INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES

November 8, 2001

Time: 10:00 - 12:00

Location: McHenry Library 481

 

I.    Welcome and Introductions

§         Members Present:  Scotty Brookie, Mark Cianca, Pat LeCuyer, Larry Merkley, Bob White, Kathleen Dettman, Terry Schalk, Bruce Cooperstein, Bill Hyder

§         Members Absent: Charlie McDowell

§         Guests: Robin Ove, Peter McMillan, Janine Roeth, Robert Miller

§         Staff Present:  Max Ritchie, Fana O’Halloran

 

II.  AIS Update – Mark Cianca

In light of the budget cuts, a formal review of the AIS project is being worked on and will be delivered to VC Hernandez by 11/19. Included in this review will be funding strategies, risks associated with delaying the project, possible limitations in project scope, and the possibility of using current programs on sister campuses.

 

The goal of the AIS project follows the 70/20/10 model.

 

70% of inquiries would be handled via an online auto transaction service.

20% of inquiries would be handled by staff ‘generalists’.

10% of inquiries would be handled by staff ‘specialists’, with highly articulated skills.

 

An example of the volume of inquiries for Student billing services was provided.  During the first three weeks of the quarter, 2,400 contacts were made to the billing office. Most of these could be handled by an online service, allowing staff time to be redirected towards other tasks.

 

Since the end of July members of the AIS team have been working to devise a high-level implementation plan for campus review.

 

VC Miller commented that one of the most important aspects of this project is a precise timetable.  He also noted that administrators would be interested to know the answers to the following questions:

 

1.      What money will be saved?

2.      What services will be increased?

3.      What risks will be decreased?

4.      What associated projects could be worked in to the AIS IP plan?

 

ITC members agreed to suggest groups who ought to be involved with the implementation plans at our next meeting. 

 

III. Student representation

    Chair Merkley will interview the two interested undergraduate students and determine which    one is to serve on the committee.

 

IV.  Security Issues – Pat LeCuyer

Pat provided a draft proposal for Guidelines and Procedures for Blocking Network Access, which addresses high-risk activity on the network.  He envisions that there will be one, possibly two, security contact(s) for each division or unit to manage local issues. Academic information would be covered under this proposal.  If a problem is identified by the security contact, that contact has the authority to unplug that system from the network.  If the person who was unplugged wants to be reconnected, the recourse process would begin with Pat LeCuyer, then VC Vani, and finally to EVC Simpson.

 

Once the proposal is in final form, it will be taken to PAC for discussion.   Pat will invite comment from the CCT Senate Committee. 

 

A broader treatment of the security issue will be scheduled for a later meeting.

 

V.  Web Presence – Robin Ove

Robin presented the Phase I, inventory component of the Web Presence assessment.

In it she highlights the findings of the Web Presence group.

 

Fana O’Halloran then presented the Web Activity Based Costing report, which details the financial infrastructure that currently runs our web presence.  The campus spends approximately 2.5-3 million dollars per year in the development and management of web sites, which accounts for about 2% of the campus’s state-funded portion of its annual budget.

 

In the discussion that followed, it was noted that there have been complaints from many donors, students, parents, etc., regarding our general web presence. Some of the specific issues mentioned included inconsistency, content accuracy and timeliness, and navigation difficulties

 

VC Miller added that the web is a major source of income for the university. He highlighted enrollments and our development campaign, and suggested that the web provides a major source for industry contacts.

 

Members of the ITC also commented that it is sometimes difficult to navigate around the site and that it is sometimes unclear which pages are official and which are not. 

 

The ITC will discuss web presence further and propose a strategy for proceeding with this at our next meeting.

 

VI.   Other Committee Business

 

VII.     Next Meeting:  Tuesday, November 20, 2001, 11:00-1:00, Bay Tree Bookstore

       Conference Room A

 

VIII.        Adjournment:  12:00 PM