Admin 10.22.18 Minutes

Attending:

Catherine Abed, Dimuthu Tilakaratne, Jim Pierce, Montanee Wongchinsri, Anthony Marino, Dale Rush, Annabelle Clarke, Monica Tith, Stacie McCloud Williams, Tony Kerber, Linda Naru, Aaron Rosenthal, Cynthia Cobb, Eric McMinoway, Nilton Garcia, Therese Molina, Alex Phistry, Kathleen Engstrom, Colleen Kehoe, Brian Shim, Mike Harner, Stephanie Dable, Gloria Keeley

  • ITPC Update
    • My UI Financials Phase Two
      • Suggested that this project has been closed and performance issues are being looked at
    • Employee Training
      • Mentioned that ethics training is being rolled out
      • Suggested it was off to a rough start, but work is being done with a vendor to ensure the infrastructure can support the load
      • Noted that the ethics office re-opened the ethics training and have progressed nicely
      • Suggested that the ethics office I still working with other areas and looking at other types of training to add in
      • Suggested that the ethics office is looking to add more types of training after the first of the year
      • Noted that OBFS is currently utilizing the training for their development program, and payroll and benefits are looking to utilize that system as well
    • My UI Financials Phase 3
      • A slight change in scope was mentioned
      • Suggested that a tableau dashboard will be added
  • New Business
    • University-wide Ticketing System
      • Noted that the ticketing systems have been being updated and evaluated
      • It was asked if the committee saw any potential benefits for a university system-wide ticketing system
      • A survey that went out to all IT contacts which consisted of which systems are being used, the status quo, etc. was mentioned
      • Suggested that the feedback from that survey is being evaluated to determine if needs are being met or not
      • Committee members indicated their units utilizing a ticketing system
      • Discussion on ticketing systems within and outside of IT needs, what they are being used for, etc.
      • Suggested that this new system-wide ticketing system will hopefully be used for both IT and non-IT needs, but for now the primary focus and representation is on IT organizations
      • Noted that the timeline goal is to have a substantial presentation for the IT Leadership team by December
    • OBFS Reporting Subcommittee Presentation
      • An overview of this subcommittee and the work they have been doing was presented
      • Noted that this group is focused on sharing information and is composed of volunteers from a wide variety of units
      • Suggested that this subcommittee has created a website that is linked to the OBFS site and what is included on it was gone over
      • Suggested that access to reports can be found on their website or through EDDIE
      • Discussion on what can be found on the reporting subcommittee’s website versus EDDIE
      • Discussion on reports
      • Mentioned that this effort is in collaboration with the AITS Decision Support
      • Mentioned that this group created a moderated listserv
      • Suggested that the goal is to help foster peer-based discussions, collaborations, resource sharing between colleges and departments, and sharing of best practices, tips, and tricks
      • Noted that this group conducted a needs-assessment survey and the results were shared
      • The FY18 accomplishments of this group were gone over
      • Goals for FY19 were gone over, which included adding new reports and updating existing reports
      • Discussion on developing standard reports, types of reports and data sharing
    • Advanced Analytics Platform
      • A presentation which mentioned an approved draft ITPC proposal was shared
      • Suggested that the approved proposal will go to the main ITPC for approval by December
      • Noted that the university currently has great reporting and visualization solutions
      • The progression from initial reporting to advanced analytics was gone over
      • The desire for a business-friendly model was stressed
      • Suggested that some ways to make differences are by building a shared, easily accessible model, becoming aligned with the strategic framework, and improving the overall student experience
      • Suggested that the ultimate objective is to ensure long-term financial sustainability
      • Example use cases were gone over
  • Old Business
    • Banner 9 Update
      • A Banner 9 upgrade in effect as of October 14th was mentioned
      • Noted that AITS is still adding things to their Banner web page and training is still available
      • Suggested that Banner 9 works easily, though there were minor issues that are being fixed
      • It was asked who is responsible for making sure trainings and jobs are updated
      • Suggested that OBFS is handling many issues on the finance side
      • It was asked which process is being used to determine what will be created using the tableau dashboard
      • A previously built tableau dashboard was mentioned
      • It was suggested that the idea is to imbed the previous dashboard into My UI Financials
    • Source to Pay
      • Work being done to impose implementation strategies and the desire to pursue dedicated resources were mentioned

Admin 09.24.18 Minutes

Attending:

Dale Rush, Eric McMinoway, Jaclyn Finch, Mike Kamowski, Cynthia Cobb, Alex Phistry, Stephanie Dable, Therese Molina, Nilton Garcia, Mike Harner, Annabelle Clarke, Linda Naru, Jon Santanni, Monica Tith, John Fudacz, Kathleen Engstrom, Gloria Keeley, Tony Kerber

  • ITPC Update
    • My UI Financials
      • Noted that this project is in phase two, the group is doing some performance work, and a report on the results should be available in October
    • START myResearch
      • Suggested that this project is in the middle of the Urbana pilot, and noted that Chicago’s pilot date is October 3rd
    • IAM
      • Suggested that this group is working on building a system for IT professionals
    • Employee Training
      • An email stating the ethics training go-live date was mentioned
    • My UI Financials Phase 3
      • Noted that this project is in progress, looking at potential additional requirements for release two and release one is being tested
    • JMLS
      • Noted that one of the AITS project managers is working with the Provost’s office to help with some of that work
    • IBPMS
      • Suggested that this project is a workflow tool, and the goal of this tool is to implement an integration of enterprise data and allow IT professionals within all of the universities and all departments to generate their own workflows
      • Suggested that there will be a presentation on this tool as soon as possible
  • New Business
    • Banner 9 Student Communication and Training
      • Suggested that there have been emails going out each week to all student contacts encouraging the completion of small, hour-long tasks to become more familiar with the service
      • Three goals were mentioned: getting users to actually look at Banner 9, updating documentation on the OSSS website, and getting users working with basic functionality to familiarize themselves with Banner 9
      • Noted that there are training sessions for certain, key areas, and hands-on training sessions for those who manage administrative sections in Banner 9
      • Noted that Banner 9 is differently mostly due to it having more navigation
      • Stressed that the OSSS’ main goal is to have users working with Banner 9’s basic functionality by the go-live date
    • Wait Listing Project
      • The background of this project was mentioned, noting that this project will be kicked off near the end of October and will focus on undergraduate courses at first
      • The steps in this project were described and discussed
    • I-Suite: New Advising System Project
      • Noted that UIC started looking at vendor software a year or so ago for advising
      • Suggested that I-Suite is a three-application suite with an advising component, a predictive analytics component, and an early alerts component
      • Suggested that this project will be starting at the undergraduate level
      • Noted that the premise for this project was to get information from current systems into one place for advisors to get a broader picture of their students
      • Suggested that these systems together would yield more transparency, and its kick-off will be in the beginning of October
      • Noted that the pilot will include two colleges, three support programs, and the writing and math labs
      • The timeline and trajectory were gone over, noting that the goal is to complete this project by Fall 2019
      • The process for validation by the vendor was mentioned
      • Noted that there will be changes to the production environment, but as much feedback as possible will be gathered as possible beforehand
      • Suggested that the main goal of this project is to get UIC’s retention and graduation rates up within the next few years, noting that this suite should help with degree plans
    • The Future of Banner: Survey
      • A meeting where the current and future state of Banner was discussed was mentioned
      • The link to the Future of the University Enterprise System feedback survey will be shared with the committee later this week
      • Noted that survey results are being compiled now
      • Suggested that this survey could represent what our Enterprise system could look like in the next 5-10 years

Admin 08.28.18 Minutes

Attending:

Todd Van Neck; Montanee Wongchinsri; Nilton Garcia; Kat Kernick; Jeff Weaver; Sandy de Groote; Linda Naru; Gloria Keeley; Dimuthu Tilakaratne; Kathleen Engstrom; Annabelle Clark; Mike Kamowski; Cynthia Cobb; Tony Kerber; Stephanie Dable; Jaclyn Finch

  • Presentations
    • Property Accounting System
      • A brief background on what the property accounting system entails was given
      • Suggested that the biennial application is brand-new, and is now a module of FABWeb, which preexisted Banner
      • Noted that FABWeb is a web-based browser that all units use to manage equipment items and its other uses and processes were gone over
      • Mentioned that the biennial inventory is a state-mandated effort, which is different than most state agencies which typically have annual inventory systems
      • Suggested that the biennial inventory project differs from the past property accounting system in that it is more accurate and effective
      • How to determine the contact for each unit and how that information is maintained was questioned
      • Suggested that units themselves designate their single unit property accounting contact
      • Also suggested that the Property Accounting office updates their website with a list of those contacts and unit heads
      • Mentioned that Property Accounting has always managed and used those names provided to review the certification forms provided and the office is the only office with access to grant or change those roles
      • Discussion on the process of the biennial cycle
      • Suggested that, in the new biennial application, there are three new roles: unit contact, unit head, and unit specialist who all have certain levels of functionality access
      • Mentioned that, with the new biennial application, there is a web-based component as well as an optional, flexible mobile app that can be downloaded with an invitation from AITS, for efficient scanning of the inventory
      • Short discussion on the new processes associated with the updated biennial system
    • Shared Metadata and Comprehensive Data Repository
      • An email recently sent out on the plan to upgrade the EDDIE tool over the weekend of September 21st was mentioned and another email will be sent out closer to the date on steps users should take to upgrade their software to be compatible with the upgraded EDDIE tool
      • A presentation on shared metadata and the comprehensive data repository was shared
      • What meta data is and how it helps to understand the data already collected by the university system was explained and it was suggested that there are a few metadata solutions available within the UI system, but there is no way to look at cumulative data
      • Noted that a shared metadata solution would be able to provide functional, structured clarifications and definitions on data as well as HR reports
      • Mentioned that the group looking into shared metadata information and vendor solutions is the Business Intelligence and Performance Management subcommittee, which includes membership from all three universities within the UI system
      • Suggested that one of the vendors being looked at is IData for their Data Cookbook tool and another tool being compared is the Informatica Enterprise Data Catalog, explaining that both tools are relatively easy to use and allow users similar functionality
      • Suggested that this project is currently in the stage of fielding demos from vendors and next steps will include choosing a tool that best fits UI system needs and writing a proposal to the ITPC for approval and funding
      • The Comprehensive Data Repository and the discussion on how to extend the current university data warehouse to include more information were mentioned
      • Noted that the tiers to this effort include the “data lake,” “data marts,” and “integrated longitudinal data”
      • Suggested that some repository storage options being looked into are local storage, storing information in the cloud, or data virtualization
      • Suggested that some of the issues being considered are time involved, composing a proposal, and getting an approval for funding
      • Concern was expressed for the user population
      • Suggested that this project be presented to the InfraSec committee for more interest and to the Reporting Solutions subcommittee of the OBFS Advisory committee
    • Faculty Profiling Tool
      • Suggested that there has been work done to implement a campus-wide profile, or activity reporting, tool to get a better idea of faculty metrics
      • Mentioned that this idea had been presented to the Dean’s Council and it was agreed upon to move to one, unified tool
      • Specifics of what the new faculty profile tool would include and how data would be obtained was gone over
      • Discussion on implementation, specific needs from different colleges and units, features, and what is to be expected from the tool overall
    • Source to Pay
      • Mentioned that RFI is scheduled to open during the first week of September, which will contribute to the completion of the RFP
      • Suggested that the vendor demos should begin around November
      • Noted that the process is currently awaiting a future-state proposal document
  • ITPC Update
    • My UI Financials
      • Mentioned the UI Financials phase two occurred in the Spring
      • Noted that UI Financials are currently working on performance improvements
      • Suggested that phase three has been added to the report and included training materials and providing the ability to display transaction details across multiple fiscal years
      • Also suggested that the project is currently in requirements and design and is getting ready to move into UAT
    • START myResearch
      • Noted that this group has released some enhancements to the portal piece of this product within the last week
      • Mentioned that this group is currently working on proposals
      • Noted that there were some performance issues that have been worked out and there is currently work being done to start a pilot in Urbana this upcoming weekend, and based on how that goes, the pilot should be coming to Chicago around the beginning of October
    • IAM
      • Suggested that this group is piloting the affiliations piece of identity and access management with Springfield, then with Urbana, and finally with Chicago
    • Employee Training
      • Suggested that there was an ethics pilot which went well based on feedback
      • They are currently gearing up for deployment
      • It was confirmed that the pilot was offered to roughly fifty individuals and about half of them have completed training
      • Noted that other groups, such as OBFS, are beginning to send their certification training curriculum out
      • Mentioned that they are also working on campus security authority training, HIPAA training after the first of the year, and the full blown annual ethics training for the whole month of October
  • New Business
    • Banner 9
      • It was asked who the appropriate point of contact is for any issues regarding the new Banner 9
      • Suggested that there is a Banner 9 Help page, but for any unanswered questions, users can create a ticket for the AITS service desk
    • Chair Turnover
      • Todd Van Neck was thanked for his years of service as chair of this committee

Admin 06.26.18 Minutes

Attending:

Dale Rush, Todd Van Neck, Mike Kamowski, Brian Schoudel, Stephanie Dable, Tony Kerber, Linda Naru, Eric McMinoway, Joe Patzin, AJ Lavender, Gloria Keeley, Kathleen Engstrom, Jackie Finch, Dimuthu Tilakaratne, Therese Molina, Heather O’Leary

  • ITPC Update
    • Project Updates
      • Project timelines were gone over
      • Noted that START myResearch have added pilots and golive dates
      • Discussion of changes to My UI Financials, expectations, and user statistics
      • Discussion on testing and pilots for myProposals
  • ERP / Business Process Next Steps
    • ERP Review
      • Planning for change for Banner 2009 was presented on
    • BPI
      • The committee was asked for input on which business processes and software need improvement and how to increase functionality
      • Noted that a survey will be sent out to everyone who sees the presentation and asked that it be forwarded to anyone who would be interested
      • Discussion of some process and software that could be improved
      • Suggested that AITS will look at survey results and determine the next steps to move forward
      • Discussion on how to get feedback from all involved parties
    • Discussion
      • Discussion on TEM, bulling from publications, FMWeb, salary planner, procurement, hiring, foundation accounting system, etc.
      • Suggested sending the survey to BAT conference attendees
      • Further discussion of systems that could be improved
      • Mentioned that part of the problem is lack of documentation for existing processes
      • Suggested evaluating the level of difficulty with different processes/systems
      • Suggested using the Survey Research Lab or another resource to help with survey design
  • Logistics on Fall 2018 and Beyond
    • Scheduling
      • The Doodle Poll for rescheduling in Fall 2018 will be resent
      • The new chair will take over as of the August meeting
      • Noted that a new LAS representative will be joining the committee
      • Discussion of reviewing current membership
  • AITS Design Principles
    • Discussion
      • Noted that this committee had made recommendations about creating designing principles for all business systems
      • ITPC created a project template to address this request
      • Suggested that the committee had discussed this at the last meeting and reviewed the template as well as other documents
      • Links to relevant documents will be shared for everyone

Admin 05.22.18 Minutes

Attending:

Kathleen Engstrom, Dale Rush, Jaclyn Finch, Eric McMinoway, Todd Van Neck, Mike Kamowski, Monica Tith, Robyn Velazquez, Stephanie Dable, Tony Kerber, Cynthia Cobb, Marla McKinney, Jon Santanni, John Fudacz, Alex Phistry, Aaron Rosenthal, Dimuthu Tilakaratne

  • Banner XE
    • Presentation
      • A presentation was given on Banner 9
      • The required reasons for the switch to Banner 9 were described along with an explanation on how it allows the university to stay with current regulatory changes and eliminates the need for a client-wide Java plug in
      • Noted that there is a much improved user interface with Banner 9
      • Noted that the functionality of Banner 9 will remain the same with added improvements
      • An introductory navigational video on the AITS website was mentioned
      • Also mentioned was Banner 9 and how it gives users a first look at how Banner 9 is more improved than Banner 8
      • A side-by-side comparison of Banner 8 and 9 was given
      • Using Oracle as an example, the changes and updates included in Banner 9’s forms were gone over
      • It was asked if the rollout would be in phases or immediate
      • Suggested that the rollout will occur on October 14th, which is a hard date with no changes anticipated
      • It was asked if other groups were consulted on the rollout date to be sure there will be no conflicts
      • Suggested that all appropriate departments were contacted and no conflicts are anticipated
    • Demo
      • A demo of Banner 9 was given, noting the different home page images for the differing universities
      • Noted that HR BPD codes will remain the same, while students will have different ones
      • New and improved search features were mentioned
      • Noted that functionality will remain the same, but that Banner 9’s look and feel have been updated
      • Multiple features as well as improvements to old features were gone over
      • It was mentioned that most forms are not introducing any new functionalities
      • Differences between basic and advanced filters were gone over
      • It was asked if data can be exported or downloaded in order to print
      • Suggested that exporting to a PDF would print the same way it displays on a screen, but that exporting to Excel could be trickier due to sensitive data
      • Noted that all form requests are reviewed and taken under consideration
      • Which web browsers will be supported was questioned
      • Suggested that most common browsers are supported and work well
      • The introductory navigational video and Banner 9 Playground on the AITS website were gone over
      • It was asked if the move to Banner 9 assures that the university will continue to use Banner
      • Suggested that AITS is still going over other options, but for now will continue to use Banner
      • Noted that Banner 9 is currently in the implementation phase
      • Discussion on who will have to undergo training
  • HR Projects
    • System HR / Nessie Redesign
      • The goals of Nessie and the HR website were described
      • Suggested that the new website is mobile friendly
      • Also mentioned that HR has created an app to make accessing features like the earnings statements easier
      • It was asked if users will still be prompted with Duo while using the new app
      • Suggested that if users are trying to access their earnings statement off campus, they will be prompted with Duo
      • The differences between the new and old Nessie websites and applications were compared
      • The updated user features of the new Nessie website were gone over
      • It was mentioned that a re-branding of Nessie and modifications to the HR website to add simplicity are being worked on
      • Noted that the old Nessie website has many redirects to the new site
      • Suggested that the anticipated date for all content to be moved is early July
      • Also suggested that Nessie decommissioning efforts will be done once all content has been transferred
      • The Nessie survey results were gone over
    • Employee Training Infrastructure
      • A brief update on the Employee Training infrastructure was given
      • The implementation process was gone over, noting the focuses
      • Suggested that the first target will be ethics training, and pilot training should be conducted sometime in June
      • Also suggested that the anticipated rollout for training and product instance is early fall, but marketing will be held off until new systems can be put in place
      • Suggested that some of the next sets of training being looked at are campus security and HIPAA training
  • UI, Architecture, and Visualization Standards Work
    • Presentation
      • A brief overview of the development and goals of ITPC were given
      • The current status of the User Interface Standing was gone over
      • Mentioned that AITS has been working on designing a common look and feel for their different interfaces
      • Suggested that AITS is trying to establish availability and usability with all applications
      • Examples of the websites redesigned by AITS, comparing their new similar looks and feels, were gone over
      • Suggested that the next step is to start designing the web standards website
      • Suggested that the goal in creating the web standards website was to create a repository for standards set forth by AITS and ITPC
      • Noted that the input for standards was mostly developed from AITS, but feedback to improve the standards is welcome
      • Noted that the standards are to be used more as suggestions than requirements
      • The status of AITS architecture was gone over, noting that the document was reviewed and updated in December 2017
      • The status of data visualization standards was mentioned, noting that they have recently updated and reviewed
      • Discussion of ITPC, the current AITS projects, and the functionality of particular systems from an end-user perspective
  • ITPC Update
    • Discussion
      • Suggested that the ITPC update is available in the Box folder for review
  • New Business
    • Logistics
      • Committee logistics that need to be reviewed and discussed will be handled in the near future
  • Old Business
    • Faculty Profiling System
      • Mentioned that this system is being worked on and will be further discussed at a future meeting

Admin 04.24.18 Minutes

Attending:

Dale Rush, Eric McMinoway, Anthony Marino, Mike Kamowski, Tony Kerber, Joe Patzin, Kathleen Engstrom, Dimuthu Tilakaratne, Aaron Rosenthal, Jackie Finch, Heather O’Leary, John Fudacz

  • IPHEC AV Contract
    • IPHEC
      • A brief overview of IPHEC and the AV contract were given
      • Noted that a notification from a vendor that the contract is not being renewed at the end of June was received
      • Suggested that there are some concerns about the contract ending and what it means for AV contracts
      • A task force was started under the IGC InfraSec committee to look into the situation
      • Other concerns were voiced
      • Discussion of the previous process for contracts and quotes as well as the proposed new contract
      • Concern was voiced about a single vendor meeting the needs of all state universities
      • Noted that UIC Purchasing is in contact with IPHEC and that pricing came in at the same or lower levels than the current contract
      • Suggested that there may be alternative contract options that UIC could consider
      • Noted that Urbana and the System Offices had also voiced concerns
      • It was asked how the committee could assist in efforts to address this issue
      • Suggested that the task force has wide representation
      • Discussion of maintaining old equipment under new contract

Admin 02.27.18 Minutes

Attending:

Brenda Hixon, Mike Kamowski, Eric McMinoway, Gloria Keeley, Mark Goedert, John Fudacz, Tony Kerber, Monica Tith, Cynthia Cobb, Linda Naru, Kathleen Engstrom, Heather O’Leary

  • ITPC
    • Updates
      • Noted that My UI Financials should be done at the end of April
      • Suggested that the new software is available and that members should look at it
      • Suggested that biennial inventory will be piloting in April at all three universities
      • It was asked which units at UIC will be included and there will be a follow up
      • Noted that IAM is still working on affiliations and the schedule has been pushed back, there will be an update at the next meeting
      • Suggested that the employee training infrastructure is in its startup phase
      • An employee training calendar was mentioned and it was asked if it could be integrated with the employee training project
      • Noted that there is a master calendar within the LMS
      • Discussion of what might go on this calendar
      • Suggested that the team is currently looking through HR data to develop a process and will also work with governance to go over some use cases
    • Source2Pay
      • The project timeline for Source2Pay was gone over and 24 processes should be complete by March
      • Next step is to put a request for proposals
      • Suggested that the committee review the website and look through the posted process documents
      • Noted that these documents are very detailed and that the team is looking to create high level requirements for the RFP
      • The committee was asked to provide feedback on the RFP as well
      • The goal is to have vendor demos by late summer
      • Noted that there are feedback meetings scheduled for UIC’s west side in April, and additional meetings will be added for the east side
      • Discussion of possible meeting conflicts and how to get feedback within the project timeline
      • A Doodle Poll will be sent out to the committee
  • UIC IT Strategy/Community
    • Presentation
      • The UIC IT Strategy was presented on as well as the idea of creating a UIC IT Community
      • The document was pulled up and strategic priorities were discussed
      • Noted that there had been some discussion of where UI Health and administration fit into these five priorities
      • Emphasized that this is a strategy document for UIC, while most administrative systems exist at the system level, above the university
      • A demo of ONE.uic was given
      • Discussion of how the central IT website, listserv, etc. will work
  • ACCC Strategic Planning
    • Strategic Planning Process
      • A presentation on the ACCC strategic planning process was given and suggested that the process is working to align to ACCC’s strategy with the UIC IT Strategy
      • How the strategies align was shown as well as the strategic planning process was gone over
      • Noted that ACCC is working to find a way to get stakeholder feedback
      • The scope of ACCC’s internal strategy was asked about
      • Suggested that the goal of strategic planning is to provide direction for ACCC projects and allow ACCC to prioritize projects to align with the priorities of UIC
      • Suggested that it goes beyond prioritizing services but also about process improvement
      • Suggested that the percentage of ACCC resources assigned to strategic efforts is still being discussed, but that ACCC is working towards being more strategic in general – prioritizing projects rather than just focusing on operations
  • New Business
    • Banner
      • Suggested that changes are coming to Banner in October
      • Suggested that Banner should function the same way, but the look and feel have changed
      • Discussion of issues related to Banner
      • A request for a demo to be shown to the committee in late spring was made
      • Concern was expressed about having enough time to train before October
      • It was suggested that the committee could look at the training schedule, navigation changes, etc. when the demo is given
      • Further discussion of training needs

Admin 01.23.18 Minutes

Attending:

Heather O’Leary, Mike Kamowski, Eric McMinoway, Cynthia Cobb, AJ Lavender, Aaron Rosenthal, Monica Tith, Gloria Keeley, Kathleen Engstrom, John Fudacz, Jackie Finch, Tony Kerber, Todd Van Neck, Therese Molina, Dale Rush

  • Wait Listing for Courses
    • Issue with Students Holding Courses
      • Suggested that a note came from Engineering regarding wait list options for high level courses and the provost has asked for a solution
      • Issue that any graduate student could hold a course in any graduate level course
      • Suggested a decision be made to restrict sections rather than create wait lists
      • OSS will continue looking at wait listing in the future
  • ITPC Update
    • My UI Financials
      • A brief update of the ITGC January report was given
      • Noted there are issues with loading data in My UI Financials which the team has been working to address
      • Suggested that the project may be complete by March
    • Biennial Inventory
      • Mentioned the Biennial Inventory has been postponed until April
      • The project will coincide with a BPI project for the biennial inventory process
      • Discussion of issues with disposals as well as other possible updates to FABweb
    • START myResearch
      • Suggested some of the requirements for the dashboard have changed
    • Identity and Access Management
      • Suggested that IAM work is nearing an end
      • The timeline will be reviewed and any outstanding items will be put into a new ITPC project
    • List of Projects for ITGC Admin
      • Suggested that many of these projects are closing
      • The committee was asked if they would like to add any more projects
      • Mentioned that there was a discussion about getting updates on a number of projects during committee meetings in the spring
      • Suggested that these presentations would provide more information and allow the ITPC to gather feedback
      • Mentioned that the committee had discussed the possibility of compiling a list of administrative process and assessing which need to be addressed
      • Discussion of how this project might work and what sorts of processes would be considered
      • Source to pay was mentioned. Suggesting that5 there is a BPI project that will finish in March
      • Mentioned that the team is currently writing the requirements for an RFP
      • Data reporting was suggested. Followed by a discussion of various reports
      • Discussion of the BAT conference which will be a future agenda item
      • Suggested adding the initial collection of the process improvement recommendations to the committee Box folder
      • Discussion of procurement
      • The committee agreed that it would be helpful to review the RFP together
      • Suggested that the committee compile the list of administrative processes and prioritize them
      • A schedule for presenting on source to pay and BPI will be worked on
  • Employee Training Infrastructure
    • Discussion
      • Suggested that the last meeting was a brainstorming session of what types of training should be included in the LMS
      • Suggested that the LMS could have a variety of uses
      • The committee reviewed the data being entered into the LMS
      • Discussion of where data can be pulled from and what information is needed for each employee
      • Suggested that initial rollout will support enterprise-wide compliance training but long-term will support other trainings
      • Discussion of issues that may arise in tracking training
    • Dashboard
      • A demo of the LMS dashboard was given
      • A brief update will be given at the next meeting

Admin 12.19.17 Minutes

Attending:

Tony Kerber; Heather O’Leary; Jackie Finch; Kathleen Engstrom; Todd Van Neck; Dale Rush; Joe Patzin; Mint Simagrai

  • Employee Training Infrastructure
    • Discussion
      • Suggested that the committee brainstorm ideas about the employee training infrastructure
      • Suggested beginning with the RFP but considering what might be missing
      • Lab trainings, such as laser and chemical safety, were suggested
      • Noted that the training infrastructure will be an LMS, not a system that does the actual training
      • Discussion of whether Blackboard could be used
      • Suggested that the training system will likely be separate from Blackboard
      • Suggested that the goal is to be able to put modules into the system for each training and allow employees to track what they have completed
      • Mentioned that trainings in Blackboard are possible, but the instance must be tracked separately
      • Discussion of reasons why Blackboard would not work well for this training system
      • Additional ESHO trainings will be added to the spreadsheet
      • Discussion of how to differentiate research/lab compliance trainings from other types of compliance
      • Suggested that if clinical training is done within the LMS, the system may have to be HIPAA compliant and have a BAA
      • Further discussion of how current trainings are tracked by EHSO, HR, etc.
      • Looking to address gaps in information needed to determine who needs to do specific trainings
      • It was asked whether employee reviews could be included in order to track professional development goals
      • Suggested that this might be possible through the individualized development program
      • Suggested that supervisors would have to be added to ensure completion
      • The committee was asked to create case studies of specific situations that might occur so that the vendor can determine how best to handle
      • Noted that supervisors could go into the system to confirm trainings
      • CEUs were asked about
      • Suggested pulling information into the system from external sources
      • Further discussion of how various trainings are being tracked and how medical residents are handled
      • Requested that the system allow employees to self-track completion in addition to supervisors being able to view trainings
      • Discussion of how to track off-campus training such as conference attendance
      • Suggested that if employees upload their own training there should be a process of supervisor approval
      • Suggested that the new system will initially focus on compliance before branching out to other training needs
      • Noted that each university in the system will have its own portal, style, and ability to customize trainings
      • Discussion of Cleary training, currently available on Blackboard
      • It was questioned what would be helpful to managers when it comes to training
      • Suggested having a list full of available trainings rather than occasional emails with upcoming trainings
      • Discussion of employees’ reviews and how this system might help

Admin 11.28.17 Minutes

Attending:

Todd Van Neck, Dale Rush, Joe Patzin, AJ Lavender, Eric McMinoway, Mint Simagrai, Kathleen Engstrom, John Fudacz, Tony Kerber, Jackie Finch, Mike Kamowski, Gloria Keeley, Jon Santanni, Heather O’Leary

  • ITPC Update
    • ITPC Status
      • Noted that not much has changed in the project timelines
      • QA testing was added to START myResearch
      • Discussion of what is currently available in the portal, reporting, and how many people are using the available tools
      • The biennial inventory system will be in pilot for April 2018
      • Noted that testing has discovered some performance concerns with My UI Financials, delaying December release
      • The different reporting options in START myResearch and My UIC Financials were gone over
      • Discussion of IAM and preparation for new student admission
    • Employee Training Infrastructure
      • Noted that it has not yet been decided which trainings will come first in the employee training infrastructure project
      • Discussion of how trainings might work in the new system
      • Suggested that a governance group will be put in place to govern the trainings made available
      • Further discussion of the best way to develop the training portal
      • Suggested that the goal of this system is for it to be an enterprise system that will be available for anyone to use
      • Suggested that a new level of skillsets will have to be developed to fully utilize the system
      • Discussion of issues that have come up in past projects and the importance of user input
      • Suggested that there may be an opportunity for the vendor to give a demo
      • Suggested that the scope of the project has not yet been determined
      • Discussion of holding a focus group
      • Will share the RFP with the committee
      • Suggested to use the December meeting to discuss ideas
      • A list will be created in Box and sent out to the committee to write down ideas
      • Broad discussion of trainings and what would be required of the portal
  • Old Business
    • Data Governance
      • A meeting was held to discuss the creation of a data governance group
      • Noted that a proposal to create an additional ITGC committee has been created, but it would require funding to hire an FTE data officer
      • This will be brought to the IT Governance Council to re-affirm their support before being brought to the provost
    • iBPMS RFP
      • Suggested that a group is being put together to draft the RFP
    • TEM Redesign
      • Suggested that this project is on hold
      • It was asked that users be involved in the design process once the project goes forward