The Activity ChartField is the basic building block for this custom functionality. This field drives the entire customization. To use the Activity ChartField correctly within PeopleSoft PC functionality requires significant restructuring with a high level of complexity. The current structure limits the system’s functionality with regard to Activity Billing preventing the implementation of the Grants and Contracts modules. See the Recommendations in the APR Report under 4.1.2 PC ChartFields and 4.3 Project Cost Customizations MOD #34. The logic of the PeopleSoft Financials system in its entirety is driven by the ChartFields, SETIDs and Control tables. The implications are: The core configuration for SETIDs in SUMMIT needs to be expanded to five positions from three positions. After version PeopleSoft v7.5, a five position SETID was required due to the processing and data issues identified in previous versions. The SETID is the major key for the PeopleSoft system and required in most of the tables as well as processes. This conversion process would impact the majority of the tables in the financial system (from five to six thousand tables). ChartFields have not been used consistently with the same definitions as discussed in the various APR reports. The delivered ChartFields within an application have not been used consistently across the modules as identified the APR and Tucker reports. Control tables have not been configured for the City-wide requirements. For example, Locations is a control table that needs to contain the values for the entire City and all the business units/departments that use this table as part of their functionality and process requirements. Changes to minor modifications identified in the previous reports would require significant analysis to identify downstream process impacts. Any modification of ChartField configurations in the current SUMMIT system will also create a cascading effect on the current customizations from a processing perspective. A number of impacts are identified below: The Time Entry system uses the Activity ChartField instead of Project ChartField to report time. Changing the logic to project would have an impact to the Labor Distribution process from HRIS and the SUMMIT PC customizations contained on the five custom pages. These five pages drive the current interfaces to the Billing application and Revenue Recognition process. It should be noted that some departments, such as HSD, use the Project, Activity, and Org ChartFields as designed; however, they are not in the majority of users. Changing from over 200 Project Trees to one Project Tree with branches would cause the rewriting of the Project- based reports. This impacts the analysis, development and testing of reports and online reporting.
The Activity ChartField is the basic building block for this custom functionality. This field drives the entire customization. To use the Activity ChartField correctly within PeopleSoft PC functionality requires significant restructuring with a high level of complexity. The current structure limits the system’s functionality with regard to Activity Billing preventing the implementation of the Grants and Contracts modules. See the Recommendations in the APR Report under 4.1.2 PC ChartFields and 4.3 Project Cost Customizations MOD #34. The logic of the PeopleSoft Financials system in its entirety is driven by the ChartFields, SETIDs and Control tables. The implications are: The core configuration for SETIDs in SUMMIT needs to be expanded to five positions from three positions. After version PeopleSoft v7.5, a five position SETID was required due to the processing and data issues identified in previous versions. The SETID is the major key for the PeopleSoft system and required in most of the tables as well as processes. This conversion process would impact the majority of the tables in the financial system (from five to six thousand tables). ChartFields have not been used consistently with the same definitions as discussed in the various APR reports. The delivered ChartFields within an application have not been used consistently across the modules as identified the APR and Tucker reports. Control tables have not been configured for the City-wide requirements. For example, Locations is a control table that needs to contain the values for the entire City and all the business units/departments that use this table as part of their functionality and process requirements. Changes to minor modifications identified in the previous reports would require significant analysis to identify downstream process impacts. Any modification of ChartField configurations in the current SUMMIT system will also create a cascading effect on the current customizations from a processing perspective. A number of impacts are identified below: The Time Entry system uses the Activity ChartField instead of Project ChartField to report time. Changing the logic to project would have an impact to the Labor Distribution process from HRIS and the SUMMIT PC customizations contained on the five custom pages. These five pages drive the current interfaces to the Billing application and Revenue Recognition process. It should be noted that some departments, such as HSD, use the Project, Activity, and Org ChartFields as designed; however, they are not in the majority of users. Changing from over 200 Project Trees to one Project Tree with branches would cause the rewriting of the Project- based reports. This impacts the analysis, development and testing of reports and online reporting.
Attach5.docx