purchasing directors’ meeting march 11, 2004 3:00 p.m

Purchasing Directors’ Meeting

March 11, 20043:00 P.M.

State Purchasing

Purchasing Directors’ Meeting Purchasing Directors’ Meeting March 11, 2004 Agenda March 11, 2004 Agenda

Welcome / Meeting Overview

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

State Term Contracts – Mail Services and Courier

Governor’s Center for Efficient Government

Blanket Purchase Orders

Open Floor / New Issues

Next Meeting Location / Time

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Rule UpdateWorkshops and Hearings

• Vendor Registration Rule (60A-1.030)– Draft published in February 27 FAW with notice of rule

development– Workshop March 15, 1:00 pm

• Chapter 60A-1 General Overhaul– Next rule development workshop March 12, 1:30 pm– First wave of proposed rules published in March 5

FAW; public hearing March 26, 1:30 pm

• http://marketplace.myflorida.com/related/proposed_rule.htm

Rule UpdateStatutory Developments

• House State Administration Committee Draft Bill (3/9/04) on website with these meeting materials

• HB 1533 – use of only in-state residents in performing service contracts

• HB 1211/SB 2756 – privatization and oversight

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Operational IssuesTraining Program

• First Wave– 36 people– 16 agencies (13 state agencies – 33%)– Content

• General Public Procurement Jan 7-9• Intermediate Public Procurement Feb 16-18• Advanced/Management Public Procurement Mar 15-19• Public Purchasing in Florida (FL specific) Mar 29-30• Negotiation Strategies Apr 21-22• Negotiation in Florida (FL specific) Apr 23• Contract Management May 19-20• Contract Management in Florida (FL specific) May 21

• Second Wave to start in September – see website meeting material

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Courier and Mail Services STCsPurposes of Contract

• Mail services is not a core competency of the State of Florida

• Provide a service-centric approach to the Governor’s objectives

• Integration of Mail & Document management solutions

Courier and Mail Services STCsAWI Experience with Mail Service Outsourcing

Year 99 - 00 00 - 01 01 - 02 02 - 03 03 - 04Outbound

Monthly -Staffing $33,870.94 $37,159.00 $25,797.67 $28,597.10 $28,597.00 -Other $0 $5,008.02 $5,008.02 $5,008.02 $5,008.02 -AWI Purchase $0 $7,926.98 $7,926.98 $7,926.98 $7,926.98 -Equip. $2,502.05 $5,642.00 $5,642.00 $5,642.00 $5,642.00 -Vehicle Costs $1,217.68 $3,271.00 $3,271.00 $3,271.00 $3,271.00 -Real Estate $1,072.50 $8,343.00 $8,343.00 $8,343.00 $8,343.00 Mgmt Fee (Mnthly) $38,663.17 $67,350.00 $55,988.67 $58,788.10 $58,788.00Annual Mgmt Fee $463,958 $813,200 $676,864 $765,551 $543,593 % Difference 75% -17% 13% -29%% Difference over Base Year 75% 46% 65% 17%

Courier and Mail Services STCsAWI Performance Measures

Year 99 - 00 00 - 01 01 - 02 02 - 03 03 - 04Performance Measures# of Employees Served 5,643 1,619 1,679 1,679 1,679Costs/Employee Served $82.22 $499.35 $400.28 $420.29 $428.93 # of Mailroom Staff 19 10 10 10 10Local Offices/Locations Served 22 8 6 5 4Costs/Location Served $21,089 $101,025 $111,977 $141,091 $179,989 Vehicles Operated

% Difference (Employees) -71% 4% 0% 0%% Difference (Cost/Employee) 507% -20% 5% 2%% Difference (Mailroom Staff) -47% 0% 0% 0%% Difference (Locations) -64% -25% -17% -20%% Difference (Cost/Location) 379% 11% 26% 28%% Difference (Vehicles) -70% 0% 0% 0%

% Differences Over Base Year Ave.% Difference (Employees) -71% -70% -70% -70% -71%% Difference (Cost/Employee) 507% 387% 411% 422% 432%% Difference (Mailroom Staff) -47% -47% -47% -47% -47%% Difference (Locations) -64% -73% -77% -82% -74%% Difference (Cost/Location) 379% 431% 569% 753% 533%% Difference (Vehicles) -70% -70% -70% -70% -70%

3 310 3 3

Courier and Mail Services STCsLessons Learned

• Need to fully understand each party’s responsibilities

• Best-practices contract management process

• Performance measures

Courier and Mail Services STCsCourier Contract (991-160-00-1)

• Currently under bid

• Application of contract pricing

• Performance measures

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentMission

What: To be the enterprise wide gateway for best business practices in outsourcing…

Why: … in order to improve the way state agencies deliver services to Florida’s citizens.

See Executive Order 04-45 (3/11/04)

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentOversight Board

• Secretary Bill SimonDepartment of Management Services

• Dr. Jim ZingaleDepartment of Revenue

• Secretary José Abreu Department of Transportation

• Dr. John AgwunobiDepartment of Health

• Director Susan PareigisAgency for Workforce Innovation

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentInitial Goals

• Develop statewide outsourcing standards and a business case template applicable to any proposed outsourcing project.

• Review existing outsourcing plans within the state agencies to ensure compliance with Center standards and business case, execution of effective contract language with vendors and implementation of successful change management.

• Propose for the Governor’s consideration by July 1 an initial list of specific outsourcing projects and initiatives that can be developed over the next 3 years.

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentStandards

Create a gateway process for all outsourcing projects:– Business Case

– Procurement

– Contract management

– Change management

– Performance measurement

Business Case

Gate 1

Procurement

Gate 2 Gate 3 Gate 4

Change Management

Contract Management

Post Implementation

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentProject Gate Management Process

Stage 1 Stage 4 Stage 5Stage 3Stage 2

Monitor

Current Projects

New Projects

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentOutsourcing Projects

• Review past outsourcing projects to highlight successes and identify any best practices the state already has.

• Review of current projects– Craft recommendations for any improvements; assist

agency in process to address issues identified.

• Recommendations for new initiatives – Create a portfolio of initiatives for the first set to be

implemented – different sizes, scopes, policy arenas; complete business cases.

– Recommend other outsourcing initiatives that can be implemented through 2006; identify working groups to begin gateway process.

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentEmployee Transition Management

• Develop recommendations for innovative programs to effectively manage transitioning employees and continue to improve upon the State of Florida’s workforce.

• Process to help place in or out of state government.

• Create incentives for agency management to fully participate in the competition process.

Governor’s Center for Efficient GovernmentContact Information

2105 The Capitol

Tallahassee, FL 32399

(850) 414-9200

(850) 414-9179 (fax)

Pam Pfeifer, Director

pam.pfeifer@myflorida.com

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Blanket Purchase OrdersItems to Cover

Key Considerations

Current Processes

Issues/Questions

Process Illustrations

• Useful when a need is established for a series of repetitive purchases, but quantity and schedule per delivery are undetermined.

• A form of centrally controlled decentralization, involving central & specialized personnel and managers when value can be added, and pushing the no-value-added transactions out and down.

• Are efficient (minimum time and effort) and effective (get them what they need when they need it) for end users to get deliveries “as needed,” and are efficient for management, budget and purchasing to approve and contract for an entire string of smaller acquisitions at a single point in time.

• 100s of BPOs may replace 1,000s of “regular” POs.

• Specify some of all of the following: vendor, ordering office, delivery instructions, contract reference, terms, items (more or less detail), item prices (or price reference), total spending limit, total time during which BPO may be used, and who under against the BPO.

Blanket Purchase Orders Why BPOs?

In a standard requisition/PO, consistent, detailed item-level data is included in the requisition, order, receipt, and invoice. In a “blanket PO” situation, such detail may be sacrificed for expediency. Now, with the MFMP increased functionality, features, and reporting capabilities, we can better track/analyze/ report our spending practices. Strategic Sourcing is a top priority for the State – it is a proven way to lower the cost of business for agencies. Key to this effort is the visibility into the spending patterns and habits of each agency. Spend at the line Item detail is crucial in improving negotiating positions. However, not all BPOs are for items that depend on this capture of detail for the procurement method applied to the BPO.

Agencies have had unique BPO processes for years, and continue to implement hybrid approaches leveraging current MyFloridaMarketPlace functionality. A more standardized approach is desired to assist agencies in complying with DMS purchasing standards, while maintaining the flexibility, expediency, and efficiency of BPOs.

Blanket Purchase OrdersKey Considerations

• Two options

– Method 1: Requisition Based– Method 2: Master Agreement Based

• Five issues (for each, must consider personnel, time and effort required to establish an MA versus a PO)

– Time to approve a requisition from a MA– Sending a BPO through MFMP to a vendor if BPO is a Master Agreement– Clean audit trail for BPO initiated by requisition– Services BPO vs. commodity BPO

Blanket Purchase OrdersOptions and Issues

User creates a requisition/PO for the BPO. PO typically has a ‘Lot’ that may be a single line item, or a lot for a group of items in one or more commodity codes. PO is issued, and agency performs receipt for each order from BPO – receiving off the original PO

Advantages:- Efficient and effective for the customer- Quick and easy method for Purchasing office. Receipt is only action required (Invoicing

performed by F&A) - Allows for flexibility in BPO purchasing, BPOs can be made to capture any item/commodity

from a vendor, and allow flexibility in delivery quantity and schedule.- No manual encumbrance required in FLAIR- PO automatically transmitted to vendor as agreement documentationDisadvantages:- May not capture line item, or potentially even commodity-level information. Makes

reporting/sourcing effort very difficult- Places workload on Invoicing/Payment personnel to add line item information at time of

invoice (adding line item info on Invoice eForm, specifying accounting information for each item, reconciling invoice w/ non-itemized PO, adding commodity information…) Does A/P use commodity numbers or just object codes?

- Lack of audit trail and order history (PO and receipt report may not clearly demonstrate what goods/services were purchased. However, past practice may indicate no problem.

Blanket Purchase Order

Method 1: Requisition–Based

User creates a Master Agreement for BPO, including all accounting, commodity, and line item information. A release (req) is created each time an agency wants to purchase from the BPO. What about “full line” flexibility, e.g. a BPO to Home Depot for building materials and general hardware items?

Advantages:- Line Item information (e.g. Commodity Code, Line Item Description, Part #...) captured for

reporting/sourcing purposes- Master Agreement can be amended at any time to adjust to pricing/terms updates.- Reduction of Invoicing/Payment workload – as line item information is carried forward to

invoice- Automated tracking of spend on BPO and notification when approaching spending

thresholds.Disadvantages:- Requires Requisition and approval flow for each release. Can enhance to avoid this.- Additional effort for Purchasing Office creation of Master Agreement- For purchases of a ‘lot’, initial effort required by Purchasing Office to ensure proper line-

item and/or commodity-level data is captured. What about “full line” flexibility, e.g. a BPO to Home Depot for building materials and general hardware items?

- All BPOs would require manual encumbrance in FLAIR (as is current process for other Master Agreements)

Blanket Purchase Order

Method 2: Master Agreement–Based

If a Master Agreement has already been created, then the approvals for a requisition against that MA may be unnecessary.

Potential Enhancements:• ‘Blanket PO’ indicator would be placed on Master

Agreements. • Purchasing Office builds one Master Agreement,

complete with line item information; requisitions created as ‘releases’ off the Master Agreement. How can we handle “full line” BPOs?

• Requisitions created from “BPO” Master Agreement would not require a workflow/approval before the order is created.

Blanket Purchase OrdersIssue #2: Time to Approve a Requisition from a Master Agreement

Currently, if an agency uses the Req-PO method for a BPO, the PO may serve as the binding agreement between vendor and agency. In the new approach, Master Agreements would not be automatically sent to a vendor (as they are used for other contracts).

Potential Resolution: As many agencies currently do, they can establish the BPO and/or line of credit with the vendor via current, non MFMP avenues. This agreement could be noted in the new Master Agreement. Then, each PO would be a binding release from that BPO.

Blanket Purchase OrdersIssue #2: Sending a BPO through MFMP to a Vendor if BPO is a Master Agreement

Under the proposed approach, a requisition would be routed to the Purchasing Agent, who would then create the BPO through a Master Agreement (or route to the rightful contract specialist to do so). The original req would have to be denied, so that an additional PO wasn’t sent to the vendor. This req and the MA would not be dynamically linked.

Potential Resolutions: a) Requester could create a Master Agreement Request (MAR) instead of a

requisition to trigger the BPO Process. This request could have some specific workflow, based on being a BPO. The MAR would be approved, and the ensuing MA would tie directly back to the MAR, with a clean and dynamically linked audit trail. (Some moderate changes would have to be made to MFMP to accommodate this workflow)

b) The Purchasing Agent (or contract specialist) could archive the denied requisition, and make note of the requisition in the comments of the Master Agreement. This would allow any auditor/inquirer to be informed of the requesting requisition, and search it in MFMP to view the details

Blanket Purchase OrdersIssue #3: Clean Audit Trail for BPO if Initiated by Requisition

Often, services BPOs are for a single line item, whereas commodity BPOs are frequently for multiple line items.

Do the services BPOs need to follow the same process as the commodity BPO?

Some other distinguishing criteria, e.g., Master Agreement if there’s an itemized STC?

Blanket Purchase OrdersIssue #4: Services BPOs vs. Commodity BPOs

Requisition

DescriptionCommodity Code

Part NumberQuantity

Unit of MeasurePrice

Receipt

Accepted/Rejected

Invoice eForm

DescriptionQuantity

IR Line Item Detail

DescriptionUnit of Measure

Commodity Code

Request Receipt Invoice Invoice ReconciliationOrder

Receipt

Accepted/Rejected

Invoice eForm

DescriptionQuantity

IR Line Item Detail

Commodity Code

Master Agreement

Discount (SL)Description (CL,IL)

Comm Code (CL, IL)Unit of Measure (IL)

Part Number (IL)Price (IL)

Requisition

Part NumberQuantity

Requisition

Part NumberQuantity

Invoice eForm

DescriptionQuantity

IR Line Item Detail

Commodity Code

Invoice eForm

DescriptionQuantity

IR Line Item Detail

Commodity Code

Master Agreement

Discount (SL)Description (CL,IL)

Comm Code (CL, IL)Unit of Measure (IL)

Part Number (IL)Price (IL)

Requisition

Part NumberQuantity

This diagram illustrates the item data required for the various stages of a blanket PO lifecycle. Arrows indicate data flow for previously-entered data.

Blanket Purchase OrdersBPO Process and Data Comparisons

• Either method (Requisition or Master Agreement- based) can be effectively used for either commodity or service BPOs

• Item data can be entered at various points in the process

• Better to enter data earlier in the process:• If entered at the beginning of the process (the Requisition

or MA), item data can be re-used; if entered at the end, has to be re-keyed for every invoice

• the more visibility into the purchase is available and the more re-use of that data available

Blanket Purchase Orders Process and Data Comparison Notes

Blanket Purchase Orders Requisition Item Data

Blanket Purchase Orders Master Agreement Item Data: Item Level

Blanket Purchase Orders Receipt Item Data

Blanket Purchase Orders Invoice eForm Item Data

Blanket Purchase Orders Invoice Reconciliation Item Data

Blanket Purchase OrdersInvoice Reconciliation Item Detail Data

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Rule Update

HIPPAA Compliance

Training Program

Purchasing Directors’ MeetingPurchasing Directors’ MeetingNext MeetingNext Meeting

Time: 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Date: Thursday, April 8, 2004

Location: Dept. of Agric. & Consumer Servs., 3125 Conner BoulevardEyster Auditorium (Ground Floor)

purchasing directors’ meeting march 11, 2004 3:00 p.m

meeting materialshb

accenture llp

public purchasing

couriergovernors center

oversightthis information

htmthis information

rule updateworkshops

directors meetingmarch

Documents

purchasing directors’ meeting december 11, 2003 3:00 p.m

purchasing directors’ meeting april 18, 2013

purchasing directors’ meeting february 16, 2012

purchasing directors’ meeting august 7, 2003 3:00 p.m

purchasing directors’ meeting february 20, 2014

purchasing directors’ meeting january 15, 2009

purchasing directors’ meeting october 21, 2010

purchasing directors’ meeting july 17, 2014

purchasing directors’ meeting september 17, 2009

purchasing directors’ meeting january 19, 2012

purchasing directors’ meeting march 20, 2014

purchasing directors’ meeting july 13, 2006

purchasing directors’ meeting september 20, 2012

purchasing directors’ meeting february 17, 2004 3:00 p.m....

purchasing directors’ meeting february 10, 2005 3:00 p.m

purchasing directors’ meeting april 8, 2004

purchasing directors’ meeting february 10, 2005 3:00 p.m....

purchasing directors’ meeting november 9, 2004 3:00 p.m

purchasing directors’ meeting march 17, 2011

purchasing directors’ meeting december 15, 2011