Glenn Marcos. Selection Committee RLI No. R0866301R2 Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution

Finance and Administrative Services Department PURCHASING DIVISION 115 S. Andrews Avenue, Room 212 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 954-357-6066 FAX 954-357-8535 DATE: September 27, 2013 TO: FROM: RE: Selection Committee Members Brenda J. Billingsley, Director, Purchasing Division Glenn Marcos Digitally signed by Glenn Marcos DN: cn=glenn Marcos, o=purchasing Division, ou, email=gmarcos@broward.org, c=us Date: 2013.09.27 19:51:54-04'00' on behalf of Brenda J. Billingsley Selection Committee RLI No. R0866301R2 Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution This memorandum contains supplementary communication which includes the following attachments: Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Ciber, Inc. Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Infor, Inc. Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from CedarCrestone, Inc. Correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Applications Software Technology Corporation. Additional correspondence dated September 27, 2013 from Applications Software Technology Corporation. Email dated September 27, 2013 from Ciber, Inc. Presentation/Ranking Meeting Minutes from. c: Glenn Marcos, Assistant Director, Purchasing Division Karen Walbridge, Purchasing Manager, Purchasing Division Carolyn Messersmith, Purchasing Agent III, Purchasing Division Glenn Miller, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney s Office Andrea Froome, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney s Office Rene Harrod, Assistant County Attorney, County Attorney s Office John Bruno, Chief Information Officer, Enterprise Technology Services Division Melissa Grimm, ERP Project Administrator, Enterprise Technology Services Division BJB/cmm attachments Broward County Board of County Commissioners Sue Gunzburger Dale V.C. Holness Kristin Jacobs Martin David Kiar Chip LaMarca Stacy Ritter Tim Ryan Barbara Sharief Lois Wexler www.broward.org

September 27, 2013 To: From: Subject: Broward County Ciber, Inc. Responses to the alleged misleading claims for RLI R0866301R2 We welcome the opportunity to respond to certain claims made by competing vendors, as provided in attachments delivered to Ciber via email on September 26, 2013, regarding the subject RLI. Top 20 Counties CedarCrestone Letter Dated September 24, 2013 CedarCrestone s claims are inaccurate regarding the Top 20 Counties portion of the Ciber presentation: Ciber s position is we are the only vendor competing at Broward to have Primed similar scoped ERP implementations at the Top 20 Counties, which we still believe is correct o Apparently CedarCrestone, or members of their team, have contracted with some of these Counties for services, but only Ciber has Primed Top 20 County ERP implementations o CedarCrestone s aggregated list as provided to Broward via a letter dated September 24, 2013 is meaningless in the context of this subject about Priming the largest County ERP projects Top 20 Criteria o Ciber s slide #17 clearly states the criteria for Top 20 inclusion as Rankings based upon Annual Operating Budget, Population, and Number of Employees, not as measured by population as CedarCrestone claims King County Project o Ciber Primed and completed the ERP implementation known as the King County ABT Program, as is stated on our slide #21 o King County is a reference customer for Ciber and the video we presented from the King County Chief Administrator at the 9/11 SC meeting is proof o Ciber acknowledges that CedarCrestone has a few former Ciber employees who did work on the King County project during their employment at Ciber o CedarCrestone s continued claims around the King County project are blatantly misleading o Note that Ciber s King County project included transit; Ciber also implemented ERP for Denver RTD Page 1

September 27, 2013 Document Management System CedarCrestone Letter Dated September 18, 2013 CedarCrestone s claims are inaccurate regarding the WebCenter product inclusion: Ciber s clear intention to provide this product is shown in our response to the subject RLI, Exhibit 2 Functional Requirements Matrix, where we list WebCenter in the Module Required column for certain categories (IT 39.00, 40.00, 41.00, 132.00, and 151.00) The WebCenter product was incorrectly categorized and inadvertently left off of the Oracle software pricing itemization of products in our response Ciber s letter dated June 28, 2013 was not an offer as claimed, but a response to a specific clarification question asked by the County following Oral presentations, Please clarify the cost of the proposed Web Center document management solution that was proposed including all relevant cost components. o Ciber replied with a detailed and itemized response for all relevant cost components as requested o As this cost was part of our overall cost estimating, there is no incremental charge to the County o Ciber did not offer any free labor as CedarCrestone claims This was not a change to our proposal but the clarification of an oversight We understand the significance of this project to the County, and very much appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you. Thank you, Vic Bentley Client Partner, Public Sector Oracle Practice Ciber, Inc. Page 2

Infor Response to BROWARD COUNTY R0866301R2, Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution Response to the Alleged Misleading Claims September 27, 2013 Submitted by: John Cifor, Sr. Account Executive office: 651 767 6763 mobile: 407 401 3837 email: John.Cifor@Infor.com Infor Public Sector

September 27, 2013 Ms. Carolyn Messersmith, Procurement Agent II Broward County Finance and Administrative Services Department Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 RE: Responses to the alleged misleading claims Dear Ms. Messersmith: Infor appreciates the opportunity to respond to the alleged misleading claims regarding our proposal. As you heard at the Selection Committee meeting, Infor is a responsive bidder to RLI No. R0866301R2, and is the lowest cost responder by over $15 million. This is significant cost savings relative to the other bidders, and this should matter a lot to the citizens of Broward County. We are able to offer the lowest cost because our single handshake solution provides inherent cost savings that we are able to pass on to you. Infor is the only bidder implementing, hosting, and supporting our own software. As such, there is no risk premium for finger pointing in our proposal. We accept full responsibility for the success of the County ERP project. No other bidder brings the software manufacturer to the table to stand behind your success and verify the roadmap of the solution you will implement. Unlike the Oracle ERP solutions under consideration, the Lawson ERP is our go-forward solution that will continue to be invested in and supported. The PeopleSoft roadmap presented by Cedar Crestone was misleading in that they used it to argue that PeopleSoft, not E-Business, is Oracle s future. The truth is that neither PeopleSoft nor E-Business is Oracle s future their future is the Fusion ERP. We recommend that the County clarify directly with Oracle what platform Fusion is being built on, as well as confirm in writing that a migration from PeopleSoft or E-Business to Fusion would be free to the County (including implementation costs) in order to avoid investing in a solution that has a roadmap to replacement. The Infor proposal offers not only the lowest cost, but the lowest risk and greatest value to Broward County. As the 3 rd largest supplier of enterprise applications and services worldwide, Infor is exponentially larger than the other bidders under consideration. We have the financial fortitude and deep resource bench to deliver this critical County project, and we stand behind our original proposal. We intend to deliver this project on time and within budget. Performance Management and Data Warehousing/Analytics As you heard directly from Infor s President, Duncan Angove, during the opening session of our solution demonstration, Infor is investing heavily in expanding and enhancing the Infor Lawson solution. Capabilities of the Lawson solution have evolved significantly since our proposal response was submitted. The licenses that were proposed now offer greater functional fit to the County's requirements, particularly in the areas of Performance Management and Business Intelligence. Our original proposal included Lawson Business Intelligence (LBI), and as noted in our Responses to Clarification Questions document dated July 20, 2012, "The latest version of Lawson Business Intelligence, including Lawson Analytics and Business Performance Warehouse, will be provided to Broward County as part of our proposal at no additional cost." This is not a deviation from our original proposal; it is simply an evolution of capabilities of the proposed LBI license.

Similarly, we now offer robust performance management capabilities as part of our proposed Budgeting and Planning solution. We learned during the software demonstrations that Broward has a performance-based culture, and that establishing performance goals / providing timely reporting and feedback are critical. We are pleased to be able to assure Broward County of our ability to meet your needs in this area. This is not a deviation from our original proposal; it is simply an evolution of capabilities of the proposed Budgeting and Planning license. Provision of Hosting Infor offers the County a true single point of accountability for the entire ERP solution, including hosting. Infor is the single point of contact for all hosted and managed services items ranging from system administration, maintenance, end to end monitoring, service delivery management and product support. Broward County will not interact with Amazon as Infor is only leasing infrastructure through their service; contracting and delivery is handled between Infor and the County. Amazon Web Services provides system resources such as hardware, storage and secure facilities to Infor to provision our Cloud Customer base. Customers have their own Virtual Private Cloud that is created, maintained and managed by the Infor team. Best regards, John Cifor - Sr. Account Executive office: 651 767 6763 mobile: 407 401 3837 fax: 407 648 9178 john.cifor@infor.com http://www.infor.com

September 27, 2013 Carolyn Messersmith Purchasing Agent III Broward County Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Direct Phone: 678-385-7540 Email: Brian.Fees@cedarcrestone.com Brian E. Fees Chief Financial Officer Dear Ms. Messersmith: During Infor s presentation on September 11 th, Mr. Beal expressed his opinion that our comparison between the PeopleSoft roadmap and the E-Business Suite roadmap was a little misleading. To the contrary, the statements that were made while discussing the roadmaps for these application suites (slides 7 and 8, shown below) are simply factual observations that were submitted for the Selection Committee s consideration, including: New versions of PeopleSoft are being released more frequently than new versions of the E-Business Suite. The current version of PeopleSoft (which is 9.2) was released 40 months after the release of the previous version (which was 9.1). In comparison, the current version of the E-Business Suite (which is 12.2) was released 52 months after the release of the previous version (which was 12.1). The PeopleSoft roadmap slide has more definition than the comparable roadmap slide for the E-Business Suite: o The PeopleSoft roadmap slide shows planned dates for future releases while the E-Business Suite roadmap slide does not. o The PeopleSoft roadmap slide shows multiple future versions (9.3 and 9.4) while the E-Business Suite roadmap slide only shows versions up to 12.2, which is the current version. o We are not aware that any E-Business Suite roadmap slide exists which shows future dates or any future versions beyond 12.2. Each of the roadmap slides shown below has been included in a publicly available document from Oracle, and the specific source has been cited within the slide. 1255 Alderman Drive Alpharetta, GA 30005 p. 678.385.7540 f. 678.385.7541 WWW.CEDARCRESTONE.COM

Applications Software Technology Corporation September 27, 2013 Carolyn Messersmith Purchasing Agent III Broward County Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Re: Emails from September 26, 2013 for RLI R0866301R2 Dear Ms. Messersmith, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the claims being made by one of the vendors participating in the County s ERP bid process. We understand that this is a significant project for the County, and AST always strives to excel in competitive procurements based upon our qualifications and track record. We believe that it is important that we respond to these claims, and have carefully reviewed the other bidder s letters provided by you. We would like to submit the following clarifications to clear the deliberate negative campaign launched by CedarCrestone. 1. The assertions made by CedarCrestone against AST are baseless and intended to deliberately mislead the Selection Committee. For example, in paragraph one, they list the top Counties they have previously contracted with. This is a careful choice of words because the work performed at these Counties by this vendor is add-on miscellaneous work, and does not include a full implementation of the ERP software. Some of the Counties listed do not even use the PeopleSoft software, which CedarCrestone has proposed, for all of their ERP requirements. The listed Counties used other system integrators for their ERP system implementations and CedarCrestone and their partners provided small roles either during or after the implementation. As a matter of fact, CedarCrestone has not provided a single CedarCrestone County Government reference in their RFP response. If they had comparable ERP implementation experience at any County, we question why they were not provided in their proposal. It should also be noted that many of the proposed team members of this Vendor, including their proposed project manager, highlighted their experience working for a competing vendor and not for the CedarCrestone team. During their presentation and subsequent correspondence, they have tried to divert attention away from their lack of full life cycle ERP implementation experience for a local government inside the State of Florida or anywhere in the USA. 2. In paragraph 3, they have made baseless accusations about AST s track record by turning on its head the customary day to day project logistics that routinely adjust schedules for interim milestones and does not constitute the delay of the overall project itself. We stand by our claim of 100% on-time and on-budget performance. We have always worked with our customers to keep the ERP projects within scope and schedule and have never failed in our implementations or have projects terminated or litigated against. We fully understand the 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL 60563 Phone 630.778.1180 Fax 630.778.1179 www.astcorporation.com

Applications Software Technology Corporation resource constraints and organizational change management challenges faced by our local government customers when implementing such large transformation projects. We have demonstrated the flexibility in making small adjustments to go-live dates to meet the Customer s specific business needs, logistics and staff availability, which is within the prerogative of project managers and is done with mutual consent. To take out of context such interim phase/wave milestones and equate them with project delays is not only incorrect, it is deliberately misleading. At Pinellas County, the project plan included HR/Payroll going live first; the Financials modules were second; followed by other waves for budgeting and business intelligence etc. The first wave went live on January 1 st, 2011 as per the original schedule. The Finance team at the County requested an additional two months (for the second wave only) in order to use their reduced staff to complete the testing and training. The 5% county-wide staff reduction affected their team the most. It should be noted that the Hyperion Public Sector Planning and Budgeting module selected by the County (against our advice) was a brand new module and Pinellas County needed the extra time to test and absorb the module. AST and the County mutually agreed to move the go-live dates for Financials at no additional charge to the County. This was an interim phase within the larger project. We continued with the other phases of the project to deliver the entire project on time and as per Pinellas County s expectations. A minor (one person) staff reduction in the Purchasing team was made on a temporary basis by AST to accommodate the pairing with the County s available staff and was done with the County s understanding. AST provided unplanned additional resources free of cost to the County to help configure the Hyperion module when needed. Overall, the County received more consulting service hours than was originally proposed at no additional cost. The Hillsborough County and City of Tampa timeline quoted in the letter was what was listed in the statement of work based on a specific start date. The originally proposed project start date was not adhered to due to the delay in the execution of the contract. Once executed, the end date was appropriately adjusted. Please note that the adjustments to the project wave 1 go-live dates at Hillsborough were done with mutual agreement. The Hillsborough County and City of Tampa system has been live and stable for close to 2 months and the subsequent waves are progressing well. The fact that the AST team has accomplished the largest of its kind, shared service model of an Oracle ERP implementation for two municipalities in record time is a matter of pride and recognition, and not deserving of these baseless allegations. The management at the City and County recognize our accomplishments and were very complimentary of the hard work of both our AST employees and the flexibility shown by AST management to meet their unique needs. 3. AST had stated in our presentation that EBS was Oracle s flagship ERP system, and the only ERP product developed by Oracle on Oracle s technology and database platform. The other ERP software now owned by Oracle, came through acquisitions and do not exclusively run on Oracle technology and were not developed to fully leverage the Oracle technology. We had also pointed out that Oracle s safe harbor policy prohibits anybody from speculating on future releases of Oracle software. Oracle s Applications Unlimited policy attached herewith is the 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL 60563 Phone 630.778.1180 Fax 630.778.1179 www.astcorporation.com

only official and correct statement of direction on the longevity of the products and clearly establishes continued support for the Oracle EBS applications, for as long as Broward County would own the software. During our presentation, AST also stated that the use of Oracle EBS applications is more prevalent among local government jurisdictions and certainly among the local governments in Florida. The EBS list provided by CedarCrestone is incomplete and deliberately misleading. In the short time available to us, we have completed a partial list of EBS customers which shows many additional local government customers that utilize Oracle EBS. 4. Lastly, we would like to point out that Oracle cancelled CedarCrestone s partner status, and filed a lawsuit against them due to concerns regarding their deliberate misinterpretation of confidential information available to partners from Oracle. We suggest that the County should not waste its time on CedarCrestone s baseless and sweeping allegations against all other bidders and disqualify them immediately for lack of qualifications and unprofessional conduct. The consistent completion of ERP projects on-budget is rare in the industry and stands in stark contrast to the examples from our competitors on this RFP. To quote a few: Montgomery County, MD (EBS implementation) the final cost was almost double from the original proposed and contracted amount. King County, WA final cost reached almost 150% of the original contract. AST s qualifications and track record of full lifecycle E-Business Suite implementations for Florida government entities is unparalleled. This week we won the Oracle Excellence Award ( Partner of the Year, previously known as the Titan Award) from Oracle Corporation at its OpenWorld conference in San Francisco on September 22 nd, 2013. We have won the Oracle Partner of the Year award three times in the last four years, which further establishes our credentials. It is obvious from the references provided in the RFP responses that AST is the only vendor under consideration with multiple full lifecycle ERP implementations for comparable Florida municipal government entities. We look forward to further meaningful discussions with the County on this important engagement and stand ready to answer the Selection Committee s specific questions. If you have any additional questions or clarifications, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Regards, Rick A. McGaughy Regional Sales Director

Applications Software Technology Corporation September 27, 2013 Carolyn Messersmith Purchasing Agent III Broward County Purchasing Division 115 S. Andrews Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Re: Emails from September 26, 2013 for RLI R0866301R2 Dear Ms. Messersmith, Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the claims made by one of the vendors participating in the ERP bid process. AST always strives to win projects based on our qualifications and track record and we pride ourselves on communicating honestly and truthfully with both current and potential clients. We have carefully reviewed the other bidders letters provided to you and would like to submit the following clarifications to clear the deliberate negative campaign launched by CedarCrestone. 1. CedarCrestone s allegations against AST are baseless and intended to deliberately mislead the Selection Committee. For example, in paragraph one, they list the top Counties they have previously contracted with. However, what CedarCrestone fails to mention is the fact that the work they have performed at these Counties is add-on miscellaneous work, and does not include full implementation of the ERP software. Some of the Counties on the list do not even use the PeopleSoft software, which CedarCrestone has proposed for Broward County. Additionally, the Counties they have listed used other system integrators as the Prime Contractor for their ERP system implementation, while CedarCrestone and their partners provided small roles either during or after the implementation. In CedarCrestone s RFP response they did not include a single reference from a full lifecycle ERP implementation at a County government. The selection committee should seriously consider why, if CedarCrestone had the comparable ERP implementation experience, did they not provide these references with their formal proposal. Also many of the proposed team members from this Vendor, including the project manager, highlighted experience; most of which was actually performed while employed by another competing consulting firm. During the presentation and subsequent correspondence, through a clever of choice of words and baseless allegations against all other bidders, they have tried to divert the attention away from their lack of experience in delivering a full life cycle ERP implementation for a local government inside the state of Florida or anywhere in the USA. 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL 60563 Phone 630.778.1180 Fax 630.778.1179 www.astcorporation.com

Applications Software Technology Corporation 2. In paragraph 3, they made baseless accusations about AST s track record by misrepresenting the adjustments made to a 3 year schedule for interim milestones and which does not constitute the delay of the project itself. We stand by our claim of 100% on-time and on-budget performance. We have always worked with our customers to keep the ERP projects within scope and schedule and have never failed in our implementations or have projects terminated or litigated against. We fully understand the resource s and organizational change management challenges faced by our local government customers while undergoing large transformational projects. We have routinely demonstrated flexibility in making small adjustments to the go-live dates to meet the Customer s specific business needs, logistics and staff availability, which is within the prerogative of project managers and is done with mutual consent. To take out of context such interim phase/wave milestones and equate them with project delays is not only inaccurate, it is deliberately misleading. At Pinellas County, the project plan called for HR/Payroll to go-live first; Financials modules were second; followed by other waves for budgeting and business intelligence. The first wave went live on January 1 st, 2011 as per the original schedule. The Finance team at the County requested an additional two months (for the second wave only) in order to use their reduced staff to complete the testing and training. A county-wide staff reduction of 5% affected the implementation team the most. It should be noted that the Hyperion Public Sector Planning and Budgeting module selected by County (not on AST s advice) was a brand new module and Pinellas County needed the extra time to test and absorb the module. AST and the County mutually agreed to move the go-live dates for Financials at no additional charge to the County. This was an interim phase within the larger project. We continued with the other phases of the project to deliver the entire project on time and per Pinellas County s expectations. A minor staff reduction of one person in the Purchasing team was made on a temporary basis by AST to accommodate the pairing with County s available staff and was done with the County s understanding. AST provided unplanned additional resources, free of cost, to the County to help configure the Hyperion module when needed. Overall the County received more hours of consulting services than originally proposed, at no additional cost. The timeline quoted in the Hillsborough County and City of Tampa letter was what was listed in the statement of work based on a specific start date. The project start date was not adhered to due to the delay in the execution of the contract, therefore the end date was appropriately adjusted. The adjustments to the project wave 1 go-live dates at Hillsborough were done with mutual agreement. 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL 60563 Phone 630.778.1180 Fax 630.778.1179 www.astcorporation.com

Applications Software Technology Corporation The system has been live and stable for close to 2 months and the subsequent waves are progressing well. We are proud of the fact that the AST team has accomplished the largest of its kind shared service model of an Oracle ERP implementation for two municipalities in record time and CedarCrestone s allegations of problems with this project are baseless. The management at the City and County recognize the accomplishments and were very complimentary of the hard work of AST employees and with the flexibility shown by AST management to meet their unique needs. 3. AST stated in our presentation that EBS was Oracle s flagship ERP system, and the only ERP product developed by Oracle on Oracle s technology and database platform. The other ERP software now owned by Oracle, came through acquisitions and do not exclusively run on Oracle technology nor have they been developed to fully leverage Oracle technology. We also pointed out that Oracle s safe harbor policy prohibits anybody from speculating on future releases. Oracle s Applications Unlimited policy attached herewith is the only official and correct statement of direction on the longevity of the products and clearly establishes continued support for the Oracle EBS applications, for as long as Broward County would own the software. 4. Lastly, we would like to point out that CedarCrestone has demonstrated unprofessional, speculative and liable behavior which includes deliberate misinterpretation of confidential information available to partners from Oracle. Their actions have in the past resulted in the cancelation of CedarCrestone's partner status with Oracle, as well as Oracle filing a lawsuit against them. We suggest that the County not waste time considering CedarCrestone's baseless and sweeping allegations against other bidders and disqualify them immediately for lack of qualifications and unprofessional conduct. The consistent completion of ERP project on-budget is rare in the industry and stands in stark contrast to the examples from our competitors on this RFP. To quote a few: Montgomery County, MD (EBS implementation) the final cost almost doubled from that in the original contract. King County, WA cost escalated significantly from the original contract. AST s qualifications and track record of full lifecycle E-Business Suite implementations for Florida government entities is unparalleled. This week we won the Oracle Excellence Award ( Partner of the Year previously known as the Titan Award) from Oracle Corporation at its OpenWorld conference in San Francisco on September 22 nd, 2013. We have won the Oracle Partner of the Year award three times in the last four years, which further establishes our credentials. 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL 60563 Phone 630.778.1180 Fax 630.778.1179 www.astcorporation.com

Applications Software Technology Corporation It is obvious from the references provided in the RFP responses that AST is the only vendor under consideration with multiple full lifecycle ERP implementations for comparable Florida municipal government entities. We look forward to further meaningful discussions with the County on this important engagement and stand ready to answer the Selection Committee s specific questions. Please feel free to reach me at the contact information below for any further clarifications. Regards, Rick A. McGaughy Regional Sales Director Attachments: Oracle Applications Unlimited Brochure Oracle Lifetime Support Policy Brochure Oracle EBS Customer List 1755 Park Street, Suite 100 Naperville, IL 60563 Phone 630.778.1180 Fax 630.778.1179 www.astcorporation.com

An Executive Guide to Oracle Applications Unlimited Summary of Applications Unlimited: 1. Applications Unlimited is Oracle s plan to provide ongoing enhancements to all our application product lines beyond the delivery of Oracle Fusion Applications. The key driving factor is the protection of our customer s investments. Our commitment has been demonstrated by new major releases of all our applications product lines. 2. Not only will we keep enhancing our applications, we will also keep supporting them. Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy further extends Oracle s support for its applications. 3. Applications Unlimited does not impact the timeline around Oracle Fusion Applications. The scale of our applications business allows us to continue investing in all of our existing product lines, including our Fusion Applications, which in turn allows us to address a wide range of customer requirements. 4. Choice is the operative word. Customers can stay where they are for as long as they want or move to next-generation applications when they are ready. Everybody can get there, in time, based on their business needs. There will be no forced migration. Applications Unlimited is Oracle s plan to provide ongoing enhancements to all our applications product lines beyond the delivery of Oracle Fusion Applications. Applications Unlimited will provide customers with more visibility into our plans and help you derive continual success with your current applications by delivering dedicated, worldclass development and support for years to come. The key driving factor behind this strategy is protecting our customer s investments. To further protect our customer s investments, Oracle offers a Lifetime Support Policy. Oracle s industry-leading support policy covers your entire technology environment, from database to middleware to applications. Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy puts our customers in control of their upgrade strategy. Our flexible support policy stages make it easier to plan and budget for Oracle s product upgrades. Along with the Lifetime Support Policy, Applications Unlimited is beneficial to customers because Oracle is giving customers the option to choose what is best for their business. Customers can continue to derive value from their existing applications, which we plan to continuously update, or they can upgrade to future technologies if there is a business case to do so. It is entirely the customer s choice. There will be no forced migrations. Applications Unlimited will not impact the planned delivery of Fusion Applications. In addition to providing ongoing enhancements to the current Oracle Applications, Oracle has dedicated development teams designing the first release of Oracle Fusion Applications and working through upgrade scenarios with customer advisory boards and user groups. Our strategy allows us to protect the investments customers have made in Oracle Applications. Oracle has the resources to continue working on our existing product lines. When Oracle acquired PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, and Siebel, the vast majority of their development and support teams were retained. In addition, we are leveraging our Oracle Fusion Middleware platform and infrastructure investments across all product lines. Prior to the acquisitions, each of the product lines had significant resources allocated to individual next-generation initiatives. The combined companies have more resources than the acquired companies Copyright 2006, Oracle. All rights reserved. Oracle, JD Edwards, and PeopleSoft, and Siebel are registered trademarks of Oracle Corporation and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Page 1 of 2

had separately. These resources can be focused on functional enhancements instead of overlapping development on infrastructure for each of the product lines. With the simultaneous launch of five new product releases, Oracle is delivering on our promise of Applications Unlimited: providing customers with continued releases in each product line, lifetime support, and a clear upgrade path to future releases. Oracle is working closely with our customer communities - including our CIO Advisory Board, Product and Industry Strategy Councils, and Customer Advisory Boards (CABs) - and with individual customers to determine product direction. We are also dedicating extensive time to analyzing customer enhancement requests across all product lines. In addition, Oracle's independent global User Groups have created a single "Fusion Channel", through which user group members worldwide can assist and provide feedback directly into our development effort. To learn more about how to get involved with the Fusion Channel initiative, contact your local User Group, or go to Hwww.iouc.orgH for more information. More Resources: HTUwww.oracle.comUTH (search word: applications unlimited) HTUhttp://www.oracle.com/applications/applica tions-unlimited.htmluth The information provided is intended to outline our general product direction. It is intended for information purposes only, and may not be incorporated into any contract. It is not a commitment to deliver any material, code, or functionality, and should not be relied upon in making purchasing decision. The development, release, and timing of any features or functionality described for Oracle s products remains at the sole discretion of Oracle. Copyright 2006, Oracle. All rights reserved. Oracle, JD Edwards, and PeopleSoft, and Siebel are registered trademarks of Oracle Corporation and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Page 2 of 2

ORACLE INFORMATION-DRIVEN SUPPORT Oracle Lifetime Support Policy Oracle Applications

Oracle Applications Maximize your support investment, unlock the full value of your Oracle products, and control your upgrade strategy with the industry s leading support policy. Simple, predictable, flexible, and the most comprehensive support policy available, the Oracle Lifetime Support Policy helps drive your business success. Oracle s industryleading support policy covers your entire technology environment, from database to middleware to applications an industry first, only from Oracle. Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy also puts you in control of your upgrade strategy. Our flexible support policy stages make it easier for you to plan and budget for Oracle s exclusive product upgrades. You ll enjoy continued peace of mind, knowing that we ll always be there to support your business. When it s time to upgrade, you ll have rights to major product releases, so you can benefit from Oracle s technology leadership and keep pace with the world of business. Expect lifetime support. Expect control of your technology future with Oracle s Lifetime Support Policy. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 1

Oracle Lifetime Support: From Five Years to Forever Oracle Lifetime Support Policy With Oracle Support, you know up front and with certainty how long your Oracle products are supported. The Lifetime Support Policy provides access to technical experts for as long as you license your Oracle products and consists of three support stages: Premier Support, Extended Support, and Sustaining Support. It delivers maximum value by providing you with rights to major product releases so you can take full advantage of technology and product enhancements. Your technology and your business keep moving forward together. Premier Support provides a standard five-year support policy for Oracle Technology and Oracle Applications products. You can extend support for an additional three years with Extended Support for specific releases or receive indefinite technical support with Sustaining Support. Premier Support As an Oracle customer, you can expect the best with Premier Support, our award-winning, nextgeneration support program. Premier Support provides you with maintenance and support of your Oracle Database, Oracle Fusion Middleware, and Oracle Applications for five years from their general availability date. You benefit from Major product and technology releases Technical support Access to My Oracle Support Updates, fixes, security alerts, data fixes, and critical patch updates Tax, legal, and regulatory updates Upgrade scripts Certification with most new third-party products/versions Certification with most new Oracle products Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 2

Extended Support Your technology future is assured with Oracle s Extended Support. Extended Support lets you stay competitive, with the freedom to upgrade on your timetable. If you take advantage of Extended Support, it provides you with an extra three years of support for specific Oracle releases for an additional fee. You benefit from Major product and technology releases Technical support Access to My Oracle Support Updates, fixes, security alerts, data fixes, and critical patch updates Tax, legal, and regulatory updates Oracle Applications Unlimited: The Choice Is Yours Oracle Applications Unlimited and the Lifetime Support Policy represent our commitment to deliver an Oracle Superior Ownership Experience by protecting and extending your investment through enhancements to the products and solutions you have licensed. Oracle Applications Unlimited gives you the option to do what is best for your business: continue to derive value from your existing applications or upgrade to next-generation Oracle Applications, such as those built on Oracle Fusion Middleware, when it makes business sense. The choice is yours. Upgrade scripts Certification with most existing third-party products/versions Certification with most existing Oracle products Extended Support may not include certification with some new third-party products/versions. Sustaining Support Sustaining Support puts you in control of your upgrade strategy. When Premier Support expires, if you choose not to purchase Extended Support, or when Extended Support expires, Sustaining Support will be available for as long as you license your Oracle products. With Sustaining Support, you receive technical support, including access to our online support tools, knowledgebases, and technical support experts. You benefit from Major product and technology releases Technical support Access to My Oracle Support Fixes, updates, and critical patch updates created during the Premier Support stage Upgrade scripts created during the Premier Support stage Sustaining Support does not include New updates, fixes, security alerts, data fixes, and critical patch updates New tax, legal, and regulatory updates New upgrade scripts Certification with new third-party products/versions Certification with new Oracle products For more specifics on Premier Support, Extended Support, and Sustaining Support, please refer to Oracle s Technical Support Policies. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 3

Oracle E-Business Suite Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends 11.0.3 May 1999 Feb 2007 Not Available Jan 2009 11.5.1 May 2000 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.2 Oct 2000 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.3 Jan 2001 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.4 Jun 2001 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.5 Sep 2001 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.6 Jan 2002 Jul 2006 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.7 May 2002 May 2007 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.8 Nov 2002 Nov 2007 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.9 Jun 2003 Jun 2008 Not Available Indefinite 11.5.10 Nov 2004 Nov 2010 Nov 2013* Indefinite 12 Jan 2007 Jan 2012** Jan 2015 Indefinite 12.1 May 2009 Dec 2016 ** Dec 2019 Indefinite 12.2 Sep 2013 Sep 2018 Sep 2021 Indefinite *For Sustaining Support for Oracle E-Business Suite 11.5.10, provided from December 2013 December 2015, Oracle will continue to provide: Severity 1 fixes, critical patch updates and United States Tax Form 1099 updates for the 2013 and 2014 tax years. During this period, payroll regulatory tax updates will only be provided for the countries and tax years specified below. Country 2013 Tax Year 2014 Tax Year United States and January 1, 2013 December January 1, 2014 December 31, 2014 Canada 31, 2014 United Kingdom N/A April 6, 2013 April 5, 2014 Australia N/A July 1, 2013 June 30, 2014 Customers must have the indicated baseline patches (or above) for new Severity 1 production bug fixes as per Patch Requirements for Extended Support of Oracle E-Business Suite Release 11.5.10 (see Doc ID 883202.1). ** For more detailed information on EBS 12.0 and 12.1 bug fixing and for Extended Support minimum patch pre-requisites, please refer to the EBS Error Correction Support Policy (Doc ID 1195034.1) For additional information regarding the above points, please see the EBS Support Policies FAQ (Doc ID 1494891.1). Customers running Oracle Fusion Middleware 10gR2 and 10gR3 in the Oracle E-Business Suite version 12 internal technology stack will remain supported for the duration of the support period for Oracle E-Business Suite 12. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications - September, 2013 Page 8

Oracle s Product Hub Options for E-Business Suite Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Demand Side Product Data Synchronization for GDSN 12.1 May 2009 May 2014 Not Available Indefinite Supply Side Product Data Synchronization for GDSN Nov 2004 Nov 2010 Nov 2013 Indefinite 11.5.10 Supply Side Product Data Synchronization for GDSN 12 Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Jan 2014 Indefinite Oracle ilearning Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends ilearning 5.0 Jan 2005 Jan 2010 Not Available Indefinite ilearning 5.2 Sep 2008 Sep 2013 Sep 2016 Indefinite ilearning 6.0 Dec 2011 Dec 2016 Dec 2019 Indefinite Oracle Student Learning Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Student Learning 3.1.x Jan 2009 Jul 2014 Not Available Indefinite Student Learning 3.2.x Sep 2012 Jul 2014 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 9

Oracle s Hyperion Releases Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustianing Support Ends Oracle Enterprise Performance Management Releases Essbase Analytics Link for Hyperion Financial Management (11.1.1.4 and higher) Essbase Analytics Link for Hyperion Financial Management Link (11.1.2..2 and higher) May 2011 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Apr 2012 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Essbase 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Essbase 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Application Builder for.net 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion BI+ 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion BI+ 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Hyperion Business Rules 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Capital Asset Planning 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Capital Asset Planning 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Data Integration Management 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Data Relationship Management 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Data Relationship Management 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Disclosure Management 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Close Analytics Dashboard 11.1.2.x Oct 2011 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Close Management 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Data Quality Management 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Financial Data Quality Management 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Management 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Financial Management 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Financial Data Management Enterprise Edition 11.1.2.x Apr 2013 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Performance Scorecard 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Performance Scorecard 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 23

Oracle s Hyperion Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Hyperion Planning 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Planning 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Project Financial Planning 11.1.2.x Apr 2012 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Profitability and Cost Management 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Profitability and Cost Management 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Public Sector Planning and Budgeting 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Quantitative Management and Reporting for Solvency II 2.1.x Apr 2012 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Strategic Finance 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Strategic Finance 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Tax Provision 11.1.2.x Feb 2013 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Hyperion Workforce Planning 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Hyperion Workforce Planning 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2018 Apr 2021 Indefinite Crystal Ball 11.1.1.x Jul 2008 Jul 2013 Not Available Indefinite Crystal Ball 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Oracle Integrated Margin Planning 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite Oracle Strategic Operational Planning 11.1.2.x Apr 2010 Apr 2015 Apr 2018 Indefinite System 9 Products Application Link 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Jun 2010 Application Link 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2009 Not Available Jun 2010 Business Intelligence + 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Business Intelligence + 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Business Intelligence 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Business Intelligence Analytic Services (including AIS, AAS, High Availability Services) 9.0.x Business Intelligence + Analytic Services (including AIS, AAS, High Availability Services) 9.2.x Business Intelligence + Analytic Services (including AIS, AAS, High Availability Services) 9.3.x Business Intelligence + Application Builder (J2EE and.net) 9.0.x Business Intelligence + Application Builder (J2EE and.net) 9.2.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications - September, 2013 Page 24

Oracle s Hyperion Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Capital Expense Planning 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Capital Expense Planning 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Capital Expense Planning 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Data Integration Management 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Data Integration Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Data Integration Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Metrics 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Metrics 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Metrics 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Financial Data Quality Management 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Financial Data Quality Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Financial Data Quality Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Financial Management 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Financial Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Financial Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite License Server 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite License Server 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite License Server 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Master Data Management 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Master Data Management 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Master Data Management 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Performance Scorecard 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Performance Scorecard 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Performance Scorecard 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 25

Oracle s Hyperion Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Planning Standard Edition 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Planning Standard Edition 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Planning Standard Edition 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Shared Services 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Shared Services 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Shared Services 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Smart View 9.0.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Smart View 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Smart View 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Strategic Finance 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Strategic Finance 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Strategic Finance 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Workforce Planning 4.1.x Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Workforce Planning 9.2.x Jun 2006 Jun 2010 Not Available Indefinite Workforce Planning 9.3.x Jan 2007 Jan 2012 Not Available Indefinite Pre-System 9 Products Analyzer 7.2.1.x Apr 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Analyzer 7.2.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Application Link 7.x Jun 2004 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Jun 2010 Hub 7.2.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Remote Authentication Module 7.2.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Application Builder (J2EE and.net) 7.2.x Jan 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Business Modeling 4.0.5.x Jun 2006 Sep 2008 Not Available Indefinite Business Rules 4.0.2.x Dec 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Central 7.x Jul 2004 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Essbase (includes EAS, EIS, EDS, and ESS) 7.1.6.x Aug 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications - September, 2013 Page 26

Oracle s Hyperion Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Financial Management 4.0.2.x Dec 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Financial Management 4.0.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Intelligence 8.5.0.x Feb 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Metrics Builder 7.3.x Jan 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Objects 7.0.2.x Oct 2004 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Planning Standard Edition 4.0.2.x Dec 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Planning Standard Edition 4.0.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Planning 4.0.2.x Dec 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Planning 4.0.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Performance Scorecard 4.0.1.x Apr 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Performance Scorecard 4.0.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Reports 7.2.5.x Mar 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Reports 7.2.1.x Apr 2005 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite SQR 8.5.0.x Feb 2006 Sep 2008 Sep 2009 Indefinite Other Products Enterprise 6.3.1.x Aug 2004 Sep 2008 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise 6.4.x Aug 2005 Aug 2010 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise 6.5.x Apr 2008 Apr 2013 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Reporting 3.9.1.x Aug 2004 Sep 2008 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Reporting 6.4.x Aug 2005 Aug 2010 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Reporting 6.5.x Apr 2008 Apr 2013 Not Available Indefinite Enterprise Financial Data Quality Management 7.2.x Nov 2006 Aug 2010 Not Available Indefinite Pillar 5.7.11.x Jun 2007 Sep 2008 Not Available Indefinite For releases on Premier and Extended Support, previous patch sets (formerly maintenance releases) will be supported for six months after the release date of a new patch set. Patch set updates (formerly service pack updates) will be supported for three months after the release of a new patch set update. Unless otherwise noted, indefinite Sustaining Support will continue to be provided for the latest service pack update of all product releases not listed above. Hyperion components (including, but not limited to, components such as Hyperion Foundation Services, Oracle Hyperion Enterprise Performance Management Architect, Oracle Hyperion Smart View for Office, and Oracle Smart Space) are supported according to the timeline noted above for the release of the product with which the component(s) were shipped. For additional information, please visit http://www.oracle.com/us/support/lifetime-support/index.html Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 27

Oracle s Global Knowledge Software Releases (continued) Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Knowledge Pathways 5.1.2 Aug 2008 Aug 2010 Not Available Indefinite Knowledge Pathways 5.1.1 Aug 2008 Not Available Not Available Not Available Knowledge Pathways 5.1 Jan 2008 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Knowledge Pathways 5 Aug 2007 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Knowledge Pathways 4.6 Aug 2006 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Knowledge Pathways 4.5 Sep 2005 Not Available Not Available Indefinite Knowledge Pathways 4 Jul 2002 Not Available Not Available Not Available Presenter 4.8 Mar 2008 Oct 2009 Not Available Not Available Presenter 4.7 Mar 2007 Not Available Not Available Not Available Presenter 4.6 r1 Dec 2006 Not Available Not Available Not Available Presenter 4.6 Nov 2006 Not Available Not Available Not Available Presenter 4.3 Sep 2006 Not Available Not Available Not Available CustomDoc 3.6A Apr 1999 Not Available Not Available May 2011 Migration path for Global Knowledge Software UPK is to use Oracle's existing product Oracle User Productivity Kit Oracle s User Productivity Kit/Professional Release GA Date Premier Support Ends Extended Support Ends Sustaining Support Ends Oracle User Productivity Kit 11.1 Mar 2012 Mar 2017 Mar 2020 Indefinite Oracle User Productivity Kit 11.0 Jul 2011 Jul 2016 Jul 2019 Indefinite User Productivity Kit 3.6.1 Feb 2010 Feb 2015 Feb 2018 Indefinite Oracle User Productivity Kit 3.5 Feb 2009 Dec 2009 Not Available Indefinite Oracle User Productivity Kit 3.1.7 Nov 2008 Dec 2009 Not Available Indefinite Oracle User Productivity Kit Professional s Knowledge Pathways 5.5 Oracle User Productivity Kit Professional s Knowledge Pathways 5.1.2 Feb 2009 Feb 2011 Not Available Indefinite Nov 2008 Nov 2010 Not Available Indefinite Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications - September, 2013 Page 56

Lifetime Support Policy: Our Commitment to Deliver a Superior Ownership Experience Now, you can have even greater peace of mind knowing that your business strategy is driving your upgrade strategy with more control, more choice, and more certainty. It all amounts to an Oracle Superior Ownership Experience available only with the industry s most advanced support offering, Oracle Lifetime Support. CONTACT US For more information on the Oracle Lifetime Support Policy, please visit oracle.com/support This document is for informational purposes only and may not be incorporated into a contract. Technical Support Services are provided in accordance with Oracle s Technical Support Policies, which can be accessed at oracle.com/support/policies.html Oracle is under no obligation to develop any future programs or functionality. Lifetime Support Policy, Coverage for Oracle Applications September, 2013 Page 75

Copyright 2010, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Published in the U.S.A. This document is provided for information purposes only, and the contents hereof are subject to change without notice. This document is not warranted to be error-free, nor subject to any other warranties or conditions, whether expressed orally or implied in law, including implied warranties and conditions of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. We specifically disclaim any liability with respect to this document and no contractual obligations are formed either directly or indirectly by this document. This document may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, for any purpose, without our prior written permission. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. AMD, Opteron, the AMD logo, and the AMD Opteron logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices. Intel and IntelXeon are trademarks or registered trademarks of Intel Corporation. All SPARC trademarks are used under license and are trademarks or registered trademarks of SPARC International, Inc. UNIX is a registered trademark licensed through X/Open Company, Ltd.

Oracle EBS Customer List Connecticut Housing Authority, CT Mass. Turnpike Authority, MA City of Detroit, MI Gennesee County, MI NJ Department of Corrections, NJ NJ DEPTCOR (Prison Industries), NJ NJ Highway Administration, NJ New Jersey Housing Authority, NJ NJ State Police, NJ NJ Transit Authority, NJ Englewood Schools, NJ Patterson City School District, NJ NY Department of Military and Naval Affairs, NY City of Yonkers, NY City of New York Housing Dev. Corp (HDC), NY New York Department of Health, NY New York City Museum of Natural History, NY New York School Construction Authority, NY New York OASAS (Alcohol and Substance), NY New York State Comptroller State GL, NY New York State Comptroller internal Financials/FMS, NY NY State ORMDD (Office of Mental Health and Disability), NY New York State Department of Education, NY NY State Thruway Authority, NY Orange County, NY Cinc. Public Schools, OH Butler County, OH Cuyahoga County (OH) Board of Mental Retardation, OH Cleveland RTA, OH NE Ohio Regional Sewer District, Hamilton County, OH Ohio Department of Education, OH Ohio Bureau Workers Comp, OH City of Philadelphia, PA Berks County, PA Providence TF Green Airport, RI PA Liquor Control Board, PA RI Department of Transportation, RI Providence Water Board, RI City of Richmond, VA State of Rhode Island Statewide, RI Loudoun County Schools, VA Loudoun County, VA Arlington Public Schools, VA Arlington County, VA Virginia Employment Board, VA Prince George's Public Schools, VA Henrico public schools, VA Henrico County, VA AL Institute of Deaf and Blind, AL Montogomery County, MA Washington DC, Lottery, DC AL Department of Docks (ASD), AL City of Jacksonville, FL City of Mobile, AL, AL City of Miami, FL Metro Washington Airport Authority, DC City of Port St. Lucie, FL City of Lakeland, FL City of West Palm Beach, FL Miami Dade Fire and Rescue, FL FL Children's Trust, FL City of St. Petersburg, FL GOAA (Orlando Airport), FL FL Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). FL Jacksonville International Airport, FL FL Housing Finance Authority, FL Jacksonville Electric Authority (part of City), FL Hillsborough County Aviation Authority (Tampa Palm Beach Sheriff's Office, FL Airport, FL Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood Airport, FL Polk County, FL Lee County Electric Cooperative, FL City of Tamps, FL Pinellas County Board of County St. Johns Schools, FL Commissioners, FL Hillsborough County, FL City of Atlanta, GA St Johns River Water District, FL City of Griffen, GA Atlanta Airport GA MARTA, GA Atlanta Housing Authority GA City of Louisville, KY Page 1

Oracle EBS Customer List Dakalb County, GA Louisville Airport Authority, KY Georgia Student Finance Authority, GA Kentucky Employers Mutual Insurance, KY Kenton County Airport, KY Louisville/Jefferson County, KY Cincinatti/Northern Kentucky International Baltimore City Schools, MD Airport, KY Louisville Water, KY MD Department of Education, MD New Orleans Public Schools, LA Montgomery County Liquor Control Dept, MD City of Baltimore, MD Prince Georges County Schools, MD Montgomery County, MD Raleigh Durham Airport, NC Montgomery County Public Schools, MD South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental and Control (DHEC), SC Charlotte/Douglas International Airport, NC City of Chattanooga, TN Wake County Schools, NC City of Memphis, TN Santee Cooper, SC Williamson County, TN City of Knoxville, TN TN Department of Children Services, TN Memphis Light Gas and Water, TN Arlington County, VA City of Clarksville, TN Capital Region Airport Commission (Richmond Airport), VA TNNCARE, TN City of Virginia Beach Schools, VA Arlington County Schools, VA Henrico County, VA City of Virginia Beach, VA VA Board of Accountancy, VA Hampton County Schools, VA VA Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), VA Henrico County Schools, VA VA Department of Medical Assistance Services, VA VA Department of Education, VA VA Department of Motor Vehicles, VA VA Department of Juvenile Justice, VA VA State Corporation Commission, VA VA Motor Vehicle Board, VA VA State Police, VA VA Department of Social Services, VA Butler County VA Department of Correction, VA Madera Housing West Virgina Bureau of Employment,WV Chicago Park District, IL Jefferson County Board of Education Lake County, IL City of Chicago, IL Chicago Transit Authority, IL Chicago Public Schools, IL PACE Suburban Bus, IL Metra, IL Indiana PERF, IN Indianapolis Airport, IN Anoka County, MN Johnson County, KS Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, MN Scott County, MN Bi State Metro St Louis, MO St. Paul Public Schools, MN OK Department of Mental Health, OK Oklahoma County, OK Oklahoma Dept of Corrections, OK Ok Tax Commission, OK Oklahoma Dept. Health Srvs, OK Oklahoma Dept of Human Services, OK City of Hurst, TX Dallas Ft Worth(DFW), TX Dallas County, TX City of San Marcos, TX Dallas Independent School District, TX Williamson County TX Richardson Independent School District, TX Page 2

Oracle EBS Customer List Page 3 Garland Independent Schools, TX Upper Rio Grande Workforce Development Board, TX Texas Parks and Wildlife, TX Harris County MTA, TX Capital Metro Transit (Austin), TX Waukesha County, WI Houston Metro Transit Authority, TX AZ AHCCCS, AZ City of Chandler, AZ Tuscon Aviation Authority, AZ Yuma County, AZ Association of Bay Area Governments, CA CA Dept of General Services, Acct Div, CA CA Dept of Insurance, CA CA Dept. of Consumer Affairs, CA CA DMV, CA CA Edfund (Superfund), CA CA Highway patrol, CA CA ISO, CA CA Legislative Counsel Bureau, CA CA School Employees Assoc, CA CA State Assembly, CA CA State Comp Insurance Fund, CA CA State Office of Courts, CA City of Burbank, CA City of Cerritos, CA City of Oakland, CA City of Sunnyvale, CA City of Modesto, CA County of Los Angeles Dept of Socials Services, CA Eastern Municipal Water District, CA Housing Authority City of LA, CA LA Community Redevelopment Agency, CA LA Metro Transit Authority, CA Metrolink, CA LACMA LA County Museum of Arts, CA Los Angeles County Dept of Social Services, CA Los Angeles Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, CA Modesto Irrigation District, CA Irvine Ranch Water District, CA Port of Oakland, CA Riverside Transit Authority, CA San Diego County, CA San Francisco Port Authority, CA Santa Ana Unified, CA Stanislius County, CA Aurora Public Schools, CO Denver Regional Transit (RTD), CO City of Arvada, CO City of Boulder, CO City of Breckenridge, CO City of Englewood, CO Colorado CFMS, CO Colorado Springs Academy School, CO Denver Metro Waste Water, CO Douglas Count Schools, CO Larimer County, CO Hawaii DOT, HI Hawaii Dept of Homelands, HI Hawaii DOT Airports, HI State of Idaho, Dept of Transportation, ID Bernalillo County Treasurers Office, NM City of Las Vegas, NV City of North Las Vegas, NV Clark County Sanitation District, NV Las Vegas Valley Water District, NV Nevada State Industrial Insurance Service, NV City of Salem, OR County of Marion, OR Douglas County, OR Douglas County Schools, OR Trimet, OR United Sewarage Agency (USA), OR Washington County, OR City of Vancouver, WA Clark County Vancouver, WA County of Kent Schools, WA King County, WA Washington Sub. Sanitary Comm. (WSSC), WA

MINUTES CENTRALIZED ENTERPRISE RESOURCE PLANNING (ERP) SOLUTION PRESENTATION / RANKING SELECTION COMMITTEE MEETING RLI Number: RLI R0866301R2 Date: Wednesday, Location: Governmental Center Building, 115 S. Andrews Avenue, Room 422, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Time: 9:00 AM MEMBERS PRESENT: Scott Campbell, Director, Facilities Maintenance Division, Chair Kent George, Director, Aviation Department Cynthia Chambers, Director, Environmental Protection and Growth Management Department Chris Walton, Director, Transportation Department James Carbone, ERP Business Integration Director, Enterprise Technology Services, Finance and Administrative Services Department ALSO PRESENT: Carolyn Messersmith, Purchasing Division Melissa Grimm, Project Administrator Glenn Marcos, Purchasing Division Karen Walbridge, Purchasing Division Glenn Miller, County Attorney s Office Andrea Froome, County Attorney s Office Rene Harrod, County Attorney s Office Lisette Forrest, Office of Economic and Small Business Development Stephen Farmer, Finance and Administrative Services Department Jackie Binns, Risk Management Division John Raite, Purchasing Division Katie Burnell, Enterprise Technology Services Division Carlos Alvarado, Enterprise Technology Services Division Nancy Rose, Enterprise Technology Services Division Ben Sanchez, Enterprise Technology Services Division Scott Eiler, Plante Moran Doug Wiescinski, Plante Moran A meeting of the Broward County Selection Committee for RLI R0866301R2, Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution Presentation/Ranking Meeting, was held in Room 422 of the Government Center, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday,. (The following is a near-verbatim transcript of the meeting.)

CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCEMENTS CALL TO ORDER MR. CAMPBELL: I d like to call to order the Selection Committee meeting for RLI R0866301R2 Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution. It is 9:00 a.m. on Wednesday,. We are in Room 422 of the Governmental Center Building, 115 South Andrews Avenue in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. I m Scott Campbell, Director of Facilities Maintenance Division, and the Committee Chair. Please make sure all the cell phones have been turned off or silenced. At this time, I d like to turn this meeting over to the Purchasing Division for a brief introduction. INTRODUCTION FROM PURCHASING DIVISION MS. MESSERSMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is Carolyn Messersmith with the Purchasing Division. I would first like to introduce County Staff present here today. Melissa Grimm, Project Administrator; Glenn Marcos, Purchasing Division; Karen Walbridge, Purchasing Division; Glenn Miller, County Attorney s Office; Andrea Froome, County Attorney s Office; Rene Harrod, County Attorney s Office; John Bruno, Enterprise Technology Services Division; Lisette Forrest, Office of Economic and Small Business Development; Stephen Farmer, Finance and Administrative Services Department; Jackie Binns, Risk Management Division; John Raite, Purchasing Division; Katie Burnell, Enterprise Technology Services Division; Carlos Alvarado, Enterprise Technology Services Division; Nancy Rose, Enterprise Technology Services Division; Ben Sanchez, Enterprise Technology Services Division. Also present is Scott Eiler and Doug Wiescinski from the firm Plante Moran, which is the County s consultant on this project. Request for Letters of Interest, RLI Number R0866301R2, for Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Solution, was approved by the Board of County Commissioners on April 24, 2012, Agenda Item Number 36. At the time of the RLI advertising deadline, 5:00 p.m., June 25, 2012, there were five submittals. On August 13, 2012, a Short List Meeting was held, at which time Phoenix Business Consulting was found to be non-responsive to the RLI requirements. A motion was made and approved to short-list the four remaining firms: Applications Software Page 2 of 185

Technology Corporation, AST; CedarCrestone, Incorporated; Ciber, Incorporated; Lawson Software, Incorporated. On August 23, 2012 a Protest Appeal pursuant to Section 21.120 of the Procurement Code was received from Phoenix Business Consulting, including an appeal bond fee of $25,000, regarding the Selection Committee s determination of non-responsiveness. As a result, the solicitation for a Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning Solution was placed on hold pursuant to Subsection 21.120.a.4 of the Broward County Procurement Code in order to resolve an appeal -- the appeal. The appeal was withdrawn by Phoenix Business Consulting on December 21st, 2012 as a Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice and the stay lifted. On February 18th, a reconvening of the Selection Committee meeting was held to review new information. Following the information review, a first motion was made and passed that CedarCrestone be deemed responsible concerning their relationship with Oracle regarding their software implementer certification. A second motion was made and passed that Lawson/Infor be deemed responsible due to their name change from Lawson Software Incorporated to Infor, Incorporated. A third motion was made and passed to agree to the process of the Functional Review Analysis which will be completed by Plante Moran based upon the results of the software demonstrations. Clarification about site visits was discussed. This meeting has been publically noticed. Thank you, Mr. Chair. QUORUM OF VOTING MEMBERS IS PRESENT MR. CAMPBELL: We have a quorum present with Kent George, Director of Aviation Department; Cynthia Chambers, Department Director, Environmental Protection and Growth Management Department; Chris Walton, Director, Transportation Department; James Carbone, ERP Business Integration Director, Enterprise Technology Services, Finance and Administrative Services Department; and myself, Scott Campbell, Facilities Maintenance Division, Public Works Department, in attendance. STATE PURPOSE OF MEETING MR. CAMPBELL: The purpose of today s meeting is to hear presentations from the respondents who were short-listed in the August 13, 2012 Selection Committee Meeting. Page 3 of 185

There will be a lunch break prior to vendor presentations. CIRCULATION OF SIGN-IN SHEET MR. CAMPBELL: A sign-in sheet is being circulated. Please be sure that everyone here today has signed in. CONE OF SILENCE IS STILL IMPOSED FOR COUNTY STAFF AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MR. CAMPBELL: The Cone of Silence for this project has been in effect for the Selection Committee since April 25th, 2012, and for Board members -- and for the Board members, August 13th, 2012. The Cone of Silence will continue to be in effect until a contract has been approved for staff and the Board of County Commissioners. The Cone of Silence remains in effect for all County Commissioners and staff as stated in the Cone of Silence Ordinance, which provides that potential vendors and their representatives are substantially restricted from communicating regarding this RLI with any County Commissioner, any Commissioner s staff, the County Administrator, deputies and assistants to the County Administrator and their respective support staff, or any person appointed by the County Commission to evaluate or recommend selection in this RLI process. After the application of the Cone of Silence, all inquiries regarding this RLI should be directed to Carolyn Messersmith of the Purchasing Division or the Director of Purchasing. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT MR. CAMPBELL: In accordance with Broward County Procurement Code Section 21.84.d, all Committee members shall be free of conflicts of interest as provided by Part III, Chapter 112, Florida Statutes, as amended, and the Broward County Employee Code of Ethics, as amended. The appointing authority shall not appoint a person to a Committee whose service would create the appearance of a conflict of interest. APPROVE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 18, 2013 SELECTION COMMITTEE MEETING MR. CAMPBELL: At this time, may I have a motion to approve the minutes of the February 18th, 2013 Selection Committee reconvened meeting? MR. WALTON: So moved. MR. GEORGE: Seconded. MR. CAMPBELL: (Inaudible.) The motion has been moved and seconded. Page 4 of 185

All in favor, say aye. Any opposed? The motion passes unanimously. VOTE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. ESTIMATED TIME PERIOD TO CONCLUSION OF AGREEMENT NEGOTIATIONS MR. CAMPBELL: We estimate that the final agreement will come to the Board for approval and execution within 120 days from the final approving -- approval of the ranking. At this time, also like to have a report from Purchasing. PURCHASING REPORT MS. MESSERSMITH: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Given the length of time since the proposals were submitted in June 2012, and subsequently when the County requested up-to-date information in February of this year, correspondence was sent requesting the four shortlisted firms to indicate whether there have been any changes with their financial information, litigation history, insurance, and to provide a current software implement -- implementer certification letter of their proposed softwares. All four firms responded. The information and materials were reviewed by staff and forwarded to the Committee members. The Purchasing Division and the ERP Project Office have provided the Committee with additional new information regarding this project including: 1. A letter dated February 12, 2013 from shortlisted proposer, Ciber, Inc. 2. Correspondence dated March 29, 2013 from shortlisted proposer, CedarCrestone, Inc. stating that Sierra Systems announced the acquisition of the Public Sector Consulting Practice of CedarCrestone. CedarCrestone is a sister company to Sierra Systems the two companies are both owned by Golden Gate Capital and are led by the same Chief Executive Officer. 3. Letters from all four shortlisted proposers that indicated their willingness to extend their proposal price through March 21, 2014. 4. Evidence of the current status of the four proposers certification with proposed software company, including Sierra Systems/CedarCrestone update of their March 29, 2013 correspondence regarding their Silver Partner certification status and settled litigation with Oracle. Page 5 of 185

5. County Attorney Litigation Review Memo 6. Finance and Administration Services Department Memo 7. Risk Management Division email 8. Plante Moran Proposal Analysis 9. Plante Moran PowerPoint Presentation 10. Project Manager interview questions 11. Vendor responses to clarification questions 12. AST response to additional clarification questions 13. Updated exceptions taken by vendors to the County s Terms and Conditions 14. Updated evaluation matrix of references provided by the vendors 15. Responses from the vendors to the Cost Normalization document prepared by Plante Moran 16. Revised Response from Ciber, Inc. on exceptions taken to the County s Terms and Conditions 17. Revised Response from Infor, Inc. on exceptions taken to the County s Terms and Conditions This information is for the consideration of the Selection Committee. Representatives of the Office of Economic and Small Business, the Finance and Administration Services Department, the County Attorney s Office, and Risk Management Division are here to summarize the information distributed to Committee members and provide clarification for this project. County Staff is available -- is available for discussion and questions after their comments. At this time, the Office of Economic and Small Business will provide their review, and that will be from Lisette Forrest. Office of Economic and Small Business Development Review Report MS. FORREST: The Office of Economic and Small Business (inaudible) MS. BURNELL: The microphone. Page 6 of 185

MS. FORREST: The Office of Economic and Small Business Development -- MS. BURNELL: Sorry. Can t hear you. MS. BURNELL: You ll have to pick it up and hold it. MS. FORREST: Thank you. The Office of Economic and Small Business Development established a ten percent County Business Enterprise, CBE, participation goal for implementation services for the Centralized Enterprise Resources Planning Solutions RLI. This ten percent County Business Enterprise goal excluded the software and application licensing portions of this project. The four shortlisted firms have submitted documentation committing to at least ten percent certified CBE participation within their project team based on their total pricing minus software and application licensing. Therefore, they are compliant with the small business requirements of the solicitation. The evaluation made by OESBD was based on accurate information provided at the time of OESBD s memo to the Project Manager. MS. MESSERSMITH: Thank you. At this time, Stephen Farmer from the Finance and Administrative Services Department will comment about the financial review. Financial Review Report MR. FARMER: Each of the four proposers submitted the required two years of financial information. The financial records were also reviewed for reportable conditions or apparent issues in the financial statements that would indicate that the firm is not capable of performing the services specified in the RLI. Reportable conditions include negative equity, net loss in its latest fiscal year and current ratios less than 1.0. A reportable condition is not necessarily indicative of a firm s inability to perform, but it may be one of the many factors the Committee considers in its evaluation. A current ratio of 1.0 or higher generally indicates a firm can meet its financial obligations in a timely manner. Page 7 of 185

The current ratio is calculated by dividing the current assets by current liabilities. Of the four proposers, only Infor s financial data indicated a current ratio under 1.0. In addition, Infor showed a net loss of 310 million and negative equity of 599,000,000 million for the fiscal year ending May 31st, 2012. Ciber, Inc. had a net loss of just over 14.6 million for the fiscal year ending December 31st, 2012. CedarCrestone, through its parent company IT Services Parent Corporation, provided an income statement for the fiscal year ending September 2012 reflecting a net loss of approximately 11.5 million. There - there were no other apparent findings. MS. MESSERSMITH: Thank you. At this time, Andrea Froome with the County Attorney s Office will comment on the litigation review. County Attorney s Report MS. FROOME: The County Attorney s Office reviewed each of the four proposers submittals to this RLI solicitation for a Centralized Enterprise Resource Planning Solution. In addition, the County Attorney s Office searched the Clerk of Courts website for Broward County, Miami-Dade County, and Palm Beach County for -- for undisclosed cases by any of the proposers. Similar searches were completed in the Pacer Federal Court database and the County Attorney s list of cases involving Broward County for undisclosed cases by any of the proposers. No undisclosed cases were found in any of these databases regarding three of the short-listed proposers, and one undisclosed case was found for Infor US, Inc., formerly Lawson Software, Inc. For due diligence purposes only, the litigation history of Sierra -- Sierra Systems, Inc., Sierra, was reviewed since CedarCrestone had previously indicated some potential involvement of Sierra. However, no undisclosed litigation was found in any of the database -- bases for Sierra. MS. MESSERSMITH: Thank you. At this time, Jackie Binns from the Risk Management Division will comment about the Page 8 of 185

insurance review. Risk Management s Report MS. BINNS: The Risk Management Division received proof of insurance from each of the four proposers pursuant to the solicitation requirements which state Number 4, Insurance: Certificate indicating that the Proposer currently carries the required insurance or a letter from the carrier indicating upgrade availability. Findings are AST submitted a letter from Matsock dated July 16, 2013, indicating that they have the ability to comply with the required insurance. CedarCrestone submitted a certificate of insurance which shows that they currently carry the required insurance and that all levels are met. Ciber submitted a certificate of insurance which shows that they carry all of the required insurance and that all limits are currently met. Infor submitted a certificate of insurance which shows that they carry all of the required lines of insurance and that all the levels are currently met. MS. MESSERSMITH: Thank you. I ll turn it back over to the Chair. MR. CAMPBELL: Is there any discussion from the Committee members regarding the additional information that has been presented? SELECTION COMMITTEE INSTRUCTIONS MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. Seeing none, at this time, we d like to reaffirm the current short-listing of the firms with the Applications -- with Applications Software Technology Corporation, CedarCrestone, Inc./Sierra Systems, Inc., and then Ciber, Inc., and Infor, Inc. Due to the -- let me just follow that up by kind of saying why. Due to the retirement of our Selection Committee Chairperson, one of the current Selection Committee members, myself, has been designated as Chairperson and changed the composition of the Selection Committee. Because of these changes and the updated information previously presented to these -- this committee on the firms, may I have a motion for ratification to deem the shortlisted firms responsive and responsible? MR. GEORGE: So moved. MR. CAMPBELL: Is there a second? Page 9 of 185

MR. WALTON: Second. MR. CAMPBELL: All in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. VOTE PASSES UNAMINOUSLY. DISCUSSION TERMS AND CONDITIONS EXCEPTIONS MR. CAMPBELL: The RLI solicitation document requires proposers to state whether they accept Broward County s Standard Terms and Conditions or, if they do not accept them, to define the contract provisions that they cannot accept. The individual with the authority to bind the firm on contractual terms and -- and conditions will be asked to speak for the firm. The proposed exceptions from each of the firms will be reviewed and discussed. And, right now, I guess, we are going to have a PowerPoint presentation regarding the terms and conditions. MS HARROD: On the screen, we have a listing of, by vendor listing of the non-negotiable exceptions. Starting in order of the presentations, CedarCrestone took exception to 63 items -- MR. GEORGE: Could you speak up a little bit, please. MS HARROD: Certainly. Starting from the top, on the screen, we have a listing by vendor of what County staff determined were non-negotiable exceptions that vendors had taken to proposed contractual terms. Starting in the order of presentations, CedarCrestone took exception to 63 items. Upon review, County staff determined that 24 of the 63 exceptions were non-negotiable for the County. The exceptions that were determined to be non-negotiable by the County for CedarCrestone are as follows: Article I, Standard Definitions; Article 1 Hosting Definitions; Section 5.2.2, Invoices; Section 5.2.3, Prompt Payment; Section 5.2.8, Disputes; Section 6.3, Completion of System Timetable; Section 6.4, Liquidated Damages; Section 7.1 Indemnification; Section 7.2 Limitation of Liability; Section 10.1, Termination For Convenience; Section 10.2, Termination For Cause; Section 12.4, Testing; Article 14, Date Standards; Article 15, Work Made For Hire; Section 16.6, Assignment And Performance; Section 16.13, Priority of Provisions; Section 16.16, Audit; Section 16.17, Warranty as to Intellectual Property; Section 16.19 Most Favored Nations; Section 16.20 Time Is Of The Essence; Section 16.22 Remote Access; Section 16.24 Page 10 of 185

References To County; Section 16.37, Liquidated Damages; Software license term is generally in terms of the contract with the County, and bonding requirements. Moving to the next vendor in order of presentation, Infor/Lawson took exception to 139 items. Upon review, County staff determined that 64 of the 139 exceptions are non-negotiable for the County. On September 11th, 2013, Infor/Lawson withdrew several exceptions resulting in 123 remaining exceptions. Of the 123 remaining exceptions, County staff has previously determined that 49 of 123 are non-negotiable. The list that I will read now includes today s removal of exceptions. Pardon? MR. GEORGE: So what you re saying -- so what you re saying now, there s 49 that are nonnegotiable. MS HARROD: Yes, sir. MR. GEORGE: Okay. Thank you. MS HARROD: And I ll read the 49 that are non-negotiable which will be slightly different than the list only due to timing. Article 1, Standard Definitions; Article 1, Hosting Definitions, Article 2, System Performance Requirement -- MS HARROD: -- Article 3, Admin Code Requirement For Testing; Section 5.1, Compensation; Section 5.1.2, Not To Exceed Amount; Section 5.2.1, Payment; Section 5.2.2, Invoices; Section 5.2.3, Prompt Payment, Section 5.2.4.1, Payments; Section 5.2.5 Software Included And Final Acceptance; Section 5.2.8, disputes; Section 6.1, term; Section 6.3, completion of system timetable; Section 6.4, Liquidated Damages; Section 7.1, Indemnification; Section 7.2, Limitation Of Liability; Section 8.2, Insurance deductibles; Section 8.9, Insurance; Section 10.1 termination for convenience; Section 10.2, termination for cause; Section 10.4, termination for convenience consequences; Section 10.5, termination right to withhold payment; Section 11.3 confidential information; Section 11.5, confidential Information; Section 13.3, resolution of disputes; Article 15, Work Made For Hire; Section 16.1.2, EEO compliance; Section 16.2, public entity crimes act; Section 16.4, Third Party Beneficiaries; Section 16.6, Assignment and Performance; Section 16.7, conflicts; Section 16.8, waiver of Breach And Materiality; Section 16.12, entire agreement; Section 16.13, Priority Of Provisions; Section 16.17, Warranty as to Intellectual Property; Section 16.19, Most Favored Nations; Section 16.20 Time Is Of The Essence; Section 16.21, Offshore Limitation; Section 16.22, Remote Access; Section 16.23, Key Personnel; Section 16.24, References to County; Section 16.28, Rights and Document and Work Section 16.32, HIPAA Compliance; Section 16.36, Truth In Negotiation; Section Page 11 of 185

16.38, Performance And Payment Bond; Section 16.37, Liquidated Damages; Software License Terms between County and vendor and bonding requirements. The next vendor in order of presentation is Ciber. Prior to September 10th, 2013, Ciber took exception to 46 items. Upon review, County staff determined that 27 of the 46 were non-negotiable to the County. On September 10th, 2013, Ciber withdrew several exceptions, resulting in 24 remaining exceptions. Of the remaining 24 exceptions, County staff had previously determined that ten of the 24 are non-negotiable. I ll now list off the remaining exceptions, post-withdrawal, that are non-negotiable based upon County staff review. Section 5.2.3, Prompt Payment; Section 5.2.8, Disputes; Section 7.1, Indemnification; Section 7.2, limitation of liability; Section 16.6, Assignment And Performance; Section 16.17, Warranty as to Intellectual Property; Section 16.19, Most Favored Nations; Section 16.37, liquidated damages; The Software License Terms Between County And The Vendor And Bonding Requirements. The final vendor in order of presentation, AST, took exception to three items. Upon review, County staff determined that two of the three exceptions were non-negotiable for the County. Listing off the non-negotiable exceptions taken, Section 7.2, limitation of liability, and Section 16.37, liquidated damages. You received in your materials the chart which is displayed on the board, which compares prior to September 10th and September 11 th s withdrawals the exceptions by the vendor and the ones deemed non-negotiable by County staff upon review. Do you have questions? MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. Thank you. At this time, I d like to ask for each of the firms in the order of presentation that an individual with authority to bind the company to the contract terms and conditions come up to answer a question. The first would be CedarCrestone. MR. BRYANT: Hi. I m Kevin Bryant from CedarCrestone. Page 12 of 185

MR. CAMPBELL: Can you also state your, again, name, title, and authority to bind your firm. MR. BRYANT: General Manager CedarCrestone Public Sector. I have the authority to bind the company. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. Are you standing by all of the exceptions taken, or would you waive the exceptions the County indicated are non-negotiable? MR. BRYANT: We re standing by the exceptions taken. MS. BURNELL: Sorry, can you speak closer to the microphone? MR. BRYANT: We re standing by the exceptions taken. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. Thank you. MR. BRYANT: Am I able to say a few words on the topic? MR. CAMPBELL: I need to ask the rest of the firms the exact same question. MR. BRYANT: I m sorry? MR. CAMPBELL: I m going to ask the firms, each of the firms, the exact same question. We re just -- we re looking for the answer to this question at this time. MR. BRYANT: Okay. Thanks. MR. CAMPBELL: Infor, Inc. Again, if you can please state your name, title, and if you have the authority to bind your firm. MS. ELIAS: Hi, I m Patty Elias. I m Assistant General Counsel at Infor. And, yes, I have the authority to bind the firm. MR. CAMPBELL: Is Infor, Inc., standing by all the exceptions taken, or would you waive the exceptions the County indicated are non-negotiable? MS. ELIAS: We do stand by the exceptions. MR. CAMPBELL: The next would be Ciber, Inc. Thank you very much. If you could state your name, title, and that you have the authority to bind your firm. MR. DOUGLAS: Yes, my name is Bruce Douglas. I ve the SVP of Ciber North America, and I have the authority to bind the firm. MR. CAMPBELL: Is Ciber, Inc. standing by all the exceptions taken, or would you waive the Page 13 of 185

exceptions the County indicated are non-negotiable? MR. DOUGLAS: We would waive on -- on a couple of items. On the most favored nation clause, we d waive our exception to that. And on clarification for -- I guess we can t waive it, but from negotiation standpoint, from our ability to warrant Oracle Software, we will warrant our solution, which includes the Oracle Software. MR. CAMPBELL: It s kind of a one -- it s one question. So are you standing by all of the exceptions taken, or would you waive the exceptions the County indicated are non-negotiable? MR. DOUGLAS: We re standing by our exceptions. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. And last but not least is AST Corporation. Again, will you please state your name, title, and authority to bind your firm. MR. KUMAR: Good morning. I m Pravin Kumar, President and CEO of AST Corporation. I have authority to bind the company. MR. CAMPBELL: Is AST standing by all the exceptions taken, or would you waive the exceptions the County has indicated are non-negotiable? MR. KUMAR: We stand by the exceptions that we have taken. We have very few exceptions. MR. CAMPBELL: All right. Thank you. MR. MILLER: And, Mr. Chair, just for the record, when we reach the point of presentations, the firms will have the ability to expand upon whatever comments they want to make about their exceptions. And you obviously will be able to address not only they but the staff on any of the specifics that they want to discuss at that point. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. At this time, Scott Eiler from Plante Moran will provide a PowerPoint presentation of the following areas of the review: software functionality, technical and hosting solution, implementation approach, pricing, and County and vendor staffing. THE COUNTY S CONSULTANT PRESENTATION MR. EILER: Good morning. My name is Scott Eiler, and I am a partner in Plante Moran s government consulting practice providing Third Party Assurance services to the County as part of the County s ERP project. And I m also the one that you can point to as being responsible for the voluminous amount of information that you ve been tasked to review and read today. Page 14 of 185

First of all, before I begin, I d like to commend the County staff on the thousands of hours of time spent in performing their due diligence activities related to this initiative, and specifically the ERP Project Management Office staff. Likewise, I would like to commend the four vendors that are being considered for award and their responsiveness, cooperation, and patience with the procurement process and the many requests for information. Your efforts in working with the County during this process have been commendable. I d like to open with a couple of comments regarding Plante Moran s experiences and qualifications as it relates to this project. So, first of all, as a firm, we have been providing independent 3PA services to municipal entities for over 30 years and have refined our methodology, approach, and tools in providing such services during that period of time At any one time, we generally have approximately 20 municipal ERP projects underway at various stages, from up-front needs assessment through implementation management assistance, so we are very deep in all aspects and phases of a municipal ERP project. Although we are vendor neutral, and are not an implementer or an integrator, and we have no direct relationships with any ERP software vendor or integrator, we are well-versed with the municipal software vendor and implementer community, to include numerous interactions with ERP software vendors and working with other clients, through product and service briefings, through attendance at conferences, and through one-on-one interaction, always recognizing the line about client confidentiality So I d like to briefly mention a couple of points for the Selection Committee related to this procurement and the material you have in front of you. First, the steps that were performed by the County staff and Plante Moran throughout the course of this procurement are consistent with our recommendations on how such procurements should be conducted. Second, the utmost care was taken in treating all vendors equally and on the same footing throughout all aspects of the procurement, with no bias given to one vendor versus another. Third, the analysis that Plante Moran performed, which has been provided to you in your packet, and the steps that we performed in conducting the analysis are consistent with our approach on such procurements Fourth, any references that I make to we during the presentation are in reference to Plante Moran and not the County, unless specifically noted. And, finally, the material provided to you in the report represents the factual information that Page 15 of 185

Plante Moran collected through review of the vendor proposal responses, through follow-up Q and A with the vendors, and through information obtained as a result of the on-site demonstrations and services presentations. Any type of analysis gleaned from the material represents Plante Moran s experience in performing similar analysis with other municipal clients and through our longevity in being involved in other municipal ERP procurement and implementation projects. The presentation document you have represents a synopsis of the report and supplemental appendices that have been provided to you in the SC packet. As compared to the analysis that was provided at the short list meeting back in August 2012, this analysis provides for a much deeper review based on further information collected through the follow-up Q and A, through the vendor demonstrations and services presentations. Now, I guess the question I have, Mr. Chair, is if you would like to ask questions during the presentation, or if you would rather me run through the presentation and hold off questions until the end. MR. CAMPBELL: Do any of you have a choice? MR. GEORGE: Can we uh -- It may be appropriate to ask during the presentation, too, but also afterwards, so if you would be flexible to do both. MR. EILER: Sure. Very good. Ok, with that, let s begin. As referenced by the Chair, our evaluation approach focused on the following project specific evaluation criteria identified on page 21 of the RLI to include software functionality, technical and hosting solution, implementation approach, pricing, and county and vendor staffing. Our approach for each of these areas was to provide factual information for the SC that we felt was relevant in determining the ability for the responding vendors to satisfy the County in each of these areas. We view all of the areas included as part of this evaluation as extremely important factors in the decision-making process. For the area of software functionality, the following four sources of fact-finding were collected. Number one, industry research. Number two, demonstration fact-finding results. Third, vendor responses to the RLI Exhibit 2 functional requirements. And, four, responses to the follow-up questions. Now, this next set of slides summarizes information provided on pages 13 to 26 of the Plante Moran proposal analysis report, along with additional details in Appendices A and B of the report. Page 16 of 185

So, first of all, Broward County is the 18th largest County in the country. You have additional complexities due to your breadth of business areas including a port, airport, and transit functions. The industry research presented on the next two slides represents research conducted by Gartner and published in their March 2012 research paper entitled, The North American Local Government IT Solution Vendor Landscape. Recent confirmation with Gartner within the last month indicates that the results are still valid as they were in 2012. Site visits were not -- were not included as part of the Plante Moran analysis fact-finding. Rather, those results will be reported on separately by Melissa Grimm, the County s ERP Project Manager. The chart on this page represents the positioning of the software vendors in terms of acceptance by the respective tier size of clients. Again, Broward County being considered a large Tier 2 client. The chart, however, does not reflect the integrator positioning, which is a separate item in and of itself and is not addressed in this presentation. So, in other words, we have AST as an integrator proposing Oracle EBS software; we have CedarCrestone and Ciber integrators proposing PeopleSoft; and we have Infor which, again, is both an integrator and implementer of their own software. Now, we recognize that the software vendor community is constantly evolving with software vendors targeting clients upstream and downstream to capture more share of the market through a variety of methods. However, as I reiterated before, Gartner has recently indicated that this chart is still valid. So this represents the first data point in assessing how well a particular software product might satisfy the County s needs. So before I move on, any questions? Okay. The next four slides summarize the data that was collected by the County staff as they reviewed the software demonstrated as part of the on-site demonstration at the County. Pages 10 to 11 of the report speak to the manner in which this fact-finding activity was planned and executed, while pages 14 to 15 of the report provide a narrative as to the nature of the data itself and a few notes regarding how the information was compiled, such that all areas were weighted equally. The results on the following four slides represent the feedback from staff as to how well they Page 17 of 185

felt each of the demonstration script items were satisfied. This slide illustrates fact-finding information -- first -- the first slide here represents fact-finding information that was collected across the entire spectrum of the software modules proposed. In viewing the results, we have made comments in the report relative to the summation of the performs efficiently in a user friendly manner and performs adequately response codes, as these responses represent County satisfaction with the achievement of the demonstrated script items. Likewise, the summation of the performs but cumbersome and does not perform response codes represents County staff fact-finding conclusions with the achievement of the demonstrated script items. As noted in the report, there were two separate PeopleSoft demonstrations that were performed, one by CedarCrestone and one by Ciber. Although there is some variation in the results, the overall results at a total and line of business level, which I ll explain in a minute, are relatively consistent. So the remaining slides, including this slide here, represent the fact-finding results at a line of business level. That is, taking the individual modules and grouping them by like areas, areas of finance, supply chain, which includes procurement, inventory, and economic and small business, and human capital management. Again, similar to our comment on the first slide, we have made comments in the report relative to the response code results. The supply chain -- chain section shows the greatest variation across each of the vendors in the fact-finding results collected as compared to the other lines of business. The HCM line of business is notable in the high level of performs efficiently in a user friendly manner response codes for CedarCrestone and Ciber, who are, again, proposing the PeopleSoft software. So, in summation, these four slides represent the second data point in assessing how well a particular software product might satisfy the County s needs. Any questions? Okay. The next four slides represent the compilation of response code information provided by the vendors in Exhibit 2 of their RLI response. Pages 20 to 24 of the report provide further information on this fact-finding exercise, along with detailed charts in Appendix B of the report. Page 18 of 185

Unlike the previous set of slides, which represent County staff feedback related to the demonstration scripts, the following four slides indicate the vendor s feedback as to their satisfaction of the County defined functional requirements in the RLI response. In viewing the results on each of the slides, it would be Plante Moran s view that as one moves from the bottom of each chart, that is going from, yes to third-party, to reporting, to modification, to future, up to not available, that the risk increases in achieving overall satisfaction to the County s stated requirements. Now, these slides represent the third data point in assessing how well a particular software product might satisfy the County s needs. Questions on those slides? Okay. So this slide presents comparative information looking at the County s fact-finding results collected through the on-site software demonstrations that were in the first set of slides, with the Exhibit 2 responses provided by the vendors, with specific highlighting in the areas of difference between the two results where there was a less than or greater than five percent change. So, again, to reiterate, while the Exhibit 2 responses indicate the manner in which the vendor s felt their software would satisfy the County s requirements as noted in their RLI response, the demonstration fact-finding results are based on County feedback and what was demonstrated. This would be synonymous with a car dealership saying that a particular car that you re looking at has power steering, that being the Exhibit 2 response, while the driver assesses how well that power steering actually functions, again, being the demonstration fact-finding results. So any questions before we move to the next section? Okay. And this slide points out the software functionality points to consider, which again are included in your report. Okay. The next section, which is technical and hosting solutions. This section of the presentation provides fact-finding information on the technical and hosting solutions proposed by each of the vendors Additional detail on this section is provided on page 27 of the report, with further details provided in Appendix C of the report under the technical and hosting section. Now, the County is fortunate in that you are viewing solutions and underlying technologies that are not considered proprietary in nature, meaning that they have a large install base and a readily available set of resources to support the technologies. Although there are some noted differences in the technologies and hosting solutions provided by the vendors, they all appear as viable solutions. Page 19 of 185

Any questions before we move to the next section? Okay. Implementation approach. Now, it is Plante Moran s view that a vendor s implementation approach, tools, and methods are one of the three critical areas to look at with respect to the ability for a vendor solution to be successful at the County, with the other two being the software itself, which we ve already reviewed, and the quality of the implementation staff from the vendor. Pages 28 to 40 of the report, along with Appendix C, provides additional information on the implementation approaches proposed by the four vendors. From a general perspective, the following success factors are considered important when viewing a vendor s implementation approach. And, again, they re pointed out on the slide here. Next slide covers the key points to consider relating to implementation approach. Any questions? MR. CAMPBELL: No questions. MR. EILER: All right. Pricing. Pricing is obviously a very important factor to consider as part of the evaluation process. The next set of slides provides a summary of information that was covered in more detail in the following two major sections of the report. First, pages 42 to 51 of the report that presents cost information based on the vendor RLI response that is further segmented along the various cost categories. Pages 52 to 54 and Appendix E of the report presents the results of the cost normalization that I will speak to in a couple of minutes. So there are a number of reasons why vendor pricing varied that is included in this analysis, as well as in the response to the cost normalization provided by the vendors. A couple of key items to note. First of all, effectively delivering -- delivery on the required services can have an impact on pricing, including a number of items such as, the use of superior tools in which to enable the various implementation services performed so an example would be the streamlined data conversion tools -- the quality of staffing assigned to the project, the leveraging of templates in areas such as interfaces, pre-configured screens, testing templates, training templates, process templates that have been leveraged by that vendor specifically for the County s use, and the deployment of a pre-configured solution, which I ll address later, to cut down on the amount of system integration consulting services to be provided. Page 20 of 185

Secondly, the County was very clear in the RLI that they were requesting a 50/50 split in level of effort between the County and vendor, as noted on page 110 of the RLI. The vendors had ample opportunity to provide a staffing structure that adhered to that request, or, if they felt differently, to explain why the 50/50 split in level of staffing was not an appropriate split. We will discuss this further as part of the cost normalization review. And, finally, solution complexity. Now, it is recognized in the industry that there are tiering of software vendor solutions, and that Tier 1 solutions are considered to be more configurable than other tier solutions which are more, what I would term, prescriptive in nature. The more configurable nature of Tier 1 solutions requires more consulting time versus a preconfigured system that a Tier 1 vendor might offer. So information on the first slide here presents vendor pricing for each of the five years by year, based on the vendor s proposal responses. Now, it s readily apparent that there is a re-grouping of three of the vendors in the 30+ million dollar range, with the Infor pricing at roughly 50 percent less than the other three vendors. We will discuss this further when we review the normalization section of pricing. The next set of slides provide a more detailed breakdown of pricing by the various categories. Pages 47 to 51 of the report provides for a more detailed review of the pricing by price category. So the first one, software licensing and maintenance, represents the license and maintenance costs of the proposed software over a five year period. And although Cedar and Ciber are proposing comparable software, the Cedar pricing is higher due to the inclusion of a third-party solution for document management and bar coding. The Infor pricing is lower partly due to not proposing a performance management and data warehousing solution. Pre-project training represents the cost to provide training for the core functional and technical staff prior to the start of each phase. MR. GEORGE: Excuse me Scott? MR. EILER: This activity is focused on immersing Yes, sir? MR. GEORGE: Sorry. Can you go back one slide, please? Are you going to address these differences of what you said where, for example, Cedar provides -- Ciber doesn t provide -- excuse me -- some -- provides in-house where Cedar doesn t. Are you going to go into that Page 21 of 185

more on normalization? Are you going to explain that some more? MR. EILER: Yeah. We re -- yeah, this is -- this is the pricing overview. We have a section here today where we re going to talk specifically about normalization and we can -- MR. GEORGE: And how that ties together. MR. EILER: -- answer questions on how that was done and how that ties to each of the individual normalization items that were provided to the vendors to address. MR. GEORGE: Because this isn t apples and apples here. MR. EILER: Correct. That s the purpose of the normalization which we will speak to in a minute. Okay. So the pre-project training again represents the cost to provide training for the core functional and technical staff prior to the start of each phase. And, again, the intent or the focus on immersing the County staff into the capabilities of the software in preparation for the upcoming consulting sessions with the vendor s staff. Now, as you can see, pre-project training services are significantly higher for Ciber than the other responding vendors by some degree. And this is consistent with Ciber s overall theme that they have stressed throughout the process as to the importance of training and change management services and their desire to have the County to be self-sufficient upon the completion of the four-year implementation. Questions? MR. CAMPBELL: No questions. MR. EILER: Next slide. These set of services translate to the following major set of activities: System integration services to include the consulting sessions between the vendor and County staff to discuss current processes, to-be processes, and the determination of how the system will be configured; project management services including overall and technical project management. It also includes application development activities related to forms development, reports, data conversion, system modification, interfaces, testing of those developed items, and conversion of data, project expenses are relevant where they are separated out, and then the pricing and the performance bond. Now, the area of pricing had a wide variation in costs ranging from 9.3 million for Infor to 20.6 million for -- for Ciber. When segmenting the costs even further, there were noted variations in the area of application development costs, and most notably in the area of system integration services, or those Page 22 of 185

services in which the vendor consultant is working with the County business staff to assist them throughout the entire process. Now, as noted on the slide, project expenses for AST and Infor are also noted, as they separated out their expenses, while Cedar and Ciber included their expenses in their billing rates. Okay. Change management and training. And consistent with the costs on the pre-project training services, the costs for change management and training illustrate a wide variation in costs, with Ciber being much higher than the other vendors, which is consistent with what is viewed as Ciber s overall approach to make the County self-sufficient at the conclusion of implementing all modules. That is their interpretation of the RLI, not necessarily an interpretation that the County asked for, but again that is Ciber s interpretation of the RLI, making the County self-sufficient at the conclusion of the implementation. Application maintenance, hosting, and support costs. These services include the categories of hosting, application maintenance, and on-going application support. Although the level of cost between three of the vendors for application, maintenance, and hosting is relatively consistent, the level of application support provided by AST is significantly higher than all of the other vendors. Now, in reviewing the staffing information provided by the vendors in detail, it is readily apparent that the difference is due to AST providing functional staff -- dedicated functional staff-- to the County after the conclusion of each phase such that they will be there for the duration of the five-year period. So, in essence, they can be viewed as the County s business analyst, performing the necessary work to support and enhance the capabilities of the application. Again, this isn t to be perceived negatively or positively by AST, but rather it s AST s it s our belief it s AST s interpretation of the RLI requirement on page 115 to, quote, provide complete turn-key support and maintenance services as described under the section entitled, functional support. Okay. Cost Normalization. MR. CAMPBELL: Scott? MR. EILER: Yes, sir. MR. CAMPBELL: Could you go back a couple slides to the integration costs? Yes, this one. Do the -- for the integration, is there any correlation between the costs that are there and -- as an indicator to system complexity? Page 23 of 185

MR. EILER: We will actually address that in a couple of slides when we get into cost normalization, but, yes, there is. We did not quantify that as part of the cost normalization, but we are planning on addressing that as part of that process. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. MR. EILER: Okay. So let me first of all start out by talking about the concept of cost normalization and how that process was performed. You know, first off, we are very cognizant of the nature of proposed costs coming out of a vendor decision-making process becoming the established costs recognized by everyone from which any upward deviation during contract negotiations and statement of work becomes challenging as justifications for these differences is required. Thus the need to address the issue sooner rather than later. Normalization is a process that we employ on all ERP procurement projects to fully -- to essentially try to come up with vendor costs to fully satisfy the elements of an RFP or an RLI. This includes really two items, the assessment of gaps in required functionality, which is much easier to quantify, and an assessment of gaps in staffing, which is the much more challenging area. No particular vendor solution was used as the baseline in which the various cost normalization -- cost normalization areas were performed. Rather, Plante Moran used its experience in being involved in previous similar implementations and through general experience in the industry. Now, we also recognize that a fixed price bid does not necessarily involve a direct correlation between the level of proposed vendor staffing in pricing, as vendors may target certain accounts as strategic accounts and thus price their solution accordingly, regardless of the amount of effort required to deliver on the scope of the project. However, this presents a challenge on this particular RLI, as the County requested a shared County/vendor implementation effort, i.e., 50/50 split. And since the difference in proposed staffing between the County and the vendors was significantly significant, again, weighing much more heavily toward the County staff, one could imply that a vendor may be pushing project effort to the County to minimize or reduce their costs, unless they address the difference in that 50/50 gap accordingly. Now, I was personally pleased with the level of detail and specificity as to the arguments provided by the vendors in responding to the cost normalization, as they clarified and defined many aspects of their pricing and staffing levels that were unable to be assessed based on their proposal response and through follow-up questioning. Given that, we would caution the SC to be careful about interpreting the normalized results, Page 24 of 185

especially in the area of staffing, as representing the actual costs that will be spent by the County with a particular vendor. Rather, we would view the normalized costs as conservative estimates on the high side, i.e., cost cap, with opportunities for further clarification with the vendors as to their assumptions and case for how they generated their proposal costs and staffing levels. Now, as noted by the bullets on the slide and by the vendors in their response to the normalization spreadsheet, there are a variety of factors that influence how the vendors generated their pricing. Now, we would weigh the arguments more favorably towards those vendors that have experience with implementing their proposed solutions with similar types of clients, i.e., similar size, similar complexity, similar geography. Now, given all of this, the fundamental challenge with the staffing aspect of the normalization is this, in summation. The vendors were requested to provide a staffing model that consisted of a 50/50 split of County versus vendor staff. Now, I refer you to page 12 of Appendix F, if you want to go to that section -- and I ll tell you what, for the sake of moving the process on, I think what you can see -- excuse me -- on that page is that there clearly is -- the 50/50 split was not being adhered to with the exception of one vendor. Now, these counts, again, are not derived by Plante Moran, but rather ones that were provided by the vendors in their proposal response. Again, the vendors had ample opportunity to address the reasons for deviating from this split if they did not feel it to be appropriate. Furthermore, we recognize that the vendor FTE count for on-going hosting services for some of the vendors is not included as these staff, but frankly our perspective is that it would not materially change the picture. So, in summary, our view of the normalization results is that this will be a valuable tool to use in discussions with the selected vendor during contract negotiations and statement of work development to ensure that adequate vendor staffing is proposed for the County that can be justified by the vendor through a rationale, fact-based explanation. Likewise, this activity will assist in defining the level of expected County staff involvement, as well. So back to the Chair s question, Slide 31 here identifies the cost normalization impacts that were provided to the vendors and responded to as well. MR. CAMPBELL: Scott? Page 25 of 185

MR. EILER: Yes. MR. CAMPBELL: Could you go back to -- to page 12? This -- again, this is over the five year period? MR. EILER: That s correct. MR. CAMPBELL: And did you see anything within that five years where, you know, the front years are more fully loaded versus, you know, the out years, or were they pretty consistent throughout? MR. EILER: You know, certainly, they re -- they re very much front loaded, as you re going through the implementation, and once you re implementing a certain phase, then the vendor will start taking on responsibility for ongoing hosting, and support, as well. MR. CAMPBELL: And that looked logical? MR. EILER: Yes. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MR. EILER: Now we did have a couple of differences in the overall implementation time period, so AST and Infor proposed roughly a three year implementation time period, while CedarCrestone and Ciber proposed a four-year overall implementation time period. So that one, in essence, spread that out a little bit for those two firms. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. All right. Thank you. MR. EILER: Okay. So one item I wanted to address on here, which the Chair brought up before, was the nature of tiering of software solutions. So there is an understanding, as I alluded to at the beginning, that Tier 1.5 software solutions -- again, I don t want to mix terminology between tiers that Gartner has put out there about size of communities but more so tier of software vendors, that Tier 1.5, Tier 2, Tier 3 so on and so forth, are more prescriptive in nature, requiring less time to configure, and thus resulting in lower system integration costs. Now, we did an analysis, which we weren t comfortable presenting in the report, but we said, let s assume that Infor, which is more of a Tier 1.5 software solution, they could reduce their system integration cost by 20 percent, because it s a more prescriptive type of solution. So that end reduction in their normalized costs would have been roughly 7.3 million dollars. Again, an estimate, no industry research out there but kind of our estimate of what we felt, again, not something comfortable with putting into the report itself. We re trying to address the Page 26 of 185

issue that we know is out there with, you know, with those other tier solutions. So a summary of the primary cost normalization factors for each vendor follows. Again, with AST, the largest increase was in the area of system integration services support, with additional notable increases in the areas of development services, report development, training services, and provision of a document management solution. Likewise, with CedarCrestone, the areas of system integration services support, with additional notable increases in areas of report development, training, and ongoing application support. Now, specifically with respect to the area of ongoing application support, as I mentioned previously, AST is providing dedicated, full time staff. I would consider those business analysts to the County upon the conclusion of implementing each phase for the duration of the five year project which we believe would be unique in their interpretation of the RLI response. So our view of -- from our normalization process with CedarCrestone, who we believe did not provide that level or service, would be a net reduction of 5.9 million dollars. So, in other words, if the County concludes we want to essentially be our own business analyst, source those internally, we believe that would be owed to reduce CedarCrestone s cost by 5.9 million dollars under normalization. Likewise with -- I guess I ll pause for a minute to make sure everybody understands that. Okay. Likewise with Ciber, again, similar comment is that they did not provide what we felt were ongoing dedicated FTE s, i.e., County business analysts. We would view that reduction opportunity as 6.3 million dollars. Again, there are other areas of report development, system integration services, and a document management solution as areas we had to normalize specifically for Ciber. With respect to Infor, there are notable increases across all major service areas that are predominantly due to significantly less staffing than all of other vendors, ranging from 58 percent to 78 percent less vendor staffing than proposed by the other vendors, as well as significantly higher rates for all staff positions, with the exception of the developers as noted on page 55 of the report. So, given all of the information, there is an aspect of normalization that is difficult to quantify that relates to the confidence level that we would have with respect to the initial vendor proposal pricing. So, in general, we would place a higher level of confidence with a particular vendor s pricing if that vendor has proven experience in successfully implementing their solution for clients with similar characteristics, i.e., similar size, similar make-up, similar complexity, similar geography. So any questions before we move to the staffing section? Page 27 of 185

Okay. The information in this section is summarized on pages 55 through 58 of the report, and Appendix F of the report. So all -- of all of the areas, we would view the area of vendor staffing as the primary factor that can influence the success of an ERP implementation. We have been in situations with the same software product, same vendor, same implementation approach, where the quality of the vendor staff made a complete difference in the overall success of the implementation. Now, the overall level of average FTE commitment proposed by the vendors for County staff participation is very consistent with three of the four vendors, with Infor noted as an outlier. Now, the Infor projected hours are not surprising, given the nature of their more prescriptive solution combined with the shorter timeframe for implementation that they have proposed. Now, the visual on Slide 37 depicts the total vendor hours committed to the project, again noting that the hosting hours are not factored into the hours estimates, since they are considered to be delivered as a service in which FTEs are not relevant. Now, the costs indicate a smaller gap between AST, Ciber, and Cedar. The gap of hours went from an hours perspective due the fact that Ciber s proposing lower rates to the County. Again, additionally, the gap in hours as to what Infor is committing to the project widened due to the significantly higher hourly rates that they are proposing across all staffing categories with the exception of development services. Again, the noted relative level of hours, higher level of hours for AST in years four and five is due to their provision of dedicated ongoing application support FTEs. So this slide clearly indicates the difference in County versus Vendor FTE commitment over the course of the project, again, with most vendors proposing significantly more County than vendor staffing on the project. In addition to the staffing information provided on their Exhibit 6 staffing grids, additional detailed information regarding the proposed staff in key positions was also assessed. Additional details on this area of review is provided in the staffing plan tab in Appendix C, the Appendix D, project manager comparison matrix, and the staffing grid in Appendix F. This slide summarizes the key staffing points to consider for each vendor. And, with that, I will entertain questions from the committee. MR. CAMPBELL: Scott, I have one. When you talk about the lines of business, in looking at Page 28 of 185

other projects that the vendors have implemented in the past, and the one I was looking at was the one in the references. Would the finance, supply chain, human capital management, would that, you know, when you re talking about modules and lines of business, I mean, what s the relationship between those two, and how do you know, like for example, under HCM, I mean, are there many modules to that? MR. EILER: Yes. MR. CAMPBELL: Or is that kind of the module? MR. EILER: No. HCM would be composed of a number of modules, payroll, personnel, learning management, all of the modules really related to human capital management. Finance, likewise, would be general ledger, accounts payable, accounts receivable, all of the finance related modules, supply chain, get more of a -- a concept used in private sector that would include areas such as purchasing, inventory management, those are the three groupings. MR. CAMPBELL: In the -- in the ones -- in the projects that have been presented in here by the vendors, do you see ones that have the -- the same technical complexity from the software side as what we are looking for? Or are examples of that in there? MR. EILER: I m not exactly sure, Chair, if I understand -- MR. CAMPBELL: The question. All right. MR. EILER: -- the question. MR. CAMPBELL: I ll hold it for later. MR. EILER: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other questions? Cynthia? MS. CHAMBERS: (Inaudible.) When you were talking about the vendor, the staffing versus County staff -- MR. EILER: Yes. MS. CHAMBERS: -- was there any part of the project or any modules or any savings where you thought that the -- the ratio was of particular concern for any of the vendors? MR. EILER: Yes. MS. CHAMBERS: Can you -- can you elaborate a little bit on what part of the project or implementation of this project was a greater concern to the vendor relative to the staffing Page 29 of 185

versus -- MR. EILER: I don t know if you want me to address it on a general level or tri-stall (phonetic) vendors or -- MS. CHAMBERS: I d like to hear it regarding the vendors. I don t know if it s appropriate now or when, but I -- I think that s a big concern for me, relative to our workforce and our ability to, you know, to (inaudible). MR. EILER: Yeah. You know, and again, the vendors interpreted the RLI. That s what an RLI is all about, is to put something out there and allow the vendors to react to that, to propose what they feel is the best solution for the County. Now, based on our experience and Melissa Grimm I know will report on in her findings with the reference sites. You know, there are areas of particular concern. I think that the County recognizes that the whole issue of changed management and training is a critical item. Again, I ll let Melissa report on her findings specifically. So you know, we felt that a couple of vendors were deficient in that area and that they needed to beef up their staffing in that area. Likewise, project management we feel is, obviously, critical for a project of this nature. Part of the -- the normalization process also had to do with looking at the time period for implementation. So, again, we had two vendors proposing three years, which frankly we feel is a very aggressive implementation time period for the scope of the software in the size of the County, while we had two of the vendors proposing a four year implementation time period, which we believe is much more appropriate. You can go into -- I think Slide 12 on the appendix is a very telling chart because you can start seeing areas, summaries where a vendor might be close on the level of the 50/50 split, and other areas where there are significant gaps. So my hope would be today is that the vendors have reviewed the report, that they ve heard what I ve said and that they are going to have an opportunity to address for the SC, maybe the reason why the 50/50 split is not appropriate or maybe additional FTE s. Whatever, I would be looking for them to justify those differences. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. So regarding the actual firms and that the staffing is that a question that I can ask when Melissa s speaking? Is that what I m hearing? MR. EILER: Well, I think there s aspects I mean, again, Melissa will be reporting on what she learned on the site visits. I know part of the site visits was looking at level of vendor staffing and whether or not that was appropriate for their implementation, as well. Now, again, I think, you know, you can look on PH 12 of appendix F, which, again, based on the vendor proposals where we asked them to articulate what are the County requirements, and then what would be the vendor staffing proposed, as well, and it s pretty clear where you can see those Page 30 of 185

gaps met 50/50. MS. CHAMBERS: All right. I am just concerned about what you think the magnitude of concern for those. I can see where (inaudible). MR. EILER: Well, I think -- MS. CHAMBERS: -- what -- MR. EILER: -- it varies. MS. CHAMBERS: -- I m looking for some help here MR. EILER: I understand. MS. CHAMBERS: -- on how serious that is, and obviously the vendors can respond to that later during the discussion period, but from your perspective -- MR. EILER: Well, and again, you know, I think some of the vendors did a very good job of articulating in their responses to the cost normalization why they felt the level of effort they proposed was appropriate. So I ll get into specifics. AST has implemented their solution in a couple of other counties in Florida. Pinellas County, Polk County. They re right now implementing up in Tampa, Hillsborough County. So I think they indicated, you know, we re drawing on previous templates, methods, interfaces for those other counties. So that, obviously, was not factored into the normalization, but that s, to me a good factual argument to say, here s why the development hours for our solution are probably less than normalizing up to an even level of effort. Now CedarCrestone put up an argument, saying that, you know, we have some data conversion tools which significantly expedite that process, and we saw those during the services presentation. So, again, I think there -- if you look through the vendors response to the normalization, there are some very compelling arguments to say here s why we think that normalization was inappropriate or incorrect. So yes, the bottom-line answer to your question is we are concerned, I think, with some vendors more than others, and again, our perspective is those vendors that have demonstrated proven experience of implementing the complete solution all three for similar types of entities, of size, geography, complexity, we would view their base numbers coming out of the proposal as probably more reliable. MS. CHAMBERS: Thank you. MR. WALTON: I have a question. This may be a question for Melissa, but just in terms of the level of ongoing support that you have experienced in implementations you ve done in the past, for an entity the size and scope of Broward, what have you found to be the more Page 31 of 185

successful approach? MR. EILER: Well, you know, frankly it s to some degree a strategic intent of the entity. Some clients don t want to be in the business of IT necessarily, and so they will outsource a contract out not only the infrastructure piece on a hosting perspective but also the application support, as well. And I think --my belief is that that is what AST is proposing as essentially a turnkey support for the County. Other vendors kind of have the perspective of we want to make the County self-sufficient such that when we re done implementing our software, the County has been fully trained. They have the appropriate staffing in place, and they re able to support it. We will provide the hosting services and, you know, break fix and tier two help desk, but for the most part, the County. So it s really a strategic decision that I think the County has to make on what you want to do. MR. CAMPBELL: And along that -- those same lines, with our requirement going out that it be 50/50, where talking that we -- we kind of drew that line where we want to have support and, you know, have the vendor in the -- in the park with us the same amount we re in the park. MR. EILER: Correct. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MR. GEORGE: Doesn t a lot of the function have to do with the quality of the individual that s providing the information to you, and providing the support? MR. EILER: Absolutely. That s why we mentioned the quality of the staffing, both implementing their ongoing support procedures, their staffing is obviously of critical importance and can adjust those up to ease accordingly. MR. GEORGE: And I think you hit it with the implementations I m going through, it s the support after implementation and continuation of making it work, and answering the questions on such a large diverse operation as we have is very important. That s just a statement. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. Thank you, Scott. MR. EILER: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other questions? And at this time, Melissa Grimm, the Project Administrator, will provide a report on the site visits. Page 32 of 185

SITE VISITS MS. GRIMM: Nine County staff members visited one implementation reference site for each vendor in order to view the system in a live setting and perform fact-finding about the vendor. In addition to conversation, staff viewed actual system screens and reports. The sites made appropriate levels of their knowledgeable staff available to us during the visit. All sites commented that their systems transformed the way they do business by standardizing processes across their organization and gave them the ability to obtain better data to manage their organization. Change management and training were identified as key areas that should have had more emphasis and resources. We should use a implementation vendor that has depth of skilled resources available. You need at least a 50/50 split of staff to vendor resources. Standard reports, in general, were weak, and report writing did not receive enough vendor focus. Embedded document storage in the systems is not robust enough for storage volume of documents required. And avoid using offshore development resources due to communication issues when working in opposite time zones. A summary of each site visit is as follows in the order in which they were visited. For Infor, we visited Greenville County School District in South Carolina. Greenville has approximately 10,000 employees and a general operating budget of 460 million. Infor installed the finance modules in 2009 and -- which includes purchasing, and HR payroll in 2010. They reported that their project was on time and on budget, and that they made no customizations to the system. They commented, though, that Greenville had to hire external resources to write reports, and they experienced issues with Infor staffing in two business areas. Staff observations included Greensville system had limited drill down capabilities as implemented. Some of the major processes were not easy to perform, due to complex software navigation, Page 33 of 185

and the scope of the software modules for Greenville s project was not as complex as the one proposed for Broward County. For AST, we visited Pinellas County, Florida. Pinellas County has approximately 3100 employees and a general operating budget of 1.2 billion. Pinellas implemented Oracle E Business Suite countywide in 2011 for HR payroll and in 2012 for finance and procurement. They reported that their project was on time for HR payroll, but delayed three months for finance and procurement, and made minimal customizations to the system. Pinellas County hired external resources to write reports. They commented that they experienced issues around insufficient depth of AST resources in a few business areas, that AST did not have the resources with report development skill sets resulting in Pinellas not having critical reports until months after going live. Staff s observations included that the Oracle E Business Suites System as implemented was easy to use, and required minimal clicks to navigate the system. And, again, the scope of the software modules for Pinellas County s project was not as complex as the one proposed from Broward County. For CedarCrestone, we visited the City of Boston. The City of Boston has approximately 18,000 employees and a general operating budget of 2 billion. The City of Boston re-implemented their finance and procurement modules in 2012 in order to redesign business processes and add functionality. They reported at the time that their project was on time, their budget was expanded for report writing, and had minimal customizations such as new fields or rearrange pages were made to the system. They commented that CedarCrestone put the proper amount of resources on the project. However, the scope of report writing was increased because they did not initially scope out correctly the -- the report writing needs, and additional vendor resources were brought in to develop reports. Staff observations included the City of Boston s PeopleSoft system was easy to use and required minimal clicks to navigate the system. And, again, the scope of the software modules for the City of Boston s project was not as complex as the one proposed for Broward County. For Ciber, we visited the City of Tallahassee. The City of Tallahassee had approximately -- has Page 34 of 185

approximately 2800 employees, and a general operating budget of 600 million. The City of Tallahassee utilized Ciber to assist with a technical upgrade for the finance models in 2008, which is less complex, and is a much smaller work effort than an original implementation or reimplementation, and more recently used Ciber to lead the implementation for finance and HR payroll systems for a new consolidated dispatch system. They reported that their projects were on time and on budget. Staff s observations included the City of Tallahassee s PeopleSoft system was easy to use and required minimal clicks to navigate the system. And, again, the scope of the software modules for the City of Tallahassee was not as complex as the one proposed for Broward County. MR. CAMPBELL: Any questions? MR. WALTON: Just one quick question. I missed the budget for the City of Boston project for CedarCrestone. MS. GRIMM: The -- the operating budget for the -- for the City of Boston itself, I said was $2 billion. So that s their operating budget. MR. WALTON: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: Maybe you can help me with the same question I was trying to ask Scott. As far as the -- the references, not -- not necessarily regarding the ones where we did the site visits, but the other references, were those projects the same level of complexity, in your view? MS. GRIMM: As far as the -- the implementation references? MR. CAMPBELL: Yes. MS. GRIMM: It -- it varied. It s hard to say. I mean, we picked the reference that we thought was the best fit for our County. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MS. GRIMM: Some references that we were given had a mix of softwares, so they weren t appropriate for us to visit. The -- the references in size for CedarCrestone was also the city of Milwaukee, a very large reference, as well. The other references, I have them right here, so I make sure I m speaking correctly. Page 35 of 185

For CedarCrestone, the other references were the City of Milwaukee and the State of Kansas. And the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The references for Infor were Bexar County, Texas, which had a mix of, again, two software modules which made them not appropriate to see, and a health care system, which again were not as similar in nature. For Tallahassee, the other reference given to us was King County, Washington, which is a big company, which, however, they too have a mix of the software. They have a mix of PeopleSoft and E Business. We had the Indiana Department of Transportation which is another one they gave us. Sizewise, they have a $10 million general fund for that one. And then for Pinellas County, the other reference was Polk County, which has a -- this is an entire budget, though, of all funds is 1.3 billion, and other references given to us was through the City of Chicago, which has a -- again, all funds of about $3 billion. MR. CAMPBELL: Kent. MR. GEORGE: Melissa, in the discussions with these folks, these references, did you explore at all the responsiveness of the companies to the needs of the Pinellas County, Tallahassee, and so forth, the quality of the individuals, the depth of their experience, and did they provide a 50/50 mix, or anything along that line in the between the vendor and entity themselves? MS. GRIMM: They all recommended that. I think that they started off with having more vendor resources, but we heard at Pinellas County that the resources were cut, resulting in less, less vendor resources to finish out the project. MR. GEORGE: Did they say why? MS. GRIMM: It s -- in some cases there was a vendor resource that left, and there was a difficult time replacing that person. There was a long period of time replacing that person. And in the other cases, they just said that staffing was cut and that the work was then divided among the remaining resources there. MR. GEORGE: In the macro sense, did they talk at all about change management and how the company worked with the entity in the change management? MS. GRIMM: For the Pinellas AST one or just in general. MR. GEORGE: In general and each one of them if you could, really, if you could specifically say that for each company, that would be great, because change management is very significant in this. Page 36 of 185

MS. GRIMM: All right. Yeah, I do have some specifics on that information. MR. WALTON: Could if it s okay, Kent, I d like to follow up on a Pinellas County question before you get away from that in terms of the staffing issues, since that was was it a unilateral decision? Was it mutual? How did they arrive at the point of making the determination that staff would be cut. MS. GRIMM: Well, it -- I don t think it was a mutual decision. They expressed unhappiness with it, and they felt that -- that as a result of those cuts they had less functionality in some areas. MR. WALTON: Thanks. MS. GRIMM: As far as change management, three of the other firms had some comments, you know, related to that, and mostly it was, for the most part that you need to really emphasize change management, that you need to have dedicated resources to do that. However, yeah, there was a -- a comment in Pinellas County that -- that there was significant unhappiness with the change in management at that place. MR. GEORGE: And which one was that? Could you identify each one of them if you have that? If you don t, you know, could you provide that? MS. GRIMM: Well, I -- I mean, I know that at Pinellas County, they basically just said that change management was is not a strength, and all the training was done by Pinellas County resources, but however, they -- they may have set that up in how they did their contract. With the City of Boston, there was mixed discussions among staff on change management. I heard in some places it was very good. I heard in other places, it was weak. So there was mixed information that was given about that. For Tallahassee, they said that that s one of their lessons learned, that they would have a dedicated change management staff in that area, and that that change management that was done was done mostly in-house. So I don t know that that s an issue to the vendor. It could be that s the way they set up their contract. MR. GEORGE: You had no comment on Infor through the Greenville School District on change management? MS. GRIMM: Infor did not have any issues with their change management. MR. GEORGE: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other questions? Page 37 of 185

We were originally scheduled to have a lunch break prior to getting into presentations, so we ll kind of put this to the will of the committee. If you want to take a break now so that we can go through presentations, or just keep on going, or wait and, you know, while we re in the middle of presentations, which I don t think would be very good, but -- MR. WALTON: How long are the presentations? MR. CAMPBELL: Each presentation is an hour, with let me try to remember was it twenty minutes? MR. GEORGE: Could we -- could we take a short break now? Let the first individual set up, do one presentation, and then eat lunch after the first presentation. Let the second folks get pick up. We eat lunch, and I don t even have any trouble eating lunch at the desk, but, you know, if that s okay. If that s a good idea. CAROLYN MESSERSMITH: Yes, that s a good idea. MR. GEORGE: Mr. Chairman, is that a good idea? CAROLYN MESSERSMITH: We ll make arrangements for that. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. So we re going to hear the, start with the first presentation, and then, I guess, we re going to then have a short break for lunch, finishing up here with the second, and moving forward. CAROLYN MESSERSMITH: Yes. The first vendor has five minutes to set up. KENT GEORGE: Can we have more than five minutes? CAROLYN MESSERSMITH: Yes. (Laughter.) MR. CAMPBELL: We ll recess the meeting for 15 minutes, and it is now 10:45. The meeting is recessed. (THE MEETING RECESSED AT 10:45 A.M. AND RECONVENED AT 11:00 A.M.) MR. CAMPBELL: 11:00 o clock. At the short listing, it was determined by the Selection Committee that the firms would be presenting in the following order. The first presenter will be CedarCrestone, followed by Infor, followed by Ciber, followed by Applications Software Technology, AST. Page 38 of 185

A hard copy of each firm s presentation must be given to Carolyn Messersmith, over here, Purchasing Agent, prior to each presentation. Presentations will be limited to 60 minutes followed by a question and answer period. At the conclusion of the question and answer period, the next presenter will have five minutes to set up. The time keeper will be John -- a combination of, I guess, John Raite and myself. I will be putting 59 minutes on the timer, and then John is going to take care of the last minute. MR. RAITE: (Inaudible.) MR. CAMPBELL: When it is your time -- firm s time to present, come up, and you will use the podium, small table, chairs, and microphones. You don t necessarily have to one hour, that is true. With that said. Ready? PRESENTATIONS MR. BRYANT: Good morning, everyone. My name is Kevin Bryant, with CedarCrestone. I m the General Manager. MR. CAMPBELL: Hold on one second. problems starting the timer. I should probably start the time. I was having MR. BRYANT: We ready to go? MR. CAMPBELL: Go. MR. BRYANT: Okay. General Manager of our Public Sector practice, and I appreciate being here, and I d like to thank Broward County. This is obviously a very complex and large procurement. One thing that is clear is the opportunity and benefit that s coming out of this, and that s very much what we re all looking at, and why we re excited to be here. To give you a little bit of background about myself, I ve been in the Oracle Public Sector Solutions space for the better part of 18 years, 16 of which have been with CedarCrestone. I started off as a consultant and a public sector implementer of PeopleSoft to organizations similar to yours, and so I can very much understand and appreciate the path that you re taking and the importance of selecting a vendor and solution. I was also very fortunately part of the development and establishment of CedarCrestone hosting and application management service offerings, and the evolution of those over the last Page 39 of 185

11 years. And so, as I look at Broward County, one of the things that s really neat that we re going to speak here about today is the benefit of selecting a single vendor with the combination of implementation, application management, and hosting capabilities to deliver that with sole accountability From CedarCrestone overview standpoint and background, one thing that you re going to find as a common theme is that our core capabilities and competencies very much align with Broward County s solution needs. From a PeopleSoft standpoint, we have nearly 25 years of PeopleSoft experience. 700-plus PeopleSoft experts to pull from, so that s very large. We ve done 300-plus public sector projects successfully. And PeopleSoft, as a package, is really built from the ground up for the public sector, and proven within the public sector. It has the largest and strongest account base, and one thing we ll talk more about is its roadmap and its upgrade path which is very, very clear, which is unlike some of the competition. At a local and state government level, our experience is significant. We ve implemented cities and counties, and at the state level. The more complex, the better. We re -- we re very good at fixed fee deliverable based solutions. We ve also worked at many very large airports, ports, and transit centers, as well as transportation authorities, as well as departments of transportation, and we have experience integrating the enterprise solution with line of business in the area of scheduling and maintenance, so we understand a lot of that complexity. At a hosting level, we ve been in the hosting business and provide our own hosting, which is unique amongst the competition. We ve been doing this since 2003, all the way from the application level to the systems level all the way down to the infrastructure and the help desk. It s tied together with the singular service level agreement. That s the market leader. And what that s allowed us to do is really develop the most PeopleSoft customers and host the largest number of environments of any of the competition that s out there. And it s -- it s a distinct advantage of ours. They re clear lines of responsibility and accountability. And we re able to integrate it with our application management services and implementation services. The same is the case with our application management services, whether it s dedicated or provided, remotely. We have over 150 customers that leverage us for Oracle application management services, and we integrate it with hosting, and we integrate it within the implementation, and that will allow is a smooth transition for Broward County into production so Page 40 of 185

that you can focus on you business. We do this at a core, which is unlike a number of the other vendors. Also, we have analytics integration and budgeting dedicated practices. We ve done hundreds of budgeting business planning implementations. The same with Oracle business intelligence, which are the solutions that we propose. So, again, standing back and looking at CedarCrestone, as a firm, we have the core competencies and the capabilities to provide more of a sole accountable solution for Broward County. This next slide is our public sector client list, and it s vast. And -- and we very much agree with the Plante Moran comment that we have significant experience with implementing the proposed software for large government clients, which would be PeopleSoft. We do. Across cities, across counties, across transportation entities, states, various state entities, as well as higher educational within the commercial space. We have vast experience. I wanted to spend a few minutes talking about a similar client that I think will resonate with Broward County. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is perhaps the largest multijurisdictional transportation authority in the country. They run and manage five airports out of New York, including in New Jersey -- including the largest, Newark, LaGuardia, and JFK. They handle all the tunnels in and out of the city, as well as the bridges. They have the fifth largest police force in the nation. They also manage the Trade Centers and the new Freedom Tower sites and the construction and the management of that, as well as having path trains, subways, and bus operations as part of their operation. They have about a $5 billion operating budget on a year-to-year basis, $10 million in capital projects, and they have 700 construction engineers. So a very, very large shop. Since 1999, we ve been providing all of the Port Authority s implementation, upgrade, and application management support services to predefined service levels. We ve gone through numerous projects with them, all fixed fee, all based on service levels, and we ve delivered. We re contracted, again, through 2020. For those that have not been involved with providing hosting or application management at the same time as implementation services, it is unique. You go through good times, and you go through bad or more challenging times, and that s something that Broward County should be giving thought to. One example would be one 12 years ago, to this very day, we had 23 resources working on the path implementation in the Trade Centers when the planes hit. At that point in time, Page 41 of 185

everyone, thankfully, was able to exit the buildings and get out as the buildings came down. But what happened next was that the network and the application wasn t so fortunate. The checks went down, as did their environments. There was the need for someone to be accountable for partnering and working with the Port Authority to get them back up and get them operational. And we turned around and worked for the next three to four days. We built networks, we built environments, to get paychecks calculated and created and hand-delivered to all those that deserved it. The level of commitment was absolutely outstanding, and there was one point of accountability. You don t get that through multiple points where you have many people in different organizations looking to see if this is my responsibility or not. The recent tropical storm that we had, Sandy, tested it again, and just the same, we went through. We focused on business operations. We reprioritized, and we helped them through that. Now, there are other organizations where we have had similar experiences, albeit different. AC Transit handles all the busing and the subways, trains in and around San Francisco. We provide their hosting. We provide their application management. Denver RTD, Regional Transportation District, the same. Implementation support, ongoing application management support. The City of Boston, New York Office of the State Comptroller, the City of Milwaukee, these all have in common that we work closely with them to provide hosting application management integration services. Here s a slide of our collective teams Florida clients. And what you ll see is that there are 25 PeopleSoft clients on this list. To the north, Palm Beach. To the south, Miami Dade. Broward County Sheriff s, who you re already familiar with. We ll hear a little bit from Florida A&M soon, but they re a hosting customer that also uses us for AMS and implementation and upgrade services. The same for Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. So there s a very strong community of presence that PeopleSoft and our team has within the State of Florida. Why PeopleSoft? Why PeopleSoft within Florida? Why PeopleSoft within the State and local space? The public sector DNA is very much built into the fabric of the solution. I can tell you, having Page 42 of 185

implemented it, and worked with many that you will hear from today, having implemented it in the early to mid 90s, seeing the functionality and the capabilities being driven back through product development and R&D into the solution. You also see a flexible tool set which has worked very well in the state and local space. There are more public sector PeopleSoft clients than either E-Business or Infor. We talked about many of them alone in Florida. We looked at the ratings in terms of the highest overall demonstrating rating. PeopleSoft performed very well, as we did for the technical solution. The other thing to think about is not necessarily the next five years, but what about the next ten years, the next fifteen to twenty years. Look at the road map and the upgrade path. What s defined and what s not. Because, again, this is a 20, 25, 30 year investment for you all. PeopleSoft has a defined roadmap at this point. E-Business Suite does not. As we look at the PeopleSoft roadmap, it becomes pretty clear and this was provided by Oracle just several weeks ago. The PeopleSoft upgrade path is defined. Dates are provided. Releases above and beyond the recent released version 9.2 are there. They are available. They re named. 9.3, 9.4, taking us out to 2018. You add in the eight years of additional maintenance and support, you re out to 2026 with very defined capabilities, upgrade paths, very, very visibly communicated. Let s communicate -- or let s compare that to the E-Business Suite. And this, again, was taken from an Oracle communication. EBS upgrade path is undefined. No dates are really provided. No releases above and beyond 12.2, which is yet to be released, are listed. Over four years has passed since the last major release. This should lead to some questions with respect to the upgrade path and the roadmap of the E-Business Suite versus PeopleSoft. What is clear is that PeopleSoft will be supported for a minimum of five years longer than E- Business, given certain release schedules, and that PeopleSoft clearly has a more visible, open roadmap. So let s consider the differences as you look at CedarCrestone versus the competition. We have software that was initially designed for the public sector, as we ve talked about, with a large Florida client base and a state and local client base, install base. Page 43 of 185

As you look at CedarCrestone s Oracle revenue, it s $170 million, and that s focused specifically on the Oracle services, space application management, hosting, and the implementation. That s nearly three times the size of the Oracle services in the competing Oracle bids. Projects of a similar nature, we have many of them across commercial, higher education, and public sector. We ve been very successful. We don t just have one. We have many. And with the availability of quality staff to support them, Keith Pace is going to stand up as our Project Manager and talk to you about those staff. It is absolutely critical that you have folks that have been involved and engaged in projects similar in nature to Broward County. That s, as we heard earlier, a very important point, and we couldn t agree more. And we also agree with Plante Moran s comment that CedarCrestone has the ability to obtain resources based on a large pool of available, qualified staff. We couldn t agree with that more. And not all of the vendors have the same characteristic. So what is the overall CedarCrestone value proposition? We boiled it down into four particular areas. We have the best government solution. Software designed for the public sector, used by more counties, cities, and states than any of the others, with an established Florida presence. Also, a very clear upgrade path and roadmap taking us to 2026, at a minimum. Second, we have the lowest Oracle fixed price costs. Period. Our bid out of the chute was the only one to meet all the required RLI scope elements. We were fully compliant. We had no exceptions to that, and our offer stands. As we look at normalization, and we would very much agree with the scope normalization. It s important. It s scope wasn t bid. It should have been included. We included it all. Well, as you look at the scope normalization, the differential in our total cost actually goes up, goes up almost $5 million. And so, again, the lowest price. Why? Because productivity of our key team members. Two similar people do not necessarily product the same. When we talk about our key team members, we have very, very strong resources that have been proposed. Our tools and accelerants, we talk about conversion tools, and other accelerators that we bring to the table. That lends itself to efficiency. We also have the best hosting SLA and hosting price, and that builds an additional efficiency, because we re providing those services. We re linked. We re integrated, so we re able to be more productive. Page 44 of 185

Most experienced. I m not going to go through the litany of firm related topics that I ve already covered. What I will cover, though, beyond, is that we ve added partners to the bid who are focused on enterprise applications, PeopleSoft and PeopleSoft training here in Florida. Very dedicated. We have the most hosting experience, and we have a culture which attracts and retains top talent, and that s been the -- that s been the case for the last 25 years. Lastly, one element is that we re the lowest risk. We have single accountability for consulting, application management, and hosting. There is not going to be finger-pointing. There s clear accountability. We re the largest Oracle practice with performance guarantees that have been noticed. We have a focus on organizational change management, that Keith will talk about, and we ve also included Tier 3 support where others have not. So the best solution, lowest fixed Oracle price, most experience, and the lowest risk. So, with that, I m going to introduce a client and a partner of ours to get up and say a few words. Michael James is the Interim Vice President of Information Technology and CIO at Florida A&M University, FAMU. We have asked him to come down and say a few words. He s been with FAMU for over 33 years, has seen through the entire process what you all are stepping into, and has had some experience with CedarCrestone along the way. So with that, I d like to introduce Michael. MR. JAMES: Thank you, Kevin. Good morning to the honorable Commissioners. I m delighted to be here today. As Kevin indicated, my name s Michael James. I m currently serving as the Interim Vice President of Information Technology at Florida A&M University. And as you can imagine, during my 33 years at the institution, I have seen quite a few implementations and dealt with quite a few implementation vendors during my tenure. I welcome the opportunity to come and share with our strong partner, CedarCrestone, and I want to talk about how they have become unique in the marketplace and how they have provided outstanding assistance to us. Can you put the slides back? I ll go on in the interest of time. Let me just tell you a little bit about Florida A&M University. We have currently about 11,000 students. We re located in Tallahassee, Florida. We re part of the State University system of Florida and occupy about 428 acres in Tallahassee. We have a very diverse academic degree offering at Florida A&M University, including undergraduate and graduate degrees, and a law school in the City of Orlando. Currently, we are running four enterprise applications that are hosted by CedarCrestone. The Page 45 of 185

applications are PeopleSoft Financials and the modules associated with that; PeopleSoft Human Resources ACM, the modules associated with that; PeopleSoft Campus Solution, which is our student information system, and the modules associated with that; and also the Enterprise Portal, which allows you to gain access into the various systems. And we re also, as Kevin mentioned, we re hosted by CedarCrestone. All of our applications are hosted by CedarCrestone. And I can freely say that they have provided us with outstanding functional and technical support, seamless integration between hosting and application management, and project services. Having the same team to provide both implementation service and hosting service, and the same methodology, the same management structure, for us, has been invaluable. We haven t experienced any of the finger-pointing and the washing of the hands, which you often get when you have two different vendors providing implementation services and hosting. We are currently, as indicated here on the slide, had some recent achievements at the University. We just upgraded our HCM module to version 9.1. I m happy to report that we did that under budget. We also have employed the self-service in Human Resources with portal technology for managers. We re piloting the time and labor employee self-service coming up later on this month. We ve been successful in creating a mobile interface for our PeopleSoft student application that we completed a couple weeks ago. And we are scheduled to bring the HR ACM module recruiting system live in November of 2013, and we re positioning ourselves to get ready to upgrade our financial application starting in January of 2014. It is my understanding that Broward County is about to start the same process with almost the identical solution set that FAMU had 12 years ago. I can tell you that implementing a integrated enterprise solution is a significant undertaking, and, as such, it s essential that you have the right team in place to help you succeed. I would like to spend just my last few minutes sharing with you some of the experiences we ve had and why we selected and look to CedarCrestone. In our minds, they stand above the crowd. First of all, project management. Their project managers are highly qualified. They did an outstanding job maintaining our schedule and budget, mitigating our risk, resolving our issues, and equally important, they kept the team and stakeholders engaged and excited. We found CedarCrestone to be flexible to work with, easy to work with, and we have not had any issues negotiating contracts. Our projects have been fixed price engagements, and they Page 46 of 185

have always been delivered as promised without change orders, which the University certainly appreciated. They are undoubtedly committed to our success, and have gone the extra mile necessary to solve problems and make sure that we are successful. CedarCrestone has an experienced team. They have deep PeopleSoft knowledge. Not only deep PeopleSoft knowledge but they also have business process experts who are able to assist us in that arena. Their change management team was able to engage each of our stakeholders, gaining buy-in and prepared our users for the day that we went live. Their training was thoughtful, and it also prepared our -- our staff to be successful with the new system. CedarCrestone s hosting and ongoing support services. Originally, we had a different hosting provider for our PeopleSoft applications from 2006 to 2012. And during that time, we experienced chronic down-time, particularly during the University s peak periods, like school opening and registration. We had poor availability, poor performance, no strategic relationships, and insufficient resources, and, to top it off, our costs were excessive and prohibitive. Without hesitation and without duress, I can say that we have a better performing system now, as a result of our implementation of CedarCrestone s hosting. The reputation of the system depends on performance. And our performance is better now than it has ever been. In fact, I ve included the comment here on the slide presentation. This is actually a snippet of an email that I received from the Director of Admissions shortly after our fall registration period which indicated we did not experience any shutdowns of the system during the registration period, and that came from the Director of Admissions, and it was an email I was delighted to receive. Cedar Crestone offers excellent value for FAMU. If we had to do it over again, there s no question that we would chose CedarCrestone as our implementation partner. In fact, as we consider to get ready to do our financial upgrade, we are seeking the University s approval to again partner with CedarCrestone to upgrade our financial application to version 9.2. I appreciate your time, and I thank you for allowing me to share Florida A&M University s experiences with CedarCrestone. Thank you very much. Mr. Christenson: Hello. My name is Brian Christenson. I m with CedarCrestone. I m the Vice President of Public Sector Solutions. I ve been working with Oracle Applications for the past 19 years. And during that time, I ve worked with more than 60 local government organizations, just like yourselves, working on projects just like this. Page 47 of 185

What I m going to be speaking about today is our project costing, our pricing, and approach, as well as some differentiators that were identified in the Plante Moran report that you all have reviewed. I d like to start by talking about the cost normalization exercise. We went through this and really broke down the items into two different categories as Scott affirmed this morning. One has to do with effort normalization, the level of effort normalization that was conducted, whereby a baseline of hours were applied against each organization s work plan to come up with some -- I guess some consideration, some findings, you know some referential information for you all to consider. We would caution you against making too much of those conclusions in the fact that, for one, they take into consideration different types of staffing approaches that the vendors had. There are different assumptions that the vendors made. In addition, there s some miscalculations. And we ve detailed our response at the end of the presentation materials that we provided to you and we provided those a week ago to the County. In great detail, we ve talked about why we think that particular exercise resulted in some miscalculations in some results that were probably not intended by the County, especially as it relates to applying work effort that s done by lower rate resources to higher rate resources that are much more productive. It actually has a geometric effect in splitting the cost there. Instead, we would greatly encourage you to evaluate the scope normalization as part of that. There are a number of items whereby Plante Moran determined that our competitors left out required scope items or part of the RLI. In fact, it was a responsiveness criteria for compliance to the RLI to include those items, the entire items, the entire scope of the RLI within their proposal, and they found that AST was deficient in two areas. They found that Ciber was deficient in two areas, and the Infor was deficient in a variety of areas. I have included what the calculations related to that scope normalization is on the next page. However, we think this -- this is absolutely essential. Mr. George, you brought up the fact that comparing apples to apples is absolutely essential when you re talking about a firm fixed price proposal, and that s what this scope normalization essentially does. And so we ve shown the effects using the Plante Moran analysis of those items that are related to scope and how they affect each of the vendors bids. In addition, I do want to restate that our firm fixed price of 31.6 million dollars is for the entire scope of work in the RLI. Applying any kind of a level of effort normalization to that, you know, would be perhaps meaningful in a time and materials type environment. However, for a fixed price environment, we stand behind that bid. So here you can see the effects of doing that scope normalization. You can see it widens the gap between us and the other two Oracle proposals by 15 percent and 25 percent respectively. Page 48 of 185

In addition, since we re talking about pricing, when you look at the project cost as a ratio of annual revenues that a firm has with respect to Oracle services, choosing to -- to look at that ratio as a key benchmark, for us, that s about 19 percent. Not too big, not too small. Certainly has the attention of the firm; however, it does not stretch our ability to be able to staff the project with quality resources. However, when you get up to 79, 80 percent, there should be concerns about that. What could result from that is turning to hiring people off the street, which creates inconsistent results and quality issues on projects. In addition, the last row here is another key performance indicator that was identified by the Plante Moran report, where the three Oracle bids all have more than a hundred thousand consulting hours included in them; however, the Infor consulting effort has less than 50,000 hours, less than half of what the other three bids included. When we talk about the differentiator as it relates to hosting, there were several findings in the Plante Moran report that we believe do support us as being a uniquely qualified vendor for the project. That relates to us being the only vendor that provides hosting under one roof, with our application management services as well as our implementation services, hosting performance guarantees. And, as Kevin mentioned, application management is a core competency of our firm. We have more than 200 individuals that are dedicated to providing ongoing support to our PeopleSoft customers. That s larger than other organizations entire Oracle practices. So those folks do not work on implementation projects. They solely deliver application management services. 200 people for PeopleSoft. The benefits of a single vendor approach, there could possibly be quite a bit of finger-pointing in the event that you have a different hosting provider versus consulting implementation provider. We avoid that. Especially when you get into post-production support periods, how that handoff occurs, when exactly it occurs, how warranty is handled versus Tier 2 support items, how Tier 3 Support items are handled, who you contact, how you contact them, that s really alleviated by going with a vendor that really covers all three of those aspects, implementation, application management, as well as hosting. The Plante Moran report identified our proposal as the only one that provides system performance guarantees. In addition, we provide guarantees related to system availability and disaster recovery that exceed our competition. This is extremely important. As Mr. James identified with his own organization, the difference Page 49 of 185

in performance and availability of the system really affects the reputation of the system, as well as the effectiveness of the system. You could do everything else right on the project, but if the system is not available and doesn t perform well for the end users, the reputation is damaged, and, obviously, the effectiveness of the project is damaged. And this is a -- a change management aspect of the implementation that we take very seriously. In addition, we ve designed a -- an approach that includes three very important aspects. We have what we believe to be by far the most experienced local minority vendors working with our team. We ve included Oracle certified training, which is a differentiator, as well as the longest implementation timeframe out of any of the proposals. Tony Jackson, who s with us today, in the interest of time, I won t be able to give Tony a chance to adequately introduce himself and his company; however, I d like to talk about them. They ve been providing ERP services to Florida governments for 11 years. He s delivered 14 PeopleSoft implementations as an organization. His folks have an average of 11 years of PeopleSoft experience. These folks will be able to work side-by-side with our team. We ll be able to merge them very effectively into our team to be able to deliver services. And this is a big reason why we re able to deliver such an attractive price with such productive resources, because his folks are just as productive as the folks that we ll be putting on the project team. In addition, he s worked with all of your neighbors that use PeopleSoft. So he s worked with Palm Beach County Clerks. He s worked with Palm Beach County Schools. He s worked at Broward Sheriff s Office. He s worked on Miami-Dade County on their PeopleSoft initiatives. His firm is not an accounting firm that decides to do ERP once in a while, or a couple people that go ahead and contract out and hire people off the street using monster.com to find resources for the project. These are his employees, and we feel really good about being able to work with Tony, and we think it s a huge differentiator. And, by the way, it reduces risk considerably for the implementation, given the fact that onetenth of the hours are provided by his firm. In addition, we ve included an Oracle certified training program rather than having Page 50 of 185

implementation consultants deliver the training program for the County. These are Oracle certified courses. They re using Oracle certified trainers. And it s a local minority owned business that s delivering this. This is a very well qualified organization. In fact, they operate eight Oracle University training centers around the country, including the one right here in Fort Lauderdale, and they re about to have the ninth added to their company in Tampa. So this organization runs eight, soon to be nine, Oracle University training centers, which means that when you go online and you log in to oracle.com and register for Oracle University training, you take that class here in Broward County, this is the organization that delivers that training. And we re happy to have them on the team. We feel like this is a big differentiator. They ve also worked with Palm Beach County, with Broward Sheriff s Office, as well as Miami- Dade County on their implementations, and they have very successful results from that. As Plante Moran identified in their report, good implementation consultants do not always make good trainers, and we recognize that. And so that s why we decided to have the professional training. Since training is so important to the County and important to the success of this project, we went with a low-risk, high-value approach to include this organization to deliver the training. And Lissette Nicola from TransAmerica Training is here to represent them, and she s had an active participation in the various different presentations to staff. Lastly, I d like to talk about the timeline analysis. This is one of the greatest critical success factors to a project. Keith Pace, who s our project manager, is going to talk later about the intelligence that is built into our timeline. I m going to talk about the durations, and how we ve not overlapped the phases, which we think is a big point for you all to consider. We are the only organization to not overlap phases of the implementation. So what does that mean? That means that Phase 1 occurs. There is a three-month post-production support period. Phase 2 does not begin until after that three-month post-production support period is over, and Phase 1 has been completely accepted by the County. Okay? The reason why that s -- and then that occurs for Phase 2, as well, going into Phase 3. The reason why that s important, and the reason why we do not agree with the approach that our competitors have taken by overlapping phases, is that when you do that, the risk to the organization and the risks to the projects really occurs to that new phase that s getting started. Page 51 of 185

All the attention from the organization, as it should be, is on that phase that s gone live. Where there s productive users in the system, those folks need stability. Those folks need support, and all of our energies should be dedicated on that before that particular phase is signed off and we move into the next phase. It s an important change management aspect of our implementation, and we feel like it s -- it s really the only way to promote the self-sufficiency within the organization and make sure that the system is as effective and the quality that the County desires, prior to moving into that next phase of the implementation. So, as you can see, we have the longest timeline. We re nearly four months long -- or four years long, sorry. And, as Scott mentioned, there are other vendors that are proposing a timeline less -- that s less than three years. That s a big difference. And we hope that you consider that. So, with that, I d like to introduce our Project Manager, Keith Pace. He s going to be talking to you about his background, the background of the team members, the intelligence that went into our timeline. He is going to address the 50/50 staffing model, and talk to you in detail, rather than at a summary level, about how we achieve that 50/50 staffing level and how we re committed to that for the County, as well as be able to answer any of your questions. Thank you. MR. PACE: Thanks, Brian. Good morning. My name is Keith Pace. I m the proposed Project Manager for the Broward County project. A little bit about my background, I ve been working with the PeopleSoft product since about 1998. Started off as a Functional Consultant, and, you know, really kept to those roots even to this day. Last year, I was at the -- the City of Fremont implementing some payroll solutions for them, and previous to that, I was at the Texas Department of Transportation. Given my -- my DOT background, as well as my ability to implement projects and grants, you know, I was chosen to be one of the consultants to actually go in there and set up the proof of concept for them. And why I feel like that s important as a Project Manager is the fact that, you know, while -- while my main duties as a Project Manager are really looking at scope, schedule, budget, resources, those types of things, as a Functional Consultant, I can actually input onto solutions, look at areas where we might run into trouble, look at areas where -- where I -- I need to consider, you know, scope variations, things like that. And it really helps me out as a Project Manager. Page 52 of 185

Around 2003-2004 timeframe, that s really when I started my project management slash project director roles, as you can see on -- on the timeline here. But the two I really want to point out are the City and County of San Francisco. In 2007-2008, I was their Project Director. They were doing an HCM reimplementation. HCM included HR, enterprise -- enterprise portal, payroll, time and labor, benefits administration. I took them through fit/gaps, requirements analysis -- I m sorry, fit/gaps, requirements analysis, those types of factors, and, you know, we worked through that project. Then in 2008, I became the Program Manager at King County. King County has a very, very similar footprint to Broward, although different softwares from the EBS side and the PeopleSoft side, but full HCM, full finance, full supply chain, and planning and budget. So four and a half out of their five and a half year program exists since I was their day-to-day Program Manager. But equally as important is the actual project team members and their experiences on the project. When the RLI first came out, you know, Roch and I sat down and, you know, we went to our resource pool and we said, who do we actually have that has numbers of years of experience with PeopleSoft and number of years of experience in large public sector accounts? And, you know, I was very happy that we were able to bring these people to bear, because, you know, they re main goal within the RLI response was to come up with what that fixed fee was actually going to be, what -- what the requirements were, what the fits in gaps are, what the interfaces needed to be from a PeopleSoft to PeopleSoft perspective, as well as temporary interfaces that would need to be created between the phases if I m talking finance to cyborg, you know, those types of -- those types of issues. So these folks are able to lean on that experience. As you can see in the relevant experience column, you know, there s a lot of the same names per consultant. You know, the good thing as a Project Manager, that helps me reduce risk. These people have worked together before. They re very comfortable working together. They want to work together again. And all of these folks were actually here, and the staff was able to meet them during the demonstration days and work through, you know, get a feel for how they work. Two people that d I d really like to point out specifically, not that they re more important than anybody else, but from a change management perspective. As a Project Manager, I view the change management lead as kind of that right-hand person. From a -- from a project implementation perspective, as you actually go through and you Page 53 of 185

implement, you could -- you could check off all the requirements. All the conversions could be done. All the interfaces could work appropriately. But from a change management perspective, if the users don t actually understand the system, or they feel -- or they re surprised by some things that actually are happening within the system, then you re going to have a bumpy go live, and you re going to have a bumpy acceptance period. So I was very pleased to see Jan Edwards, you know, as part of this project. She and I worked together at Denver Regional Transportation District. We put together a multiple year plan, multiple go live plan on that particular client. And, quite frankly, she s one of the best in the business. She s been working at this for about 15 years. The other person that I have a long, long history with on this list is Suzanne King. Suzanne King and I, you know, we started off at the City and County of San Francisco. She was -- she was, again, my payroll lead. You know, then we moved up to King County. And I would -- I -- there, she was the HCM payroll lead. I would venture to say that if you ask anybody at the county why that piece of the project was so successful, it would be Suzanne King s efforts. It s a highly complex unionized environment with -- with numerous modules. She was able to manage risks, to manage -- come up with creative solutions within that environment. So, again, you know, great to see that team, as well as the other team members that have large complex, you know, histories within the public sector, which I think is very important for Broward County. Again, that team was really tasked with -- with helping me determine the project timeline, the phasing, the assumptions that actually went into this, and I really want to take the next couple of slides to focus in on that timeline and on those assumptions. You know, some of the major assumptions that we had, you know, the first one was go live dates. So from a best practice perspective, financials should go live on a fiscal year end. Helps out with conversions, helps out with conversion validations, CAFA (Phonetic) reporting, year-end processing, those types of things. You know, so, again, we made the assumption that that would be a best practice that the County would want to use. From an HR perspective, calendar year end is the best time to go live, specifically if you re paying people on a semi-monthly basis. You know, you have equalization periods in January and September. You know, if you re going live on a calendar year end, you don t have to worry about, you know, maybe a special pay run to equalize people, a gift of funds issues, you know, anything like that. Page 54 of 185

So, again, we did -- our first major assumption was kind of those go live dates, and that helped us set the timeline. The second assumption that we put in there, and Brian alluded to it, is a post-production support and stabilization period. As a project manager, the best projects that I ve been involved with have had these types of periods. And what that does is -- is in the slide, from a financials perspective, at the -- at the end of that go live, I m still doing month-end processing. I m still doing reports that have to -- that have to be run. I m still dealing with people that are doing first-time processes, people that might need additional training. So, again, you need that stabilization period to be able to do that. I m going to talk a little bit more about that from a change management perspective a little bit later. But within each one of those -- of those phases, we have that post-production and stabilization period. You know, the third major assumption that we made is that we re going to do global design on the front end. And what do I mean by that? From the financials implementation perspective, we re going to look at elements of what the system is going to look like at the end -- at the end of this entire program. So what we would want to do is, from an HR perspective, I want to know how position management will work and how position budgeting will work. From a labor distribution perspective, are hours going to be, you know, brought in through (inaudible), project costed before they re sent to payroll. I need to know those things from a budgeting perspective. You know, I need to know do I need statistical accounts, do I have enough accounts within my chart of accounts to handle that budgeting. You know, so we want to get all of those design elements up front because we, obviously, within Phase 2, we don t want to have to redevelop any of those things if we can avoid it. You know, we also don t want to have to reconfigure what we have in financials because we made bad assumptions of what was going to happen in Phase 2. So we want to do that global discovery up front. And a last major assumption that we actually made was around -- was around the knowledge transfer and the decision timeframe windows. You know, what we wanted to do is we know these decisions aren t going to come lightly. If we re going to centralize processes or decentralize processes, if we re going to have all of this change that s actually going to happen, we built in time for that. Page 55 of 185

From a knowledge transfer perspective, we built in time because a lot of the knowledge transfer is that day-to-day operations, sitting together and making sure that the County is absorbing the actual knowledge and measuring that. So we wanted to make sure that our timeframes were appropriate for that. That s why we have the longest timeframe of any of the vendors. So, I really want to talk about the 50/50 split right now, and that was one of our major assumptions. There s -- there s two issues, you know, that I saw with the Plante Moran report, you know. So, one, within -- within the exhibit that we put in within our RLI, there was a place for Broward County s FTE -- FTEs per year. Okay? So within there, we said, okay, it s going to be, you know, ten functional people, and it s going to be, you know, 12 technical people, and it s going to be this and that. But the -- but what it didn t take into account is the fact that all of those resources don t start at the same time. Some of them start months within the project, especially if I think from a technical perspective. You know, not all the developers will be there day one. There are going to be a lot of developers that will be there, you know, as we move forward. So what we did in the -- in the presentation that I gave you and in the Excel spreadsheets that you see within your presentation that wouldn t display up here on PowerPoint nicely, but, you know, what we did was we spread that out across months and said when would people start, when would people end, and how could we get, you know, more towards that 50/50 split. And I want to talk about that 50/50 split as opposed -- in a utilization perspective in just a second. But, you know, Phase 1, when we took that split out, it was really kind of a 52/48 percent split Broward County to Cedar Crestone. In Phase 2, more 50/50. In Phase 3, more of a 49/51 percent split. But, you know, what I really wanted to talk about is level of effort there. You know, by no means do we think that a 50/50 split means Broward County, you re doing this 50 percent, CedarCrestone, you re doing this 50 percent. We re going to meet in the middle somewhere and we re -- we re actually going to be all good and the system s going to be, you know, live and working. We -- there is not a deliverable that is going to be produced that is not going to have the thumbprints of both the County and the CedarCrestone folks on there. Again, knowledge transfer, 50/50 split, sitting side-by-side to be able to do these things, I mean, that s the core of what we do. That s the core of how we make these implementations work and how we have referenceable clients and clients, as Kevin was talking about that, you Page 56 of 185

know, span, you know, multiple decades. A little bit more about that 50/50 organization split. From a project management perspective, you know, we fully expect to see that 50/50 split. You know, we have functional team leads and project management -- project managers within that PMO organization. Some of the hours that weren t reflected, you know, included Project Director hours, Account Manager hours, as Scott alluded to in his presentation, some hours around hosting, you know, things like that. So from a -- from a 50/50 split, we fully expect project management-wise that it s going to be -- you know, that it s going to be more 50/50. From a functional perspective, that s where it gets a little bit different. From a functional perspective, we expect the core team members of Broward County to bring the core knowledge of how the County actually does business, you know, to the table. We re going to bring the core knowledge of how PeopleSoft works and how PeopleSoft best practices work. But those aren t always going to fit together. You might have State statutes, or you might have County statutes, or you might have State procurement laws that cause those best practices to have to be changed, you know, and we re going to have to work together to figure that out. You know, it s going to be our consultant, but it s also -- they re going to be working with multiple people. It s not just, you know, the core project team member at that point. They re probably going to have to go out to agencies and discuss these things. They re going to have to go to procurement, you know, and discuss these things if we want to try to do business process change, you know, to standardize some of these processes. You know, that kind of goes -- that kind of goes across, so while it s a 50/50 work effort split, there might be additional resources, and we accounted for those, you know, within our -- within our project timeline. From a technical perspective, very, very similar. We expect to have a 50/50 work split, but, at the end of the day, we don t expect Broward County, their technical folks, they re not going to be ready day one. They re not going to have gone to training and then we can unleash them on -- on 50 percent of the work that actually has to be done. I don t expect them to be as efficient as a person that I ve had, you know, working with the software for 12 years, you know, that understands the tools a little bit better. So we baked in some time to actually do some of that knowledge transfer, to do some mentoring. You know, we expect that our technical folks will sit with your technical folks to really, you know, do that knowledge transfer, to really understand what it s going to take to move this project forward. Page 57 of 185

So that s where we -- that s where we stand on the 50/50 split. A couple of more items that I wanted to cover. Methodology and tools, it deals a little bit more with the -- with the accelerators that we actually have. From a methodology perspective, you know, there was a question from the Committee about, you know, how that methodology would work. Rest assured that everybody, you know, that works on this project will use what we call our Propel Implementation Methodology. Everybody will be trained on that. That includes the County. You know, we re going to set up some training sessions to work through what that methodology actually is and what it means, so that, you know, we can be productive. Nobody -- you know, everybody understands what a fit/gap process actually is and what discovery really means, you know, as we go through this process. You know, the other pieces on here, as Plante Moran indicated in their report, we do bring a lot of tools and accelerators to the process. Project dashboards, deliverables managements, solutions libraries, Microsoft project plans that we ve used in the past. But the two I really wanted to focus in on are the ARIS process tool and the Conversion Center tool. From a project management perspective, again, this helps me reduce risk to the county. From an ARIS processing perspective, it s a business process redesign tool. It s not like your common Visio, you know, where you have your swim lanes, and you have people roles and responsibilities. It s actually an interactive tool. It will produce those things, but within each one of those boxes you can click it on and you can say, now, these people -- these people actually have these roles and responsibilities, or these roles, you know, exist within the system, and then I can do - - I can create a report that prints out across all of my Visio diagrams or all of my ARIS tool sets so I can see, you know, where do I actually have issues? Where do I have conflicts of interest, where do I have people that can enter a vendor and enter a voucher and enter a payment, you know, which we -- which we don t want to happen in our -- in the system. So that s a tool that helps us from a productivity standpoint. Conversion Center s the same way. Conversion Center s a proprietary tool that we built within PeopleSoft. And what we did, you know, there, and how that helps me as a project manager is the fact that I have all of my conversions in one place. I have all of their dependencies in one place. I can go in and I can see where -- where are things erroring out? Where are they not working? I can run it in a multi-threaded capacity so I don t have to actually say, I run this process, and then I run this process, and then I run this process. From a multi-threaded capacity, I can Page 58 of 185

actually run all of those processes together, obviously provided that they don t have dependencies on top of each other. So, again, helps me reduce risk to the County. And then last but not least, our hosting tool set. You know, between our implementation and our -- and our hosting groups, we actually use the same tool set. So, again, it s not something where my implementation folks or the Broward County folks are going to understand, oh, my gosh, I didn t know I needed to enter a remedy help desk ticket to be able to refresh this environment, things like that. Everybody s trained on that, everybody uses the same tool sets to move forward. And then the last part I really wanted to focus in on is change management and training. So, again, from an implementation perspective, change management and training are built into what we do. You know, this diagram, a little bit -- a little bit hard to read, you know, but it really talks about how our implementation methodology and how our change management methodology mix with each other. In that first piece, the Phase I, Assessment, piece, what we re really doing there is we re actually doing the assessments. We re determining how ready is the County, you know, for this. Where are the -- you know, where are the issues going to lie? Stakeholder analysis, you know, happens to say, you know, what are the expectations of this project, and how are we going to communicate those, you know, to the implementation team. Communication plans are actually developed on what works best for Broward County and what doesn t work best for Broward County. Is everybody going to read their email? If we post it out to a website, is anybody going to look at those types of things? You know, we really start to focus in on managing that change strategy. Then we kind of shift into Phase 2, which is really, now let s take a look at those strategies and move that across our target audiences. Again, from an implementation perspective, I ll give an example. We re going to have business process changes that are going to come in. Those will -- those will come in through the ARIS tool. Our change management folks are actually going to take a look at that, and they re going to say, okay, you know, what do we need to change? What roles and responsibilities, where are we going to get resistance? We know that these business processes are changing. Where are we going to identify the pockets of resistance that -- that we need to focus in on so that we can actually turn some of those people around, obviously before the project goes live? Those -- you know, those are big pieces there. You know, coaching plan, sponsor roadmap, Page 59 of 185

you know, again, from a -- from the perspective of how are we going to turn these people around, we really focus in Phase 2 on those audiences. Within Phase 3, we start to take that information and we start to give that future outlook and communicate out, you know, within our implementation methodology and within our change management methodology, really around impact analysis. You know, we re at that point, we re really measuring, you know, the amounts of the changes that are actually happening, and the amounts of information that are taken in both internally from the project team and kind of externally, you know, at the user community level. You know, again, are the stakeholder messages getting out there, you know, are -- are roles and responsibilities being understood and changed as necessary? Some of these things, again, will not be easy decisions. These roles and responsibilities might require us to, you know, maybe look at some statutes, look at some procurement laws, and, you know, in doing so, you know, we need to be able to communicate that out, and our change management and communication is geared for that. Phase 4 is more of a knowledge transfer. It starts to get more outward-facing. You know, again, it centers around training, but, again, evaluation is key there. How much of this is actually happening? After we run through these first training sessions, how much of that knowledge is actually absorbed? Do we need to adjust appropriately? Do we need to add more training? Is it too much? Do we need different materials? Those types of things are taken into account. We do those way in advance so that as we get to the core of the training. You know, we have -- we have the ability to adjust as necessary. And then last but not least, that reinforcement phase. I d love to stand up here and say, after we go live, everybody s going to be trained. Everybody s going to know how to use the system. Everybody s going to feel very comfortable with it. That s not the case on a project of this size and complexity. We have to have a postimplementation training strategy for folks that might not be getting it, for folks that might be on vacation, for folks that need a little bit of extra help. And we re going to set that -- set that up appropriately long beforehand, again, measuring these folks as we go along and putting them within these training programs, because we want the users to accept the system and to be self-sufficient on the system. And then the last box down there that I really want to point out is the working labs. Again, as part of that stabilization period, you know, we have -- we have workshops and labs that are actually set up. So the folks that are running processes at month-end, maybe they can t understand their training material. You know, we have a lab that will actually be set up, be with our trainers, you Page 60 of 185

know, with our functional folks, you know, that so that those folks can actually come in, and they can run those processes, and they can -- they can work through, you know, the issues that they actually have, so hopefully during that second month of that transition, you know, we re seeing less and less people. And then, obviously, the third month, hopefully, you know, we re seeing that self-sufficiency and the sign-off that Brian had talked about. So, again, that s a -- that s it from a change management perspective. I m going to turn it over to Kevin. He s going to -- he s going to finish up with a -- with a couple of points, and then we ll turn it over to questions and answers. MR. BRYANT: Thank you. Okay. I believe I have one minute and 50 seconds plus a 60-second red countdown here, so I ll try and finish up. What I -- want I wanted to do was put up our value proposition again, because I think, at the end of the day, as it -- as it comes up on the screen, that s really what we re providing. And now that you ve heard from Keith, talked a little bit about staff and our approach, as well as from Brian, you see the bigger picture when it comes to CedarCrestone and our solution. We believe that clearly we have the best government solution. Software designed for the public sector, used by more counties, cities, and states. Florida community of practice with defined roadmaps and upgrade paths through 2026, at a minimum. Back to the lowest Oracle fixed price cost. As Brian laid out, we were the only one to respond to all required RLI elements. Above and beyond that, with the scope normalization process, which we entirely agree with, the gap becomes even greater. Almost $5 million difference. And we re certainly committed to meeting that at a 50/50 split, and per our fixed contract commitments, where we re actually providing more of the level of effort, even though the 50/50 split, you know, of resources, as Keith articulated it. We re able to do this because of the productivity of our key team members, the tools in the accelerators, and the hosting and the SLA benefits built into the overall process. I d also say that our hosting solution has performance guarantees. We re the only ones with that. Very different than performance objectives. If we don t hit issue response and resolution -- I think I ve got one minute -- if we don t hit issue response and resolution, if we don t hit security needs, if we don t hit uptime commitments, you get your money -- you get credited, so you re not paying for that. Page 61 of 185

The most experience. We talked about it at a firm level. We also talked about the partners that we re bringing to the table, and the culture which attracts the rich talent. And the last one, we re the lowest risk solution. Singular accountability for hosting, application management services, and hosting. The largest Oracle practice. We have a timeframe and a project duration, and a lack of overlaps that is not risky to the County. And where others will need to build that up, perhaps, additional cost would be added. We also provide strong change management team training and Tier 3 support. So, with that, I think I m, you know, hitting the end of the time. We appreciate the hour, and we re happy to take questions as you have them for the next 20 minutes, if that s what we have. So would you like us to take the questions up here or seated or does it matter? MR. CAMPBELL: Where you re at s fine. MR. BRYANT: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: And thank you very much for your presentation. And questions? And I ll guess we ll start -- Cynthia, do you want to start? MS. CHAMBERS: Oh -- sorry. You mentioned the firm Jackson very quickly, and then you indicated you didn t have enough time for them -- the representative to speak. Either you or that individual could -- if you could help -- help me understand the change management and training, and is that where Jackson s firm is -- I heard they re training. How does that training fit into your -- your solution? MR. CHRISTENSON: Yeah, I can address that question. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CHRISTENSON: So Tony Jackson s company is going to be providing functional and technical resources to the team, so these are experienced PeopleSoft consultants -- MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CHRISTENSON: -- that are going to be participating on the team. Page 62 of 185

We are actually the only vendor that did not include any subcontractors working on our change management effort. It s going to be delivered entirely by our team. Staff has met our team. Staff did our presentation for change management. In addition, when I was talking about training, that s a separate company. It s TransAmerica Training. It s also a minority owned business. And they specialize in delivering Oracle University training. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CHRISTENSON: So two different companies there. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CHRISTENSON: Does that answer your question? MS. CHAMBERS: Yeah. Yes. MR. CHRISTENSON: Okay. MS. CHAMBERS: And for the Jackson firm, can you tell me in -- in similar implementations to the one that you would be doing here in Broward County, can you tell me what your greatest challenge was relative to the solution that is being proposed here -- MR. JACKSON: Well, the -- MS. CHAMBERS: -- and how you addressed it? MR. JACKSON: Yes. Well, the -- the biggest challenge that we have met is really a -- MS. BURNELL: I m sorry, can you speak up? MR. CAMPBELL: Microphone. MR. JACKSON: Oh, I m sorry. My name is Anthony Jackson. I m Managing Director with A.L. Jackson and Company. And I think that the biggest solution, the biggest challenge that we ve ever had at the -- at our client is one of change management, of those people accepting the solution. The training and the change management, we -- you cannot -- and I think Mr. George has identified that -- you cannot underestimate that. I mean, again, the solutions, you know, it s not the software. It very rarely is the software. Most times, it s the change management issue. So those are the biggest challenges that we ve seen in our implementations. Page 63 of 185

MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. And just back to the issue -- thank you -- the issue of working labs, are those labs here at the County? Where will they be and how do we access those working labs? MR. PACE: Those -- those labs will actually be scheduled. You know, we ll work with the County to determine is -- is there a room, is there a project team room, is there a training room somewhere where, you know, we can have standard hours -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. PACE: -- and a standard working environment with a connection to the system -- MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. PACE: -- so that people will know exactly where it is. You know, if we -- again, working at counties of large size and complexity as well, some of those labs might actually have to have to move out, you know, farther than just the project team building, you know, where we know that we re going to have issues -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. PACE: -- and where we know we re going to have resistance. You know, at previous clients that I ve been at, we ve actually had to go out, you know, to different -- to different areas within the county which, you know, could be 20, 30 miles away, and actually set up those labs as well. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. Thanks. MR. CHRISTENSON: And just -- just to add to that, one idea that we have kicked around is setting up those working labs for folks that work out in the field, that if TransAmerica Training s training center, with their own training labs, that we could use those as training labs if they might be more accessible by some folks that aren t centrally located here downtown. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. And regarding coaching, does that -- how does that work? Is that a group coaching session for people that sign up, just like a class, or are you talking about where someone can call and say, get me through this problem right how? MR. CHRISTENSON: Sure. MS. CHAMBERS: How does -- MR. CHRISTENSON: So what were -- yeah. So what we re going to do is we ll have those training labs, those working labs, that are basically proctored by -- by super users that have become self-sufficient, become very knowledgeable about PeopleSoft and -- and the way that Page 64 of 185

that s being used at the County here. Also staffed with implementation consultants so that folks can come in and bring their productive work, and then get the support from the project team, if you will, the core project team, to really get assistance with any kind of first-time transactions, look over their shoulders, be able to answer -- be able to ask and answer questions, that sort of a thing. MS. CHAMBERS: And that s real time, as it s going on, as the problem s occurring? So your experience is you can deliver that when I m in crisis right now? MR. CHRISTENSON: Absolutely. That s the intent. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. Thank you. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MS. CHAMBERS: Probably, but that s okay. MR. CARBONE: I m good for now. MS. BURNELL: Vendors if you could just say your name before you speak and before you answer a question, just so when I m playing the recording back, I know who it is that s talking. Thank you. MR. WALTON: At the beginning of the presentation, you mentioned a two-hour disaster recovery. How do you achieve that? MR. BRYANT: We have -- MR. CAMPBELL: Your name. MR. BRYANT: Oh, sorry. And I blew it, didn t I. Kevin Bryant, CedarCrestone. We achieve that by setting -- we have a primary and a secondary site. Primary site is the SunGard facility in Alpharetta, Georgia. The secondary site is in Nashville. And they re essentially two physical environments with a big connection between the two. You have routing to both that s tested well in advance, and at the point in time that the primary goes down, you ve been routing all the logs and all the information to the secondary every ten to fifteen minutes. And so max data loss at any point in time is going to be ten minutes. And then at the point that there s a disaster and it s declared, the hot site is brought up. The logs and the, you know, the data are directed as -- as active, and you follow the procedure to access, then, that secondary site within a two hour period of time. Page 65 of 185

And then we have, I think, two tests of that annually. And this is something we ve been doing since, you know, 2003, so it s -- it s clockwork. MR. WALTON: Okay. And back to the staffing, how -- explain the -- the staffing model. How much of the staffing is resident here in the County throughout the project? The project managers and some of the other staff that you identified. MR. PACE: Keith Pace, CedarCrestone. So the -- the staff is all on site. It was a question, a -- an issue of kind of on site, off site? I mean, I just want to -- MR. WALTON: Uh-huh. MR. PACE: -- make sure that I -- that I --- MR. WALTON: Right. MR. PACE: -- understood it. Okay. So the implementation, the functional team, the technical team, those folks are actually all on site. Project manager, all on site, you know, full time. The -- the leads that you saw in the graphic that I had, all on full time site for -- full time for the project. There are some off site resources that are actually used from a hosting perspective. And, again, some of the hours that -- that weren t reflected, there s a -- there s a hosting account manager to make sure the things that Kevin just talked about are actually being done, you know, and appropriate -- you know, those -- those pieces are there. Outside of that, everybody else will be on site. There s a -- and, again, from a -- from a full time perspective, I guess I should say, project oversight, quality assurance, you know, those types of things, those are -- those are on a, you know, quality assurance at least on a quarterly basis. Usually we actually, you know, put that within our methodology in very, very specific timeframes of things that we want to measure around, you know, testing quality, training quality, fit/gap and discover done -- you know, done, complete. You know, those folks will be on site. And your project director will be here, you know, at least every couple of weeks for -- you know, for a week s worth of time. MR. WALTON: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: That s all? Kent? MR. GEORGE: Thank you. Kent George, Airport. Page 66 of 185

I have really two questions. The first one is a hypothetical, and I d like to know how you handle this. As you might imagine, everybody has ownership of their -- their function that they do within the County, and some more so than others. And so when you go through an ownership and you go through best practices, give me an example of how you handle ownership and specialization requested by an individual versus best practices and how those best practices should go forward and -- and especially in accounting functions and things on this line. MR. PACE: Keith Pace, CedarCrestone. So that -- that s a great question. I mean, you know, the reality is is that -- is that each instance is a little bit different, but, you know, I ll talk about a specific example. So when I was at -- when I was at King County, we actually had -- we had separately elected officials that felt like they didn t have to follow the business processes that were trying to be standardized by the county. MR. GEORGE: Really? MR. PACE: Yeah, I know it s a shock. I know it s a shock to everybody here, but, you know, they definitely didn t want to follow those businesses processes, and we literally had to -- you know, we literally had to drag them along, you know, to be able to do that. Now, again, in -- in this specific instance, it was a revenue generating department, so that revenue generating department felt like, you know, we definitely don t have to follow, you know, what -- what is going on. So we ended up, in that specific instance, having to develop two business processes, and actually having to develop a customization to the system, and having the county actually sign off to physically say we understand that this is outside of the business process. We understand that this has upgrade implications, you know, and everything else. And they re actually having that revenue generating department actually fund, you know, part of the upgrade specifically for that. That s one case example. Other case examples are, you know, it depends on the level of sponsorship that you actually have, and, you know, in some cases you have a group of departments that can actually put pressure on perhaps individuals, you know, or -- or you have a council that -- that can do that. So, you know, we really look from a steering committee meeting -- capacity, from a -- from a -- a council capacity to maybe push some of the -- some of that information down. Now, relatively, within public sector, doesn t always work, you know, and I -- and I fully expect Page 67 of 185

within Broward County we re going to find, you know, those issues where we re going to have to say what do we need to do to actually standardize that business process? What is the best way to physically do that. You know, we re going to go back to, you know, State and County statutes, again, back to procurement laws, you know, things like that that we can actually try to persuade these individuals. But, again, unless you -- you know, unless you have the -- you know, that kind of hammer to push down on things, sometimes that becomes a little bit difficult. MR. GEORGE: Thank you. Secondly, and this is going to be a little bit more difficult statement, and I think, Keith, you re going to have to answer this one. You took exception, non-negotiable, to 24 items. Even though some of our items may be strongly worded and so forth, we love our items. (Laughter.) MR. GEORGE: I suggest that if you are chosen, are you willing to sit down during the negotiation process and discuss and negotiate those 24 items? MR. BRYANT: The answer to that is, yes, absolutely we are. And let me give you a little color behind it so you can see where we re coming from on this. We appreciated the opportunity that Broward gave us to respond to the red lines with our comments, and -- and I think what you ll find with CedarCrestone is that we re very upfront. We re very direct, and at each particular term and condition, we provided comments on what we could agree to and what we couldn t agree to. But that s really at an individual term level. And for those of you who have been involved in negotiating contracts, you re very well aware that it s a collective negotiation, not on any one particular part. We re willing and open to negotiating on every particular term that you noted as a mandatory and an exception, but it s the collective solution and the collective contract that requires legal and business discussion. And there s a time and a place for that, and we would absolutely sit down and negotiate those terms. I think when you look at warranty versus indemnification versus limitation of liability versus termination; there are all sorts of liability that crosses. So in our -- in our experience, the best path is to head down a path where you can sit down together, have an open forum discussion on it, and come to terms. Page 68 of 185

You heard from FAMU that we re easy and -- and he was very amenable to the legal process. We have not had an issue where we ve had to walk away from any public sector or higher education hosting or commercial contract. We ve been able to get through those, and I would absolutely expect that to be the case here. You know, one thing that we were talking about doing was, you know, submitting what you could call a conditional response, saying, yeah, we ll take these 15 off the table on the condition that we reach agreement mutually. Right? So what does that do? At the end of the day, we get behind closed doors, and we talk about the same terms, and they all come back up. And so, you know, our intent is to sit down and negotiate each of these terms. And most of our exceptions came in the area of Oracle licensing, which we don t control. And we were, frankly, a little bit surprised to see that, because Oracle licensing is Oracle licensing supported by Oracle, that, you know, others didn t take similar conditions and exceptions, because, typically, Oracle, you know, sticks to the same message. And then the other thing that I would add is at a hosting level, that was the other big grouping. The majority of our changes are to your benefit. The majority of what we pulled in are the performance guarantees, the additional service level agreements, the additional, you know, expansion that wasn t within yours that actually plays to Broward s benefit. So that s a long way to say, yes, we re willing to -- to get through it, but I would absolutely see us coming to terms and not having an issue. MR. GEORGE: Thank you for your response and your acknowledgement that you re going to negotiate those, but let me point one thing out. This is Florida, and it won t be behind closed doors. (Laughter.) MR. BRYANT: Yeah. Okay. Thank you. MR. GEORGE: That s it. MR. CAMBPELL: Yeah, I have a couple questions. I ve got -- I ve got them spread across a couple pages here. In 2013, you had posted a loss. Can you give us some reasoning behind why you had such a -- at least, in my estimation, a large loss in 2013, business loss? MR. BRYANT: Yeah, and I m not -- Kevin Bryant. I m not the CFO, so I m going to give you the layman s view, and we re very happy to follow up specifically on that. Page 69 of 185

My understanding, and at -- at the point in time that that loss was posted, my understanding is that a lot of it had to do with goodwill, so non-cash related loss as it related to some of the goings on with the Oracle legal situation and how that impacted the perceived business. So, with that settled, and with that out of the way, I can t speak to, you know, moving forward adjustments, but it was, in my understanding, more of a non-cash. And, outside of that, I think I can, you know, clearly say that CedarCrestone is a profitable organization, has been run that way from the very beginning, and we fully expect that as we re in budgeting and business planning for next year. And so, above and beyond that, I m happy to give, you know, you a formal response through our CFO, if that s helpful. MR. CAMBPELL: Switching subjects a little bit, the -- one of the references that you had given for similar projects of complexity and size and that was Nassau County. And in there, you had HCM, FMS, Hyperion, and it was hosted. I didn t see supply chain in there. So how do you get that those are kind of equal? And -- and it s -- and, again, I m getting back to, you know, from what I ve seen in a lot of them, I m not seeing the same size and complexity for the projects that we have. MR. CHRISTENSON: Yeah. Well, so Nassau County, in -- in some ways, I would say that it s very, very similar, and -- and almost, you know, as close as we could get, but I wouldn t qualify that for CedarCrestone, because we were not the prime on the implementation, which is still underway, and so they re still very early on. So just to qualify that. But the functionality is financials, and it s HR, and it s budgeting and business planning, and I think there are latter stages of business intelligence associated with it. Hosting is something that they opted to do midstream into the implementation where they determined that they weren t able to provide the level of support, and it was costing the project, and so they secured us, and so we re currently hosting that. But we re not the prime on that, and hosting is really the role that we re currently playing, so I wouldn t put it out there as a CedarCrestone similar qual, but, globally speaking, in terms of the Tier 2 -- that s a Tier 2 or -- if not Tier 1 county. They re -- they re very large. I would say it s very similar with a very similar solution footprint. MR. CAMBPELL: Have you had a project, say in the last three years that is very similar, meaning all of the -- the same business lines being hosted that you can cite? MR. CHRISTENSON: I would say the -- the State of Mississippi implementation that we re currently underway with would be one example. Page 70 of 185

We would have, you know, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the City of Milwaukee, the Boston implementation, and then, as you look at, you know, other organizations, you know, within CedarCrestone, we have multiple higher education, $20, $30 million footprint projects that are being executed that have HR, that have financials, that have business intelligence, that have, you know, Hyperion. And so it depends on how far we stray. Collectively, as an organization, you know, they don t always come in one particular implementation. They may come over the course of time or multiple phases. So that would be the most honest response that I can give you to the -- to that question. I would -- I would also say that as you look at the resources that we ve contributed that are, you know, committed as key personnel, that s equally important. Have they? And a large number of them have implemented something of this complexity. And at the end of the day, that s who s taking you through the process. MR. CAMBPELL: Also, this is kind of going back to the staffing, time for -- I know we talked a little bit about change management and training, but not about report generation and testing. Can you speak to that a little bit? Because I know a lot of your tools and everything, you didn t -- those weren t in there. MR. PACE: Absolutely. Keith Pace, CedarCrestone. From a report perspective, you know, again, we took a look at the RLI requirements, you know, and we -- and we derived an amount of reports from those, you know, as well as buckets of hours that we are going to suggest as part of the project for report development. So those are both in the assumptions as -- as well as in the pricing. Again, from working -- you know, from these -- the folks that I had up on the slide, from them working at complex, you know, public sector institutions like that, you know, they had input on to those to say, okay, it s not just one trial balance sheet, you know, that we need -- that we need to do. It s -- it -- it s multiple. So all of those factors are based in our assumptions and what we have going forward. From a testing perspective, you know, I know we didn t talk about that. We do -- we do provide some testing tools, as well, you know, templates that we ve used on other projects. You know, when I look at ARIS, ARIS, you know, also helps us attach some of those testing scripts, you know, within there. So, again, we re going to bring what we ve used at previous public sector clients, you know, especially ones where we have, you know, complex integrations as we re going to see here at Broward County. Page 71 of 185

From a testing perspective, you know, we walk through the complete testing gamut. It starts off with unit testing, you know, up at the front. We have hours associated with that. From a unit testing perspective, what I mean is, does a particular unit within the system actually work. Whether that s from a technical perspective or a configuration perspective. You know, so we have hours dedicated to that. We have hours dedicated to system testing, which is taking those components and making them work together, both across modules as well as across systems. You know, then we move into -- into more of user acceptance testing. You know, while we re doing HR and payroll, we have parallel testing built into that. And then we have, you know, kind of a finalized production testing. You know, all the -- I talked a little bit about a cutover plan, you know, as I went through the presentation, but, you know, the biggest piece of that is the testing of that cutover plan and how that s actually used, and that s where the Conversion Center tool comes into play right there. MR. CAMBPELL: Okay. Thank you. MR. PACE: Yeah. MR. CRISTENSON: I d actually like to clarify something as well. Brian Cristenson. I do believe that the Plante Moran report did conclude that we have one of the two highest number of -- well, level of effort for reporting, and that was a positive finding that they included for us, so just for what it s worth. MR. CAMPBELL: Anything else? Thank you very much. Okay. The time is 12:26, and we will break for lunch and reconvene at 2:00 o clock. And with that, the -- until 2:00? Do you need that much time? MR. RAITE: No. We re at 12:25 right now. MR. CAMPBELL: How about like an hour. MR. RAITE: Okay. 45 minutes. 1:15. MR. CAMPBELL: Unless -- do you need time? Page 72 of 185

And we ll reconvene at 1:15. Meeting is recessed. (THE MEETING RECESSED AT 12:26 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 1:18 P.M.) MR. CAMPBELL: -- Selection Committee meeting for the ERP. It is now 1:18. I had a little technical difficulty. With that, I have one hour on the timer. You ll see 59 minutes, and then John will be timing your last minute. And, with that, ready? MS. BEAL: Ready. MR. CAMPBELL: You re up. MS. BEAL: Susan Beal with Infor. You heard this morning that Infor is a responsive bidder, and we are the lowest cost responsive bidder by $15 million, or more, relative to each of our competitors. And that should matter a lot to the citizens of Broward County. $15 million is a lot of money, and this significant price difference between Infor s firm fixed price and the three Oracle-based solution prices may raise questions in your mind about the credibility of our proposal. What we want you to understand is why we are able to offer you a significantly lower price for this project, and offer the County a savings of $15 million. Infor is the only bidder that is bidding to implement their own software, and that results in significant cost savings that we are passing on to you. So today we are here to address your specific questions that you asked of us, as well as to provide additional information and concerns that we believe are critical for you to consider as part of your selection for this process moving forward. I wanted to start with an introduction of who is Infor, because you don t see us and our name plastered all over school buses when you go to a conference. Infor is the world s third largest supplier of enterprise applications and services. We are the largest bidder by far responding to this solicitation. Page 73 of 185

We have the financial fortitude to stand behind our firm fixed price proposal and deliver a successful project for Broward County. As part of our work, we have implemented over 1200 state and local government agency solutions. We bring in over 2.8 billion dollars in revenue, and our 70,000 customers includes over 160 customers running our proposed solution, Lawson, within the State of Florida alone. The Infor solution set also expands beyond traditional application boundaries. As part of the current implementation, you asked us to provide a proposal for core ERP services, but we know the County s been looking at this project for a long time, and we know that the scope of it originally started out a little larger than core ERP, which is traditionally financial, HR, and procurement. The original scope included additional solutions such as work orders. What we wanted you to be aware of is that Infor includes many additional solutions as part of our public sector suite that can accommodate your needs today and well into the future, including all of those -- those second phase items that you were looking at. And I show you this to emphasize that Infor s knowledge and understanding of County operations is extensive. We have significant solutions that address specific and detailed needs of agencies within a government, such as community development and regulation, utility billing, work orders. I say this to make sure you understand that we have the understanding of County operations in mind as we put together these proposals. So I want to start with a slide that we took from the Plante Moran deck and we put it into some Infor colors here for you. This is a picture of the total cost of ownership over five years for each of the solutions. And I put this here because I want to emphasize again the value that we are able to provide to the County. $15 million is significant, but I want you to understand, it s not just a price difference. As a single vendor solution, we bring you lower risk. Other vendors are going to come and talk about how they may provide all of the services, but when you get into a project dispute on a -- on a project, there is often finger-pointing between the solution vendor and the implementation partner. You will not have that with an Infor project, because we are the sole vendor accountable for your software, your services, your hosting, and your support. We stand behind the price that we ve presented to you, and we are excited about the opportunity to work with the County on this project. Page 74 of 185

Our competitors may like you to believe that this price is reflective of a lack of complete software functionality or missing implementation services. We have provided a very high functional fit of software, and our software continues to evolve such that two of the modules that we were unable to respond with as part of our original proposal response, we now have and have included in our proposal at no cost to the County. That s the business performance warehouse, and our budgeting solution now includes performance management capabilities. When you look at our scores, you will see a gap. We did not and were not authorized to show those pieces during the implementation or the fact finding, because we didn t have them in our original proposal. But we want you to understand that choosing Infor does not mean you do not have those pieces of functionality. We would have loved to have shown them to you, and we would love to talk to you more about them moving forward. So a little bit about why I was chosen to come up and talk to you. I m rather passionate about public sector ERP. I ve been doing this for about 16 years. I ve been personally involved in over 20 implementations and at least a hundred procurements. I have a lot of experience architecting ERP solutions for large governments across the county. And what I mean by that is when we look at your requirements, we think what do you need to be successful from our particular product line, and then we come in to make sure you understand how that can work as part of the implementation. The other thing I want to make sure of is that I m not proposing things that you don t need. We took a very value conscious approach to this proposal. When we looked at your requirements, we did not propose customizations to fill a hundred percent of the things that you asked for. We believe it s extremely important for you to understand the software s baseline capabilities before you commit to spending tens of thousands of dollars to customize that software. There is a ripple effect that comes from every customization that you apply to your code in terms of maintaining it, in terms of upgrading it, in terms of long term support for it. We absolutely want you to understand what you re buying before we change it and make you pay for that. It s also very hard to determine an accurate scope of a customization based on what often is a single sentence in a functional requirements matrix, so we want to make sure that we have the opportunity for you to see what that is before we propose a cost for that. What I wanted to do now is talk a little bit about why we believe that the Infor solution is the Page 75 of 185

right choice for the County. For those of you that were here for our original presentation a few months ago, these are the same points we talked about then, and I believe that they continue to apply today. First is that Infor is the only vendor offering you a single handshake solution. As we talked about, that means no finger pointing on the project. We take full responsibility for your success. It also means there s no risk premium in our price for all of that effort and management of that relationship. We have access into our development organization to make sure that the customizations that you may want can be applied to the product. We have access directly to the support organization. And we have a complete team ready to bring you this solution. What that also means is we -- when we talk about terms and conditions and exceptions, we are also speaking on behalf of the software. So the other vendors here are speaking about exceptions on the services side. We re able to speak to the software side, as well, and commit to our responses as part of that negotiation, as well. And our counsel is here today to talk to you about our flexibility on supporting those. So when we talk about a single point of accountability in terms of software, when you look at the three other bids you are considering, 100 percent of the software that they are proposing is third party. That means they didn t write it. They don t -- they implement it, but they don t control it. Infor does. I do want to point out that we have four subcontractors or four third party software partners that are included in our proposal. They are long-term strategic partners. They are not one-off solutions that we chose for the County. We implement them everywhere we go on all of these implementations. Same methodology, great relationships. They do represent 8.2 percent of the functionality that we ve proposed for the County. Everyone else is offering you 100 percent code that s not theirs. The second thing we want to draw to your attention is that there s no confusion about the path forward for our software. Infor acquired Lawson with the intent to expand it and to continue to invest and expand those capabilities. Every dollar that we re investing, we re looking to solve the problems of Page 76 of 185

government. We do not have a second or third ERP system that we market to public sector. All of our capabilities and dollars are spent expanding our capabilities, not planning how to merge all of those solutions into a single one at some future point in time. We are excited about the advances in our technology and our capability. For those of you that were here when our President, Duncan, came to talk to you, he talked a lot about how we re investing in the user experience, not just in broadening functionality, but in making the software a better user experience. He s British and has a better accent, but the way the he phrased it was that he wants enterprise software to suck less, so that when your users go to their computers, they will go in and they fully utilize those capabilities to get data out, not just put data in. And we were really excited about what we were able to show you, and what we continue to develop and expand this solution set to include. Finally, the last point that I want to make -- oh, I have a screen shot in here so you can see what this beautiful software looks like. We have a design firm in-house called Hook and Loop. They ve been brought in to talk to our users to say not only what do you do, but what s the context of how you do it, and where are you typically sitting or moving when you enter these transactions and when you want to get the data. So when you talk to executives, they re in an airport. They re not at their desk. They don t necessarily want to log into a computer to get information. We need to push it to them, and they need to be able to get it on the fly. As a casual user, I need to be able to log in quickly and get data out. And as a manager, I want to be able to power through operations quickly and efficiently. We re taking all of that into account when we design these solutions and roll them out for you. The last point that I wanted to make today is that, once again, you re not going to see buses at a conference plastered with our logo. Our goal is not world domination. Our goal is to make software that helps you solve public sector problems. We are passionate about good government. We are passionate about constituent involvement in these processes. And we are extremely excited about the opportunity to participate and all the benefits that the Sunshine State procurement has afforded to us. This has certainly been an enlightening experience for us, as well. So our goal is to provide measurable success for you. What does that mean? That means Page 77 of 185

that after you re live in three years with our solutions, we can come back to you and say, are you more proactive? Are you less reactive? Are you getting the efficiencies out of the solution that you want, and do your users enjoy it? And when you say, yes, we will consider ourselves successful. At this point, I d like to bring up Paul Davis, our Project Director. And he s going to talk about how we re going to make that possible for you. MR. DAVIS: Thanks, Susan. My name s Paul Davis. I have responsibility for Infor s public sector practice nationally for all of our public sector products and installations, including the Lawson product set. There were a number of questions that were directed at us that we have chosen to go through here today. Most of those questions are regarding the architecture of our solution as we are presenting it to you. I was the one that was responsible for the architecture of that solution, and, as such, I m here to talk to you about it. We have Bill Sulkanen here. Bill is our Project Manager. Bill presented to your teams. Bill walked through our solution and our approach and our methodology in great detail with your project team along with the rest of our staff. However, given the context of the questions and the architecture and the applicability to other organizations, I ve chosen to take this opportunity to talk to you about why we put this together. I have over 20 years of experience in implementation around enterprise software. That 20 years includes over nine years at PeopleSoft. It includes over nine years at AMSCGI, and some independent work in a system integration organization, and now here with Lawson Infor. This is what I ve been doing. I ve been doing it in multiple organizations. I ve got a lot of experience in implementing these products in different environments. As a result of that, I have a great deal of confidence that the solution that we ve put forward, at the price point we ve put forward, is the best value to the city -- or the County in moving forward with an ERP solution. First question that was asked was about our experience. And, really, this question gets down to where have you done this before? We have done this before. We ve done this at the State of New Hampshire. Our organization just finished the implementation of the full HCM suite statewide for the State of New Hampshire, integrated fully with our financial applications, running statewide. Page 78 of 185

So the State of New Hampshire now has a full ERP, financials, supply chain, human resources running statewide of Lawson as completed for the HCM solution by Infor Consulting. Bexar County, a county with roughly the same population, roughly the same employee count as Broward, we implemented their financial and procurement applications. This is a successful project for us. Greenville County Public Schools, where you visited. You went out, you talked to them. You talked to them about our team. You talked to them about our success. Full suite implementation, financials, supply chain, human resource management. Full implementation, full success. In addition to that, we have over 160 accounts in Florida. Those accounts include two very large health care organizations here locally that most of you are probably familiar with in Broward Health and Jackson Health. We also have Hillsborough County Public Schools. All these entities, very large, very complex, running Lawson Infor software. The Florida account base being as large that it is provides you with a great deal of resources here locally that would have experience around the software, a great deal of contacts with other organizations to collaborate with and work with on an ongoing basis. Further, we understand the needs of public sector completely. As Susan identified, we work with public sector organizations beyond ERP software. We have a wide breadth of entities that are using our software in airports, including Houston Airport, Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Atlanta, New York Transit, LA Metro. These are very large transit organizations that are using Infor products today. We also have large and complex deployments statewide with our ERP solutions at the State of Arizona, State of South Dakota, State of New Hampshire, and the State of Michigan. And beyond that, we have hundreds of additional state, local, and federal customers that are using our projects where our consulting teams have been engaged for their implementation and ongoing support. In addition to that, we continue to grow. We continue to grow our customer base. We have sold our product into more entities recently. Right now, our teams are engaged at the City of Corpus Christi, actively replacing the PeopleSoft applications that they have been using. We were just selected and contracted with Miami-Dade County Expressway. DuPage County in Illinois, just outside of Chicago, is another organization that selected Infor software to replace their PeopleSoft application. Rochester Regional Transit, Chesapeake Public Schools, Maryland National Parks and Page 79 of 185

Planning Commission, and the San Francisco Transit Authority are all entities that have recently selected Infor software. The next question, really, this question gets down to how will you manage your third parties. And, as Susan identified, we have the smallest volume of third party participation. We own the software. We re the only vendor that s providing implementation services to the product that they own. We do have 8 percent of our solution that is filled by third party software partners that we use regularly, frequently, not just with our applications, but with our implementation teams. These are longstanding partnerships that have been in place for a long period of time. Those organizations are familiar with our methodology, our Stepwise methodology. We could spend a lot of time about that, but we wanted to talk about the value we bring. Everybody brings a methodology. We have our own methodology. Our third parties have used and worked with our methodology on a frequent basis. Our teams have worked together on a frequent basis. So there s no confusion about roles and responsibilities between the organizations, between what the software functionality is going to do, and how we re going to take that on. And from an implementation perspective, all of the responsibility for that implementation is through our organization. We don t defer that to the third party vendors. We just bring it right in. Next question, this is another long question. Really gets down to how are we going to make you successful. Right? That s the challenge. We ve seen our price is lower. We don t shy away from that. So why is our price lower, and how can we make you successful at that price point? We are one vendor. We re the only vendor that has developed and maintains and supports the products that are the core ERP solution for the implementation and for the project. We re the only vendor that s providing the direct implementation services from that product. And we are also providing direct hosting and managed services from Infor. All of these services come directly from Infor. And where does that come together? That comes together at me. There s not another firm in here that can give you one name where all of those things come, and you can go for resolution, and you can go to shake the hand. For Infor, there is. By taking that approach, we eliminate risk premium and really double margins. For organizations that do subcontracting work, they have to have a profit motive. That s the Page 80 of 185

market. That s what we do. And so all those other organizations that have multiple entities involved have to be able to accomplish that somehow. That accounts for some level of the pricing differential. Beyond that, from an execution perspective, we have direct access to any support resource that we will need to engage our organization. I don t have to worry about is the vendor going to escalate this. I am the vendor. I don t have to worry about am I going to get good support from my managed services team. I am my managed services team. I take responsibility for all of that. In conjunction with that, this proposal was built based on the experience that I bring to the table from multiple organizations and a capability to deliver in smaller, larger, similar size complexity, and the experience and strength that Lawson brings to the table with the teams of consultants that we have. Our approach represents a model and methodology as requested in the RLI that represents our approach and our model as to how we can make you successful. And it s at a different price point. And it s a -- an approach that we ve had success with. Another key factor of that approach is we focus on the configuration of our software versus the customization of our software. Our functional fit is 93 percent of the solution. So the software that we bring and install is going to meet 93 percent of the requirements, out of the box, no changes required. The other seven percent, that s made up of modifications that were identified, a specific number of 19 modifications that were identified as necessary to meet your requirements. Beyond that, there are 112 interfaces that every other vendor has to propose. They were -- that list was provided. The customization levels are variable. That variable is based on the capability of the product and what has to be built and managed through the project. Our number is very low for that. By not having a great deal of customization, we have a streamlined project environment. We do not have to spend time designing these solutions en masse, developing these solutions en masse, testing these solutions en masse, introducing risk to the project and to the organization, both for the project and for the long term. These customizations add cost and complexity on an ongoing basis. The County has measured this over a five year period. Those costs extend well beyond that five years. Every Page 81 of 185

time you touch the software, every time you take an update, every time you take an upgrade, you re extending that cost. And rather than look at the normalization exercise as one of let s take the high water mark because we re going to customize the most software, we re proud to have the low water mark with the lowest level of customizations to meet those needs. MS. BEAL: Did you want to talk about staff? MR. DAVIS: Oh, I m sorry. Thank you. Yeah, the other thing we bring to the table is our staff. Our staff is experienced. Every team member that we have proposed has over ten years working with Lawson. Not just with Lawson products but working with Lawson. Our team was here and presented to your team during the services presentation day. You had a chance to meet them all. Couple interesting points about that. Two of them came from customers. So not only have they been with our organization for over ten years, prior to that, they worked in a customer environment, as you have. That s the kind of people you want on your project. They know what your job is. They know what you re going through. They know what you do on a daily basis. Those are the people that you want to have around. The other thing is we know you visited Greenville Public Schools. The team that we have proposed here is the same team that they had at a functional level. All the functional leads are the same people. Our HR lead, our supply chain lead, and our finance lead. That s the organization that, as you recall, said they didn t have any change management issues. That s a result of our approach and our methodology and how we bring projects together, how we bring the experience of our resources with the experience of your resources together to form an effective team. The other thing I want to point out is not only do we bring these references to bear, put the size of the organization back up there again, context about the work that they ve done, but also validation that we did these projects substantially within the initial parameters that we set up. Change orders are a big thing in ERP implementations. Many ERP implementations, I m sure your firm can tell you, end up with a lot of change orders. Things change over the course of the project. The references that we ve brought forward, and our general experience, is we want to avoid change orders. We want to put together a solution that can be successful from the start. And what we have here is statewide, State of New Hampshire HCM implementation, over 12,000 employees, we had a 7 percent change order volume. The project was extended a little bit for a variety of reasons, and there was a change order as a result. Page 82 of 185

Bexar County, there were some responsibility changes over the course of the project, resulting in 2 percent change order volume. Greenville Schools, where you visited, there were no change orders. That project started and finished at the same value. So as the vendor and the implementation partner, we deliver. Question 4, once the project s complete, what happens? That s really what this question is. What happens when your project team leaves? What kind of support do we get? We ve got a little technical issue. If you can catch up, my computer didn t work here, so when I change my slides, it doesn t change. She s got the clicker to change the slides, so if there s a little delay, that s how we resolve the technology issue in a short period of time. (Laughter.) MR. DAVIS: So what happens post production? You know, the first thing is the first three months after each phase of the project, we ve got a support level and a support team that s going to be with you to get you through that. In addition to that, we ve got -- we re the vendor. Our organization supports our software throughout the implementation, and when we transition out of here, we don t transition from Infor to another organization. We continue the service that we ve been providing as a software support organization. And we ve been working with you on an ongoing basis, and if you have problems on a future basis, the people that were here are the same people you can call about your software. And you don t even have to figure out if it s the software or the managed services or something that s left over from the implementation. You don t have to figure out which one of those arms it is. You just have to call Infor. You can call me. You can call Bill. You can call any of the people you ve worked with, because it s three years down the road, and we ll all be able to direct you, because we all work for the same company. You re going to have an ongoing support from our managed services team. Full hardware and technical infrastructure support. You don t have to worry about the hardware. We refresh the hardware on a regular basis. You don t have to worry about the database and the operating system. We manage and maintain those. We apply all the fixes to those. We apply all the fixes to our software. By virtue of your maintenance agreements, you have access to upgrades. By virtue of your managed services support, we will apply those upgrades, technically, upon Page 83 of 185

your request. All of that continues. All of that is one. All of that is common for our organization, start to finish. And finish is whenever you chose to move away from Infor. It s not finished with the project. Everyone else that s here, when their projects are done, they re either going to be coming back looking for more work from you, or walking away. We re here. We re getting married. We re staying together. The other thing I want to touch on here is that from a staffing perspective and a review of staff perspective, the staff that we provide for our managed services and hosting, which is the application support and actually the software support, all of that is delivered on service levels. Those are not hours that are committed to. Those are service levels that are committed to. And those service levels that are committed to are things that we will deliver. And it doesn t matter how many staff we need to do that. What matters is we have to take the initiative. We have to take the ownership, and we have to be able to deliver on those commitments. Next question, really, this is about what does the County have to commit to the project, and this is talking about the 50/50 split. And, here again, we can take a lot of questions, but really, what we identified is a level of resource that was necessary, from our experience, from our perspective, based on our approach to the implementation, for the County to contribute to the implementation. We identified, based on our experience, based on our interaction with other customers, based on our understanding of this opportunity, the volume of staff that we needed to commit from our organization, and that didn t always match to a 50/50. But rather than bring our staff levels up for costs that we don t believe is appropriate, we left it where it was. Our identified participation levels for this County will enable the County to take ownership of this application from start to finish, so that at the time these projects and these applications go into production and the County is using them, the County will be able to support them. The County will have resources that understands them, and the County will be in a position for long term sustainability of these applications in partnership with Infor. That partnership with Infor extends after, because we re still here managing the environment. We are still here managing the technology. We are still here caring for the software as delivered. We are still here, maintaining all of the customizations that have been developed on this project, maintaining all of the interfaces that have been developed on the project, maintaining any of the reports that have been developed on the project. Page 84 of 185

Any of that stuff that s been developed for the project, we will continue to manage on a goforward basis. So we ve put together the resource plans that we believe are the most cost effective approach for the County. The full details of that approach and our methodology, again, we re not going to take the time to walk through our entire methodology today. That could -- we could take the whole hour to do that. We spent an hour on it in our services presentations. We could spend days on it. It s all in our proposal. It s all in our original clarification responses how we manage and approach the project. And it s a very -- it s basic software implementation. The County s going to be there with us when we start the project to be trained, to participate in functional prototyping of the application, to participate in the configuration of the application, to configure - - to participate in the functional design of those requirements that we talked about so that the customizations are performing as the County expects and meeting the County s business needs, to support the testing activities of the project, and to be there to provide data for conversion, and expertise around interfaces that are going to be needed to go to third parties or other County systems. Those levels of expertise, those levels of things that the County knows, that we don t know. We know how our applications work. We know how business processes work. We know how all these things work. We bring a variety of things to support you in those areas. We bring pre-delivered security templates so that how your organization -- how public sector entities run, we have a template for that security model within our application. We have learning accelerator training material that provides templated training material for our standard business process. We have process definitions that are frameworks and starting points for all the process across our products. So you have a starting point. It s not a consulting exercise to define all those to be processes. We know how our software works. It s a validation point of where your current processes and the software come together. We have conversion Lert (Phonetic) programs for the data that we need to load into conversion. You would have to give us the data in a loadable format, and we re going to load it. It s that simple. Then we need you to validate it, because we don t know if the numbers are making sense, based on your experience in the County, but we need you to validate it. But we ll get it in there. It s very easy. It s a very straightforward process. Page 85 of 185

We have test scripts. We re not going to start from scratch. We re going to provide test scripts as a starting point. Those are going to need to be roughed out, framed, make sure that they meet your needs, make sure that they re complete for you, and all of those things. The other thing is -- on our side, the other thing that we bring from a staff level perspective is depth. What we do is Infor. We do Lawson. I don t have any other resources. Well, I do; they support different applications that Infor developed. So any resource that I need, I have. I ve got a full well, a full depth, a full boat of resources. And my team, all my team does is public sector. I ve got another team in our organization that does health care. We ve got another team that does some commercial stuff. Sometimes there s cross reference, sometimes there s commonality. A lot of the technology is common across all those entities. But I ve got a deep well that I can tap into to bring the resource that I need to support this. And our proposal was for a firm fixed price. Our proposal was to deliver you a solution based on milestones, based on success, based on working together. It was not based on the resource plan that we put in this proposal. That is a framework. That s not something to be ignored, and that s not something I m backing away from. But we re not expecting to execute this on a time and materials basis. We put together a firm fixed price bid, and we stand behind that bid. The last question I have is really what s expected of the County technical team. And to a great extent, I got into this already. But, really, we need your support around the technical areas of the application. We don t need your support in maintaining the environment, because we re going to maintain that. We don t need your support in managing the hardware. We re going to manage that. We don t need your support in applying patches. We re going to apply those patches. We don t need your support in managing the performance application. We re going to take on responsibility for that. What we need your support for is things that you know about and that are integral to your business. We re going to need your support to make sure that we can produce the 19 modifications that are necessary to the County. Some of that s going to be functional. Some of that s going to be technical. Page 86 of 185

We are going to need your support around the integrations. We re going to need to have functional specifications for those. We re going to need validation of our technical specifications, and we re going to need a lot of information about those systems that those things interface to. We did present our effort as an estimate, and we want to make sure that those are accurate and complete so we can turn that into something that s firm fixed. We have no problem doing that. I don t think that the margins are very big on that. I know the margins aren t 20,000 hours on that. The County s going to need to provide access to the legacy data for us from your current systems so that we can bring it into our application. You know those applications. I don t know those applications. Reports. I heard a lot of talk about reports. And I won t -- I won t dissuade any of it. Our model, our approach is that reports are something that your organization is going to need from the day we start to the day that you turn this system off. And you need to know how to do that. We deliver over 850 reports in our application. Our analysis of the functional requirements identified 42 reports that would need to be generated and developed based on the one sentence that s out there. Our experience is that our data that s available in the applications, our query tools that are available satisfy a lot of that reporting requirement once we can get down and look at it and understand each other. And rather than put a huge volume of effort out there for reports that we don t understand, we didn t do it that way. We would rather invest the time with your technical teams to make sure that you understand our reporting tools and take on more of the responsibility of generating that. We have 500 hours embedded in here in order to make sure that we can do some of that development, have some shared activities. We can work together the best way to approach that and understand how you want to do that. And the last thing the County really needs to provide from a technology perspective is connectivity. Again, we re going to be taking care of this application. It s all back there. If there s software defects, we take care of that. If there s performance issues, we take care of that. If there s updates to the system, we take care of that. All of those things are in our bid. All of those things are there. The normalization process said we were missing some things. We think it s fairly complete. Page 87 of 185

What you need to provide is, again, just the network connectivity for us, the local network access and the connectivity to the managed service site to address that. I think I m done. Thank you. MR. BEAL: As I prepared, I was prepared to say good morning, but I ll say good afternoon instead. And, unfortunately, I m getting over the flu or a cold or whatever has made me feel not so good for the last couple of weeks, but I do want to speak, and I -- my name is Jason Beal. I think you have my card. I m Jason Beal with Infor. Let me talk to the broader audience. And I m going to talk a little bit about the normalization process. One of the things we were asked to do was to provide some comment on that. And my role normally here at Infor is the -- as the Chief Innovation Officer for our public sector solutions. Also I have folks who work for me who do the health care, but my focus has always been and continues to be on public sector. So I help figure out what we re going to invest in, products we re going to develop and enhance, and if there s an acquisition, those types of things, consider that to broaden out our portfolio. So that path forward Susan talked to is a big part of what I do on a daily basis. Today, I m going to talk about this based on my own experience and talk about the normalization. I joined Infor in March, and prior to that, I worked for a leading ERP independent third party advisory firm. So I actually helped people select ERP, very large governments, state governments primarily. And I m going to bring to this discussion about normalization not only my perspective as an Infor employee and a representative of Infor, but also that experience having done ERP selections and help governments do ones that were successful. So in preparing for this, you ll see on the slide that I m an academic, too, so I took the academic approach and did a bit of research to look at the normalization process, because, to be candid, it was a process that s unusual to me as a person who s worked in this industry doing those types of things, both as a vendor involved in more than a hundred ERP projects, and as a person who advised governments on selecting. So I looked at the Florida Statutes related to procurement, and I had a procurement expert do that for us. Also consulted academic resources on the topic of government procurement, particularly competitive procurement, and looked for things that might relate to the normalization process. And there are three things, and I m going to generally use the term, covenant, because we re Page 88 of 185

really talking about legal implications. We re also talking about public trust and public confidence in the process. So there are three covenants that I find -- found that have direct applicability to this normalization process and I m confining my comments to normalization. The first and foremost is a broad covenant. It s not specific to Florida. It s kind of the universal covenant of competitive procurement, and that is that competitive procurement should protect the interest of taxpayers, and should make sure that contracts are awarded based on fair, objective processes that are free of collusion and free of favoritism. And I think we d all agree that that s the reason you guys have invested so much and put so much of your time and energy and resources into this process. Then there are two that are more specific and have relevance to the law here in Florida. One is in order to protect that fairness and help to avoid collusion and favoritism, we need to maintain we, being the collective folks involved in this process -- a constant set of evaluation criteria through the process. So as vendors respond to your RLI, put in fixed -- firm fixed price proposals, in this instance, the evaluation criteria need to remain constant throughout. Otherwise, there s opportunity for bias, favoritism, and other things to creep into the process. The other covenant that I find that relates to this normalization process is that when vendors submit a firm fixed price bid, they expect that that is what will be evaluated, and that there won t be subjective and material changes made to that -- that firm fixed price bid that they re standing behind as that commitment. I just put these out there. I m not saying these specifically apply. What I want to do now is pivot and talk about normalization with these covenants as a context for that. So -- and instead of going into assertions and claims about this process, what I want to do is ask four questions. And I think these are important questions we might want to ponder about the normalization process. And not to be coy, but I will be, as someone who s worked in this industry for a long time and works with people who are very seasoned at doing government procurements, literally probably 500 of them between us, none of us have ever seen a normalization process like this one. It really is unique, particularly at the Tier 1 level of government, or large Tier 2, as we heard defined earlier. So the first question I have about the normalization process is -- and this one has some -- some applicability to Florida Statute -- did the evaluation criteria change after vendor proposals were submitted? It s an important question about this process of normalization. Page 89 of 185

I think it s pretty clear they did, and -- and I say that as a representative of Infor. They did in that there were subjective cost additions that are not based on industry standards or any metric or any Gartner or IDC study, additions made to the cost, inflations, if you will, that were subjective to vendor proposals, both in cost and effort. So the normalization, I think CedarCrestone made the point, there is scope normalization, which is very common. I do see that. There was this now, after even though it s a firm fixed price bid, which makes little sense, there was this effort to normalize the level of effort. We re on the hook for what we proposed from a delivery standpoint. The hours aren t really -- that -- that s for a time and materials process. So there definitely was an introduction of new criteria. And, in fact, one instance, they referred to the AST proposal and said we re going to use their number and apply it to yours and make some extrapolations off of it. Well, that necessarily introduced new criteria into the process. The other piece of that is if you accept the normalizations and you consider those as part of your evaluation, you have to accept two premises that I think I ve heard some of you ask questions that you don t accept. One is you have to assume that each ERP product, software product, requires the same level of effort to implement, configure, sustain, and train people on. And that s just not the case. And there are plenty of examples in the industry that illustrate that. And we all know. I can grab my iphone and go download a couple of apps that do the same thing. Some are easier to maintain, support, and use; right? If they can t get two iphone apps exactly the same, how do we get two full ERP components with all the scope of functionality we ve talked about to be exactly the same? But in order to normalize in the way that the normalizations were done, you have to make that assumption. The other assumption you have to make is that every implementation consultant has the same skill set and the same capability. And, boy, if I could tell you anything that s not true, that s not a valid premise. And you can t conclude -- or make conclusions based on that as a valid premise. I ve worked with consultants for many years that involved about a hundred public sector ERP projects. Organizations ranged from the size of City and County of Denver to the whole Federal Government of Australia. Page 90 of 185

And I can tell you that one really good subject matter expert who knows their product is worth ten other consultants. So any effort to normalize around work effort necessarily introduces a bias into the process. So that is the first question we have, and some observations we have related to that question. The second question was -- was the normalization fair and objective, going back to those covenants we talked about. I m going to not assert that it was fair or not objective, because that s very subjective, and I don t want to be subjective on this, but I will say it was unusual. And I say that from my unique perspective in this industry. It went beyond the scope of normalization for -- or scope normalization, which might be we -- hey, we had a piece that we need to put in here, which is common. But that s incremental, and it involves an exchange between the vendor and the government to normalize around that. But this scope -- or this normalization around level of effort was very unique. Also, it introduced new requirements in the process. And I already mentioned that, so I won t continue on that. And then, third, this normalization was unprecedented in the term -- in the level of change in a vendor s proposal. We went -- we being Infor -- went from 16.6 million to $65 million if you look at it through the lens of that normalization. Unprecedented. I said earlier, it s very common to do normalization around scope. That tends to be a few percent here or there. You know, in some instances it could be more. But not a factor of 400 percent. Just standing back and looking at that, a normalization that says we re 400 percent more expensive than -- we, who know our software best, who implement it all the time, are 400 percent wrong on what we proposed for a firm fixed price bid. Right? And then the third question, does normalization deliver the best value to taxpayers and maintain the public trust. Then we get to what we probably all would agree is important. I would contend, Infor would contend that normalization is driving up the cost and raises a lot of questions. The normalization process took the lowest bid, which was Infor initially, from 16.6 million to exchanging the order of the bids after you normalized, to Ciber being the lowest at 49.9 million. Now, I don t know what the County intends to contract for, is it the 49 million or is it the 16 Page 91 of 185

million but the firm fixed price bids would -- would seem to be logical. But if you look at that, you have to say, are we then going to consider the normalization, which has a value that nobody s going to contract for. The additional point I would make around the normalization driving up costs is that it fails to acknowledge one very important factor. And I said I ve been in this business a long time, and most recently did evaluation, but before that, I spent nine years doing SAP in the public sector. So I m used to big, complex projects like Broward County Schools over here. And one thing I learned in that process is that if a software vendor implements their own software, it s an order of magnitude less costly. And I m going to cite the Tale of Two Cities. There are two very large Texas cities, which you guys have heard of, the City of Houston and the City of San Antonio. Both implemented SAP - - and I m citing SAP because they re not involved in this process -- both implemented SAP. City of Houston has implemented SAP with SAP Consulting, the software vendor providing implementation service, in the range of $25 million. City of San Antonio, which is actually smaller than Houston, chose to implement the very same SAP ERP solution. Guess what they paid? Four times as much. Guess which one s a better reference for SAP? I bet you can call and ask Houston, and it would be the better reference. So there is precedent in the industry for software vendors who implement their own software being much less costly. And I m citing an example that s not even us. And I think the fact that that wasn t considered in this normalization, and other things that seemed more arbitrary were, would -- would lead me to ask this question that I asked about the process. So let me end with the fourth question, and I won t even add commentary. When I came out of my MPA program and started working in local government and did RFPs, you know, and did this kind of solicitation for other things, in many instances, I remember being told by the city managers that our goal is to make sure we have qualified vendors, which you ve certified all four of the vendors as qualified vendors, and then to get the best deal from those qualified vendors. And what I m going to suggest to you is that we take out this normalization, not consider it, because it is an unusual practice, at best, and it doesn t represent reality, and look at the firm fixed price bids, and get the lowest cost of a qualified vendor, and save the County at least $15 million. And that s firefighters. That s more deputy sheriff s. That s many miles of resurfacing, Page 92 of 185

that s improved safety at intersections. There s a lot that this County can do with $15 million in saving. That would make a great headline. Save 15 million for other things. Thank you. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. DAVIS: We do conclude our presentation at this point, so we have some extra time. I -- we don t need to stand here in silence, if you want to proceed with questions. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. I think this time we ll start with Kent. MR. GEORGE: Thank you. You talk about your implementation of your own software, et cetera. I didn t see anything -- and, by the way, are you going to provide us with copies of your presentation? MR. DAVIS: I believe we did. JOHN CIFOR: Yes, I have it. MR. GEORGE: Okay. MR. DAVIS: Yeah. Yes. MR. GEORGE: All right. Very good. MR. DAVIS: Sorry. I thought we had done that. MR. GEORGE: But you re going through here, we heard earlier today about PeopleSoft being supported out by PeopleSoft to 2026. MR. DAVIS: Right. MR. GEORGE: Tell me about your support and how long you re going to do it, and how that s going to go forward, and what are your plans. What -- what series are you on so far, and what s going on there? MR. DAVIS: Okay. So Infor s currently on what we call Infor 10, that s the application level that is currently available, current release -- MR. GEORGE: Okay. MR. DAVIS: -- Infor 10, that we would supply you with. Page 93 of 185

I didn t bring our full roadmap presentation, but we have roadmaps we present at our user conference, and we can get that information as follow-up to you, that call out what our plans are for the next year and a half in terms of software, specific software functionality and expected deployment of that over that period of time. And on a longer term basis, we fully expect -- there s references, we ve -- our organization has expanded its development staff. One of the reasons that Infor acquired Lawson was to take on the responsibility ERP system and to maintain it. In my experience of having gone through the acquisition, there is significantly more development occurring within our applications now than there was prior to the acquisition from Infor, and it s a foundation point for the future of the Infor organization to take it forward. But we can get you some of those specifics. I don t have it with me today. MS. BEAL: Do you want Jason to address that? MR. DAVIS: Jason, you got that? MR. BEAL: Yeah, I can get it from here. Does that work? MR. GEORGE: Yeah, just step over -- MR. BEAL: I ll put my other hat on as the innovation guy and say that probably the unique perspective, we really have two software vendors in the room, in spite of four bids. We have Oracle and Infor that provide software. Oracle s a sub to the other parties we talked about. I would say that, going back to the core of your question, we re unique in the sense that we only have one public sector go to market ERP solution we re investing in. We ve made a very strategic -- that s product that Infor acquired the last couple years, so it s obviously strategically aligned to their long term path. I would say that the CedarCrestone, for all of us in the industry, their presentation was a little bit misleading. I think most people know that Oracle s been working on the Oracle Fusion ERP for many years, and, in fact, they just bid it at the State of Maryland, which says they re starting to look at now a three product go to market strategy, plus JD Edwards, so it s four ERP products they re spreading their investment over. So they can publish a roadmap, but one has to ask how many resources is going to back that roadmap up. For us, we ve one place we re putting our money. We re betting on Lawson. We re going to invest and improve that product specific to public sector. That s my job. I have a team of former government experts that wake up every day thinking about that. Page 94 of 185

It s a different model. When we say we have a clear path forward, we mean that there is not that -- that ultimate point where we re going to have to look at merging people. And I think most people in the industry, if you look at Gartner or IDC will tell you that the foundation for Fusion, which is where most of the investment will go, right, that s their new baby, is going to be E-Business Suite, not PeopleSoft. So I -- it was a little bit interesting to see that. Obviously, Oracle wants to keep their customers that they have already, and that s the reason you publish a roadmap like that. But think about the context as you consider who s got the most viable solution long term. And - - MS. BURNELL: (Inaudible.) I know I have your business cards, but if you could just -- MR. DAVIS: Sorry. MR. BEAL: Jason Beal. MR. DAVIS: Every time we speak. I m sorry. MS. BURNELL: That would be perfect. MR. BEAL: I m the other Beal, and you can figure out whether we re husband and wife or brother and sister. MS. BEAL: Brother and sister. MR. GEORGE: Okay. Number two I had, you talked in there about reporting tools and reports and you have 500 hours in for that and so forth. What that speaks to me about is specialization and specialized reports that are coming out that, as we go into the future, requires support. And that s ongoing support for specialized reports. Talk to that a second and tell me why I shouldn t be considering that. MR. DAVIS: Let me -- is your question will you need 500 hours of specialized reporting? MR. GEORGE: No. You ve got 500 hours of -- if I read it correctly -- MR. DAVIS: Yes. MR. GEORGE: -- you ve got 500 hours to develop specialized -- develop reporting tools and reports in there. MR. DAVIS: To use our reporting tools to develop reports to meet your requirements, yes. Page 95 of 185

MR. GEORGE: Yes. Now, will they be specialized, and will they require ongoing support after the four years, six years, ten years and -- MR. DAVIS: So -- MR. GEORGE: -- going on? MR. DAVIS: Yeah. So -- MR. GEORGE: So in other words, we re married to you forever. MR. DAVIS: Yes. Well, their reports are developed using our reporting tools. We ve got our -- our Microsoft add-ins tools. We use Crystal as a reporting tool. We ve got our Lawson Business Intelligence tool. So we have a number of different tools that we can use to develop the report, and we re going to make sure we use the right tool to develop that. Once developed, that report, when we develop it, we re going to transition that in with our managed services model, and our managed services organization is going to maintain that on an ongoing basis, so that we will take responsibility for maintaining that. If an upgrade comes along and it changes something such that that report needs to be changed, our managed services contract with you will allow for that change to be made. So you won t have the responsibility of maintaining those on an ongoing basis. Similarly, reports that you develop, and, as I discussed, we do expect you to develop those reports and become expert at that so that you can be self-sufficient on a long term basis, those reports, as well, will transition into our managed services agreement and be maintained by us on a go forward basis. MR. GEORGE: Okay. MR. BEAL: Could -- could I add a bit about reporting. And I know Broward County was at CGI when you guys did your -- your last upgrade, right before it went to SAP. And it s important when you say, specialized reports, ten years ago there was -- a specialized report meant that something came out on green bar ledger or at least was statically almost programmed, right, and required a lot of technical support. The tools we re proposing, the tools we use, are tools that are highly configurable, highly adaptable by end users, and will -- they ll make copies and transform these reporting on their own on a daily basis. It s not something that requires the level of maintenance and support that you might be used to with -- I m sure you re used to, because I know a lot of the reports you already use. Page 96 of 185

So I d point that out. It is a different model. We re relying on the tools, and, you know, one of the things I would point to with our investment in our product, there s been some comments about change management and our approach to reporting. We have the luxury, because we are the software vendor, but it s also a strategic focus for us, we re trying to build change management into our solutions. So when you heard Susan -- and this applies to reporting as well. We provide context and data marks, if you will, that come with the solution that make it very easy for end users to do reporting. When you heard her talk about making our software not suck, making it a pleasing -- MS. BEAL: (Inaudible.) MR. BEAL: -- and -- or making ERP software suck less, the real point there is we want to make it to where it doesn t require a ton of training. We want to make it to where it s intuitive and easy to learn. And I guess most -- how many of you have a smart phone? Probably -- you don t have to raise your hands, but how many of you had to have training to use the apps on those smart phones? That s where we re headed, right? So the focus -- yes, we do change management, but what we do is invest and put it into product to reduce the need for that, to make it easier for people to adjust and -- and adopt those tools and to leverage those tools, whether it s implementation, configuration, it s training, or it s support. Same applies to reports, and that s the paradigm that we re approaching is we train you on tools that are easy, intuitive, and user friendly, and then you have the ability to own that process. And, frankly, if we build the reports for you, it takes almost as much effort from you. And I ve built reports on projects for years. I have to sit down with a functional expert and have them -- the knowledge helps me on me on the day, what makes sense, how to lay this out. There s multiple iterations. Easier process, takes less -- just no more time for him to sit down and build it if he knows how to use that tool and it s user friendly and intuitive. That s the approach we re approaching. That s why it seems anomalous. We would argue this is where everyone else is going to go in the future. MR. GEORGE: Thank you. Last question, and I ve asked this question before, and the other companies, you might as well prepare yourself for it at this time, too, is you took exception to 49 items, approximately 49 items. That s our determination, but there are a significant number of items. Page 97 of 185

Are those items negotiable at all if you should be chosen as the number one, or are they not negotiable? MS. ELIAS: Patty Elias. Those items are absolutely negotiable. We basically responded based on being a vendor hosting provider, a service provider, and providing support. So, obviously, we took meticulous exception and did a really thorough job. You re going to find that a number of our items are clarifications, trying to figure out what you were actually asking. Other items, we would like to negotiate. But at the end of the day, we don t think the contract itself should be an impediment to getting the deal done. MR. GEORGE: All right. Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Chris? MS. HARROD: If I can, just for clarification, the 49 items were non-negotiable. The total number of exceptions was 123. Just for clarification. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. Thank you, Chris MR. WALTON: On the issue of staffing, you indicated that the team that you re proposing for us is the team that did the implementation at Greenville County Public -- Public Schools? MR. DAVIS: The functional leads. The functional leads for HR, supply chain, and human resources. MR. WALTON: And what are they doing now, today? MR. DAVIS: What are they doing now, today? They re waiting for you to sign a contract with us. (Laughter.) MR. DAVIS: No, they re -- they re actively engaged in projects. I mean, we re a consulting firm. Our people are our business. But we are committed to delivering the team that we ve identified, provided that this solicitation proceeds on the schedule that s been defined. MR. WALTON: So if they re actively involved in current projects, and you re willing to pull them off those projects to come here, how do I know that they ll be committed to this project once they get here? Page 98 of 185

MR. DAVIS: So, first thing, to come here, we re talking about the March timeframe, as I understand it, so we have sufficient time to plan, and we ve planned our business with that potential in mind. And we have strategies and plans that we can take. We expect to deliver the projects that we are contracted for and to manage our staff with the length of time that we have from this point. Many of those -- a couple of those projects are ending, and we re looking for shorter-term engagements for people. But we can t just have people sit for five months. That s not an effective cost model for a consulting firm. MR. WALTON: I understand. I just -- I just want to be clear that the individuals who are currently involved in those projects will all be wrapped up by the March timeframe and that once they get here, they ll be committed to staying here to see this project through. MR. DAVIS: Our expectation is to deliver the team that we ve identified for the project based on the current schedules, and for them to stay with the project from start to finish. MR. WALTON: Okay. MR. CARBONE: I have no questions. MS. CHAMBERS: I just have a couple simple ones, in think. You said -- thank you. Earlier in the presentation, you mentioned -- mentioned templated training materials, and I guess my question really is how do you -- how are you going to deploy that material, and how do you -- what is your training like? How do you coach? How -- what -- how are you going to deliver your materials to us, and will it include -- how many human touch points, basically? So not only the materials, but what kind of -- what delivery method you use for your training. MR. DAVIS: Yeah, the delivery method, we have a tool called Learning Accelerator that s an automated tool that can take screen captures so that you can see and simulate the work that you re doing. It s a try me, show me type of environment -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. DAVIS: -- so you can -- you can -- it will display what you re -- if you re supposed to enter an accounts payable voucher -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. DAVIS: -- it ll like show you where the mouse clicks are for you to do that, and then you can come back through to the next round, and you have to simulate those mouse clicks so that you can do the effective learning for that. Page 99 of 185

And so our approach is we have templates for those processes and those things, and we ve defined a volume of hours that we would commit to enhance those locally for Broward County. And we would want to work with you cooperatively to make sure that you understood how to maintain and manage those tools on a go forward basis, because your business will continue to grow and expand, and you want to be able to make sure that you can maintain those tools, those environments, so that as you bring on new staff, as staff change positions, you have those tools to you on an ongoing basis. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. And on your implementation, the project is three years long. I think we ve talked about that before, and other vendors are talking about a four year rollout. MR. DAVIS: Right. MS. CHAMBERS: I guess how do you -- what s your expectation for the County s workforce to be able to absorb the knowledge that you re going to -- that we re going to be required to absorb within three years as opposed to four, and what s your experience with that, and how did you pick three? And I understand you control the horizontal and the vertical -- MR. DAVIS: Right. MS. CHAMBERS: -- with your firm, but still, I mean, you re still dealing with you know, public sector employees that have to learn all this, and so now you re collapsing it by, you know, quite a bit of time. MR. DAVIS: Right. So our approach, first off, we have a change management organization that we ve brought in with us -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. DAVIS: -- our -- they re one of our firms that are -- she s here today, Natalie -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. Hi. MR. DAVIS: -- to be focused on the change management, very much identifying, you know, the standard approach of identify the stakeholders, identify the communication methods, be able to provide what s changing, communicate, communicate, communicate, and training those people as they go forward. In terms of the time frame that we ve identified, we were looking at an efficient timeframe that we believe -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. Page 100 of 185

MR. DAVIS: -- that a county of this size can digest the applications in, and that three year time period allows for us to have sufficient time for each of the veins of the implementation to be successful. MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. DAVIS: Again, we believe that our timeframes are a little shorter, based on the customization decreases and the cascading impacts that those have, and the efficiency of our software fit, out of the box, and our approach to the overall implementation, and that we ve been effective in those timeframes with other organizations. MR. BEAL: And I would add, I heard this discussion earlier about the timeframe. In my experience doing projects, actually, shorter duration projects are better. They tend to be more successful, because the longer you drag out with political changes and all the things that happen in public sector, the more risk you expose the project to. That s why you end up seeing a lot of governments get half implemented and don t finish. MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. BEAL: And I also believe in the principle, and I think we ve all seen it in this industry, Parkinson s Law, which is you give someone 48 months, they ll take 48 months; right? MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. BEAL: We re trying to keep the costs down -- MS. CHAMBERS: Uh-huh. MR. BEAL: -- save the County money, and make sure we expose this project to the least amount of risk. And we re going to do it in ways that will make sure you re successful. MS. CHAMBERS: Do you -- do you answer the phone after three years? MR. DAVIS: Yes. MR. BEAL: You can call me forever. MR. DAVIS: I said -- yeah, I already told them. I m Paul Davis. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. DAVIS: I m responsible for your success. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. Just -- just one other question off -- off the subject was earlier you had mentioned, I think there were two modules. One was a business warehouse model that Page 101 of 185

you said wasn t part of the original package and -- as well as another model. I didn t hear the name. MS. BEAL: Uh-huh. MS. CHAMBERS: So I m not sure how all that works, but you said you were including those -- MS. BEAL: Yes. MS. CHAMBERS: -- without an additional cost? MS. BEAL: So the business performance warehouse was developed about a month after we submitted this proposal, so we -- MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MS. BEAL: -- so we included it in the first RFC. We said we would include that, since data is clearly critical. MS. CHAMBERS: Right. MS. BEAL: We know you need that. MS. CHAMBERS: Right. MS. BEAL: Since the proposal was submitted, our budgeting solution has added a performance management module, so it would be included as part of the license that we included in the bid. We were not authorized to demonstrate it, since it wasn t specifically included in the proposal, but we don t want you to think that you don t have those capabilities if you choose Infor. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other questions? MS. CHAMBERS: That s it. Thanks. MR. CAMPBELL: Have either of those modules been implemented anywhere yet? MR. DAVIS: The business performance? Yeah, we have -- MR. CAMPBELL: Yeah. MR. DAVIS: -- customers that have implemented those. They are new, and the customers that are using them -- I ll just be candid -- they re in our health care organization today. Page 102 of 185

MR. BEAL: And then for the performance management folks, yeah, we do have several customers. I don t know the names of those customers off-hand. They re in multiple industries. That s a tool that s used -- lots of folks, not just governments, use performance management. MR. CAMPBELL: Also, in 12 and 13, you posted significant losses. Can you give us insight into what was the cause of those? MS. BEAL: Yes. I m glad you asked that, because when there was a financial point raised, I shot a note to our president, and I said, hey, this is what the understanding is, can you help me clarify this for the team. I ve got an official email I m happy to send to your organization from the president announcing and telling you what that is. And I am not a financial person. My understanding is that the way that we reported those numbers is something to do with the way -- of all the acquisitions that Infor s been doing, and those acquisitions have impacted the numbers. However, if you look at -- if you take that out or extrapolate it, our profitability is excellent. Would you like me to get the message and read that to you? If you re a financial person, it will probably make more sense to you. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MS. BEAL: Okay. What the summary was that he wanted me to convey to you was that our profitability was probably higher than the revenue of the other vendors that you re looking at combined for last year. MR. CAMPBELL: Do you want to follow up? MR. GEORGE: No, just any information you want to send has to go to the Purchasing Director and not come to us. MS. BEAL: I would only send it to Carolyn. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. JOHN CIFOR: And I could share with Carolyn and ask her to share (inaudible). MS. BEAL: Thank you, John. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MS. BEAL: Would you like to hear it? It s a paragraph. It s not that painful. Page 103 of 185

MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: Sure. MS. BEAL: Okay. It says our financials as reported have to conform to gap requirements. Like almost every other public company, those financials are converted to pro forma results, and not cash items, and acquisition related charges and other similar items removed to provide a more accurate picture of the true cash financials. Oracle reports gap and non-gap financials, and has done so for a decade. Acquisition accounting distorts the financials, which is why investors demand the pro forma numbers. We do the same with our investors and provide that data on our earnings call. Using the pro forma numbers, as everyone else does, we generate 830 million of EBITADA profit in the last 12 months. We have over $500 million of cash on our balance, and more than $400 million of free cash flow, and all of that is growing. Our debt securities have nearly doubled in value in the public markets in the last two years, reflecting the dramatic increase in demand from investors. We are generating more profit than most vendors have in revenue. Courtesy of Charles Phillips, Chief Executive Officer of Infor. MR. CAMPBELL: The other question I had, you know, you were talking about, you know, the training for a -- you know, for a smart phone and stuff like that. And I appreciate that. And I was kind of wondering how do you measure your success in that area. MR. BEAL: Well -- MS. BEAL: Jason Beal. MR. BEAL: -- that s a good question, because I m a functional person from government, so I sometimes skew toward can it provide the right functionality to the right people, and I have some certain areas I m very passionate about. I think in general it s something that we can take non-technical users, non-functional users and sit them down. And I think you heard about our Hook and Loop group. That s what they are. These are artists. These are not -- not technicians, not even functional budgeting types like me or procurement types like Susan. These are folks who walk in off the street and design based on user interaction with the software. So we -- it starts with the design. We actually start, instead of taking our products and retrofitting them to mobile, for instance, we start with mobile in mind, and that mobile user, and Page 104 of 185

that user experience, and design software back. And a lot of the products I m working on are really built around that orientation. So it s inherent in it. Obviously, the users and customers will confirm that over time, but I will tell you -- I don t have the quotes with me, but I have several analyst quotes by IEC and Gartner and others that -- that are applauding us for our approach to doing that and really taking on what we call our Soho experience, which is improving that user interaction, trying to make it a lot more like the iphone, if you will. And, in fact, I haven t seen the new iphone that was released yesterday, but some folks did and said it looks remarkably like our Version 10. So maybe they re taking some notes from us. MR. CAMPBELL: (Inaudible.) What s kind of driving my question is page 14 of Plante Moran s report. That s where it shows, you know, after the -- you did your demonstration to County staff, that the fit/gap changed, and it changed to the negative and not to the positive. So how do you speak to that and reconcile that with your -- the direction that you re going versus what the results were here at Broward County? MS. BEAL: I ll take that first. Susan Beal. I don t know. I wasn t the one filling out the scoring sheets, but I sat in a lot of those sessions. We showed a lot of the new user experience, but we were asked to show not the version that s the latest. We were asked to show what we proposed. So just like Greenville Schools isn t running that latest and greatest version which has all of these great things in it, we weren t able to show it to your teams fully, either. However, that s what you would be utilizing on the implementation. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other questions? MR. CARBONE: No. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. MS. BEAL: You re welcome. Thanks for having us. MR. DAVIS: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Anyone like to recess for 15? MR. GEORGE: Fifteen minutes? Yeah. MR. CAMPBELL: We ll recess for 15 minutes. It s is now 2:30, and we ll reconvene at 2:45. Page 105 of 185

(THE MEETING RECESSED AT 2:30 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 2:45 P.M.) MR. CAMPBELL: We re reconvening the ERP Selection meeting -- Select Committee meeting. It is 2:45. Prior to you starting your presentation, I do want to say that at the end of all of the presentations there may be some questions that the Selection Committee may want to ask each of your project managers, and we ll be, as I said, taking that up after the presentations, all of the presentations are complete. And, with that, Ciber, you re next. You have 59 minutes on the timer, plus one. And, with that, you ready? MR. BENTLEY: It says zero. MR. CAMPBELL: Yeah, well, I ll hit enter. Ready? MR. BENTLEY: I can t start before? MR. CAMPBELL: There you go. MR. BENTLEY: There we go. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Vic Bentley, and I m with Ciber, Incorporated. I am the Client Executive for public sector within our Oracle practice, and I oversee the state and local customers in the eastern and southeastern states. And I want to start off just by saying how happy we are to be here. We re grateful for the opportunity to have come this far. Also want to take just a second to thank you for your efforts. We know how hard it is on the vendor side. It s hard enough on our side. We know it s even harder on your side. So we appreciate your due diligence, your transparency, your stick-to-itiveness, and all the effort that goes in there. It s -- it s been long, and we re real close. Right? You should be feeling good. We re real close to this. So thank you for your efforts. A little bit about what we re going to talk about -- well, actually, I should introduce myself a little bit more. So I have more than 30 years experience in professional services and consulting, more than 20 years in public sector. I spent many, many years with IBM and then with Oracle before coming to Ciber, and have picked up quite a bit of background along the way. Page 106 of 185

So we do have a lot of experience. You ll hear similar levels of experience from our team here. I think someone used the term earlier, well-seasoned. That would describe us, as well. A little bit about what we re going to talk about today. I won t go through each one of these points, but just two things. One is you ve asked us to cover some specific topics. We re going to talk about those. Then we have a few things that we feel you -- you would want to see and hear about for your consideration. You know, but before we do that, let s do this. We want to make sure you know that we understand what your goals and objectives are. And to my knowledge, these have not changed over the years that this procurement has -- has been working. These are the things that you ve set out to achieve, and these are still the things you want to achieve. And from Ciber s perspective, these are the things that matter the most. All of our implementations, all of our engagements, always go back in every major decision and visit these key objectives here that you have that are important to you, reducing your costs, simplifying architecture infrastructure, reducing redundancy in your costs, licensing, systems, all of those things. I ve heard you say before that you re interested in having some mobility and some mobile applications, and we ve heard that some of those are coming. Well, for some of us, they re here already. So we do pay attention to all of this. In fact, you know, before we really get started, would you like to see an example of one of the mobile applications? Would that be something you d want to see? All right. Let s do that. Can we hand you a little something to look at? MR. CAMPBELL: It is your time. MR. BENTLEY: It is our time? Excellent. MR. GEORGE: Mr. Attorney, are we able to accept this gift? (Laughter.) MS. WALKER: We re going to take it back from you, so don t worry. It s not a permanent gift. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MS. WALKER: While Vic s handing that out, I m Woody Walker. I m with the PMO and the practice of PMBAs at Ciber. Page 107 of 185

So we d like you to take a look at what we ve handed out to you and click on the headings. We ve pulled some of this information from various websites, Broward County reports. They may not be entirely accurate, but it gives you an idea of what you will see once the ERP system is implemented. And you can access this data from your phone or from a meeting, or anywhere you re at, and it provides complete transparency to all of your information. So what do you guys think? MS. CHAMBERS: Cool. MR. BENTLEY: Pretty cool. You know, we can (inaudible). MS. WALKER: Oh, yeah MR. BENTLEY: So the audience can see it. MR. GEORGE: I don t see Aviation on here. (Laughter.) UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It s on there. MR. BENTLEY: You like it? MS. WALKER: We see smiles. Are you enjoying it? MS. WALKER: So that s what one ERP system can do for you, all your information in one place. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Very good. MS. WALKER: All right? So we ll collect those from you. No long term gifts. Thank you. It was nice meeting you guys. MR. BENTLEY: Thank you, Woody. You know, when you think about an ERP system, you think about a big, complex system, mostly back office, right, lots and lots of data. This is a real good example on how, especially at your levels, that you ll have the opportunity to see and have this with you on your phone, on your ipad. You can -- these things can be -- can be configured, as Woody mentioned, to suit you individually. They don t all have to be the same. They were today for our ease of producing Page 108 of 185

this for you. But an idea of what you ll have when you get done with this thing, again, going back to those key objectives that you have. Okay. A little bit about Ciber. I think most of you are probably familiar with us, but we are a publicly held company. We re about a little under a billion dollar company, more than 7,000 employees. We -- we ve been around a long time, since 1974. Long time been in business. We have -- we have been an Oracle Platinum Partner since 1990, so long before many firms were even in existence, we ve been an Oracle Platinum Partner. That s of key importance to you. We ve done literally thousands of Oracle implementations, so we bring with us the most experience that you re going to see here today. I mentioned some of the other impressive firms that I ve worked for. I can t tell you that any of those firms had a higher return rate, customer return rate, than Ciber. 98 percent is an overwhelming number. It s a good number. We re very happy about our satisfied customers. The team that we re bringing is a good team. It s a team that you re probably somewhat familiar with. We re bringing you what we believe is the optimum team for your county, for Broward County. A large, complex, a lot of diversity. Most importantly, we are the prime vendor. You will hear that theme throughout our presentation today. We have primed in many large county implementations, and we are your single point of accountability. One contractual relationship. We also bring Oracle on board, not only for the software, but for the hosting, reducing your risk. I think providing you the lowest risk when it comes to the software hosting relationship. We ve got Sharpton, Brunson and Company, who are subject matter experts in a lot of areas that -- that are -- they re very familiar with Broward County, and I think you re familiar with them. We also bring aboard Maverick Solutions, which is a specialized training firm to do the preproject training, which you ll hear a little bit more about as we go through our presentation today. With that, I m going to let Tony come up and spend just a minute. MR. BRUNSON: Thank you, Vic. Good day. My name is Anthony Brunson. I m the managing partner of Sharpton, Brunson and Page 109 of 185

Company. I ve enjoyed a 35 year public accounting career. And beyond oil and gas and banking, my industry expertise is governments. As a Price-Waterhouse Government Specialist, I ve served the U.S. eastern seaboard, South America, and the Caribbean, and we carried that accumulated knowledge that we acquired and built upon it as a Sharpton, Brunson Government Specialist. I love serving governments. As each of you know, those outside the industry just simply -- excuse me -- simply don t understand the conglomerate you are. Let s take a look at the Broward County business lines. I mean, you have airports, a seaport, transit services, wastewater services, housing, and there s more. Environmental services, solid waste, parks, libraries, and I certainly can go on. A core commonality is the concept of funds. Differentials are general funds, special revenue funds, enterprise funds, capital funds, debt service funds, et cetera. The Sharpton, Brunson work efforts, and the value that we will bring to the project will be our contribution working with the business processes, business process function, and some of the change management functions. Our efforts serve as a bridge that enhances the understanding of those core issues, but certainly highlights the differentials. You know, it matters to the airport that costs associated with passenger facility charges versus those associated with concessions, parking, or leases. It matters -- matters to the Transit Department, the restrictions of federal grants awarded for capital projects versus those unrestricted -- relatively unrestricted nature of gas taxes or the half cent sales tax. It certainly matters to the port to distinguish costs and revenues associated with cargo versus passenger vessel fees and other charges. The Ciber team provides a comprehensive set of disciplines to fully achieve your objectives and your ERP mission. Thank you. Okay. MR. SIMLER: Hello, I m Gary Simler, and I m a Senior Vice President with Oracle Corporation. And I m here today to represent our Managed Cloud Services group. And I m in kind of a unique position in that we have two partners that we re aligned with, and I ll make you the guarantee that this will be the shortest presentation that you ll hear today, because I really just want to focus on one thing, and -- because you -- you know, you know Page 110 of 185

what we do, but what I d like to focus on is this matter of risk reduction and what we ve been calling single point of accountability. You know, this is a big, complex project. It s north of $30 million or however you want to count the dollars. And containing risk is all important. And if we re chosen, we will be your partner for a minimum of five years, and probably ten and beyond. So what we re doing behind the curtain, the way we manage your applications, I ll just say two things about it right now, and then I ll return -- you ll see me later. When we talk about what our mission is in application management, it s not simply to take what exists and put it in an environment and run it. Our mission is to put you in the highest performing environment on Oracle equipment and Oracle applications that the Oracle Corporation knows how to do. And the complement to that is to keep you there over the years. So in order to do that, there s many techniques and there s many pieces of equipment, software, and so on, involved, and I ll get into that perhaps a little bit later. But I want to focus on this matter of risk, because when someone says they re the single point of accountability, it s -- we have to separate contractual accountability and what s behind the curtain and the real ability to deliver what -- what somebody s committing to do. And if you look at this chart, every one of these components in that stack are things that you will be using. You ll be using storage and servers and virtual machines and operating system and the database and the middleware and the applications, and the data centers and the people behind it, and so on and so forth. And all I really want to say about risk mitigation is that each and every one of those components are Oracle components and, in this case, they are being managed and run by Oracle personnel, and in Oracle facilities, and there s nobody else involved. So regardless of where the issue is, and regardless of how it s reported, or regardless of where it is within the organization, there truly is one place where these problems come, and that s to Oracle. So for right now, I just want to -- I just want to put out there, as we talk about risk mitigation, the best way, in my -- in our opinion, to mitigate risk is to truly make one entity accountable for those things. And when there s a problem, and we all know there ll be a problem at some point, those issues come to Oracle Managed Cloud Service, and we take it from there, no matter where in the stack it is. So for now, I ll leave it, and I ll see you later, in the blink of an eye. Page 111 of 185

Okay. Thank you. MR. BENTLEY: Thank you, Gary and Tony. Appreciate it. Vic Bentley, back up here again. Okay. Let s continue on. You had asked us to talk about comparable counties, and I would submit to you today that Ciber is the only vendor here that truly has comparable counties to Broward County. We are the large county experts. It is our forte. It s what we do best, and it s what we do a lot of. You see the two highlighted there near the top. We will -- we will take a little bit closer look at those here in just a moment, but this is why we think that we are the right choice for Broward County, because of our direct experience with counties that are really just like you. Okay. A little bit of a comparison here. King County, Washington, Montgomery County, Maryland, very large budgets, over 3 to 4 billion in -- in budgets. High numbers of users, large populations, a full complement of ERP systems. It -- it s notable that we were the prime contractor for King County and Montgomery County, and all of those counties that I showed you on the previous slide. So we stood -- we stood to -- to take responsibility, and we stayed with them and got them done, and they re very happy customers with their -- with their systems. I d like to take just a moment and play a video clip from our customer at Kind County, Caroline Whalen, who s the County Administrative Officer, so bear with me here just a moment. (Video plays) MS. WHALEN: Hi, I m Carolyn Whalen and I m the King County Chief Administrative Officer. King County is a large regional government. We re the 14th most populous county government in the country. We had been operating basically as two separate governments for over 15 years, so we had two payroll systems, two financial systems. They weren t integrated. The business processes were different. We wanted to move the county from really clerical to automated. The county had accepted the fact that we had to make this change. It was built into our DNA. So we implemented a single financial system on the Oracle platform, Oracle EBS, and we implemented PeopleSoft countywide. We did not implement PeopleSoft financials. Hindsight, I sort of wish that we had. And so, for the first time, we were in the same environment for our entire government. Page 112 of 185

Thinking about the change from the individual employee level was very important. Partnership with our unions and early communication with our unions was important. You must engage the highest levels of your government, and have their support. We had great experience with the Ciber team on our PeopleSoft payroll HR implementation. They brought in very skilled resources. Ciber being a Platinum consultant with Oracle helped us. I was pleased with the fact that Ciber was able to bring the right resources to bear to solve the problems, to make sure we could go live. We couldn t have done it without the -- the experts that -- that Ciber brought in. They are time and labor experts. (Video ends.) MR. DOUGLAS: Good afternoon. I -- as I mentioned before, I m Bruce Douglas, and I am the SVP of North America, General Manager for North America for Ciber. And I m here to show our executive commitment to Broward County. I came from Oracle before I joined Ciber -- little background about me -- and then before Oracle, I was at Sun Microsystems, where I ran the professional services. Before that, I started two companies and sold them off to -- one to Sun Microsystems. Why that s important is this video that we just showed you is very important to us as a company. To have a client that will give a testimonial of what a great job we have done is very important. The exciting news that I have to tell you is the person that made that project successful is going to be the person running your project, Nate Holley. And so that, I think, is key. The success to these projects are the people, and we are in the people business, so we will bring the best people to bear to make it successful for you. As you have heard today, we re about a billion dollar company across all Ciber. We have North America operations and international operations. You know, it s -- we re -- I think this is a very important part for your risk mitigation, as Ciber, as being a publicly traded company, and one of the only publicly traded companies that s presenting to you today, it shows a level of transparency that you ll get through our corporation. It s easy for each company to agree to terms and conditions for you, but to actually be able to live up to that commitment is a different -- is a different (inaudible) that -- that Ciber brings to you. Being a billion dollar publicly traded company, I have to be aware of my fiduciary responsibility to our shareholders. And making those commitments and binding the company to that, being a publicly traded company, is very important to us. Page 113 of 185

And as you ve seen with -- through our negotiations so far, we ve been very aggressive of negotiating those T s and C s with you. In fact, we ve come from 24 down to I think 10, and I actually tried to negotiate two this morning with -- so, Kent, we will definitely work with you to negotiate our T s and C s of the contract. And if we -- as we ve been chosen over the years, 34-year-old company, 39-year-old company, we have never not negotiated to successful conclusion on a project. So I m very confident that we ll be able to do that. You know, that raises probably some questions in my mind with such a large company that we are and being able to back our T s and C s from a -- from -- from a publicly traded company perspective. If you look at some of our competitors, our recruiting agency, our recruiting group in our company is larger than their entire company. And so, you know, being able to agree to a term and saying, yes, we ll do it, but being able to fulfill that agreement in the long term, I think is something that you need to look at from a risk mitigation perspective. Like I said, Ciber s been in business for 39 years and has had the same name, and we re dedicated to our clients. Many of our clients we ve had for the 39 years. Large companies such as Ford and UHG, Walt Disney here in Florida. We actually have offices here in Florida, too, and hundreds of employees here in Florida supporting the Florida economy. So we have been dedicated to your team since the start of this -- since the start of your journey on this implementation, and we re looking forward to continuing that journey. One of the things that I think differentiates us as a large -- larger company is our executive support. You won t only see me here at least quarterly, but you ll also see my boss, who s the CEO of the company, Rick Genovese, and Dave Peterschmidt. In fact, Dave is with another client right now, another Infor client of ours right now, up in New Jersey, doing a project kickoff. Rick and I last week were doing a project review on a $60 million PeopleSoft implementation we re doing in Washington State. So we re very into being part of the team, helping you guys succeed, and you have our executive commitment that we will be here the whole time and make you successful jointly. So I really look forward to, after we re successful jointly, to having Bertha Henry do a testimonial like we just saw. So, with that, I m not going to spend too much time. I want to introduce Jeff Haisley, who s going to come in and start talking about the details of our presentation. Page 114 of 185

Thank you. MR. HAISLEY: Thanks, Bruce. My name s Jeff Haisley. I am the Senior Director responsible for all delivery of the PeopleSoft product line in North America for public sector. So I would be on this project as a director and an executive sponsor, as well as Bruce and Rick and some of the others. My background, I ve been implementing PeopleSoft for 20 years, and 95 percent of it s been in the public sector. So I ve seen a lot. I ve done a lot, and I ve estimated a lot. To that end, I want to talk to you now just about why we chose PeopleSoft. And before I do that, I want to thank Keith Pace from CedarCrestone, because he really did a lot of the heavy lifting for me. He mentioned that, you know, PeopleSoft was built from the ground up, and it has public sector DNA, and that s certainly true. It wasn t a business application that started out and then somebody decided to morph it into a public sector space. That s important. New PeopleSoft features are typically developed and put into the product based on implementations just like you re going to experience here. I m certain, you know, that we re going to find things here that Oracle would be -- would be interested in putting into the product line. And we ve actually been recognized for one of those. It s called the Titan Award, and we now have a piece of our code that was developed for another client in the product. And it has to do with split funding and billing to the Federal Highway Authority. Locally here in Florida, you have a lot of support and a very strong user group. And that s important for a couple of reasons. Number one, you can reach out to a lot of different people and ask for what their experience has been. And then I want to go back up to the first bullet here, and I want to emphasize that although one of the vendors today tried to dissuade you and make you believe that all of us are implementing third party software, we think that s a new definition of what third party software is. We are the only vendor that is implementing one single application from one single vendor, and none of it is third party. So we are implementing Oracle HCM, Oracle financials, Oracle s Hyperion budgeting, Webcenter for imaging, and it s wrapped by analytics, and we showed you an example of those analytics today on those ipads. Now, this is a list of clients in the State of Florida. I m going to be real up front with you. They re not our clients. I put it up here for a second reason; right? You re surrounded by Page 115 of 185

PeopleSoft clients. And that s important to you from one perspective that I think you re going to find is going to -- going to be a need over time, and that s a labor pool. Right? You can build your own here, and we ll help you to do that during the implementation, but out there in the future somewhere, people are going to retire. People are going to move to other public sector -- sector entities. And people are going to potentially just leave the County for whatever reason. And you re going to need to replace those people. And we believe it s important to have a labor pool in your state that s using the same application that you can draw from. Now, we ve got a poster board up here, and we think this is one of the most important points we re going to make today. This is the top 20 counties in the United States, based on annual operating budget, population, and number of employees. And every one of those bars that s highlighted yellow use PeopleSoft. Now, there s two of them that are fractionalized and use a little PeopleSoft and a little EBS. And one of them is King County, and you heard Carolyn Whalen say very clearly, if I had it to do over again, in hindsight, I would have done it all on PeopleSoft. So at least nine out of those ten, I think you can take to the bank and know that they re of your size, and they implemented this application, and they implemented it for a reason. Now, was it because it fit well? Yeah, I think so. It certainly wasn t because the solution consultants from Oracle demonstrated it better than the EBS consultants or the CGI consultants or the Lawson consultants. It was because it fit, and it was built for government. But, more importantly, before I leave this slide, nobody in this room has been the prime implementer of any of those in the top 20 with the exception of Ciber, and we held the prime contract on three of those. I think that s an important distinction. So, what was behind our estimate? I m the one that built the estimate for Ciber, with the help of our consulting organization. And really what needs to be said here is that we were honest with what we know it s going to take. Yes, our hours were higher. Yes, we bid every single gap, not a bucket of hours for reports, not a bucket of hours for customization. We estimated every single one of them. Why s that important to you? Because we ve experienced during negotiations that typically, when we explore those customizations with clients, the number comes down. Real example, Montgomery County, Maryland. I estimated that deal that we won. Before we Page 116 of 185

started the project, we took $5 million of customizations out of the price. We didn t go up. We went down. And that was through discussions with folks like you that know more than one sentence. You ve heard two vendors talk about it. You can only glean so much from one sentence. And we did our best to do that. Secondarily, if you underbid a project, what typically happens is you sacrifice functionality, and we don t intend for you to sacrifice any functionality here. We want you to get what you need to become more efficient to run your business. So, with that, and taking into account the fact that the average number of years of consulting experience with PeopleSoft in our organization is 11, we didn t bid non-experienced people. Was our blended rate lower than our competitors? Yeah. I can t answer why. Maybe they were looking for higher margin than we were. I don t know. So the cost normalization, you ve heard a lot of people talk about it today. At the end of the day, I m okay with it. I m okay delivering -- (Laughter.) MR. HAISLEY: -- I m okay delivering at 37 million, and if you want to bump me up to 49 or somewhere in between, we d be happy to talk to you about what additional services you might get out of that and realize. But, at the end of the day, we believe strongly in our 37 million number. We stand behind it today. And if you had to call somebody during the implementation, if by some chance it got by Nate Holley, you d be calling me, and I m the one that estimated it. So, with that, I ll turn it over to Nate. MR. HOLLEY: Thanks, Jeff. My name s Nate Holley. I m your proposed Project Manager for this implementation. And I m glad he started to get you guys lively and with the laughter and some smiles. So I m going to tell you a little bit about myself. I m glad to be back in Fort Lauderdale, because I ve got some history here. Twenty-one years ago, actually, tomorrow, I was married here. So a great fondness to this place because of that. I was married at a place called Burt & Jacks. I don t know if you guys remember that place. It was pretty popular place back then, and I consider that to be one of the best meals I had when I -- when I was in Florida, actually. And then the next day, we got on the boat and went over to the Bahamas. So a little bit more about me. I ve been managing ERP projects for about 18 years, and I gauge that because of my 17 year old. I started doing a projects about year before he was Page 117 of 185

born, and I started with Oracle Corporation. Was managing, actually, projects before that, so I ve been total management -- project management experience is about 26 years totally. I ve done a lot of large, complex implementations. San Diego Airport, City of Atlanta. I did some federal implementations where the Federal DOT, actually, I implemented 12 of the 13 agencies. The Federal Highways, NIPSA, Volpe MARAD, and actually laid the groundation [sic] for the FAA implementation. And right down the street, I did Lee County Public Schools, which was a PeopleSoft total implementation of financials, HR, payroll. So I ve got a lot of experience. Not only that, so I m the guy who did King County. Okay? Carolyn Whalen agreed to do the testimonial for us. It was because of the commitment that not only Ciber did and took them successfully live, but because of me. I had -- I built a great relationship with her, her executive staff, the project director for that program. It became a partnership. It was commitment. You heard Bruce talk about the commitment that not only the executives bring to bear for our partners, they did it there. Carolyn did that testimonial there. And, actually, the other project that Bruce talked about, the $60 million project, Carolyn went there personally to talk us -- tell the story at the orals, to tell them about what a partner we were, how we were successful in getting them live, and really how to -- how much of a dynamite guy that I was. Okay? So I want to talk about a couple of things as far as lessons learned with King County. It wasn t easy. No ERP implementation with this type of complexity is easy. All right? You ve got a lot of disparate systems. They had 105 collective bargaining units, so negotiating with those units on the changes that needed to happen was not an easy task. On the steering committee, that -- they had Fred Jarrett, who was the Deputy Executive; Carolyn Whalen, who was the Chief Executive Administrator; Bill Kehoe, who s the CIO; Ken Guy, who was the Director of FBOD, the financial business operations. He basically owned the systems for finance, HR payroll, and all the processes and policies for those. We had the Director of Labor Relations on the steering committee because they had to understand what we needed to communicate to the unions to start the negotiations. So we had the heavy lifters of the organization on the steering committee that can guide and make the decisions that we needed to make to make everything successful. There was 26 distinctive interfaces that we used. We used a publish and subscribe architecture that we developed that actually interfaced to 55 different side systems. Okay? In addition to that, the information went out to 77 special districts, so we had to coordinate that information through change management, a lot of communications, and make sure the Page 118 of 185

messaging was crisp. So it was -- it was not an easy task, but it was a task that was doable. A little bit more about it, I was interviewed -- you know, Ciber was looking for an expert in this field when the previous project manager had left, had resigned. And I was sourced out as an expert in this field. And one of the deals of hiring me, not only for Ciber, but for King County, was that King County had to interview me. Just like you guys -- I m standing in front of you guys today -- they had to make sure that they were getting the right person that was going to take them to success. And, today, I m pleased to announce they were right to who they chose. So what s my job as a Project Manager? Well, it s to ensure success. It s to make sure I keep Melissa out of trouble. Right? It s actually that partnership that we talked about. It s making sure that I control and manage what we call the triple constraint, the cost, the scope, and the schedule. Right? To bring it in on time and on budget, and to make sure that we deliver all the requirements that King -- that -- that Broward County has in the statement of work. That s what my goal is, and that s what I do for a living. In my previous employments, Oracle being one, I worked for Oracle for 14 years, I was the goto guy. I was the guy that they put on the baddest projects, because they needed a success, whether it was at the beginning of them, or whether it was in trouble. I m -- I was the go-to guy. So I m that guy here, as well, at Ciber. And this is the one they ve designated that I be the project manager for, because it s very important to them. Okay? What s important about being a project manager, as well? Well, 95 percent of our customers require our PMs to be PMP certified. Okay? Project Management Professionals. Okay? That certification is governed by an organization called PMI, Project Management Institute. It s a worldwide governing agency for certifications of project managers, and I m a PMP Certified Project Manager. So what -- you know, what that s done for me is that I was a good PM before that. I was certified back in 2005. It enhanced my knowledge. It enhanced my skills. It taught me tools that I didn t have before. Of the vendors that we have here, there s only two vendors that presented PMs that are PMP certified. I think that s an important thing to look at. Okay? Would you want to go get your taxes done, if you had a tax -- a complex tax situation, by someone that was not a CPA - who was certified? Would you want to have a legal representative, a lawyer represent you in a -- in a pretty large or complicated legal issue if he was not certified by the Board? I m thinking you re going to say no. Well, I think you need to think of this the same way, because it s a discipline, just like those are disciplines, and you have to renew your certification every three years. Okay? Page 119 of 185

So -- differentiators. You ve heard about repositories and templates from some of the other vendors. Well, we bring a unique tool. We bring our own repository called PMRx. And within PMRx, we have our own templates that you ve heard we ve already implemented over a thousand projects. So we bring templates with information and samples from other projects like King County, like Washington State, where you won t have to worry about starting from scratch. We bring a charter that we can -- as a sample, that we can tailor to Broward County. We bring other items to the table, as well as our IPs, our configurations, our conversion programs. So, you know, to say that other people have anything better than us, I m going to say, no, that they don t. I think we have a leg-up on most other vendors. So I ve -- you ve heard me talk about my experience in other companies. Oracle was one. You know, I ve -- I ve implemented a lot of different products. JD Edwards. I ve implemented PeopleSoft back at Oracle when they used the methodology of Compass or Oracle E-Biz, when they used AIM, and now they have this, you know, unified method methodology. So everyone has a methodology. I think our differentiator with our methodology is that the phases that -- when we go through our phases, one component that we carry through after the discovery, which is developing the solution, is that when we configure the application, we test it. Okay? We bring end users in to test it, so that what your requirement was, we test it to make sure that the results are as expected. In the next phase, we bring extensions in. We test that, okay, to make sure that the building block for those requirements, plus the configuration, that end product, is what was expected. And we bring end users in. Okay? So every phase within our implementation after we ve developed our solution, we do testing, you know? It s a component of training, as well. So you don t -- you don t wait until the end where you deploy things or get ready to deploy things to find out where you re at. It s a building block approach. So that s the differentiator with our methodology that -- that no one else has. Another thing is that throughout our methodology -- you heard other people say they re trying to introduce change management -- we have change management through our methodology. The training component and the change management, those pieces -- and you heard Carolyn Whalen talk about change management -- those are the things that are important. You ve got to make sure that you communicate to your end users, to your sponsors, what s going on, what s coming, what are the changes. Page 120 of 185

And our methodology does a great job with that. So we ve talked about the cost normalization. We ve talked about the Plante Moran normalization studies. You heard Jeff say he doesn t have a problem with it. I don t have a problem with it, either. I think, you know, I -- within my PMP practice, we used to do risk analysis. And one of the methods I used was the Monte Carlo method, where you did sampling. So I think this pretty much did the same kind of a thing as the sampling approach to normalize, to see where the risks are. So what we did in our estimate is no surprise. It s what you asked for. You asked for resources to be provided on a 50/50 basis. We re the only one that came close to that. We didn t do it just because you required it. We did it because it was our best practice, as well. We understand the importance of having a match of one of our consultants to one of your County resources. The knowledge transfer is just much better with that approach, rather than having a resource trying to teach two -- a consultant trying to teach two or three County resources. Somebody s going to be waiting. Right? Somebody s going to be waiting. And I think that s not fair to the County. So our model was to do the one-to-one match, and it s the better match. So our assumption was based off of the 50/50 participation. It was based off of the business functions that you requested, the interfaces that you requested, the customizations and extensions that you requested. All right? And we said some of them that the County would do. We talked about the labor pool around the PeopleSoft in the -- in the Florida area. And we re assuming not only the training that we would give you guys and the -- and the knowledge transfer we would give you guys, but you would pick up some of that -- those resources, as well. So we looked at all of that. And, again, I think Jeff and our team that did our estimating did the job the right way. And I can tell you that because the years of experience I ve seen in doing this. I know the tricks of the trade. I know how they -- you know, vendors will reduce the costs by reducing resources. We didn t do that. We did the solution to give you the less risk way. All right? We were -- our way was to reduce your risks, and to make sure we would have the right resources, like Carolyn said, to bear for the County. And that s the difference with Ciber. On the support side. So one of the things that we didn t include in ours, and it s not a negative, because in the RLI it actually suggested that it was a TBD, was the Tier 3 support. So the Tier 1 support is the help desk. It s no different than what the County does right now. If someone has an issue, someone picks up a phone. Right? And help desk -- and you ll -- Page 121 of 185

they ll figure out if the issue is a functional or technical issue. That gets routed to Tier 2. We did provide the Tier 2 support in our solution. So we provide the functional or the technical. If it s a functional issue, they ll do the analysis and figure it out. If it s technical, we ll do the break fix work. But most likely it won t get to the technical piece, because all of the testing that we put through our methodology, we will have proven that everything works. But every now and then, something slips through. But we provide that in the Tier 2 support. The training on the UPK. UPK is a tool for training that -- that s used, and Ed s going to talk about that shortly. But everything else, we provide on the Ciber side. So this flow right here is really just talking about the process of that support structure, from the help desk through routing it to the functional or technical, and also through the application layers. You know, I do want to emphasize that it will be seamless. You won t have to worry -- or it won t even recognize if it s being a Ciber person or an Oracle person. It will be a seamless approach. We developed the same approach for Broward County. Okay? We helped them with their help desk support. And it s successful. Okay? Or for King County. Excuse me. I m jumping the gun. DR. KELLER: I m applying some change management here with my colleague, Nate. If you select Ciber, here s your project manager, and here s your change lead. We re not just talking that we have change or hire a subcontractor or it s an offshoot. It is germane to who we are. You have both of us should you select Ciber. Thank you, Nate. MR. HOLLEY: All right. DR. KELLER: A little bit about myself before I go into my presentation. Twenty-six years in the public sector, 13 of those as a Chief Financial Officer in the public sector. I ve been doing change management a long time. I m IBM certified in change management. And I had the great privilege and honor to work on an extremely complex ERP implementation in another governmental entity in Broward County in my past. So it s great to be back in Broward County. First, let s talk about change. And this is what Gartner has to say about the eight key factors of change. And if you look at the second quote, it says very clearly that you would increase employee participation earlier in the implementation process, make greater investments in end user training, and focus more on change management. Page 122 of 185

We have. And I m going to share with you why our change management and training is the most robust and gives you the greatest insurance for success, beyond anything you ve heard so far and that you ll hear following Ciber. And that s why I m here. I ve done this many times. I ve done it here in Broward County. And we will succeed together. One of my favorite slides, coming out of the Plante Moran proposal analysis. See, here s the thing. In the RLI, you said the change management was a crucial element, not something that a project manager should talk to you about, not something that a subcontractor should talk to you about, but your prime contractor should talk to you about change management, which is why I m here. We have these numbers in here because we ve done projects like this, counties your size. I have experience across the spectrum in ERP, and I know what it s going to take to work. At the end of the day, 45 months from now, you will not do business the way you are now. The technical aspects, no problem. The functional, no problem. If we don t move the human element to accept and adopt the change, get them the training necessary, and the go live support, et cetera, we will fail. That s why our numbers are what they are. We know what works. I m standing before you telling you I know from personal experience what works. Another reason, there s a differentiator for Ciber. We have a dedicated change management and training practice. From the very beginning of the project, when we do a leadership alignment to make sure that the executive committee, the board, the other department heads, everyone is aligned, the various divisions, we need that stakeholder alignment. Then we ll look at a readiness assessment to survey the greater population. Do we have alignment issues? Do we have the issues? Yeah, I hear it s coming, but I don t know how it s going to affect me. I work at the airport. I m not worried about it? We need to find out how ready is the organization. It s kind of a standard tool, but ours is more robust, because we go right in to the departments and in to the individuals. And we will look at organizational design. And I m going to talk in a moment about go live, because we don t go live unless we are ready. And that s another differentiator about Ciber. Communication is key, and I ve spent a lot of my time over my last decade looking at visual anthropology, which is how people understand and see things, because our backgrounds and where we work determines how we process communication. A newsletter is not always going to work. We live in a social media age. We may need a blog. Page 123 of 185

We may need a newsletter. We may need emails. We may need Twitter. I had another customer tell me, we like texts. We can deploy all of those, because the key is to get the right message to the right people at the right time, without providing clutter. None of us wants clutter. You know, if you don t respond to a newsletter, you shouldn t be getting a newsletter. But at the same time, having executive sponsors and/or the board members provide a video message, maybe on a quarterly basis. We ll decide all that once we do our analysis and find out what works. Pre-project training. Again, we know what works from past experience. We ve got over a thousand implementations. I ve been involved with over a hundred implementations. And out of the Plante Moran analysis, our pre-project training has training for the project staff before each phase, and we are working with our partner, Maverick Solutions. They are Oracle certified. They have implemented these products and continue to have their Oracle certification. The training, as we re going to talk about in a moment, will be on site. But that s the reason that number s so high, because we ensure success. You said, and told us, and we listened, by the way, that communication and training, change management is crucial. Why private training and why is it exclusive? It will be conducted here, in Broward County offices in the locations. Your users will benefit from the local familiar environment. Class attendees will only be Broward staff. As I mentioned, they re trained in the implementation. They know the product inside and out. It s flexible. If we find that we have a class of four and you still want to hold the class, that s fine, we hold the class. If we find there s great demand and we have 30 users register for a class and we need more classes or more locations, we do that. We have the flexibility. Again, we re coming back on our best practices, what works, and what I ve done in my career, and how I make sure that we do well. I have never been part of a project that has perceived to spend too much in training and fail. We know what it takes to cost training and change management. Let s talk a little bit about end user training, because we have a specific roadmap for end user training. And, of course, it begins with a needs assessment. Again, in our multicommunicative world, what is the best way that people learn? Perhaps in the classroom with a teacher, perhaps on ipod, perhaps they take webcasts, they like that. Perhaps train the trainer. We don t know which modality is best for Broward County until we do an assessment and find out which works for which people at what time. And then we will design a program using UPK, which is Oracle s User Productivity Kit, which has -- think of it as a learning management Page 124 of 185

system. And it s got curriculum guides. It s got -- the user can go through and see the application, try the application, test themselves on the application. They can do that on their own. They ll do it in training. Multi-faceted, multi-layered. That s our training approach, beginning with the needs assessment. You see on Step 3 there, the design and development piece; where we actually look at the curriculum, develop the course outlines. And I can stand before you today and tell you that the training regimen will be designed by me. No one will be in a classroom, training, unless they ve met my standard. We all have been in training situations where perhaps someone s talking too much. Someone s not paying attention. They re bogging down the class, or we ve had ineffective teachers in our past. That s not going to be the case. Part of what I do is I m an Adjunct Professor at Penn State University, so I m very particular about instruction. Delivery, training delivery. We ll train our trainers and, of course, train anyone who s going out, whether it s podcast, webcast, social media. They ll have complete training, because when we go live, before we go live, we ll do another readiness assessment. And if Nate says, Ed, we re ready to go, we re ready to flip the switch, to coin a phrase, but we find out that the organization is not ready from a change perspective, we re not going live. It is not in your interest and it is not in our interest to go live prematurely just because the technology s ready. Our people have to be ready. And that also ties back to communication. But after we do go live, we celebrate that success. And then we continue with ongoing change management and communication. Something unique, again, that Ciber s bringing. We re bringing a training portal. No one else is proposing a specific training portal for users of Broward County that will be loaded with content, class information, and individuals will be able to go in and register for the classes they need at the time they need them, not before, not after. They can get their training whenever they need it. So this is what a mockup might look like for your training portal, the front facing page. The next slide, as you see, that is -- shows the courses, as an example, for human resources. And all of the modules for all of the courses will be in here, and we can tailor it in such a way that if you re in finance, maybe you re not taking something in supply chain, or maybe that is necessary. My doctoral degree is in education and being a CFO in finance, so I know what is going to work, how much it s going to cost, the hours it s going to take to develop this and deliver this successfully for your staff. And that s most important. Page 125 of 185

And, finally, everyone will have a personalized training schedule. You can track, follow all your courses, what you re registered for, when you re going to class. Yes, this integrates with Microsoft Office. Yes, it integrates right out to your mobile devices so you know when you -- when you have class. You can set your alerts, make sure you re in class on time. If you re not, we send reminders and so on. It s totally interactive. Because the bottom line of this is we want an experience that not only helps change the organization, but has members of this administrative board, as well as the users across the County, accept, embrace, and, at the end of the day, they say I can do this. Because that s where I want to get them. I can do it. And wherever we do have pockets of resistance, we have a resistance management plan. We will find those that resist -- (Laughter.) DR. KELLER: -- and we will surround them with love. (Laughter.) DR. KELLER: At this time, I d like to turn it back to Vic, who will close. MR. BENTLEY: Thank you, Ed. Vic Bentley. Can you tell we re excited? Can you tell we re ready to do this? We ve been thinking about this a long time. We re ready. We believe we are the most ready. We believe that we have the -- really, the best solution for Broward County -- we put a tremendous amount of thought in this -- based on experience that -- that we believe is unique amongst all the vendors. And if I could just run for you -- through a couple of important points here that they re on the poster board, they re up on the screen. We put the most emphasis on training and change management. As Ed said, he s never seen a project fail for spending too much on training and change management. Doesn t happen. It s necessary. We re the only team that s really following your requested and best practices 50/50 staffing model. We are the lowest cost solution today, based on the normalization. Either way you slice it, we have the lowest equivalent hourly rate of any of the vendors, as well. We re a billion dollar company. We can bring the most resources. You heard some -- some testimony earlier that perhaps that s a problem for some vendors. Not a problem for us. We Page 126 of 185

have our own internal recruiting organization. We re a large organization. We re not huge, but we re plenty large enough to be able to manage this type of a project and make sure we get the right resources in the right quantities for you, for Broward County. We have the most experience in large county government. We have the only experience here today in truly equivalent, comparable county governments such as Broward. Our past success with those 20 -- comparing you to those 20 counties, the past success with PeopleSoft is evident. Our ability to estimate and provide to you what we believe is a fail-safe proposal, this is something you can count on. You can take it to the bank. It s not something you re going to have to go back to the well again and ask for more money. That s the way we planned it. That s the way we ve priced it, and we feel very confident in that. PeopleSoft is built for governments like you. You can tell, you re surrounded by them. The other large diverse counties, some names you just see absent from that top 20 list, those that aren t PeopleSoft. There s a few SAPs you ll see there. They re all pretty much heading towards PeopleSoft. It s the right solution for Broward County. We have a PMP Certified Project Manager with very good recent experience. We re keeping him busy, but he s not assigned to a project right now. He s overseeing and helping lots of different projects. If you said, let s start Monday, we d say, okay, Nate s ready to go. Let s start Monday. He s ready. He s ready to come here for Broward County. We do believe we re bringing the lowest risk solution. We have no third party applications. We have the most robust training for Broward staff and we believe the most successful proposal for you today. With that, that concludes our presentation. We thank you for your time and, again, for your effort on this procurement. We ll open it up to questions. MR. GEORGE: They have two minutes left. MR. BENTLEY: I can talk for another minute 30 if -- (Laughter) MR. CAMPBELL: Chris, would you like to start? Page 127 of 185

MR. WALTON: Sure. Could someone from Ciber clarify the experience that you -- the specific experience that you have in transit, ports, and airports, and even more specifically, as it relates to the federal grants process? MR. BENTLEY: You want to do that? Get Tony up there, too. MS. MESSERSMITH: Why don t you stand up so we can (inaudible) the questions. MR. BENTLEY: Okay. I think we ve got two -- two levels of attack there, so we ve got Nate with some experience, and I think Tony with some experience there as well. MR. HOLLEY: Okay. Tony? MR. BRUNSON: Well, let me start, you know, with the beginning, as to the beginning to answer that. As I mentioned, you know, I ve spent the entire career working in governments, and we certainly have had experience at airports, ports, transit facilities, as well. If you were to go back to the chart, you can see that. I mean, we re going to be involved in those needs assessments, the process controls to help identify, you know, how that gets changed into the IT world, so to speak. But, specifically, I mean, we re -- Miami-Dade port, I ve worked here at Broward port -- port, Miami-Dade airports, Palm Beach airports, Jacksonville transit. Clients now South Florida Regional Transit Authority. So -- MR. WALTON: Okay. But as -- you re the sub; correct? MR. BRUNSON: Yes, sir. MR. WALTON: I want to know what specific experience Ciber has in those areas. MR. HOLLEY: Okay. So I implemented King County. They ve got the ports. They didn t have the airports. As far as dealing with the federal grants, the solution we had was a project-centric solution for labor distribution where we were able to collect all the expenditures using the particular grants, as well as bill it out. So using the different, say, flavors or colors of money, we had a solution of for that. As well as the -- I ve also implemented the City of Atlanta, which also had the airport, as well as City of Chicago. So those grant solutions are in particular to -- and pretty much the same flavor because of the Page 128 of 185

different flavors of money that would fund the grant. So we do have those -- those solutions, and we have the resources that we can come and talk about those solutions. We didn t bring those resources here with us, but we do have those solutions. MR. HAISLEY: Yeah, let me just add to that, Nate. I think I -- I d like to give you three pristine examples that are transportation related. We implemented the Indiana Department of Transportation. We implemented the Wyoming Department of Transportation, and we implemented the Oklahoma Department of Transportation, and all three of those were PeopleSoft implementations, and we were the prime. MR. WALTON: And those sound like they would be State DOTs who manage highways, bridges, and roads. MR. HAISLEY: Correct. MR. WALTON: But I m looking for more experience specifically related to public transit, ports, and airports. MR. HAISLEY: Well, I m not equipped to answer that question today, unfortunately. MR. HOLLEY: So I ve been doing this for a long time. So the other places I ve implemented was actually Cleveland RTA, and actually one of your DOT employees actually recognized me when we did our demos, because I came there to implement that. Chicago Metro, CTA, I was the PM for those implementations as well. So, again, using those examples, there s different flavors of money because of the particular grants and the projects that we have solutions for. I have to bring one of my projects and grants resources here to actually talk about those solutions. I don t have those solutions with me, but we do have those resources. MR. WALTON: Okay. MR. BENTLEY: Can I add -- MR. WALTON: Sure. MR. BENTLEY: -- just one more opinion, one more comment here? More than just an opinion. Where this becomes important is when we re taking a look at your existing business processes, the way you re doing things now, and how the tool is going to change that, because it will change that. Page 129 of 185

So this happens early on in the project. This happens during a fit/gap process discovery, if you will. And that s why when we talk about subject matter experts that have experience from our subcontractor, Sharpton and Brunson, these are folks that are very familiar with -- with the processes, not, perhaps, in -- exactly in a seaport, but certainly in ports, in transit, and other areas where they have experience. That s at the front end of the project, and that s where those subject matter experts can come in and help understand and bridge that gap between the processes as you do them today, and the processes as they will be with the new tool. Is that getting closer to answering your question? MR. WALTON: That -- that -- that s fine. MR. BENTLEY: Okay. MR. WALTON: Ongoing support. As I understand it, after three months, you guys have gone and then you turn us over to Oracle? MR. BENTLEY: Not exactly, no. We re never gone, at least as far as our presence in providing support. So you had requested a five year term -- MR. WALTON: Uh-huh. MR. BENTLEY: -- for support, and our project ends 42 plus three months, I think, of onsite post-production support, which is pretty traditional for an ERP implementation. So it s that delta between there and five years. That also applies to the earlier phases of the project. As they go live, they re a longer term than that. So the only period of time where you re not going to have consultants on the ground here from Ciber would be after that last phase is done. And at that point, you have a combination of Oracle support and Ciber support, but pulled together in one help desk, if you will, right, one single point of contact. Oracle, as part of their hosting services, provide all the database support, all the things that you saw up there, that you saw Gary talk about in that big red stack. They provide all of those things. And then on the functional side, because we were the consulting firm that did all your functional things, we re going to support that. That s included in there. That s all your break fix, that s all of those -- those things which were included. Page 130 of 185

Is that getting to where you re -- MR. WALTON: That s fine. Okay. And the project team will reside here in Broward full time? MR. BENTLEY: Oh, yes. MR. HOLLEY: Yes. MR. BENTLEY: Yes. MR. WALTON: Okay. MR. HOLLEY: Yeah, I want to bring my wife down here, that s why. (Laughter.) MR. CAMPBELL: Jim, any questions? MR. CARBONE: Yes. Jim Carbone with ETS. On page 10, there is a list of large counties that Ciber has primed. My question is are all of those implementations complete, and were you the sole implementer in charge of those projects? MR. HAISLEY: There is two of those projects that aren t 100 percent complete. Sonoma County out in California, we started that project this -- this current year, in January. And we re through fit/gap right now, so that one s in process. And then the other one that s not completely done is Montgomery County, Maryland, and the only piece that s not done there is the Hyperion budgeting piece, and that s due to a software issue, so. MR. CARBONE: Thank you. I have one more question for Dr. Keller -- MS. BURNELL: Say your name. MR. HAISLEY: Sorry, that was Jeff Haisley. MS. BURNELL: Thank you. MR. CARBONE: Okay. Jim Carbone with ETS. I have a question for Dr. Keller. You mentioned that you had worked with a government entity in Broward County before. Would you share with us who that was? Page 131 of 185

DR. KELLER: Broward County Public Schools, the SAP implementation. MR. CARBONE: Thank you. DR. KELLER: Thank you. Ed Keller. MR. CAMPBELL: Cynthia? MS. BURNELL: I m not trying to be difficult. I know who you are, but the recording can t see your face. DR. KELLER: I understand. MS. CHAMBERS: On the School Board implementation, did they not have two implementations of ERP, the School Board? DR. KELLER: It was one SAP implementation. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. And -- DR. KELLER: Ed Keller again. MS. CHAMBERS: -- were you part of the first or second or how did that -- DR. KELLER: I was part of the first. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. DR. KELLER: The one -- that was the second -- the one that began in 2005 -- MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. DR. KELLER: -- so it would be the second one. MS. CHAMBERS: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: Kent? MR. GEORGE: Just to reemphasize, and the only question I have, it s sort of a statement. The comment was made that you would negotiate -- negotiate the exceptions, and that I understood that you would very clearly do that. And I know it s on the record before. I just want to reiterate that that was there. Okay? MR. DOUGLAS: Yes. Bruce Douglas. And we will definitely work to negotiate the exceptions Page 132 of 185

to the -- to the terms and conditions. MR. GEORGE: That s all. MR. CAMPBELL: You probably can guess what my first question s going to be. You know, in 2012 and 2013, both those years, you had shown losses. Can you kind of explain that to us? MR. DOUGLAS: Sure. Absolutely. Currently, for the last two years, we have taken restructuring in the company. We re a publicly traded company, so you can go through and read our 10K, describes pretty much what we re doing. Much as where we consult with other companies to help them to improve their performance, we re doing that internally in Ciber. And so we took two restructurings. And if you back out the restructuring, you ll see a profit. MR. CAMPBELL: There s one other question that I had, and I just -- I couldn t reconcile this in my mind. You had data cleansing in Phase 3. I -- yeah, you know, I just couldn t -- why s data cleanse -- I would think that would be one of the first things that you would do. MR. DOUGLAS: I m not the data cleansing guy. MR. CAMPBELL: Yeah, I understand that. (Laughter.) MR. HAISLEY: Now, are you -- are you referring to -- MR. CAMPBELL: Project schedule. MR. HAISLEY: Jeff Haisley, Ciber. So were -- were you -- was it -- MR. CAMPBELL: Your project schedule, Phase 3, data cleansing. MR. HAISLEY: Oh, okay. You know, I -- I m not sure why that shows that way or where you re seeing it, but in our methodology, we start to cleanse data right after the first phase, which is discovery. We do data mapping. We work with your folks to identify what we re going to need with respect to data. We develop the data maps, and the data cleansing effort really starts right there, so. MR. BENTLEY: Excuse me. Vic Bentley, Ciber. Is the question related to the phases you saw in our timeline, or our methodology phases? MR. CAMPBELL: It s -- Page 133 of 185

MR. BENTLEY: Because if you re looking at -- MR. CAMPBELL: -- I couldn t be that specific. MR. BENTLEY: It starts -- MR. CAMPBELL: It was in -- MR. BENTLEY: -- it starts in specifically. MR. CAMPBELL: -- it was called out specifically in one of your implementations where you were showing the phases that you had gone through and data -- data cleansing was in Phase 3. Another one was it didn t seem -- and I think this came from Plante Moran s report, that the -- that whether there was a warranty on any customizations seemed to be in question. Can you tell us whether or not -- I m not saying we are or not going to do any customizations, but if we were to, are those warranted? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. DOUGLAS: No, yeah, we will do customizations for you, and we will warrant our -- MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MR. DOUGLAS: -- solution, which would include customizations. And that was part of our negotiation and part of the terminology that you have in your terms and conditions that we just need to talk through so you understand how we put that all together and warrant the entire solution with the backing of our -- of our partner, Oracle. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MR. DOUGLAS: Bruce Douglas, Ciber. Sorry. MR. CAMPBELL: And that s all the questions that I have. Thank you very much. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: And next up is AST. Do we want to take a small break or keep going? MR. GEORGE: Ten minutes? MR. CAMPBELL: Ten minute break? Page 134 of 185

MS. BURNELL: I need a break. MR. CAMPBELL: All right. MR. GEORGE: She needs a break, too. MR. CAMPBELL: We ll -- we ll recess for 15 minutes. It is now about three minutes to 4:00, and we ll reconvene at quarter after. The meeting s in recess. (THE MEETING RECESSED AT 3:57 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 4:12 P.M.) MR. CAMPBELL: It s 4:12, meeting for the ERP Select Committee is now back in session. AST, you re up. MR. MCGAUGHY: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for this opportunity. My name is Rick McGaughy. I m Regional Director for AST Corporation. And what we re going to do today in this next hour is prove to you what your staff has acknowledged in their evaluation of our proposal and software. We are going to demonstrate the validation of Plante Moran for what we have proposed, and prove to you why the partners and the strategy we have proposed will be the foundation for success for Broward County. So with that, I have with me today -- I m going to do some quick introductions -- our President and CEO, Pravin Kumar; our Senior Executive Vice President, Shaji Zechariah; Tony Catalano, our Senior Vice President of Consulting Services; Janet Dahman, our Vice President of Project Management; Herbert Barnes, our proposed Project Manager; Allen Stines, who s our change management lead, Ph.D.; and Lucy Montana, functional financial lead; and Josephine Abel, technical lead; and J.P. Gabay is our DBA. So for questions later on during the presentation, so we brought that staff with us. So, in moving forward, our presentation is designed pretty much away -- around the letter that we received as far as kind of the approach going through the software implementation of similar sizes. So we pretty much followed your outline, and we ll get more into that in a little bit. So as I was reviewing the RFP prior to, obviously, this presentation, I was reading through and it said, you know, a little over 16 years AST has been working with Oracle E-Business Suite and in the public sector. And then I started to think, well, we just celebrated our 18th anniversary this July, in the same space, so, you know, my hair s a little bit grayer, and I m glad I m not up on that screen like the Page 135 of 185

people were earlier, because I know how ten pounds I ve added since we started this program would look even worse up there. But, anyway, AST Corporation is exclusively focused on Oracle implementations. Eighty percent of our work is in the public sector. We do not use offshore or 1099 contractors for a reason. We feel that the cohesive nature of a corporate structure, and the fact -- and we ll get into this a little bit later -- the proposed team has relevant Florida experience and has worked together on multiple engagements, which leaves the least amount of risk to a project of this size. One hundred percent on time, on budget, track record. And one of the other things that we wanted to emphasize is, obviously, not only do we have municipal government experience at the state level, the local county level, the city level, we also have airports, seaports, and public transportation agencies. Now, I know one of the questions that was asked a little bit earlier, obviously, was your airport and transit authority experience. And I ve got another slide that shows a little bit more of that. Pace Suburban Bus in Chicago, Metro Rail in Chicago, Greater Cleveland Rapid Transit Authority, Los Angeles MTA we re working with right now. As far as airports here in Florida, Jacksonville Aviation, Orlando Aviation, Hillsborough County Aviation, multiple other airport institutions across the United States, Rhode Island, a few others. Seaports, one of the largest ones, obviously, is the Port of L.A. And when we kind of get into that, and there s going to be a little bit more conversation about that, as well. Port of L.A., even their executive management has their own union, so you can imagine the union things we dealt with at the Port of L.A. As far as what we bring to the table, I mean, we ve heard a lot about risk in today s presentations -- excuse me -- and typically, you know, AST doesn t like to sit in other vendors presentations, but today, you know, we did, because of the format. But, you know, it -- it s not really risk that we need to address. It s fear. And it s fear of a product of this size and this magnitude and what that means. That you want someone that s been there, has been in the trenches, understands exactly what you re going to be going through. And we are specialized to provide that assistance. We re specialized in that our company only works with the E-Business Suite for Oracle. We only work with Hyperion Business Intelligence and other Oracle applications specific to an end-to-end Oracle E-Business implementation, as requested in your RLI. Okay? Page 136 of 185

All of our staff is 100 percent Oracle certified, so we are specialized, and specialized in the public sector. As far as recognized, we re recognized across industries. We re recognized by Oracle. In fact, a lot of our work -- for the gentleman from the airports, a lot of our work at Orlando Aviation won us the Titan Award in 2011 for an implementation that we did there. It was their success. They ve been able to now boast what they were able to do in a unique manner to all of the other airport authorities across the United States. We ve also been recognized by Inc. Magazine as one of the fastest growing companies in America. But even though we re a fast growing company, we have maintained a steady growth year after year. Okay? And that is prescribed. I mean, we look at this and say, you know, we re not going to necessarily be the largest company out there, but from a consultant perspective, we have 210 consultants dedicated to Oracle. Okay? That is a differentiator as we go through this. Preferred. We re Oracle s go-to public sector partner. They call us whenever they need assistance in the public sector. We re the first ones, because we ve done a lot of this. We ve been the first implementers for a lot of things unique to Oracle and unique to the public sector. We re active members of several of the boards as far as the user group community, so we assist. We re an active member of the Florida Users group community. Meets a lot of times over at -- in Hillsborough County or the City of Tampa, Lakeland, I mean, different places, but we re active in that in providing support for all of those folks, as well. So one of the questions that you obviously had was our recent experience, recent experience in jurisdictions of similar size and complexity. In Florida, geographically, these are our clients as the prime contractor for work that has been done there. We are currently working in the City of West Palm Beach. We ve been a long time provider to them. We re currently doing an upgrade there. We re continuing to do work at Orlando Aviation Authority. We re continuing to do work at Jacksonville Aviation Authority. Little bit, if I may, on the Hillsborough County project and the City of Tampa, that is the largest collaborative shared service model for ERP in the United States and possibly the world. Two distinct, separate government entities working together in a shared environment. I also serve as the project executive there. I m there three to four days a week. And what we Page 137 of 185

have identified is obviously a need to be able to facilitate communication all the way from the project level through the executive level. So I serve in that capacity there. One of our other clients which you brought up is Pinellas County. And what I would like to do is introduce our CEO. There was some conversation. I think there were some outside factors that may have not been communicated to the team that visited Pinellas County that I would like our CEO, who is actively involved in all of our clients, to come up and just say a few words to clarify maybe some things that were misunderstood. MR. KUMAR: Thank you, Rick. Good afternoon. This is Pravin Kumar, CEO of AST. So Pinellas County has been one of our great references, and to date, we use them on our future RFP and RLI responses. You guys made a site visit. A very relevant and appropriate county in terms of the software you are using and the complexity of the products that you are using. They re using all the financials, procurement, human resources, Hyperion, Business Intelligence, so they are pretty cutting edge in terms of using new, and they were first to use some of the really new products from Oracle. And to this day, they are a very referenceable client. So when I heard about that during site visits there was some talk about staff transition and things not being 100 percent compliant, I wanted to put that in perspective and get the complete story behind it, which is all verifiable. And I did make a call to make sure that their project manager was on board with what I was saying. Their chief information technologist confirmed that that s -- I m not mis-stepping and saying anything that s not in order. We were awarded that project in December of 2009. We started the project as soon the negotiation was completed in about four to five weeks timeframe. January 10, we had boots on the ground. Our team was working there. That will tell you about our negotiation capacity and -- and how well we work with a Florida county. We don t do any closed doors. And after we started working on it, about five months into our project, county had a serious layoff. They laid off about five percent of their staff. It was 211, and it s all in their board meetings and agenda. They laid off 211 people, out of which, 46 were in IT. That had a serious impact on the project team support from the client side, and that s probably some of the staff reductions that you might have been hearing about. From our side, in a 24-month project, we had one single functional person that had to be -- go out of the project because of long term disability. And we supplemented that person right Page 138 of 185

away, and the project was completed on time. The second phase of the project, that was extended by three months, that was completely due to client request, because of their staff layoff in the middle of the project. Their IT organization was completely reorganized during that time, because they laid off 46 people in one department, in IT, which was very critical. So Paul Alexander, their CIO, ended up restructuring the whole IT, and their staff roles were drastically changed. All verifiable, and that s why they requested that the second phase of the project be moved out for three months. We agreed to do that for no charge to the county. We did not charge a single penny for that extension, and it was completed very cordially, and the client is very, very referenceable. You can -- you can check with their Finance Director, Teresa Harris. You can check with Peggy Rose, who s the HR Director, you can check with IT Directors. So very, very referenceable client. Good success story, both for Oracle and us. So they are on Oracle s website with a video clip advertising and saying what a great job we have done, and Oracle, what a good product Oracle is. So I was surprised to hear some of these things. And a lot of times, when you do site visits, there are 20 people talking about things, and that doesn t -- the whole perspective doesn t get through. So I wanted to set the record straight. And I ll be here throughout the presentation to answer more Q and A, anything you d like to hear about that and any other projects. Thank you. MR. MCGAUGHY: Thank you, Pravin. Rick McGaughy again, with AST. Continuing on, just to give you a little bit of a high level of all of our -- not all of our, but a sampling of our clients nationwide, I mean, what we bring to the table is, you know, large city experience. You know, City of Chicago is one of our references. We bring a lot of other city experience. We bring a lot of county experience, airport experience, transit authority experience, and we also get to the state level of experience, as well. So on here, a couple of them, just to kind of point out, Loudoun County, Virginia, is also a collaborative implementation. It is the county and the county schools working together. City of Yonkers, New York is also the city and the city schools. Page 139 of 185

So, you know, one of the things that, as we go through, and I ll -- I ll talk about this in a minute, is the scalability of the Oracle E-Business Suite to be able to define and work within multijurisdictional or, in this case, multi-large departmental organizations, meaning that we understand airports have unique situations that they need to deal with from a general ledger perspective, from a sub-ledger perspective, from a grants and projects perspective. Same thing with the transit authority, same thing with the seaport. We understand all of those, and the Oracle E-Business Suite is the solution that can handle all of those different types of activities under one umbrella. Little bit about our staff. The staff that we have proposed has -- every one of them has over 12 years of experience working with the Oracle E-Business Suite. All of them have multiple, and double -- lot of them double digit projects in the public sector. All of them have Florida municipal government experience. Huge differentiator when it comes to -- when we talk about the level of expertise that AST brings to the table, this is what we bring. Florida experience. With that, you know, one of the things that we d like to talk about is proof, not promises. You know, Oracle E-Business Suite is the flagship product for Oracle Corporation. Okay? In the public sector, if you take out state government, the EBS solution is the most used software for local municipality, county, and city government. It was developed for the federal government. In Florida, large government, your counterparts in other parts here in Florida, that you can leverage, you can ask questions. When we take a look at the software itself, 93.7 percent of the requirements are accommodated out of the box, meaning very minimal, if any, modifications are required. So when you talk about upgrading the software and future releases, if you have a large amount of modifications, it adds multiple levels of complexity and points of failure when you look at the upgrade strategy. The Oracle E-Business Suite, and Oracle can propose -- or has told you about this, called Applications Unlimited, it will always be supported. AST as a company, we are financially solid. We have a strong balance sheet, and we provide what we believe is the most comprehensive solution for your requirements in the RLI. To prove that, or to continue that, I m going to turn it over to Herbert Barnes to talk about the integration approach and our third party vendors, and why we think the addition of the two partners is only going to enhance and reduce the risk for this project. Herbert. Page 140 of 185

MR. BARNES: Thank you. MR. MCGAUGHY: Uh-huh. MR. BARNES: Good afternoon. As Rick said, my name is Herbert Barnes, and one of the things that I want to get into before I talk about the implementation approach and our third parties is just to do one of the things that I promised my team, that I don t like to do, is that I d talk about myself. I m going to give you a little bit of background about who I am and why I would be a -- an asset to this particular project. See, I ve designed my career around projects like this. Computer science degree, Master s in Business Administration, 16 years project management in the Oracle E-Business Suite, practice manager for Oracle, 27 years of industry experience, many, many, many public sector projects where either I was the technical lead or the project manager. So I ve structured my career to make sure that I can bring to you a balanced manager, someone who understands technology, someone who knows the business processes, someone who has the industry experience, whether it s commercial, public sector, or quasigovernment. I ve had all of that experience implementing as either project manager or as a technical manager. And I am PHR certified, so I understand the human aspect of what is behind the technical tools of project management, so. Okay. So let s talk about integration. So, from an integration standpoint, we brought to you an integrated solution which consists of the Oracle E-Business Suite, NEOGOV, which is the recruitment, and PCI, which is the tax. What s unique about this is that we need to keep in mind that the E-Business Suite only represents -- represents 95 percent of our solution. So the other two entities, as important as they are, represent a small aspect of our implementation. However, we have worked with them on previous projects. We ve worked with PCI at Loudoun. We ve worked with them also at the City of West Palm Beach. We ve worked with NEOGOV City of Miami, Pinellas. And I say that because one of the things that we do from an AST standpoint is ensure that, from your standpoint, you have a very transparent and cohesive approach to the project, so you don t have to worry about how does this one do it different from how this other person does it. So what we do is we -- we -- we work with our partners, we bring them in, we have an orientation to make sure that they understand our approach, make sure they re committed, make sure that they understand that we own the project. We are the primes. I am the -- the one neck to choke. So they make sure that they understand that upfront. Page 141 of 185

We use similar -- we use our templates, we make sure that, you know, there -- there s buy-in from their standpoint, that they can use our templates. So that reduces the risk for the County when it comes to reviewing and approving documents. You don t have to search around and -- and -- and find out where this piece is and how it relates to this. You have one common template throughout the project. They re an integrated part of our project plan to make sure that we re looking at it from a holistic view, and not through silos. So one of the other questions that you had asked was about the proposed AST staffing, and the various levels. So this area is something that we spent a lot of time in considering before we proposed it. We ve based it upon our experience with other projects of this same -- of similar size, of similar footprint, and not only just in other states, but in the State of Florida itself. So I m going to ask Janet, who is our VP of Operations, to come up and give you a little bit more details around our staffing levels. MS. DAHMEN: Thank you, Herbert. MS. BURNELL: Say your name. MS. DAHMEN: My name is Janet Dahmen. I ve the VP of Operations. And with that role gives me some interesting insight into the different clients that I have up on the screen here. Basically, I have been part of all of -- putting together all of the responses to the different RFIs. I ve assisted in the negotiation of the statement of work for Hillsborough, I was very actively involved in the Loudoun implementation for the Phase 1 as an executive, and have experience working with the Port of Los Angeles in terms of providing the guidance and the governance from a project management perspective, and working with the Pinellas team in terms of understanding the things that worked well and putting together lessons learned. So I really understand what each of these different solutions were, and I feel very confident in terms of that what we have presented to Broward from a staffing perspective really matches with what has worked in the past. You ll see that each of these different implementations basically are similar in terms of their overall project size. And as I proceed into taking a look at the project snapshot, you ll also see that they re very similar in terms of footprints. They included both a financials implementation, which included procurement, as well as an HRMS implementation with payroll and budgeting, time and material, grants and projects. Each of these -- each of these footprints were very, very similar to what it is that you re looking Page 142 of 185

to -- to put in place. From an overall budgeting perspective, you ll see that Hillsborough is a very large operating budget. The Loudoun County, what you re seeing is their operating budget, but you don t -- the Loudoun Schools also has a very large budget which is encapsulated as part of that as well. Both Hillsborough and -- and Loudoun County were multi-agency implementations. And why that s important is because, as Rick stated earlier, you have very different business processes in terms of, say, how the city is going to work versus the county, in terms of how Loudoun Schools needs to do business versus how Loudoun County needs to do business. And our teams have been able to build a solution that works for all of these agencies. And we understand from a staffing perspective that we re not working with just one agency. And so, in many different situations, our functional leads were working with representatives from each of those different agencies, understanding the uniqueness of them, as well as the similarities. So from a supportability perspective, you want to make sure that what is put in place is sustainable, that you have as many common processes as possible, and you have the unique things that support those specialized business processes that are unique to whether you re a port within Broward or you are -- you re the -- the County or one of the smaller agencies within the County. In terms of each of these, one of the things that s important is that none of these would have been successful without building in the change management aspect of it. Each one of these had their challenges. From the Loudoun County and Loudoun Schools perspective, I can give you some firsthand experience of some of the change management situations that we ran in there. The -- the county basically funds the schools, but the schools feels very constrained by the county. And when it comes time to budgeting, the county basically hands the schools, you know, here s your budget, go off and -- you know, here s a pot of money, go off and do with it what you want. Well, the schools didn t want the county see what they were doing. And with a shared implementation, there was a lot of concern that when the schools were doing their budgeting, that the county would be in there, kind of poking around and seeing what was happening. And so we had to be able to assure them that what we were putting in place from a solution perspective would give them the autonomy that they needed during budgeting, but also had the similar implementation so that when the -- when the county provided them with their money, they knew that they could go an run with it. And once the schools budget was accepted, at that point, they could open it up for the county Page 143 of 185

to actually see what was going on. So you need to have a very -- a very holistic approach in terms of what you were doing, that you respected the autonomy, but you also understood, as an overall implementation, that it was a -- a shared service implementation that needed to be supported by both. From a Hillsborough perspective, you can imagine we -- one of the stories that we saw while we were negotiating the contract with, the -- the county and the city couldn t even agree what to call the Christmas tree in Town Square. So imagine going into contract negotiations with them when you have two entities that want to do a shared implementation but they can t even agree in terms of how -- how they re going to name their Christmas tree in the beginning. During the negotiation, we had to go through each line item that -- that was deliverable and indicate what percentage of that line item was a county deliverable versus a city deliverable. So they -- you know, it was -- it was very challenging from that perspective, but our team figured out how to work through some of that. In terms of a port, I think you heard Rick talk earlier about the port. You have a lot of unions that we had to work with. In -- in fact, some of -- from an acceptance perspective, some of the unions were actually part of the -- the management team. So we understand how to do projects of this size. And why is that important? Because when we re putting together what our solution is, when we re putting together the overall estimate of what it s going to take to do that, we ve got multiple instances of proven track record of knowing what it takes to make it happen, and we can bring those solutions to bear, and we feel comfortable that what we ve put together in the past from an estimate perspective is -- is accurate, because we ve actually be able to deliver on that. So I d like to introduce Allen Stines. He s going to talk a little bit from a change management, give you some additional color commentary on some of the things that he -- that he implemented, because he currently the change management lead at Hillsborough. Allen has a Ph.D. in workforce development and organizational change management. DR. STINES: Hi, good afternoon. My name is Allen Stines, and I am currently the change management lead for the ERP project, the Hillsborough ERP project, and -- which is being done collaboratively with the -- with the City of Tampa. Today, you ve heard a lot of people talk about -- about change management, talk about their frameworks, but at the end of the day, if you actually look at the components of the -- of the change management frameworks, across most large initiatives, the components are fairly the same. You have -- you have to take care of training, you have to make sure that people are prepared. Communications is very critical. But in terms of philosophy, I think our philosophy is -- is -- is different. Instead of starting with a very large team, where you actually have a bunch of consultants coming in and telling people Page 144 of 185

this is what you need to do, the -- the approach is slightly different. And this is something that I started doing about ten years ago, because every single time I would actually go on a project team and the change team would be very large, you would end up with the members of the team actually going out, having these meetings, and trying to convert people and getting everybody to drink the Kool-Aid. And, a lot of times, the person was an outsider, and, in many cases, the person didn t necessarily understand the nuances of the organization. So what I started doing was pretty much start with a very, very small team, and invest a tremendous amount of time coaching people so that these people can become ambassadors, and we -- they can -- they -- they can become agents of the change. They can actually champion it. And I would say that over the past decade, that has worked best. Because what ends up happening is if I go inside an organization or an agency and I start sending out messages for example, I start communicating, I draft emails, in a lot of cases, people actually read them, and they might feel that it -- it doesn t really -- the -- the language is not the language of the organization, the medium by which it s -- the information s conveyed doesn t necessarily work. So the approach that we actually use is, like -- as I mentioned, different. And it s actually working very well with the City of Tampa and -- and Hillsborough County. We actually have a series of change agents, and these people are dispersed across the agencies. In some cases, you might have one person who s pretty much representing, or who s the ambassador for a group of, say, 300 people, because that s adequate. In other cases, we might have one person who s the ambassador to a group of 30 people, because these people have their own little -- it -- it -- they have their own needs. And we decided, when we were actually going to segment and identify the -- the -- the different groups that we had to address, that that s how pretty much we would actually break it. Effective communication is -- is very important -- important, as well. And we actually plan it -- plan it out. But, as I mentioned before, it s not -- the -- the approach, it s -- it s systemic. It s not systematic. We don t come in and say this is how it s going to be done for every single individual. What we actually do, we say this is how it s worked best in the past. And when we actually meet with the change agents and the change champions, we actually allow them flexibility so that they can tweak it, even though we actually provide a baseline and provide the core, so that they can tweak it into something that will actually work for -- for their group. Page 145 of 185

And that s how we manage our stakeholder communities. And in terms of the -- the methodology that -- that we use, as I mentioned before, it s -- all the main components have been already discussed throughout the day. We make sure that people are prepared for the change. We work with the project sponsors, we -- we work with -- with the executives. Recently, I started having a special meeting with -- with the HR executives within the county because -- within the county because we also have the clerk s office that -- that s involved in this, because there were areas where there were issues around alignment, and this particular group actually -- this -- this particular meeting actually helped us address a bunch of issues. Not everybody was involved. We actually have meetings where everybody s involved. But it was more about working it out and making sure that we actually get alignment. Because at the end of the day, we re trying to have common processes, and so not everybody s going to be happy. But if someone feels that it s very important that certain things are done their way, it helps to be able to explain why. And throughout the process, we always make sure that we collect feedback at every critical stage. We actually do lessons learned so that we understand what worked and where certain things need to be tweaked, as well. Thank you. MS. DAHMEN: Thanks, Allen. I d like to talk a little bit about the support services that we have proposed for staffing after go live. I know there were a lot of questions to different -- different vendors today about what happens after the three months after the implementation. And so one of the things I wanted to make sure that you understood is -- is that we recognize that this is incredibly important that you have looked at this at the beginning at -- at the beginning of the project. Oftentimes, our clients aren t thinking about what happens after go live until after go live. And to begin with the end in mind is really important, because you can plan and you can get yourself situated for that from a mindset perspective and from a funding perspective. Overall, the support services that we have include insure that you have a single point of contact that includes both supporting not just the Oracle solution but any of the third party applications that are being implemented. So we ll have a project manager that s on staff for the entire duration of the implementation. So Herbert will be here for five years, and I know he s really excited about that. Page 146 of 185

We ll be providing you with the application level support for every single component, whether it s the financials and you re going live with the -- with HRMS and that implementation is midstream and you need support on what happened during Phase 1, which was financials, we ll continue to have the people on site to be able to support that,. We ll ensure that some of those key processes, like your month end close, your quarter and year end close, those are supported. During your first payroll, whether it s the first one, the second or the fifty-second one that you're running, there ll be people here to support you during that, as well as from a budgeting perspective. When budgeting happens, in some cases it happens quarterly, sometimes yearly, and we ll make sure that we have the people that are on site to support that, as well. The support includes not just the business support, as -- but it also includes both technology and well as infrastructure support. The other thing that s really important to recognize is that there ll be continued knowledge transfer, so you will have the -- the people on site to continue to help you understand what s been put in place, understand the technology, understand the business processes. And we realize that -- that, overall, that it s not unusual for there to be turnover. And I think that you heard several stories throughout the day where people that were part of the implementation on the client side, they either left shortly after go live, or in the middle of a go live. We ll ensure that from a continuity perspective that we continue to have, from a training, everything that you need in place to be able to continue that knowledge transfer, not just from your key individual, but you have backups as well. So taking a look at the staffing, what does the five year plan look like? You see here that we looked at it from a monthly perspective over the five years. And, on average, the -- after go live, the project manager associated with providing support will be dedicated approximately 120 hours during the month. You see from financials, as well as procurement, you have well over one FTE that will be supporting you on a monthly basis. On the HR and payroll side, there s -- there is significant amount of support that s there. In terms of budgeting, and projects and grants, business intelligence, they ll continue to have support. You ll have a full time dedicated technical lead, as well as technical developers. Page 147 of 185

Now, we are proposing a cloud service implementation, but that doesn t mean that you -- that you will not have representation on our side from a -- a DBA and sys admin perspective as well. There ll continue to be a relationship in place between AST and Oracle Cloud Services during post-production support. It s important to recognize the fact that we were one of the only vendors that provided the level of support for the five year time period. I d like to turn it back over to Herbert. MR. BARNES: Herbert Barnes, AST. So, assumptions. So, for me, assumptions are like surprises. So one of the things that I tell my team all the time is I can deal with anything except surprises. So I m going to provide you guys with detail around what we re assuming from a County standpoint with regard to the staffing, the percentage of utilization of those staff members throughout the project, and some of the key activities that those individuals are expected, from an AST standpoint, to bring to the project. So the executive steering committee, we re looking at ten percent. So primarily what I m looking for from the executive steering committee is to -- to -- to be that -- that champion, that leader of the -- the implementation, making sure that the vision, everyone within the County should be able to articulate or -- or related to what is the vision of this project, what are we trying to accomplish. All of the team members should be able to be aware of that, and the expectation is that that comes from the executive steering committee. They would participate in various meetings and, most importantly, also assist with any decisions that need to be made that have been escalated to that particular level. Project management staff, what I m looking for from here from the project management staff is that myself and that project manager would be joined at the hip. The right hand would know what the left hand is doing. It would be narcissistic of me to think that I can walk in here and tell you everything about your business. Although I have years of experience, you guys are the experts. So I m looking for that -- that collaboration with the project manager. We will work together to develop the project plan. We will work together to make sure that we re allocating resources, on both sides, effectively. We will look and review schedules on a regular basis. We ll make sure that we re accurately keeping the steering committee abreast of -- of the status of the project, making sure we re escalating in a timely fashion anything that the project manager and myself cannot resolve at our particular level. Page 148 of 185

So we talked about the change management and -- and the roles with regard to that, but we re looking at a hundred percent utilization from the County from a change management perspective. And as both Allen and Janet spoke to, those are the change agents. Those are the people that your -- your employees, your resources, respect. They re going to be that -- that catalyst to make sure that the message gets out correctly, making sure that they re championing this project, and making sure that, at the end of the day, the project is utilized to its fullest and the product is utilized to its fullest. Functional director, 50 percent of their time dedicated to the project. They will spend some of their time reviewing documents that the team has put together, making sure that it meets the expectation of the organization, working effectively with -- and with the management, making sure that they re assisting with scheduling and bringing in the proper resources at the proper time. The track leads, these are your leaders that going to be championing for the finance, for HR, for procurement, you know, they ll be working with us, making sure that, as we go through the requirements analysis they would be heavily involved in that aspect, making sure that we are traceable to the requirements that you have identified in the -- the proposal. We also would make sure that they are a part of the decision making process, making sure that they re keeping the subject matter experts involved in the project, making sure that they re that change agent that needs to be bringing the message to the rest of the team. They ll be working with our -- our functional consultants. They would be basically joined at the hip with our functional consultants. Why is that so important? Because at the end of the day, one of our goals is to make sure that we leave you guys self-sustainable. We want to make sure that the knowledge transfer occurs. We want to make sure that we are -- we are preparing you to take over the system post go live. So the subject matter experts, again, these are more of your focus groups. They re the groups that we re going to bring in when there are specific areas that needs to be addressed that relates to their specific area. So, for example, it may be water works or something, public utilities, may have to bring some people in at specific points within the project to make sure that their needs are being addressed. So the -- the track leads, basically, probably could cover 80 percent of what everyone needs, but we want to make sure that other 20 percent does not get forgotten, and make sure that, from a testing standpoint, that they re brought in at appropriate times, and making sure that the requirements of their different agencies or departments are met. Page 149 of 185

Technical lead, again, at the end of the day, we want to make sure that you re self-sustaining -- sustainable. There are going to be technical things that come up post go live that you want to make sure that you re able to address. Someone may have a new requirement for something, and you don t always want to have to call back a consulting firm. So our goal, again, as your trusted advisors, is to make sure that we leave you selfsustainable, making sure that you re able to maintain and operate the system post go live. Application administrator, this is a combination of your database administrator -- administrator, your roles as far as making sure that people are able to access the system from a networking standpoint. This would be that particular person that we re assuming would -- would assist with those activities. Technical developers and technical staff, again, we want to make sure that, from a development standpoint, that we re bringing them along, that their -- their skill sets, as good as they are now, are being retooled in many areas to make sure that they re able to contribute and support the organization post go live. Staffing levels, so we talked about the 50/50 staffing, and that was -- like many of the other organizations, that was our goal. But one of the variations that we wanted to make sure we address was that we included in hours some things, for example, the first year, this 37K versus the -- the 51K for the County. We also looked at it from a standpoint of we have additional hours that are related to just supporting the project. From our executive team, I have a whole network out there that I can call on as -- as part of this. And we also include, from our standpoint, you know, their hours in those numbers. The whole knowledge transfer of the County, so the numbers that we re also providing is insuring, again, the self-sustainability. And I know I m saying it a lot, but it s important. One of the things that we always want to make sure is that the people for the County are able to utilize and maintain the system post go live. So some of those hours consist of that, it consist of the support of -- of this training staff. Okay. So we re going to talk about it more from a technical standpoint of some of the assumptions as it relate directly to the technical team. So one of the things that we look for from the County s standpoint and their technical resources when we start talking about conversions and we talk about the data cleansing, our approach is to make sure that data cleansing occurs as early as possible. And that technical team and -- along with their business counterparts, are the ones who have the knowledge about the legacy Page 150 of 185

applications, they have the knowledge about the data, they have the knowledge about the data structure. So they will be involved in -- very heavily, early in that process. Data extraction, making sure that from an interface standpoint, you may still have and probably will have legacy systems that will still be standing after this particular implementation. Someone has to be able to make sure that those systems are still supported and provided with the data that they need. So your technical staff, that s an assumption that we would make that they would be the owners of that relationship between the legacy system. We, as your trusted advisors in all areas, are here to lead, we re here to advise, and we are here to assist. But these are some of the specific areas within your technical team that we assume that they would be providing. Development service staff, as you can see from the numbers, these are some of the staff roles that we ve identified during the project. As you can see, system administrator, we re expecting one; post go live, likewise. Technical staff role, one, and then one post go live. Now, your report developers, two. Again, it s important that -- this is one of the most important roles within the project, because, again, after we go live, reports are one of the areas where individuals, after they become with the -- familiar with the system, will say, you know, what, it d be nice to have this. And so that is an area we want to make sure that is properly staffed. Your data conversion developers, again, this process of having the three individuals is to make sure that not only do they cleanse the data, but they re able to extract the data, they re able to transform the data into what Oracle expects, they re able to provide that information, and also assist with the verification of that data, because the data that goes into the Oracle EBS system is only as good as the converted data. So that s another important role. All right. With that, I will turn it over to Rick. MR. MCGAUGHY: Hi, Rick McGaughy with AST again. What we d like to do is give our partner, Oracle Managed Cloud Services a few minutes. I know you already heard from Gary Simler a little bit ago, but what we ve asked -- one of the things that Gary can t tell you that -- that I m going to tell you, and all he can do is confirm, is that they are our partner at Hillsborough County and the City of -- excuse me -- the City of Tampa, and Oracle Managed Cloud Services hosts more Oracle EBS applications for clients than PeopleSoft. With that, they have a lot of experience, and he s going to talk all the way down to insight into Page 151 of 185

the data and application layer. So, with that, I m going to turn it over to Gary, and you ve got this -- this space. There you go. MR. SIMLER: Okay. Hello again. I m still Gary Simler, still with Oracle, and unless something terrible happened, I m still a Senior Vice President. (Laughter.) UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I (inaudible). MR. SIMLER: And this is the most déjà vu experience I ve ever had. All right. I m still -- still have one slide, because I -- I m still on the same theme, but I just want to go a little bit deeper this time, and I have a few more minutes. What I mentioned last time is that, you know, what we feel is that it s all about risk containment, and, you know, there s just sort of a blatant fact. If you have an Oracle application and you allow Oracle to run it, it s Oracle running on Oracle by Oracle. And I mentioned that, you know, our goal is not simply to run it. That s not success to us. Success is that we put you in this high performance environment, and we keep you there. And we keep you there through patching and we keep you there through technology. And we -- we put you in this environment through what s called the certified configuration, which is what you see on the screen. And this configuration of storage and servers and virtual machines and so on, is a -- is a stack of technology that s designed and implemented specifically to do work in the cloud. It s what Oracle uses to run Oracle s work, you know, in the same manner. Now, the last time, I said the key point of risk reduction was just that we own and operate and have all of the resources necessary to fix anything that ever happens to this stack. And that s still true, but it s not just a matter of fixing things. It s a matter of improving things. And so if we simply stayed the same over a five to ten year period, and continued to provide service at a given service level, that s one way of approaching this. But one of the points you see on here is continued innovation. And that is more than a tagline. And to give you an example of recent innovation, even as something as mundane as run and maintain, we just spend $20,000,000 on some investment that we passed on to our clients, and the -- these investments were passed on at no additional fee, and everything we provided was included in their existing fee. One part of the innovation was pretty simple. It was a technology refresh, so we updated the servers, we updated the storage, we updated the switches, we updated everything. Actually, Page 152 of 185

we updated the entire architecture within our data centers, and didn t charge anybody anything for doing that. But out of that innovation came some other really nice things. One of the things we haven t talked about is part of the way we reduce risk is simply by monitoring that system. And there are several ways to monitor the system. And -- and we have literally hundreds of customers, millions of attachments to our system, and we do millions of database transactions per hour. So this is a very, very large operation. So you can imagine how would we successfully monitor something like that? So through these innovations, through the 20 patents that are suggest -- or mentioned on the screen, and through technology, we have what s called preventative monitoring. So there s two ways to approach problems. One is to detect a problem and fix it, quickly, and the other way is to prevent it. And through preventative incident monitoring, to be technically correct, through our intellectual property, through 13 years of collecting incidents that have happened, you know, from all of our users, our monitoring system is able to put together situations that are occurring within your system, real time, seven by 24, and say, you know what, if just the processer was this utilized -- this percentage utilized, it s no problem. If memory was this utilized, it s no problem. But as we look at the whole picture here, something could occur. We ve seen it before. So an automatic service request is issued to an analyst that says look at this and do something about it. That s just an example of our approach to things. It isn t just a matter of fixing things quickly. It s a matter of using Oracle technology to prevent problems, in addition to -- to fixing them. Another recent innovation that I ll talk about very quickly is something called Pulse. And that means that, you know, we re running and maintaining your applications, but you need total transparency into what we re doing. One way of giving you transparency is to simply look at what s happening in the system from an IT perspective. And that has a certain amount of use. So you can see how much the process -- you know, processors utilize and how much storage we re using, how you re comparing to your entitlements. You know, there s all sorts of IT information that IT people care about. But the most recent release of this product, called Pulse, you can take that same ipad and download an application for free, and it will show you not only how your system is performing, but it will show you from a business transaction level how are certain business processes coming along. So your procurement process, you can look on your ipad, and you can see, from beginning to end, how s our process running to -- right this minute. How many users are logged on, you Page 153 of 185

know, at a point; what s their response time; how many invoices have we issued, et cetera, et cetera. So innovation is sort of at the cornerstone of what we do. And I -- I -- you know, I m -- I m claiming that Oracle runs Oracle best, which I think on its face, you know, might be obvious. But I also want to let you know that this is more than just something that s mechanical. And the last thing I ll say is when we talk about resources, everybody s talked about resources, if I give you the number of resources tied up in this operation, it s almost meaningless, because we have 14,000 people behind the curtain that help run this operation. I gave you the number of transactions we do. You know, we have 700-plus customers. There s five and a half million attachments that we re doing. We also, though, do work for financial institutions, banks, savings and loans and so on, and the federal government and the Department of Defense. So we understand security. So I m not trying to relate their applications to your application, but, clearly, security is part of the -- managing your risk. And we meet every certification that we have to meet, including HIPAA and PCI and SSAE 16 and the -- all the latest ISO certifications, and everybody that touches our system is ISO certified. So we understand how security works. And I won t go into technically, you know, the -- the tools that we re using, or even, you know, any kind of a war story on this thing, because security is secure, and we don t talk a lot about it. But I want to assure you that you would be in the most secure environment that Oracle knows how to provide. All right? Thank you very much. MR. MCGAUGHY: Thank you, Gary. Rich McGaughy with AST again. So, wrapping up, I mean, it s been a long journey. And, actually, in my position with AST, I probably have the -- probably the best job in -- in the world. I get to start a project like this with you from the very beginning, from the time the RLI comes out all the way through the demonstrations, the presentations, understanding your pain points, and then I get to work on the project with you. I get to support Herbert like I am in Hillsborough County right now and the City of Tampa. I get to support Allen in change management, because, let s face it, change management is an important component. So what I get to do is if Allen identifies, let s say Bobby or Suzie in a department that is a little Page 154 of 185

bit negative, then he can come to me, and I can to talk with either that person or that person s manager, say we need a little bit of help here. It s a great opportunity. And, a lot of times, by giving someone a little bit special attention, not ratting on them at all, just giving them some special attention, they become our biggest advocate and the biggest change agent for that department. It s amazing how that works. But Allen and I worked that same process at Hillsborough County and the City of Tampa, and it s working perfectly. So, with the little bit of time that I have left, couple of things to recap. What we presented, what we presented back in April, what we re presenting again today is that AST, with Oracle EBS, is the number one public sector ERP in the nation. Okay? It s best in class. It s scalable. It has the ability to be configured for multi-agency, multi-departmental organizations. And if, by chance, I heard at one of the Board meetings that a city or two locally had inquired about joining this implementation, it was on the TV that I watched, the -- the product, the software, EBS, can accommodate that. You could add a sister city here within the County into this application. Okay? You ve got a strong local presence. Multiple organizations, governments, airports, transit authorities throughout the United States and locally in Florida are your resources to go to for business specific things that maybe we can t address because they re specific to an organization. And we ve helped facilitate that with the user groups and everything like that. We ve provided a solution where it s Oracle software on Oracle hardware, and it s managed by Oracle. How much more secure can you get than that? So if they don t know what their product does, how can anybody else? And one of the things that Gary really didn t emphasize that I wanted to emphasize is that you can have a data center that is completely bulletproof. Okay? The servers are up and running a hundred percent of the time, 24 hours a day. But if your application is not running and you cannot get the information that you need, what s the point? And Oracle s data center goes all the way down and looks and reviews at the application level. Very important. And, in fact, I can give a quick story of Hillsborough County. There was a situation where Oracle had seen this before, it s a training issue, where people were not logging out of the system, so their instances on demand were staying open. Okay? Eventually, that fills up the buffer zone, fills up the queue, and, you know, degrades the level or service. Page 155 of 185

Well, Oracle already knew this was going to happen, put in place a procure that, after a certain amount of time, logged individuals out, especially after hours, so that we did not have any issues through that. So that s experience and understanding the application and the user community. Very important. We are the go-to partner for Oracle in the public sector. Our team is experienced in Florida with government. We re specialized in government. We re committed to a successful implementation, because we can say this is a success all we want. It s you folks up here that need to go out and tell the rest of the community, like you ve heard from our references, that your project was successful. We boast a hundred percent on time, on budget track record. Okay? We know situations come up. Pravin talked a little bit about Hillsborough -- or Pinellas County, where they went through a staff reduction. We were delayed in the project, but it was by their choice. We did not charge them a penny for that delay. Our company is flexible, and we are here to make sure you are successful, you are happy, and we re going to go that extra mile. We re going to do whatever it takes to make sure, before we re out of here in five years, you are extremely happy and you re an advocate for Oracle and AST. So, with that, we can go to questions. You know, we think that our staff has shown that we re innovative, we have leadership, and we have the partnership in working with our partners that have been proposed for this project to provide the least amount of risk, with out of the box functionality, minimizing modifications that are a huge risk to any project and subsequent future upgrades and things of that nature. So, with that, I m actually two minutes early. Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. Jim, I d like to start with you. Questions? MR. CARBONE: The list of project snapshots on page 20 of your presentation, can you tell me, are the months that are shown there the months from when the contract was signed until go live, or what those represent? That s the first part of my question. Page 156 of 185

MR. ZECHARIAH: Shaji Zechariah. I m the -- if selected, I will be the Project Director from AST. Yeah, that s the duration of the project. That s when the project started and that s when the last part of the project went live and the support is completed. MR. CARBONE: Okay. And are all of the projects listed here complete now or what -- if not, which -- what stage is the incomplete project in? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible) the next slide. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. ZECHARIAH: So the next slide actually shows that. Hillsborough County, the first phase, which is the financials, procurement, HRMS payroll and projects are live. We are on track to complete the HCM in the next few months. MR. CARBONE: Okay. MR. ZECHARIAH: Loudoun, it s the same situation. We have completed the first phase, which is the heavy lifting, the financials, the projects grants, which impacts everybody else. And then HCM is on -- on track. It s getting started. It s a 36-month implementation. MR. CARBONE: Thank you. MR. ZECHARIAH: It s been complete, and they ve been live for two years now, two-plus years. It s close -- actually, it ll be three years in October. Port of Los Angeles, they are live with all modules. That -- that completed a few -- couple of months back. MR. KUMAR: If I may add something real quick here, the -- the point of these slides was to really impress upon you the relative timelines and the effort required for those projects as proposed, and as we are implementing them, and that s in its entirety so that you can compare how -- what s the size and timeline of your projects. We understand there were some concerns about the 33 month timeline, and -- and we re going to work that out with you to find a common ground. But this will give you a good picture of how complex those projects were, and what the timelines were proposed and the number of hours. MR. CAMPBELL: Cynthia? MS. CHAMBERS: (Inaudible.) Page 157 of 185

MR. CAMPBELL: Kent? MR. GEORGE: Yeah. Yes, I ve got a couple. My standard one, you had a grand total of two exceptions. Are those exceptions set in stone, or are you willing to negotiate those if you should be chosen -- chosen as the first selectee? MR. KUMAR: Again, this is Pravin Kumar, for the record. And we understand the Florida government. This is not the first time we are seeing a contract like this. In fact, to -- to correct how long we have been engaged with Broward County, we looked at your first RLI when you came out with it the first time. And we looked at those terms and conditions, and we think you were not primed for that. So, in fact, we have been engaged with the County for four years. So -- and Rick has been engaged with that. We came out with Oracle reps and -- and Kevin Mitchell, and we decided to not bid an EBS solution the first time you came out with it. So if a vendor has seen it, the RFP, they have worked with Florida government, they should know these terms and conditions, and we understand and know those. So that s the reason you have fewer exception from us. The other reason you have fewer exceptions, because, unlike some of the vendors, we are also a reseller of the product, so -- so we get to control the terms and conditions much better than some of the vendors who are not reseller of the product. So -- and we understand the County government pretty well, particularly in Florida. MR. GEORGE: I appreciate those comments. Is that a yes? (Laughter.) MR. KUMAN: So -- so, yes, we will work with you on -- on those contract. But, as contracts work, you have to look at it holistically, and we ll work it out. MR. GEORGE: That s a better answer. Thank you. Number two, we ve danced around it, and an earlier vendor talked about the length of time that -- that PeopleSoft s going to be supported all the way through 26. There was only one comment made about Fusion. I m familiar with Fusion, JD Edwards. I ve implemented JD Edwards before. I ve implemented PeopleSoft. Talk to me a little bit about Oracle s Fusion, the support by Oracle of the Oracle E-Business end of it, and the -- are they going to drop this off the face of the earth in 2016, or are they Page 158 of 185

going to continue on? MR. KUMAR: Great questions. Pravin Kumar again. As I sat through all the presentations, there was a temptation to fall asleep, but some of these comments were quite fantastic and kept me awake. They were quite amusing. Before starting AST, and we ve been at 18 years for it now, I -- I worked for Oracle Corporation in product development, as well as the consulting side. I got this product, Oracle Financials EBS certified by GSA for the first time for Oracle. I was in charge of that product. As an Oracle employee, and as a partner in good stead for 18 years, we all find a safe harbor with Oracle. And nobody, absolutely nobody, including Oracle employees, generally speaking, are entitled to talk about de-support date that s not officially put on their website. Nobody for sure can talk about a product dropping off the face of the earth. Let me start with that. Anyone who does that is asking for trouble, and that s why people get into legal and other troubles. We don t. Second, Oracle is on record saying there s a lifetime support for Oracle EBS. So if you acquire this product today, this is official, you can own it as long as you want and it will be supported. So those are the two things I can say that s on record. Nobody else can proclaim that a product is being de-supported unless it s on Oracle s website, and they have a product direction for those. Oracle EBS is Oracle s flagship product. That s the only ERP product that they invented and built in house. It s not going anywhere, from my perspective, but that s purely my perspective, not Oracle s (inaudible). MR. ZACHERIAH: Shaji Zechariah, AST. I want to add to it. Oracle has a policy called Oracle Unlimited. That means at least when you re going in, at least 12, it is going to be supported as long as you own the product. If it s ten years, it s ten years. If it s 15 years, it s 15 years. Those -- that product will be supported. As Pravin said, again, right now it s -- nobody can state Oracle s product directions other than them. There s a safe harbor policy, so we can t state it beyond our interpretation of it. But Oracle EBS is Oracle s flagship product. That s a product they ve developed. That s actually the only product that uses the power of technology, because the other products, PeopleSoft, JD Edwards, can run on any database. Oracle will only run on Oracle s technology. It is the only product which can leverage not just the application features, but the technology features. Guess where they will invest more -- more of their R and D effort in. Page 159 of 185

In fact, the next big release, some of you must have heard about Fusion. The architecture behind that is rumored to be EBS. That is a product here to stay. That s what we ve been told. Now, there is no -- we can t tell you officially how many years it s going to be supported. Your release is going to be supported as long as you own the product. MR. KUMAR: Pravin Kumar again. Another -- another interesting fact that you can quickly check, and Oracle on Demand, or, as they call Oracle Managed Cloud Services are on multiple bids. Another fact that you can check, how many Oracle EBS instances they manage versus other instances, other product. MR. WALTON: I m just wondering if the Senior Vice President of Oracle would be interested in making a comment. (Laughter.) MR. SIMLER: Not really. No -- I -- the only comment I could think of is that -- MR. CAMPBELL: Could you -- please, the microphone. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKERS: (Inaudible.) RICK McGAUGHY: Remember the safe harbor statement. MR. SIMLER: Gary Simler, Oracle. No, these -- these guys are right. I -- we are under the cover of safe harbor, and even talking about, you know, future releases and that sort of thing, I mean, I would tell you that I m not really privy to it anyway. So anything I would say would be, you know, conjecture. As far as the other comment on Oracle, you know, how much of E-Business do we run, how much of PeopleSoft do we run, let me preface my answer by saying one thing. Oracle Managed Cloud Services runs every product that Oracle has. And our strategy is to continue to do that, because every product we acquire or build or what have you is cloud based, we want to make it cloud based. So one of the -- one of the nice advantages here is that if you become an Oracle Managed Cloud Services customer, you have a certain amount of freedom in the future to procure other Oracle products knowing that they can be managed and run by us. Page 160 of 185

Now, in terms of the specific statement what do we run more of, I ll answer it this way. E- Business Suite has been out how many years? Thirty-five? Thirty or however many years, so, obviously, there s more people that have E-Business Suite, so, yes, we have more instances of Oracle E-Business Suite. But I would just leave it to say that it s because of longevity and history versus anything else. We run both. MR. WALTON: Well, which is growing faster, E-Business or -- MR. SIMLER: Which is growing faster? MR. WALTON: Last five years. MR. SIMLER: They re both exactly the -- no. (Laughter.) MR. SIMLER: You re -- you re -- you know, honestly, for -- for -- for Managed Cloud Services, if I told you that they re probably growing at about the same rate, I don t know if you d believe me, but that s -- MR. WALTON: No -- MR. SIMLER: -- the truth. MR. WALTON: -- I wouldn t. MR. SIMLER: No, I know you wouldn t. But it s -- it s the truth. No, it is. Because we have -- the way we ve organized our sales force, we have people that call on existing accounts and new accounts, and they both, you know, seem to grow. The fact is we do have more E-Business Suite accounts because it s just the Legacy. You know, we ve had it longer. I can t -- I -- I can t say anything more than that. MR. GEORGE: He loves his kids equally. MR. SIMLER: I will -- you know, I will -- I will -- (Laughter.) MR. MCGAUGHY: Let me get you off the -- let me get you off the hook. MR. SIMLER: Yeah. Page 161 of 185

MR. MCGAUGHY: Let me get you off the hook. MR. SIMLER: All right. That s fine. MR. MCGAUGHY: Rick McGaughy with AST. You know, that s obviously putting Oracle in a difficult position, because they do have multiple bids here, and we do need to be cognizant of that. I can tell you that in Florida, based on governments of similar size to yours, EBS is growing faster. MR. WALTON: Okay. Any concerns at all from your company -- I see that you don t use -- you don t hire subcontractors, you use all in house staff; is that correct? MR. MCGAUGHY: Well, I mean, there s -- there s two answers to that. We do not hire 1099 independent consultants to work on our projects. We do hire subcontractors, as in the case of our minority disadvantaged small business requirements in our projects. So -- so we do have subcontractors. We do not use 1099 help because 1099 help, in our experience, what they do is they have multiple projects, and they are not dedicated to a particular project. They re worried about their paycheck and that s it. They don t have any common incentive, like our consultants do, to finish a project on time and on budget. MR. WALTON: So has it ever caused you a strain in terms of personnel on a project? MR. MCGAUGHY: It has not caused strain. I mean, obviously, it has -- it -- it does present its challenges, but we have managed the -- the company, and Pravin can elaborate on this, in a controlled growth mode. And in this case, with Broward County, the team that would be moving over here is the same team or a majority of the same team that was on Pinellas before it moved over to Hillsborough. Hillsborough to Broward County. So we have a cohesive team, we have staff available for this. And I don t know if you want to elaborate. MR. ZECHARIAH: Yes, let me -- Shaji Zechariah again with AST. And I -- I want to go back on our ability to complete these projects in the -- in a -- in the short amount of time. The Hillsborough/City of Tampa, it s one of the biggest initiatives they have as a combined Page 162 of 185

entity. And that s going to be done in two years. Twenty-four months. Now, how do we do that? The reason why we re able to do that, and we responded that in our -- in our response, too, is we have repeatable efficient process we build around the people have implemented here. It s the same staff. What -- what do you -- there are a lot of -- you get -- every jurisdiction is different, but there are also a lot of commonalities. Your State reporting is very similar. Your CAFR reporting needs are very similar. So we hit the -- hit ground running. The efficiencies and the knowledge you gain on each project is our asset. Not the company. It is the people who are our assets. One of the other things we didn t mention is more -- many of these people have been with us for a very long time. Lucy Montana, who is the -- the financial lead, has been with us forever. She did Polk, Pinellas -- MS. MONTANA: I m not that old. (Laughter.) MR. ZECHARIAH: -- and -- and, no, what are the -- the reason why we are able to get every project done on time, on budget, in that short timeframe, is because of the repeatable nature, which we built using the model we have. You have a subcontractor, their interest is to get paid for the hours they work, and the knowledge is lost. That s why we are efficient. That s why we can do it on the technology side lower staff. We have tools and technologies, just like every other vendor. We have automated tools. But it s the -- the knowledge base. That is what differentiates us from the rest of the competition. MR. KUMAR: This is Pravin Kumar. I d like to speak for about half an hour on this topic. (Laughter.) MR. KUMAR: I m just kidding. No, really, that s -- that s very close to who we are. That s our company s identity and culture. And when the opportunity presents, we re -- our preference is to not use any subcontractors, 1099s, period. In case of Hillsborough County, for example, we knew it was a very complex project and we were putting in a very challenging timeline. Twenty-four months to do pretty much what you re doing. We have four third party products onto that project, and we are doing it all within the timeframe. Page 163 of 185

There was five percent point for MBDE participation on Hillsborough County. It s all on public records. We forego that five percent points to not bring in MBDE company because we know we were taking on a challenging project that s not been done in the U.S. before at that size of municipality, cities and county doing it together. And we were the company that were selected to do that. And -- and we -- we really ran with the big guys at that projects. IBM, Accenture - So it was number two and threes in other companies, similar size. So we do it as per plan. It s our philosophy, it s our culture. That s why you d find employees in our company that have been very, very long time. And not only that, I mean, Rick had a slide early on about our company, and -- and the two achievements that we are very proud of. We have received multiple times best places to work award. And that s not for a reason. There s companies that have -- large companies, by the way, and some of the large ones have filed, like Enron -- better for that we have smaller staff than their recruitment team. Fully agree. From any of the competitions that s in the room or that s on this bid, they have not been able to hire in ten years a single one of our employees. And we have employees from each and every one of them. Verifiable fact. So our people don t leave us. If they leave us, they are tired of traveling or they don t want to do consulting anymore. And understandable. People do leave us, and they will go work on an in-house job or something, easier job than travel day in day out. But our people don t leave to go work for another consulting company, and that s the kind of company we have. That s not spelled out in any other proposal. You won t see it unless you talk to us and our customers and ask face-to-face. And that is the difference. That s what our qualitative difference is. Every company has a methodology, and IBM is probably the most well-known. They -- they do the intelligent planet. Right? But look at the Gartner study. Forty percent of the ERPs fail. Not a single one of our ERPs have failed in 18 years. We have a methodology as well. Is the methodology doing it? No, it s the people doing it. And it is the people who understand the product and company and our customers. You pick up any of our consultants and ask them which port authorities and airports we have worked on, they ll rattle off the name like you would never believe. So you would not have problem with our customers. They will, in fact, rattle successful accounts of the past clients. That s why we don t use subcontractors, and that s the qualitative difference you ll see in our -- our team. Page 164 of 185

So sorry for taking that much time. MR. WALTON: You -- you really did mean a half hour, didn t you? (Laughter.) MR. BARNES: Herbert Barnes with AST. I just want to kind of echo some of those comments, but from a project manager standpoint. As the quarterback, or as the -- the point guard, it s -- it s a level of confidence that I have that I know I m throwing that ball to somebody I ve worked with. If we look at the team members that we ve brought in today, most of them, I ve worked on projects in the past. So I know, you know, exactly how to motivate them, I know exactly what -- you know, how to -- how to make sure I can get the most out of them. I mean, they re highly intelligent, highly motivated people, but having that relationship, having that knowledge about, you know, how s your family, you know. JP and I talk all the time about his throwing his son a big bar mitzvah, and it s just that relationship that, as employees of a company, just something else extra on top of that. And, as we say in New Orleans, it s just lining you out. MR. WALTON: Okay. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other questions? MR. WALTON: Go ahead. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Oh. MR. CAMPBELL: We re done with questions. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah, we re done. Okay. RICK McGaughy: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: I guess at this time, Committee members, in -- in our books, there is under a PM interview questions, a series of questions, series of six questions that we may, if we choose, ask the -- the specific project managers that are going to be assigned to this project. So the question to the Committee is do you want to ask some, all, or none of these questions to the project managers? And we would bring them up in their order of presentation and ask Page 165 of 185

them the questions. MR. CARBONE: Do you need a motion, or is this just -- MR. CAMPBELL: Yeah. No. MR. CARBONE: I d like to hear all the questions. MR. WALTON: (Inaudible) answers. KENT GEORGE: I have two. MS. CHAMBERS: I ll go -- I ll go for it. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. All right. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. CAMPBELL: So it would be Cedar. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Cedar first. MR. CAMPBELL: Come down for your grilling. MR. PACE: Keith Pace, CedarCrestone. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. In chronological order, what were the last three clients that you served as Project Manager/Director, providing the day-to-day management of the project? And -- okay. So start there. MR. PACE: Okay. So -- MR. CAMPBELL: Because it has -- it has an A, B, C, D, and E that follow it. MR. PACE: Absolutely. So the last three projects that I ve actually worked at, I m currently the project manager at the State of Wisconsin for one of their departments, implementing PeopleSoft financials. Started in July of -- or, I m sorry, started in July of this year. Planned go live, which kind of answers your second question, is February of 2013. Implementing PeopleSoft financials and supply chain on a fixed fee basis. The second -- you know, the -- the one previous to that, I was the project manager at the City of Fremont, an HR implementation, HR benefits administration, time and labor. That started in early 2012 and finished in -- in mid-2013. And then the project before that, again, I was a program manager at King County from the 2008 -- well, actually, started off with King County in 2007, actually, at their Metro Division. Page 166 of 185

King County is -- is made up of -- of Metro and -- and then the general county itself. And then in 2008, I actually became their day-to-day program manager. I worked there from early 2008, I want to say April, through July of 2011. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. Were you providing project manager -- management over the entire project or a portion? MR. PACE: Absolutely. So -- so the three that I just mentioned -- MR. CAMPBELL: Yes. MR. PACE: -- I m -- I m the project manager at -- at Wisconsin over the entire project. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MR. PACE: At the City of Fremont, I was over the entire project. And at King County, I was the program director over HCM -- HCM and payroll, finance, supply chain, as well as we did a requirements analysis for Hyperion planning and budgeting. MR. CAMPBELL: And was that all with Cedar or -- MR. PACE: No. MR. CAMPBELL: -- was it various firms? MR. PACE: The first -- the -- the Wisconsin and the City of Fremont were with CedarCrestone. And the King County project was with Ciber. MR. CAMPBELL: What clients are you working on now and what -- and when does that project go live? MR. PACE: Sorry. So, again, the State of Wisconsin, project -- again, I m the project manager there, and that project is scheduled to go live, and we are on track to go live, in February of 2014. MR. CAMPBELL: And when do your obligations with that client finish? MR. PACE: My obligations finish in March of 2014. MR. CAMPBELL: How would you handle a situation in which a client was not providing the level or resources and/or engagement in the project as planned, which has negatively impacted the project timeline? MR. PACE: So, that s a great question. You know, from a -- from a -- a project stability Page 167 of 185

perspective, you know, I really take a look at -- at the resources and try to -- try to identify those things early, you know, try to take a look at, you know, what do we actually need to do to -- to maybe to pay some special attention to some of these folks. Because what I find is that -- is that the -- the project resources that may or may be acting negatively, you know, it s usually a -- a number of things. They don t understand what s going on with the project, they haven t been trained, they -- you know, they don t understand where we are in the methodology or what we re doing. So, you know, obviously, we try to -- we try to handle that up front. You know, the second -- the second version of that that I actually see is normally around, you know, people that are overloaded. So, in other words, they re dedicated maybe too much to the project, or 75 percent to the project and 25 percent to their existing job, and that 25 percent is taking up too much time, you know. And the third thing that I see is -- is just traditional burnout. These are long projects with long hours, you know, and folks are -- are -- you know, they re -- they re dedicated, you know, but sometimes it s just a little bit too much, especially if you haven t done a project like that. So I work with our change managers, I work with, you know, our project leads to actually make sure that we can uncover and take a look for those areas. Now, that doesn t mean that I m not -- that I -- that I don t like to have the hard conversations if they re actually necessary. You know, I plan on working with the PMO office, you know, with Melissa directly, to actually determine are we actually -- are -- are we doing the things that we need to do to make this project going forward, and where are things being negatively impacted. And that doesn t go just for Broward County. You know, that goes for our resources as well. Again, having worked with all of these resources in the past, you know, my job and my mantra, you know, with them is to -- is to say, okay, whether it s perception or -- or if it s a reality, so if we ve got a perceived issue, you know, or we ve got a real issue, it s the same thing, and how are we going to address that and make those things happen. You know, there -- there are examples where I ve removed people from the project. That s a very, very difficult decision to actually get to, because you lose a lot of that knowledge transfer, a lot of the -- a lot of that business acumen going out the door. So you never want to get to that -- that place. You want to -- you want to attack it early. You know, we will do that. You know, we will make corrective actions, you know, moving forward. And if we can t make those corrective actions, you know, as a last step, we ll -- we ll -- we ll talk about switching out that project resource. Page 168 of 185

MR. CAMPBELL: These types of projects often require long hours to meet project deadlines and obligations, which can task employees to their limits. How do you keep them motivated throughout the project? MR. PACE: That s a great question as well. So it really -- you know, really depends on what we can actually do, and -- and -- and -- and what we have the capabilities to do. So I ll give an example of -- of Wisconsin. I mean, it s a very long project. It -- it s a very narrow window. We ve got a lot to do. You know, people are still trying to do their day jobs, and they feel overloaded. You know, one of the things that we ve actually done, and I -- I -- I hate to say this, because it s a little embarrassing for me, but, you know, we -- we actually joined a bowling league together. None of it s actually paid for by CedarCrestone. There s -- you know, we actually have the purchasing manager on -- on there. And I go embarrass myself every week, you know, in -- in -- in getting out there and -- and trying to pretend like I can do this. So, you know, we -- we -- we try to do things like that as best that we actually can. That s kind of from an outward facing perspective. From an inward facing perspective, again, we -- as a project management team, we re keeping careful track of what s actually going on with the project, what we ve actually loaded on to any specific resource to make sure that it s not too much, taking a look at those status reports and determining are they falling behind on specific things, do they need some help, can we actually go get them some help. You know, again, working on these, you know, for -- from a four to five year duration time -- timeframe, I mean, you know, we really get to know these people and get to understand there might be outside influences and outside problems, you know, and really try to take a look at those and -- and determine, you know, what can we do to motivate people. You know, from a consultant perspective, it s a little bit easier to motivate. From a Broward County perspective, you know, again, I d have to work with Melissa to determine, you know, what we can do to motivate people and what we can do to make sure that people are performing on the project. MR. CAMPBELL: What strategies have you used to resolve conflicts with project teams so that they work to a common goal? MR. PACE: So conflict resolution is probably the biggest part of change -- or biggest part of project management. You know, from -- from an internal project team perspective, not everybody is going to get along all of the time. You know, we -- we strive to make sure that people do get along. And, again, I put that a lot on myself and the team, you know, to make sure that those -- those things are happening. But, you know, there s going to be instances where -- where we re not getting along, where -- Page 169 of 185

where there s, you know, resolutions that -- that -- that need to happen. You know, the best way that I ve -- that I ve been able to do that is, again, you know, to kind of sit with the person that s actually having the conflict. If it s -- if it s a -- if it s a consultant resource, you know, that s pretty easy for me to handle. Again, you know, I m not afraid to have those types of conversations, you know, with my resources. Having worked with them, you know, quite a bit in the past, they know where I m coming from; I know where they re coming from. You know, when it s a Broward County person, that s a little bit more difficult. You know, I might not -- you know, I might have some rapport with them, but I don t want to overstep a boundary, you know, and -- and so, again, that s -- that -- that strategy is, you know, working with the project management office to determine, you know, what can we do. Is it just, you know, do I need to switch out the resource mix? The great thing is that, you know, a lot of these -- a lot of the functional folks that you actually saw, you know, they know more than one module, you know, so -- so the best thing I can do is maybe take one person and sit them down with that person and say let s really look through these problems. I ll take, you know, if -- if, you know, Bob is working on this piece of it, you know, and I need to get Jeff over here to -- to kind of help him out a little bit, you know, and -- and -- and work through that process, that s -- that s one key -- key way that I ve actually done it in the past. I mean, the other way is -- is, again, you know, we re really going to have to look at what stage are we actually in. If we re at a beginning stage -- not a beginning stage of the project, but a beginning stage of what the perceived issue actually is, you know, there s different ways of actually handling it. If we re a little bit more towards an end state and it s negatively affecting the project, then, again, I m going to have to sit down with Melissa. And -- and this won t be the first conversation we re having. I m not going to come to her and say this person really isn t working out. We are going to have that -- have had that conversation, you know, multiple times as we go along. MR. CAMPBELL: What arrangements do you have with your firm as project manager if necessary to replace your project team members? And first would be kind of due to previously planned vacations, holidays, illness, leaving the firm, and then also due to issues with the client, if such would arise. MR. PACE: Okay. So I ll tackle the -- I ll tackle the first piece of that. The first thing I actually do as a project manager when we -- when we put together that project plan is to physically go out and say, okay, what are the busy times. I mean, we have a project plan. You know, that s what we re actually working to. You know, what are the times that -- that, you know, you as resources actually can t be gone from a vacation perspective. You know, now, there s going to be unexpected illnesses, there s going to be, you know, things Page 170 of 185

like that. Again, that s where I -- I feel one of my strengths is. I have that functional knowledge and I m actually able to -- you know, to lend a hand if somebody s actually out ill. But from a vacation perspective, you know, we really take a look at what that project plan looks like, and, you know, we don t schedule, you know -- you know, during some of the testing phases. We don t schedule, you know, obviously, during cutover. You know, things that are -- that are -- that are really important. If there s important decisions that are actually being made on business process change, you know, we make sure that vacations aren t happening there. We take a look at it holistically and say, okay, we ve got a project team of, you know, 20 people. Okay, of those 20 people, we can t have eight of them gone, you know, on the same week. So, you know, we really take a look and -- and manage that appropriately. So from a vacation and an illness perspective, you know, I take a look at that. From a -- from a client -- from a not getting along from the client perspective, again, I go back to some of the answers that -- that -- that I ve given where, you know, we really sit down and we take a look at what is the -- what is the conflict, what is the real issue. Try to attack it early, you know. And, again, like I said before, I ve -- I ve got arrangements with -- you know, with Roch, with Kevin, you know, that if I need to remove a resource, I can do that. And one of the reasons I feel comfortable being able to do that is, again, we have a -- a deep resource pool to actually be able to pull from. So in the cases -- and in the one case, I can say, while -- while I m here at CedarCrestone that I ve had to remove a resource, I was able to fill in with a qualified resource. And how do we actually do that? We had an overlap period, so the resource that was on the way out stayed on for two weeks, the resource that came on for two weeks, you know, they -- they worked together, they transferred knowledge, you know, and we tried to -- we tried to make things appropriate. Again, that was at no cost to the client. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you very much. MR. PACE: All right. Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Infor. MR. SULKANEN: Good afternoon, almost good evening. I m Bill Sulkanen, the project manager from Infor. MR. CAMPBELL: If you could please, in chronological order, what were the last three clients that you served as Project Manager/Director, providing the day-to-day management of the Page 171 of 185

project? And that would include start and end dates that you worked there, what phase was the project in when you started, what phase was the project in on the end date, and were you providing project manager -- management over the entire project or a portion of the portion. If portion, what portion, and which firm you were employed with during that project. MR. SULKANEN: First, the simple part of the question. For all my responses, I was an employee of Infor. I ve been an employee of Infor for the past 15 years, so all my experience implementing Infor products are as an Infor employee. Chronological order would be my current project, Chesapeake Public Schools. That just kicked off about a month ago. We are in initiation phase, and just started financial functional core team training in the middle part of August. I am the project manager over the entire project. That includes all HCM applications, including talent management, talent acquisition, performance management, goal management, and learning and development. It s a multi-phase project scheduled to go live in January of 2015. Prior to my work with Chesapeake Public Schools, I spent the prior two years starting August, 2011 through July, 2013 with the State of New Hampshire, from initiation through project closure, implementing Infor s full HCM solution, HR, payroll, benefits, talent management, talent acquisition. That project had a successful go live earlier this year in February, and we just recently closed that project out and are providing minimal support on a go forward basis. From January of 2008 through July of 2011, I spent my time with the City of Columbus as the primary project manager through initiation, and when I left that project in July of 2011 (Phonetic) to take on the State of New Hampshire, we were just completing the design acceptance testing phase. That is -- was a very complex project involving more than 50 complex modifications to meet City of Columbus requirements. And also, prior to that, I think it s also relevant, I spent ten years at the State of Michigan in various capacities from consulting to project management, and also strategic planning, managing various environment and application upgrades, and also providing strategic guidance on a -- for Michigan on a go forward basis. MR. CAMPBELL: And what client -- excuse me, what client are you working on now and when does that project go live, and when do your obligations to that client finish? MR. SULKANEN: My current client, as I mentioned, is Chesapeake Public Schools. That current -- the go live plan for that client is January of 2015. Page 172 of 185

We understood that Broward County may come up as my project prior to me taking that -- this current assignment, so working with Paul Davis, who you met earlier or spoke earlier today, we already have an exit strategy in place for me to leave Chesapeake Public Schools as -- as needed to come to work for Broward County full time. MR. CAMPBELL: And how would you handle a situation in which a client was not providing the level or resources and/or engagement in the project as planned, which was negatively infected -- negatively impacting the project timeline? MR. SULKANEN: First, working with the project team and Melissa and -- and the client -- and the County side of the team is to really validate and -- and confirm that the resource constraint has adversely affected the project. Right? Once we ve confirmed that there is a -- some level of concern from -- as a resource perspective, what -- what s the impact of -- of the slowness or -- or the non-completion of that -- of that effort? Are we able to reallocate different resources or reprioritize that work within the project plan to limit the impact on a go forward basis? If we re not able to do that working together as a team, then the next piece may be having to go to the steering team as a next possible step to recommend alternatives to get the project back on track. MR. CAMPBELL: These types of projects often require long hours to meet project deadlines and the obligations, which can task employees to their limits. How do you keep them motivated throughout the project? MR. SULKANEN: My experience over the last ten, fifteen years has been from a County perspective and from a consulting organization perspective is that these projects bring opportunities to learn something new. Right? So what you try and do early -- early on is -- is work with the resources, both County and consulting team, and stretch them. Get them to learn something new. Get them engaged. Make -- make sure they re interested. Right? Learning, the skills they re going to learn as part of this project not only benefit the County project team members and the Infor team members, they benefit you as the client as the whole long term. So there s a long term benefit and a gain, both personally, professionally, and for both organizations to stretch those resources and get the most out of them. And, as also simply stated, celebrate the milestones. You know, everybody works hard. Whether it s as simple a reward as a lunch, right, a nice night out on the town, leisure activities after work hours such as, you know, the previous PM -- PM mentioned, you know, a little bowling league, a golf league, you know, stuff to get them out of the work mode also keeps people fresh, right? And also to -- my job as a PM is also to monitor the activity and the -- I m sorry, I lost my word - Page 173 of 185

- the effectiveness of the resources and team members throughout the life of the project. So if we notice people are struggling, why is it, right? As we all know, within public sector organizations you re not going to be able to dedicate your resources full time. They still have regular jobs or other responsibilities to take care of. So you have to be aware of that, right? And know when to give and take. Within the project, not everything can be a critical task or critical level of effort, right? There are certain things needing to get done, and it becomes and art and a science as to how you manage your people and your resources throughout the life of the project to keep everybody going to that common goal, which is a successful implementation. MR. CAMPBELL: What arrangements do you have with your firm as a project manager is -- if necessary to replace your project team members? And the reasons we re looking for is due -- due to previously planned vacations, holidays, illness, leaving the firm, and or due to issues with the client, if such would arise. MR. SULKANEN: Again, part of any -- I m sure all four of the PMs here today are going to say some of the same things, right? As we develop our project plan, right, one of the first things you do from a -- from a client perspective, are there certain times of the year. Well, there s fiscal year close, you know, end of the -- end of the calendar year, around the holidays, there are certain times of the year where you just can t schedule work, right? And there s also vacations. So you have to account for those times of the year when you built your project plan, right? And also with that is, is that, again, there s a work/life balance, right? So as we get into the project activities, you -- you work with the teams and say, all right, we know at this -- at this phase of the project we re doing testing or training or whatever, there -- there s going to be certain parts or certain blocks of time that it ll be difficult for you take extended time -- you know, time away from the project. But the other times, as long as you know up front, you can plan for it. That s part of what I do. That s what PMs do. You have to be able to plan for that and bring in the secondary resources that needed -- as needed to keep the project moving forward. If you -- if you build your plan and your team depending on one or two people, you re going to fail. You ve got to develop a full team, and that means multiple resources that know the same topics. You can t be single threaded. So you ve got to develop that bench strength to keep the project on track. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. Oh, did I skip one? MR. GEORGE: Resolving conflicts? Page 174 of 185

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yeah. MR. CAMPBELL: What strategies have you used to resolve conflicts with project teams so that they work to a common goal? MR. SULKANEN: Okay. I looked at this question maybe a little bit differently. When you re saying common goal, from a project perspective, you know, do you have a technical group working on an interface or data conversion item and you have a functional team working on something -- some other activities, right? So there s personal conflicts, a staffing conflict, and there s also conflicts of work priority, right? So my job as a PM, as part of regular weekly team meetings, and when we kick off any major work package within the project plan such as prototype testing or training or design acceptance testing, the first thing to do is a workshop, right? Which is a level set, make sure everybody understands what we re doing and why, who s involved, and what the responsibilities are, right? You have to be able to define the priorities of work. So by staying in front of the teams as the PM, and letting them know what s coming next, right, many of those conflicts can -- I m going to say be minimized or go away, but you hope to be able to minimize those and make sure everybody has the -- the same level of understanding of what we re doing, why, and when, right? From a personal perspective, again, it depends on how far down the road, you know, is there a staff conflict and why is there. Working with Melissa, working with, you know, the -- my leads from -- from an Infor perspective for -- in the functional areas, and the Broward County team leads, you know, you want to get the full story. Right? Why is there a possible conflict? Work with those resources, see if it can be resolved. Right? If it ends up being a staffing issue from an Infor perspective and it s in the best interest of the project for that resource to potentially be reassigned or removed, that s something I will work with Paul and the project management team from an Infor perspective and work with the client to make sure we replace that resource with a resource that will ensure that Broward County is successful. But, again, it comes back to communication, right? If you stay up front, work with the people ongoing, going -- you know, let them know what s coming and why. Call it change management if you want, but that s all part of the project. It s what we do, and it s inherent. You don t even think about it. You just need to keep in front of everything. And you need to also rely on your team members and your team leads to provide that valuable feedback on a regular basis to make sure those conflicts are kept to a minimum. MR. CAMPBELL: Now I think I m done. So thank you. Page 175 of 185

Mr. SULKANEN Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: Ciber. Ciber. How you doing? MR. HOLLEY: How you doing? Nate Holley from Ciber. MR. CAMPBELL: In chronological order, what were the last three clients that you served as Project Manager/Director, providing the day-to-day management of the project? MR. HOLLEY: Okay. The last -- MR. CAMPBELL: Let me just go through these. Start and end dates when you worked there, what phase of the project -- what phase was the project in when you started, what phase was the project in on your end date, and were you providing project management over the entire portion or just a portion. And, if just a portion, what portion. And what firm where you employed by at those three -- for those three projects. MR. HOLLEY: Okay. With the last project, which was August of 2011 through May of 2012, was King County. The phase that it was in was the complex extension elaboration phase, so we were testing, system testing, integration testing. I took the project live for payroll and financials, okay? What -- what -- did you ask -- sort of ask what state the project was in as well? MR. CAMPBELL: What -- MR. HOLLEY: I think I got that one. MR. CAMPBELL: -- what phase. MR. HOLLEY: What phase. So -- all right. So I answered the phase. The project before that was University of Kansas and the University of Kansas Medical Center. I started that project in January of 2011 through July of actually 2011. That was a merger, upgrade of PeopleSoft applications, and a merger of the two universities, and additional -- and implementation of additional modules, as well. So I didn t finish that project because I left and went to -- to Ciber. That organization was with Oracle before. And I was the day-to-day manager, program manager for that project. The project before that was Lee County Public Schools. It was a PeopleSoft implementation. It started in 2007. I think the actual start date was August of 2007, and went through 2009, and that was December of 2009. Page 176 of 185

And that was a full suite of -- full suite of PeopleSoft applications, HR, payroll, financials, supply chain. Pretty similar to the footprint you have here, other than it didn t have the budgeting component. And I was the day-to-day program manager for that implementation. And that was with Oracle, as well. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. What clients are you working on now, and when does that project go live, and when does your obligations to that client finish? MR. HOLLEY: My -- my capacity to what I m doing right now, until you guys select us, I ve actually been heading the delivery excellence organization for Ciber. So I m touching many projects. I m not -- not in the day-to-day, but I m touching many projects, making sure that the standards in the projects are doing as they should be doing, meaning the schedule, budget, resources, and -- and baselines that we established for that project. So my oversight is wide spreading right now, because of my experience. MR. CAMPBELL: How would you handle a situation in which a client was not providing the level or resources and/or engagement in the project as planned, which was negatively impacting the project timeline? MR. HOLLEY: So, there s a couple different things. You know, my experience is that I ve seen this pretty much everywhere that I ve -- I ve implemented. It happens quite often. So one areas, of course, is to address the issue. So I need to understand with Melissa and/or my counterpart really what is the issue. Is it the resources that you don t have enough of them or you don t have the skill set? And if not, is there something that I can do on my side to supplement that. And I m going to give you an example. At King County, and Carolyn actually mentioned the resources there, she actually had that situation. She didn t -- was not able to get some additional resources because they had 17,000 projects to convert. That meant going out to all the different departments and making sure that they mapped these projects to the projects and grants module to convert. She could not even go and get the backup resources that were -- had retired. She had basically tapped into her resource limit. Our team, you know, to say it one way, instead of being a black and white team, it became gray. We merged the teams to complete the task necessary. I brought the resources in that could help do that. So that s one area. But if not, what you -- the only other thing you could do is say here s -- if you can t hire contractors, if you don t want to use Ciber resources, right, then you d have to Page 177 of 185

look at the schedule impact of that, and then make tough decisions based off of that, if we re not going to meet our goals. Here s another thing. There is ways that you can actually crash the schedule. You know, you put more resources on it from a lot of different sides to get things done, and -- or basically say here s what we re not going to be able to get done because of this resource limitation, and are we okay with that. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. These types of projects often require long hours to meet project deadlines and obligations, which can task employees to their limits. How do you keep them motivated throughout the project? MR. HOLLEY: Well, that -- that starts at the beginning, right? So at the beginning, our change management people are getting involved, they re doing exercises so that everybody understands everybody. And that s a process that continues throughout the implementation. We have team building exercises so that we understand the personalities of the different teammates, and we make sure that we map the teammates together as far as knowledge as -- and the skill set they should be -- should bring. And there s daily contact. We have the weekly staffs reports meeting that my team would get together. Of course, Melissa s team would get together. And then I always make sure that what we do also is have a consolidated team meeting to make sure that we bring out any issues, so that if there is an issue with a particular resource, then we d have to deal with it. Okay? MR. CAMPBELL: What strategies have you used to resolve conflicts with project teams so that they work to a common goal? MR. HOLLEY: Oh. So, leadership is -- and management is a component that we have to do. We re dealing with people. And you're going to have issues, because not everybody is normally on board with, you know, making these things happen. I ve seen it in organizations where the cultural component just doesn t want to change, right? So the change management piece in that and making sure that everyone is involved with the key objectives, from the top down, right, from the executive steering committee -- committee down to the -- the teams, are involved in acknowledgement of here s our goals and commitments, and making sure that they ve got the feedback into those goals and commitments, too. That s -- that s a very -- a key component. It doesn t just start from the top. Make sure that your team members have that buy-in and have given that their acknowledgement of what they re expecting, as well. So I think that s the key component. Page 178 of 185

MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. What arrangements do you have with your firm as project manager if it s necessary to replace your project team members, A, due to previous planned vacations, holidays, illness, leaving the firm, and, Be, due to issues with the client, if such would arise? MR. HOLLEY: So I -- you know, I -- so I m the -- I m the lead for here. I m the project manager that makes those decisions. I have daily contacts back with either Jeff Haisley and/or the executives to make those decisions, and we can make them very quickly to make sure, of course, that if those things happen, we have the replacement resources as well. As we talked about, we don t have a shortage of resources, and we have the right resources. So if those things happen -- nobody normally, from our side, that I ve seen, have -- has left abruptly unless they died, right? MR. CAMPBELL: Uh-huh. MR. HOLLEY: And that doesn t really happen at all. We don t work our people to kill them. But we just -- we make sure we plan for it. And we go back into the resource pool. There -- there s a weekly meeting internally to make sure that we have the right resources for the projects that we need. So if there is a one week or two week termination or -- or we know there s a leave coming up, we plan for those things to make sure that we get that right resource to the project that s needed. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. All right. Thank you. MR. HOLLEY: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: AST. MR. BARNES: Good afternoon. Herbert Barnes, AST. How you doing? MR. CAMPBELL: In chronologic order, what were the last three clients that you served as Project Manager/Director, providing the day-to-day management of the project, and in that, what was the start and end dates that you worked there, what phase was the project in when you started, what phase was it in when it ended, when you -- when you left there, and what -- were you providing project management over the entire project or a portion? And if a portion, what portion was that, and which firm were you employed with during those three projects? MR. BARNES: Okay. I ll answer the first -- the last one first. For all of them, I was the project manager over the entire implementation. So, with that being said, in chronological order, Hillsborough County, February 2013 to present. Page 179 of 185

Yonkers, and that includes both the City and the Board of Education, April 2011 to January, 2013. Duson was May, 2008 to December 2008. And for all of those, I -- for the first two, I was with AST, and with the last one, I was with Deloitte. Did I miss any of them? MR. CAMPBELL: I think that s good. What clients are you working on now and when does that project go live and when does your obligations to that client finish? MR. BARNES: I m currently Project Manager at Hillsborough County. Go live December 15, 2013. And my obligation ends at January 15th, 2014. MR. CAMPBELL: And how would you handle a situation in which a client was not providing the level or resources and/or engagement in the project as planned, which was negatively impacting the project timeline? MR. BARNES: First of all, I would meet with the -- my counterpart, my project manager on the -- on the County side. As I mentioned earlier in our presentation, we should be in unison, so we should be joined at the hip, so it s more of the right hand knowing exactly what the left hand is doing. So I would feel comfortable with going to the County s project manager, explaining the situation from a professional standpoint as how it impacts the overall project. And together, we would look at alternatives. We would -- I would also offer, you know, are there ways that we can work together to try and identify exactly what the issue is with the level of staffing, and, in many cases, we can supplement that level of staffing, depending upon, you know, what the nature of it is and, you know, exactly where we are within the project itself. MR. CAMPBELL: These types of projects often require long hours to meet project deadlines and obligations, which can task employees to their limits. How do you keep them motivated throughout the project? MR. BARNES: Right. Having worked for the federal government directly myself, I know -- and also working with other municipalities, that there are certain limitations that you have with regard to the activities that you can be involved in from a motivational standpoint. So a lot of the things that you might not -- you might do from a commercial standpoint, you just cannot -- cannot do. Page 180 of 185

So, with that being said, first of all, I would make sure that I m creating a -- an environment that the person wants to be in, making sure that it s an exciting environment, and making sure that when they wake up in -- in the morning, they feel like they ve contributed something to the success of the project. We want to make sure that they re involved in the decision making processes, because, typically, you know, things arise because people don t feel that they -- their input matters, that they re brought into the process. So we want to make sure that from a project standpoint, that regardless of the level that the person is at, that they feel that they are a part of the -- the decisions, they re part of the success of the project, and that there is no hats within the project. Everybody s opinion, to a certain degree, definitely matters, and make sure that it s -- it s at least listened to. Maybe sometime we can t do -- do something about it, but we want to make sure we give them that -- that proper time and respect of their contribution means something to the project. So from a motivational standpoint, again, we just want to make sure that we keep the project exciting, making sure that they realize they are contributing to the end result, and then that there is an end in sight. MR. CAMPBELL: What strategies have you used to resolve conflicts with project teams so they work to a common goal? MR. BARNES: Conflicts with project teams, again, conflicts is something that will arise. And sometime conflicts can be a positive thing, because it sheds light on, you know, some of the underlying problems. So, with that being said, one of the first things I want to do is make sure that I have a clear understanding of what exactly is the problem, because sometimes what s articulated is not necessarily the problem. If you dig deeper, you actually find out, okay, this is something we can solve. So after that point, I would make sure that we sit down together with that individual, bring in the project manager, depending upon, you know, what side it s on, and identify the pros and cons and alternatives of what s causing this particular conflict and how can we collectively come to a decision on how can we address it to not only meet the needs of the individuals, but also to meet the needs of the project as a whole. I m very passionate from a person standpoint because, at the end of the day, it s the people that makes the technology, not the technology that makes the people. MR. CAMPBELL: What arrangements do you have with your firm as project manager if necessary to replace your project team members? And this could be due to previously planned vacations, illness, or leaving the firm, and then due to issues with the client, if such arise. Page 181 of 185

MR. BARNES: All right. That s a very easy one for me. AST has empowered me, as the Project Manager, to make decisions with regard to staffing for the particular project that I m on. And also, we have weekly management staffing meetings that I participate in, and can provide input, and also, from a planning standpoint, able to project if there s issues where I may need temporarily -- temporary support while someone s on vacation. All of the things that some of the other PMs mentioned with regard to the planning aspect and making sure that, you know, people aren t taking vacation during critical time. Our resources are very professional. They re seasoned. They know appropriate times of when it s the time to take a vacation, when it s not. My payroll person would never ask for vacation at quarter end or, you know, end of the year, because she knows that that s the best time for payroll to go live. Same thing from a closing of the -- the books standpoint. These people are seasoned. They ve worked in this industry. They know the responsibilities that s on them. And they ve accepted that role. So it makes my job slightly easier, but, again, I m empowered to make staffing decisions. MR. CAMPBELL: Thank you. MR. BARNES: Thank you. MR. CAMPBELL: And with that, is there any discussion among the committee? We ve had a - - a lot of information given to us today, both in terms of staff presentations, consultant presentations, vendor presentations, presentations from the project managers. Again, any discussion? MR. GEORGE: Yeah, I d like to say a couple things if I could, and I ve got a motion that I d like to slip in here, if I could. MR. CAMPBELL: Sure. MR. GEORGE: First, I want to thank all four firms for your work, you dedication, your professionalism, your stick-to-itiveness of going through this long, arduous process. And we appreciate that, probably more than you understand. This is something that is extremely, extremely important to the County. It s long overdue, and it s been vetted and it s been vetted some more. And a rush to judgment after this much in this hand and then this much today will not serve the process, I believe, properly. Page 182 of 185

And I would like to make a motion, and hopefully would get a second, and then I ll probably have to, if we get a second, then ask the Attorney and Purchasing some -- for some information, but I would like to recess this selection process for a determined period of time until we can get something rescheduled so I can spend time to more appropriately review this information, this information, and also take a look at the minutes so I can make sure that I give a educated, thorough, and -- and hopefully decision that best meets the County s needs. And that s a motion. MR. WALTON: I -- because I would second it, just due to the volume of information. You know, I found myself up here today, after the -- during the presentations and, you know, reading, going back and trying to validate some of the things that we had read earlier. It s a lot of stuff to digest in a short period of time. So I -- I would second that. I think it s a good idea. MR. CAMPBELL: Any other discussion? MR. GEORGE: Can we do this? MR. CAMPBELL: Well, yeah, I just wanted to see if there s a -- (Laughter.) MR. CAMPBELL: -- I would just add that I agree that there is such a volume of information that we received today, and a lot. I ve heard some things that, you know, were -- we were given some things, and I, too, would like to have some other things validated. So, I guess, with that, Glenn, is this something that the committee is able to do? MR. MILLER: Let me see here. (Laughter.) MR. MILLER: Yes, you have the discretion to recess to a time to be determined in the future. Yes. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. With that, we have a motion on the table to recess and to reschedule the ranking portion of this meeting to a future date. All in favor? Any opposed? Hearing none, that s -- the motion does pass unanimously. Page 183 of 185

VOTE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. MR. CAMPBELL: Is there any other instructions that the Selection Committee would like to give staff in preparation for, you know, either getting more information for us for -- you know, to clarify any particular points, or any other type of instructions that you may want to -- to do? MR. GEORGE: I d be very interested in seeing the minutes. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. MR. GEORGE: And I know that s something -- Katie, can you have it tomorrow, please? (Laughter.) MR. WALTON: I d like a little more follow up on that Pinellas County situation. We heard the vendor s side -- MR. CAMPBELL: I would -- MR. WALTON: -- and we also heard the report earlier. MR. CAMPBELL: Yeah. I would like that, also. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: What was that? MR. WALTON: The Pinellas County situation where the staff issues were, I guess, were budget concerns. MS. CHAMBERS: And also if staff heard anything today that they think was a not -- not fully accurate or misleading, it would be helpful to know that in the presentations. One of the presenters made a comment regarding misleading statements made by another presenter, so I don t know if that s -- if you have the ability to clarify anything that you heard, if you thought there was anything that was out of line. I see our attorney over there making -- okay. Again, I don t -- just based on what I heard today, that would be helpful. MR. MILLER: And, Mr. Chair, I just want to impress upon you that the cone of silence is still in play -- MR. CAMPBELL: Yes. MR. MILLER: -- regardless of the fact that the meeting has started and you're recessing. So please keep that in mind. Page 184 of 185

MR. CAMPBELL: We certainly will. Any other business? MR. MILLER: Yeah, it s -- that s -- it s cone of silence amongst yourselves, as well as with the vendors -- MR. CAMPBELL: Uh-huh. MR. MILLER: -- as well as anybody else in that particular cone. So please keep that in mind. And that s as well as to -- for staff members who are within the cone. Everything is the same as before, even though the meeting has taken place. MS. CHAMBERS: So -- MR. GEORGE: I move that we recess. MS. CHAMBERS: Wait. Mr. Chair, is this like a don t call you, you ll call me? Like how do we know -- since it was -- we re just recessing -- MR. MILLER: As -- MS. CHAMBERS: -- what s next? MR. MILLER: -- as in any other type of cone of silence, the communication has been through the Purchasing Department. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Yes. MR. MILLER: Brenda and/or the designated individual. That is who and how you would get information from here on out until you meet again. MR. CAMPBELL: Okay. Any other business? Hearing none, the meeting is adjourned. (THE MEETING ADJOURNED.) Page 185 of 185