6 FAH-5 H-320
ICASS STANDARD AND ICASS LITE
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Office of Origin: CGFS/ICASS)
6 FAH-5 H-321 Comparing the TWO APPROACHES
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. ICASS has two approaches for cost distribution at posts: “ICASS Standard” and “ICASS Lite.” The two methods provide options for achieving a balance between ease of administration and a greater alignment of cost distribution based on service consumption. While the administrative services provided under both approaches may be identical, the Lite approach “bundles” services for a simpler method of cost distribution. The bundling of services usually requires fewer staff hours to administer while the “unbundled” Standard approach tracks costs in much greater detail and requires more staff time.
b. For example, under ICASS Standard, agencies that subscribe to 6139-Motor Pool Services are assessed costs based on kilometers driven for each agency. When ICASS Lite is used, Motor Pool plus eight other services are bundled into a single cost center 6145-General Services where the costs are distributed based on the number of people (per capita). If all agencies used all nine bundled services at the same usage level based on the size of their staffing, then ICASS Lite equitably distributes the cost of the services. However, if agencies have widely varied levels of usage of the services, or do not use one or more of the services offered, distribution based on per capita counts would not provide the best match between distributed costs and the level of services used.
c. The ICASS Lite and ICASS Standard approaches can be described along an “ease of administration” continuum, with ICASS Lite being the less labor-intensive method to administer, and ICASS Standard being the more detailed method providing a greater alignment of cost distribution with the services consumed. For Lite posts, modifications to an agency’s workload counts (6 FAH-5 H-332.1), the creation of Sub-Cost Centers (6 FAH-5 H-332.3) and activating up to three Standard General Services cost centers (see 6 FAH-5 H-332.3 d and 342.7), may result in greater alignment between distributed costs and level of services consumed without requiring a change to the Standard method.
d. A description of the services and the predetermined distribution factors for ICASS Standard are found in 6 FAH-5 H-341 and for ICASS Lite in 6 FAH-5 H-342. ICASS Standard has 34 different cost centers. ICASS Lite has 22 cost centers.
6 FAH-5 H-321.1 Decision Making
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. The post ICASS Budget Committee, with guidance from the financial management officer, determines the more appropriate approach for post to use. If a change in method between Lite and Standard is recommended, it is referred to the ICASS Council for approval (6 FAH-5 H-012.7).
b. The decision to use one approach or the other is a significant one; do not view it as an annual decision. Leadership turnover (management or committee members) with a preference for one method over the other should not be the sole determining factor in making a change; rather, the factors outlined in 6 FAH-5 H-321.2 should guide the decision.
c. Once a decision is made to the satisfaction of the service provider, the Budget Committee, and the ICASS Council, the choice should stand. Only major changes at post, such as a substantial increase or decrease in the number of U.S. direct-hire positions at post, the number of agencies at post, or the level of services to which the agencies subscribe, would justify a change of method.
d. Before post makes a final decision on changing approaches, consultation with Washington, DC is essential. The post ICASS Budget Committee (comprised of all serviced agencies) should consult with their agencies’ headquarters. The ICASS Service Provider should consult with its regional bureau and the ICASS Service Center to ensure all factors are considered
6 FAH-5 H-321.2 Cost/Benefit Comparison
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
While ICASS Standard may be used by any post, more than half of the posts worldwide use ICASS Lite, with most large posts using ICASS Standard and the smaller posts using ICASS Lite. Mid-sized posts are evenly mixed in which method is used. Distressed posts that face frequent challenges and have minimal ICASS staff often use the Lite method. The method used is determined on a post-by-post basis and size is not the only factor to consider in this decision.
6 FAH-5 H-321.2-1 ICASS Standard
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. The ICASS Standard approach provides additional detail to distribute costs based on workload counts which are more closely matched to serviced agencies’ consumption of services. This approach may be most appropriate when serviced agencies receive widely different levels of services (see 6 FAH-5 H-341).
b. Post must consider the benefits of using the ICASS Standard approach versus the costs associated with collecting and managing data. The costs include additional time and effort to collect more detailed data for workload counts, tracking an increased number of cost centers, and more administrative time required to prepare the additional data for budgeting, accounting, and analysis. The resulting benefits include better detail to match distributed costs more closely with the consumption of services by ICASS customers.
6 FAH-5 H-321.2-2 ICASS Lite
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
a. While ICASS Lite is used by more than half of the posts worldwide, this approach may not meet the needs of all posts. The bundling of services provided by each of the General Services, Information Management, and Human Resources Services offices limits the ability to closely match the distribution of those costs with the consumption of those services (see 6 FAH-5 H-342). In ICASS Lite, nine Standard General Services cost centers are combined into a single cost center, three Standard Information Management Services cost centers are combined into a single cost center and two Standard Human Resources Services and Payroll Services cost centers are combined into a single cost center.
b. Posts must consider the easier administration of using ICASS Lite compared to the more limited ability to closely match distributed costs to consumed services. ICASS Lite uses fewer cost centers and simpler distribution factors which require less effort to accumulate data and fewer areas requiring analysis for budgeting. In the ICASS Lite methodology, the use of workload count modifications (6 FAH-5 H-332.1), the creation of sub-cost centers (6 FAH-5 H-332.3), the option to activate up to three Standard General Services cost centers (see 6 FAH-5 H-332.3 d and 342.7), and the activation of Standardized Sub-Cost Centers (6 FAH-5 H-332.3 e and 341.15) are all factors to be weighed in the “ease of administration” continuum.
c. Post’s selected approach must achieve a balance between ease of administration and a greater alignment between distribution of costs and consumption of services. If the inequities cannot be remedied using a combination of the four methods listed above in paragraph b, the ICASS Standard approach may be the better choice for a post.
6 FAH-5 H-321.3 Factors to Consider Before Switching Between Standard and Lite
(CT:ICASS-112; 01-10-2023)
(Applies to participating ICASS agencies)
If a change in methodology between ICASS Standard and ICASS Lite is contemplated, the following factors should be taken into consideration. Changing the method may be triggered by dramatic growth or reduction in the number of agencies and related customer staffing levels. Below are other considerations:
(1) ICASS budget size - What is the size of the ICASS budget? Be sure that the increased level of effort to gather and provide more precise cost allocations are justified by the increased value of more closely connecting the costs of administrative services to the users. A smaller post budget may not be able to absorb the additional costs of the extra work required in order to use the Standard approach;
(2) Post agencies and their size – How many agencies are at post and what is their relative size compared to the Department of State at post? A post with only two agencies present, including State, is much more likely to use the Lite approach. A post with over 40 agencies represented may find the additional detail resulting from the Standard approach is necessary for equitable cost distribution among the agencies. Also, whether an agency is co-located with State may influence the complexity of gathering relevant data;
(3) Agency services – Do all agencies subscribe to the same services? Generally, if all agencies at post subscribe to all ICASS services, using the Standard approach will not produce significant differences in agency invoices compared to using the Lite approach. However, if certain agencies provide a significant number of services for themselves, the ICASS Standard approach may provide the flexibility to provide a more equitable cost distribution;
(4) Service provider resources - Does the service provider have sufficient resources to handle the technical and workload requirements that a more complex system demands? ICASS Standard requires more extensive data collection than ICASS Lite. The service provider must be able to handle the increased complexity in budgeting, cost distribution, and accounting. Many distressed posts use ICASS Lite. Posts should not expect any additional resources (funding or personnel) from Washington, DC headquarters for the purpose of performing the additional work necessary to gather data and track costs to support the ICASS Standard approach as compared to the ICASS Lite approach;
(5) Timing - If a decision is made to change from Lite to Standard or from Standard to Lite, the timing of that change must occur at the beginning of a fiscal year. The change should be planned during the previous year so that requirements for workload counts for the new methodology are shared with the service providers so that collection of cumulative workload counts, if applicable, are planned in advance. Such a change cannot be implemented mid-year; and
(6) Agreement - If the ICASS Budget Committee, ICASS Council, and the service provider are unable to reach agreement on which approach to use, the issue will be brought to the chief of mission for resolution.
6 FAH-5 H-322 THROUGH h-329 UNASSIGNED