Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07221997 - C75 < TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IOC _ 04 s-•:•L Contra Costa FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ot x, County DATE: July 22, 1997 °sq COON SUBJECT: PROPOSED RESPONSE TO REPORT NO. 9705 OF THE 1996-1997 GRAND JURY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . Adopt this report of our Committee as the Board of Supervisors ' response to 1996-1997 Grand Jury Report No. 9705 : "Independent Auditor's Opinions and Financial Systems Modernization. " 2 . Remove this item as a referral to our Committee. BACKGROUND: The 1996-1997 Grand Jury filed the above report, which was reviewed by the Board of Supervisors and subsequently referred to the Internal Operations Committee. On July 15, 199.7 our Committee met to discuss the recommendations and review proposed responses . At the conclusion of those discussions, we prepared this report which clearly specifies : A. Whether the .recommendation is accepted or adopted; B. If the recommendation is accepted, a statement as to who will be responsible for implementation and a definite target date; C. A delineation of the constraints if .a recommendation is accepted but cannot be implemented within the calendar year; and D. The reason for not adopting a recommendation. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE - APPROVE OTHER � JIMROGERS DONNA G BER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE ,/-UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Dean Lucas 335-1077 ATTESTED Contact: Internal Operations Committee PHIL UTCHEODR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF cc: County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Superior Court Presiding Judge Grand Jury Foreperson County Counsel BY DEPUTY Auditor-Controller "INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S OPINIONS AND FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION" REPORT NO. 9705 The 1996-97 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that: RECOMMENDATION A: The County proceed with modernization of the general accounting system forthwith. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted as modified. B. The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Grand Jury' s assessment of the need to modernize the County' s financial system but recognizes substantial arguments for deferring the start of modernization efforts . The County is emerging from a years-long study and development of the Human Resources/Payroll system in which Auditor Department staff is involved. This system will be on-line in January, 1998 . Experience gained from its implementation should prove valuable in the financial management system development. Funding for modernization must be evaluated carefully against competing needs for general fund dollars . A source of funding for a project as large as this will take time to be developed. The Department of Information Technology has been working with departments to bring computer systems into Year 2000 compliance since September, 1995 . The Auditor's systems (except for the current payroll system which is being replaced) are included in the program. Office of COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER Contra Costa County Martinez, California July 8, 1997 TO: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator FROM: Kenneth J. Corcoran, Auditor-Controller SUBJECT: Response to 1996-97 Grand Jury Report#9705 This responds to your memo dated May 15, 1997, same subject, which asked for our response to: Grand Jury Report #9705, "Independent Auditor's Opinions and Financial Systems Modernization" (dated May 5, 1997) In this report, the Grand Jury accurately portrays the County's financial management system as an old, inflexible, mainframe-based legacy system that is in need of replacement. The Grand Jury also notes, correctly, that modern financial management systems offer significant functional and operational advantages compared to the County's current system. The Grand Jury concludes by recommending that the process of implementing a new system should begin "forthwith." I agree with the findings of the Grand Jury and feel that a high priority should be placed on implementing a new financial management system. For the past year and a half we have been closely watching the emergence of new technologies in the area of financial management systems and have been in contact with other counties and jurisdictions that are implementing new financial management systems. We also have participated in several demos presented by various financial management system vendors. However, for the reasons stated below, I respectfully disagree that the implementation process of a new financial management system should begin "forthwith" and based on this position have informed the Department of Information Technology to proceed with the necessary programming changes to ensure our present system is Year 2000 compliant. Staflin2 Implementing a County-wide financial management system would require a major commitment of County staff from the Auditor-Controller's Office and other County departments. In addition, experienced consultants with specific knowledge of the selected software would need to be hired. To provide a sense of the level of staffing required for a project implementation team, I have attached a press release from PeopleSoft, the software vendor the County selected for our Human Resources/Payroll System. The press release notes that, on average, PeopleSoft customers assign about 23 people (combined in-house staff and consultants) to a financial management system implementation team. I would expect the time commitment for project team members would be 1-1.5 years. 2 Phil Batchelor 07/08/97 Speaking solely for the Auditor-Controller's Office, I believe that removing a number of our key staff members from their current work responsibilities and assigning them to a project implementation team could result in significant operational difficulties. I suspect the same would be true in the other County departments that would be dedicating staff to an implementation team. Another major concern is the availability of seasoned, knowledgeable consultants. Last month, when attempting to engage an additional consultant to work on the Human Resources/Payroll system implementation, we found that the pool of available consultants with more than 6 months technical experience was virtually non-existent. This shortage is clearly the result of firms throughout the world, both public and private, implementing Year 2000 compliant systems. I believe that forming a project team that includes consultants without solid, proven experience would be very risky. Cost The Grand Jury report states that the cost of implementing a new financial management system is expected to cost approximately $3.0 million. Since meeting with the Grand Jury and providing that estimate to them, I have learned from other similar sized counties which have recently gone through an RFP process that the pricetag may be considerably higher. For example, Fresno County received a bid of $5.5 million from PeopleSoft/Anderson Consulting for implementation of a financial management system and Sacramento County recently contracted with SAP for $9.0 million for a combined financial management system and Human Resources/Payroll system. As of this date, the County has not identified a sufficient source of funding to meet even the lowest estimated cost of a new system and is, therefore, not in a position to begin implementation "forthwith" as recommended by the Grand Jury. Technology Issues The 1990's has seen a major shift in the design of enterprise-wide computer systems as mainframe legacy systems have given way to client-server applications. When the Human Resources/Payroll system goes live in January 1998, it will become the first County-wide client-server application. Unlike mainframe applications, client-server applications require a highly developed, complex infrastructure that links the desktop PC's(the"clients") throughout all County departments with the server. I believe it is wise to learn from the experience that will be gained in 1998 with the implementation of the new Human Resource/Payroll System before embarking on a County-wide client-server based financial management system. With this experience, the County will be in a better position to make an informed decision leading to a successful implementation. KJC:pm Attachment Yahoo! PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 1 of 4 �T B JSaEss EVI'RF, �kANCE [ Yahoo I Write Us Search Headlines Info [ Business - Company - Industry - Finance - PR Newswire - Business Wire - es ] Monday June 9 6:04 AM EDT Company Press Release PeopleSoft customers again report rapid, succ f implementations .Survey finds that over 99% would choose PeopleSoft again. PLEASANTON, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 9, 1997--PeopleSoft Inc. (NASDAQ:PSFT), a leading provider of enterprise applications software, today announced the results of the 1997 PeopleSoft Implementations Report, a survey covering customers' implementations of PeopleSoft applications. Drawing responses from 502 out of 1,400 customers polled, the survey yielded substantial information on customers' best practices and successful approaches to implementing PeopleSoft applications. 'The 1997 PeopleSoft Implementations Report is a very comprehensive and valuable compilation which will assist others in their implementation efforts," said Ken Ward, manager of employee services, BP America. ' 'It is extremely important for new and prospective customers to know what approaches and methods have worked best for PeopleSoft customers either involved in implementations or currently in production." Among the key findings in the report: • For PeopleSoft's two most widely used HRMS applications -- Human Resources and Payroll -- more than half the respondents are in production, and on average, their implementation projects took less than one year. • For the three most widely used PeopleSoft Financials applications -- General Ledger, Payables, and Receivables -- nearly half the respondents are in production, and it took them less than a year to implement. • For the two most widely used PeopleSoft Distribution applications -- Purchasing and Inventory -- over 30 percent of the respondents are in production, and on average, their implementation projects took less than one year. • Implementation of 78 percent of PeopleSoft applications required less time, on average, than customers had planned. Yahoo! - PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 2 of 4 • Of the PeopleSoft HRMS customers who responded to the survey, over 99 percent reported they would choose PeopleSoft again. • Of the PeopleSoft Financials customers who responded to the survey, over 98 percent reported they would choose PeopleSoft again. • Of the PeopleSoft Distribution customers who responded to the survey, 100 percent reported they would choose PeopleSoft again. Survey Documents Best Practices for Implementation ' 'Companies face tremendous pressure to implement enterprise applications quickly, without massive project teams," said Sebastian Grady, vice president of customer services at PeopleSoft. ' ' For many,the Year 2000 problem has made rapid implementation a survival issue. The 1997 Implementations Report shows new and prospective PeopleSoft customers that swift implementation is achievable, and it details the best practices that make it possible." With the flexibility and modularity built into PeopleSoft applications, customers are able to pick the implementation strategy that best meets their needs. An implementation project entailing minimal customization may take as little as four months. Large customers, or those with more extensive customization needs, may choose a longer, phased schedule -- ' 'going live" first with specific applications, or in specific geographic locations, and then phasing in additional applications or locations. Over 77 percent of the responding customers indicated that they used a phased implementation approach, rather than a 'Big Bang' approach. ' 'The phased approach allows customer project teams to show a very rapid return on investment to upper management," said Grady, ' 'while keeping user interest and project morale at peak levels." Product Fit and Flexibility Pay Off PeopleSoft Financials customers reported that the applications met 82 percent of their business needs without reengineering or customization. The PeopleSoft HRMS applications, 'straight out of the box,' met 80 percent of customers' business needs. The PeopleSoft Distribution applications, without modification, met 78 percent of business needs.. The customers' remaining requirements were met primarily through customization of the PeopleSoft applications and reengineering of internal business processes. ' 'A key criteria for Sears in choosing PeopleSoft was ease of implementation. With 300,000 associates, we needed powerful software that could adapt to our size and business model. 'We were able to take our first business group of 35,000 associates into production Yahoo! - PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 3 of 4 inless than a year," said Peter Ackerman, director of human resources services at Sears, Roebuck and Co., which uses PeopleSoft Payroll, HR, and Benefits Administration. ' 'We were impressed with the quality and flexibility provided by the PeopleSoft products. It is clear that these applications can extend and change to meet.our needs, without forcing us to reengineer to fit the software." CEp1em:nt� tionTeamSize�and�Time Respondents reported that they were able to implement PeopleSoft applications rapidly using small, focused project teams. For PeopleSoft Financials customers in the survey, with average annual revenues of $2.3 billion, implementation teams averaged slightly less than 23 people. The majority of the team members were in-house employees; the rest were consultants from PeopleSoft Professional Services, PeopleSoft implementation partners, or other third-party service providers. For PeopleSoft HRMS customers, averaging $3.0 billion in annual revenues, implementation teams averaged slightly under 16 people. For PeopleSoft Distribution customers in the survey, annual revenues averaged $1 .6 billion, and the implementation teams consisted of less than 23 people. The average implementation time for these multi-billion dollar organizations was 10 months. PeopleSoft's Customer Service Organization and Philosophy PeopleSoft has dedicated over 40 percent of its 3,000-plus employees to customer service. All customers licensing a PeopleSoft application are provided with a support package that comes free of charge for the first year. The support package includes installation support, new product releases, 240 hotline support, an account manager who acts as the customer's advocate, and credits for training classes. Worldwide, nonstop access to these services is greatly facilitated by PeopleSoft Customer Connection, the Web-based support service launched on April 28 (see PSFT-26.97). About PeopleSoft PeopleSoft Inc. (NASDAQ:PSFT) was established in 1987 to provide innovative software solutions that meet the changing business demands of enterprises worldwide. A client/server applications pioneer and market leader, PeopleSoft develops, markets, and supports a complete suite of enterprise solutions for accounting, materials management, distribution, manufacturing, supply chain planning, and human resources. In addition, PeopleSoft provides industry-specific enterprise solutions to customers in select markets including financial services, retailing, healthcare, manufacturing, higher education, the public sector, and the U.S. federal government. With more than 1 ,600 Yahoo! - PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 4 of 4 customers around the world, the company has been recognized for both its award-winning customer service and its remarkable growth. PeopleSoft was listed by Fortune Magazine as one of the fastest growing companies in America in 1994, 1995, and again in 1996. PeopleSoft product and service information is located on the World Wide Web at http://www.peoplesoft.com, and for recent press releases and financial information, via fax-on-demand at 800/296-0937. Note to Editors: PeopleSoft, PeopleTools, PS/nVision, PeopleBooks, and PeopleCode are registered trademarks, and Red Pepper and PeopleTalk are trademarks of PeopleSoft Inc. All other company and product names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Contact: PeopleSoft Inc. Kit Robinson, 510/468-2124 kit robinson@peoplesoft.com or The Horn Group Carol Shen, 415/519-6424 cshen@horngroup.com More news for referenced ticker symbols: PSFT, and related industries: computer, internet, telecommunications. Search News 1 Help Copyright ° 1997 Business Wire. All rights reserved. All the news releases provided by Business Wire are copyrighted. Any forms of copying other than an individual user's personal reference without express written permission is prohibited. Further distribution of these materials is strictly forbidden, including but not limited to, posting, emailing, faxing, archiving in a public database, redistributing via a computer network or in a printed form. Important Disclaimers and Legal Information Questions or Comments? "INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S OPINIONS AND FINANCIAL SYSTEMS MODERNIZATION" REPORT NO. 9705 The 1996-97 Contra Costa County Grand Jury recommends that: RECOMMENDATION A: The County proceed with modernization of the general accounting system forthwith. RESPONSE: A. This recommendation is accepted as modified. B. The Board of Supervisors concurs with the Grand Jury's assessment of the need to modernize the County's financial system but recognizes substantial arguments for deferring the start of modernization efforts. The County is emerging from a years-long study and development of the Human Resources/Payroll system in which Auditor Department staff is involved. This system will be on-line in January, 1998. Experience gained from its implementation should prove valuable in the financial management system development. Funding for modernization must be evaluated carefully against competing needs for general fund dollars . A source of funding for a project as large as this will take time to be developed. The Department of Information Technology has been working with departments to bring computer systems into Year 2000 compliance since September, 1995 . The Auditor' s systems (except for the current payroll system which is being replaced) are included in the program. Office of COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER Contra Costa County Martinez, California July 8, 1997 TO: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator FROM: Kenneth J. Corcoran, Auditor-Controller SUBJECT: Response to 1996-97 Grand Jury Report#9705 This responds to your memo dated May 15, 1997, same subject, which asked for our response to: Grand Jury Report #9705, "Independent Auditor's Opinions and Financial Systems Modernization" (dated May 5, 1997) In this report, the Grand Jury accurately portrays the County's financial management system as an old, inflexible, mainframe-based legacy system that is in need of replacement. The Grand Jury also notes, correctly, that modern financial management systems offer significant functional and operational advantages compared to the County's current system. The Grand Jury concludes by recommending that the process of implementing a new system should begin "forthwith." I agree with the findings of the Grand Jury and feel that a high priority should be placed on implementing a new financial management system. For the past year and a half we have been closely watching the emergence of new technologies in the area of financial management systems and have been in contact with other counties and jurisdictions that are implementing new financial management systems. We also have participated in several demos presented by various financial management system vendors. However, for the reasons stated below, I respectfully disagree that the implementation process of a new financial management system should begin "forthwith" and based on this position have informed the Department of Information Technology to proceed with the necessary programming changes to ensure our present system is Year 2000 compliant. Staflin Implementing a County-wide financial management system would require a major commitment of County staff from the Auditor-Controller's Office and other County departments. In addition, experienced consultants with specific knowledge of the selected software would need to be hired. To provide a sense of the level of staffing required for a project implementation team, I have attached a press release from PeopleSoft, the software vendor the County selected for our Human Resources/Payroll System. The press release notes that, on average, PeopleSoft customers assign about 23 people (combined in-house staff and consultants) to a financial management system implementation team. I would expect the time commitment for project team members would be 1-1.5 years. 2 Phil Batchelor 07/08/97 Speaking solely for the Auditor-Controller's Office, I believe that removing a number of our key staff members from their current work responsibilities and assigning them to a project implementation team could result in significant operational difficulties. I suspect the same would be true in the other County departments that would be dedicating staff to an implementation team. Another major concern is the.availability of seasoned, knowledgeable consultants. Last month, when attempting to engage an additional consultant to work on the Human Resources/Payroll system implementation, we found that the pool of available consultants with more than 6 months technical experience was virtually non-existent. This shortage is clearly the result of firms throughout the world, both public and private, implementing Year 2000 compliant systems. I believe that forming a project team that includes consultants without solid, proven experience would be very risky. Cost The Grand Jury report states that the cost of implementing a new financial management system is expected to cost approximately $3.0 million. Since meeting with the Grand Jury and providing that estimate to them, I have learned from other similar sized counties which have recently gone through an RFP process that the pricetag may be considerably higher. For example, Fresno County received a bid of $5.5 million from PeopleSoft/Anderson Consulting for implementation of a financial management system and Sacramento County recently contracted with SAP for $9.0 million for a combined financial management system and Human Resources/Payroll system. As of this date, the County has not identified a sufficient source of funding to meet even the lowest estimated cost of a new system and is, therefore, not in a position to begin implementation "forthwith" as recommended by the Grand Jury. Technology Issues The 1990's has seen a major shift in the design of enterprise-wide computer systems as mainframe legacy systems have given way to client-server applications. When the Human Resources/Payroll system goes live in January 1998, it will become the first County-wide client-server application. Unlike mainframe applications, client-server applications require a highly developed, complex infrastructure that links the desktop PC's (the"clients")throughout all County departments with the server. I believe it is wise to learn from the experience that will be gained in 1998 with the implementation of the new Human Resource/Payroll System before embarking on a County-wide client-server based financial management system. With this experience, the County will be in a better position to make an informed decision leading to a successful implementation. KJC:pm Attachment Yahoo! PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 1 of 4 F.Zfik •. �y R [ i R G LEI. ` *T � :%?ilYt�$kSV i7�.I S �ESS ate? 4� IB�1 90 It" �T.IQ ar.S U.IYxaQR�heJf[L—.. FiRAE [ Yahoo I Write Us I Search Headlines Info l [ Business - Company - Industry - Finance - PR Newswire - Business Wire - es Monday June 96:0 4 AM EDT Company Press Release PeopleSoft customers again report rapid, succ implementations .Survey finds that over 99% would choose PeopleSoft again PLEASANTON, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 9, 1997--PeopleSoft Inc. (NASDAQ:PSFT), a leading provider of enterprise applications software, today announced the results of the 1997 PeopleSoft Implementations Report, a survey covering customers' implementations of PeopleSoft applications. Drawing responses from 502 out of 1,400 customers polled, the survey yielded substantial information on customers' best practices and successful approaches to implementing PeopleSoft applications. 'The 1997 PeopleSoft Implementations Report is a very comprehensive and valuable compilation which-will assist others in their implementation efforts," said Ken Ward, manager of employee services, BP America. It is extremely important for new and prospective customers to know what approaches and methods have worked best for PeopleSoft customers either involved in implementations or currently in production." Among the key findings in the report: • For PeopleSoft's two most widely used HRMS applications -- Human Resources and Payroll -- more than half the respondents are in production, and on average, their implementation projects took less than one year. • For the three most widely used PeopleSoft Financials applications -- General Ledger, Payables, and Receivables -- nearly half the respondents are in production, and it took them less than a year to implement. • For the two most widely used PeopleSoft Distribution applications -- Purchasing and Inventory -- over 30 percent of the respondents are in production, and on average, their implementation projects took less than one year. • Implementation of 78 percent of PeopleSoft applications required less time, on average, than customers had planned. Yahoo! - PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 2 of 4 • Of the PeopleSoft HRMS customers who responded to the survey, over 99 percent reported they would choose PeopleSoft again. • Of the PeopleSoft Financials customers who responded to the survey, over 98 percent reported they would choose PeopleSoft again. • Of the PeopleSoft Distribution customers who responded to the survey, 100 percent reported they would choose PeopleSoft again. Survey Documents Best Practices for Implementation 'Companies face tremendous pressure to implement enterprise applications quickly, without massive project teams," said Sebastian Grady, vice president of customer services at PeopleSoft. 'For many,the Year 2000 problem has made rapid implementation a survival issue. The 1997 Implementations Report shows new and prospective PeopleSoft customers that swift implementation is achievable, and it details the best practices that make it possible." With the flexibility and modularity built into PeopleSoft applications, customers are able to pick the implementation strategy that best meets their needs. An implementation project entailing minimal customization may take as little as four months. Large customers, or those with more extensive customization needs, may choose a longer, phased schedule -- ' 'going live" first with specific applications, or in specific geographic locations; and then phasing in additional applications or locations. Over 77 percent of the responding customers indicated that they used a phased implementation approach,' rather than a Big Bang' approach. ' 'The phased approach allows customer project teams to show a very rapid return on investment to upper management," said Grady, ' 'while keeping user interest and project morale at peak levels." Product Fit and Flexibility Pay Off PeopleSoft Financials customers reported that the applications met 82 percent of their business needs without reengineering or customization. The PeopleSoft HRMS applications, 'straight out of the box,' met 80 percent of customers' business needs. The PeopleSoft Distribution applications, without modification, met 78 percent of business needs. The customers' remaining requirements were met primarily through customization of the PeopleSoft applications and reengineering of internal business processes. 'A key criteria .for Sears in choosing PeopleSoft was ease of implementation. With 300,000 associates, we needed powerful software that could adapt to our size and business model. 'We were able to take our first business group of 35,000 associates into production Yahoo! - PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 3 of 4 inless than a year," said Peter Ackerman, director of human resources services at Sears, Roebuck and Co., which uses PeopleSoft Payroll, HR, and Benefits Administration. ' 'We were impressed with the quality and flexibility provided by the PeopleSoft products. It is clear that these applications can extend and change to meet.our needs, without forcing us to reengineer to fit the software." Implementation Team Sizes and Times Respondents reported that they were able to implement PeopleSoft applications rapidly using small, focused project teams. For PeopleSoft Financials customers in the survey, with average annual revenues of $2.3 billion, implementation teams averaged slightly less than 23 people. The majority of the team members were in-house employees; the rest were consultants from PeopleSoft Professional Services, PeopleSoft implementation partners, or other third-party service providers. For PeopleSoft HRMS customers, averaging $3.0 billion in annual revenues, implementation teams averaged slightly under 16 people. For PeopleSoft Distribution customers in the survey, annual revenues averaged $1 .6 billion, and the implementation teams consisted of less than 23 people. The average implementation time for these multi-billion dollar organizations was 10 months. PeopleSoft's Customer. Service Organization and Philosophy PeopleSoft has dedicated over 40 percent of its 3,000-plus employees to customer service. All customers licensing a PeopleSoft application are provided with a support package that comes free of charge for the first year. The support package includes installation support, new product releases, 240 hotline support, an account manager who acts as the customer's advocate, and credits for training classes. Worldwide, nonstop access to these services is greatly facilitated by PeopleSoft Customer Connection, the Web-based support service launched on April 28 .(see PSFT-26.97). About PeopleSoft PeopleSoft Inc. (NASDAQ:PSFT) was established in 1987 to provide innovative software solutions that meet the changing business demands of enterprises worldwide. A client/server applications pioneer and market leader, PeopleSoft develops, markets, and supports a complete suite of enterprise solutions for accounting, materials management, distribution, manufacturing, supply chain planning, and human resources. In addition, PeopleSoft provides industry-specific enterprise solutions to customers in select markets including financial services, retailing, healthcare, manufacturing, higher education, the public sector, and the U.S. federal government. With more than 1,600 Yahoo! - PeopleSoft customers again report ra... Page 4 of 4 customers around the world, the company has been recognized for both its award-winning customer service and its remarkable growth. PeopleSoft was, listed by Fortune Magazine as one of the fastest growing companies in America in 19944, 1995, and again in 1996. PeopleSoft product and service information is located on the World Wide Web at http://www.peoplesoft.com, and for recent press releases and financial information, via fax-on-demand at 800/296-0937. Note to Editors: PeopleSoft, PeopleTools, PS/nVision, PeopleBooks, and PeopleCode are registered trademarks, and Red Pepper and PeopleTalk are trademarks of PeopleSoft Inc. All other company and product names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Contact: PeopleSoft Inc. Kit Robinson, 510/468-2124 Lit robinson@peoplesoft.com or The Horn Group Carol Shen, 415/579-6424 cshen@horngroup.com More news for referenced ticker symbols: PSFT, and related industries: computer, internet, telecommunications. CSearch News Help Copyright® 1997 Business Wire. All rights reserved. All,the news releases provided by Business Wire are copyrighted. Any forms of copying other than an individual user's personal reference without express written permission is prohibited. Further distribution of these materials is strictly forbidden, including but not limited to, posting, emailing, faxing, archiving in a public database, redistributing via a computer network or in a printed form. Important Disclaimers and Legal Information Questions or Comments?