Day 1 Sebata EMS User Group 7 December 2017 TIME SESSION TOPIC - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Day 1 SebataEMS User Group 7 December 2017

2 TIME SESSION TOPIC PRESENTED BY TARGET AUDIENCE 07:00 – 09:00 Registration 09:00 – 09:15 Welcoming Sebata 09:15 – 09:30 G1 Approval of the previous minutes Maritz van Zyl Sebata Municipal Executive Management 09:30 – 09:45 G2 What is in the news – a recap on events post 1 July 2017 (mSCOA “Go-Live”) Maritz van Zyl Sebata Municipal Executive Management 09:45 – 10:00 G3 Sebata Hybrid mSCOA Compliant Solution Sebata Municipal Executive Management 10:00 – 10:30 Session break 10:30 – 12:00 G4 Client status feedback Simon Moloi Sebata Municipal Executive Management, mSCOA Steering Committee 12:00 – 13:00 Lunch 13:00 – 13:30 G5 Consolidated view of the Auditor General management report Guest speaker Sebata Municipal Manger, CFO and all HOD’s 13:30 – 14:45 G6 MFMA Section 173 and the potential implication on public servants Sebata Municipal Manager, all HOD’s and all public servants 14:45 – 15:00 Session break 15:00 – 15:15 G7 Impact of amended Project Plan Sebata Municipal Manager, all HOD’s, Internal Audit, Supply Chain, Risk Managers. 15:15 – 15:45 G8 A treasury perspective of mSCOA implement and status

• f Sebata

Northern Cape Provincial Treasury Municipal Manager, all HOD’s, Internal Audit, Supply Chain, Risk Managers. 15:45 – 16:00 Recap Sebata 16:00 – 16:15 Conclusion of the first day Sebata 18:45 – 19:00 Arrival for Gala Event 19:00 – 19:30 Dinner 20:00 onwards Live Entertainment

3

Welcome

4

Approval of minutes

5

What is in the news Recap on events post 1 July 2017

Presenter: Maritz van Zyl

6

Critical areas overlooked by the municipal landscape

• Adjustment of project plans post 1 July 2017
• Sigh -off : user acceptance testing
• Continuity of the m SCOA steering committee
• Risk registers

7

The Sebata Hybrid mSCOA compliant system

Presenter: Maritz van Zyl

8

• 1. The Sebata Hybrid mSCOA Compliant Solution - Background
• Sebata took conscientious decision in 2014 to completely rewrite

SebataFMS system

• Reasoning and justification:
• All budget and transactional information within municipalities to be derived at source of transaction

directly informed by associated detail containing seven segments of the SCOA Regulation – no mapping or data extrapolation will be allowed;

• Significant efficiencies and improved effectiveness by embedding required 15 key business processes

within one integrated system;

• Single database, single point of entry financial management system encompassing the entire financial

management accountability cycle of local government including seamless reporting i.e. Municipal Budget and Reporting Regulations, Annual Financial Statements, Statutory in-year reporting etc. ; and

• Development of the first fully integrated, purpose built solution for South African local government

that is also totally proudly South African in the truest of form.

9

The Sebata Hybrid mSCOA Compliant Solution – Rationale

• Always Intention to “go-live” with mSCOA on 1 July 2017
• Various external factors – forcing Sebata to revisit implementation methodology in
• rder to mitigate risk including:
• Changes associated with version 6.1 of chart
• Business continuity risk on the part of the municipality (i.e. Payroll and Billing)
• Limited user acceptance testing
• Audit outcome risk
• Collective decision taken (Sebata and clients) – phased implementation of

SebataEMS modules during 2017/18 financial year

• IMPORTANT – phased implementation of SebataEMS and not mSCOA

10

Sebata Hybrid mSCOA Compliant Solution – Implementation

• Misconception in relation to mSCOA “go-live” and “go-live” of SebataEMS.
• Perception that municipalities can only be “live” with mSCOA if SebataEMS is fully live. NOT

CORRECT

• Interim Hybrid Solution between SebataFMS and SebataEMS implemented from 1 July 2017 utilising

mix of functionality of SebataFMS and SebataEMS in achieving full transacting against mSCOA classification framework directly from source of transaction

• Important to note:
• All clients fully adhered to project based budgeting requirements of the Regulation including

seven segments. All municipal 2017/18 MTREF’s (budgets) compiled in SebataEMS and are hosted in the SebataEMS database; and

• All mSCOA Data Strings generated from source of transaction through the application of the

Hybrid Solution between SebataFMS and SebataEMS. This includes all budget related string submissions, in-year and monthly performance and validation checks on the part of the National Treasury Local Government Database (LG Database).

11

Sebata Hybrid mSCOA Compliant Solution – Architecture

12

13

14

Sebata Hybrid mSCOA Solution - Architecture

• All clients migrated to, and through utilising, SebataEMS to ensure mSCOA compliance within the

Planning and Budgeting module of the solution.

• The mSCOA Chart of Accounts that originates from the SebataEMS Planning and Budgeting module

seamlessly integrates with SebataFMS via the “Legacy Unbundling Utility”.

• Depending on maturity of client migration from SebataFMS to SebataEMS, clients utilise

combination of modules from both SebataEMS and SebataFMS to ensure and satisfy all mSCOA transactional compliance requirements.

• Where SebataFMS modules are used, the resulting Legacy General Ledger Transactions are

unbundled via the “FMS Legacy Unbundling Utility” and the resulting mSCOA General Ledger Transactions are, in turn, seamlessly fed into the “EMS mSCOA Gateway”.

• EMS mSCOA Gateway automates insertion of transactions, with its budget consumption, into the

EMS Database. Importantly - transaction details fed through the EMS mSCOA Gateway include cross-referencing document numbers to allow drill-down capabilities between the two systems.

• Temporal output functionality required for National Treasury’s mSCOA compliance, such as IDP

, Budget and Transactional Strings, are all extracted by end-users from SebataEMS via the standard SebataEMS front-end processes, regardless of where the originating transaction occurred.

• The above mentioned solution is similar for instances where the municipality is utilizing other third

party (not Sebata solutions) applications for example Payroll, Asset Management, Pre-paid vending etc.

15

Generic Challenges

• Perceived misconception that mSCOA “go-live” is directly aligned to SebataEMS “go-live”
• Negative impact on the payment of outstanding invoices
• UAT sign-off (municipalities are currently in the process of finalisation of the their AFS (Auditor General)
• Data credibility (data enhancement problematic)
• Upload into SebataEMS for assets and inventory after audit period (provision for movements of 17/18).
• Municipalities have a misconception that the data string submission have replaced the institutionalised

reporting as per In-Year reporting framework (A,B,C,D,E and F schedules) to LG database

• Resource constraints and vacancies in key management positions i.e. MM, CFO.
• Further training required to understand the designed framework and associated changes to business

processes and standard operating procedures introduced through and associated with the mSCOA regulation.

• ICT infrastructure and general environments i.e. connectivity

16

Way Forward

• UAT to be completed on all other relevant modules as per the SebataEMS phased in

implementation methodology including Go-Live of the SebataEMS modules.

• Continue with the submission and reconciliation of all associated data strings in

collaboration with the NT and respective PTs (mSCOA)

• Subsequent to the finalisation of the 2016/17 audit process and AFS undertake unbundling

exercise to provide for opening balances (Legacy charts)

• Preparing for the adjustment budgets process through the application of mSCOA on

SebataEMS

• Preparing for the 2018/19 MTREF budget compilation process as informed and aligned to

the IDP

• Further data cleansing and enhancement
• Further capacity building, change management and training
• Working proactively and collectively with all stakeholders i.e. National and Provincial

Treasuries to ensure the successful implementation of not only the mSCOA regulation but the entire financial management reform agenda for local governments

17

Conclusion

• All stakeholders need to acknowledge that the implementation of mSCOA has been a learning process on

the part of all and will continue in this fashion for the short to medium term, i.e. refinement of the LG database and data string methodology including validations and reconciliations

• There is no go-to manual which provide the blue print for the implementation of a sophisticated and

complex reform of this nature (undoubtedly the first in the world)

• Need to be acknowledged that there is no one size fits all implementation methodology and that each

vendor and respective service provider would have formulated their implementation methodology aligned to their process, one cannot be assessed as being better or worse than another. The true test of mSCOA compliancy will be determined in the compilation and finalisation of the 2017/18 AFS – Auditor General. NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE MENTIONED SEBATA IS FULLY COMMITTED TO NOT ONLY OUR CLIENTS BUT ALL STAKEHOLDERS IN PROVIDING INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS THAT NOT ONLY PROVIDE FOR COMPLIANCE BUT POSITIVELY CONTRIBUTES TO THE OVERALL IMPROVEMENT OF THE MANAGEMENT OF THE MUNICIPALITIES FINANCES, OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCIES AND EFFECTIVENESS, AND ULTIMATELY IMPROVE SERVICE DELIVERY FOR THE CITIZENS

18

Client feedback

Presenter: Simon Moloi

19

• 1. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Financial Data

20

• 1. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Financial Data

21

• 1. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Financial Data

22

• 1. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Financial Data

23

• 1. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Financial Data

24

• 2. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Non Financial Data

25

• 2. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Non Financial Data

26

• 2. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Non Financial Data

27

• 2. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Non Financial Data

28

• 2. High level status of mSCOA compliancy per client – Non Financial Data

29

• 3. mSCOA Progress to date

Planning:

• Unbundling of current ledger and vote structure to mSCOA charts.
• Implementation of a full project based budget (Opex, revenue and capex).
• Implementation and alignment of policy intents (IDP) to MTREF (Budgets)
• Compilation of a mSCOA compliant budget in terms of mSCOA 7 segments.
• Implementation of fully fledged balance sheet budgeting.
• Initiation of projects on SebataEMS.
• Lock down of budgets on SebataEMS.
• Capturing of the IDP in line with the national KPA, strategic objectives, IDP programmes, MSTF

and UIDF.

• Generation of the budget and IDP strings for submission on the LG portal
• Uploaded and locked the virement policy.

30

• 3. mSCOA Progress to date (Continued…)

SCM:

• Completion of take-on sheets for vendors in accordance with CSD.
• Completion of take-on sheets for active creditors used by the municipalities.
• Vendors and creditors uploaded and missing information completed on SebataEMS
• Approval of procurement plans
• Onsite training to users of the SCM module of the municipalities
• User Acceptance Testing demonstration and sign off
• Handholding in creating the following on SebataEMS:
• Requisitions;
• Quotations;
• Orders;
• Invoice approvals;
• Sundry payments.

31

• 3. mSCOA Progress to date (Continued…)

Ledger:

• VAT and cash book set-ups
• User Acceptance Testing demonstration and sign off
• Bank transfer file and bank payment
• Activation of mSCOA trial balance votes and detailed ledger
• Modifying on financial reports.
• Generating of transaction strings in mSCOA format.

32

• 3. mSCOA Progress to date (Continued…)

HR & Payroll:

• Alignment of the employees to the approved departments and divisions
• Confirmation of employees as per the legacy system, which were imported to SebataEMS
• Importing master payroll information into SebataEMS
• Setting up of positions in accordance with the reporting lines as per the organogram
• Completion of task grades and salary notches

Billing:

• Property file missing information updated – for municipality that accepted the provided

quotations

• Set-up and alignments of tariffs according to mSCOA requirements
• Import of valuation roll
• Import of account information
• Set-up of street, towns and suburbs.

33

• 3. mSCOA Progress to date (Continued…)

Assets:

• Completion of assets take on based on the audited information for the 2016/17 financial year
• Unbundling of asset register in mSCOA format
• User Acceptance Testing demonstration and sign off

Inventory:

• Completion of inventory take on based on the audited information for the 2016/17 financial

year

• Stock take for inventory take on
• User Acceptance Testing demonstration and sign off

34

• 4. User Acceptance Testing Process
• Is a testing procedure intended to sign off all general and municipal specific configurations and

system processes of SebataEMS.

• Basically clients need to confirm that:
• Settings have been appropriately captured and configured per module; and
• System workflow is functioning as it should.
• Transferring of skills also takes place during the UAT process.

Thereafter

• SCOA Champion, CFO and MM needs to sign off UAT working papers for various modules.

35

• 5. User Acceptance Testing Phases

UAT sign off should be completed for:

• General settings
• Planning module
• SCM module
• Assets module
• Inventory module
• Billing module
• HR/ Payroll module
• Ledger module

36

• 6. Summary – UAT sign off Procedures

37

Overview of AGSA Findings

2016/2017

Presented by Mubesko Africa (Pty) Ltd

Presenter: Smartryk Calitz RGA, CGAP , CFE

38

Index of presentation content

• Summary of most critical findings
• The immediate future
• An audit committee perspective
• Closing

39

Summary of most critical findings

40

Assurance levels

41

Root cause and risk areas

42

Status of the internal control drivers

43

Statement of Financial Position

• Accumulated Surplus/Reserves
• Non-current Employee Benefits
• Non-current Provisions
• Payables
• Unspent Grants
• Property Plant and Equipment
• Investment Property
• Agriculture
• Receivables
• Cash and Cash Equivalents

44

Accumulated Surplus/Reserves

• Effect of qualifications on statement on financial performance;

45

Non-Current Employee Benefits

• Basis of qualification for benefits not supported;
• Actual benefits paid in the Report from Actuaries differ from General Ledger;
• Incomplete lists of employees provided to Actuaries;
• Incorrect lists of employees provided to Actuaries - Example a list includes a deceased person;
• Impact of fraudulent payments to fictitious employees not considered.

46

Non-current Provisions

• Costs on reports of Engineers seems to be incorrect. No provision for permit was made in calculation

for landfill-sites operating without permit;

• Reports differ if current year report is compared with previous year report. For example: Fencing was

included in current year calculation and none was included in previous year calculation;

• The validity of license permits could not be verified;

47

Payables

• Lack of an adequate creditors system to support the amount disclosed;
• Creditors reconciliations are not performed;
• No supporting documentation for sundry creditors;
• Motor Vehicle Registration account not reconciled;

48

Unspent Grants

• Grants payable back to National Treasury not disclosed under Payables;
• Grants used for operating activities;
• Confusion with regards to agency versus principal with regards to housing transactions;
• No supporting documentation for old unspent Grants from various sources.

49

PPE

• Incorrect depreciation calculations;
• No proof that useful life’s were reviewed;
• No proof that testing was performed for indicators of impairment;
• Depreciation calculated on Capital Under Construction;
• Community Assets were not unbundled – Sport Fields consists of more than 1 asset with different

useful lives (Pavilion, rugby field, hall, netball courts, etc.);

• Infrastructure Assets not previously recognised, record at incorrect values. DRC was calculated

incorrectly;

• Municipality has no idea what old WIP projects consist of;
• Physical existence of assets could not be verified;
• Condition assessments weren’t done properly;
• No supporting documentation for calculation of CRC/DRC;
• New repairs and maintenance disclosure not complete;
• Directive 7 applied incorrectly.

50

Investment Property

• Incorrect classification of Investment Property – must be able to demonstrate that property is rented
• ut to make a profit, otherwise it is considered to provide a service to community and must then be

classified as PPE;

• Fair Values adjustments not obtained for IP carried at Fair Value;

51

Agriculture

• No supporting documentation for calculation of fair value for Biological Assets;
• No proof that asset count was performed for Biological Assets;

52

Receivables

• Calculation for Debt Impairment not in accordance with GRAP 104;
• Age analysis differ from General Ledger;
• No supporting documentation for Sundry Receivables;
• No payment history from departments for unfunded mandates, causing concerns on lack of

impairment consideration of the receivable.

53

Cash and Cash Equivalents

• Outstanding Deposits not followed-up. Outstanding deposits older than 1 month appear on bank

reconciliation;

• Investments with maturity date more than 3 months post year-end incorrectly classified as cash and

cash equivalents.

54

Statement of financial performance

• Revenue from Exchange transactions
• No billing and or incorrect billing;
• Revenue from non-exchange
• No reconciliation performed between valuation roll and financial systems;
• No reconciliation performed between rates levied and valuation roll tariff;
• Other income
• Discount received from Auditor-General must be recorded as non-exchange transactions;
• Employee related Cost
• S56 employees receiving an Acting Allowance, must also be included in the disclosure note under

Employee Related Cost. Only the acting allowance must be disclosed for these employees and not all benefits paid to them;

55

Disclosure notes

• Irregular expenditure;
• Unauthorised Expenditure;
• Fruitless and or Wasteful Expenditure;
• MFMA Disclosures;
• Related Party Disclosures;
• Going Concern;

56

Irregular Expenditure

• Prior year instances of Irregular Expenditure not followed-up;
• Deviations from SCM not clearly documented;
• All deviations from SCM not included on the deviations list submitted to the MM on a monthly basis;
• Classification of deviations not clearly documented – Why is it only 1 supplier, Why is it Emergency,

etc;

• All Irregular Expenditure not identified and disclosed in AFS; What is the impact for the following

year?

• Incomplete register for Irregular Expenditure
• Incorrect members of bid committees
• No system in place to accurately identify the occurrence of irregular expenditure
• No consequence management

57

Unauthorised expenditure

• Unauthorised Expenditure calculated incorrectly;
• No supporting documentation for total Unauthorised Expenditure on year-end;

58

Fruitless and or Wasteful expenditure

• Incomplete register for fruitless and wasteful expenditure;
• Not all expenditure that meets the definition of fruitless and wasteful expenditure was included in the

register and disclosure note;

59

MFMA Disclosures

• Incorrect disclosure of PAYE/UIF; Pension/Medical Aid, VAT, etc.
• Incorrect disclosure of material losses;
• Incorrect calculation of distribution losses;

60

Related Party Disclosure

• Incomplete disclosure of transactions with related parties – Services with councillors and senior

management;

• Incomplete disclosure of transactions with people in service of the state;
• No declaration of interest from Audit Committee, Council, Staff, etc.

61

Going Concern

• No going concern assessment performed;
• Going Concern assessment not clearly documented in AFS.

62

Material corrections to AFS

• The AGSA includes an emphasis of matter paragraph when material corrections were allowed and

report on section 122 of the MFMA. MFMA section 122(1)(a) and (b)

• “Every municipality and every municipal entity must for each financial year prepare annual financial

statements which—

• (a)

fairly presents the state of affairs of the municipality or entity, its performance against its budget, its management of revenue, expenditure, assets and liabilities, its business activities, its financial results, and its financial position as at the end of the financial year; and

• (b)

disclose the information required in terms of sections 123, 124 and 125.”

63

Performance management objectives

• We noted the change in the methodology causing the inclusion of paragraphs in the audit report

based on the assessment of the specific performance indicator selected.

• Service delivery and Local Economic Development appear to feature as high risk theme

64

The immediate future

• Audit action plans
• Annual report – tabled before 25 January 2018
• Mid-year assessment
• Consequence management
• Financial Misconduct Disciplinary Board (FMDB)
• King IV
• mSCOA reporting
• Critical to get the various assurance providers to focus on the root causes, provide assurance on the

existence of policies and procedures, adequate systems, and implementation of the audit action plan.

• Accounting Officers, The Speaker and Council to activate consequence management processes by:
• Evaluating the existence of intention and or negligence not to comply with the MFMA,
• Classified financial misconduct to be referred to FMDB
• Section 32 investigations done and decisions recorded (PAJA)

65

An Audit Committee perspective

• Effectiveness of Finance Unit and CFO (King IV)
• Implementation of audit action plan
• Risk management
• Performance management
• Financial management
• Effective use of internal audit
• mSCOA compliance
• Consider a special audit committee meeting dealing with the AGSA management report, Audit

Report, Audit Action plan, Internal audit follow-up matrices and focus on root cause responses;

• Most APRC only have 2 more engagements prior to year-end 30 June 2018, IS it enough to display

sufficient leadership and oversight?

• More rigorous detailed reviews of mSCOA transactions classification, improved focus on initial

recognition, management review of information to and from experts, more timeous AFS, detailed review of AFS and supporting documents.

Action plan Implementation Follow-up Report AGSA/IA reports

66

Closing

• There might be an expectation that entities transact compliant with GRAP standards in a system that

accurately reflect and report on financial information, that will meet the reporting requirements as defined in the framework for the preparation of annual financial statements.

• Subsequent measurement, disclosure and presentation should be the result of a clearly defined

process, established to ensure compliance with GRAP standards and MFMA disclosure expectations.

• Assurance providers including Senior Management, Municipal Manager, Mayor, Internal Audit, Audit

Committee, MPAC and Council should work collectively together to achieve the desired result.

• In the event of a breach of conduct, appropriate consequence management should be considered,

properly documented, referred to the correct oversight bodies who should apply their minds timeously and recommend appropriate actions.

• Promotion of Administrative Justice Act should be understood, implemented and adhered to that will

enable the assurance providers to assess the appropriateness of actions taken.

• Internal audit should be adequately resourced to ensure that assurance providers receive timeous and

correct reports to enable corrective steps to be taken.

• Together we can achieve the goal of a sustainable economy, implementation of policies, and reporting
• n institutional performance management that change the lives of our people.

67

Questions

68

MFMA Section 173 and the potential implications on public servants

Presenter: Christo Venter

69

• Christo to provide

70

Impact of amended project plans

Presenter: Maritz van Zyl

71

EMS implementation agreements

• A tailor made project plan where compiled for each municipality
• deliverables with timelines is stipulated in the plan
• Scope changes could arise due to deviations within the deliverables
• If its not in the implementation plan then it deemed to be out of scope

72

Examples of project scope extension:

• Regulation changes by NT
• mSCOA chart 6.1 to 6.2
• Circular updates
• NT reporting assistance
• A, B and C-schedule compilation (Old format)
• Reconciliation between council approved budget and system budget
• General accounting work
• Compilation of mSCOA asset register
• Stock take
• GRAP updates
• Revenue enhancement
• Data purification of master information (all modules)
• Reconciliations of control accounts before migration to SebataEMS
• Alignment of sub-module data into a mSCOA format
• mSCOA Budget process (Adjustment Budget 2017.18, 2018/19 Budget)
• Unbundling of 2017/18 opening balances
• Continuous Handholding and training after UAT sign off

73

A treasury perspective of mSCOA implement and status of Sebata

Presenter: Provincial Treasury

74

Recap and conclusion of the day

75

Day 2 SebataEMS User Group 8 December 2017

77

TIME SESSION TOPIC PRESENTED BY TARGET AUDIENCE 08:00 – 09:00 Registration 09:00 – 09:30 G9

• Municipal Sustainability
• The entire value chain

Sebata / UMS Revenue Management, debt collection, water management and CFO 09:30 – 10:15 G10 The new mSCOA chart 6.2 and the impact on the new budget cycle Sebata Budget Office, all HOD’s and Municipal Executive Management 10:15 – 10:30 G11 Lessons learned during the last project based budget Sebata Budget Office, all HOD’s and Municipal Executive Management 10:30 – 10:45 Session break 10:45 – 11:45 G12

• The power of the SebataEMS master

agreement

• Draft regulation 15 Key Business Processes
• Entire value chain

Sebata Municipal Manager, all HOD’s, Internal Audit, Supply Chain, Risk Managers. 11:45 – 12:00 G13 Centre of Excellence: Training and the Sebata Service Centre Sebata Budget office, HR and WSP 12:00 Conclusion of User Group

78

Municipal Sustainability / The entire value chain

Presenter: Leon Vermaak

79

The UMS Model

FMS FMS

Pre-Billing Post-Billing

EMS EMS ERP ERP

80

Pre-billing Process

Meter Reading Data Management & Verification Revenue & Debt Management

Pre-Billing

81

Pre-billing Solutions

Meter Reading Data Management & Verification Revenue & Debt Management

Pre-Billing

82

Pre-billing Solutions

Meter Reading

 Physical Meter Readings  Phone-in Readings  “Snap-Snap” App Readings  First & Final Readings  Exception Reporting

Data Management & Verification

 Demographic Analysis  Stand Data Verification  Stand Audits (Spatial)

Revenue & Debt Management

 Debt Book Analysis  Strategy Development  Policy Review  By-laws

Smart Tools

• Data Cleansing &

Verifications

• Online
• Batch

Smart Tools

• Work Flow management (WFMS)
• Handheld (Android)
• Spatial Platform – Web based

Smart Tools

• Work Flow Management (WFMS) – Web Based
• SMS Communicator – Web Based
• Handheld (Android)

Analysis Model

• Consumer verification services (CVS)
• Bank Account Verification Services (AVS)
• Collection Prioritization Model (CPM)

83

Pre-billing Solutions

Arrears Collection Indigent Registrations Infrastructure & Maintenance

Post-Billing

84

Post-billing Solutions

Arrears Collection

 Credit Control  Debt Collection  Water Flow Restriction Devices  Electricity Secure Enclosures

Smart Tools

• Work Flow management (WFMS) – Web Based
• SMS Communicator – Web Based
• Handheld (Android)

Smart Tools

• Work Flow management (WFMS) – Web Based
• SMS Communicator – Web Based
• Handheld (Android)
• Consumer verification services )(CS)
• Online
• Batch

Smart Tools

• Work Flow management (WFMS)
• SMS Communicator – Web Based
• Handheld (Android)
• Consumer verification services (CVS)
• Bank Account Verification Services (AVS)
• Collection Prioritization Model (CPM)
• Electronic Door Locks

Indigent Registration

 Indigent Registrations  Communications & Campaigns  Management of Authentic Indigent Register  Reporting

Infrastructure & Maintenance

 Supply & Install Meters, both Electricity & Water  Meter & Installation Audits  Meter & Installation Maintenance  Design, Supply and Fitment of Customised Electricity Secure Enclosures  Refurbishment of Electricity Distribution Units & Mini-Subs  Smart Technology/Meters

85

SMART Tools - Bvelaphanda

• SMS Communicator -
• The SMS Communicator was developed to send short messaging to consumers regarding

amongst other things, their monthly balance of account after billing, scheduled maintenance information, or any other special message(s) from the municipality or even the Office of the Speaker.

• The SMS Communicator is a pre-built product that assists with communication management

between various entities. Amongst others the standard version of the system without any additional configuration can assist a client with the following –

• SMS Messages for Credit Control, Indigent Management and Infrastructure related matters i.e. meter

placements

• Categorise individuals into various and customisable groups
• User definition per specific area (user access per suburb or depot)
• Send pre-configured messages to groups or individuals
• Send instant messages or schedule messages for later or repeated messages
• Individuals can respond to messages which the system will link with the respondent’s information
• Track and report on all inbound and outbound communication between a client and their customers
• Full database import of billing system or other data to ensure messages are sent to correct consumers
• Data setup and configuration is customizable to Suburb -> Area -> Street groups that can be setup

for specific users

• Predefined approved message templates to ensure that messages are within the 160 character count

and without spelling or grammar errors, portraying professional image of the municipality.

• The SMS Communicator is available on desktop, mobile & tablet platforms and designed to be

flexible, simplistic and user friendly

86

SMART Tools - Bvelaphanda

► Spatial Platform -

• Customisable setup to suit specific needs
• Manage the fieldwork spatially in real-time environment
• Communicate with Fieldworkers through Offline App in offline environment
• Dedicated approval and quality assurance process included for captured

data

• Barcode and QR code scan functionality if available on handhelds
• Setup of dashboards and reports on data received from field in real-time

► Indigent Profile Manager -

• A web based workflow management system, which is easily configured to

manage the indigent policy of a municipality

• This is done to create a profile of the indigent household, to manage and

drive the Free Basic Services as well as Social and Poverty Alleviation initiatives in conjunction with the municipality

• The software includes a full audit trail, to update and report the results of

an authentic register

• This includes the registrations, physical verifications, external scan, appeals

and feedback reporting – via SMS communication or template letters.

87

SMART Tools - RUMAS

• Credit Man -
• Is a tailor made Credit Control Management Software automating and

managing the entire credit control process, imposing the municipality’s policy on the workflow based software

• It schedules field actions for optimum revenue collection automatically

generating follow-up procedures where specific conditions of outcomes are not met. It offers excellent managerial and operational reports portraying the status of every credit control action as well as performance reporting throughout the entire process

• The software is a web based system and incorporates handheld technology

running on Android OS

► Indigent Profile Manager -

• A web based workflow management system, which is easily configured to

manage the indigent policy of a municipality

• The software includes a full audit trail, to update and report the results of

an authentic register

• This includes the registrations, physical verifications, external scan, appeals

and feedback reporting – via SMS communication or template letters.

88

SMART Tools - TransUnion

• Consumer Verification Services – CVS
• The External Verification process creates an overview of the applicant using

various national databases. This is a web based solution that caters for online and batch verifications.

• The verification provides a high level recommendation on whether the applicant

will qualify for Indigent Support based on the policy income threshold.

• For this process we require valid ID numbers of all applicants.
• Account Verification Service - AVS
• Online tools that allows a status check for a current or savings account prior to

payment processing

• Minimize fraud risk and number of returned payments
• Consumer Prioritization Model - CPM
• Rules based model which provides a score based on data held by

Transunion

• Score is assigned based on previous experience, past data or

behavioral patterns observed wit the collections book or Consumer/Commercial outcomes

• Past behavior predicts future behavior
• This solution prioritizes ranks and sorts a Collections Book according

to a matrix between:

• Willingness to pay &
• Capacity to pay

89

The new mSCOA chart 6.2 and the impact on the new budget cycle

90

Introduction

Why is mSCOA Changing?

• The whole of local government implementation of mSCOA in terms of the SCOA Regulation on 1 July

2017 identified critical issues requiring National Treasury to revisit V6.1.

• National Treasury introduced “Workarounds” at the March 2017 mSCOA / CIGFARO Workshop

necessitating solutions embedded in the Chart of Accounts, for example sufficient posting level accounts had not been requested by municipalities to inform the set-up for Transfers and Subsidies received from District Municipalities and Provincial Treasury.

• More detail were introduced in the Supporting Tables to the A-schedule not informed at the “same

level of detail by mSCOA V6.1”, for example depreciation, impairment and reversal of impairment.

• Reconfirm the treatment of Cost of Free Basic Services, Revenue Forgone and Property Rates Rebate in
• mSCOA. The impression were created that the proposal made by National Treasury in the SOS Guide

had been a “workaround” and not the ultimate solution.

91

Introduction

Why is mSCOA Changing?

• Practicalities from a system development perspective require the same level of detail for all “balance

sheet accounts (Statement of Financial Position) to fully automate balance budgeting and management / financial reporting – EMS Future Enhancements

92

Introduction (Continue)

Process followed by National Treasury

• Request must be logged on the mSCOA FAQ.
• mSCOA Project Team consider the content, complete the assessment of the query and respond if a

clarification of any matter relating to mSCOA, string or report submission. National Treasury is busy “catching-up” on the backlog.

• Changes in account description and definition maybe made by the Project Team. Additions and retirements

must be approved by the Technical Committee.

• Changes are only considered by the Technical Committee if backed by a FAQ.
• The mSCOA Technical Committee is an In-house National Treasury Committee – drawing opinions and

inputs from their stakeholder group (municipalities, consultants, professional bodies, vendors, provincial treasury, etc.)

• National Treasury host periodic Reporting Reference Groups to share with the System Vendors envisage

changes and pertinent reporting issues. Sebata issues this opportunity to the best interest of our users to resolve issues.

93

Introduction (Continue)

Process followed by National Treasury

• Changes to mSCOA is released annually simultaneously with the Budget Circular for the next budget

cycle, i.e. 2018/19.

• Version 6.2 is expected for release by National Treasury the second week in December.
• Although some insights were given by National Treasury at the October 2017 Reporting Reference

Group consideration of the impact of changes bought-about by Version 6.2 can only be done when the approved tables had been released by National Treasury.

94

Introduction (Continue)

Process followed by Sebata

• Sebata to collectively (Technical Team, Implementation, Development, etc.) assess V6.2 changes and

determine the impact (if any) on EMS.

• Prior to “blindly” making changes, workshop the best possible way to deal with the revised requirements

and consult with municipal experts within our client base “on how to embed the mSCOA changes in EMS to the best interest of our clients, improved budget efficiency and report automation……… Automation of Balance Sheet Budgeting

• Specific changes requested by Sebata to enable the development of automated balance sheet budgeting

from the point of capturing IE, operational and capital projects simultaneously provide for creating the balance sheet items accounts. Management Reporting, including Annual Report

• The changes as indicated in the content to follow is a necessity to enable the full automation of most of the

aspects of management reporting requirements as well as the annual report.

95

Region Segment

Proposed Changes Impact EMS Budgets and Planning Added towns for Swellendam Municipality: Swellendam, Barry dale, Suurbrak, Buffelsjagsrivier, Malagas and Infanta Update of Regional Indicators in Chart applicable for 2018/19 None Added town for Langeberg: Ashton, Robertson, Montagu, Bonnievale and McGregor Re-aligned the ward councillors and town names for Rand West City Retired some municipalities due to demarcation – 34 municipalities retired Name changes due to demarcation – 16 names changes made

96

Item Segment

Proposed Changes Impact EMS Budgets and Planning Corrected Depreciation / Impairment and Reversal of Impairment. The Depreciation accounts provided for in mSCOA V6.1 did not support the level of detail required by the A- Schedule, SA34 d. Update COA for 2018/19 Budget Preparation Closing Balance accounts to be removed from the Chart. Typically this is a requirement that need consideration by Sebata to avoid an unnecessary system

• change. However, at present not a

posting level and should not have any impact on the user. Opening Balance and movement accounts to be added if not available in Version 6.1 Consistent application of Balance Sheet Budgeting Principles. For example: Movements on accruals and payables. These accounts are an absolute necessity for balance sheet automation and automated annual financial statements.

97

Item Segment

Proposed Changes Impact EMS Budgets and Planning Add to Expenditure more options for “Capitalisation”….. Sebata objected against the changes as the only reason for having the split on “Salaries and Wages” are to Budget for Payroll at Net as required in the existing format of the A-schedule. No similar requirement exist for

• perational expenditure items. Cost

to be capitalised are provided for within “Construction Work-in- progress” Item Assets. If necessary expansion to be done of the existing classification to be more comprehensive. Subjected to NT Technical Committee discussion – not necessary as the Budget Tables does not require this level of detail. For example: Capitalisation of labour cost, contracted services. Update COA for 2018/19 Budget Preparation Budgeting Principle remain. Require consideration of EMS functionality to assist in Budget Preparation

98

Item Segment

Proposed Changes Impact EMS Budgets and Planning Transfers and Subsidies: Revenue and Liabilities Unspent / Receivables Proposed changes to “remove” detail for PT and DMs. NT Technical Committee decision pending. Detail will still be required and may have an EMS System Change Impact re to provide for Breakdown of detail for Management and Reporting Purposes. Transfers and Subsidies: Expenditure and Payables Proposed changes to “remove” detail for DMs. NT Technical Committee decision pending. Accounts providing for debit / credit transactions to split to assist in Balance Sheet Budgeting NT Technical Committee decision pending. Enhance Balance Budgeting and Simplify Monthly / Annual Reporting

99

Fund Segment

Proposed Changes Impact EMS Budgets and Planning Transfers and Subsidies Proposed changes to “remove” detail for PT and DMs. NT Technical Committee decision pending. Detail will still be required and may have an EMS System Change Impact re to provide for Breakdown of detail for Management and Reporting Purposes. Transfer from Operational to Capital Provide for more detail. NT Technical Committee decision pending. Update of COA informing the budget process. Detail is needed for management and reporting purposes, for example, fund management.

100

Function Segment

Proposed Changes Impact EMS Budgets and Planning Expand definitions Provide more assistance to users Update of the COA to be used for 2018/19 Budget Preparation. Explanatory information, Project Summary Document, was release by the NT on 2 December 2017.

101

General

• Account descriptions and definitions changed following requests through FAQs
• VAT Indicators updated – already provided in the Anticipated EMS Release for first part of December

2017.

• Budget submission and i.e. TABB and ORGB does
• Costing must be implemented at all municipalities with the 2018/19 MTREF, and new enhancements

requirements identified.

• No changes made to:

The Costing Segment; and The Project Segment. NB: These are only initial views and as mentioned earlier the full impact of changes will only be certain once the revised charts had been released by National Treasury.

102

Lessons learned during the last project based budget

Presenter:

103

104

SebataEMS Master agreement

Presenter: Sebata

105

Sebata Centre of Excellence

Presenter: Maritz van Zyl

106

Sebata Training

107

108

Conclusion