        10th    Tot. Dist. - 19,366       Tot. Drvs. - 64

Driving Accuracy Percentage   58.3%        157th   Fwys Hit - 261            Poss. Fwys - 448

Greens in Regulation Pct.     71.9%        1st     Greens Hit - 414          # Holes - 576

Putting Average               1.790        116th   GIR Putts - 741           Greens Hit - 414

Eagles (Holes per)            82.3         2nd     # Holes - 576             # Eagles - 7

Birdie Average                4.31         2nd     # Birdies - 138           Tot. Rnds. - 32

Scoring Average               69.14        1st     Tot. Strks - 2,241        Tot. Adj. - 28.575-

Sand Save Percentage          48.8%        88th    # Saves - 21              # Bunkers - 43

Total Driving                 167          51st    Total rank from stats 1 & 2

All-Around Ranking            377          11th    Total rank from stats 1-8

Money Leaders                 $4,263,563   1st     -                         -

Par Breakers                  25.2%        2nd     #Bird/Eagl - 145          #Holes - 576

Putts Per Round               29.91        176th   Tot. Putts - 957          Tot. Rnds. - 32
 In summary, the overall benefits available to the
  Commonwealth of MA Finance are significant
• Address fragmented processes and organizational structure in
  cash disbursements and revenue cycle – “Step Change
   – Improve transaction processing service levels (i.e., shorter
      cycle times, increased productivity, reduced unit costs)
   – Investigate opportunities to expand current “Centers of
      Excellence” into a Shared Services strategy at the
      Commonwealth level
• Investigate the technical capabilities and functionalities of
  existing systems to ensure they are fully leveraged in support of
  transactional activities

• Maintain current levels of focus in risk management and decision
  support in order to identify incremental improvements in
  efficiency and effectiveness

• Performing a more strategic/advisory role vs.
  controllership/transaction oriented role will provide for richer jobs
  and enhance Finance’s reputation
We recommend that the Commonwealth
 of Massachusetts focus on two high
          priority actions

• Action #1 – Develop best practice based
  solutions in AP and Revenue Cycle

• Action #2 – Ensure existing systems and
  applications are being fully leveraged to
  obtain full benefits of investments
Action #1 - Develop best practice based solutions for
            core transactional processes
 •   Cash disbursement improvements to reduce manual invoice processing:
      – Increase the utilization of prompt pay discounts
      – Expand the implementation of E-Payments
      – Expand use of Procurement Card (reduces small value transactions)
      – Web invoicing (ideally suited for small suppliers)
      – Automated audits at point of entry (an online self-service T&E
         system is required)
 •   Revenue Cycle improvements to reduce manual billing and cash receipt
     application processing:
      – Where possible standardize invoice/billing formats; build approved
         format templates
      – Begin/expand use of electronic data interchange (EDI) and the
         Internet for incoming requests for program services and outgoing
         electronic billing (and/or credit card payment processing)
      – Consolidate invoice printing and distribution to take advantage of
         bulk mail discounts
      – Install high-speed invoice insertion equipment to eliminate manual
         stuffing in high-volume departments/agencies where hard-copy
         invoices cannot be eliminated
      – Fully deploy electronic distribution of invoices using email, efax,
         EDI, and portal presentment
                     Next Steps
• Distribute and educate stakeholders on benchmark
• Establish action item owners
• Evaluate multi-stakeholder governance to avoid
  duplication / competition of effort
• Start initiatives and measure permanent progress
   – Set quarterly timelines including quantitative targets
   – Measure, report and communicate progress on a
     quarterly basis
• Keep focus and communicate, communicate,
 To move from transaction processor to business
  partner the best have followed the same path

                          Observed Best Practices

    Eliminate                   Simplify              Automate
• Redundant or                  • Chart of Accounts    • Employee/Customer/
  ineffective approvals         • Allocations            Supplier Self service
  (e.g. expense reports,        • Cost Centers         • Delivery of
  requisitions)                 • Technology             management
• Duplicate data capture          standards and          information
• Immaterial transactions         systems
  (journal entries, small $     • Data Definitions
  payments)                     • Customer/Supplier
• Paper invoices/Checks           Databases            • Remaining manual
• Allocations                                            JEs
• Manual JEs                    • ETC
• ETC                                                  • ETC
     Close/Open Information
• Close/Open Meetings
  – May 3, 2007 – Federal Reserve Bank,
  – May 10, 2007 – Hoagland-Pincus
                   Conference Center,
 Key Close FY07/Open FY08 Dates

• April 27 – COA Changes Including Dept.
• May 4 – Table Rolls
• May 7 – Evaluate COA changes for FY07
           and/or FY08 entry
• Weeks of May 14/May 21– Roll Budget
• May 25 – Load House 1
  Key Close FY07/Open FY08 Dates
• May 31/June 1 – FY08 Contract Roll
• June 2/June 3 - FY08 Contract Roll
• June 4 – FY08 MMARS Opens for Pre-
             Encumbering and Encumbering
• June 25 – Last Day to Post Payroll for Pay
             Period End Date 6/23
• June 29 – Last Day to Process FY07 Transactions
             Requiring CTR/ANF Approvals
• June 30 – Final Day to Receive FY07 Goods/Services –
             MMARS Available
 Key Close FY07/Open FY08 Dates
• July 2 – Cash Cutoff – 2007 Revenue Must Be
             Deposited by Noon
• July 7/July 8 – RE Roll
• July 9 – Last Day to Post Split Week Payroll for
             PPE 7/7
• July 11 – MMARS Unavailable
• July 13 – Last Day for Fixed Asset
• July 14 – Period 12 Fringe and
• July 20 – Balance Forward Begins
Federal Grants Update
    MMARS Reconciliation Reports
• NCA495W – CMIA Selection Report by Letter of Credit
    – This report captures all transactions submitted by the
      Commonwealth for reimbursement by the federal government since
      the last prior draw. Data is grouped and sorted by department,
      major program, appropriation, letter of credit number, CFDA
      number, program, sub account and doc ID. This report is
      scheduled to be generated weekly.
• NCA496W – BFY Non-Central Draw Grant Report
    – This report captures the funds drawn for all non-central draw grants
      as a percentage of the amount expended, and includes activity for
      all open budget fiscal years. This report is scheduled to be
      generated monthly.
•   NGA220W Reimbursable Grant Statement
    – This report captures inception-to-date activity for federal budget
      lines in the reimbursable grant budget structure. Data is grouped
      and sorted by department, major program, program, funding
      profile, funding priority and funding line number. This report is
      scheduled to be generated weekly.
NCA495W Report – Doc Direct
NCA495W Report – Doc Direct
NCA495W Report – Doc Direct

Draw COA   Disbursement Trans              Reference Trans
                                Draw Amt
   Other Reconciliation Reports
• Two detailed draw status reports are loaded
  to OSC Website under the Business
  Function/Federal Grant and Cost
  Accounting tab.

• (1) CMIA Weekly Draw Status report and
• (2) CMIA Historical Draw Status Report.
OSC Website
OSC Website
CMIA Weekly Draw Report
  Federal Payment Draw Status
• Departments should use the CMIA
  Weekly Draw Status Report to validate
  successful draws from their designated
  federal payment system.

• If there is a discrepancy the department
  should notify OSC immediately.
Historical CMIA Weekly Draw
   Federal Payment Draw Status
• Departments can use the Historical CMIA Weekly Draw
  Status Report to review the status of past draws requests
  from their designated federal payment system.

• Currently, OSC & ITD are evaluating different models to
  make the data from the Historical CMIA Weekly Draw
  Status Report available to departments.

• Departments can use Commonwealth Information
  Warehouse ( MA_Draw_Reimb_and_Receivable_Detail)
  table to research detailed transactions.
    Electronic Payments Update
• Statewide ePay contract is in place and pilot initiative is
  underway (with HCF, HRD, and DEP)
• Pilot goal is to expand functionality to other revenue
  streams and payment methods
• Many departments are using credit cards; pilot focus is
  ACH because it is the lowest cost option
• Evaluation of pilot projects to leverage experiences, identify
  best practices, and develop policies and procedures for
  future departmental implementations
• Steering committee provides assistance, guidance, and
  knowledge transfer
• For more information contact
    Electronic Payment Options
• Currently available under statewide ePay contract:
  – Automated Clearing House (ACH) – consumer
    provides bank information and authorization;
    we originate funds transfer
  – Credit cards – Visa/MC, AMEX, Discover
  – Interactive Voice Response (IVR)
  – “Signature” debit cards – point of sale Visa/MC
  – Wire transfers to TRE
  – Combination of any or all of the above as
           Late Breaking News
          HCF Pilot Success Story
• HCF Nursing Facility User Fee Renewals
  pilot ePay implementation went live on
  January 18, 2007
  –   6 days of processing
  –   14 ACH transactions
  –   Transaction cost of $11.20 to the Commonwealth
  –   Total $1,002,524.70 deposited directly into
      Commonwealth accounts from customers
 Consideration For Electronic Payments
• Which electronic payment options make sense for my
  Department’s business processes? Consider:
  – High dollar volume, low transaction number
  – High transaction number, low dollar volume
  – Industry vs. individuals?
  – Fees vs. data?
  – Likelihood that customer wants to do business this
• Other departmental considerations:
  – Business requirements
  – Technical resource requirements
  – Information (data) requirements
Transaction Cost Comparison

                Payment Method and Fees
Dollar Amount   ACH       MasterCard Visa
          $50      $.80         $1.85       $1.75
         $100      $.80         $2.68       $2.50
         $200      $.80         $4.32       $4.03
         $500      $.80         $9.26       $8.59
           ePay Implementation Costs and
   • Department absorbs costs
   • Development and testing costs for enhancements to
     departmental web applications and interfaces
   • (Dependent on payment type)
                                                            ACH VS. CREDIT CARD FEES

• Costs depend on level of               $18.00

  service contracted with EDS            $16.00                                            $16.16

  and mix of services provided:


   – ACH is flat rate of $0.80    FEES
     per transaction                      $6.00

   – Credit cards charge a % of           $4.00


                                                  $0.80        $0.80       $0.80       $0.80
     transaction value                    $0.00
                                                  $100         $200        $500        $1,000
                                                              TRANSACTION AMOUNT

To top