Skip to Content

A Plan for the Implementation of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) for the State of Texas

prev | next

Exhibit B – Independent Business Case Study Executive Summary
© Salvaggio, Teal & Associates

Section 1. Executive Summary

Approach and Deliverables

Four groups were identified to provide data and information to support the BCA analysis:

  • A subset of 182 State agencies surveyed in November 2007. This group was composed of twenty-four (24) of the State’s largest and most complex agencies as selected by the Comptroller’s Office and represents at least 97% of the State’s total FY 2007 expenditures.
  • System stakeholders that represent the existing statewide administrative systems, including:
  • Uniform Statewide Accounting System (USAS);
  • State Property Accounting (SPA);
  • Texas Identification Number System (TINS);
  • Uniform Statewide Payroll/Personnel System (USPS);
  • Standardized Payroll/Personnel Reporting System (SPRS); and
  • Human Resource Information System (HRIS).
  • Higher Education System Offices that represent all institutions of higher education except for Stephen F. Austin University, Texas Southern University, Texas Woman’s University, Midwestern State University, and Texas State Technical College.
  • Members of the Information Technology Council for Higher Education (ITCHE) that is composed of representatives of:
  • The Texas A&M University System;
  • The Texas State University System;
  • The Texas Tech University System;
  • The University of Houston System;
  • The University of North Texas System;
  • The University of Texas System; and
  • Texas Woman’s University.

The deliverables associated with the Study include the following:

  • Documentation of the alternative scenarios to be analyzed;
  • High-level assessment of existing administrative systems;
  • Development of Cost Estimates for the Status Quo, and the alternatives to be evaluated;
  • Development of Avoided Costs (costs that would no longer be incurred if a statewide ERP system was implemented) for the alternatives to be evaluated;
  • Development of Process-improvement Savings (process efficiency savings that would be achieved if a statewide ERP system was implemented) for the alternatives to be evaluated;
  • Development and documentation of the business case to support each alternative to be evaluated;
  • Recommendation of a specific alternative to be pursued to address the State’s statewide administrative system needs;
  • High-level implementation plan documenting a recommended approach for deploying the recommended solution across State government (and higher education as applicable); and
  • Funding plan to support the recommended alternative to be pursued.

back to top