An Coiste Feabhais Riarachán agus Seirbhísí
The Committee on Administration and Services Quality Improvement
The Administration and Services Quality Assurance Programme 2002–03
REVIEW OF
RESEARCH ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
ADMINISTRATION
Final Report
June 17th 2003
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
This report arises from a visit by a review team to the RESEARCH
ACCOUNTING OFFICE on the 9th and 10th December, 2002. The RESEARCH
ACCOUNTING OFFICE self-assessment group had already prepared and
submitted a 'Self Assessment Report' that, with other documentation, was made
available to the review team approximately 2 weeks in advance of the visit.
The Review Group consisted of: Mr Stephen Manuel, Office of Funded Research
Support Services, University College Dublin (Chair); Mr Tom Corbett, BDO
Simpson Xavier, Dublin; Mrs Heather Hamilton, Deputy Director of Finance,
Queen’s University Belfast, and Professor Terry Smith, National Centre for
Biomedical Engineering Science, NUI, Galway, who acted as rapporteur.
During the review process, the Review Group met with the self-assessment group,
composed of the members of the Research Accounting Office, as a group and
individually. In addition, the Review Group met with a number of other interested
parties, who interact with the Research Accounting Office, including other
administrative units and members of the academic research staff of NUI, Galway
(Appendix 1 shows the schedule of meetings held and staff met by the review Group).
The report is structured to cover the following main topics:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Executive Summary
Aims and Objectives
Organization and Management
The Wider Context
Concluding Remarks
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
1
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
1.
Executive Summary
The Research Accounting Office is part of the accounting function of the University
and reports to the Bursar, through the Director of Management Accounting. The
Office consists of three people, namely the Research Accountant, a Research
Administrator and a Clerical Assistant.
In recent years there have been significant increases in both the volume of research
activity and the complexity of the research accounts function. Research income has
increased from approximately €10m in 1998 to €15m in 2001. In addition, the
University has implemented a new accounting system, Agresso, which went live in
October 2001. Staff within the Research Accounting Office have been heavily
involved in both the implementation of the Agresso system, the subsequent provision
of training and ongoing support, and the development of management information.
Throughout this period staffing levels in the office have not changed.
The Review Group acknowledges both the individual and collective achievements of
the Research Accounting Office staff, particularly given this period of rapid growth in
complexity and volumes and the recent implementation of the new financial reporting
system. The fact that throughout this period staff continued to sustain a high standard
of service provision is largely a reflection of their professionalism and commitment.
The high value of their contribution was consistently commented on throughout the
Review Group’s visit and discussions with the research community within the
University.
Following two days of consultation with University management and staff involved in
research at all levels, the Review Group has put forward the following major
recommendations. Actions associated with each of these recommendations are
articulated in the body of the report.
A summary of the Review Group’s recommendations is provided below:
A.
Increase the quality of services by the Research Accounting Office
through the provision of added value services by:
Adopting a more pro-active approach to identifying researchers’ requirements in
order to improve and develop the service provided and to ensure added value –
Section 4.2.5.
Co-ordinating activities related to research accounts and reports between the
Research Accounting Office and Research Centre Administration Offices,
including eliminating the duplication of financial accounting systems – Section
4.2.6.
A detailed Procedures Manual be updated to reflect known changes, including
those arising from the implementation of Agresso, and that these be circulated to
head of Department in the first instance. Details should also be made available on
the web to all staff and should be updated/maintained on an ongoing basis.
Consideration should also be given to incorporation a section on recruitment
procedures to inform staff of any relevant changes. Clearly responsibility for this
latter function would reside with Personnel rather than the Bursar’s Office
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
2
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
A number of recommendations have been made in relation to Agresso issues
including
Establishment of a help-desk to deal with ongoing Agresso issues and queries.
This in turn would relieve the current pressures placed on the Research
Accounting Office
Setting up an Agresso User Group to deal with ongoing user requirements in
conjunction with the University’s overall development plan for Agresso.
Membership of the User Group would include representatives from Finance and
from the main user constituencies including research academics and research
centres/institutes
Undertaking a Review of the level and adequacy of training as a matter of
urgency. Consideration should also be given to the production of ‘user friendly’
manuals and to the provision of tailored training courses for particular generic
research groups within the University. This would not only enable users to gain
an improved understanding of Agresso but also assist in the accurate completion
of input forms and hence reduce the number of posting errors referred to above.
Considering the development and enhancement of research management
information within Agresso. This would not only be required to facilitate
researchers in undertaking their financial management function but also provide
details of research performance at a summary level to members of the UMT - see
Section 4.3.
Centres/Institutes working with the Research Accounting Office to ensure that
problems with the Agresso system are resolved in a coordinated manner – Section
4.2.6.
Recommendations for delivering on the above
B.
Management/Organisational Recommendations
Clarification of the roles of the Research Accountant and the Director of
Management Accounting in the day to day management of the unit – Section 3.2.
Re-examination of the responsibilities of members of the unit, focusing in
particular on whether certain duties would normally be expected to fall within the
remit of the Research Accounting Office – Section 3.2.
Enhancing the relationship with other units including:
-
Linking the Research Accounting Office and Industrial Liaison Office formally to
provide a one-stop shop for researchers. This should include consideration of the
physical location of both and the production of a user manual outlining the
processes related to research funding from application stage to account opening –
Section 4.2.1.
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
3
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
-
Establishing a formal mechanism for the exchange of information and experiences
between the Research Accountant and her equivalent within the Financial
Accounting office – Section 4.2.2.
-
Clarifying the relationship between the office of the Dean of Research and the
Research Accounting Office – Section 4.2.3.
-
Clarifying the respective roles of MIS and the Research Accounting Office in
relation to provision of training, manuals and user support for Agresso – Section
4.2.4.
C.
Resources – greater efficiencies
More efficient use of the resources available is required in order to deliver on the
requirement for value-added services and creating greater efficiencies can play an
important part in this.
Encouraging researchers to be more self-sufficient by providing adequate training
and user support manuals – Section 3.1.
Reducing the number of correcting journal entries by reviewing the source and
type of posting errors in conjunction with other members of the Bursar’s Office
and ensuring that steps are taken to reduce such errors via training or by improved
on-line validation on Agresso - Section 3.1.
Reducing time spent identifying sources of income through greater liaison with
funding agencies and the Bank – Section 3.1.
Reducing the amount of unidentified non-research sources of income being posted
to the Research Income Suspense Account
Liasing more closely with the various Research Centres/Institutes to ensure that
the relative roles and responsibilities of each are clearly defined to avoid either
duplication or other tasks not being actioned. – see section 4.2.6
D.
Resources – physical requirements
Consideration should be given to:
Re-examining the responsibilities of members of the unit, focusing in particular on
whether or not certain duties should normally be expected to fall within the remit
of the Research Accounting Office – See Section 3.3.
Reallocating the capital expenditure responsibility to a different member of the
Bursar’s office – Section 3.3
Providing extra staff in the Research Accounting Office to cater for the increased
level and complexity of research activity and the implementation of requirements
arising from this review process – See Section 3.3.
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
4
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
Giving urgent attention to providing satisfactory accommodation for the staff of
the unit within one physical location – See Section 3.4.
E.
2.
Action Plan:
All those involved in the unit’s management and operation should agree on an
action plan to implement the required changes – Section 3.1.
Aims and Objectives
2.1
Aims and objectives as articulated in the self-assessment report
The aim of Research Accounting Office is to support the research activities of the
University through the efficient financial planning, management and control, and by
developing and implementing effective systems to improve the service to the research
community. The specific objectives of the Office are:
To provide administrative support structure to academic personnel who have
obtained research funding.
To develop formal research accounting policies and procedures to reflect best
accounting practice.
To provide financial reporting to Project Leaders, Industrial Liaison, Accounts
Office, Senior Management and External Bodies, which will satisfy their
requirements.
To continue to develop the new Agresso financial system with MIS.
2.2
Comments on Aims and objectives
The aims and objectives of the Research Accounting Office are extensive and far
reaching. The successful achievement of these aims and objectives is an essential
requirement if financial planning , management and control is to be applied to the
research activities of the University on an efficient and effective basis.
In practice, however, the provision of administrative support would appear to include
duties undertaken by the staff of the Research Accounts Office, which actually relate
to areas outside of their direct control or responsibility, for example dealing with nonresearch queries. The resolution of such queries diverts the staff from undertaking
their core duties, i.e. dealing with research accounts matters, and impedes the
Research Accounting Office from providing added value to their customers.
It was also felt by the Review Group that because of the concentration of effort on
achieving the first objective, insufficient time and resources were available to address
the other three objectives. In this respect, it is the opinion of the Review Group that
further progress needs to be made on the development of formal research accounting
policies and procedures, financial reporting, and on Agresso. Further reference to the
specific recommendations arising from these observations are outlined in Section 3 Organisation and Management.
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
5
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
3.
Organisation and Management
3.1.
Overview
This section of the report focuses on organisation and management issues within the
Unit itself. Section 4 of the report comments in greater detail on the interaction with
other units and with researchers in the University.
The Research Accounting Office is part of the Accounting function of the University
and reports to the Bursar through the Director of Management Accounting (John
Gaffney). The Office consists of three people, a Qualified Accountant (Orla Timon),
who spends approximately 60% of her time engaged in activities related to the
Research Accounts function (the remainder is spent on capital accounts), a Research
Administrator (Eamonn Haverty) and a Clerical Assistant (Claire Keane). Based on
feedback from members of academic research staff (the customers), the Research
Accounting Office staff are very responsive, helpful and obliging, and there is general
satisfaction with the service provided.
There have been significant changes in recent years in respect of substantially
increased research activity (increasing from approx. €10m in 1998 to €15m in 2001,
and an expected research income of €20m in 2002). In addition to the increased
research activity, there has been substantial growth in the complexity of the Research
Accounting function, including different reporting requirements from the various
funding agencies. This has not, however, resulted in any additional staffing to date,
resulting in the existing staff being overstretched. The introduction of a new financial
reporting system (Agresso) within the past year has also led to staff spending more
time preparing financial reports and cost-statements, reacting to an increased number
of enquiries from researchers, and correcting posting errors in research accounts. The
introduction of the new Human Resources system "Core" has also contributed to an
increased workload, as this system has given rise to additional and more complex
procedures. The increased activity and the two new systems have made it more
difficult to plan and undertake the additional workload on an organised basis.
Additionally, it can be difficult to allocate time to assess the efficiency of certain
operations and solve recurring problems.
In addition to the Agresso-related queries, the staff of the Research Accounting Office
are also asked to deal with queries in relation to clarifying the sources of research
funds lodged to the NUI, Galway Bank Account, where no identifying information is
provided. This activity also takes considerable time and diverts them from their
primary role. Furthermore, many of the unidentified sources of income posted to the
Research Income Suspense Account are not related to research which causes extra
difficulties and takes time to identify and correct.
To enable the existing staff carry out their increasingly complex core duties more
effectively, it is recommended that consideration be given by the Bursar’s Office to
the following areas:
Encouraging researchers to be more self-sufficient by providing adequate
training and user-support manuals – This is referred to in section 4.4 of “The
Wider Context” below
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
6
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
Reducing the number of journal entries, by reviewing the source and type of
coding and input errors in conjunction with other members of the Bursar’s
Office, and ensuring that steps are taken to reduce such errors via training or
by improved on-line validation on Agresso – see section 4.2.2
Greater liaison with funding agencies, the Financial Accounts office (?) and the
Bank (NUI, Galway account-holder) to ensure that adequate support
documentation, codes and information are provided to assist in the
identification of sources of research income received, including unidentified
sources of income posted to the Research Income Suspense Account
Liaising more closely with the various Research Centres/Institutes to ensure
that the relative roles and responsibilities of each are clearly defined to avoid
either duplication or other tasks not being actioned. – see section 4.2.6
The key management challenge going forward is to improve operational efficiencies,
to ensure the Research Accounting Office is properly resourced to meet the demands
of an ever-increasing and complex workload, and to provide additional value-added
services to the various users of the Research Accounting function.
The Review Group recommends that:
All those involved in the unit’s management and operation should agree on an
action plan to implement the required changes
3.2
Duties & Responsibilities
A review of the duties and responsibilities of the Research Accounting Office, as
outlined in the Self Assessment Report, was undertaken by the Review Group.
Arising from this review, it was noted that a major part of the Research Accountant’s
duties (40%) related to non-research activities, namely the financial management of
capital expenditure projects. In addition, it was also noted that the management of the
Research Accounting Office staff had not been included as a responsibility of the
Research Accountant. This may be due to an oversight but could also be a reflection
of the accommodation problems, which are alluded to in more detail in section 3.4
and the fact that the research accountant is physically remote from her staff.
The Review Group acknowledges both the individual and collective achievements of
the Research Accounting Office staff particularly given the period of rapid growth in
complexity and volumes and the recent implementation of the new financial reporting
system. The fact that throughout this period, the staff have continued to sustain a high
standard of service provision is largely a reflection of their professionalism and
commitment. The high value of their contribution was consistently commented on
throughout the Research Group’s visits and discussions with the research community
within the University.
Having regard to the recommendations in this report and the management challenge
set out in 3.1 above, the Review Group recommends that consideration be given to
Clarification of the roles of the Research Accountant and the Director of
Management Accounting in the day to day management of the Unit
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
7
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
3.3
Resources
The Review Group was made aware from both the content of the Self-Assessment
Report and its own enquiries that the growth in the area of external research funding
has been rapid and substantial, in addition to becoming increasingly complex, in
recent years. Research grant income has increased by 50% in the period from 1998 to
2001 (see Self-Assessment Report section 3.3.1). This has resulted in a very
significant increase in the activities of the Research Accounting Office, particularly in
the creation of new research accounts, preparation of additional cost statements, and a
rise in general research account-related queries.
Additionally, the Review Group observed that part of the existing duties of the
Research Accountant is involved with capital expenditure budgeting and monitoring
(Self-Assessment Report, Section 2.1) and that the clerical assistant is involved with
the payment of fees and fellowships. As a result of the above, weaknesses identified
within the Self-Assessment Report (Section 3.3.3) may not be rectifiable within the
existing resource constraints.
Despite the significant increase in and increasingly complex nature of the Research
Accounting Office’s activities, staffing levels in the Research Accounting Office have
remained static during the period at three. The increased research activity, combined
with the recent introduction of the Agresso Management Information system, has led
to a considerable strain on the existing resources.
Therefore, the Review Group recommends that consideration should be given to the
following:
Re-examining the responsibilities of members of the unit, focusing in particular
on whether certain duties would normally be expected to fall within the remit of
the Research Accounting Office
Non-research queries should be dealt with by other personnel within the
Bursar’s Office, thus freeing up the Research Accounting Office time to
concentrate specifically on matters relating to research
Consideration be given to reallocating the capital expenditure responsibility to a
different member of the Bursar’s Office
Provision of extra staff in the Research Accounting Office to cater for the
increased level and complexity of research activity and the implementation of
requirements arising from this review process
3.4
Accommodation
The Review Group noted that the existing arrangements for accommodating the
Research Accounting Office were very unsatisfactory. The staff associated with the
unit, including the unit’s line manager (John Gaffney) are currently located in three
separate areas of the Quadrangle.
This has led to a number of difficulties, as follows:
1.
Managing the unit as a whole, due to reduced input by the Research
Accountant into the activities of the administrator and assistant
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
8
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
2.
3.
4.
The physical location of the office in relation to the ILO (and, to a lesser
extent, the Office of the Dean of Research) is unsuitable given the proposed
increased interaction between the offices
The unnecessary and inefficient flow of paper between offices together with
the time associated with couriering same.
Obtaining copy documentation from archive material located some distance
from the office. The lack of storage space in the existing offices may be
exacerbating this problem.
Despite the above difficulties, the Review Group received no comments during its
visit to indicate an overall diminution in the quality of service provided to users.
The Review Group acknowledges that space is at a premium in the University.
Furthermore, it recognises that the issue of space and location concerning the
Research Accounting Office forms part of its current plans. However, indications
from meetings held by the Review Group are that extra accommodation is unlikely to
be made available in the foreseeable future.
Accordingly, the Review Group has some concerns over this issue as it could impede
on the effectiveness of the improvements that the Research Accounting Office wishes
to implement.
Therefore, it is the recommendation of the Group that:
Urgent attention be given to providing satisfactory accommodation for the staff
of the unit within one physical location
3.5
Training
The self-assessment report has identified the need for training in the new Agresso
System and this should be commenced as a priority. Such training should be made
available both to staff within the Bursar’s Office on an ongoing basis and also to other
users of the system – see also section 4.3.
3.6
Documentation of Standard Processes
The self-assessment report has identified the need for documenting standard processes
and procedures within the unit, and the time-frame for same seems reasonable.
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
9
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
4.
The Wider Context
4.1
General Observations
The Research Accounting Office interacts on a regular basis with a number of other
units within the University. In particular the Research Accounting Office is closely
associated with the Industrial Liaison Office, the “Financial” Accounting Office,
Personnel, MIS, and the Office of the Dean of Research. In addition, the Research
Accounting Office interacts routinely with academic researchers, including those
associated with Institutes and Centres, as well as individual researchers, who are the
main customers of the unit. Finally, the Research Accounting Office interacts with
external agencies, including in particular funding agencies.
4.2
Relationship with other units and customers
4.2.1 Industrial Liaison Office
There is a close but informal relationship between the Research Accounting Office
and the Industrial Liaison Office. This interaction consists of routine matters
pertaining to the approval of contracts with funding agencies, and decisions on VAT
eligibility, but particularly in relation to the initial account set up forms, which are cosigned by the Industrial Liaison Office and Research Accountant.
It is desirable for the Research Accounting Office and the Industrial Liaison Office to
operate in very close proximity, in the context of pre-award and post-award
operations. Ideally both offices would be located adjacent to each other and provide a
one-stop shop for researchers, preparing to submit grant proposals or following
successful bidding for research funding. A standard procedures manual for all users
of the research Services should be prepared by the Bursar’s Office, in conjunction
with the Industrial Liaison Office (see section 4.4 below).
Locating the Industrial Liaison Office and Research Accounting Office in close
proximity would also facilitate the exchange of information on research grant
submissions, which would assist the Research Accounting Office in planning for
future needs in relation to research accounts (see section 4.5 below).
Accordingly it is recommended that:
The Research Accounting Office and Industrial Liaison Office should be formally
linked to provide a one-stop shop for researchers, to facilitate the exchange of
information and for planning purposes
Consideration is given to the location of the Industrial Liaison Office in relation to
the Research Accounting Office, given the required level of interaction between
both offices
A user manual be developed to provide easy access and easy to follow information
regarding processes related to research funding from application stage to account
opening. The production of this manual will require significant input from the
Industrial Liaison Office, as the procedures involved fall underb the responsibilities
of this office
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
10
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
4.2.2 Financial Accounting Office
There is a close relationship between the Research Accounting Office and the
Financial Accounting Office, especially Creditors/Payments/Lodgments. This is done
on an informal basis, with no formal mechanism established for the exchange of
information or for discussions re problems between the Research Accountant and her
equivalent within the Finance Accounting Office.
There are a large number of journal entries required for research accounts, which arise
from various sources, including input errors into the Agresso accounts system. There
may be a need to enhance and improve on-line validation controls for data input
within the Agresso system to reduce the number of errors posted to accounts. In
addition, there is a requirement for the ongoing provision of training to both research
and administrative staff including on the need for both accurate and complete
information to be included in the input forms.
To ensure that recurrent problems and/or issues which impinge on both areas are
highlighted at an earlier stage and addressed as appropriate, it is our recommendation,
therefore that:
A formal mechanism be established for the exchange of information and
experiences between the Research Accountant and her equivalent within the
Financial Accounting Office
4.2.3 Relationship with the Office of the Dean of Research
One of the comments of the self-assessment group in relation to external relationships
within NUI, Galway, was the relatively small contact that exists between the Office of
the Dean of Research and the Research Accounting Office. The relationship between
the two offices is unclear and the Research Accounting Office suggest a greater role
for the Office of the Dean of Research in dealing with research bad debts/provisions,
while the Research Accounting Office should be able to provide suitable financial
reporting to help the Dean manage the research portfolio.
It is our recommendation, therefore that:
The relationship between the Office of the Dean of Research and the Research
Accounting Office needs to be clarified
4.2.4 MIS
MIS plays a pivotal role in the ongoing development of Agresso in particular and in
the provision of the IT infrastructure in general. The demand placed on MIS by the
Research Accounting Office is significant and this is largely a reflection of the proactivity and innovation of the Research Accounting Office staff, in making full use of
the available technology and functionality within Agresso. In this respect, the
contribution made by the Research Accounting Office is both valuable and important,
and the Research Accounting Office is a major champion of the new system.
It was unclear to the Review Group what the relative roles of the Research
Accounting Office and MIS were in terms of both developing Agresso and in the
provision of appropriate training, manuals and user support.
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
11
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
As part of the future development of Agresso within the University it is recommended
that:
The respective roles of the RAO and MIS be clarified in relation to the provision of
training, manuals and user support
A review is undertaken to identify and prioritise key tasks, specific persons
responsible, resource implications and target dates for implementation
4.2.5 Academic researchers
The major customer-base of the Research Accounting Office is the academic research
community within NUI, Galway. From the discussions the Review group had with
representatives of the research community, it is clear that the members of the
Research Accounting Office staff are held in very high esteem. The major problems
that were identified during our discussions were related to Agresso (see section 4.3).
Another problem highlighted in our discussions related to delays in the preparation of
cost-statements. This problem is related to the substantial increase in workload within
the Research Accounting Office over the past 4-5 years, without any increase in staff,
and also due to distractions from the core duties and responsibilities of the office staff.
The key issues that were raised by researchers in relation to the Research Accounting
Office and its interaction with them were:
1. Need for a one-stop shop for research matters (accounts, personnel, contracts). There
is significant duplication of information to different support units (just in case it goes
astray) and there seems to be inconsistencies in the processes applied by the different
support units.
2. Desire for added-value services from the Research Accounting Office to facilitate
them in their research activities. Researchers would like greater consultation and a
forum for discussing difficulties e.g. salaries and invoicing, posting differences,
headings not compatible with the procurement office, example of delays in getting
access to systems. They would also like greater account monitoring, e.g. how
spending is going etc.
3. There is no procedures manual, many different departments to deal with and better
communication to researchers is required of changes to procedures etc.
It is our recommendation that consideration be given to:
4. Adopting a more pro-active approach to identifying researchers’ requirements
in order to improve and develop the service provided and ensure added value
4.2.6 Research Centres/Institutes
Research Centres and Institutes represent an increasingly important component of
NUI, Galway’s research activity. Discussions took place between the Review Group
and representatives of Research Centres and Institutes, which again indicate that staff
members of the Research Accounting Office are held in high esteem. The major issue
raised in the Review Group’s discussions was the lack of confidence in the accuracy
of finance reports emanating from the Research Accounting Office, due to what is
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
12
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
perceived to be the significant amount of posting errors in Agresso. This has led to a
number of Research Centres developing their own additional financial management
control systems, which essentially duplicate the Agresso system, resulting in extra and
unnecessary administrative workload within Centres, in addition to significant extra
workload involved for Centres and the Research Accounting Office in reconciling
differences between the Agresso system and in-house systems.
Specific
recommendations in relation to Agresso are outlined in 4.3.
Another important issue raised during these discussions was in relation to invoicing
by the centres and inconsistencies arising between them (e.g. related to VAT charges).
Other issues raised included:
1. Procedures should be documented as they are not currently standardised and are
generally passed by word of mouth.
2. Difficulties encountered with the set-up of new accounts, because of the relative
location of the ILO office and the Research Accounting Office
3. Improved communication of changes, e.g. VAT/employment law
It is our recommendation, therefore that consideration be given to the following:
Coordination of activities related to Research Accounting and reports between the
Research Accounting Office and Research Centre Administration offices, including
eliminating the duplication of financial accounting systems
Centres/Institutes work with the Research Accounting Office to ensure that
problems with the Agresso system are resolved in a coordinated manner
4.3
Agresso
The University has implemented a new accounting system, Agresso, which went live
in October 2001. The new Human resources system Core was also implemented at a
similar time. The review Group recognises the significant input and effort required by
all staff in implementing the Agresso and Core systems, particularly those within the
Bursar’s office, and the impact it has had on their workload. In the course of the
discussions between the Review group and the various users of Agresso, however, a
number of issues were raised. In particular, comments were made on the adequacy of
the Agresso training provided, the quality of the Management information and the
availability of ongoing support. In addition, for “MAC” users, it is understood that
access to the system will only be available from January 2003.
In implementing a new system, there will inevitably be teething problems, particularly
as the system beds in and staff become familiar with the different functionality and
processes involved. The need for relevant staff, however, including researchers, to
continue to exercise financial management remains paramount. In this respect, it is
essential that adequate training is provided and that this be reinforced by both a user
manual and the availability of user support.
Similarly it was noted that in some cases, there appeared to be a general lack of
confidence in the integrity and the underlying data contained within the management
reports, and this was attributed to the perceived significant number of posting errors.
Comments were also made about there being too much or too little information being
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
13
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
provided. It was also noted that there was a lack of management information
available at a summary level for the review of senior management. To conclude, it
would appear that the management reports available are not fully addressing user
requirements.
It is accepted that a number of these issues may not directly fall under the line
management responsibility of the Research Accounting Office. Nevertheless, given
the importance of the financial monitoring of research accounts, it is essential that
individual researchers are provided with the appropriate financial skills and
management information to undertake this task efficiently.
Accordingly it is recommended that:
A help-desk be established to deal with ongoing Agresso issues and queries.
This in turn would relieve the current pressures placed on the Research
Accounting Office
An Agresso User Group be set up to deal with ongoing user requirements in
conjunction with the University’s overall development plan for Agresso.
Membership of the User Group would include representatives from Finance
and from the main user constituencies including research academics and
research centres/institutes.
A Review of the level and adequacy of training to be undertaken as a matter of
urgency. Consideration should also be given to the production of ‘user friendly’
user manuals and to the provision of tailored training courses for particular
generic research groups within the University. This would not only enable
users to gain an improved understanding of Agresso but also assist in the
accurate completion of input forms and hence reduce the number of posting
errors referred to above.
Consideration be given to the development and enhancement of research
management information within Agresso. This would not only be required to
facilitate researchers in undertaking their financial management function but
also provide details of research performance at a summary level to members of
the UMT.
4.4
Procedures
In the course of its discussions with researchers and research centres, the Review
Group noted that there is a perceived problem in relation to the quality, content and
availability to staff of general financial and administrative procedures.
Included within the research accounting office review document was an extract from
the University’s Financial Policy and Procedures Manual (appendix 3.3.2.1 of Selfassessment report) relating to Contract Research. This document is dated November
1999 and appears to deal more with policy rather than procedural matters. Whilst it is
accepted that other parts of this manual probably do deal with Procedures, the
contents do not appear to have been made widely available to staff. Moreover, the
procedures need to be updated in any case to address the significant systems and
procedural changes arising from Agresso. General guidance relating to research
account form filling, expense claims, and the raising of sales invoices, should be
provided in a widely available on-line financial procedures manual. In addition, given
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
14
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
the significant impact that VAT can have on the costing of a research project, there is
also a need to issue specific guidance on such matters in such a procedures manual.
Similarly, comments were made about the ongoing changes in employment
procedures. Again these do not appear to have been promulgated to staff on a regular
or consistent basis.
As outlined in point 4.3, it is essential that staff involved in a financial role within the
University are given adequate training and are fully conversant with the University’s
procedures.
In the opinion of the Review Group, the Procedures Manual should be produced by
the Bursar's Office with contributions provided where relevant by the ILO and HR on
research and personnel procedures respectively.
Accordingly it is recommended that
A Procedures Manual be updated to reflect known changes, including those
arising from the implementation of Agresso, and that these be circulated to
Heads of Department in the first instance. Details should also be made
available on the web to all staff and should be updated/maintained on an
ongoing basis. Consideration should also be given to incorporating a section on
recruitment procedures to inform staff of any relevant changes. Clearly
responsibility for this latter function would reside with Personnel rather than
the Bursar’s Office
Allied to the need for Agresso training, all new research staff should be made
aware of these procedures and should familiarise themselves with the contents
of the Procedures Manual at the earliest opportunity
4.5
Role of Research Accounting Office in Research planning
One of the issues highlighted in the Self-Assessment Report and in discussions
between the Review group and the Research Accounting Office staff was that of the
lack of awareness within the Research Accounting Office of likely future research
grants, and therefore potential research accounts. Equally this issue would be
improved significantly by the formalisation of the relationship between the ILO and
the Research Accounting Office and by closer liaison between both offices, as a result
of the implementation of recommendations in this review (see section 4.2.1). Also
closer links and better communication between the ILO, Research Accounting Office
and the Office of the Dean of Research, in relation to ongoing and future research
activities, would facilitate greater integration, control and monitoring of the entire
research service function
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
15
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
5.
Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, following two days of consultation with University management and
staff involved in research at all levels, the Review Group has put forward a number of
major recommendations to improve the quality of the service provided by the
Research Accounting Office. These recommendations are set out in the executive
summary (Section 1).
The Review Group would like to commend again the professionalism and
commitment of the staff of the Research Accounting Office, who have continued to
sustain a high standard of service provision, as the volume of research activity and the
complexity of the research accounts function has increased. In the light of the
strengthened institutional research profile generally, however, the University will
need to review the future role, size and strategic development of the Research
Accounting function.
The members of the Review Group wish to express our appreciation at the cooperation and assistance provided by the staff interviewed and in particular those of
the Bursar's office and the Research Accounting Office for their honest and
comprehensive input into the process. We also wish to express our appreciation at the
co-operation and assistance provided by the other members of staff interviewed as
part of the review process.
Mr Stephen Manuel, (Chair)
Mr Tom Corbett
Mrs Heather Hamilton
Professor Terry Smith, (Rapporteur)
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
(June 17th 2003).
16
Research Accounting & Financial Administration: Review Group Report
Comments on The Methodology of the Review Process
All members of the Review Group were new to the Quality Review process, and
therefore, required time to understand and get to grips with the process. There was a
tightly packed two-day schedule of meetings, which proved to be very intense and
exhausting. The time constraints, however, did not impede on our ability to extract
the relevant information from the people met by the Group.
However, time did become critical during the latter half of the first day, primarily
because the Review Group let certain meetings run on since important points were
being developed during them. Perhaps more time would have been useful prior to
each meeting so that we could establish a line of questioning beforehand. Also, some
more time at the end of each meeting to gather our initial thoughts would have been
helpful.
Producing a summary of the Group’s initial findings was difficult, especially as the
Review Group were also trying to start writing the first draft of the report at the same
time. It would have been helpful to have some secretarial assistance, particularly on
the second day when first drafts of the report were being prepared.
Overall, therefore, the process worked quite well except the Group was not quite
prepared for the amount of off-site work required after the review to prepare the
report. In hindsight, it might have been better to spread the review out over three
working days, perhaps starting at lunchtime Monday (allowing Monday morning for
travel or additional preparation) and meeting with the RAO staff/Bursar on the
Monday afternoon. This would have allowed greater time for discussion amongst the
Review Group with the remaining interviews being conducted on the Tuesday.
After all the interviews and preliminary discussions within the Review Group, it
would then have been useful for each member to spend some time alone formulating
their views on how the various sections should be structured. The Group might then
have met again (late Tuesday afternoon or first thing Wednesday morning depending
on the timing) to agree the draft structure. This structure would have given additional
time for group interaction and some time individually formulating our thoughts before
agreeing on the structure for the first draft. The first draft would have been largely
completed by the time we would have finished up on Wednesday.
The Review group feels that perhaps there should be greater time allocated to group
interaction and some time alone in the process. Depending on the number of
interviews involved, this might require three days on site but could ultimately prove
more beneficial in the long run. Producing a report from a distance, involving three
or four people is extremely difficult and ideally, it probably would have been more
efficient in terms of time allocation for the Review Group to have stayed on for
another day to complete this task.
In relation to the documentation provided to the Review Group, it was felt that it was
very lengthy and voluminous, and difficult to cross refer the papers in question.
Perhaps more guidance might be provided to those being reviewed in relation to the
provision of essential and succinct documentation only.
ResearchAccountsFinalReport03
17