Travis County Commissioners Court
Tuesday, March 29, 2011,
Item 17
17 is to approve contract award for appraisal software to the highest qualified respondent, hlogen software inc.
>> county purchasing agent with our county clerk.
this item, dana has been trying to get to the software purchase for several months and have been working with the county attorney and the contractor.
a lot of our software contracts have a lot of different terms and conditions.
so there's a lot of things we have to look out for.
that is why it's taken so long.
in the process of this we have been talking about ways to save money and trying to streamline and consolidate some of our software packages.
lucky, dana was the first one out of the shoot.
because of the be fit program we're hoping this functionality will be there when it comes up.
but that is two, maybe three years down the road.
dana would like to go ahead and proceed with this purchase because of her large staff and trying do things..
she was kind enough to go over and talk to the team and also look at some of the other programs to see if something else would fit.
that is where we are at.
we are recommending to go ahead and approve this purchase.
>> I asked for this to be brought up because the its subcommittee of the court has been having discussions on different packages like this that are purchased by the different elected offices, divisions, and they aren't necessarily one in the same.
we're trying to be heading towards uniformity that is cost saving.
I know purchasing, its is recommending tilt, joe?
--at this time, joe?.
>> with this product you have a couple other systems that are in the county that some people are using.
then you have it coming down the road with be fit too.
so I think it's just, like you were saying, time we start taking a k loo, especially with the money into the be fit project, we should really evaluate these other products that are going to be taken care of when that lands.
>> I'm move approval of this.
but I would like to say that the next couple of years we're going to be going through lots of transitions in our its planning and programs. Joe is working very hard with others to be sure that we have economy of scale that functions well for everybody.
so I just would like to put that out there, this opportunity.
>> do we think this will be compatible with the be fit?
>> the be fit program, sap, we have purchased the performance evaluation product --module.
we start our first meeting next week with the team, lsi, to determine what the module is going to look like.
but I would say that we have done some other things electronically even though we are going ahead with the be fit.
we have done the time entry, doing that electronically now, doing neo gov, our recruitment system.
we haven't stopped doing things electronically.
some of it is going to help us bridge to the new system.
we would ask for dana's experience that she is going to gain from this purchase, but eventually we want everybody to go through and be part of the sap performance evaluation module.
some of this experience we're gathering is a bridge to where we are going.
again, we have made some advances that way.
>> as a director of human resources department, are you supporting the recommendation?
>> I would have to say I'm probably amount bive lent --ambivalen t.
I do think the information she will gather is going to be valuable as we go forward.
I think if she will promise to be on the team for the performance evaluation module for sap, I whole heartedly supportive of that.
>> I do support be fit.
I'll be happy when it gets here to use this.
this is an interim for us, not very expensive for a three-year price.
I'm happy to help out in the interim.
>> I have a question with regard to, this is is appraisal, a performance appraisal module.
I'm wondering whether other departments of comparable size have like electronic performance appraisal modules.
do we have any idea?
>> we don't know of one that is out there.
>> so as far as we know--
>> everybody is doing it manually as far as we know.
>> as far as we know only the county clerk is doing this, so everyone else is doing it the old fashioned way through manager appraisals and staff development.
>> as far as we know, yes.
>> and let me clarify that this is going to be a management done appraisal.
the manager will just go in electronically and there's work flow that is going to be done electronically.
this doesn't get rid of the tdo performance appraisal process.
manager still does that.
it's just done electronically.
>> the employees have access to it, though, just an important piece of it.
and the language that is used is very standardized in trying to evaluate experience and performance.
and the employees can look at their, you know, online they can look at their account any time they want.
>> and if we were to not go forward with this module, how long has electronic uploading of this performance information been done.
what I'm getting at, what amount of disruption would you have in your current protocol?
how long have you been doing it this way?
>> I'm not sure, I had an electronic employee appraisal system that became obsolete.
within the last year.
it became something that I couldn't use anymore because the company that we had wasn't very good about keeping up patches and it became incompatible with the user operating systems that we were putting in place.
it sort of undid itself.
what I was trying to do was put something in place to remace what I had lost.
so what we risk is I lose the ability to have the standardization between departments.
I lose the ability to see the fairness between employees and managers and lose the ability to have a database that we can build up presumably to put into be fit ones it gets here.
what we are talking about from a human resources point of view is all that collection of data can move forward and be a part of be fit, at least that is our intention.
>> so you haven't had a reliable system up for very long.
>> no, I did not.
>> or lost it.
>> yes.
>> I think this is an absolutely laudable direction that the county clerk is moving in and is on the cutting edge of.
my concern, though, is that, I would like to know from its the value of this pilot as a way to enhance our utilization of be fit because it sounds like no other department will have this leg up in utilization once it goes live.
in some ways what I'm struggling with is the idea that we would give this leg up to one department because they ask, because they are proactive, and that is wonderful.
but it is, sorry, what was the dollar amount on this?
>> 123,000.
>> it's not huge, 23,000 for thee years.
will we be able to maximally utilize that expenditure in order to enhance our utilization of be fit.
>> I think that you will gain some experience that can be valuable to put a framework in place to implement the be fit module when it's here.
>> can we utilize it to work with the other departments to make their information with regard to performance appraisals maximally available for upload to be fit?
one thing we have seen with transitioning to new systems is the personnel costs in that transr transition.
will the utilization of this module by the clerk's office provide us a template for figuring out how to get that data into a format that will be maximally utilized by be fit?
>> that depend on the criteria that sapwill have for their module.
you know, they will define the requirements for the database to be constructed.
probably some of it would be applicable.
we just don't know.
>> I think it would help, yeah, with things like work flow, how we are going to do electronic work flow.
and especially seeing with an elected official there.
has been valuable in my opinion as far as seeing how the workload is going to go.
electronic work flow, we haven't done it before, so we have to kind of map out what we think is the best way to do it.
if we actually have somebody with an example out there using that electronic work flow, I think it will help.
>> I think the experience will be a good thing.
you know, to take into be fit conversion.
>> what is the source of funding?
>> ourselves.
we saved money from little bits and pieces from the other departments and put it together.
>> it's already in your budget.
>> yes, sir.
>> do we know if this software has migration capabilities to be fit and what we are hearded towards?
and if not, are we likely looking at huge costs to transfer data?
>> we don't know for sure.
it's our intention we try to do that.
that is our muned set.
>> Commissioner Huber made a motion to approve the request.
I second the motion.
discussion on the motion.
Commissioner Eckhardt.
>> I remain concerned about the fact that we don't know about its migration capabilities into be fit because it's an extremely expensive system.
we're talking more than $30 million dollars.
although this is a very small amount, I would like to know that this pilot will function as a springboard into utilization of be fit.
I am very very concerned about us boutiquing these modules across departments, particularly after we have had a herculean effort to put together the be fit program.
I'm also mindful this is a small amount and within the county clerk's budget, and also any delay is going to increase the amount by $3,000.
but I'm just, I'm having a little difficulty here with the idea we're considering purchasing this module without knowing whether it has migration capabilities into be fit.
>> does it have migration capability.
yes or no?
>> that would depend on what is required at sapand way don't know.
>> we don't know at this time is the answer.
Commissioner Davis.
>> thank you, judge.
I understand there will at least be 150 licenses that will be issued for the use of this particular software.
my question is how much, as far as support, if anything goes down wrong with the software that is necessary training to use the software, will all that be included in what we are talking about here today?
I think it is probably a great benefit to county clerk's office.
however, I'm being cautious by asking those questions if number one, the user license that is issued with the particular software, number two is the availability of the vendor to make themselves ready and available for problems if they are incurred during the process of the training of the use of the software.
>> any answers to those two questions?
license, what is the it includes 150 licenses subscription and training.
I assume that maintenance of the system.
>> the vendor.
>> is going to maintain it.
under these terms and conditions.
it's a one-year with two one had ever year renewals.
>> okay.
>> vendor availability, the answer is yes?
>> yes, sir.
in fact, they specifically mention about the training costs including travel and expenses, for them to be available to us.
>> okay, good.
>> any more decision on the motion?
>> I have one question.
the data that is accumulated by this program is maintained by our system or out in the cloud somewhere?
>> yes.
>> so we have it.
>> yes.
>> we don't have to purchase it.
>> no, no, no.
>> okay.
>> all in favor of the motion.
show Commissioners, show unanimous court.
thank you very much y'all.
>> thank you very much.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
