a t t a c h m e n t “a” written technical proposal ... · written technical proposal evaluation...

Florida Department of Transportation – Work Program Integration Initiative

ITN-DOT-17/18-9005-GH | Attachment A of 21

A T T A C H M E N T “A” Written Technical Proposal Evaluation Criteria

The Department seeks to engage a Vendor who demonstrates the best capability to collaborate with FDOT through all phases of the Work Program Integration Initiative (WPII) project, from detailed requirements (Define Phase) through Operations and Maintenance. Attachment A represents a sample of FDOT’s critical business functions and the standards by which each Vendor’s capabilities will be assessed. Attachment A is comprised of the following three components:

1. Scoring Categories – Defines the specific categories by which each Vendor’s qualifications will be assessed.

2. Technical Response Scoring – Defines the scoring system to be used by the Technical Review Committee members in evaluating Vendor responses.

3. Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project – Provides a summarized description of FDOT’s master workflows with respect to managing a project and the related program of projects, including sample high-level requirements. Vendors will be assessed on their ability to propose solutions which satisfy these master workflows.

1) SCORING CATEGORIES

As a basis for the Technical Review, please document comprehensive responses to the individually numbered items in each table. Adhere to the specified page limits, where applicable, and provide concise responses. While the Department anticipates contracting with a single prime vendor (Vendor) as the systems integrator, unless specifically called for from the Vendor, the responses to these criteria should represent the Vendor and its sub-contractor(s) experience and qualifications collectively (Team). The Department will score the responses based on the following sections and their respective categories:

• Company Qualifications

• Functional Requirements

• Technical Requirements

• Value-Added Services

Company Qualifications

The Department will consider the overall qualifications of the Vendor that best meet the needs identified in this ITN, including company background and experience, Team experience and key personnel, project management methodology, and system integration methodology.

1.1.1 Company Background and Experience

The Department will consider Vendors with a strong company background. It is imperative the Vendor have verifiable references and be fully capable from an experience and qualifications perspective.




Company Background and Experience

1. Describe the Vendor’s corporate background and relevant scope of service offerings, and how they align with supporting the WPII Project scope and size. Provide evidence of recent experience implementing and supporting the proposed enterprise solution within the past seven years, and for an organization substantially similar to FDOT’s size, budget, and complexity. Response not to exceed four pages.

2. Describe the Vendor’s qualifications and experience implementing components of an enterprise financial management system in a phased approach while keeping the legacy environment functional for those areas not yet replaced. Response not to exceed three pages.

3. Provide three Team client references for projects of similar scope and size as the WPII Project. Include the following information for each reference:

• Client Contact (Name and Title)

• Address

• Phone Number

• Email

• Project Title

• Project Duration (Start and End Dates)

• Summary of Team’s Role on the Project Response not to exceed three pages.

Company Background and Experience

1.1.2 Team and Key Personnel Experience

The Department will consider Vendors with a talented and experienced Team. It is important the Vendor provide a detailed staffing model which highlights the Team’s experiences, qualifications, and training.


Team and Key Personnel Experience

1.

Describe the proposed staffing model including subcontractors, with key personnel and supporting personnel. The model should include a bio and resumes for all key personnel, what organization they are employed by (Vendor or subcontractor), what stage/phase they will be assigned to the project, and if they will be onsite or offsite (note: preference given to replies with key personnel onsite during key stages/phases). Describe how key personnel will be dedicated to the project and aligned to support the proposed implementation timeline. Describe key personnel’s previous experience with projects of similar size and scope in terms of qualifications, training, and certifications (if applicable) needed to effectively perform the role for which they are proposed.





Key personnel include (at a minimum): Project Manager, Solution Architect, Technical Architect, Lead Business Process Analyst, and Data Architect. Response not to exceed 20 pages.

2. Describe additional staffing roles, and highlight any that are being proposed as key personnel beyond the above required roles. Describe non-key personnel in terms of qualifications, training, and certifications (if applicable), needed to effectively perform the role for which they are proposed. Response not to exceed five pages.

3. Describe how your proposed Team will integrate with the current FDOT project team structure (as defined in the Project Management Plan) and any additional resource requirements of FDOT. Response not to exceed three pages.


1.1.3 Project Management Methodology

The Department will be responsible for creating the Project Management Plan (PMP). The Vendor will provide input and updates to the PMP and will be responsible for managing and adhering to the processes and guidelines established by the PMP.


Project Management Methodology

1. Provide your project management services approach, including details by phase. Include how your approach will integrate with FDOT’s PMP and recommended Organizational Change Management (OCM) approach. Response not to exceed five pages.

2. With respect to project management activities, please describe your Team’s anticipated responsibilities and those of FDOT. Response not to exceed three pages.

3. Provide a detailed project schedule to complete the Planning and Define Phases and a high-level Gantt Chart of the proposed three-year Design, Development, and Implementation (DDI) Phase and a two-year Operations and Maintenance Phase. Response not to exceed two pages.

4. Describe the proposed deliverables per phase, and provide sample work products to support project management activities for a project of this size and complexity. Response not to exceed five pages; attach relevant, sample work products as an appendix to the overall response (not counted in page limits).




5. The Department has standardized on Sparx Enterprise Architect (EA) as its enterprise tool to document business processes, collect requirements, develop test scripts, manage traceability and (potentially) manage software development (customizations). Describe what toolset you propose and how you would leverage the work the Department has invested into EA. Response not to exceed two pages.

Project Management Methodology

1.1.4 Systems Integration Methodology

The Vendor shall detail the implementation approach and methodology for delivery of the proposed solution.


Systems Integration Methodology

1. Describe your approach and methodology for the Define Phase (detailed requirements development). Response not to exceed four pages.

2. Describe your approach and methodology for Design Phase based on the requirements analysis and validation. Response not to exceed four pages.

3. Describe your ability to interface to and integrate with systems operated both inside and outside of the Department using modern, services-based patterns and technologies. Response not to exceed four pages.

4. Describe your approach to data conversion, including data cleansing and data migration, specifically with respect to WPII. Also, describe the role your Team would have in these activities and the role FDOT staff would play. Response not to exceed four pages.

5. Demonstrate your understanding of the complexity of data conversion as it relates to data validation and migration, the implementation schedule, and the phased approach. Response not to exceed four pages.

6. Describe your testing approach (including the development, management, and execution of data scenarios and scripts), and include your understanding of how parallel testing between legacy systems, including external interfaces, and the solution will be performed. Response not to exceed four pages.

7. Describe the training approach and methodology proposed for WPII. Include specifics with respect to knowledge transfer. Response not to exceed four pages.





8. Describe your configuration and release management approach, including end-user support during deployment and post implementation. Response not to exceed four pages.

9. Describe the proposed implementation approach and methodology for delivery of the proposed solution. An iterative (phased) approach is anticipated. However, the Department is open to alternative approaches. Include in the implementation strategy and the approach for designating the solution as the official system of record for the development and delivery of the Department’s capital plan of projects. Response not to exceed four pages.

10. Describe your approach to meet the one-year warranty period. How will defects be reported, tracked, and resolved? How will this work in a phased implementation? Response not to exceed three pages.

11. Describe your approach and methodology for providing Operations and Maintenance (O&M), i.e., all activities to operate the new system including but not limited to: operator support, system administration, database administration, problem troubleshooting and coordination, preventive maintenance, and repair. Response not to exceed three pages.

12. Describe your approach and methodology for Development Operations (DevOps) for WPII. DevOps is defined as continuous improvement of the solution over time, to include new development, modules, and product capabilities. Response not to exceed three pages.

13. With respect to system integration services, please describe your Team’s responsibilities and those of FDOT. Response not to exceed three pages.

14. Describe and provide sample work products by Phase (Define, Design, Implementation Planning Develop, Test, and Implementation), including enough content to support implementation services such as requirements analysis and validation, technical and functional design, application configuration, customization and development, interfaces and integration, data management, data conversion and data migration, testing, hosting, and deployment and post implementation support. Response not to exceed five pages; attach sample work products as an appendix to the overall response (not counted in page limits).

15. Describe your experience in developing and incorporating sound internal controls throughout the system design process, including the FHWA certification process. Response not to exceed three pages.

16. Describe your approach and methodology for a potential turnover/disentanglement. Response not to exceed two pages.




Functional Requirements

As a basis to rate the Vendor’s experience with transportation departments’ financial management business processes, FDOT has summarized key functionality in two story lines, a “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” and a “Day in the Life of a Project” high-level process flows (Please see Section 3.0 below).

1.2.1 General Understanding

This section gauges the Vendor’s understanding of the FDOT WPII Project and expected outcomes.


Understanding of the Department’s Work Program Integration Initiative, Desired Outcomes, Goals, and Objectives

1. Describe your comprehensive understanding of the WPII project and FDOT’s desired outcomes, goals, and objectives. Response not to exceed three pages.


1.2.2 Overall Proposed Solution Capability and Rationale

This section covers the Vendor’s strategic approach to meet the Project’s objectives.


Overall Proposed Solution Capability and Rationale

1. Provide a diagram of the proposed solution with sufficient detail to determine where major financial management capabilities are supported. Highlight any financial management capabilities that will NOT be provided in the proposed solution. Response not to exceed seven pages.

2. Describe any proposed systems, applications, or tools proposed as a solution module (referenced in the diagram) and both the integration and interoperability the module has with the proposed Core ERP. Response not to exceed three pages.

3. Describe any area or capability proposed to leverage existing FDOT systems or tools, if any. If proposed, include integration and interoperability considerations with the proposed solution. Please describe your Team’s responsibilities and those of FDOT with respect to integration and interoperability management. Response not to exceed three pages.

4. Describe the rationale as to why your proposed solution is the best value for the Department, including pros and cons of pursuing alternative solutions in the marketplace. Response not to exceed three pages.

5. Describe any strategic advantages to FDOT in selecting your proposed solution. Response not to exceed two pages.



Overall Proposed Solution Capability and Rationale

1.2.3 A Day in the Life of a Project and A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects

This section calls for the Vendor to specifically respond to the Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project story lines. Please reference Section 3, Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project, for comprehensive descriptions of the in-scope business functions.


A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project

1. Describe how the proposed solution will satisfy each need as presented in A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project. Highlight any need that will NOT be satisfied by the proposed solution and describe the rationale and any alternatives. Response not to exceed 30 pages.

2. Describe how the proposed solution will manage the data and data relationships throughout the process as presented in A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project. Response not to exceed 10 pages.

3. Describe your understanding of information reporting at various points throughout the processes to develop and deliver the Department’s capital plan of projects. Response not to exceed five pages.

4. Describe your understanding of the Department’s development of financial policies, funding allocations and targets, and project prioritization. Response not to exceed three pages.

5. Describe your understanding of the allocation of accounting transactions throughout the delivery of the Department’s capital plan of projects. Response not to exceed three pages.

A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project

1.2.4 Core Capabilities

The Schedule IV-B Business Case for the Work Program Integration Initiative provided a comprehensive description of WPII and the critical business needs it will address for FDOT. The project completed an assessment of FDOT’s in-scope business processes, and a series of functional and technical gaps and opportunities for improvement were identified for consideration. Using those findings, the Department derived a list of core system capabilities, or high-level requirements, for FDOT’s new financial management solution. The initial exercise to define the core capabilities yielded approximately 160 capabilities across dozens of functional dimensions.


Core Capabilities Matrix

1. Complete the Core Capabilities Matrix according to the instructions provided on the first tab of Attachment B – Core Capabilities. In narrative form, describe the Core ERP and every module, configuration, and customization included in the proposed solution. Include a description and rationale for any of the capabilities that will NOT be provided in the proposed





solution. Describe the proposed solution’s alignment with the Department’s Core Capabilities. Attach completed matrix as an appendix to the overall response (not counted in page limits).


1.2.5 Solution Assurances

Knowing that technology is always in a state of constant change, this section provides the Vendor an opportunity to articulate how its approach will provide long-term value to FDOT.


Solution Assurances

1. Describe how the proposed solution will be viable for a minimum of 15 years, including solution upgrades (addressing time from release to implementation), transitions to newer technologies, and other similar changes expected during the same timeframe. Response not to exceed two pages.

2. Describe how the proposed solution provides or plans to provide Software as a Service (SaaS) in the future. Response not to exceed two pages.

Solution Assurances

Technical Requirements

The Department will evaluate the Vendor’s technical services. The Vendor must have a sound technical approach, capabilities, and prior relevant experience.

1.3.1 Hosting and Technical Architecture Services

The Department desires to have the Vendor host the solution, leveraging cloud technologies to the extent possible considering functionality, performance, support, cost, and risk amongst other criteria.


Hosting and Technical Architecture Services

1. Describe how the proposed software and software modules integrate to create the proposed seamless solution. Response not to exceed three pages.

2. Describe the strategic advantages to FDOT offered by the overall architecture of the proposed solution. Response not to exceed two pages.





3. Describe the technical approach for data management, including integration and interoperability between processes, systems, and software. Response not to exceed three pages.

4. Describe the proposed hosting solution, including where hosting resides for all environments (e.g., staging, development, test, production, UAT, and training), security, and disaster recovery/business continuity. Describe what roles and responsibilities your firm, FDOT, and the hosting firm (if applicable) would provide. Response not to exceed three pages.

5. Describe how you would transfer the solution from your proposed hosting environment to another third-party hosting environment if required. Response not to exceed two pages.

6. The Department has chosen to use Microsoft Azure as its enterprise, integrated Enterprise Service Bus (ESB). Describe how the proposed solution works with the Azure ESB. Response not to exceed two pages.

7. Describe any strategic advantages of the data management, integration and interoperability, hosting solution, or ESB proposed that would benefit FDOT. Response not to exceed two pages.

8. Describe the technical approach to support legacy applications through a phased implementation. Response not to exceed three pages.

9. Describe the proposed technical hosting “stack” (i.e., network, storage, servers, virtualization, O/S, middleware, runtime, data, application, and security). Response not to exceed three pages.




Value-Added Services

The Department desires to work with a creative and agile Vendor.



1. Describe any value-added services (i.e., innovative, sustainable, practical, demonstrated) your firm will provide as part of the proposed solution. Response not to exceed five pages.




2) TECHNICAL RESPONSE SCORING

Vendor responses will be scored by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) members according to the point system established in the table below.

Scoring Categories

Section Category Point Value

1. Company Qualifications

Company Strength 5

Proposed Team and Key Personnel 15

Approach to Project Management Services

Approach to System Integration Services

10

Company Point Value 30%

2. Functional Requirements


5

Overall Proposed Solution Capability and Rationale 10 A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project

25

Core Capabilities Matrix - Core Modules, Configuration, Customization

5

Solution Assurances 5

Functional Requirements Point Value 50%

3. Technical Requirements

Hosting and Technical Architecture Services 10

Technical Requirements Point Value 10%

4. Value-Added Services Value-Added Services 10

Value-Added Services Point Value 10%

Total Points 100/100%

TRC Scoring Categories

Evaluator Scoring Guidelines

The TRC members will assign 0 – 3 points to each evaluation Category using whole numbers (i.e., no fractions or decimals). The table below provides the scoring guidelines to be used by the TRC when assigning points to each Category.

Assessment Description Rating

Exceeds Expectations

• Reply fully meets all specifications and offers innovative solutions to meet specifications

• Reply exceeds minimum specifications and provisions in most aspects for the specific items

3

Meets Expectations

• Reply adequately meets the minimum described need, or provisions of the specific needs and is generally capable of meeting the Department’s needs for specific items

2



Assessment Description Rating

Partially Meets Expectations

• Reply does not fully address the need, one or more major considerations are not addressed, or is so limited that it results in a low degree of confidence in the Vendor’s Reply or proposed Solution

• Reply is lacking in some essential aspects for the specific items

1

Does Not Meet Expectations

• Reply fails to address the need, or it does not describe any experience related to the component

• Reply is inadequate in most basic specifications or provisions for the specific items

• Insufficient information provided to be evaluated

0

TRC Scoring Guidelines

Calculating Scores

Once each TRC member has completed his/her scoring, totals will be calculated, summarized, and averaged by Vendor.

Sample Average Total Scoring for a Vendor

Section Category

Point

Value Rating

Total

Points Rating

Total

Points Rating

Total

Points Rating

Total

Points Rating

Total

Points

1. Company Qualifications 5 1 5 2 10 1 5 2 10 1 5

Proposed Team and Key Personnel

(Up to 28 Pages) 15 1 15 0 0 2 30 1 15 1 15

Approach to Project Management

Services (Up to 17 Pages)

Approach to System Integration

Services (Up to 58 Pages) 10 1 10 1 10 1 10 2 20 2 20

2. Functional Requirements Understanding of the Department’s

Work Program Integration Initiative,

Desired Outcomes, Goals, and

Objectives (Up to Three Pages) 5 0 0 2 10 1 5 0 0 0 0

Overall Proposed Solution Capability

and Rationale (Up to 16 Pages) 10 3 30 2 20 0 0 2 20 2 20

A Day in the Life of a Program and

Project (Up to 51 Pages) 25 3 75 1 25 0 0 2 50 2 50

Minimum Capabilities Matrix - Core

Modules, Configuration, Customization

(Page Limit N/A) 5 1 5 2 10 0 0 3 15 3 15

Solution Assurances (Up to Four

Pages) 5 0 0 1 5 2 10 3 15 3 15

3. Technical Requirements Hosting and Technical Architecture

Services (Up to 23 Pages) 10 1 10 0 0 2 20 0 0 0 0

4. Value-Added Services Value-Added Services (Up to Five

Pages) 10 1 10 2 20 3 30 3 30 3 30

Total Points 100 160 110 110 175 170

Average Total Points for Vendor "A" -> 145

Member 5Vendor "A" Ratings Member 1 Member 2 Member 3 Member 4



Totaling Scores

The average scores from each Vendor will then be sorted with Vendors with the top four scores moving forward to Oral Presentations (Orals).

Sample Average Total Scoring for All Vendors

Advanced to Orals

Average Total Points for Vendor "F" -> 189

Average Total Points for Vendor "C" -> 187

Average Total Points for Vendor "A" -> 145

Average Total Points for Vendor "E" -> 141

Not Advanced to Orals

Average Total Points for Vendor "D" -> 130

Average Total Points for Vendor "B'" -> 125

Average Total Points for Vendor "G" -> 122



3) DAY IN THE LIFE OF THE PROGRAM OF PROJECTS AND A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A PROJECT

To focus the Vendors’ efforts and to provide a basis for determining the most capable Vendor to provide services to the Department, FDOT identified two key master workflows: A Day in the Life of a Project, and to demonstrate how those projects roll-up and are managed together; A Day in the Life of the Program of Projects. In addition, some critical high-level requirements have also been identified as Core Capabilities. FDOT will evaluate the extent to which each Vendor’s proposed solution satisfies the Day in the Life flows and the Core Capabilities throughout the selection process. The rationale behind this approach is FDOT’s belief that many of the basic requirements should be addressed by core Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) functionality; Vendors will be expected to communicate any significant exceptions to this premise.

Day in the Life of the Program of Projects and a Day in the Life of a Project

In order for the Florida Department of Transportation to deliver the products that meet the Department’s mission, the Office of Work Program and Budget works with its partners to develop the Tentative Work Program. The Tentative Work Program is the capital plan of projects and supporting work required to create transportation infrastructure in Florida. Please reference the two diagrams associated with the, “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” and “Day in the Life of a Project” to follow the narrative presented here.

Day in the Life of the Program of Projects



Day in the Life of a Project

3.1.1 Policy Setting

FDOT is required by statute to fully consume its resources on a program of transportation projects that meet the Department’s mission. Included in the Department’s statutory requirements is the need to focus on safety and system preservation. Before investing in new capacity, FDOT must first ensure appropriate investments are made in identified safety improvements and the required maintenance and lifecycle replacement of the existing infrastructure. This includes bridge rehabilitation and replacement, roadway resurfacing, and daily replacement of things like reflectors, pavement markings, and traffic delineators. FDOT hosts a Program Planning Workshop annually to establish investment policies and these policies (which reflect executive-level decisions on how the Department will satisfy its governing statutes) are translated into funding allocations and investment and infrastructure targets. From a business process perspective, these decisions are collected by the Office of Work Program and Budget and translated into a subsequent set of deployment tactics in the form of data attributes in the financial system to support the policy decisions. Please reference box number 1 in the “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.

3.1.2 Fund Allocation and Targets

In the current environment, fund allocations serve multiple functions. They are a projection of funding available for transportation infrastructure needs and improvements based on cash flow projections of proposed contractual obligations for the Department’s capital plan of projects. They are used to track a specific revenue source or an aggregation of revenue sources (such as funding for multiple federal transportation acts from the same federal program). They are also used to separate revenue sources into the various uses required by law. Please reference box number 2 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.



Financial and Infrastructure targets are program-wide measures to determine if investment priorities and product priorities are satisfied when fund allocations are applied to specific projects. Financial targets provide guidance for levels of investment in specific programs or to satisfy a specific statutory requirement. Funds programmed for landscaping projects or preliminary engineering activities are examples of the Department’s targets. The target looks for specific project attributes to flag the project as one that can satisfy the target measure, and the amount of funding programmed on that project counts towards satisfying the target measure. Please reference box number 3 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity. Reports on infrastructure targets give FDOT insight into how much of a specific infrastructure characteristic has been funded in the five-year capital plan of projects. Miles of lanes resurfaced is an example of this target. The target identifies resurfacing projects through the project work mix attribute (resurfacing) and identifies the number of lane miles associated to the project as another project attribute. Once the project is funded in the tentative version of the capital plan of projects, the lane miles associated with the project satisfy the lane mile target for resurfacing. Please reference box number 4 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.

3.1.3 Candidate Project Development and Prioritization

FDOT projects are conceptualized in the planning process and developed into long range plans. Local partners (e.g., Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Transportation Planning Organizations, Counties, etc.) prioritize planned projects and submit these priorities to FDOT. FDOT begins scoping the projects and develops attributes to define the project. Potential projects are created in a “Candidate File” where a unique project identification number is created for the project. This is known in FDOT as a “Financial Project Identification Number” or FPID. They are also known as “FM numbers” or the “Project ID number.” Please reference box number 1 on “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity. Many project attributes are assigned to the project number to define the scope and character of the project. This includes, but is not limited to: geospatial information, work mix, transportation system, managing district, geographic district, and a description of the scope. Please reference box number 2 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity.

3.1.4 Adding Prioritized Projects to the Tentative File and Consuming Funds

FDOT staff involved in Work Program Development add fund allocations to projects prioritized for funding. FDOT ranks projects for funding based on a variety of internal criteria, including the prioritized lists of projects received from local partners. Project estimates are provided by an internal estimates office in each district (and specific offices in the Central Office) or by a local agency or partner. Once the fund allocations match the project estimate, the project is considered “funded.” Please reference box number 5 in the “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects,” and box number 3 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity. Once projects are funded, they satisfy funding and infrastructure targets based on the characteristics associated with the project and the corresponding targets. A high-level schedule is also established by fiscal year for each project. FDOT staff repeat this process to consume all fund allocations on projects in each of the next five fiscal years and to satisfy target measures. Once this is completed, the Department has



developed the full “Tentative Capital Plan of Projects” and the program is ready for several reviews before submission to the Executive Office of the Governor and State Legislature for consideration in the budget appropriation process. Included in this step is the establishment of contingency items. Contingency items, or “boxes” are established in each budget category to cover supplemental agreements, overruns, and litigation that can occur on projects. Fund allocations are held in contingency boxes up to a threshold established in the Program Planning Workshops. These funds protect the program integrity by reducing the amount of movement on projects between fiscal years due to unexpected requirements for additional funding. Please reference box number 6 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.

3.1.5 Confirming Financial Soundness

Once the Tentative Capital Plan of Projects has been developed, the Department evaluates the plan to ensure there is sufficient cash flow to cover forecasted expenditures based on project estimates and anticipated schedules. To achieve the complete and balanced financial plan required by statute, spend patterns are analyzed to develop payout projections and these are applied to the Department’s proposed commitments to develop a cash outflow model. Reimbursement projections from funding stakeholders are then developed and evaluated collectively with revenue estimates to develop projected receipts, which are then matched to the projected cash outflows. This matching of projected cash outflows and receipts ensures the Department’s allocation of transportation dollars is fully funded by current and future transportation revenues. Once this is done, financial teams at FDOT develop financing strategies to ensure sufficient cash availability to fund the program of projects, and these strategies are presented to executive management for policy decisions on how to ensure the financial soundness of the Tentative Capital Plan of Projects. Once a decision is made on the financing strategies, information on these strategies is provided with the Department’s submission of the balanced financial plan to the Executive Office of the Governor and Legislature as part of FDOT’s budget request. Please reference box number 7 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.

3.1.6 Developing the Department Budget Request

Specific project attributes and funding details translate the Tentative Capital Plan of Projects into the corresponding budget structure for reporting and submitting the Plan into the statewide budgeting application. This application is known as the Legislative Appropriations System/Policy and Budgeting Subsystem or LAS/PBS. The project attributes of “Budgeting District,” “Transportation System,” and “Phase,” along with the funding attribute “Program Number,” are used to map projects to the budget coding of “Budget Entity,” “Budget Category,” and “Program Component.” A reporting application translates these details for manual entry into LAS/PBS. Each district and the Central Office holds a Public Hearing for review and public comment before final submission of the plan to the Executive Office of the Governor and State Legislature before the annually scheduled Legislative Session begins. A comprehensive set of reports and graphics is developed for each presentation from the project and financial data assembled during the development of the Tentative Capital Plan of Projects. Please reference box number 8 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.



The annual budget request includes the budget request data in LAS/PBS and contextual reports drafted from the Tentative Capital Plan of Projects. Several manual exhibits are assembled with the submission to provide additional Department information as instructed. Once the budget has been submitted, FDOT coordinates with the Executive Office of the Governor and State Legislature to provide additional insights into the plan as well as any requested modifications for clarity. Please reference box number 9 in “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for this work activity.

3.1.7 Adopting the Work Program and Conforming to General Appropriations

When the Governor approves (or vetoes portions of) the annual General Appropriations Act, FDOT has to align project programming to comply with any new laws, statutes, or executive policy before the Tentative Capital Plan of Projects is adopted. The act of adopting the plan changes the data attributes for the capital plan of projects from “Tentative” to “Adopted,” and all master financial data is updated to reflect this change. Another round of confirming the financial soundness of the plan is completed, as well as a confirmation of cash management policies and financing strategies. During this time, master allocation tables are drafted that indicate how budget will be allocated to the districts and Central Office for the new fiscal year. Please reference box 10 on “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” and box number 4 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for these work activities. At this point, FDOT moves from developing the tentative capital plan of projects into delivering the adopted capital plan of projects.

3.1.8 Manage Program-wide Funds/Budget/Cash Balances

With the adoption of the Department’s capital plan of projects, the managing and monitoring of the execution of the entire five-year plan and each individual program area is ongoing, including making required adjustments to the planned number and mix of projects based on actual performance. When modifications are necessary, fiscal responsibility and data integrity of the Department’s capital plan of projects must be maintained. Allowing modifications, while maintaining consumption of funding allocations and amending the Department’s budget as necessary, requires periodic review of the entire five-year plan. This includes managing the multiple funding sources and review of actual and forecasted cash balances. The Department continually manages the federal funds program and produces the vital information necessary to support the Department’s partnerships with federal agencies. In order to consume federal obligation authority over the federal fiscal year, the development of the Obligation Authority Plan is completed. The Department’s outstanding obligation authority balance is reconciled with the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) obligation authority balance. Federally funded production needs are estimated for the remainder of the federal fiscal year in order to ensure consumption of all obligation authority and to prevent reversion to FHWA for redistribution to other states. To routinely confirm a balanced financial plan, the Department converts the proposed commitments contained in the capital plan of projects, into projected cash disbursements which are matched against projected cash receipts. This matching of projected cash disbursements and receipts ensures the Department’s allocation of transportation dollars is fully funded by current and future transportation revenues. By operating on this cash flow basis, the Department maximizes the use of funds over time and covers existing commitments as they occur. As such,



the Department will continue to perform the functions required to manage budget, funding sources, and cash flow concurrently. Please reference box 11 on “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for these work activities.

3.1.9 Funds Approval

To begin the delivery of the Work Program, individual project (or project phase) funding must be authorized. For federally funded projects, FHWA must approve project specific authorization requests before contracts for construction or maintenance projects can be advertised. For projects funded with local funds, these funds must be on deposit with the Department prior to advertisement. Remaining unauthorized phases are manually authorized by Office of Work Program and Budget staff. To proceed with the delivery of the Department’s capital plan of projects, Florida Statutes require a funds approval statement from the Comptroller of the Department that funds are available prior to entering into any contract or binding commitment of funds. This funds approval statement is to be obtained prior to advertisement of construction or maintenance contracts. This commitment of funds is represented with a current year “memo” encumbrance recorded in the State of Florida’s accounting system and ensures the disciplines of budget and funds management are aligned, budgeted funds are in place, and those funds are set aside for payment of the specific contract. For commitments on a contract for obligations of years beyond the current year, a reviewed funds approval is completed and is “contingent upon annual legislative appropriation.” Once the funds approval process is completed by the Department and “memo” encumbrances are created in State of Florida’s accounting system, the funds are committed for each specific transportation project and funding source within the Department’s financial management system(s) with an accounting transaction allocation process. Please reference box number 5 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity.

3.1.10 Award Contract

After the contract has gone through the procurement process and a contractor has been selected, the financial impact of the contract award must be reflected in the transportation project programmed and committed amounts as well as the associated contract(s) encumbrance balance within the State of Florida’s accounting system. The award amount may differ from the amount originally programmed and memo encumbered, so the transportation project programmed amount must be adjusted and authorized with a funds approval completed, including the association of the contract to the awarded vendor. Similar to the advertisement process, the funds approval adjustments resulting from the award of the contract are represented in the State of Florida’s accounting system as an encumbrance accounting transaction. Per Florida Statute, funds must be encumbered prior to execution of all contracts, contract amendments, or supplemental agreements that obligate the Department’s funds. The encumbrance process ensures the budget and funds are in place and sets the budget and funds aside for payment of the executed contract. The resulting encumbrance balance adjustments are then committed for each specific transportation project and funding source within the Department’s financial management system(s) with an accounting transaction allocation process. Once the financial impact of the contract award is reflected in both the transportation project and contract funding/budget details and supporting attributes, the project is now considered ready for



the selected vendor to begin work and invoice for work completed. Please reference box number 6 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity.

3.1.11 Manage Scope/Schedule/Costs

For the Department to maintain a viable capital plan of projects, it is necessary to make modifications to reflect changes during the lifecycle of the transportation project (including supporting contracts). Such modifications may be due to funding changes, bid results differing from estimates, overall operational delays, etc. When modifications are necessary, fiscal responsibility and data integrity of the Department’s capital plan of projects must be maintained. Allowing modifications, while complying with funding and budgeting capacity, requires periodic review of the overall capital plan of projects as well as the many individual projects. In addition to the management of the technical work and financial impact of the project, there must also be management of the contract to ensure all provisions are completed and the multiple aspects and issues related to project funding and budget allocations are addressed. As invoicing occurs during the life of the project, the resulting payments are made from encumbrances and/or sanctioned unencumbered disbursements. At the time of the payment, assurances must be made that the work, services, or goods have been delivered prior to payment of an invoice, the invoice is within the terms of the contract, and the invoice is properly documented. These payment transactions are tracked by interfacing with the State of Florida’s accounting system, with the actual accounting transactions being allocated within the Department’s financial management system(s) to the funding source for each individual project. Coordination of reimbursement activities with the Department’s funding partners is also required. The eligibility of expenditure accounting transactions is confirmed, and billing request exceptions are reviewed to validate billing adjustments and to maximize and authorize reimbursement requests submitted to funding partners. The reimbursement request approvals are tracked, and the necessary entries in the various financial systems are recorded to direct the reimbursement deposits to Department-maintained trust funds. For many of the Department funding sources, statistics are provided related to the expenditure of funds such as Cash Management Improvement Act (CMIA) guidelines and Schedule of Expenditure of Federal Awards (SEFA) requirements. Please reference box number 7 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity.

3.1.12 Close Project

As the project and associated contracts are brought to completion, multiple offices within the Department work to close out the project and contracts. The project must be closed after all expenditures have occurred and there are no existing encumbrances or outstanding payable balances. With the submission and processing of final invoices, the “cycle” of adjustments for transportation project programmed amounts, authorizations, and funds approvals must be completed. The resulting encumbrance balance adjustments are then reflected in the commitments of each specific transportation project and funding source within the Department’s financial management system(s) with an accounting transaction allocation process. After the proper project closeout activities have taken place, the final reimbursement/adjustments of federal funds is requested. Transportation project and contract attributes are updated to reflect the “closed” status, with notifications provided to Department personnel to complete the required closing documentation.



At this point, project and contract performance is assessed. Lessons learned from the performance measures are then incorporated into the next cycle of the development of the Department’s plan for projects for the “cycle of continuous improvement.” Please reference box number 8 in “Day in the Life of a Project” for this work activity.

3.1.13 Manage Fiscal Year Transition

As part of the Department’s delivery of the capital plan of projects, procedures are undertaken at the end of the state fiscal year to close out financial activities from the prior year, bring forward accounting and budget related balances from the previous year, and initialize accounting and budget related balances and supporting control structures for the upcoming state fiscal year. To preserve budget for the Department’s executed contracts, an annual certification forward request is prepared and submitted to the Executive Office of the Governor to certify outstanding obligations of prior year budgetary appropriations to the new fiscal year. Commitments on executed contracts not approved for certification forward are un-encumbered and re-encumbered using the upcoming fiscal year’s budget. Due to the nature of the Department’s multi-year capital plan of projects, eligible projects with an uncommitted or un-expended balance at the end of the year become a part of the roll forward process. This process “rolls” uncommitted budget forward from the current state fiscal year to the upcoming state fiscal year. To reflect the consumption of funding and budget due to the current year reviewed funds approvals that impact the upcoming fiscal year, it is necessary to process encumbrances in the statewide accounting system to recognize those contractual commitments. The statewide accounting system only processes those encumbrances for a current or prior state fiscal year. Inflation factors for the construction costs of the transportation projects are also reviewed to determine what factors to apply to the present day costs programmed within the Department’s capital plan of projects. In addition, the Department’s Indirect Cost Allocation Plan (ICAP) is developed, including the fringe benefit distribution, to determine the rates that will be applied to the transportation project’s direct expenditures in the upcoming state fiscal year. Another round of confirming the financial soundness of the program is completed, as well as a confirmation of cash management policies and financing strategies. A balanced “benchmark” financial plan is published and used throughout the upcoming fiscal year to track the variance of forecasted to actual results and revise forecasting assumptions based on cause and effect analysis of the variances. Please reference box number 12 on “Day in the Life of the Program of Projects” for these work activities.

a t t a c h m e n t “a” written technical proposal ... · written technical proposal evaluation...

Documents