BASIS Steering committee
Gerry Bomotti, Gene Buckley, Dick Cottrill, Tom Dorre, Allen Lacey,
David Martinson, Susan Unger, and Bob Zimmerman
W. David Wimberly
Colleen Briney and William Rains
BASIS II project file and discussion list
BASIS II August status
Significant progress was made during August primarily due to our
ability to finally pull together the data requirements for our
This forced, and had to be preceded by, several key decisions
which resolved two Major Issues from last
month's report (how to accurately calculate sales tax and how
to commit and encumber tax and freight across multiple lines that
are subject to change).
The decisions made were:
- Company cost center distribution criteria will be maintained at the
line item level, although they will not have to be specified by line
when a default header level definition is adequate.
- Estimated tax and freight will be committed (and encumbered)
at the line item level.
- Tax will be estimated for requisitions and purchase orders
using a flat rate, no attempt will be made
to take into consideration local tax caps.
- Funds will be committed as the lines of a requisition are
entered, which will precede the approval of the requisition by the
individuals responsible for the funds (department heads).
The following decisions were also made during August:
- Users authorized to enter requisitions will not be restricted
in terms of the department or company/cost centers that may
specified on the requisition (security by value will not be
employed for this function).
- The accounts payable liability will be based upon the date of
receipt reported by the
However, acknowledgement of receipt will not necessarily
constitute approval to pay a
vendor's invoice since
explicit approval for payment may be requested by a department.
- Payment for multiple invoices to the same vendor will not be
intentionally split in order to avoid the $5000 DF&A pre-audit
Meetings held during August included:
This meeting of the central project team addressed
bid solicitation data requirements, sales tax exemption regulations
and purchasing regulations that exempt items from competitive bidding.
This meeting of the central project team discussed:
- Committing and encumbering tax and freight at the line item level.
- Maintaining company/cost center distributions by line item.
- Committing funds at the time of requisition entry versus at the
time of requisition approval.
- Pros and cons of restricting what company/cost centers can be
designated on a requisition based upon the individual entering the
requisition (security by value).
- Reporting expenditures by the federal year of the obligation.
- Methods of accounting and techniques for establishing an end of year
accounts payable liability.
- Necessary levels for funds checking in research and property
- The need for life-to-date balances for research incentive funds
Xerox and Bottom Line Technology were
on site presenting
a desk-top laser printer that can print MICR encoded checks with
digitized signatures stored on a removable hardware device.
Part of this solution included PC software to drive the printer and
enhance the security, controls and audit trail available within the
The availability of this technology would significantly alter the
design of the system related to voucher and check processing.
Computing Services is preparing justification material for
the acquisition of this type of technology.
This was a meeting of the Financial Affairs Advisory
Group. The main topics discussed were:
- The option for departments to approve
invoices as well as, or in place of, receiving.
- The idea of testing the feasibility of departments providing
explicit approval of invoices (positive confirmation) prior to payment
was discussed and volunteers were solicited.
- The possibility that an operator authorized to enter
requisitions might inappropriately commit the wrong company/cost centers
- The format of the DBR in relation to the levels at which funds are
- Requirements for life-to-date balances in research incentive funds.
This was a walk-through conducted with UA Press.
They were very interested in the features of BASIS II
and hope to be able to eliminate some of the tracking and
reporting systems they have had to implement internally.
The first cut at the data requirements for the REQUISITION and
REQUISITION-LINE file were passed out at this
meeting of the central project team.
A detailed review of this data was scheduled for September 2.
The August 13 proposal for handling inter-departmental orders
was also discussed as well as ideas for a phased implementation.
Initial questions regarding the requisition file were fielded
at this meeting of the central project team.
The following documentation was released for review and comment
during the month of August:
- Requisition file data element definitions and an entity relationship
- Revision 2 of an overview
(and a totally new approach) for inter-departmental
- An overview for travel processing.
- A BASIS II Glossary of Terms.
We also hammered out what we think is a good understanding of
the issues related to tax exemption, developed a better understanding
of our element naming standards, and made significant progress
defining the data needed for bid solicitations and contracts.
Paul Bixby also started participating in the meetings of the
BASIS public relations group headed up by David Hyatt.
On the technical side, the following progress was made in
- Completed work on the edit macros
that generate programs which conform to
the five existing defined models.
(Several additional models need to be developed, the most
significant being for TARGET.)
- Two internal drafts were prepared
for the NSM Architecture version 2 functional specifications.
conversion of the NSM Maintenance System to the new architecture
was completed, with code review, testing and final touch up work now
- Update of the NSM Maintenance System specifications has been
initiated as well as development of specifications for the
program generator (edit macros).
- Internal training of the BASIS team on the NSM enhancements
and the program generator was initiated.
The two items added last month have now been removed due to the
decisions documented at the beginning of this report.
There is little change in the other items.
- There is a need to replace or interface with various inventory
systems. The areas that have a possible interest in such a facility
include: Scientific Supplies, Dining Services, Physical Plant and
Cooperative Extension Service.
- No decision has yet been reached regarding inter-departmental orders,
although there seems to be a great deal of acceptance of the last
- A method of identifying and reporting federal expenditures by the
period of the obligation needs to be identified.
- We plan to develop a general purpose facility to provide word
processing-like capabilities for requisition and
purchase order descriptions, but need some time to do
some prototype work in this area.
- The requirements of the system remain chock full of exceptions and
special handling requirements.
We hope we can document all of them and develop a system that takes
them into consideration.
The following are our plans for September:
- Document and distribute the data requirements for
bid solicitations, contracts, and purchase orders.
- Define an Available Funds File, tolerances to be
employed during funds checking, and
the company/cost center attributes that will
govern how funds are checked.
We hope to do this in a manner that will be somewhat flexible regarding
the methods employed for funds checking.
- Design the system components for maintaining encumbrance balances
and performing funds checking.
- Develop an overview for requisition processing.
- Reach a firm decision regarding the processing
of internal orders.
This will need to
take into consideration responses to the last proposal
which are to be obtained by David Hyatt from
the service departments.
- Document from a BASIS II perspective
the advantages and reasons for acquiring a printer capable of
printing MICR encoded checks with a digitized signature.
- Investigate further the concept of a phased implementation.
- Initiate development of programs to process vendor related data
- Complete the NSM Architecture, NSM Maintenance System,
and Program Generator functional specifications.
- Develop a
basic TARGET function module model program and update the TARGET
- Meet with more departmental "bookkeepers" regarding some of
the basic concepts we plan to incorporate into our system and solicit
their opinions and feedback.
Please feel free to raise any questions or concerns prompted by this