myfloridamarketplace business case · pdf file governor, legislature, department of management...

Click here to load reader

Post on 13-Jul-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • MyFloridaMarketPlace

    Business Case

    Amended November 2010

    Original Submission July 2010

  • MyFloridaMarketPlace

    MyFloridaMarketPlace Business Case Submission

    Amended November 2010

    Section 1 – Executive Summary

    Section 2 – Program Overview

    Section 3 – DMS Cost Benefit Analysis and Recommendation

    Exhibit 1 – Cost Benefit Analysis Detailed Worksheet………………………………19

    Exhibit 2 – eProcurement Shadow System Comparison…………………………… 24

    Exhibit 3 – Functionality Comparison………………………………………………. 32

    Exhibit 4 – CEG Cost Benefit Analysis……………………………………………… 34

    Section 4 – DMS Transition Plan

    Section 5 – Procurement and Contract Management Process

    Exhibit 1 – MyFloridaMarketPlace Timeline………………………………………. 6

    Appendix 1 – OPPAGA/BPCI Report

    Appendix 2 – Supplemental Materials

    MyFloridaMarketPlace Facts …………………………………………………….… 2

    MyFloridaMarketPlace Chronology…………………………..………………….… 5

    Strategic and Tactical Plan………………………………………….......................... 19

    Exhibit A – FY 2009 Accomplishments..………………………………………….... 27

    Exhibit B – FY 2010 Accomplishments..………………………………………….... 30

    Exhibit C – DMS Organization Structure..…………….………………………....... 36

    Exhibit D - Accenture Organization Structure..…………………………………… 37

    Exhibit E – MFMP System User Information.…………………………………...… 38

    Exhibit F – Customer Satisfaction Survey Results…………………………….…... 44

  • MyFloridaMarketPlace

    Page 1 of 4

    Section 1

    MyFloridaMarketPlace Business Case Submission

    November 2010

    Executive Summary

    Summary of Recommendation:

    The Department of Management Services (Department or DMS) recommends re-competing the

    contract for the MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP) services. This course of action is in accordance

    with the recommendation contained in the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government

    Accountability (OPPAGA) report dated January 12, 2009. As to the reprocurement, it is the intent of

    the Department to continue to follow the recommendations of the report with two minor exceptions:

    (1) that DMS continues outsourcing of Disaster Recovery (DR) hosting services with the Service

    Provider; and (2) that DMS continues the outsourcing of the Billing and Collections Services (BCS).

    The analysis below provides the rationale for its recommendations.

    Background:

    Section 287.057(22), F.S., authorizes DMS to develop an eProcurement solution. Specifically, this

    section states, “The department, in consultation with the Agency for Enterprise Information

    Technology and the Comptroller, shall develop a program for online procurement of commodities

    and contractual services. To enable the state to promote open competition and to leverage its buying

    power, agencies shall participate in the online procurement program, and eligible users may

    participate in the program…..” Chapter 287.057(22)(a), F.S., further provides: “[t]he department, in

    consultation with the agency, may contract for equipment and services necessary to develop and

    implement online procurement.” The statute also permits the use of a transaction fee to fund the cost

    and operation of the online procurement system.

    Based upon this authorization, DMS procured an online procurement program that later became

    known as MyFloridaMarketPlace (MFMP). DMS executed the Web-based eProcurement contract

    October 9, 2002. Based on recommendations in the OPPAGA BCPI report dated January 12, 2009,

    and after an extensive renegotiation effort by both the Department and vendor, a second renewal of

    25 months was executed, effective July 1, 2009. The current contract expiration date is December 8,

    2012.

    Agency Mission:

    DMS provides a variety of centralized services to Florida’s state agencies, enabling them to focus on

    their primary missions. These services include, but are not limited to: providing state group

    insurance benefits to state employees, facility management services for state buildings, private prison

    services to incarcerate prisoners, and retirement program services to state employee retirees. These

    services also include establishing state term contracts and purchasing agreements for agencies and

    eligible users to use and DMS providing centralized procurement services through the Division of

    State Purchasing (SP) - these services include the MFMP online procurement system.

  • MyFloridaMarketPlace

    Page 2 of 4

    Section 1

    Stakeholders:

    Currently, 32 state agencies use MFMP, including the Office of Legislative Services added in late

    September 2008. The system, as of this writing, has more than140,000 vendors registered of which

    more than 43,000 are certified business enterprises (CBEs) and has 15,000 users. The system is

    interfaced with the State’s Vendor Bid System (VBS), where state agencies and some universities and

    local governments issue notices of bid opportunities. MFMP is also interfaced with the state’s

    financial system, the Florida Accounting and Information Resource Subsystem (FLAIR). Other

    stakeholders include but are not limited to: state agencies, vendors, Department of Financial Services,

    Governor, Legislature, Department of Management Services’ Office of Supplier Diversity (OSD),

    State Purchasing (SP) and CIO. MFMP system utilization has grown since project inception,

    demonstrating that the system is widely used and accepted by state agencies.

    OPPAGA Report and Recommendations:

    The 2008 General Appropriations Act directed the OPPAGA to conduct an independent study of the

    state's eProcurement system, MyFloridaMarketPlace (see Appendix 1). To complete the study,

    OPPAGA contracted with BCP International (BCPI), a company that provides advisory services in

    information technology planning, integration and management and business transformation.

    The five options for continued eProcurement services that OPPAGA directed to be considered are:

    1. Continue contract with Accenture;

    2. In-source all support of the MFMP system to state employees;

    3. Solicit a competitive bid for a new service provider for the MFMP system;

    4. In-source some of the support to state employees and solicit a competitive bid for a service

    provider for the remaining support of the MFMP system; and

    5. Solicit a competitive bid for a new service provider and a new system.

    BCPI recommended a hybrid of post-contract alternative 1 (renegotiate current contract) and 4 (in-

    source some functions and solicit a competitive bid as a long-term solution).

    DMS Plan:

    In accordance with OPPAGA’s recommendations, DMS completed option 1 and renegotiated and

    renewed the contract with the current vendor, thereby achieving significant reductions in cost that

    meet or exceed the OPPAGA/ BCP report recommendations.

    DMS also plans to implement OPPAGA’s post contract option 4 with two minor revisions:

    The recommendation to in-source the Disaster Recovery (DR) site hosting, and

    The recommendation to in-source the Billing and Collection Services (BCS).

    DMS investigated the recommendation to in-source the DR hosting. DMS’ conclusion was that any

    in-source of DR hosting would be in the City of Tallahassee as this is where the state owned

    resources centers are. DMS believes that placing production equipment and DR equipment in the

    same city is not in the state’s best interest. The current DR hosting is in Suwannee, Georgia, which is

    sufficiently removed from Tallahassee and should be impervious from any disaster event in

    Tallahassee.

  • MyFloridaMarketPlace

    Page 3 of 4

    Section 1

    DMS also investigated the in-sourcing of the BCS staff. DMS conducted a full study of in-sourcing

    of the BCS in 2006 (see Section 3). The results of that study are still pertinent today.

    There are several substantive reasons for having the contractor retain responsibility for the billing and

    collections operation. Pursuant to the authority in section 287.057(22), F.S., the contractor is paid

    from fees after the Legislative Budget Request (LBR) is satisfied. Therefore, the Service Provider is

    highly incented to do a diligent job of collecting fees. The OPPAGA report does provide that the

    potential loss of revenue should be considered as part of an evaluation. DMS considered that factor,

    and concluded that lost revenue collection would exceed any possible savings. Finally, with the state

    now retaining any excess fees collected above the LBR and con