1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE August 2, 2004 “SUMMER FOCUS GROUP SESSION ”

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
October 16, Network Planning Task Force Information Security Strategy.
Advertisements

TUITION & FEE PROPOSAL (Revised) Recommendation to The University of Texas Board of Regents (Revised) Recommendation to The University of Texas.
Responsibility Center Management 1. Known as RCM, it is the managerial framework for our internal budgeting and financial reporting activities Created.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE FY’06 “ Final Session – Setting the Rates” 12/5/05.
1 The Florida International University Faculty Senate Meeting Operating Budget FY07-08 & Budget Reduction Plan September 18, 2007.
Budgeting at Penn and within Vice Provost for University Life (VPUL) My View: William Turner June,
Linda Bragg Office of Title II, III and System Support Division of Educator Quality and System Support.
Five-year Fiscal Sustainability Plan October 2014.
Peralta Community College Budget Allocation Model BAM November 17, 2014.
1. Funding model for telecom services  FTE funding model  Blue Ribbon Committee on IT Excellence Horizontal wiring upgrades 2.
Financial Overview and Budget Recommendations David Cummins Vice President for Finance and Administration/CFO Mike Sherman Senior Vice President and Provost;
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE November 15, 2004 FALL FY 2005 MEETINGS “STRATEGIC DISCUSSIONS”
11/29/20041 Network Planning Task Force “Consensus Building: Preliminary Rate Setting”
Fiscal Year 2008 Budget Report Oakland University Senate November 15, 2007.
Tuition & Aid Advisory Board A Discussion of UCB Priorities and Funding Strategies September 27, 2004.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE November 01, 2004 FALL FY 2005 MEETINGS “OPERATIONAL DISCUSSIONS”
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE August 16, 2004 SUMMER FOCUS GROUP SESSIONS “SETTING THE AGENDA”
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE “ SUMMER PLANNING SESSIONS ” 8/01/05.
Network Planning Task Force Strategy Discussions.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE September 20, 2004 FALL FY 2005 MEETINGS “OPERATIONAL BRIEFING”
NPTF Wireless Discussion. 3/3/20032 Agenda Goals Strategy Current status Future plans Challenges Options.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE FY’06 Network Strategic Discussions 11/7/05.
12/1/20031 Network Planning Task Force “Consensus Building: Preliminary Rate Setting”
ALASKA ’ S FIRST UNIVERSITY  AMERICA ’ S ARCTIC RESEARCH UNIVERSITY University of Alaska Fairbanks Executive Leadership Workshop 1 ALASKA ’ S FIRST UNIVERSITY.
Network Planning Task Force Special Spring Session.
A Comprehensive Approach to Budget Planning at a Major Research University David E. Hollowell, Executive Vice President and Treasurer Carol D. Rylee, Director.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE FY’07 “ Setting the Rates” 11/20/06.
11/17/031 Network Planning Task Force Strategic Discussions.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE “ SUMMER PLANNING SESSION ” 08/21/06.
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE Fall Agenda Setting and Focus Group Planning
FY ‘08 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE Fall Agenda Setting and Discussion
Office of Financial Planning October 2009 FY Budget Preparation.
Academic Budget Presentation March 4, FY05 University Budget Unit Description NonExempt BudgetExempt Budget Total Budget President's Units 2,121,8942%
University Strategic Resource Planning Council Budget.
May 15, 2009 Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi Fiscal Forum 1.
Multi-Use Network Update Presented to: Colorado Higher Education Computing Organization CHECO Spring Conference 2001.
2012 Task Force on Teacher Leadership & Compensation Teacher Leadership & Compensation Task Force.
Deans, Chairs & Directors Meeting April 30, 2009.
FY ‘08 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE Strategy Discussions
Happy Valley School District Technology Budget Team A: Paula Fehlinger Natalie Leibensperger Chris Parsell Monica Parsell.
9-1-1 From an Auditor’s View Point Navarre Beach, Florida October 8, 2003.
Budget Basics An Overview of the South Seattle Community College Budget Presented to College Council November 18, 2003.
Information Technology Study Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) Las Virgenes Unified School District Presented By: Leslie Barnes Steve.
1 E-911 Services Board Meeting General Business Meeting September 8,
1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE “ FY ’06 FALL SESSIONS ” 10/03/05.
ABA Management Council September 15, UBAC Considerations –Strategic Goal #1 Meet Enrollment Targets –Recruit New Students –Class Schedule Supports.
NPTF Planning Session 6 April FY ‘10 NPTF Members 2  Robin Beck, ISC  Michael Palladino, ISC (Chair)  Mark Aseltine /Amy Phillips, ISC  Gary.
STRATEGY SESSION SEPTEMBER 15, YEAR SECURITY DISCUSSION 1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE.
NPTF Strategy Session May FY ‘10 NPTF Members 2  Robin Beck, ISC  Michael Palladino, ISC (Chair)  Mark Aseltine /Amy Phillips, ISC  Gary Delson.
Lecture 4. IS Planning & Acquisition To be covered: To be covered: – IS planning and its importance Cost-benefit analysis Cost-benefit analysis Funding.
January Cal Poly Budget Presentation UPBAC January 2009.
Update on IT Consolidation Initiative Presented by Rick Boggs to Commonwealth Technology Council March 27, 2008.
City of Peachtree Corners Preliminary Expenditure Review May 22,
INDIANA UNIVERSITY SOUTH BEND Budget Presentation for Academic Senate Meeting November 2006 By Bill O’Donnell and Robert Pope.
FY ‘08 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE Rate Setting
STRATEGIC BUDGET COMMITTEE CHARGE Develop model for a 5 year sustainable budget. The model budget should include strategies for cost reductions, recommendations.
12/15/20031 Network Planning Task Force “Consensus Building: Final Rate Setting for FY ‘05”
Objectives for Training Session Familiarize managers with new process Link planning process to Institutional Effectiveness and budget process Review forms.
NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE FY ‘08 Planning Session I 1.
FEBRUARY 22, 2016 FY 2017 County Administrator’s Recommended Budget.
Educational Excellence – Phase One Lisa Blazer & Dan Gelo Presenting.
Campus Data Storage & Services Task Force Update IT Pro Forum 9 November 2011.
Cattlemen’s Beef Board Planning & Budgeting Process.
CASBO 2016 Conference “Will New LCFF Base Revenues be Sufficient to Fund Your District's New Annual Costs?” Increasing Costs for New and Ongoing State.
Five-Year Financial Forecast August 2007
University of Oregon Financial Briefing
The Size of Campus – Considerations and Analyses
About PennNet Redundant Gigabit Ethernet Core
Finance & Administration
Priorities for the new century
Presentation transcript:

1 NETWORK PLANNING TASK FORCE August 2, 2004 “SUMMER FOCUS GROUP SESSION ”

2 MEETING SCHEDULE – FY ‘05 □ Summer Focus Groups ■ July 19 ■ August 2 □ August 16 □ Fall Meetings □ September 20 Review Current Status □ October 04 Operational Discussions □ October 18 Strategic Discussions □ November 01 Strategic Discussions □ November 15 Strategic Discussions □ November 29 Strategic Discussions □ December 6 Consensus/Prioritization/Rate Setting

3 NPTF FALL ’05 MEMBERS Mary Alice Annecharico / Rod MacNeil, SOM Robin Beck, ISC Chris Bradie/Dave Carrol, Business Services Chris Field, GPSA (student) Cathy DiBonaventura, School of Design Geoff Filinuk, ISC Bonnie Gibson, Office of Provost Roy Heinz / John Keane, Library John Irwin, GSE Marilyn Jost, ISC Deke Kassabian / Melissa Muth, ISC Doug Berger/ Manuel Pena, Housing and Conference Services Robert Helfman, Budget Mgmt. Analysis Dominic Pasqualino, OAC Kayann McDonnell, Law Donna Milici, Nursing Dave Millar, ISC Michael Palladino, ISC (Chair) Dan Shapiro, Dental Mary Spada, VPUL Marilyn Spicer, College Houses Steve Stines / Jeff Linso, Div. of Finance James Kaylor, CCEB Ira Winston / Helen Anderson, SEAS, SAS, School of Design Mark Aseltine/ Mike Lazenka, ISC Eric Snyder*, Vet School Brian Doherty*/John Yates*, SAS Richard Cardona*, Annenberg Dan Margolis, SEAS(student) David Seidell, Wharton * New Members

4 NPTF Agenda □ Review of FY 2005 – 2009 budget assumptions □ Additional customer feedback/discussions Process Operational Customer Service Strategic Informational

5 NPTF Revised Principles □ Many Penn investments and operations are dependent upon the viability, accessibility and security of the Network. ISC maintains close alignment with University academic, research and business strategies. □ Customers and ISC work as partners when making decisions, insuring flexibility to accommodate business needs and changing technologies. Using a continuous process improvement approach, we seek maximum cost- effectiveness and a high degree of customer satisfaction. □ Customers and ISC are proactive in identifying strategic directions and emerging technologies and encourage the retirement of obsolete services and systems to insure that we remain competitive with our peers and industry.

6 NPTF Revised Principles (Funding Model) □ The costs are visible for data, voice and video services and their associated components, showing a 5-year view of budgets and assumptions. Aggregate service rate increases are targeted at 0-3% maximum yearly, determined in conjunction with the NPTF. □ The funding model is rational from both a customer and ISC perspective and is measurable in terms that are meaningful to the customer. □ All operating expenses (business continuity, planning, support, security) are included in the model. □ The model is demand-based. □ The model remains simple in order to minimize overhead costs and to allow for easy budgeting and discussion.

7 Planning Assumptions (FY ) □ Security concerns are a top priority as various viruses, worms, etc. have reduced Penn’s productivity levels. These concerns have constituted a significant portion of the Fall NPTF discussions. □ ISC will provide one-time funding to support these critical security issues in FY ‘04. □ ISC received supplemental security funding for students from various sources. □ 5 year phase-out of allocated monies ($2.317M) to occur from FY □ Telecommunications surplus, operating efficiencies and increased costs to offset allocated cost phase out. □ Aggregate PennNet, Telecommunications and Video service rate increases projected at 0-3% maximum yearly, determined in conjunction with NPTF. □ N&T total expense budget increases from $22M in FY ’02 to only $23.4M in FY ’09, an average increase of only 1% per year □ Excellent bandwidth management techniques combined with a good Internet strategy have eased the pressure on developing tiered network connectivity options. However, this will continue to be explored and evaluated as the need/opportunity arises.

8 Planning Assumptions (Continued) □ Wireless is a strategic technology for Penn. □ Authentication is run by ISC for the wired network. It is important to have public wireless connectivity. □ ISC will provide one-time funding to support centralized wireless authentication. □ Schools to provide MAC address to PennKey authentication conversion costs. □ There is no ongoing cost increases necessary for FY ‘05 and FY ‘06. □ It is important to have public IP addresses subsidized by the CSF. □ Total subsidized IPs estimated between □ Wireless support costs need to be part of the service delivery.

9 Planning Assumptions (Continued) □ Separate SLAs for College Houses and Greeknet for maintenance and bandwidth. □ FY budget assumes Next Generation PennNet project averages $590k/year, down from original $837k/year. Funding source is Telecommunications surplus. □ No rate increases for existing Telecommunications and Video services in ’05, except PVN. □ For FY2005 College House students will continue to be billed indirectly as part of housing fees for baseline PennNet and Penn Video Network services. □ Building entrance and router equipment are on a four-year replacement cycle. □ Closet electronics and network servers are on a three-year replacement cycle. □ N&T will run a fiscally self-sufficient GigaPoP (MAGPI) and break even in FY ’04 and beyond. Revenue and expense were over $900K in FY ‘04.

10 Planning Assumptions (Continued) □ The CSF will subsidize approximately 850 wired, public lab connections that have computers attached in FY2005. □ The growth rate in IP addresses from the schools/centers is projected to increase by 1200 per year from FY (Needs to be confirmed) □ The growth rate in ISC managed wallplates from schools/centers is projected to increase by 800 per year from FY (Needs to be confirmed) □ To retain and recruit appropriate N&T IT staff, 3% compensation has been budgeted to include annual performance increases, equity increases, bonuses, promotions and reclassifications from FY2005 – 09. (2% in FY 2005 and FY 2006) □ In FY2005 a 53% overhead rate was projected to cover costs of benefits, rent, training, computers, telephones, etc. □ The NOC will not be physically staffed (7x24x365) through FY2009. It will continue to operate from 6 AM – 11 PM, M-F with the rest of the week covered by technical staff on beepers.

11 CUSTOMER FEEDBACK/ DISCUSSIONS