Once we moved to an eTS we considered continuing with one of our current travel agencies as an accommodated TMC.  However, the one TMC, which partnered with our eTS and was embedded, offered a lower price for both traditional and on-line booking and came with a great reputation as a travel agent.   In addition, we avoided additional costs that the eTS vendor would charge us to accommodate our current TMC.  We also had a short time period for implementation and needed a solution that was already in place.

The first year of our eTS implementation was filled with TMC issues, both from the TMC and from the interface with the eTS.  Our travelers would arrive to the airport without reservations, reservations would get stuck in queue and agent international expertise was non-existent. Both the eTS vendor and TMC were willing to work with us to improve service.  We developed logs that tracked every issue and had standing weekly conference calls with the TMC to address each issue.  Many of the issues were due to lack of training for the agents as well as a lack of communication between the eTS and their subcontractor TMC.  Over time the logs reduced in size and travelers stranded at the airport became a thing of the past.

Looking back I believe we made the right decision by going with the embedded TMC.  Since we were the first to fully deploy an eTS I believe many of the issues would have surfaced regardless of the TMC we chose.  The vendor has continued to add additional embedded TMC’s to provide options to our customers.  Although we have more options now, most of our customers have decided to remain with the original TMC and are happy with the current level of service.

by Diana Bonnell

Disclaimer: The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.  Use of this equipment is consistent with the agency’s policy governing limited personal use.

• Clearly defining conversion goals
• Mitigating risk issues that could result in monetary or time loss
• Optimizing/revamping current business processes the customer performs
• Administering end user training on the eTS

Our eTS customer implementation process usually consists of four steps. We begin implementations with a project kick off meeting with the agency. These are normally on-site visits at the agency. During this kick off meeting several things are accomplished such as:

• Introductions
• A demo of the eTS
• Provide the customer with a high level overview of the project plan
• Try to determine any unique needs the customer may have
• Attempt to gain a feel for the customer’s business practices/processes and visualize the impact on the project and/or ongoing operations after implementation

Once the kick off meeting is completed, then we hold bi-weekly conference calls with the customer. During these bi-weekly conference calls we continue to develop relationships and establish contacts with key personnel. We review/monitor tasks on the project plan documenting the status of each task. Besides the demo that we provided during the kick off meeting, we also allow for select customer personnel to have access to our training database in order for them to have ‘hands on’ experience and to be able see ‘up-close’ how the eTS system works. By the customers actually creating documents in the training database of eTS, these bi-weekly calls aid in allowing for ongoing discussions of system capabilities and capacities to meet the customer’s needs. Also during the course of these bi-weekly meetings, the customer is working on completing traveler information worksheets, approving official worksheets, routing lists, and groups. We need all of this information, prior to the customer going live in the eTS, to set up their organization correctly. A rollout schedule is also established during these calls.

Our third step is training the customer. Normally the training is done on-site, but we have also used an on-line training tool to provide training. The customer decides what type of training is to be done, such as ‘Train the Trainer’ or ‘Train the User’ type of training. The customer also decides how the training will be done (such as demos, hands-on training, on-line sessions, etc.) and who will attend the training. Each training session is geared specifically toward the agency’s policies and requirements. A normal training session would include a thorough overview of authorizations, vouchers, local vouchers, amendments/adjustments, and how to approve a document.

The fourth step is post implementation issues. Post implementation issues are usually minor and are easily corrected. An example of a post implementation issue may be that a user does not have the proper permission level to approve a document. When this happens, we refer back to the worksheets provided to us by the agency and can determine if the user should have originally been set up with approval access or not. If they are not listed on the documentation we originally received, then we simply ask for documentation from the customer and update the user’s profile.

Now just because a customer’s eTS implementation is completed, the relationship and communication process does not stop. We continue to communicate any eTS outages, reservation unavailability, and system changes/enhancements via email notifications. Our eTS vendor informs us of any scheduled or unscheduled eTS outages and reservation unavailability, which in turn, we pass on to our customer contacts. Our eTS vendor also routinely implements table updates and enhancements to the eTS. We are notified in advance of these implementations and the items that will be included. We perform comprehensive testing in both the training and production environments of the items being implemented, as well as, ‘routine’ testing. ‘Routine’ testing includes the basics such as creating authorizations, vouchers, local vouchers, amendments, etc. If we find any items that do not work or are not working correctly, we contact our eTS vendor and then they research the issue to determine the problem. Sometimes the issue can be resolved quickly and other times it may take a while. It just depends on what is causing the problem and how it needs to be fixed.

After our testing is completed, we send out guidance to our customer contacts that includes information on the enhancement updates, as well as, any major system functionality that may have been disabled/interrupted during the implementation.

Another part of the communication process with our customers is through our help desk. We have a very qualified and informed help desk. After we have completed a customer’s eTS implementation, that customer’s users call our help desk to obtain the information, assistance, and/or guidance they need in order to resolve their issue or problem within the eTS.

by Susan Garrett

The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.

FedRooms is a lodging program that travelers are encouraged to use, primarily because rates are at or below the per diem rate.  It is currently not mandatory to select a FedRooms lodging property, but the Federal Travel Regulations (FTR) requires that the traveler must give first consideration to using a FedRooms property because of the value of the FedRooms rates and many associated benefits.  FedRooms is able to negotiate the best hotel rates on behalf of the government.

There are many benefits to using FedRooms:  FedRooms rates are always at or below the per diem rate.  There are no hidden costs or penalties attached to the FedRooms rate.  There is no charge for early check-out.  There are over 10,000 hotels located in high demand travel locations that are close to the places Federal travelers visit most frequently.  Most of the major hotel chains are included.  Travelers may collect hotel award points on every room night.  Travelers may cancel reservations by 4p.m. (or later) on the day of arrival without penalty.  There are no deposits needed to reserve the rooms.  FedRooms rates may also be used for leisure travel at selected properties*.  FedRooms hotels may have last room availability and some amenities.  FedRooms rate can also be used by federal travelers for small groups and meetings of up to 25 people at selected properties*.  (* These rates are available at select FedRooms  properties-see the advanced search at fedrooms.com).

FedRooms provides FTR compliant hotel rooms for federal government travelers while on official business.  Hotels in the FedRooms program are FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency ) and ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990) compliant, they have at least a two star Mobil Travel Guide or American Automobile Association (AAA) rating, they accept government credit cards and other forms of payment.  (To become AAA Approved, the hotel must meet 27 basic requirements, covering comfort, cleanliness and safety).  They offer more than 5,000 hotels in more than 1,600 cities around the world, a significant increase from 636 hotels in 2004.  Also they offer the flexibility to add hotels in cities that meet traveler’s needs.  They have a well recognized help desk to answer program-related questions.  An example of some of the 90 hotel chains represented in the program is Wyndham, Double Tree, Hilton Hotels and Resorts, and Radisson Worldwide.  FedRooms offers an increasing number of international properties at or below per diem.

FedRooms accommodations are available through E-Gov Travel electronic systems (ETS).  FedRooms properties display first in the on-line booking engine.    You may search directly by telephone for a FedRoom property by asking the agent for a FedRooms property and the FedRooms rate.  Lastly, confirm that you have received a FedRooms rate.  You may also search the FedRooms website atwww.fedrooms.com.   Ninety percent of the partner hotels have a direct link to the booking site.   (Booking hotel accommodations either through the ETS or Travel Management Center (TMC) or Commercial Ticket Office (CTO) provides the government with booking data, that is lost if reservations are made directly with the hotel).  FedRooms cancellation of hotel accommodations is automatic if the reservations are made through the TMC/CTO or through ETS or Defense Travel System (DTS) when a trip is cancelled.

There are significant differences between the FedRooms rate and the often referred to as “government rate” or “federal government rate” or “military rate”, these rates often include hidden fees and costly penalties.  These government rates are unmanaged.  The FedRooms rate is guaranteed to be at or below per diem, the government rate is not.  The FedRooms rate ensures the travelers can cancel a reservation until 4p.m. on the day of arrival without penalty.  The government rate does not.  The FedRooms rate promises the travelers will not be charged for checking out before their check-out date.  The government rate does not.

GSA has partnered with CW Government Travel, Inc.  of Minneapolis, MN to manage the government wide lodging program.  CW offers its expertise by providing program management, marketing and communications, and continued expansion of the government wide lodging program.

By: Kathy Runion

The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.

What was surprising to me about solicitation TFL06-RH-1040 was the vast scope and limited timeline of the project. The project requires that TRX establish data feeds with not only DTS and the three ETS vendors, but also with:

• multiple charge card vendors (presumably GE Capital, Chase, Citibank, US Bank)
• every government TMC/CTO (which I understand there are approximately 100)
• settlement data (i.e. ARC)
• data direct from suppliers (air, car, hotel)

When you step back and think about the scale of the project from a technology perspective, not to mention the privacy and security issues, it is immense. And now for the laughable part: GSA required the contractor to achieve “full operational capability” within 180 days (6 months) from the date of award. That is simply not feasible.

TRX was awarded the contract in December of 2006. That would have meant the business intelligence system was generating reports from all requested data feeds by June of 2007. Credit GSA for implementing what might turn out to be a world class travel management system, but they need to comprehend the scope of their request and establish realistic timelines.

By Ted Schuerman

When we were in the initial pilot format, and the problems became more acute and obvious shortly after we required mandatory use of the system agency-side, we discovered several problems in our internal practices.  Many of our managers, especially those in the program areas, are here only as temporary personnel.  These interim managers do not understand appropriations law, government accounting, and they have no interest in complying with the FAR or the FTR.  Civil service staff often understood the rationale for the regulations and agency processes, but had a difficult time enforcing compliance when their management was telling them to do otherwise. There was a strong underlying culture of “make-it-work” and pro-forma paperwork (in some cases no paperwork until the travel vouchers were presented for payment).

Some of the problems discovered had been suspected for years by accounting personnel who did not have the political influence to correct them within the organization.  These issues included such things as traveling without evidence of advance approval for the travel (no written and approved orders); and violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act (traveling without funds committed and obligated in advance of expenditure by an authorizing official);   A significant amount of the organizational resistance to the implementation of the ETS, in my opinion, came not from just the complexity of the ETS, but also from the enforced standardization and compliance with the letter of the law and internal regulations.

Mandatory use of the ETS has successfully standardized travel practices and forced  cultural change at the agency that can only improve financial integrity and compliance with federal regulations, and the internal policies that require us all to be good custodians of the taxpayers’ money.

by Julie Speers

Federal travelers are required to use a Travel Management Service (TMS) and their ETS. In 2003 the Federal Travel Regulations (FTR) were published to state in Chapter 301-50:3 that travelers must use the ETS once it becomes available through their TMS.  However, for reasons beyond my control or understanding there remain individuals and groups who appear to continue to follow business as usual with no regard to the change in the FTR.  And, until someone with a lot more importance or influence than I have puts a stop to it, the practice will never change.

The ETS is the current way of doing business in the government. In November, 2003, three competitively bid E-Gov Travel Service Contracts were awarded to: CW Government Data Systems Corp (EDS), Northrop Grumman Mission Systems (NGMS).

Over my 20+ years in the travel field for the government; I have seen many changes.  However, I believe the current ETS can be a highly effective way of doing business IF and WHEN we can train, convince, or somehow force the employees out there who are resisting the change to utilize the system.  As long as there remain exceptions (as in employees) we will never have a fully effective system.

The current ETS is not designed to handle the Permanent Change of Station (PCS) vouchers, so these will continue to be processed manually at this time.

I believe that as Bureau Administrator for the ETS, it is very important for me to maintain an open line of communication with both the Department and our contracted ETS vendor.

Having a good working relationship is important no matter what level you are, or who you are working with.  In my position, it is extremely important as customer service is my main concern.   As travel administrator, I am the help desk for my office.  I also have Regional administrators who forward issues they cannot resolve up to me.  I serve as the liaison between the Regional administrators and the Department and ETS Vendor.

The relationship you build with your ETS vendor is a very important relationship.  We count on them to provide us the flights, hotels, and rental cars that we need to conduct our business; at the lowest possible prices.  If you do not have a good relationship with your vendor, how do you expect them to be willing to work with you on getting flights to small offices loaded into the GDS?  Or to make programming quirks or changes to enhance the system to better suit our needs?

Sure, there are times and issues that we all wish would get resolved, we as government employees feel the ETS vendors just aren’t listening to us on the priority of some of the issues, however; after taking this course, I now understand that the vendor is probably sitting over there with a list just as long as ours trying to figure out how to make everything work for everyone.

If you have a good working relationship with the E-Gov vendors TMC team, they will be more willing to work with you in resolving your help desk issues, and to resolve questions that they get from our employees.  Gradually; by working together, the issues and problems will decrease, which means the call volume for both of you decreases.

The ETS is a constantly evolving system, as we mold and modify it to make it compatible with our day-to-day operations.  Of course, the travel industry is constantly evolving as is government reporting regulations, so the ETS system must continue to be a work in progress to keep up with the changes demanded of it and its users.  Not only are we making demands for changes to keep up for current reporting requirements, we are preparing for implementation of a new financial system, so our ETS vendor is having to work with us on that as well.

Presently, we are in the testing mode for the next version of our ETS system, which I hope implements easier than the first.  So far; it appears to be more intuitive and user friendly which is what our travelers were asking for.

Shirley Keller

“The comments presented here are mine personally and do not reflect the views of either my agency or the government.”

First, per diems are issued in early August to be effective October of that year through September of the following year. Since we currently contract January to December, all the hotels are given the opportunity to change their rates for October through December. In most cases, one of two things happens. Either in areas where the per diem went up hotel potentially loses that revenue if they do not amend the rate, or the properties are suspended from the program if they do not amend rates that were bid at the previous years per diem in areas where the per diem went down. As we already make exceptions and concessions for this entire market, why do we not solicit rates based on the government calendar year? It could not be harder for us or the travel agencies than managing and loading for the same program year twice.

Next, we need to address the issue of soliciting all hotels worldwide versus utilizing production and market data to develop a more sensible and manageable program. Understanding that there is some amount of government business everywhere, and acknowledging that hotels base rates on their best business information and potential revenues, the government rates could be solicited much like any other large lodging consumer. Hotels should be made aware of the total government lodging credit card spend for the specified program or government agency (i.e. FedRooms, CW|Sato Government Travel; Navy Elite; Army Lodging) in their city or area based on the two previous years. They should be made aware of any base construction or closings as well as agency headquarter relocations planned within the program year. The government or its representative should commit to authorizing only a certain number of hotels per hundred or per thousand room nights, and only accept that many hotels into the specified program for the year in that location. This will create competition for the revenues between hotel companies and that is when we can examine concessions.

The first concession we could look at is commissions. I understand that the very hard working agents should be paid and paid fairly for their work. I have wonderful relationships with the agency travel managers I work with on the government accounts and do not wish to take anything away from them. However, when the rate offer requirements dictate that the rate must be at or below per diem, must be commissionable at 10%, plus there are participation fees or pay for performance models, it severely reduces the number of hotel and quality of service the lodging industry can provide. When a rate that is already, in many cases, unattractive to the hotel, is then reduced further by fees, they cannot make government business fit into their business needs. Say, for instance, the CONUS rate is $70.

We are now looking at the hotel receiving only $60.67, in effect, as they cannot use the $70 as the actual value from which to pay operating and staffing costs and see a profit. It is my understanding that the airline industry no longer pays commissions on the CPP or other government rates, so maybe we should have discussions with them industry leaders to industry leaders about how that is working for them and how it has affected their relationships with the various government program managers, and of course the bottom line revenues. Hopefully, together, we could find a system that would benefit budgeting for all parties involved; the government as a whole, the lodging industry; and the agencies.

Following commissions, last room availability is a concern. Most hotels have complicated yielding plans that optimize revenues while still being able to offer rates to lower rated business client and the government. Although during some times during the year, the property may be able to offer these more discounted rates readily, the majority of the year, in my experience, the hotels must be very careful with their thresholds. If the government agency and its travel agency want to guarantee that there are always rooms available at their contracted rates, then they should accept the limited hotels per area as discussed, and not only mandate per diem rates, but that the travelers must stay in program hotels. Although when working with the corporate market transient programs we see a high level of leakage, there are programs which are very well mandated and will not pay a traveler back for stays in properties not listed on their program directory. Hoteliers are more willing to offer last room availability when they are aware they are one of a select few getting the business and are aware of how much they can expect to receive.

Once we get these more critical items addressed, we can look at the competitive edge and value added type concessions. Some hotels already include breakfast or other meal functions in the rates for all guests and that allows the traveler more freed up funds for other meals and incidentals. Some hotels which do not have inclusive items for all guests, will include items such as continental breakfast and/or afternoon hors d’oeuvres to their executive level guests and frequency program members. These could be value add items for the government and contracted into the program rates. If you have one hotel who would offer per diem and no concessions and one hotel that would offer a meal or other amenity at the same rate in order to be guaranteed the business, then the government gets a choice as they can then counter-offer or negotiate a lower rate or amenity with the first hotel as many of our corporate customers often do. As developing technologies emerge and thinking outside of the box, unconventional items we could look into as we move forward would be expanding electronic folios to include “government ready” receipts, divided folios, or TDY travel claim voucher style itemized cost savings reports, as well as, some in-house items like laundry/pressing services for our military travelers including military service style uniform and shoe shine care.

Although there are more questions than answers at this part of the game, there is a better way out there. We as the travel industry cannot just require changes on the government’s side of the equation. There are things the hoteliers and the lodging industry need to consider as well before agreeing to this type of arrangement. Some of the other questions I have as challenges to the change but do not have answers to are:

• If a hotel cannot offer the contractual government rates, or a rate at per diem, should they offer a rate at the hotel that is labeled government? I know currently most do.
• Once this more corporatized process is in place, are government travel managers at the agencies still going to audit to see what other federal government rates are available and insist on the same rates or benefits? If rates are offered on a production driven basis, knowing each travel agency manages different departments and agencies within the government with different travel needs, they should not be allowed (at that point) to demand equalization. We don’t offer our corporate clients producing 10000 room nights a year at a property to offer the same rate packages to clients consuming 300.
• Are technologies in place that could manage a October to December program versus a January to December program on both the industry and the government travel agency sides? What would it take to create or update that use? Could they be made compatible to ETS?

We have made a lot of progress in how we work with the government. But I think with all the new technologies we have access to, it is time to look at how to make it better; both more cost effective for the government and more profitable for the hotels.

by Crystal Wright

At our agency, Travelers are responsible for making sure that their receipts are attached correctly and the attachment is legible.  All receipts for air, lodging, rental car, and any single expense greater than $75 must be attached in the travelers’ ETS travel document.  Within our ETS there is an automatic pre-audit functionality built in which alerts the document preparer/traveler in the event that a receipt has not been uploaded.

Our ETS users have the capability of either scanning or faxing in their receipts.  Either option is a very easy process.  For faxing, the user is required to print a cover sheet from the ETS.  This cover sheet includes a unique bar code, which identifies to the ETS which document the receipts are to be attached to.  The user simply places their receipts behind this ‘bar coded’ cover sheet and faxes the information.  The second option allows users to scan in their receipts.  I personally find scanning to be the easier option for me, mainly since receipts come in all shapes and sizes, I find it easier to scan my receipts at my local shared scanner, then browse and upload the file within the receipts section of my ETS.

by Brian Shears

Not all airlines and hotels use a Global Distribution System as the GDS charges travel vendors to display inventories. If a supplier uses a GDS, it is the airline carrier, hotel, or rental car company’s responsibility to keep the GDS updated with current information. In some instances some small airlines do not use the GDS and therefore, the TMC must be contacted directly either by phone or by requesting assistance on line by entering a comment. The TMC will then contact the Non-GDS vendor to work with the traveler to make their reservations.

With domestic and foreign (non-complex) travel it is a requirement that our customers use the online booking tool within our eTS to book their reservations. However with complex foreign travel we encourage our customers to book directly through the TMC via phone. With complex foreign travel, the TMC has knowledge of and can offer advice about Visa requirements, the fly America Act, or if foreign carriers and flights are limited or unavailable in the GDS and will require TMC assistance.

by Brian Shears

John and Jill work for an agency that does not have centralized travel services.  Although this story is fictitious, similar stories have been told by travelers who compare notes and find out although they work for the same agency they travel by different rules.  Standardized and consistent policy is just one of the benefits of centralizing travel services.  From working in a shared services arena over the last 15 years we have come to recognize significant benefits from centralization such as the following:

Back office efficiency – One example of this is the interface between the Electronic Travel System (ETS) to the financial system.   Interfaces are costly and by moving to a centralized service all components can benefit from the development of one interface and one financial system.   If financial systems are upgraded or changes to the interface are required, it only needs to be done one time.

Shared best practice – Once a best practice is identified it can be shared across the organization or customer base.    Determining a system work-around is one example of this.  Once the best method to perform a particular function is identified it can be shared with all system users.

Economy of scale – Fixed costs can be spread out across multiple customers or agency components.   Costs for overhead, system testing, contract management and research and development are spread out over a larger base thus reducing costs for everyone.

Increased controls and process improvements -  Internal controls will apply to all components served by the central service provider.   Agencies that perform a yearly SSAE16 (previously known as SAS70) can develop internal controls that are consistently applied.  Process improvements are a benefit to all.

Consistent Policy – As mentioned in the story above, inconsistent policy and practices only lead to traveler frustration and potentially unnecessary expenditures.   As a Shared Service Provider we provide one travel policy guide to all customers that is updated as the Federal Travel Regulations are amended or best practices are identified.  This guide allows for customers to identify areas they want to deviate from such as allowance for phone calls or number of miles from their Permanent Duty Station that are considered local travel.  Customers can adopt this guide as their own and have it apply to all travelers.

In the early 1990′s the Bureau of Public Debt had two administrative offices.  One that served the DC office and one that served the Parkersburg, WV office.  Before the internet, when manual paper processing of travel was the norm, it made sense to have decentralized administrative support at each location.  During the early 1990′s, administrative services were centralized in the Parkersburg, WV office providing remote support to employees still located in DC.  The Bureau of the Public Debt recognized many benefits from centralizing administrative services.  At this time the internet was just taking-off and it was recognized that this new way of communicating and sharing information could be used to provide services to other government agencies.   Other government agencies could receive great administrative support and realize the same benefits that the Bureau of the Public Debt had received when they centralized their services.

On November 9, 2011 President Obama release Executive Order 13589 Promoting Efficient Spending which continues the administrative commitment to cut waste and promote efficient and effective spending.   In line with Executive Order 13576 Delivering and Efficient, Effective and Accountable Government this new executive order calls for reducing the combined administrative costs by at least 20 percent from 2010 spending from several areas including travel.   Agencies are now developing plans to comply with this order.   Although this could result in less federal travel, there are also opportunities for agencies to look at all aspects of their travel including administration of their travel program.  Centralizing the administration of travel can lead to traveling smarter which will allow agencies to reduce travel costs without reducing the number of trips.   By looking at travel policy across the organization they can find ways to reduce costs.  Policies such as requiring employees to ride together if driving to a TDY location, taking public transportation and not exceeding per diem for hotels can reduce overall travel spend.

Serving the last 15 years as a Shared Service Provider we have seen the benefit of consolidation and centralization.  Many customers come to us with decentralized services and reap the benefits of centralizing their services when moving to a shared service center.   As budgets are cut and the government looks for more ways to reduce costs, agencies will be looking at all their options.  Decentralized services can be inefficient and expensive and with today’s technology it is no longer necessary.

By: Diana Bonnell

Disclaimer: The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any position of the Government or my agency.  Use of this equipment is consistent with the agency’s policy governing limited personal use.