Best Practices and Lessons Learned in Preparing for a Next Generation Contract Writing Solution

Transcription

1 Best Practices and Lessons Learned in Preparing for a Next Generation Contract Writing Solution Erin Lambert Office of Naval Research Slide #1

2 Overview ONR s Current Process/Needs ONR s Award Decision Award Structure (Proof of Concept) Lessons Learned The Way Ahead Slide #2

3 ONR s Current Process PR s created in Legacy System (NAVRIS) Commitment sent from NAVRIS to STARS Contracts created in Microsoft Word Contracting Personnel manually enter select data into NAVRIS (including obligation information) Award Execution in NAVRIS Obligation sent from NAVRIS to STARS Word Document signed and scanned Send Award info to other procurement/assistance related systems Data clerk manually posts to FPDS Select POCs manually post to FedBizOps Custom interfaces built for other systems (EDA, DAADS, etc.) - requires manual intervention Navy ERP to be deployed at ONR in Oct 2012 Slide #3

4 ONR s General Needs Contracts AND Grants functionality FAR/DFARS compliance Deployment by Oct 2012 (when Navy ERP is deployed at ONR) Web-based (no client footprint - to eliminate NMCI issues related to upgrades) Ability to send XML to external systems (EDA, FPDS, etc.) (PDS Compliance) Ability to integrate to financial systems (ERPs) Slide #4

5 ONR s Requirements (Solicitation) Software Functionality Functional Requirements (FAR/DFARS/DODGARS) (create/execute/administer awards/solicitations, workflows, clauses, milestones, reports, closeout, archiving, etc.) Intuitiveness / Ease of use Flexibility of software to accommodate agency unique requirements Grants (no CLINs) S&T focus (issue BAA, then PR, then Award) Integration and Technical Adaptability System Architecture, Extensibility, Security, System Management, etc. Interfacing/Integration Ability Scalability of Software Proof of Concept Approach Slide #5

6 Options (Business Case) Deploy Existing System (SPS) Pro already in production throughout DoD Con Lack of grants functionality Con Outdated architecture (client/server) Con Program being sunset (users know they would have to be trained and re-trained) Wait for Navy next-gen CWS solution Pro Will be in-line with the rest of Navy Con Not guaranteed to be ready in time to prepare for a NERP deployment at ONR in Oct 2012 (still unknown) extends manual processes Expand Navy ERP to meet ONR s functional needs Pro everything would be in one system (reduces integration) Con Too costly and previous efforts by other organizations to incorporate contract writing into ERPs has not been successful Build GOTS System Pro Will have some control over functionality and enhancements (govt. owns) Con Starting from scratch (takes a lot to get to an 80% solution) Con Not guaranteed to be ready in time to prepare for a NERP deployment at ONR in Oct 2012 (still unknown) extends manual processes *Deploy COTS CWS* Pro Existing product already in production throughout the Federal government Con Recurring costs (software maintenance) Slide #6

7 ONR s Decision / Way Ahead Compusearch s PRISM system was selected Benefits of PRISM: Deployed at other Federal Granting Organizations (i.e. NASA) Integrated with other SAP and Oracle requirements/financial systems (similar to Navy ERP/NAVRIS) Configurable system ONR Needs Contracts AND Grants functionality FAR/DFARS compliance Deployment by Oct 2012 (when Navy ERP is deployed at ONR) Web-based (to eliminate NMCI issues related to upgrades) Ability to send XML to external systems EDA, FPDS, DAADS, etc.) Ability to integrate to financial system PRISM Yes Yes regular updates Yes deployment (without integration) expected in 6 months Yes web page look and feel (intuitive GUI) Yes Will be accommodating all PDS requirements Yes Open API Slide #7

8 Award Structure Base Contract Proof of Concept Option 1 Integration to legacy financial system Option 2 Implementation (configuration, testing, training, deployment) Option 3 Operations and Maintenance Option 4 Operations and Maintenance Option 5 Operations and Maintenance Slide #8

9 Proof of Concept Mini-deployment User demo Configuration and testing of select scenarios No user licenses Scenarios (included integration to NAVRIS) Basic FFP Award Created from CR Line Items 1 fully funded line 1 fully funded line obligated for less than CR amount 1 unfunded line (future funding) 1 Option line Incremental Funding Mod Exercise Option Mod Reduction Mod (De-Ob and reduce TAV) Admin Mod Early testing, Early user involvement Slide #9

10 POC Results Basic Data exchange between NAVRIS and PRISM worked User Comments Quick learning curve of PRISM functionality by users Appears to improve processing time (especially with Mods) Users liked many of the features included with PRISM (look and feel, help options, etc.) No training needed for testing (intuitive) Assisted with change management (users involved early) Slide #10

11 Lessons Learned What Didn t Work Administrative delays led us to realize that integration to the legacy system was not going to provide an effective ROI Will need additional contract for integrating with Navy ERP Need Navy ERP Program Office approval for integration with non SPS system (Support from DASN) What Worked POC was a success Early user involvement Users were involved with developing business processes and testing the system this gave them an early look at the solution and helped form bottom-up buy-in for the product Users can t wait for the system to be deployed Users invited to the product demos Flexibility in contract structure (provided an out for integration and implementation) Slide #11

12 The Way Ahead Skipping Option 1 (Integration) PRISM will be deployed on its own - No longer integrating to legacy financial system Users will become familiar with the product Integrations to external systems still exist Reduced processing time for mods Next Steps Hold Configuration Workshops with users Integration requirements will focus on Navy ERP Data Migration (needs to be complete prior to Navy ERP deployment) Slide #12

13 Questions Slide #13