2. Replacement of Financial and Human Resources Systems Project of the Long Range Plan for Information Technology Infrastructure and Administrative Systems

3. LRTP VISION: Provide affordable access, appropriate to the data and informational needs of any USNH user, that will be available at anytime from anyplace. WITH GOAL: Provide a reliable information technology infrastructure with sufficient capacity and responsiveness to support the ongoing operational and functional requirements of USNH

4. Steering Committees: (1) Decision Support (2) Facilities (3) Finance (4) Human Resources (5) Student Information (6) Library (7) Alumni/Development (8) Technology/Telecommunications Information Technology Coordinating Council (ITCC) Information Technology Planning and Advisory Council (ITPAC) Chancellor Administrative Board Financial Affairs Committee Board of Trustees Governance Structure

5. Eight LRTP Projects Project 1: Replace FIS and HRIS Project 2: Implement research admin system Project 3: Analyze alumni/development Project 4: Implement Library tech projects Project 5: Continue space inventory system Project 6: Authentication/authorization system Project 7: Network mgmt and analysis system Project 8: Consolidate voice, data, video comm.

6. FIN/HR Replacement New Research/Admin. Jstor Electronic Archives Add UNH-M Media delivery Enhance catalogs Migrate to C/S Authentication/Authorization Network mgmt system Improve and Consolidate Communications, Voice, Data and Video UNH Alumni development

7. PWC Management Letter, 1998 “The current financial and human resource systems that are in place at USNH expose the University System to increased risks due to the systems’ age and the outdated platforms on which they run…The incompatibility of applications, hardware, and operating systems, and relevant upgrades to the respective pieces, may cause disruption to system usage and processing, and instability in the production environment.”

8. PWC Management Letter, 1998 “The risks that USNH incurs by continuing its exposure to such an unstable environment include irregularities in critical processes and operations, potential non-compliance with regulatory requirements, and disruption of services to the campus, system users and key business functions.”

9. Risks Associated with the Operation of Current Financial and Human Resource Systems Systems operate on VAX hardware that is no longer manufactured Systems rely on VMS system that is obsolete CUFS software is no longer vendor supported 1032 database and Cobol derived software were developed internally for human resources

10. Implementation Oversight Structure

11. Resource/Costing Assumptions Functional areas have responsibility to fund FTE’s to support LRTP implementation beyond budget. Campus responsibility to provide staff support for on-going local training/consulting Campus responsibility to replace necessary desktop hardware/software on 3-4 year cycle. FIN/HR project assumes accelerated process and selection of low cost vendor, commitment to zero modifications, capability to fill key positions, and responsiveness of selected vendor.

12. Decisions Made as a Result of the “Scout Team” Process History Recommendations and Conclusions Other Assumptions

13. Replacement of both HRIS and FIS with external products is feasible Enterprise-wide solutions are available The selection process should be limited to those vendors providing integrated solutions already installed at some higher education site Concurrent implementation is preferable

14. Vendors should be able to provide 90% of current functionality “Vanilla” or zero modification is the goal The task of the Core and the CURT will be to determine: what functionality will be lost/gained? can USNH adapt its practices to fit the product? can the product adapt to fit USNH?

15. Responsibilities for Selecting New Finance and Human Resource Systems

16. Everyone Know that what is decided in this selection process will determine how we do much of our business for the next 10-20 years Read, understand and discuss the RFP, vendor proposals, and other information on the web site (fresh.unh.edu) Attend vendor presentations Give your views to the appropriate Representatives and members of the Core Team

17. Campus User Representatives (Campus User Review Team) Review computer system proposals from your campus and individual professional perspective Under leadership of your campus Core Team representative, collect information from perspectives of other key campus constituencies Determine how your current business procedures would have to be changed for each system proposal Report to your Core Team representative on the pro’s and con’s of each proposal

18. Resource Representatives Review computer system proposals from your individual professional perspective, considering this professional perspective across the University System Includes areas such as Accounting, Audit, Benefits, Budget, Purchasing, Research, Technology Infrastructure, etc. Determine how current business procedures in your business area would have to be changed for each system proposal Report to your Core Team representative on the pro’s and con’s of each proposal

19. Core Vendor Review Team (The Core Team) 16 representatives from each campus and various business service areas across the University System who will lead the vendor review Lead campus and professional area reviews of proposals Develop evaluation criteria Analyze vendor proposals, costs, etc. Meet with people who use the proposed systems on other campuses Prepare the final report for the Executive Steering Committee detailing the strengths and weaknesses of each proposed system

20. Executive Steering Committee 5 people responsible for debating all input and deciding which new system will be selected for Finance and which for Human Resources Composed of Vice Chancellor for Planning and Budget (chair), Vice Chancellor for Financial Affairs, Director of Human Resources, UNH Assistant VP for Computing and Information Services, and USNH Controller In the final decision, there will be one representative for each professional area: Technology (VC for Planning and Budget), Finance (VC for Financial Affairs), and Human Resources (Director of Human Resources)

21. Vendor Selection Phase High Level Evaluation Criteria 1. Basic Product Functionality 2. Supplemental Product Functionality 3. Product Technology 4. Total Costs 5. Professional Services and Support 6. Financial Viability 7. Corporate Strategy 8. References

22. 1. Basic Product Functionality a. Common Items b. Finance c. Human Resources d. Research/Sponsored Programs

23. 2. Supplemental Product Functionality a. Common Items b. Finance c. Human Resources d. Research/Sponsored Programs

24. 3. Product Technology * Platforms on which software runs, system architecture, etc.

25. 4. Total Costs * Cost of ownership over the estimated system life cycle, including anticipated internal costs

26. 5. Professional Services and Support * Implementation and on-going a. Basic Services b. Optional Services, Ideas, and Proposals

27. 6. Financial Viability * Bidder’s long-term financial viability

28. 7. Corporate Strategy * Bidder’s mission/vision: growth, product strategy

29. 8. References * Other higher education institutions for which bidder has provided similar products & services

30. What has been done so far …. Since February 4 approval of the LRTP by Trustees, we have…

31. February Advertised for Project Director & HR Lead Appointed RFP Team Designed specs for Nesmith Hall operations center

32. March Addressed BSC Forum & UNH FAC Decided on 4 vendors for RFP Wrote RFP Prepared official responses to vendor RFP questions Developed LRTP accounting & financial reporting structure

33. March (continued) Attended 3 vendor user conferences Appointed Core Vendor Review Team Developed “first-cut” high-level evaluation criteria Created project web site: http://www.fresh.unh.edu core.steering@unh.edu core.steering@unh.eduCreated email address: mailto: core.steering@unh.edu core.steering@unh.edu

34. April Addressed BSC Forum Selected 4 finalists for Project Director Finalized Nesmith Hall R&R plans, budget & funding Developing detailed HR evaluation criteria with key user groups Visited UNH, PSC and KSC to develop detailed Finance evaluation criteria

35. April (continued) Posted detailed Research evaluation criteria to the web site Appointed Campus User Review Team Appointed Resource representatives Held 1 st full meeting of Core Briefed ESC on user conferences attended Held orientation meeting for ESC, Core, CURT, Resource reps, and others

36. What still needs to be done? What still needs to be done?

37. April Complete detailed Finance & HR evaluation criteria Review/analyze vendor RFP responses Interview (and hire??) Project Director Fully fund the LRTP accounts Manage renovation & set up of Nesmith Hall Write article for campus newspapers Address UNH FAC & other campus user & management groups

38. May Select finalist vendors for on-campus demos Move into Nesmith Hall operations center Address campus user & management groups Perform client reference checks Perform client site visits

39. May 17 – June 18 Approximate dates for vendor presentations & demos Depends on number of finalist vendors Dates, times, locations & content to be determined later Current plan: Each vendor spends one day at KSC & PSC Each vendor spends 4 days at UNH Each vendor has at least one day of follow-up with Core

40. Late June Core will collect input from CURT, Resource reps & all others Core will issue preliminary report to ESC on pros & cons of each vendor proposal

41. July, August, September Perform detailed cost analysis Perform due diligence Finalize report of pros & cons to ESC ESC negotiates with finalist vendor(s) ESC makes decision on vendor, product & proposal Address campus user & management groups

42. October Contract signed with successful vendor