Section 1: Introduction The Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business (BFELoB) is chartered under the Budget Officers Advisory Council (BOAC) and managed by the Department of Education. This is an interagency effort to improve the quality of budgeting in the Federal Departments and Agencies. The BFELoB has initiated a number of activities to improve collaboration between members of the Federal budgeting community, improve the skills of budget professionals, document common business processes, improve the flow of budget data between Federal entities, and identify and improve the automated budgeting tools available to the Federal Departments and Agencies. The BFELoB has created a working group consisting of knowledgeable staff from a number of Federal Departments and Agencies to develop a comparison of off the shelf budgeting software tools both in use by Federal Departments and Agencies and available in the private sector. This comparison is not part of any procurement activity. It is intended solely to help Departments and Agencies judge their own needs and make plans for fulfilling those needs. The comparison would be available only to the Federal budgeting community. The off the shelf software tools of interest to the BFELoB are those that provide widespread support to the complicated processes involved in Federal budget formulation and execution, to include activities such as strategic planning, payroll modeling, budget performance and integration, budget document production, and reporting. The BFELoB is not including in its review software developed for a specific Department application (that could not be used in another Agency setting) or of general budgeting use that does not meet the specific needs of Federal budgeting organizations (spreadsheet applications, for example). The BFELoB had earlier surveyed Federal Departments and Agencies and is aware of what is in place within those organizations. As described below, the work group is participating in demonstrations of those systems as part of this review. The final data gathering step in our process is to gain an understanding of systems meeting our criteria that are available in the private sector, so that those systems can also be included in our review. Section 2: Approach The BFELoB work group, which consists of acting professional Federal budget and IT officers, was established last year. Steps taken to date and planned in the near future are as follows: 2.1 Develop Generalized Functional Requirements To focus the review process, both on the part of the reviewers and organizations with budgeting tools being reviewed, the work group developed a generalized set of functional requirements containing elements needed by most Federal budgeting organizations. This set of requirements was initially based on the functional requirements used by several Federal Agencies in earlier procurement activities. This generalized set of functional requirements is available at: https://max.omb.gov/maxportal/webData/lob/datahost/Revised_Decision_Matrix_Requirements_v2.0.xls 2.2 Develop Budgeting Scenarios To guide people demonstrating the budgeting tools and to help the work group review the products, the work group has developed a set of scenarios depicting common business processes that are part of the Federal budget formulation and execution process. These scenarios are being used by the working group during the demonstrations described below. The functionality called for in the scenarios will for the basis of the comparisons. The scenarios are available at: https://max.omb.gov/maxportal/webData/lob/datahost/Formulation_and_Execution_Scenarios_v._2.doc 2.3 View Demonstrations The work group has begun viewing demonstrations of budgeting software in use in Federal Departments and Agencies. During these demonstrations, work group members are determining whether the particular information system meets the functional needs contained in the scenarios. The next step for the work group is to view demonstrations of vendor products not yet in use in a Federal Department or Agency. As stated above, the work group is interested in reviewing software products that meet the specific needs of Federal budgeting organizations, not just generalized budgeting tools. 2.4 Create Comparison Document When the work group has witnessed all of the demonstrations, it will produce a matrix document listing each software product, and whether it addresses the required functionalities in each of the scenarios. It is assumed that no software product will contain all of the functionalities contained in the scenarios. The comparison document will be made available to Federal budget officials for review. Section 3: Requested Action Vendors that have budgeting tools designed to meet some or all of the needs of Federal budgeting operations as spelled out in the functional requirements document and the related scenarios, but not yet in use in a Federal Department or Agency, are encouraged to volunteer to demonstrate their software to the working group. Vendors are also welcome to optionally indicate which of the specific functional requirements in the Decision Matrix Requirements their product addresses. They may do so by sending an email within thirty days of the date of this RFI to:
[email protected] . The email should describe the software proposed for demonstration including (but not limited to) such elements as: · A broad description of the functionality included in the product, · A brief description of the technical aspects of the product (platform, underlying software, scalability, etc.), and · A description of the product’s availability. The email should also include the vendor’s contact information including name, phone number and email address. The working group will contact vendors from whom we would like to receive a demonstration. To reiterate, this comparison is not part of any procurement activity. It is intended solely to assist Federal Government Departments and Agencies in assessing their current budget process capabilities and making plans to fulfill their needs. Further, the inclusion of certain vendors in the comparison document should not be construed as an official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any products or services offered.