Fit-Gap - Meeting Summary
Prepared by / Meeting / Location / Date / Time
Martin / Commitment Control / RP-302 / 4/25/2018 / 1 – 4 PM
Attendees: Besana, Das, DuBuc, Guzman-Carreras, Hale,Hodum, E. Jacobs, Kentish, Mullins, R. Richards,Sanders, B. Smith, Strohfus, Tant, Vilsack, Vitale
Decisions
Date / Description
4/25/2018 / The budget will be controlled at a level two.
4/25/2018 / Budget will be entered at the Child level and transactions will be entered at this level.
4/25/2018 / Budget will be entered for the Function segment at the roll up “00”. It is not required to see the function detail level. The segments of Program, Purpose, Site, Bud Ref. need to function at the detail level.
4/25/2018 / Commitment control will be done via Set ID.
Action Items
Due / Status / Assignee / Description
TBD / Reggie / Development of a more realistic tree once values have been more firmly established.
TBD / Reggie / Provide the current combo edits for the current KK.
TBD / Reggie
Parking Lot
Due / Status / Description
TBD / TBD / The logic in the example provided for UCF01 was tentatively agreed to for RFD01 BRG01, but the value setting process my impact if it will mirror this process.The control segment for other units still to be determined.
TBD / TBD / Determine if adjustments for control at different levels is required.
TBD / TBD / Confirm if control via the fund segment is sufficient for control purposes and other segments for tracking purposes for prior to determine if different rules are needed for different Business Units.
TBD / TBD / Determine where combo edits will be used to prevent end user actions and where Speedchart functionally can be incorporated to assist end users
Meeting Agenda/Minutes:
Meeting opened at 1:08 PM
Reggie Besana and Dorann Mullins shared a presentation regarding Commitment Controland provided sample structure for commitment control. The example that was presented was for the UCF01 unit. The presentation included the topics as follows:
- Budget Definition
- Budget Accounts
- Budgetary Level
- Budget Tolerance 5%
- Parent/Child
- Control/Track
Dorann provided an example of the New Segments to include Organization, Org Descr, Fund Desci, Fund Value, Function – DESCR – Program SESCR, Program, Purpose, Project, Site DESCR, Site, Budget Ref DESCR, and Budget Ref.
Commitment Control Example Review and Discussion:
Commitment Control will be pointed to trees. Each one of these are using a tree so they can be tracked in the detailed ledgers. Reggie shared an example of the Tree Manager shared the hierarchical structure. We are going to control the budget at level 2. This is for demonstration purposes only. If we want to change and have control at lower level, it will need to be added in the structure. In the provided Commitment Control example, the budget definition will communicate with the tree and select level 2. The existing trees for project and department we control it at the 0 level and at the project Chartfield we are actually controlling it at the budget level. In the current system, it is called the budget category.
In the current example, the Fund Code is the only one with more than a single level of control and the budget definition for every Chartfield that we have. Reggie indicated that some of the lowest levels may be a level two while others may be controlled at lower levels if needed. Reggie stated that adjustments for control at different levels can be done if that is what is decided.
Reggie shared how the Parent budget will viewed in the system. He noted that the Organization is a node on the tree these are the two level two nodes on the tree and at the fund code level of details you are actually creating a budget at the Fund Code at the detail level. He stated that a transaction does not occur at the Parent Budget level. Question: Are we using Organization as the same it is an aggregated level? It will roll up to a tree node it is a folder it has to be a real value, but it is tagged as budgetary only. We are not planning to track at the Function level. Commitment Controls are needed if all of these are required in a transaction. We would loading at the Child level for the segments of program, purpose, and site. The “00” indicates the segment is a required field in your transaction. If you want to control it when you spend the money, we would need to establish the control at the site level. Currently, we are controlling at the total level. Reggie noted that for every different type of unique type of purpose, a corresponding a budget journal will need be generated. Within commitment control, we want to be able to track at an aggregated account level just like we do with SBL. The system needs to provide budget versus actuals information but control is not required at the detailed level. You control at the Parent level and budget and theChild budget is utilized to track the budget.
Commitment control can split it or break it at many different levels. For every organization for every fund, there is a one to many relationship to generate the Chartfield combinations. The Child budget creates the Parent budget and thus the Parent budgetcannot be more than the total Parent budget. Dorann explained that combo edits prevent users from entering invalid combinations and speed type guides them to entering the correct data so determinations will need to be made to establish where these would need to be utilized.
Reggie then shared the Budget Details Overview in PeopleSoft. He notated that the ITR is still waiting for approval. When the value sets are approved for the ITR, a more accurate example will be able to be provided. It was stated that the current values for the College of Medicine and ITR are anticipated to be consistent. If they are very typical, then they would be models for other groups. Question: When you load the budget you load it at the Child, when you are loading the Child budget you are updating the Parent budget? Yes. In the Child journal entry page, there is a check box that enables the Parent budget will be updated. Becky noted that once the values have been determined a future meeting is scheduled to revisit these questions for “KK” and have decisions regarding what is needed.
Reggie and Dorann asked if the same commitment control logic structure is going to be established in the other business units as it is in UCF01. They shared that we allow for different budget definition for other business, then we would need to set up a separate rule set that would result in a separate ledger group. This may result in challenges with reports and queries. It was asked if we wanted to use Program as a rule set then we need to create another Child to accommodate this modification? Reggie stated he could see if generating a new Child level would accommodate this request. Donna noted the desire was to track at the Child level and not commitment control. Dorann stated that providing views at the detail levels would provide good management visibility as opposed to Commitment Control.
There was some questioning that if even if the same rules are used, it would be pointing at a different node within the same tree, but testing will need to be done to confirm this will work.
Associated Revenue Discussion:
Currently, the way Associated Revenue is managed the revenue is tracked without budget and our rule sets is by department an organization. It was questioned if we wished to continue to allow for this process or to see if these could be moved into departments. It was question if a single Fund Code level could be used for this purpose. It was stated that after a review the organizational needs, it may require more than a single Fund Code for Associated Revenue but it is not likely to require many. Christy stated the Associated Revenue available to the budget as it is received.
It is mostly the matched departments that use this revenue. It was noted that the operations should revisit the impacted groups see which of the revenues could be moved into departments.
Currently, Associated Revenue is mixed bag into many different departments. We have to associate with our budget definition for the organization to actually track that without budget. The rule set has to if we can make that we are doing at the detail. The rule set at the organization is at the detailed level of the fund code. Because our rule set, you don’t load budget on the organization not on the associated budget. We are asking that this same logic be used for all of the business units. We wouldn’t use an associate revenue fund code with a regular budget. It can identified by fund code.
It was noted that Utility has been switch to the SBL and is not part of associated revenue. It was noted by Dorann that the setup of the match may change depending on the requirements of the Grants module.
Meeting adjourned at 3:55 p.m. until Accounts Payable (Vouchers All BU’s) fit gap at 9:00 a.m. tomorrow morning
T:\FI_LEAP\Financials 9.2\9.2 Project Management\Project Shared Documents\CoA Redesign Project\Phase 4 - CoA approved design\Fit Gaps\Fit Gap Sessions Agendas and Minutes\2018-4-24 Gen Ledger fit-gap minutes.docx
Page 1 of 3