26.3 Shared Services Delivery & Public Sector Project Management

13.4 Shared Services Delivery & Public Sector Project Management

Shared Services Delivery Models in Government

Public sector organizations face persistent legislative and fiscal pressures to eliminate administrative redundancy, modernize aging technology, and optimize resource allocation. Traditionally, every governmental bureau, department, and independent agency maintained its own decentralized administrative support operations—operating separate payroll offices, running isolated general ledger software, managing unique travel portals, and conducting independent human resources processing. This fragmented structure resulted in duplicative IT capital expenditures, inconsistent operational standards, fragmented data, and bloated overhead.

Definition and Concept of Shared Services

Shared Services is the operational strategy of consolidating common, mission-support administrative functions across multiple organizational units, departments, or distinct governmental jurisdictions into a single, specialized, customer-focused service organization. Unlike traditional centralized administrative mandates that simply concentrate bureaucratic authority, shared services operates on a customer-service partnership model governed by formal service performance agreements, transparent cost accounting, and customer representation.

Common functions delivered through public sector shared services include:

• Core Financial Systems Hosting and Maintenance (ERP/FMIS);
• Centralized Payroll and Timekeeping Administration;
• Accounts Payable and Travel Expense Voucher Processing;
• Common Purchasing and Multi-Agency Contract Administration;
• Human Capital Management (onboarding, benefits, and retirement administration); and
• Information Technology (IT) Infrastructure, Cybersecurity, and Helpdesk Support.

Service Delivery Mechanisms

Public entities implement shared services across three primary structural arrangements:

1. Intra-Agency Shared Services:
   • Consolidating administrative and operational support functions across disparate bureaus, divisions, or operating administrations within a single large parent department.
   • Example: The Department of the Interior's Interior Business Center (IBC) consolidates financial systems and payroll processing for multiple internal DOI bureaus (such as the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, and U.S. Geological Survey).
2. Inter-Agency Cross-Servicing (Federal Shared Service Providers):
   • A designated governmental entity operates as an authorized Shared Service Provider (SSP), delivering comprehensive administrative, financial, or IT capabilities to external customer agencies across the government.
   • Statutory Authority: In the federal government, cross-servicing is authorized under the Economy Act (31 U.S.C. § 1535) and guided by OMB directives (such as OMB Memorandum M-19-16, Centralized Mission Support Capabilities for the Federal Government). Under the Economy Act, inter-agency agreements allow customer agencies to procure specialized services from providing agencies when the action is in the best interest of the government and the services cannot be obtained as conveniently or cheaply from commercial sources.
   • Prominent Federal SSPs: The Department of the Treasury's Administrative Resource Center (ARC) at the Bureau of the Fiscal Service (providing full-suite financial management, procurement, and travel cross-servicing to dozens of federal agencies), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's National Finance Center (NFC) (processing bi-weekly payroll for over 600,000 federal employees across hundreds of executive agencies).
3. Regional Multi-Jurisdictional Consortia:
   • Independent local governments—cities, counties, school districts, and special utility authorities—creating formal Joint Powers Authorities (JPAs), councils of governments, or interlocal agreements to jointly procure, implement, and maintain shared operational systems.
   • Examples: Regional 911 emergency dispatch centers, shared municipal court case management platforms, joint property tax assessment databases, and pooled public works heavy equipment fleets.

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                         PUBLIC SECTOR SHARED SERVICES DELIVERY MODELS                             |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                                                                                   |
|  +-----------------------------+  +-----------------------------+  +---------------------------+  |
|  | INTRA-AGENCY SHARED SERVICES|  | INTER-AGENCY CROSS-SERVICING|  | MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL      |  |
|  | (Within Single Department)  |  | (Federal Shared Providers)  |  | REGIONAL CONSORTIA        |  |
|  +-----------------------------+  +-----------------------------+  +---------------------------+  |
|  | • Bureau of Land Mgmt       |  | • Small Business Admin (SBA)|  | • City of Oakridge (Local)|  |
|  | • National Park Service     |  | • Consumer Product Safety   |  | • Franklin County Board   |  |
|  | • Fish & Wildlife Service   |  | • National Science Found.   |  | • Oakridge School District|  |
|  +--------------+--------------+  +--------------+--------------+  +-------------+-------------+  |
|                 |                                |                               |                |
|                 v                                v                               v                |
|  +-----------------------------+  +-----------------------------+  +---------------------------+  |
|  | Interior Business Center    |  | Treasury ARC / USDA NFC     |  | Joint Powers Authority   |  |
|  | (Parent Dept Shared Center) |  | (Certified Federal Provider)|  | Regional Shared Platform  |  |
|  +-----------------------------+  +-----------------------------+  +---------------------------+  |
|                                                                                                   |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

---

Strategic Analysis: Advantages vs. Operational Challenges

Transitioning to a shared services delivery model represents a major strategic shift requiring rigorous evaluation of operational trade-offs.

---

Planning, Governance Instruments and Cost Allocation Models

A successful shared services implementation requires formal legal, operational, and financial governance structures.

1. Readiness Assessment and Business Case Development

Before entering a shared services partnership, an agency must conduct a formal Readiness Assessment and develop a rigorous Business Case:

• Readiness Assessment: Evaluates organizational process maturity, IT architecture compatibility, data quality in legacy systems, and leadership commitment to change.
• Business Case: Compares the total lifecycle costs of the "Status Quo" (operating, maintaining, and eventually modernizing independent legacy systems) against the projected costs of the shared services model over a 5-to-10-year horizon. The business case must demonstrate a positive Net Present Value (NPV), calculate a realistic Return on Investment (ROI), and identify a viable payback period, while articulating qualitative benefits such as enhanced audit readiness and disaster resilience.

2. Service Level Agreements (SLAs)

The Service Level Agreement (SLA) is the critical operational contract that defines the performance obligations between the shared service provider and the customer agency. A comprehensive public sector SLA must establish:

• Precise Scope of Services: Clear enumeration of all covered baseline functions (e.g., bi-weekly payroll direct deposit, weekly AP check runs) and explicit identification of excluded services;
• Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): Objective, measurable performance standards, including:
  • System Availability: Minimum 99.9% uptime during standard business hours;
  • Processing Timeliness: 98% of clean vendor invoices processed within 5 business days of receipt;
  • Accuracy Metrics: Payroll processing error rate not to exceed 0.05% per pay period;
  • Helpdesk Responsiveness: Critical (Tier 1) incident response within 30 minutes, resolution within 4 hours;
• Escalation Pathways: Defined hierarchy for resolving operational bottlenecks and system outages;
• Performance Credits / Remedies: Financial fee credits or administrative penalties assessed against the provider for persistent, unexcused SLA failures; and
• Periodic Reporting and Review: Monthly performance dashboard reports submitted by the provider to the customer agency's oversight committee.

3. Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) and Interagency Agreements (IAAs)

Interagency agreements provide the overarching legal architecture for the partnership. They articulate legal statutory authority (e.g., the Economy Act), define data ownership (establishing that the customer agency retains 100% legal ownership of its financial and personnel records), govern confidentiality and public disclosure compliance, establish term and termination provisions, and outline dispute resolution mechanisms.

4. Cost Allocation and Full Cost-Recovery Models

Under public financial management principles and federal statutes (such as the Economy Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1535), providing agencies are legally required to operate on a Full Cost-Recovery Basis. A public provider cannot generate a commercial profit, nor may it subsidize client services using its own direct legislative appropriations (which would violate the Anti-Deficiency Act):

• Activity-Based Costing (ABC): Pricing based on the actual direct consumption of operational activities and indirect administrative overhead (e.g., $1.40 per processed AP invoice voucher, $4.25 per payroll direct-deposit transaction per employee per pay period).
• User / FTE Subscription Tiers: Fixed monthly or annual fees assessed based on the client agency's active system user count or total authorized Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs).
• Tiered Banding: Tiered annual service fees categorized by client agency annual budget size or transaction volume brackets.

---

Project Management Governance in Public Financial Initiatives

Implementing an ERP platform, modernizing an FMIS, or executing a shared services migration represents a complex, multi-year, multimillion-dollar capital initiative. The history of public sector IT is littered with high-profile project failures—projects that suffered massive cost overruns, fell years behind schedule, or collapsed during cutover. Disciplined project management governance, grounded in the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) established by the Project Management Institute (PMI), is indispensable.