Contents
Cal Poly Pomona

P&R Responses for recommendation 109

Recommendation 109
Department Admissions
Consensus Opinion 10 out of 10 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation “Although we suspect that there is potential for synergy, restructuring, and increased quality and efficiency among the remaining programs, they are so widely distributed both organizationally and by function that the potential is not easy to identify.” We feel that this is true and would recommend with modifications.

SAITS has provided the Division of Student Affairs with high quality services and support. Specifically, in the desktop support area and common set ups of technology. Additionally, SAITS is implementing server applications that will protect all of the divisions data in a SANS environment.

With respect to PeopleSoft analysts employed in various departments, they serve a mission critical need at the functional level and if these resources were reallocated there would be a detrimental impact on service delivery at the operational level for end-users (staff) as well as degradation in services to other customers.

“We do not feel the need to not talk about centralized or decentralized approaches.” Once again, what is the other option to talk about? We feel that the IT Governance Committee should take a leadership role, but that an on-going consultative process is explored with multiple stakeholders to accomplish incorporating the absolute best ideas and ways to provide technology support.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Applications
Consensus Opinion 10 out of 10 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation We agree. In order to facilitate this, we suggest the creation of a Task Force to provide guidance to IT Governance. We strongly suggest technical staff (subject matter experts) be represented on this Task Force as we believe that these staff members are the ones required to implement solutions and possess the strongest technical knowledge base to make a more sound recommendation.

We agree that the Data Warehouse requires a high priority for examination.
• Additional technical personnel.
o Data Analyst – perform data models to include HR, Finance, and other campus data sources.
o Technical Writer – document all the procedures and processes.
o Report Developer – develop and validate user friendly reports.
o Backend Programmer – to handle programming requests to make the Data Warehouse more effective and efficient.
o Enterprise Data Architect – follow the flow of data throughout the campus and into the Data Warehouse.
• Functional Training to increase the Learning Centeredness of the University by teaching our campus users the possibilities of using the Data Warehouse to make more informed business decisions.
• Technical training on Hyperion to expanded functionality.
• Invest the time in determining the long term ETL (Extract, Translate, and Load) tool for the data warehouse solution for moving to an enterprise level Data Warehouse application.
• Invest money in purchasing (or upgrading) the long term ETL tool.
• Receive commitment from functional campus constituents regarding their support resources. This would be needed in order to facilitate moving HR and Finance data into the data. Additional collaboration between functional areas and I&IT to increase the number of data models in the Data Warehouse.
• Marketing campaign to promote the Data Warehouse (Data Warehouse road-show).
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department AVP Student Services
Consensus Opinion 2 out of 2 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation We need more money for a more efficient data warehouse used across the campus (faculty, staff, etc). The modification would be that PeopleSoft is already a collaborative effort. It would not be the best interest of Student Affairs departments to have I&IT take over hard ware and software distribution and service. SAITS works perfectly for us!
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Children's Center
Consensus Opinion 1 out of 1 faculty/staff : Con
Consensus Explanation Technologies across divisions are appropriately organized. Each department should be responsible to maintain their own files and personalized programs. I&IT should be a service where people call to ask for help
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Computer Science
Consensus Opinion 11 out of 12 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation The computer science department supports technology-based approaches in the classroom and the corresponding student success that results from the increased modes of instructional delivery.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Counseling and Psychological Services
Consensus Opinion 11 out of 11 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation The Counseling and Psychological Services faculty counselors and staff support moving forward with Recommendation #109 - Technology Support, but with the following essential modification.

Day-to-day operational support and responsibility for hardware and software applications should remain at the divisional level. Gains made in these respective areas since the inception of the Student Affairs Information and Technology Services Department have been critical to the success of Counseling and Psychological Services and the entire division. CAPS relies heavily on SAITS to troubleshoot day-to-day problems and support its unit-specific needs, including multiple software applications unique to the provision of mental health services.

Greater cooperation and collaboration is certain to improve overall strategic planning and coordination of enterprise-wide technology resources, but IT Governance Committee efforts are best focused on addressing campus-wide network infrastructure and security, as well as storage room safety issues, etc.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Dean of Students
Consensus Opinion 4 out of 4 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation PRO WITH MODIFICATIONS
Explanation: We completely support additional funding for data storage and warehousing, but do not support the centralized distribution and service of all technology by I&IT. SAITS is effective, efficient, and has a perfect balance between quality and speed of service and distribution.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Disability Resource Center
Consensus Opinion 14 out of 14 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation It is important for us to be able to have more access to data information and the use of the data warehouse for reports and file transfers so additional funding should be allocated to this area. We support additional funding and continued collaborations with the modification that technology services remain at the division level rather than all users be served by I&IT. The I&IT division is organized around networks, security, and storage room safety issues. As a department that administers tests utilizing assistive technology and alternate media, we have specific and immediate technology needs that require prompt and specific responses that I&IT is not set up to handle.
Minority Opinion 0 out of 14 faculty/staff : Con
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Enrollment Services
Consensus Opinion 2 out of 2 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation We are supportive of the IT Governance Committee developing a recommendation for a comprehensive IT plan based on consultation with a wide range of campus constituents. We encourage the committee to review best practices currently in place at the university for certain technology functions. A primary example is the cross-divisional management of the PeopleSoft implementation which has been very effective. Another successful example at the divisional level is the approach taken by the Student Affairs division with its centralization of these tech support functions into the Student Affairs Information Technology Services Department. Similar gains might be realized with a divisional or college approach for centralization for these types of technology needs.

While this required a significant redirection of funds away from other priority needs in the Student Affairs division and departments, the results have been well worth the commitment in both the People Soft and PC and network support areas.

We are strongly opposed to any possible shift of divisional tech support positions to IIT in these two areas. Network, security and storage are appropriately centralized with IIT being the service provided for the campus. However, anything specific to a department or the services it provides is best served at the divisional or department level. In particular, PeopleSoft is a functionally driven application which requires both functional and technical expertise and comprehensive knowledge of business processes and policies to determine the structure and appropriate utilization of PeopleSoft.

We strongly support an infusion of funding for the management and implementation of the data warehouse. While a network of administrators and faculty across the divisions have been trying to implement a new approach to the data warehouse, the current structure and level of support has not achieved the level of expertise in providing comprehensive, consistent data and reports to support decision-making. The results have been slow in coming. Many of the same campus constituents involved in the current structure for the data warehouse development are involved with several other major technology implementations and, as a result, this project is not getting the priority needed. We would be very supportive of a consultant review of the current implementation to identify the appropriate staffing and funding requirements as well as best practice models that might be considered.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : With modifications
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department I&IT Division
Consensus Opinion 49 out of 75 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation I&IT agrees that review of technology support across the university should be turned over to IT Governance to determine where efficiencies, synergy and coordination can be enhanced and in some instances reduce conflicts caused by multiple systems, such as authentication and multiple email systems. I&IT recommends that IT Governance create a special task force to address this.

Technology support resides throughout the I&IT division as well as across all other divisions on campus.

We are concerned that this recommendation is too general and would like to see clearer guidance to IT Governance on the following:

• The scope of the review should include all IT activities across the campus, including technology supported by I&IT and all divisions. Review of how the technology is being delivered and where changes can be made to increase efficiencies, synergy and coordination should be identified.

• There should be a timeline of no more than 1 year from the establishment of the task force for it to complete the work.

• The expected outcome should be final recommendations in the form of a report to the University President, recommending changes to increase efficiencies, synergy and coordination between all IT activities across campus . Since IT Governance is defined as the guiding policy and planning body for information technology at Cal Poly, the recommendations of the IT Governance study should be considered authoritative.

I&IT also recognizes that the expertise to carry out this review is very specialized and that those on campus possessing this expertise are also people who are major stakeholders in the work to be done. It is for this reason that I&IT recommends the use of consultants to get an unbiased assessment and to make broad recommendations.

Within I&IT the support for the Data Warehouse resides in I&IT Applications, although this is done in collaboration with the campus community. We concur that this program would benefit from special attention. We anticipate what is meant by “special attention” is that it would be given more resources (funding and space).

With special attention, the data warehouse could provide even better support of campus needs than it does today. Currently the data warehouse supports Student Data reporting. With more resources, Financial, HR and TMA (Facilities) data, as examples, would be supported as well. Thru this process we would identify single authoritative sources for data and reconcile discrepancies in data across multiple shadow systems (i.e., room numbers). This should eliminate redundancy and contention regarding authoritative source.


The support for the campus’s Instructional technology resides in I&IT Operations and I&IT Learning. We concur that this program would benefit from special attention. We anticipate what is meant by “special attention” is that it would be given more resources (funding and space).

Ideally, every learning space should be enhanced with technology, there should be more space provided for open labs and support for these learning spaces should be enhanced. The campus should have a learning management system (LMS) that supports both classroom and organizations across campus. This LMS should enhance the learning environment and all faculty should be helped to develop the expertise to deliver instruction using advanced technologies. These technologies should be well supported and prepare the student for a world in which technology is constantly changing.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department I&IT Learning
Consensus Opinion 12 out of 12 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation I&IT Learning is in support of recommendation 109, Technology Support. However, we wish to emphasize that the three instructional support programs in I&IT Learning that are “clearly central to our mission, demonstrate high quality outcomes, and articulate good proposals for additional resources are in the group with the least funding per FTE-E” (SPPR Report, p. 14).

We recommend that members of the campus community take a more deliberate approach to assessing the learning needs of our diverse, 21st century students and in determining how the use of technology facilitates the university’s goal of preparing students for life in a changing, multicultural world. The services provided by I&IT Learning are central to this mission. Through collaborations with the Faculty Center, Academic Affairs and other university entities, I&IT Learning provides the technological and pedagogical expertise crucial to the creation and dissemination of effective, engaging and interactive learning materials. With an emphasis on anytime, anywhere learning, I&IT Learning is uniquely poised to help the campus community provide flexible and effective on-line learning opportunities for our students.

Blackboard, our Learning Management System, supports approximately 500 faculty and 1100 courses in which 19,000 students are enrolled. Our streaming video server, which provides on and off-campus access to video content, is accessed 8,000 times per week from locations around the world. Our video team provides professional services to faculty interested in enhancing courses with video-based learning objects and video presentations. Video productions of campus events also contribute to the campus reputation for technological excellence. Each June over 36,000 viewers, from 80 countries, access graduation services via streaming video. We support Clicker systems for in-class, interactive learning and our Connect team assists faculty in producing online, interactive tutorials rich with assessment features.

Most important are the in-depth consultation services provided by the Learning staff. Our teams of instructional designers, media specialists, video producers and streaming engineers assist faculty in re-conceptualizing the learning process and in creating learning-centered environments that can be accessed by all learners. With the current focus on accessibility issues, we are playing an integral role in envisioning an accessible university and in providing support in the form of training and services (e.g. video captioning). The Learning team is taking a proactive approach to accessibility and is helping faculty members integrate universal design methodologies into their teaching practices.

For the Learning staff, accessibility issues extend beyond ADA compliance and include provisions for student access to computers and training. Viewed as an extension of the classroom, Studio 6 provides students, faculty and staff with access to multimedia resources. Cognizant of the digital divide and the schedules of non-traditional learners who need access beyond traditional operating hours, Studio 6 provides students with many of the resources needed to be successful learners. We realize that more faculty expect students to be versed in the use of digital communication tools; Studio 6 is a unique place on campus where students can learn how to use these technologies for the presentation of scholarship.

Our goal in I&IT Learning is to provide technological and pedagogical services perceived by students, faculty, and staff as responsive, innovative and visionary. Our services are unique in that they are not replicated elsewhere on campus. In order to maintain and expand these services, the department requires additional funding. Therefore, we support Recommendation 109 that specifies that the three instructional support programs in I&IT are “excellent candidates for increased funding and investment” (p. 21).
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department I&IT Operations
Consensus Opinion 11 out of 12 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation The I&T Operations Department endorses the basic premise of recommendation 109 that technology support should be reviewed for the whole university and not individually for one department, college or division.

Technology has been added to classrooms, research labs, teaching labs, general computing student labs and other learning spaces for the last twenty years without the benefit of a campus-wide plan. Comprehensive planning should have included when the hardware and software would be refreshed, who would support the space and the equipment, and when the program or service would be considered “end-of-life”.

Periodically technology projects are started such as the Learning Centered Technology Initiative (LCTI) which recently placed new equipment in high capacity classrooms and provided laptops for many faculty members. The initial funding for these high profile projects has typically come from campus Lottery money. Refreshing the equipment and the daily support of these resources has become the burden of insufficiently funded departments, colleges and divisions.

We recommend that all 300 “learning spaces” on campus be technologically enhanced (see bulleted list) in the next three years. This will require major cooperation and collaboration among many departments and colleges.
• Podium with an integrated control panel at the teaching station
• PC or Macintosh computer
• Connection for faculty laptop computer
• Network and internet connections
• Ceiling-mounted data projector with close captioning
• Screen
• Digital document camera
• DVD/VCR combo player
• Amplifier and speakers

Additionally, there are not enough gathering places for students to do homework alone or in groups, perform research, use wireless connections or to stay connected with the campus community in a safe environment. The ratio of available non-discipline specific computers to students on campus is below nationally recognized standards.

We recommend that more space be designated for general computing student labs. These spaces should be collaboratively designed by the departments, colleges and divisions to provide the appropriate hardware and software for our students.

Each of the technology enhanced learning spaces and general student computing labs should be supported by a dedicated team of experts who can quickly solve problems with the hardware or software. Technicians should be available to give the faculty assistance if issues arise while they are teaching. Trained staff should be available to help students in the labs. This expanded support of more technology enhanced learning spaces and general student computing labs will require additional personnel.

The hardware in these learning spaces and labs should be refreshed every three years as part of a comprehensive planning effort to provide the best solutions for the faculty and students. A collaborative approach to equipping these learning spaces and general student computing labs will benefit the faculty and the students and make the support of the spaces more efficient and better utilize scarce resources.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department I&IT Support
Consensus Opinion 9 out of 10 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation Proposal: All divisions should cooperate to achieve a similar increase in effectiveness of enterprise-wide technology support. To do this, the divisions should re-examine how resources are distributed and programs structured in this area and establish effective, cooperative cross-divisional programs to support the educational and enterprise use of technology.
Support’s Reaction: This makes sense from many angles, including budgeting for technology, resources and knowledge, which vary widely division by division. We should build on the work of IT Governance committees. Each college or department should review its technology resources and propose adequate funding and coverage.
Proposal: To accomplish this, we must overcome our habit of talking about centralized or decentralized support for technology as if these were the only options for the campus.
Support’s Reaction: Then what are the other alternatives? Collaboration is mentioned, but there needs to be suggestions on how to collaborate. Multi-division technology support committees can accomplish and have accomplished much. However, there must be a commitment from all divisions to participate equally on collaborative technology projects. And the committee’s participants must all be held accountable for each committee’s success. Although IT Governance can’t solve all the university’s technology projects and practices conflicts, the committee is a good place to start and push out university technology initiatives and key projects. Examples include DOLCE classes, advice on new operating system adoption, PeopleSoft expansion proposals and support of secure passwords.
Proposal: Cal Poly Pomona will need a more cooperative, university-wide focus to provide faculty, staff, and students the increased service they will need as technology evolves. At present, the best ideas for the future should be developed by IT Governance. The committee suggests that this organization play a leadership role in this effort.
Support’s Reaction: We agree synergy needs to increase. With the spread of new help desks, there needs to be an examination and recommendations as to which help desk students, faculty and staff go to for what services. There should be a formal backup plan for what are now viewed as personnel single points of failure.
Instructional programs need formal business practices to be established for technical support. In I&IT we have moved forward in making the Help Desk the central point of contact for I&IT-owned technology spaces, but how is a professor to know whom to call? We recommend that the Learning Centered Technology Initiative Classroom project re-model and control all technology learning spaces.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department I&IT Systems
Consensus Opinion 5 out of 12 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation Department Response to P&R Recommendation #109 – Technology Support I&IT Systems

I&IT Systems agrees that a review of technology support that occurs across the campus should be conducted to determine where efficiencies, synergy and coordination can be enhanced, as well as reduce conflicts caused by multiple separately implemented and managed systems. I&IT Systems recommends that IT Governance create a special task force to address this.

The scope of such a review should include all IT activities across the campus, including technology supported by I&IT and all divisions. It should review of how the technology is being delivered and managed, and where changes can be made to increase efficiencies, synergy and coordination.

The task force should deliver a report to the University President for changes that could be made to increase efficiencies, synergy and coordination between all IT activities across campus.

I&IT Systems also recognizes that the on campus participants with the necessary IT knowledge are also the major stakeholders in the end result of any recommendations. As a result, I&IT Systems recommends the use of external consultants participating in the review and recommendation process in order to obtain an unbiased opinion.

I&IT Systems also recommends that core technology services such as email, security, networking, and authentication, etc. should not be duplicated in order to achieve efficiency, reduction in conflicts, and synergy across the campus. Proposed exceptions should be reviewed and approved by the VP of I&IT. The implementation of shadow databases should also be subject to the same review and approval process in order to ensure validity and integrity of data being relied upon by the campus

The support for the campus’ Instructional technology resides in I&IT Operations and I&IT Learning. We concur that this program would benefit from special attention. We anticipate what is meant by “special attention” is that it would be given more resources (people and money).

Every learning space should be enhanced with technology, including additional space for open labs. Technology enhancements should include the expansion of wireless network access across learning spaces and common areas throughout the campus to further make technology accessible. All faculty should have the expertise to deliver instruction using advanced technologies
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department I&IT Web Development
Consensus Opinion 5 out of 5 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation I&IT Web Development concurs with all parts of this recommendation. We believe the opportunities for efficiency, synergy, and coordination are especially great among web designers and webmasters, and we look forward to IT Governance considering this. We agree that the Data Warehouse needs additional resources; it is an important source of data for our applications. We also support additional funding for the three Instructional Technology Support programs. Beyond its use for classes, the Blackboard Learning Management System is also an important resource for campus organizations, and it provides in an integrated environment a number of web services that we might otherwise have to provide separately, at a higher cost.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Information Security Office
Consensus Opinion 2 out of 2 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation Recommendation 109 speaks to the need for IT Governance to review technology support programs across the campus for efficiency, synergy, and coordination.

Our feedback regarding this recommendation is that the scope of this review should also look at the information security implications of managing certain technology support programs such as user authentication.


User authentication Systems
User authentication systems are used to verify a user’s identity prior to granting access to a system (e.g., swipe card readers, windows logon, Bronco Direct login, Exchange)

Why is it important to review?

We currently have multiple user authentication systems on campus. Some are synchronized with the central identity management but others around campus are not. A good example of a system that is not synchronized is the Library’s authentication system.

A reduction in redundancy with a single authentication system would be expected. A savings in resources used to address security concerns with multiple authentication systems could be realized. Synergies felt by every campus constituent would be a reduction in the number of user ids and passwords, and a reduction in the number of user-authentication information-silos.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Office of Financial Aid
Consensus Opinion 5 out of 5 faculty/staff : Modifications
Consensus Explanation
1. Though we support the idea of a centralize warehouse of data we do not support the plan if it includes removing the technical support from the Office of Financial Aid, University Financial Services, Registrar, Admissions & Outreach and EOP
which would have a negative impact on these departments. This will also hinder compliance with federal regulations, reporting issues with the Department of Education, National Student Loan Data System, National Clearing House, Common Origination Data, California Student Aid Commission, Central Processing Service, OpenNet (loan delivery services), the Office of the Chancellor, and lastly customer service will be in jeopardy.
2. Centralization of all departments under I&IT will mean the error factor will be very high leaving the campus vulnerable for inefficient processes of funds to students, exposing the campus to losing our Title IV funding to 80% of our student population. The first part of this recommendation is acceptable where faculty use of technology should be enhanced for student success.











Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department ReEntry & WoMen's Resource Center
Consensus Opinion 2 out of 2 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation Technology is key area to entire campus community. Development of SAITs has made huge improvement in support we receive, and concerned how our division/department needs would fare with further “collaboration”. Assistance and access to data management warehouse is a priority in our work and target population communications.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Registrar's Office
Consensus Opinion 9 out of 9 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation There was a consensus that the data warehouse should be re-examined. Its organizational structure lacks clear lines of accountability. Technically, the current data warehouse should change to one that is a mirror of the production database would enhance its viability as “the” reporting source and increase its utility. Campuses like CSULB, are doing exceptional things in support of students and faculty. These are greatly facilitated because they use a mirror of production. Additionally, a different reporting environment should be sought. A more main stream environment such as Crystal Reports, should be implemented in place of the current Hyperion environment.

The composition of IT Governance committee structure shows a commitment to shared governance through its composition. The Executive Committee and it’s subcommittees, are very large, 60 committee seats, collectively. This is very unwieldy and makes progress difficult to attain. Down sizing or modifying the structure, while maintaining a commitment to shared governance, could help address this. It would also serve the Cal Poly community well for the committee’s minutes and agenda to be posted online as an informative way to communicate any updates. Currently, only the Executive Committee posts agendas and minutes on the website.

There is a consensus that large scale expenditures should be centralized to effectively coordinate resources and that divisional service department, such as SAITS in Student Affairs, should continue in their current structure, where they are operating effectively.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Student Affairs Administration
Consensus Opinion 3 out of 3 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation We feel that the way IT support is currently organized is appropriate with I&IT providing the backbone (such as the network) and individual divisions financing their own operations and supporting their own programs and data.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Student Affairs Administration
Consensus Opinion 3 out of 3 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation We feel that the way IT support is currently organized is appropriate with I&IT providing the backbone (such as the network) and individual divisions financing their own operations and supporting their own programs and data.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Student Affairs Info & Tech Services (SAITS)
Consensus Opinion 11 out of 11 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation While we are supportive of, and participate in cross divisional collaboration at many levels, there are concerns related to the intentions and scope of these recommendations. For example, while the report spoke of moving beyond the centralized/decentralized discussion framework, several sentences inferred an outcome different from the stated goals; examples include “rebalancing funding”, “eliminating duplication” and designating committees as the source for “the best ideas for the future”. Our view is that we are in favor of collaboration, not centralization.

Secondly, the department agrees that the university would be well served by a re-examination of how resources are distributed. In 2004, Student Affairs conducted a similar assessment to address the “have-versus-have-not” technical support environment that existed within the division. This assessment lead to the creation of SAITS using a model that is very similar to the best practices recommendations Gartner made in their 2003 report to Cornell University. The Cornell report recommended that the university organize their IT staff at the major unit level (“schools and Vice Presidents”). This allows the units the strengths of a larger IT unit while at the same time keeping the focus on the needs of the functional units. We would recommend the Gartner/Cornell report and 2004 Student Affairs assessment for consideration as a possible model for the university.

The P&R report also references collaboration to increase the effectiveness of enterprise-wide tech support resources. Related to technical support staff, our operational experience has shown that the differences across departments make this a greater challenge than it appears on the surface. Department level functional needs related to data, applications and business practices make it difficult for technical support staff to work as generalist and function equally well in all areas. In terms of information technology infrastructure, there are always conflicts over equitable and open use of “shared” resources when they are managed centrally by one unit. Experience shows that when IT services are too distant from their business functions there is a disconnect and lack of responsiveness to core functional services and needs. Examples of this can be seen in the restrictions on hosting equipment in the Co-Lo and data access limitations in the Data Warehouse. We believe that collaboration works best when common interests bring parties together as demonstrated by the Student Affairs partnership Administrative Affairs related to the new SAN and server virtualization environment.

Lastly, the report recommended IT Governance as the place where “the best ideas for the future should be developed”. Given the size and scope of the committee, it is difficult to see an implementation where the level of technical understanding and distinct perspectives would result in more effective solutions. Innovation should be open to all, as it is most often sparked by individuals and small groups. We would propose that IT Governance work with the campus’ innovators to collect, disseminate and promote best practices. We would also like IT Governance committee be open to more campus input, and in turn, see the committees do more communication with the campus community.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department Student Health Services
Consensus Opinion 34 out of 34 faculty/staff : Con
Consensus Explanation Student Health Services oppose this recommendation from the Steering Committee. I & IT provides the technology infrastructure to the campus community and Student Affairs Information and Technology Services (SAITS) provides divisional support to its constituents and is organized appropriately.

Collaboration, when the relationships are equal and fair is usually ideal. Complex partnerships, such as this proposed recommendation, is usually not simple and sharing of resources is usually not equal. Although alliances can be achieved at some level for services, such as desktop and office support, supporting the special applications specific to ones business process is not as straightforward and requires special and unique skills. For example, although the use of computers and office applications are the same for both Housing and Student Health Services, the business applications used for both departments are completely different and communizing the support would be challenging.

Enterprise wide support should focus on campus initiatives that are beneficial to all. Purchases of computers, software licensing, email and common help desk support software are some examples where economy of scale can be achieved. However, flexibility, responsiveness and timeliness should be considered when promoting cross divisional collaboration.

The I & IT Governance Committee should be charged with developing comprehensive IT planning for the university. Due to the complexity of the issues, collaboration and input from the divisions and departments should be considered.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department University Development
Consensus Opinion 12 out of 12 faculty/staff : Con
Consensus Explanation The savings in initial elimination of redundancies and efficiencies will not outweigh the negative impact on service and specifically tailored expertise needed for diverse needs.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : With modifications
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department University Housing Services
Consensus Opinion 25 out of 25 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation The section is ambiguous and should be reviewed for more detail. Consensus agrees that I&IT has control of the infrastructure and acts as the back bone of campus technology. However the Divisions and Departments should retain control of their own data and technology needs. We have a concern that IT Governance committee does not have the level of detail needed to understand the role that technology plays in each area. The Governance committee should also illicit feedback from the Division and Departments as they review the recommendation to ensure they have a full understanding of the needs and expectations of each area. We are responsible in meeting the needs of our students in regards to their technology in the residence halls, the services we provide them with technology, and the security of the data in which we are in control.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 109
Department University Police
Consensus Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation The department concurs that increased cooperation, collaboration and communication cross divisions should increase effective and efficient technology access, support, strategic planning, resource allocation, and fiscal management. Divisions should be engaged in ongoing examination of resources, resource management and deployment of technology and support services. Divisions should collaborate to reduce/minimize redundancy, improve coordination, and reduce cost of new/replacement technology.

The department agrees that the IT Governance Council is an appropriate venue for identifying and promoting collaboration to increase efficiency and effectiveness cross divisions and in university level programs. The Council may consider expanding its current role of identifying priority themes to providing more specific guidance for implementation of these themes at the divisional level. The Council should establish protocols to ensure adequate representation and effective communication channels for input and feedback regarding implementation of priorities and their potential impact.

It does seem clear that the campus should develop a data warehouse system to effectively coordinate programs involved in its creation and maintenance.

The University Police department has designated IT staff (50% time/position shared with Parking and Transportation Services) via and agreement with Student Affairs Information Technology Services (SAITS). While SAITS is relatively new, the unit seems to be progressing in its ability to meet its established mission and primary functions.

In this department we have never been as equipped with IT resources to handle the unique needs of our 24 our essential operation. We rely on very specialized equipment/technology/software/security systems to maintain our day to day operations which include emergency 9-1-1 response, law enforcement, emergency services and auxiliary services. Our needs extend well beyond typical support; redundancy, system security, emergency support and backup are critical to our own preparedness to respond to daily campus needs as well as emergency/incident response. The SAITs team provides such support. Previous to SAITS, the department had either no designated support, or one IT staff with no trained backup.

While the department supports greater coordination throughout the university’s IT environment, it is our feeling that to completely centralize this function would not serve our needs. Without a massive infusion of budget and personnel resources, no one organization could support the entire university, and it is unlikely such resources will exist any time soon. Similarly, the division-specific approach now in place seems to serve our needs.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendations not submitted through the forms are available in this folder. They mainly consist of Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat documents. If none were submitted for this recommendation, the folder will be empty.