Space Working Group Workshop Feedback Presented by Marlyn Esterhuyse 13 March 2013

Introduction Resolved Issues Cancelled Proposal Internal Process Issues General Discussions Completed Proposals Proposals Agreed To No Changes in Software Clarification Needed Questions / Comments

Resolved Issues Proposal 4: Buildings excluded on STG6MN-1 but included in Valpac and Errors in Valpac Comment: Institutions should ensure that patches are transferred completely to avoid such problems Proposal 38: SPOPS-5 Validate for Stats – error message for allocations not adding up to 100% was removed, but we still need to know where data doesn’t add up to 100%

Reason: All is working as it should Cancelled Proposals Proposal 24: Changes in PBOP-1 page 3 and SPOPS-1 should reflect on both options Proposal 29: Office allocations on SPOPS-2 and on PBOP-2 page 3 should reflect on both options Reason: All is working as it should

Internal Process Issues Proposal 18: There should be validations on HR and Timetable data to prevent poor quality data in Space System Comment: There are validations available: STIME3-5 (All subjects that are active but not scheduled) and STIME3-6 (All subjects that are inactive and scheduled) Internal processes should address this problem

General Discussions Proposal 33: How do institutions handle major renovations/changes to buildings Proposal 46: How do universities handle the lack of cost norms for administrative departments Comment: Table 4 of DHET norms document provide calculations based on FTEs

Completed Proposals Proposal 11: SPOPS-1 – Deletion of spaces should be allowed if due to Capturing Errors Change implemented: T188785 Rooms can be deleted in SPMNT-2 Enhance error message in SPOPS-1 to: “Delete not allowed here … use Delete Entries from Space Inventory {SPMNT-2}” Enhance menu description for the deletion of Space Inventory (SPMNT- 2) to: “Delete entries from Space Inventory” Update the manual for SPMNT-2 to reflect the above

Completed Proposals Proposal 20: Is it possible for (SPCS-2) Land information to be included on (SPOPS-1) space inventory first screen as well as the land asset information? Proposal 41: Change requests to various screens e.g. additional fields Change implemented: T188268 Campus code and name displays in SPOPS-1 Proposal 25: If stations are not captured for relevant space categories, can system be changed not to allow record to be saved: Change implemented: T185894 Completed

Completed Proposals Proposal 43: Building description only accepts 30 characters and the alternate name 40. Could this be increased (120 proposed) Change implemented: T188620 A 120 character field has been added to the Building definition. This field is also displayed on the Space Inventory and the Building Codes report. Proposal 44: Building effective date defaults to 1900. Older buildings can not be captured correctly. Change implemented: T188267 Effective building year no longer a mandatory field in SPCS-4 Allowable values reduced to 1700 SPCS-4 – update manual to reflect above

Completed Proposals Proposal 52: Why does HEMIS space extract stop at every error, can’t it run with the entire list of errors in the output? Change implemented: T183415 ITS has added a batch prompt to HEMIS-7 where the user now decides if the process must continue even if there are errors

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 2: SPCOPY-5 – Could ITS change this options so only venues for which information is available on the timetable are updated? Proposal 3: “Building not linked to asset” error message inconsistent in SPCOPY-4&5; To be implemented: T183394 & T187636 Change "Copy Office Utilization {SPCOPY-4}" and "Copy Timetable Data {SPCOPY-5}" to not delete all venues for Categories 1310 to 1314 or Categories 1110, etc before the process. Refine the program to only delete venues that will be inserted Do the same for personnel system "Copy Date from TimeTable {PSOP- 2}" - for each lecturer Also do reports to list venues with detail, but that was not copied i.e. does not exist in the Timetable or Timesheet Info. Add batch prompt to have option to exclude STG6MN-1 buildings or not in SPCOPY-4&5 Time Frame?

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 5: Can users be forced to capture HR information when accessing iEnabler? To be implemented: T185797 New development to force Personnel to enter Statutory Information required for Statistical reporting, before processing a Leave application: Title, initials & surname Personnel number Building number Floor number Room code Work number or Cell number Qualification Time Frame?

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 6: How is timetable information copied to the space system (subject, percentages etc.)? Proposal 7: How are the pro-ration fields calculated? Proposal 8: How are CESM codes derived for HEMIS reporting? Proposal 9: How is the SCU calculated? To be implemented: T188788 Proposal 6, 8 & 9: Update the manual for HEMIS-7 (Extract Space Data to HEMIS table) Proposal 7: Refer to manual for explanation of the pro-ration field ITS = Valpac?

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 12,13 & 14: Space validation reports are to include Space-use Category, Description, Building Decription To be implemented: T188269 The following columns are required on the report of SPOPS-5: space use category, building and room description. Please no wrapping because it creates problems in excel. ITS report can only accommodate 132 characters. ITS will change the report to export in excel and comma delimited. Descriptions can then be added as requested.

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 15: Why do reports include buildings that was excluded for HEMIS purposes? Proposal 16: Can missing room barcodes be included in validation report? To be implemented: T188720 SPSCU-3/SPSCU-5 Add batch prompt: “Do you want to include Buildings that have been excluded from Statistical Reporting?” Add batch prompt: “Do you want to do validation on Bar codes?”

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 28: Add field to Building detail to inactivate buildings no longer in use. To be implemented: T178403 (only from Integrator 3) In SPCS-4 - Add field: “Inactive Date From“. Do not validate this field in this form. Change LOVs and Screens to not allow new records or updates after the Inactive Date (I suspect it will serve the purpose if we only validate on SPOPS-1) Change copy programs (Timetable, Office allocation, Fee Structure, etc) to be sensitive to the field.

Proposals Agreed To Proposal 30: Update Oracle view M45v with additions to database To be implemented: T188635 Create a new view for SPOPS-1b3,4,5 Proposal 30 and 31: Validation report should have a 1-line error message when building is not linked to an asset instead of same error message for each room To be implemented: T186437 Change the program to do a distinct selection for the error message, meaning that you only see Building 1 once with message e.g. “Building not linked to an asset” Add new validation: “Building without any Room linked to it” Proposal 45: All space system help files must be updated and must correspond with what is actually done in the system Ongoing exercise

No Changes to Software Proposal 10: Users would like to be able to back-date inactivation date Proposal 23: Give an option where one can view incomplete orders or requisitions linked to room to be able to act on it Proposal 26: The space information should be linked to an Academic Year Proposal 53: Request that space shadow table is year based – comparing data currently impossible (Why comment: client to use Valpac to query historical data?) Reason: ITS to do an in-depth investigation to find the best possible solution Proposal 19: Increase size of campus code field (>99) Reason: The problem is a result of exam venues being captured as campuses. This can be resolved by using the Service Centre System which is part of the distance system

No Changes to Software Proposal 21: Is it possible for all reports to be exported in Excel? Reason: Report data can be converted to Excel format by user (MAC) Proposal 22: Is it not possible for land codes and building codes to be the same – should it be 2 different codes? Reason: Agreed Campuses may constitute of more than one piece of land Proposal 32: Add a field for the condition code of a building in SPCS-4 to be extracted into HEMIS Reason: Agreed Conversion codes from IFRS system addresses this issue Proposal 34: Could ITS reconsider the total banning of system updates by institutions Reason: Institutional updates are part of the maintenance contract with ITS and may compromise the support that ITS gives on the system.

No Changes to Software Proposal 35: Could ITS reconsider the use of certain local software developed by institutions – in specific a program used to move everything linked to a room to another room Reason: This program doesn’t update all space details. ITS proposes this be tabled as a ITSUG proposal for inclusion in future ITS release. Proposal 36: How can Adhoc Bookings research/instruction be handled in order to include CESM data for reporting? Reason: Agreed The affected institution will determine the importance of this data based on the magnitude and will discuss with ITS Proposal 37: How can research subjects, which is not captured on the timetable be handled to be reflected in reporting? Reason: Agreed No change in software

No Changes to Software Proposal 39 and 40: Can space reports be 1 menu option with different parameters and report groupings? Several other changes to reports requested. Reason: Discoverer can be used to create these customised reports Proposal 42: SREGB-1 and SPCS-1 are both used to capture campus data. This is unnecessary Reason: Institution specific – to be taken up with ITS Proposal 48: How to ensure accurate information when comparing a) on-site, b) plan (autocad) and c) what’s on SPOPS Reason: Entered as a development request – Number 961 – ITS: investigate the mobility idea after discussions at the User Group.

No Changes to Software Proposal 49: Allocation of parking bays as part of space utilization Reason: Institution specific Proposal 50: Is there a prompt if the total active area exceeds the gross area and if so is the user allowed to save the record Reason: There is a warning on the system but the user can still save. Users do not want this changed. Proposal 51: Can the copy to shadow tables prompt the calculation of the SCU like when we extract HEMIS staff data? Reason: There is an SCU calculate option on the shadow menu

Clarification Needed Proposal 27: Add field to Campus detail to inactivate campuses no longer in use ITS Response: Main purpose is to prevent old campuses going to Valpac. Add a new Date field on Campus Codes (SPCS-1) - prompt should be something like “Exclude from STATS Reporting From“. The report "Campus Codes {SPCSR1-1}" will have a prompt to exclude Campuses excluded from STATS reporting (meaning where the “Exclusion Date/ Inactive Date” on SPCS-1 is less than the Reporting year). In the "Space Inventory” {SPOPS-1} there could be a message that the campus is excluded from STATS Reporting from X date. This could give an indication to all users/departments that the campus is not used and that they should move their objects. Excluded campuses must be excluded from: a. SPOPS-5: Validate Space for STATS b. SPOPS-6: Copy Structure for STATS c. SPCOPY-1: Copy Office Utilization to new Year d. SPCOPY-2: Print Offices not in Use e. SPCOPY-3: Print Non-Office Spaces f. SPCOPY-4: Copy Office Utilization g. SPCOPY-5: Copy Timetable Data h. SPSCU-3: Validate Space for STATS i. SPSCU-4: Calc SCU Validation errors if Inactive Campus included in "Copy Timetable Allocation {}. Field to show inactive campuses on “Campus Report {SPCSR1-1} and inactive buildings on "Buildings Report {SPCSR1-3}". Note: Existing functionality … Campuses without anything linked to it, can be deleted on SPCS-1 (Campus Codes).

Questions? Comments?

Thank You