Office of Learning and Information Technology
UWS CIO Council
January 21, 2010
- HRS Data for Campuses Via the PersonHub
- Source and Maintenance of Email Addresses for HRS
- Executive Committee on Data Privacy and Security update
- HRS Project Update
- UW System Procurement Update
- Cloud Computing
- Broadband Networking
- Executive Videoconferencing
- e-Portfolio Pilot Extension
- ID Management System
- IT Plans
- Next CIO Council Meeting
|CIOs and their Representatives||Guests|
Chris Holsman reviewed the discussion at the last meeting council regarding the integration of employee data from the PersonHub to systems located at the UW System (UWS) institutions. He introduced MILER representatives Brian Busby and Kathy Caya. Caya explained that all pieces of the integration are inter-related and inter-dependent. Employee data, e.g., new hires, job changes and terminations, will be entered by campus departments directly into the upcoming Human Resources System (HRS). The data will then be sent to the PersonHub, formerly known as the IAA system (Identity, Authentication and Authorization). From there it will be provided back to the UWS institutions on a timely basis using interfaces that MILER has developed for either Active Directory or PeopleSoft Campus Solutions. A MILER interface will then take the enriched data, e.g., email addresses and credentials, from the UWS institutions and send it back to the PersonHub. The data will then be sent from the PersonHub to the Identity & Access Management (I&AM) system for provisioning HRS accounts and roles, including employee self-service HR functions. Various groups are building the different pieces of the overall system. There are timing issues that must be resolved to make sure that all of the pieces function together in near real time.
Elise Barho explained that the build phase of the HRS project is scheduled to end on June 30th. Questions have arisen regarding which email addresses HRS will use when communicating with employees, where those addresses can be found on a consistent basis, and whether it is appropriate for HRS to send employee-related communications, e.g., benefit statement notifications, to non-UWS email addresses.
Derrian Jones described how currently there are three systems that share email address data, IAM, HRS and IAA. It needs to be determined which is the preferred, authoritative source. The process for updating email addresses across the three systems also needs to be determined. The legacy payroll system, CPAD, contains email contact information that is sent to IAA from just UW–Madison, UW–Milwaukee and UW Extension. There are other feeds that come form the other campuses for Preferred Email (PE) address and/or Official Email (OE) address. Not every campus has an OE, e.g., UW–Madison. Each campus needs to describe how they've chosen which email address to provide to IAA today.
Going forward, one option is to have campus-based systems update email addresses that flow through IAA to IAM and then to HRS. A person could have multiple official email addresses, e.g., by being employed at multiple UWS institutions. IAA would select one and provide it to IAM and HRS as the official business email address.
A second more complex option is to have multiple email addresses for persons stored in HRS. Some of the email addresses could be entered by the individuals themselves and others could be provided by campus HRS staff or other campus-based provisioning systems. This would make HRS the authoritative source for email address information. There would still be only one email address per person, the business email address, sent to IAM and HRS by IAA. For the UWS institutions to stay up-to-date regarding peoples' preferred addresses, the email addresses would have to flow back to the campuses from the HRS system. However, the business email addresses would always be in sync with campus-based systems because they would be provided to HRS by the UWS institutions.
The overarching question is whether or not employees will be allowed to enter a preferred email address that is not provided by a UWS institution. UW–Madison allows employees to do so and about 20% have done taken advantage of the opportunity, not including those who may be forwarding email from their official campus addresses. Since email delivery is not guaranteed, the only way to ascertain whether someone has checked their email is to look at logs. Once email is forwarded, or outsourced to a provider, that ability is lost.
Email addresses are used for both personal purposes, e.g., payroll notifications, and business purposes such as campus workflow. Currently, people are responsible for the accuracy of their personal information, such as their home address and direct deposit routing, and mistakes are their responsibility. However, the UWS probably doesn't want these same risks for email messages that are sent as part of campus workflows. Personal addresses can be blacklisted, and people generally don't know that it is happening.
It is presumed that, even after termination, employees will still need a way to access their work-related documents through the HRS portal for a period of time to retrieve W-2 forms, etc. This would require that the UWS institutions keep employee IDs active even after the employees have been terminated while not allowing them inappropriate access to other systems.
Each UWS institution needs to have its own discussion of these issues, but a decision between the two aforementioned HRS options needs to be made soon. A decision document will be prepared for the HRS Decision Council that will recommend the first option. Regardless of which option is chosen, UW–Madison, UW–Milwaukee and UW Extension will need to come up with a replacement method for supplying the email address data that now comes from CPAD.
Stephen Reed reported that the committee had its first meeting and reviewed the work of the end point security project and its report. The committee also discussed:
- IAA and the need to work with its governance group
- simplified standard definitions of security terms, e.g., public versus non-public data
- a privacy statement for UW System
- a minimum set of campus security policies
- the differences between policies and procedures
- (actual) lines of IT security authority within campuses
- training options both in terms of target audiences and delivery mechanisms
- security breach procedures
- relationships with campus internal auditors
- budget requests to the Common Systems Review Group (CSRG)
Committee members are researching the above items and will be bringing their findings to the next meeting. The committee needs to sanction any budget request before it goes to the CSRG.
Lorie Docken announced that there will be a meeting at UW–Oshksoh on February 18 - 19 for all of the UW staff that have participated in the HRS process advisory groups. The sessions will show the advisory group members the end-to-end business processes within PeopleSoft.
The HRS team is affirming all of the development work that still needs to be done before the end of June.
The CBOs are interested in knowing additional details regarding what efforts will be required of the UWS institutions. Brad Krause is leading the effort to develop a campus scorecard that outlines the necessary tasks and timeframes.
Al Crist and Ed Meachen are scheduling meetings at the UWS institutions to talk with the campus executive leadership and the CIO regarding the HRS project.
A CSRG budget proposal is being developed for "Service Center 2.0" to fund the operation of the HRS after implementation.
Ruth Ginzberg reported that there is a UWS Request For Proposal (RFP) process underway for a system to manage study abroad programs. Therefore, the UWS institutions are asked to not sign study abroad software as a services (SaaS) contracts in the meantime.
UW–Madison has an enterprise license for VMWare which includes platinum support that the other UWS institutions and technical schools are encouraged to use for renewals and new purchases. Licenses come with pre-packaged Platinum Level maintenance through 9/29/2012. Informational sessions will be held at UW-Madison on February 23rd from 8:30 to 12:30. Additional sessions will be scheduled around the state. More information and updates can be found at wiscsoftware.wisc.edu/vmware/ or via email@example.com.
Bruce Maas reported that he will be going to a CIO/CBO cloud computing summit sponsored by EDUCAUSE and NACUBO in February. The goal is to get on top of the issue so that departments are not contracting for cloud services on their own without the appropriate legal protections of templates, contractual language, etc.
Melissa Woo has written an ECAR bulletin and given two EDUCAUSE presentations on cloud computing. Woo described the terminology surrounding cloud computing, A number of people in EDUCAUSE are calling cloud computing "above campus computing," although it is not clear if the term will stick. Other terms in use are:
- Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) - cycles or storage, e.g., Amazon ECS
- Platform as a Service (Paas) - platforms for developing web applications without the purchase of servers
- Software as a Service (Saas) - enduser services, e.g., gmail or Salesforce.com
With regard to cloud computing, most infrastructure staff are concerned about security, privacy, a lack of standards and vague exit strategies. UW–LaCrosse will be a real world test case of SaaS in higher education because they have announced that they are going with Google Apps for the entire campus, including faculty, staff and students.
Ruth Ginzberg reported on a recent discussion on the EDUCAUSE CIO listserv regarding whether or not Google can actually commit to keeping all institutional data on servers within the United States. This is important because the laws of other countries may allow their governments or others to access the data. This has FERPA implications, e.g., a faculty member emailing a student to tell them that they got a B in a course. There are also export restrictions on certain types of faculty research.
Chris Ashley confirmed that there are a lot of issues with cloud computing which make attorneys nervous. Contracts are risk allocation documents, so the appropriate language needs to be included when procuring cloud services. Nancy Lynch reported that Google Apps wants to have a single contract that covers all of the UWS institutions rather than negotiating campus-by-campus despite the different missions of the various UWS institutions. Ruth Ginzberg has put together a UWS group to consider all of the issues from different perspectives
Ed Meachen reported that the proposal process led by UW Extension to obtain stimulus funding for community area networks (CANs) is going forward with a focus on:
- Chippewa Valley
- Menominee Nation
Funds for infrastructure, sustainable adoption and public computing centers are being sought. The proposal team will meet with the Wisconsin Department of Administration and the governor's office next week.
Ed Meachen reported that the some of the UWS chancellors are interested in reducing their in-person meetings, perhaps through telepresence. The UW–Whitewater telepresence system was demonstrated at a recent Board of Regents meeting.
The UWS Educational Media Technology Council (EMTC) surveyed the UWS institutions regarding their current videoconferencing capabilities. Several have high definition (HD) videoconferencing systems that are close in functionality to the dedicated telepresence rooms that some vendors recommend.
The Polycom 800 HDX series systems can be mounted on carts for $10-20K apiece. The ROI could be as little as three years in terms of recovering the lost travel time of the chancellors. It would be feasible to outfit a conference room at each institution with an HD system, but Instructional Communications Systems (ICS) at UW Extension doesn't yet own a bridge for connecting multiple HD participants. Tomorrow, a presentation will be conducted for the chancellors that will include only four UWS sites which doesn't require a bridge.
Dedicated telepresence systems produce images that are life size and have excellent sound, whereas HD is basically high resolution television. Telepresence costs about 3 times as much as HD. The two technologies are not mutually exclusive depending upon the requirements of different applications. For example, is telepresence the most cost effective venue for a 15 site meeting? Many UWS groups already use conventional videoconferencing. A higher quality venue would probably increase the value of the experience.
Ed Meachen reported that UW System signed an agreement with D2L for an e-Portfolio pilot in December 2008 and the original pilot period was January 2009 through January 2010. The pilot included 3 institutions and up to 1,500 users with the option to purchase extensions to additional users. UW–Madison, UW–Milwaukee, UW Colleges, UW–Stevens Point and UW–Whitewater each paid a set up fee and UWS covered the remaining costs. Because of initial glitches and too tight a timeline for training and implementation, UWS asked for and received an extension through June, 2010.
During the fall 2009 semester, 600 users and over 40 courses used the system. UW Colleges also has 80 faculty members using the e-portfolio product for promotion and tenure decisions. All participating institutions felt the need to have another extension to fully evaluate the system. Lorna Wong was able to negotiate an extension of the pilot through June, 2011 at no additional cost.
The D2L e-portfolio is hosted by Learn@UW and the utility has the capacity to host additional users. Any campus that wishes to join should contact Lorna Wong for additional information. Each new campus will need to pay the set up fee. Ed Meachen will find out whether data can be exported from the e-portfolio using standard D2L tools. David Dumke noted there has been a positive response from UW–Stevens Point on the use of student profiles. Kathy Pletcher asked the institutions that are using e-Portfolio to report on their experiences to the Learn@UW Executive Committee. This information will also be shared with the provosts and academic groups.
John Krogman announced that there is a new ID management system in use and five institutions (UW–La Crosse, UW–Milwaukee, UW–Platteville, UW–Stevens Point, and UW–Superior) have expired certificates that create a warning message for the users. If there are questions, Madison’s middleware staff should be consulted.
Ed Meachen reminded the council that their annual IT plans, or links to their IT plans, are due now and should be sent to him as quickly as possible for inclusion in the report to the Board of Regents.
The next in-person CIO meeting will be February 18, 2010 in Madison.
Meeting dates, Directory of UW CIOs, Meeting Summaries: