Search Results

Division August 10, 2023 Client Challenge Our client, a public university, had an annual revenue exceeding $575 million from discretionary awards, including grants, contracts, and cooperative agreements from federal, state, and private sponsors. Due to an expanding award portfolio, their resources fell short in handling the associated administrative tasks, resulting in a substantial backlog of accounts needing closure. Solutions Delivered BGSF was selected to manage this massive undertaking and partnered with our client to develop, manage, and execute a plan to address the backlog of accounts requiring closeout. Learn More Here Click here to download the full case study and learn about project results (including discovering $18 million of undetected, billable revenue!) and conclusions that were drawn from the experience. If you are facing a similar challenge in your organization, click here to talk to an expert today!

Division Professional Division August 2, 2023 Client Challenge As a forward-thinking educational institution, our client adopted the Oracle PeopleSoft suite to streamline its administrative processes and enhance the overall efficiency of its operations. With the complexity and ever-evolving nature of PeopleSoft applications, the client recognized the need for expert assistance to bridge their skills gap and ensure the seamless operation of their critical systems. The college utilized PeopleSoft applications including Finance, Human Capital Management (HCM), and Campus Solutions. Solutions Delivered BGSF offered the expertise and dedication required to exceed the client’s specific needs, including filling the skills gap, technical and application upgrades, uninterrupted support, and strategic consulting. Learn More Here Click here to download the full case study and learn about project results and conclusions that were drawn from the experience. If you are facing a similar challenge in your organization, click here to talk to an expert today!

Division Donovan & Watkins, Professional Division February 7, 2020 This Statement establishes financial accounting and reporting standards for stock-based employee compensation plans. Those plans include all arrangements by which employees receive shares of stock or other equity instruments of the employer or the employer incurs liabilities to employees in amounts based on the price of the employer’s stock. Examples are stock purchase plans, stock options, restricted stock, and stock appreciation rights. This Statement also applies to the transactions in which an entity issues its equity instruments to acquire goods or services from non-employees. Those transactions must be accounted for based on the fair value of the consideration received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued, whichever is more reliably measurable. Accounting for Awards of Stock-Based Compensation to Employees. This Statement defines a fair valued based method of accounting for an employee stock option or similar equity instrument and encourages all entities to adopt that method of accounting for all their employee stock compensation plans. However, it also allows an entity to continue to measure compensation cost for those plans using the intrinsic value-based method of accounting prescribed by APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees. The fair value-based method is preferable to the Opinion 25 method for purposes of justifying a change in accounting principle under APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes. Entities electing to remain with the accounting in Opinion 25 must make pro forma disclosures of net income and, if presented, earning per share, as if the fair value-based method of accounting defined in this statement had been applied. Under the fair value-based method, compensation cost is measured at the grant date based on the value of the award and is recognized over the service period. Which is usually the vested period. Under the intrinsic value-based method, compensation cost is the excess, if any, of the quoted market price of the stock at the grant date, and under Opinion 25 no compensation cost is recognized for them. Compensation cost is recognized for other types of stock-based compensation plans under Opinion 25, including plans with variable, usually performance-based, features. Stock Compensation Awards Required to Be Settled by Issuing Equity Instruments. Stock Options For stock options, fair value is determined using an option-pricing model that takes into account the stock price at the grant date, the exercise price, the expected life of the option, the volatility of the underlying stock and expected dividends on it, and the risk-free interest rate over the expected life of the option. Nonpublic entities are permitted to exclude the volatility factor in estimating the value of their stock options, which results in measurement at the minimum value. The fair value of an option estimated at the grant date is not subsequently adjusted for changes in the price of the underlying stock or its volatility, the life of the option, dividends on the stock, or the risk-free interest rate. Nonvested Stock The fair value of a share of nonvested stock (usually referred to as restricted stock) awarded to an employee is measured at the market price of a share of a nonrestricted stock on the grant date unless a restriction will be imposed after the employee has a vested right to it, in which case fair value is estimated taking that restriction into account. Employee Stock Purchase Plans An employee stock purchase plan that allows employees to purchase stock at a discount from market price is not compensatory if it satisfies three conditions: (a) the discount is relatively small (five percent or less satisfies this condition automatically, though in some cases a greater discount also might be justified as non-compensatory), (b) substantially all full-time employees may participate on an equitable basis, and (c) the plan incorporates no option features such as allowing the employee to purchase stock at a fixed discount from the lesser of the market price at grant date or date of purchase. Stock Compensation Awards Required to Be Settled by Paying Cash Some stock-based compensation plans require an employer to pay an employee, either on-demand or at a specified date, a cash amount determined by the increase in the employer’s stock price from a specified level. The entity must measure compensation cost for that award in the amount of the changes in the stock price in the periods in which the changes occur. Disclosures The pro forma amounts requires to be disclosed by an employer that continues to apply the accounting provisions of Opinion 25 will reflect the difference between compensation cost, if any, included in net income and the related cost measured by the fair value based method defined in this Statement, including tax effects, if any, that would have been recognized in the income statement if the fair value based method had been used. The required pro forma amounts will not reflect any other adjustments to reported net income or, if presented, earnings per share. Effective Date and Transition The accounting requirements of this Statement are effective for transactions entered in fiscal years that begin after December 15, 1995, though they may have adopted on issuance. The disclosure requirements of this statement are effective for financial statements for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 1995, or for an earlier fiscal year for which this Statement is initially adopted for recognizing compensation cost. Pro forma disclosures required for entities that elect to continue to measure compensation cost using Opinion 25 must include the effects of all awards granted in fiscal years that begin after December 15, 1994. Pro forma disclosures for awards granted in the first fiscal year beginning after December 15, 1994, need not be included in financial statements for that fiscal year but should be presented subsequently whenever financial statements for that.

Division Professional Division October 6, 2022 Read here!

Division Professional Division September 16, 2021 Read here!

Division Professional Division September 16, 2021 Read here!

Division July 15, 2021 Are you ready to join us for the next installment of our webinar series on diversity in the workplace? Click to register today for free to hear four thought leaders share their tips and tricks for driving equity in the workplace. Grab your ‘seat’ at this complimentary event today! When: Wednesday, July 21st 2021 @ 11:30AM CST Cindy Clare President & Chief Operating Officer, Bell Partners As Bell Partners’ Chief Operating Officer, Cindy Clare, CPM, oversees the operations of over 65,000 apartment homes in more than 240 apartment communities across the nation. She is responsible for all aspects of community management for both third-party and Bell-owned communities. This oversight includes community operations and maintenance, lease-ups, relationships with third-party owners, marketing, and brand management. Marci French VP Operations, HRG Management Services LLC Marci French is the VP of Operations with HRG Management Services and an NAAEI faculty member. With over 25 years of multifamily experience, she builds, leads, and coaches high-performing teams. With a unique combination of skills, Marci possesses extensive portfolio experience including urban and suburban living, LIHTC, new development and lease-up, renovations and repositioning, as well as student housing. Her drive has garnered several industry awards across the nation. Rob Laster HR Director, Helen of Troy Rob is an accomplished Human Resource (HR) and Organizational Development (OD) leader who connects business strategies to cultural health drivers and performance metrics. As Sr. Director of HR at Helen of Troy, a company focused on elevating lives and soaring together; Rob has led the way to a total company cultural transformation. Now as an employer of choice, Helen of Troy leads the field in best-in-class results in Associate Satisfaction/Retention, Customer Satisfaction, and Financial Results. Cynt Marshall CEO, Dallas Mavericks Cynt Marshall has been a dynamic force for inclusion and diversity within the Mavericks organization and over a 36-year career at AT&T.  When Cynt was hired as new the CEO of the Mavs in March 2018, she set her sights on a culture transformation. Her vision was for the Mavericks organization to become the NBA standard for inclusion and diversity and brought transparency, trust, and a values-based leadership style that evolved the company culture in her first 100 days. Ebony Butler Director Diversity, Learning & Development, BGSF Ebony Butler has 16+ years of learning and development experience and over six years of experience, specifically focusing on creating inclusive workplace cultures for all. She joined BGSF in January 2021 as the Director, Diversity, Development & Learning. Ebony feels extremely fortunate to be able to couple both of her passions: sharing knowledge and cultivating inclusive and appreciative work cultures.

Division Professional Division May 19, 2021 Read here!

Division BGSF, Information Technology, LJ Kushner & Associates, Professional Division May 13, 2021 Read here!

Division BGSF, Professional Division May 13, 2021 Read here!

Division Professional Division, Whitepaper November 11, 2020 Read the full pdf here: EDR – White Paper – PART 1 Migrating On-Premise Application to the Cloud I am sitting at my desk after leaving our leadership meeting where we discussed many key initiatives for the following quarter. My boss, the CEO has instructed me to lower our overall SGA within my area (Information Technology). As I sit at my desk and ponder some ideas, I remember reading some articles about the labor and capital expense savings by migrating key applications to the cloud, specifically ERP applications. As I start to search the web for some key information, I quickly become overwhelmed with all of the content related to “cloud” and savings. The amount of content and trying to decipher what is real and what is sales related was overwhelming and daunting. This event occurred over a year ago and we have since migrated our ERP (PeopleSoft) application to the cloud. I committed to write an article that simply outlines the project and the items to consider before jumping into such a project. This article will outline: Criteria to determine if Cloud Migration is viable: Identify your current costs – internal labor costs, hardware costs as well as software licensing Determine if the application you plan on moving has any restriction to running in the cloud (Licenses, Technology limitations, etc…) Ensure the Cloud you move to will have the ability to verify “Usage” as well as SLA and downtime compensation Does the Cloud solution offer you the same or better DR (disaster recovery)? Data Location (Will the location of the data violate any internal policies?) In addition to the key points above, it is very important for the organization to consider prior to migrating any application to the cloud is determining the KPI’s(Key Performance Indicators) for how to measure successful criteria. Some of these KPI’s are Hardware and Labor Cost Savings, Performance, and application maintenance. These KPIs can be used not just for the initial migration but to benchmark the criteria, one month, one quarter, or even one year after the migration. Data points are always valuable, especially when you are asked the question, what were the benefits of migrating these applications to the cloud? Identify your current internal labor costs: Current application and infrastructure costs, which include the direct and indirect costs of using and maintaining your application can be difficult and very expensive. The direct costs cover hardware and software (including physical servers), software licenses, maintenance contracts, warranties, supplies, material, spare parts, network bandwidth, storage and database capacity, all labor, and facilities. The indirect costs include loss of revenue and productivity resulting from any outages or downtime. This step is essential to fully understand the business case for cloud adoption and make an apples-to-apples cost comparison. These indirect costs are harder to quantify but creating a way to measure these will help you and the organization as more and more applications get migrated to the cloud. Determine if the application you plan on moving has any restriction to running in the cloud: Not all applications within your enterprise are candidates for cloud migration. Some of these applications have software licensing limitations, like that of the Oracle Database Engine. Oracle certifies certain cloud providers with the hosting and licensing certifications. For example Amazon (AWS), Microsoft (Azure), Rackspace, and Oracle (OCI) are all Oracle Database certified cloud providers, regardless of BYOL (Bring your Own License) or if you purchase your license from one of these providers. The inverse of this is hosting a BYOL within CenturyLink which is not a certified OracleDatabase Cloud hosting provider. It is very important to validate and confirm the Cloud provider you are migrating to is certified to host and run the applications you are considering prior to moving them. Not all cloud provider allows customers to bring their own license (BYOL), some require the purchase of their subscription for key pieces of software. The cost of license violations is much more costly after the fact than spending the time to ensure you are not violating and license agreements. Ensure your cloud provider has the ability to verify, usage performance, and uptime SLA with downtime compensation Most cloud providers today have the ability to measure usage of resources (CPU, Disk, Memory, Network) in order to determine billing and reporting. In our experience of finding the right cloud provider, it was clear that the top tier-1 cloud providers all had the ability to measure usage and each provider had their own unique industry-standard SLA’s with downtime credits and compensation. The tier-one providers are: Amazon Microsoft Azure Oracle (OCI) Google We found the ability to measure and report the usage allowed us to script streamline the days, hours, and times certain applications were up and running. This permitted us to take full advantage of bringing applications off-line when not needed, hence saving us a great deal of cost each month. This exercise took a few months to perfect as well as striking a balance of what applications needed to be available during what periods of time. The cost savings for us was reduced by over 35% annually. Does the Cloud solution offer you the same or better DR (Disaster Recovery)? Disaster recovery is something every organization requires, especially for their tier-1 applications. The cost for an organization to design, maintain, test, and support disaster recovery is great. This cost is driven from the design of ensuring three areas of Disaster Recovery are achieved as well as the labor cost to test and maintain this structure: Data Location (Will the location of the data violate any internal policies?) While security remains top of mind of most CIO’s and CEO’s, the location of data is rising in prominence as a barrier or concern for cloud adoption. These concerns stem in part from the difficulty of visibility into data transit and storage. Customers might want to know where exactly their data is residing so they can retrieve it quickly —and also for legal implications, which we’ll get into momentarily. With many clouds, because of the way cloud storage works, data might be spread over several servers or storage arrays, and even between multiple data center facilities. This makes it hard for even the provider to identify exactly where data is stored. But while transparent, cloud service providers might be forthcoming with their infrastructure design details and maintain their security through a strong web of compliance standards and data security best practices, there remain legal entanglements to the storage of data in the cloud. Some organizations have internal data policies in conjunction to legislation the restricts certain data to cross international borders. Some of these policies have large financial penalties if data privacy and data locations are violated. The best way to ensure your data is not in violation of internal policies or international Laws is to locate your data containers in specific regions(Locations). This can be controlled in all of the tier-1 cloud providers. Data Location (Will the location of the data violate any internal policies?)As your organization goes through the rationale of considering the migration of applications to the cloud, I would suggest speaking to peers who have undergone this exercise as well as an organization that specializes in these types of projects. I wrote this article in conjunction with our partner Momentum Solutionz who helped us with the project. Many organizations do not put enough stock in the benefits of working with an organization that brings experience to the table, like in golf. I would prefer to have my playing partner putt before me so I can see the speed and break of the greens, which allows me to have a better chance of being successful with my putt. Momentum Solutionzspecializes in advising and assisting organizations with their journey to the cloud, we can generally reduce project time and cost by 35% by leveraging our been-there-done-it experience. Please sign up for a more detailed conversation and allow us to assist you and your organization with this journey.

Division LJ Kushner & Associates, Whitepaper November 11, 2020 Read the full pdf here: Cybersecurity Case Study_Global Financial Tech Company Situation: This client’s product is vital to the global financial services industry and operates on a complex private network. Our financial systems rely on the integrity of this client’s data in order to run, therefore customer data protection, information accuracy, and availability/reliability are paramount to the company’s success. After placing their Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), this global financial technology company, based in New York City, engaged us to continue to build out their Information Security Program including an Information Security Operations Center (ISOC) Team. Search / Assignment We worked with the CISO to understand his vision for the ISOC Team and the needs for each role, including an overall leader, individual team lead, and experienced analysts with various skillsets: ISOC Director – An experienced leader who can strategically build-out and advance the ISOC function, communicate up through the C-level, as well as earn the confidence of the ISOC Team. ISOC Team Lead – The most technical member of the team required to not only have the technical depth within threat detection and incident response but also convey a level of maturity for management. Experienced ISOC L2, L3, and L4 Analysts – The analysts monitor and analyze activity on networks, servers, endpoints, databases, applications, websites, and other systems, looking for anomalous activity that could be indicative of a security incident or compromise. To do this well, we require various skills/knowledge in the ISOC space, including but not limited to: Triage of Detection Alerts Forensics – Host and Network Proactive Threat Hunting Malware Analysis / Reverse Engineering Incident Response Threat Intelligence / Indicators of Compromise Automation/Programming Skills (generally Python) Methodology From the onset of the project we forged a partnership among the CISO, hiring managers, the client’s talent acquisition team, and our firm. Then we proceeded to: Identify the appropriate level of talent for each role. Qualify a shortlist according to skill and location; introduce opportunity and company. Make introductions to CISO and existing ISOC Team for initial interview / assessment. Manage further interview processes from inception(introduction) to close (accepted offer / onboarding). Result: Over a six month period, we placed the ISOC Director, an ISOC Team Lead, and five experienced ISOC Analysts with various technical skills. The majority of the team is still in place and successfully operating the program four years later.