|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Improvements have also been made to Quick
Quote, one of the more popular features. Changes have been made
to make Quick Quote more user friendly to produce the necessary
information to support electronic record keeping. The eMall
feature has also been improved over the years by undergoing
three major upgrades. The eVA application management team
continually searches to find hidden flaws in the system and
fixes them in order to make improvements that give both buyers
and suppliers better tools. User feedback is continually sought
and used to develop new functions and features.
“When eVA was introduced in 2001,
the difficulties and cost in creating an electronic catalogue
seemed staggering,” said Katheryn “Ty” Roop,
president of a one woman owned business in Southwest Virginia.
“We found that our computer system could be adapted and
that the electronic warehouse and delivery processes we were
already using were perfect for doing business with eVA.
Electronic procurement sounds cold and calculating, but we have
received many new orders and established a number of new
accounts from outside our traditional market area . . .
something that could not have happened without eVA.”
Even with the few bumps in the road,
overall eVA has been successful in becoming a national leader
for statewide procurement systems linking vendors and buyers
and creating a data repository for procurement information. In
FY 2005, the Commonwealth realized cost reductions of $69
million by using eVA procurement functionality. Recognized as one
of the most sophisticated electronic procurement systems
rivaling even the private sector, eVA has won multiple national
awards. In 2003, eVA won the State Government Innovator Award
from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Accenture,
the Trailblazer Award by eGov Magazine’s government
services administration, and the Cronin Gold Award for
Innovations in IT by the National Association of State
Procurement Officials, just to name a few. In 2005, the
division of purchases and supply, that includes eVA, was
recognized by the National Institute of Government Purchasing
and the National Procurement Institute with the Achievement of
Excellence in Procurement Award. This award measured
innovation, professionalism, productivity, eProcurement, and
leadership attributes within public and nonprofit procurement
organizations. The eVA took top honors receiving the highest score
of only five states that received the award.
|
EXPANDING OPPORTUNITIES
To date, more than 800,000 orders have
been processed through eVA equating to $7.6 billion in expenditures.
Over the years, eVA has expanded from a “state use
only” user group to having 492 local government entities
enrolled as eVA users. Local government purchasing departments
and local school divisions have the choice to adopt eVA as a
major tool in streamlining and improving their purchasing. Over
8,000 purchases have been made by local government entities for
over $77 million in spending since the system was expanded to
include local governments and local school systems a few years
ago. In a recent commendation of a school division’s
efficiency, a consultant’s report noted that since
implementing eVA and using Quick Quote for a particular
purchase, the division had expanded the vendor pool from 1 to
22 and reduced the cost from a projected $25,000 to
approximately $15,000.
One of the greatest challenges faced by
local government organizations is keeping control of scarce resources
while still being responsive to a myriad of internal needs. Tom
Sawyer, a York County Purchasing Officer said, “We are
still doing some things the old fashioned way through the
newspaper, advertisements for bid, faxes, posting on cable TV
and so forth, but for a small staff with a fairly large volume,
eVA is the way to go.”
Many local governments have embraced eVA
and are individualizing the application to meet their needs.
Most are already using Quick Quote and eMall and some are
choosing to use the full system for their purchasing process. A
local government entity may choose to decentralize purchasing
to the school or department level, electronically approve
requests, capture detailed records of purchasing, and keep
users and suppliers better informed. The system
|
|
||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|