Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Records Management Hr topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County to reissue RFP after UKG document‑management problems; payroll and integration questions remain
Summary
Human resources staff told commissioners their planned UKG document‑management implementation is not meeting requirements. The county will issue a request for proposals to find a vendor to scan and index personnel records, provide legal‑hold capability and integrate with existing systems.
Human resources and IT staff told the Rockingham County Commissioners on Feb. 20 that the county's planned document‑management implementation with its HRIS vendor (UKG) cannot presently meet several necessary requirements, and the county will issue a request for proposals to identify an alternative solution.
Why it matters: The county has more than 125 filing cabinets of personnel records to digitize. Commissioners were told a robust electronic document management system is needed both for records access and for legal‑hold capability; vendor failure to deliver threatens compliance, increases storage/fire risk for paper records and imposes delays on payroll and HR processes.
What staff said: HR staff described an initially promising integration with the vendor's document module but reported that the product, as implemented, lacks features the county needs. Staff escalated issues within the vendor and met with account management; the vendor reported that some required features will only appear in a later version and cannot be delivered on the county's timeline. HR recommended an RFP to obtain a system that can scan, index (staff cited a consistent indexing scheme in place), apply legal holds, and integrate with payroll/HR systems such as UKG or ADP.
Payroll compatibility and alternatives: Commissioners asked whether a single vendor could satisfy both payroll and document management. Staff said many potential vendors are experienced with ADP and UKG integrations but that ADP declined to bid for the county's needs. NeoGov and other systems were mentioned as having import options from UKG. The HR team recommended involving the county's payroll/finance stakeholders in the RFP evaluation and including the county's HRIS subject‑matter experts in vendor selection.
Ending: The board authorized staff to prepare an RFP and continue scanning/indexing work already underway. Commissioners asked staff to include payroll compatibility considerations and to involve the county's payroll and legal reviewers in the vendor review process.
