State & Federal Government
Public money needs a trail, not a reconciliation.
ERP modernization, fund accounting, and IT controls for agencies where the audit trail and the grant report are the deliverable, not a by-product.
Draft for review — Draft sector positioning. Confirm the compliance frameworks named on this page are ones OneVision genuinely works to before this goes live.
You are probably here because
- Grant and federal reporting is assembled manually every cycle
- Fund accounting structures no longer match how programs are actually run
- A modernization program has stalled between procurement and delivery
- Legacy systems are unsupported and the knowledge left with the staff who ran them
- Audit findings repeat because the underlying process was never changed
What makes this sector different
Agency ERP programs fail for reasons that have little to do with technology: procurement cycles outlast leadership, requirements are written to be defensible rather than to be built, and the system that results describes the process nobody wanted to change.
We work inside those constraints instead of complaining about them. Fund accounting, grant reporting, and access controls are designed so the reporting obligations drive the configuration, and so the trail an auditor needs already exists.
What we actually do here
Fund & program accounting
Fund, appropriation, and program structures configured so reporting obligations are met by the data model rather than by effort.
Grant reporting
Federal and state grant reporting produced from the system, with the trail from expenditure to submission intact.
Modernization sequencing
Phasing a replacement so each stage delivers something usable inside a single budget and leadership cycle.
Controls & access
Role design and monitoring aligned to the frameworks your agency is assessed against, documented as it is built.
Annual
Budget cycle every phase has to fit inside
Public
Audience for the audit trail
Per grant
Level at which spend has to be defensible
What you are measured against
We would rather name the frameworks up front than discover in week six that the configuration cannot satisfy one of them.
FedRAMP & FISMA
Cloud and system controls aligned to the authorization path your agency has to follow.
GASB & fund accounting
Reporting structures configured to the standards your financial statements are prepared under.
Uniform Guidance (2 CFR 200)
Grant administration and reporting requirements reflected in the configuration, not in a side process.
Draft for review — Every framework above needs confirming against what OneVision can genuinely speak to in a first call. Naming one you cannot is worse than omitting it.
Platforms we run in state & federal government
Services we deliver most here
Questions from this sector
Can a modernization program deliver anything inside one budget cycle?
It has to, or it will not survive the next one. We sequence so that each phase produces something the agency uses, which also means the program can be paused without leaving a half-built system.
How do you handle procurement requirements that specify the wrong solution?
Directly, and in writing, before the award if we can. If a requirement will produce a system nobody can use, saying so early is the most useful thing a partner can do — and it is cheaper than the change order later.
Do you work as a subcontractor to a prime integrator?
Yes, and often that is the right structure for a large program. We are usually brought in for the finance, EPM, or controls workstream where specific depth matters.
Other industries
Engineering & Construction
The job is the unit of account. Most ERP configurations forget that.
Industrial Manufacturing & Fabrication
If the shop floor and the ledger disagree, the ledger is wrong.
Oil & Gas
You answer to partners and regulators at the same time, from the same ledger.
Healthcare
Every system that touches PHI has to survive an audit. Including the ERP.
Finance & Banking
The examiner will ask who had access. Have an answer that is already true.