6 FAH-5 H-320
ICASS STANDARD AND ICASS LITE
(CT:ICASS-35; 07-01-2013)
(Office of Origin: CGFS/ICASS)
6 FAH-5 H-321 Comparing the TWO
APPROACHES
(CT:ICASS-16; 10-15-2010)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. ICASS has two approaches for cost distribution at
posts: ICASS Standard and ICASS Lite. The two methods provide options for
achieving a balance between ease of administration and a greater alignment of
cost distribution with service consumption. While the administrative services
provided under both approaches may be identical, the Lite approach bundles
services for a simpler method of cost distribution requiring fewer staff hours
to administer while the Standard approach tracks costs in much greater detail
and requires more staff time.
b. For example, under ICASS Standard, agencies that
subscribe to motor pool services are assessed costs based on kilometers driven
for each agency. When ICASS Lite is used, the costs are distributed based on
the number of people (per capita). If all agencies average two motor pool trips
per week, then ICASS Lite equitably distributes the cost of the service.
However, if agencies have widely varied levels of usage of the service, distribution
based on per capita counts would not provide the best match between distributed
costs and the level of services used. When inequities of this type can not be
remedied using modifications (6 FAH-5
H-332.1) or sub-cost centers (6 FAH-5
H-332.3), the ICASS Standard approach may be the better choice for a post.
c. A description of the services and the predetermined
distribution factors for ICASS Standard is found in 6 FAH-5 H-341
and for ICASS Lite in 6 FAH-5 H-342.
ICASS Standard has 31 different cost centers. ICASS Lite has 16 cost centers.
d. The ICASS Lite and ICASS Standard approaches can be
described along an ease of administration continuum, with ICASS Lite being the
less labor-intensive method to administer and ICASS Standard being the more detailed
method providing a greater alignment of cost distribution with the services
consumed. Modifications to an agencys workload counts (6 FAH-5
H-332.1), the creation of Sub-Cost Centers (6 FAH-5
H-332.3), and location budgeting (6 FAH-5
H-471.3) add additional complexity and a greater alignment between
distributed costs and level of services consumed as you move along the
continuum. The exhibit at the end of this chapter (6 FAH-5 Exhibit
H-320) shows the different points along the continuum where posts can
choose to provide a balance between ease of administration and a greater
alignment of cost distribution with service consumption.
e. The post ICASS Budget Committee determines the more
appropriate approach for post to use. If a change in method between Lite and
Standard is recommended, it is referred to the ICASS Council for approval (6 FAH-5
H-012.7). The decision to use one approach or the other is a significant
one; do not view it as an annual decision. Once made to the satisfaction of the
service provider, Budget Committee and the ICASS Council, the choice should
stand. Only major changes at post, such as a substantial increase or decrease
in the number of U.S. direct-hire positions at post, the number of agencies at
post, or the level of services to which the agencies subscribe would justify a
change of method.
f. Before post makes a final decision on changing
approaches, consultation with Washington DC is essential. The post ICASS Budget
Committee (comprised of all serviced agencies) should consult with their
agencies headquarters. The ICASS Service Provider should consult with its
regional bureau and the ICASS Service Center to ensure all factors are
considered.
6 FAH-5 H-321.1 Cost/Benefit
Comparison
(CT:ICASS-16; 10-15-2010)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
While ICASS Standard may be used by any post, more than
half of posts worldwide use ICASS Lite. Large and mid-sized posts may use ICASS
Standard and smaller posts generally use ICASS Lite, but this is decided on a
post-by-post basis and size is not the only factor to consider in this
decision.
6 FAH-5 H-321.1-1 ICASS Standard
(CT:ICASS-16; 10-15-2010)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. The ICASS Standard approach provides additional
detail to distribute costs based on counts which are more closely matched to
serviced agencies consumption of services. This approach may be most
appropriate when serviced agencies receive widely different levels of services
(see 6 FAH-5
H-341).
b. Post must consider the benefits of using the ICASS
Standard approach compared to the costs associated with this approach. ICASS
Standard relies on additional detail to distribute ICASS costs. The costs for
this approach include additional time and effort to accumulate more detailed
data for workload counts, an increased number of cost centers and the related
distribution factors, and more administrative time required to prepare the
additional data for budgeting, accounting, and analysis. The resulting benefits
include better detail to more closely match distributed costs with the
consumption of services by ICASS customers.
6 FAH-5 H-321.1-2 ICASS Lite
(CT:ICASS-16; 10-15-2010)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. While ICASS Lite is used by more than half of posts
worldwide, this approach may not meet the needs of all posts. The bundling of
services provided by each of the General Services, Information Management,
Financial Management, and Human Resources Services offices limits the ability
to closely match the distribution of those costs with the consumption of those
services (see 6
FAH-5 H-342).
b. Posts must consider the easier administration of
using ICASS Lite compared to the more limited ability to closely match
distributed costs to consumed services. ICASS Lite uses fewer cost centers and
simpler distribution factors which require less effort to accumulate data and
fewer areas requiring analysis for budgeting. However, the post may still
require additional budget detail or differentiation of the use of
administrative services. In the ICASS Lite methodology the use of modifications
applied to workload counts and the creation of sub-cost centers moves posts
selected approach along the continuum to best achieve the balance between ease
of administration and a greater alignment between distribution of costs and
consumption of services.
6 FAH-5 H-321.2 Factors to Consider
Before Switching Between Standard and Lite
(CT:ICASS-16; 10-15-2010)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
If a change from ICASS Standard to ICASS Lite or from ICASS
Lite to ICASS Standard is contemplated, the following information may be useful
to consider. Considering a change in approach may be triggered by dramatic
growth or reduction in the number of agencies at post or by a large increase or
decrease in the number of employees. Other considerations include:
(1) ICASS budget size - What
is the size of the ICASS budget? Be sure that the increased level of effort to
gather and provide more precise cost allocations are justified by the increased
value of more closely connecting the costs of administrative services to the
users. A smaller post budget may not be able to absorb the additional costs of
the extra work required in order to use the Standard approach;
(2) Post agencies and their size
How many agencies are at post and what is their relative size compared to the
Department of State at post? A post with only two agencies present, including
State, is much more likely to use the Lite approach. A post with over 40
agencies represented may find the additional detail resulting from the Standard
approach is necessary for equitable cost distribution among the agencies. Also,
whether or not an agency is co-located with State may influence the complexity
of gathering relevant data;
(3) Agency services Do all
agencies subscribe to the same services? Generally, if all agencies at post
subscribe to all ICASS services, using the Standard approach will not produce
significant differences in agency invoices compared to using the Lite approach.
However, if certain agencies provide a significant number of services for
themselves, the ICASS Standard approach is more likely to provide the
flexibility to provide a more equitable cost distribution;
(4) Service provider resources
- Does the service provider have sufficient resources to handle the technical
and workload requirements that a more complex system demands? ICASS Standard
requires more extensive data collection than ICASS Lite. The service provider
must be able to handle the increased complexity in budgeting, cost distribution,
and accounting. Posts should not expect any additional resources (funding or
personnel) from Washington, DC headquarters for the purpose of performing the
additional work necessary to gather data and track costs to support the ICASS
Standard approach as compared to the ICASS Lite approach;
(5) Timing - If a decision is
made to change from Lite to Standard or from Standard to Lite, the timing of
that change must occur at the beginning of a fiscal year. The change should be
planned during the previous year so that workload counts for the new
methodology may be determined in advance. Such a change cannot be implemented
mid-year; and
(6) Agreement - In the event
that the ICASS Budget Committee, ICASS Council, and the service provider are
unable to reach agreement on which approach to use, the issue will be brought
to the chief of mission for resolution.
6 FAH-5 H-322 THROUGH h-329 UNASSIGNED
6 FAH-5 EXHIBIT H-320
ICASS Lite/ICASS Standard Continuum
(CT:ICASS-6; 06-17-2008)
Ease of Administration
ICASS Lite
ICASS Lite with Modifications to Workload Count
ICASS Lite with Sub-Cost Centers
ICASS Standard
ICASS Standard with Modifications to Workload Count
ICASS Standard with Sub-Cost Centers
Greater Alignment of Cost Distribution with Service
Consumption