IT Governance Purpose: Information technology is a catalyst for productivity, creativity and community that enhances learning opportunities in an environment of unlimited demands and limited resources. Executive Committee Meeting May 13, 2016 Adopting a strategic approach to information technology planning, budgeting and implementation at Cal Poly Pomona.

Administrative Technology Recommendations Business Intelligence/Data Warehouse Enhancement Infrastructure Technology Recommendations CBORD Recommendation Web Technology Recommendations Faculty/Staff Websites IT Governance Executive Committee Action Items

Administrative Technology Working Group Action Items Presenters: Diane Carter Interim Manager, Business Intelligence Glendy Yeh Associate Vice President, IT Applications Guest: Lisa RotunniExecutive Director, Institutional Research & Academic Resources

Tools: RDS (PeopleSoft Reporting Database Service) - Deployed in 2005; used for data warehouse builds - Product no longer supported since at least 2011 ODI (Oracle Data Integrator) - Deployed in 2013 to replace RDS - Conversion has not yet started Hyperion - Deployed in mid 1990’s - Used to generate static and other data warehouse reports OBIEE (Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition) - Deployed in 2009 with 8 other CSU campuses - Used to create student and finance dashboards Administrative Technology Working Group Business Intelligence/Data Warehouse

Challenges: Upgrade ODI to the current release Convert data models in RDS into ODI environment OBIEE Financial factors - Named user license for 647 users - Configured/set up to support X concurrent users - Additional named user license or site license is very costly Usability factors - Data modeling process is cumbersome - Deploying new reports is time consuming - Upgrade path is tedious and not straightforward - Browser compatibility challenges Administrative Technology Working Group Business Intelligence/Data Warehouse

Administrative Technology Working Group Reporting Tools Data Modeling Tools

Assess and enhance the BI/Data Warehouse environment Streamline data modeling using ODI Address the need for a modern reporting/dashboard tool - Evaluate reporting tools: Hyperion, OBIEE, iDashboard, Tableau - Evaluation criteria: Multiple data sources, cost, ease of use, comprehensive dashboards, scalability, sustainability, performance, ease of administration, compatibility with popular browsers and mobile devices Administrative Technology Working Group A Strategic Approach

OBIEE Dashboard Tableau Dashboard Administrative Technology Working Group Comparison of Dashboards

Tableau Implementation: Rapid implementation (6-12 months) Rapid dashboard development Deliverables: Visual and interactive reports Deployed by 16 CSU campuses (enterprise deployment at 6 campuses) Server-based campus deployment with a 10 developers in Student Affairs, IRAR and IT. Changes to Current Dashboard Access (Limit 647 users): 5 Licenses - President's Office 500 Licenses - Academic Affairs 60 Licenses - Admin Affairs, IT, Student Affairs, and Advancement 82 Licenses – Administrative Users Administrative Technology Working Group Recommendations

Infrastructure Technology Working Group Action Items Presenter: Al Arboleda

Background Evaluation Process IT Governance Recommendation Infrastructure Technology Working Group Electronic Card Access System

In January the President’s cabinet instructed the working group to help shepherd the selection of a modern electronic card access system. The new electronic card access system will replace three separate card access systems that are used to manage access to 932 doors across campus. Users will no longer have to carry multiple cards The new card access standard will be secure Twenty year old equipment in need of constant repair and maintenance will be replaced A campus “One Card” office will be established Infrastructure Technology Working Group Electronic Card Access System

2 Gather Info (Evaluate here) 3 Analyze (Evaluate more here) 4 Negotiate (Evaluate more here) 5 Construct (POC) 1 Assess and Plan A bit of evaluation occurred at each step Higher ED focus Support for open standards Large Installed base Market leader Custom er support Customer feedback System Requirements Price Technical Architecture System Integration partner Product Roadmap Infrastructure Technology Working Group Evaluation Process

Scope The market leaders in the higher education access control system space Blackboard Transact and CBORD CS Gold Evaluating Goals Select by consensus the electronic card access system within budget the fully meets the campus stated needs Team members and roles Al Arboleda – project lead Chris Laasch – technical lead Housing Information Technology Campus Police Foundation Admissions Infrastructure Technology Working Group Evaluation

Infrastructure Technology Working Group Recommendation CBORD Solution that best meets campus needs Door access control Secure card access standard format Mobile device support - BLE/NFC Product Integration compatibility with existing services Campus id, payment mechanism, stored value cash card, data repository for additional information, housing management system, event attendance tracking Vendor qualifications - customer feedback Support services

Infrastructure Technology Working Group Recommendation Complete proof of concept with CBORD Begin development with Facilities, Housing, and current card access system administrators on a plan to migrate to the new card access system

Infrastructure Technology Working Group Backup Slides

Infrastructure Technology Working Group Current System Total number of buildings = 30 of 126 Total number of doors = 932 DSX = 20 buildings doors Continental = 10 buildings doors and 23 panic alarms Onity = Campus Housing Suites doors Campus Online by Persona = 1 (village gate) Total number of door access administrators = 29 including dispatch

Infrastructure Technology Working Group Problems Problems with the current card access system(s) Multiple card access systems Users have to carry multiple cards to access buildings, rooms, pay for goods, vending, laundry, printing Twenty year old equipment -installed when buildings were built – areas lack the funds to repair the equipment Users have to multiple administrators to gain access to buildings/doors across campus Lack internal expertise to repair the existing electronic locks we have on campus (always reliant on an outside vendor or areas call John Rotunni)

Web Technology Working Group Action Items Presenter: Tim Raymond

Web Technology Working Group Faculty/Staff Websites Web Redesign Project: The project started in 2012 and completed in To limit the scope of website relaunch, faculty and staff websites were excluded. With relaunch complete it is time to provide a website solution for faculty/staff.

Web Technology Working Group Faculty/Staff Websites Recommendation: Utilize the existing campus content management system (CMS) to support other types of sites Partner with vendor to modify existing CMS set-up to accommodate faculty/staff websites Create custom templates for use by these sites This will allow central administration of format to ensure adherence to campus accessibility and web standards.

Accessible Technology Updates Administrative Technology Student Success Dashboard Instructional Technology Classroom & Lab Updates IT Governance Executive Committee Informational Items

Accessible Technology Working Group Informational Items Presenter: Carol Gonzales

CSU ATI - Internal Audit Update CSU Annual Campus Status Report 2014/15 Current CSU Campus Web Litigation Threats Accessible Technology Working Group Agenda

26 In July 2015, CSU Internal Audit completed an audit on 6 CSU campuses for ATI, which included CPP. System recommendations resulted in a Coded Memorandum update in Dec. 2015: Formally acknowledging CO ATI department is part of the systemwide Academic Technology Services (ATS). Campus presidents will appoint an Executive Sponsor. Includes the CO. A summary of the ATI annual report results is provided to the campus President. Duties are specifically assigned to the ATI Steering Committee including reviewing, revising and updating the plan. Training, integrity, and clarity in the criteria for evaluating the success indicators used for status reporting Accessible Technology Working Group CSU ATI – Internal Audit Update

Accessible Technology Working Group Summary of CSU ATI Status Level Changes Audit recommended improvements to how criteria is evaluated and assigned for status reporting. Resulted in decrease in evaluations by some campuses even though support and ATI programs did not decrease. CSU ATI believes the assessment is more valid and reliable of the CSU ATI capabilities

Reference - CSU ATI Status Level Criteria Status Level Description for Procedures Description for Documentation Description for Resources Optimizing The campus has a mature practice. Additional procedures are in place to conduct regular administrative reviews of success indicators to gauge effectiveness and implement improvements. Documentation is continually revised to reflect the managed practice. Periodic administrative review of documentation is conducted. Resources have been both identified and allocated. Periodic administrative review of resource allocations is conducted. Managed Campus has a mature practice. Additional procedures are in place to track and capture success indicators (milestones and measures of success). Documentation is complete and fully reflects the standard practice. Resources have been both identified and allocated. Established Campus has a standard practice. Procedures are consistent and formal. Documentation is complete and fully reflects the standard practice. Resources have been both identified and allocated. Defined Campus has a common practice. Any procedures in place are consistent but informal. Documentation, if present, is in working draft form. Resources have been firmly identified but not yet allocated. Initiated Campus has an ad hoc or developing practice. Any procedures in place are generally ad hoc. Documentation is generally absent. Resources have been tentatively identified but not yet allocated. Not StartedNo action has yet been taken. No documentation has yet been generated. No resources have yet been allocated.

Accessible Technology Working Group CPP/CSU 2014/15 - Procurement Top Level Goal CPP 2014/2015 CSU Median 2014/2015 Above or Below CSU Median Procurement Procedures Established Same Staffing or role definition Established Same Exemption Process Established Same Equally Effective Access Plans EstablishedDefined Above Training EstablishedDefined Same Outreach (Communications) Defined Same Evaluation & Monitoring Initiated Same Experience/Implementation ManagedDefined Above

Accessible Technology Working Group CPP/CSU 2014/15 - IM

Accessible Technology Working Group CPP/CSU 2014/15 - Web

A private law firm, Carlson Lynch Sweet & Kilpea, is reaching out across the nation threatening private industry and universities with legal action based on the accessibility of their websites. Defending Against Website Accessibility Claims: Recent Decisions Suggest the Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine Is Unlikely to Serve As Businesses’ Silver Bullet Defending Against Website Accessibility Claims: Recent Decisions Suggest the Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine Is Unlikely to Serve As Businesses’ Silver Bullet Stop The ADA Trolls Accessible Technology Working Group Web Litigation Threat

Administrative Technology Working Group Informational Items Presenters: Megan Stang & Glendy Yeh

Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard Where Are We ? Institution data in multiple applications Data source of existing dashboards and data warehouse reports Existing reports provide good summary and detail information but not enough analytics Logical Progression and Future Roadmap

Other Challenges Current ETL (Extract – Transform – Load) tool is no longer supported Current data modeling and dashboard reporting tools need to be upgraded Limited staff resources License issue and cost Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

Why Tower Insights? Founders are senior leaders in higher education:  Andy Clark: Vice President for Enrollment, Marketing, and Communications  Brian Haugabrook: CIO – Uses technology to combine data from multiple systems, identify patterns and measure student engagement. Oracle suite of products Actionable Student Insights and Predictive Analytics Full access to expand and modify predictive models Cost Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

Actionable Student Insights (ASI) Phases Academic information Student profiles Early alert triggers and at-risk students Student support and resource workflow Predictive analytics Enrollment reports Retention, progression, and graduation reporting and analytics Admissions reporting and analytics Historical data and trends Predictive analytics Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

Admissions Day-to-Day Trends Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

Visual Course Roster Interactive Report/Flip Cards Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

Academic Department Analysis Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

Academic Department Analysis

Feedback and Questions Section 508 accessibility review Technical requirements Experience with PeopleSoft Student Data Experience in integration with other applications:  GradesFirst  PeopleSoft Planner  Degree Audit Interactive demo requested by the Registrar A general concern that the solution is not widely used Reference checks with existing customers Administrative Technology Working Group Student Success Dashboard

What’s Next? ATI review Assessment of technical requirements Onsite demo/workshop Reference checks with existing customers Additional resource

Instructional Technology Working Group Informational Items Presenter: Susan Reese

Instructional Technology Working Group Classroom Updates SSF Funds ($500K for Classrooms) for 2015/16 5 New Full Classroom installs Based on top 5 rooms that received media cart deliveries Upgrades to 5 Minimum technology rooms Worked with colleges to identify rooms Every College to receive one of these types of room upgrades

Instructional Technology Working Group Classroom Updates Install electronic display screen in ~16-20 rooms that still have manual screens (Full technology rooms) Replace Manual screens in ~25-50 rooms (based on cart deliveries over last 2 years) Finalize sticky screen replacements in ~20 rooms Solidifying room standards, upgrading screens that are old and well used.

Instructional Technology Working Group Classroom Updates Trial room conversions from analog to digital in ~3-5 rooms This conversion activity will inform our plans to convert remaining rooms to digital in the next year or two.

Instructional Technology Working Group Classroom Updates Wireless Display Pilot (~ 10% of the budget) Goals of this pilot is to identify what types of courses may benefit from wireless display technology which will promote either instructors walking freely in the room or group presentation and collaboration.

Instructional Technology Working Group Lab Updates SSF Funds ($400K for Labs) for 2015/16 9 labs can be updated, replacing 240 Dell computers and 49 Apple computers Based on a list of labs ranked by oldest machines and most used (and feedback from the colleges) Labs are located in Ag (1), CBA (1), ENG(2), ENV (1), Lib (1 lab, 1 open computer area), SCI (1), CLASS (1)

Instructional Technology Working Group Last Minute Funds for Labs and Classrooms 70K Last Minute Extra Funds 35K for Classrooms 28K for upgrading classrooms to full technology 7K for classroom development/Research and Backup Equipment 35K for Lab Upgrades This, plus the savings from Bulk Buy allowed us to address two more college labs, CCHM (1) and Science (1) and purchase a few spare machines.