ACCOUNTING USER GROUP
Minutes: October 28 - 29, 1998
Held at SCSU Glacier Room
I. GROUP MAKEUP AND RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Group Members (list and attendance at end)
1. Campus user representatives selected by method described at regional accounting meetings,
intention remains to rotate membership on an annual basis, anticipating 1/3 turnover, with
3 year terms. This group to replace all other financial system groups previously in existence,
with subgroups to be formed as deemed necessary.
2. System Office personnel to provide information on legal and board reporting requirements,
assist in determination of best business practices for audit and legal concerns, and aid in
facilitation of meetings and demonstrations.
3. Campus Services Unit Architects to arrange meetings, take minutes, and provide functional
specifications to developers which reflect users requirements. Architects will maintain
priority lists. Development Supervisor(s) and/or developers will be present to provide technical expertise
whenever possible.
B. Process
1. Group to meet at least every two months (schedule at end).
Additional meetings may be scheduled at group’s discretion, as need dictates.
2. Group will determine priorities of work for developers within guidelines:
a. Legal requirements will be met.
b. Board defined requirements will be met.
c. "Bugs" in systems in production will be fixed, to include correction of systems, which, although functional,
do not accomplish intended purpose.
d. Prior commitments to complete systems will be honored. Example is Expendable
Inventory/Chargeback system, which will no longer be available when Unisys is removed from service.
e. User Group defined priority of enhancements and new systems, reports, or processes.
C. Goals (list developed through groups first morning discussions of priorities and concerns)
1. Get CFOs back to concentrating on financial management (get day to day processing functions solidified).
2. Get developers concentrating on development (away from Help Desk functions).
3. Assure software is working properly when it goes to production.
4. Keep working to provide new software that makes it easier to do business.
5. Make sure Help Desk has tools to provide help efficiently.
6. Transition all campuses to new systems as soon as reasonably possible (to eliminate need to allocate
resources to maintenance of old systems).
D. Scope
1. Accounting
2. Accounts Receivable
3. Accounts Payable
4. Purchasing Control System
5. Student Payroll
6. Equipment
7. Payroll related SCUPPS
8. Facilities
II. DISCUSSION OF PRIORITIES AND GENERAL CONCERNS
A. Current Developer Priority List
1. Third Party Billing
2. Modified Refund Process
3. Customized Training (any remaining billing issues, reporting processes and requirements
directed back to ISRS)
4. Expendable Inventory/Chargeback System
5. W-2 form printing
6. Hope Scholarship Reporting Requirements - 1098T form printing
7. 1099 form printing
8. Direct Deposit
9. Y2K issues
10. Uniface 7 conversion
B. General Concerns
1. CSU unit
a. Need to train users to call Help Desk if they run into a problem, rather than the developers.
Result will be better production from developers, and Help Desk will learn quicker and more completely.
b. Enhancement screen to be used just for enhancements, not bugs.
c. Help Desk should be thoroughly trained prior to new rollouts.
d. Look at training process, suggestions of return training after operating under new system for a short time,
look at training and manuals to explain functions and processes rather than just screens, suggestion to involve
users in creation of manuals. Suggestion of Help Desk, Trainer, Q/A personnel rotation.
e. Discussion of Q/A process; none in place for some time, just beginning.
2. Phase II schools: discussion of effect of adding additional load on a system, which does not appear to be
stable.
Would staying with old systems relieve pressure on new system, or just add to delays, due to requirements of
maintaining old systems. How long would Hitachi be available? Unknown to this group at this time.
Development Supervisors related that despite problems being discussed, systems are becoming better by the
day, many institutions are using them, with primarily great success. General consensus was that best use of
resources is on new systems, rather than maintaining multiple systems; encouraged movement to new system.
3. Discussion of payment plan issues: fairly long and involved discussion centered around
percentage charges vs. flat rate charges, and common vs. institutionally defined.
Consensus for the best common system seemed to be an optionally imposed
incremental fee, based on amount of time past due. Example would be $10 at 30 days,
$20 at 60 days, etc.
4. Review of draft of Refund and Waiver Policy.
5. Security review needed for all modules.
6. Latest draft of MnSCU Program Code Definitions handed out.
C. Review of Problem and Enhancement Priority Lists and other concerns by Module
1. Accounts Receivable
a. Refunds – old process barely functional, can take 45 minutes to retrieve
screen.
New process going to Q/A. Tests show should be great improvement.
Screens and process demonstrated for group. Final version to be
demo’ed at Nov. meeting.
b. 3rd Party Billing – All screens going to Q/A. Process described for group,
final version to be demo’ed at Nov. meeting. Release dependent on
Funds Applied rewrite – Raja working on it. Need report for unapplied
3rd party awards.
c. Customized training – A/R screens functioning properly for those using
them,
questions remaining are more to overall process and reporting – referred
to ISRS.
d. Users are looking for a variety of reports and queries for better identification
of
prepays, both applied and unapplied, deferments, waivers, and financial
aid applied.
e. Process needed to age non-term related receivables; developers to examine
attaching due date to invoice number.
f. Users request ability to print statements for non-student receivables.
g. Need ability to record collection actions on account; turned over to MCE or
sent to
Revenue Recapture, need to be able to exclude from future billings.
h. No method currently exists to drop classes for non-payment, which is an
option under current drafted policy.
i. Report needed to show when switcharoo is required (or possible). Janet to
create generic report.
j. Housing charge questions to be examined by Housing group, developers and
architects.
k. Users request more information on receipts from slip printers, such as tech
ID, date, and varying degrees of detail.
l. In Funds Applied, the award year is needed in conjunction with Title IV aid.
m. Subgroup to be formed to identify needs for putting PALS charges and
parking fines into A/R system.
n. LMS connection to be moved up on priority list; balance of list reviewed.
2. Purchase Control System
a. Roger informed group that Pete would be available for awhile part time to work exclusively on PCS.
Group agreed that his best use of time was on fixing bugs, then on identified priorities.
b. Review of security processes and user documentation of security needed.
c. Pete had done cost center roll and fiscal year cutoff rolls as requested.
These processes need to be standardized and available to users.
d. Roger to check with Pete on progress of 3 Way Match process.
Users expressed desire to see this in production, or if not feasible to bring up completely, perhaps just the
online verification of goods received.
e. Priority list reviewed.
3. Student Payroll System
a. W-2 printing legal priority. To be done on individual systems for 1998 reporting.
1999 reporting to be combined and printed by system office, due to shut down of other systems.
b. Earned Income Credit is a legal priority. Ted examining requirements.
c. Enrollment verification needed. Preference for campus to set required credit levels by object code
(to separate federal workstudy, student help, etc.), by term, and whether or not prior or future term enrollment
meets requirements.
d. Pay Period Controller - pay periods to be tied to term by common definition,
break periods tied to prior term.
e. PR0003UG Payroll Earnings Type Controller - validation tables to be set for common values.
f. Tracking of taxes for different states desired but should not be critical.
g. Need functionality for processing payments for Common Market Students - registered at one college,
but employed at a different campus.
h. Direct Deposit - see Accounts Payable.
i. Check cancellation - must reverse taxes, set flag in Student Payroll, but primarily
an Accounts Payable function.
j. Security to be reviewed for separation of Human Resource and Payroll duties.
k. PR0021UG - allow profile on name.
l. Move error messages from message window to pop-up box.
m. Create summary screens like SCUPPS HR0055UG and HR0057UG.
n. Routing should look to FC_BLDG for location.
o. Financial Aid requirements to be identified, including SERA and SAFE.
Fund transfer process to be defined, data storage location to be determined.
p. Review of balance of priority list.
4. Accounting
a. Interfund accrual payoff is a priority, needed for student payroll and chargebacks to
prevent a large number of manual entries.
b. Month-end option on AC0521CP report is a high priority with users.
c. Priority list reviewed, reports a high preference item.
5. Accounts Payable
a. Direct Deposit process a high priority – prior commitment.
Architects working on defining bank interface requirements.
b. Reissue check process completed, need reissue correction to release.
Correction has been defined, and specifications will go to developer very soon.
c. Users would like credit memo use to result in credit memo number printed on check stub.
This will take a good deal of reprogamming, and group is not defining it as a critical function at this time.
d. Review of balance of priority list.
6. Equipment
a. Priority list reviewed, no critical problems identified.
7. Facilities
a. New systems becoming available in near future, Cindy Trudeau to provide documentation
and demo for November meeting.
Accounting User Group Members
10/28 & 10/29
PERSON INSTITUTION PRESENT?
Mark Rice Moorhead State U Yes
Pat Nordick Northwest TC Yes
Lori Bates Central Lakes Yes
Jan Mahoney Alexandria TC Yes
Deb Winter Hennepin TC Yes
Karen Snorek Riverland Yes
Gary Swenson Rochester Yes
Ruth Siefert Rochester No
Bill Maki Itasca Yes
Tony Bartovich Laurentian Yes
Dave Thorn Winona State U Yes
Jill Bemis Metro State U No
Lori Voss MnWest No, represented by Marcia Beukelman
Rick Straka South Central TC No
Jerry Winans Bemidji State U No
Rosalie Greeman MnSCU Yes
Cindy Trudeau MnSCU Yes
Roger Gillson MnSCU Yes
Janet McMahon MnSCU Yes
Al Finlayson MnSCU Yes
Teri Welter MnSCU Yes
Dave Lund MnSCU Yes
Lisa Liljedahl MnSCU Yes
Melissa Primus MnSCU Yes
Jay Folk MnSCU Yes
Kathy Froysland MnSCU Yes
Marie Krey MnSCU 10/29
Ted Heller MnSCU 10/29
Defined Meeting Schedule
Dates Location
November 18, 1998 St. Cloud
December 16-17, 1998 St. Cloud
February 17-18,1999 St. Cloud
April 21-22, 1999 St. Cloud
June 16-17, 1999 Brainerd
August 11-12, 1999 Brainerd