r April 2013 - SUNY Information Technology Services Status 1 - Shared Services...AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES: Auxiliary enterprises furnish goods or services to students, faculty, and staff

Office of Shared Services

Project Status Report

July 1, 2013

Attachment 1 Operational Efficiencies and Service Excellence Shared Services – Implementation Plan April 2013

Operational Efficiencies and Service Excellence Shared Services – Implementation Plan April 2013

A

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

Operational Efficiencies and Service Excellence: Shared Services – Implementation Plan April 2013

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

stetsola

Typewritten Text

This page is intentionally blank to allow for double‐sided printing.

Operational Efficiencies

and Service Excellence

Shared Services – Implementation Plan

April 2013

Operational Efficiencies and Service Excellence

2

Table of Contents Shared Services Implementation Plan ........................................................................ 4

Mission ................................................................................................................................... 4 Vision – Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 4 Sense of Urgency ................................................................................................................... 5 Definitions ............................................................................................................................... 6 Governance ............................................................................................................................ 9 Functional Working Teams ................................................................................................... 10 Shared Services Project Manager ........................................................................................ 11 Communications Plan ........................................................................................................... 12

Shared Services Priorities – Project Overview ......................................................... 13 Strategic Sourcing ................................................................................................................ 13 Information Technology Transformation ................................................................................ 16

IT Transformation Team ................................................................................................ 17

Student Information Systems (Banner) ......................................................................... 17

Standardization of Campus-Based Software ................................................................. 18

Business Intelligence and Data Warehousing ................................................................ 18

Data Center Consolidation ............................................................................................. 19

Centers of Excellence ........................................................................................................... 20 Transaction Processing Centers .................................................................................... 22

Benefits .................................................................................................................. 22

HR & Payroll .......................................................................................................... 24

Procurement .......................................................................................................... 26

Functional Expertise ...................................................................................................... 29

Financial Aid .......................................................................................................... 29

Library Services ..................................................................................................... 32

Print Matters ........................................................................................................... 34

Regional Hubs ............................................................................................................... 35

MWBE .................................................................................................................... 35

Legal Services ........................................................................................................ 37

Regional Campus Alliance Networks .................................................................................... 38


3

Project Plans .............................................................................................................. 39 Communications .................................................................................................................. 39

Strategic Sourcing ............................................................................................................... 44

IT Transformation ................................................................................................................ 54

Student Information Systems (Banner) ......................................................................... 54

Standardization of Campus-Based Software ............................................................... N/A

Business Intelligence and Data Warehousing ................................................................ 57

HR Data Warehousing and BI Initiative.......................................................................... 66

Data Center Consolidation ........................................................................................... N/A

Centers of Excellence .......................................................................................................... 70

Transaction Processing Centers ................................................................................. N/A

Benefits ........................................................................................................... N/A

HR & Payroll ................................................................................................... N/A

Time and Attendance ............................................................................ 70

Procurement ..................................................................................................... 75

Functional Expertise ..................................................................................................... 80

Financial Aid ..................................................................................................... 80

Library Services ................................................................................................ 86

Print Matters ..................................................................................................... 89

Regional Hubs .............................................................................................................. 94

MWBE .............................................................................................................. 94

Legal Services ................................................................................................ N/A

Regional Campus Alliance Networks ................................................................................. N/A


4

Mission Our goal is straightforward: to enhance the core academic and student service missions of our campuses by redirecting resources to them from administrative and non instructional functions. The campuses have done an outstanding job in the last five years managing the reductions in state funding. Significant savings are no longer easily available at any individual campus. There are significant opportunities for not only saving resources but also for improving efficiencies and enhancing services by working across the campuses and across the system. Therefore, we have committed ourselves to identifying improvements in efficiencies in an effort to fully maximize all of the system’s assets. Our goal is to drive savings across the system to reinvest $100 million back in to our students needs.

Vision - Assumptions Goal – Reinvest $100MM in savings into instruction and direct student support services. This averages 5%. The campus goals will be set in terms of actual dollar savings as budgets and percentages will change as we invest new tuition dollars into instruction and direct student support services. Overview - There are four main areas of our shared services plan:

1. Strategic Sourcing. Using our buying power to save on products and services. This has the

opportunity to save the most money.

2. IT Transformation. There are significant opportunities for improving our efficiencies, services and at the same time reduce spending

3. Transaction Processing Centers, Regional Hubs, Centers of Expertise

4. Campus Alliance Networks & Administrative Alliances

a. Campus to Campus – Ideas, projects and program initiated and implemented across the system

b. Shared Administration – Full Administrative alignments of two campuses


5

Sense of Urgency Now is the time to create and maintain a sense of urgency.

• Presidents

• Business Officers

• Provosts

• Students

• College Councils & Trustees

• Faculty Senate

• Board of Trustees


6

Definitions

NACUBO Expenditure Definitions: The following definitions for expenditure functions are detailed below to assist campuses in developing reinvestment strategies.

INSTRUCTION: Expenditures for all activities that are part of an institution’s instruction program. This includes credit and noncredit courses; academic, vocational and technical instruction; remedial and tutorial instruction; regular, special, and extension sessions. Excluded are expenditures for academic administration when the primary assignment is administration (academic dean). Expenditures for department chairpersons and administrators for whom instruction is an important role are included. Include expenditures for noncredit offerings that are part of adult education or continuing education, as well as adult basic education courses. This category also includes expenses for formally organized and / or separately budgeted instructional information technology. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to this category and the remainder to institutional support. RESEARCH: Expenditures for all activities specifically organized to produce research, whether commissioned by an agency external to the institution or separately budgeted by an organizational unit within the institution. This category also includes expenses for formally organized and / or separately budgeted research information technology. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to this category and the remainder to institutional support. PUBLIC SERVICE: Expenditures for activities providing non instructional services beneficial to individuals and groups external to the institution. Included in this category are community service activities for conferences, institutes, general advisory services and reference bureaus, consultation, and testing services. Also include cooperative extension efforts between the institution and outside agencies. Expenditures for operation and maintenance of broadcasting services operated outside the context of the institution’s instruction, research, and academic support programs are also included in this category as well as expenses for formally organized and / or separately budgeted public service information technology. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to this category and the remainder to institutional support. ACADEMIC SUPPORT: Expenditures for support services for the institutions primary missions of instruction, research, and public service. The following two subcategories will be used:

• Libraries: Expenditures for organized activities that directly support the operation of a catalogued or otherwise classified collection.

• Other: Expenditures for services that directly assist the academic functions of the institution such as demonstration schools, audio-visual services, computing support, and academic administration. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to this category and the remainder to institutional support. Include Academic dean’s expenditures, such as deans of research, deans of graduate schools, and college deans but not expenditures for department chairpersons. Expenditures associated with the chief academic officer of the institution are classified as institutional support. Also include expenditures for formally organized academic advising.


7

Include expenditures for activities that provide the faculty with opportunities for personal and professional growth and development as well as expenditures for activities that evaluate and reward professional performance of the faculty. These include sabbaticals, faculty awards, organized faculty development programs.

STUDENT SERVICES: Expenditures incurred for offices of admissions and the registrar, and activities with the primary purpose of contributing to students’ emotional and physical well being and intellectual, cultural, and social development outside the context of the formal instruction program. This includes student activities, and services provided for particular types of students such as minority students, veterans, and handicapped students. Exclude from the category activities of the chief administrative officer for student affairs as this is classified as institutional support. Expenditures for cultural events, student newspapers, and student organizations should be included. Include expenditures for formally organized placement, career guidance, and personal counseling services for students. This includes vocational testing and counseling services and activities of the placement office. Also include expenditures for activities that provide financial aid services and assistance to students. Expenditures for activities related to the identification of prospective students, the promotion of attendance at the institution, and the processing of applications for admissions. Also include expenditures for activities to maintain, handle, and update records for currently enrolled students as well as for student’s previously enrolled (registrar). This category includes expenses for formally organized and/or separately budgeted student services information technology resources. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to this category and the remainder to institutional support. INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT: This function is broken down into two subcategories as follows:

• General Administration: Includes expenditures for all central executive-level activities concerned with management and long-range planning for the entire institution. This includes the president, chief academic officer, chief business officer, and chief student affairs officer and chief development officer. Also include the governing board, planning and programming and legal operations. Include expenditures for operations related fiscal control and investments, the accounting office, bursar’s office, and internal and external audits. Include expenditures related to general administrative operations and services, including expenditures for personnel administration.

• General Institutional Support: Expenditures related to space management, administrative data processing, purchase and maintenance of supplies and materials, campus-wide communication services, general stores, and printing shops. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to academic support and the remainder to this category. Also include expenditures for activities to maintain relations with the community, alumni, or other constituents and to conduct activities related to institution-wide development and fund raising.


8

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF PLANT: Expenditures of current operating funds for the administration, supervision, operation, maintenance, preservation, and protection of the institution’s physical plant. They include expenses normally incurred for such items as janitorial and utility services; repairs and ordinary or normal alterations of buildings, furniture and equipment; care of grounds; maintenance and operation of buildings and other plant facilities; security; earthquake and disaster preparedness; safety; hazardous waste disposal; space and capital leasing; and facility planning and management. This category also includes expenses for formally organized and / or separately budgeted maintenance information technology. If an institution does not separately budget and expense information technology resources, the costs associated with the three primary programs will be applied to this category and the remainder to institutional support. SCHOLARSHIPS AND FELLOWSHIPS: Expenditures in the form of grants to students resulting from the selection by the institution or from an entitlement program. This includes grants-in-aid, trainee stipends, prizes, and awards. Tuition and fee remissions to students should be included here. If the tuition and fee remission was granted because of faculty or staff status or family relationship of students to faculty or staff, then the expenditure should be recorded as an employee benefit in the appropriated functional expenditure category. AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES: Auxiliary enterprises furnish goods or services to students, faculty, and staff for a fee. These enterprises are managed as a self-supporting activity. Examples include the following: residence halls, food services, intercollegiate athletics, college stores, faculty clubs, faculty and staff parking, transportation services, faculty housing, and student health services. This category includes expenses for auxiliary enterprise activities primarily intended to furnish goods and services that are related to the higher education mission. Customers for these goods and services generally are not students, faculty, or staff. Entities of this type are formed to meet the geographic and public service needs of a region and generally relate to an institution’s mission of teaching, research, or public service. Examples of such an entity would be a drug testing center or a university press department. This category also includes activities that were established primarily to provide goods and services to other internal units on a fee for service basis. The goods and services are provided at an institutional level. This characteristic excludes enterprises that only serve units within the same department. For example, a telecommunications department that services the entire institution would be considered other self-supporting.


9

Governance SOURCING SUNY-Wide Committee - A critical component of the implementation process includes the SUNY Shared Services Steering Committee. The committee will help coordinate and bring to scale the shared services initiatives. They will advise the Chancellor and her Executive Team as well as their colleagues at the campuses and will provide the leadership to drive change. The committee will also help prioritize savings opportunities vet ideas and help make decisions on system-wide initiatives for shared services. This group will be convened by the SUNY Provost, SUNY Chief Financial Officer, and the Chancellor’s Special Advisor on Shared Services. Membership of the Committee consists of the following:

• A president, provost, and business officer from each of the four sectors as nominated by the presidents across the system.

• Shared governance representatives, including Faculty Senate, Faculty Council of Community Colleges and Student Assembly.

• A member of the SUNY Board of Trustees as nominated by the Chairman of the Board. • Representatives of key constituent groups including initially the President of ACT and the

President of NYCCT with more to be added as needed. • Cabinet and relevant staff from SUNY System Administration.

Campus Teams - Each campus is expected to establish advisory committee to ensure that all local stakeholders have input in shared service priorities.


10

Working Teams – Each functional area will have a working team charged with developing and implementing a specific plan. These teams will include:

• Champion/Executive Sponsor – Provides overall leadership addresses broader issues and potential conflicts. Gives guidance to the team, monitors results and takes responsibility for the results of teamwork. Acts as liaison from the Project Team to the Steering Committee. This individual is responsible for communicating project status to the Steering Committee, ensuring milestones are completed in a timely fashion, and providing the overall supervision of the employees assigned to the project. Additional responsibilities include being the primary contact for issues and questions from the Project Team as well as review and monitoring of the project plan milestones. Other specific responsibilities may include:

o Liaison to Steering Committee; Keep Steering Committee and project stakeholders updated as to project status, progress and/or any deviations.

o Identify and secure all required project team members for the project (e.g. Functional Experts, Key Users, and System Administration.)

o Regularly review project status and emerging risks and select/approve potential solutions from those presented.

o Provide direction on prioritization of emerging issues and risks. o Provide advice and counsel on major project and policy decisions. o Ensure the appropriate project team members and key decision makers are identified

and available to fulfill their project responsibilities. o Identify and secure access to additional end user staff as needed to support specific

areas of expertise not represented by the project team. o Provide informal project status and communications to project team members and

various user communities. • Functional Lead - Responsible for overall coordination, research, reporting, best practices,

meetings and conferences, communication. Functional Team Leads spearhead an individual functional area and are dedicated to the project (and generally relieved of traditional day-to-day responsibilities for departmental operations while participating on their area of the project) for the project duration. Their initial primary objective is to gather process and configuration information from the key users and define the business and systems needs based on that information. These individuals may develop process flowcharts for the existing and new system processes, develop methods of resolving process gaps, identify report and data requirements in support the end users, and identify data conversion requirements to support their modules. Functional Leads are responsible for coordinating and facilitating key user meetings, scheduling key users for tests, preparing process documents, approving training documentation, and ultimate training of the end users. Some of the major responsibilities for this role are as follows:

• Understand the “as is” environment and provide functional expertise and knowledge of the existing business practices.

• Responsible for the successful configuration, processing and implementation of functional transaction processing.

• Reconciliation of user requirements to the new system capabilities. • Liaison between user community and project team; Act as a mentor and liaison to other users

of that functional area. • Represent the user interests in system design and software configuration decisions. • Identify and implement business process improvements and changes

• System Admin Liaison - Provides resources, advice, and support.

Functional Working Teams


11

• Information Technology Liaison – Provides technical knowledge, responsible for IT related project plan.

• Every project team member has a fiduciary duty to make a proactive and positive contribution to

the project. All team members are ‘owners’ of the project and the new system and are personally accountable for taking charge of their respective areas and promoting the project to their user communities and colleagues. Project Team member duties include the following:

• Provide input to process improvement ideas • Review circulated communications; provide feedback as required • Identify high impact / high return opportunities within respective areas • Proactively ask questions and offer input • Attend every Project Team status meeting; recognize the importance of this project to the

organization • Keep Project Stakeholders updated • Act as liaison and constituent for represented user community: Keep user community

informed of project status and progress, provide a mechanism for users to contribute to project and voice suggestions for improvement

Shared Services Project Manager

SOURCING Project Manager – The overall Shared Services project will be coordinated by a project manager. Responsibilities will include:

• Coordinate the initiatives of all functional groups • Work with functional campus organizations - HR, Payroll, Purchasing, ABB, Facilities • Development of templates, action plans, reporting, tracking including a database and web-site • Develops the implementation schedule and project plan. • Research best practices • Identify Contact points & Interfaces • Develop and manage overall shared services budget • Act as technology liaison

o Define work plans o Timelines/milestones o Priorities

• Work with campus alliance networks to drive efficiencies & effective across campuses • Best Practice implementation across campuses including documentation & communication • Identify Multi systems and transition to unified system • Conduct or facilitate the Implementation Project Kick-off and Status meetings • Manage the customer relationship with the stakeholders • Confirm solid understanding of objectives and expectations • Measurement of plan vs. actual with variance analysis. • Continually monitor scope, time frame, budget and risk


12

Shared Services Mission SUNY’s Shared Services initiative is about creating efficiencies, reinvesting in academic and student support, enabling better service, identifying cost avoidance, improving quality, and allowing the campuses to concentrate on their core competence – education. Communications Plan Goals and Approach The goal of SUNY’s Shared Services Communications Plan is to reinforce this mission statement at every opportunity in which we share information. We will do this by developing tools to distribute information about the broad initiative-based goals, as well as the project-specific goals, to both internal and external stakeholders through multiple mediums. Additionally, SUNY seeks to capture and report out on successful campus projects and best practices across the System. In order to achieve these goals, we have developed a structure and process for the collection and distribution of this information. SUNY’s Shared Services Communications Plan will approach information sharing on two fronts: earned media and owned media. Earned media is the favorable publicity gained through communications and promotional efforts generally found in print, television, or online. Owned media is information created, maintained, and distributed by the organization. We currently have no plans to engage in paid media, which refers to publicity gained through advertising.

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley • System Administration Liaison: Jen LoTurco • Project Lead: David Belsky • Team Members: Paula Russell, Emily Schwartz, Laura Stetson

Communications Plan


13

Working with the State of New York (DOB/OGS) and Accenture Consulting Group we will use our combined buying power to allow savings in virtually everything we buy. The largest savings that we must support as a system and at every campus will be achieved by leveraging our purchasing power. Many of these efforts have failed in the past as individuals that ultimately placed the orders continued to buy what they always had from whomever they always bought from. The need for change was unknown or not reinforced from the top. Leadership, process controls, reporting and accountability will be required to optimize savings while ensuring quality. DOB/OGS NYS State Initiatives

Phase 1 : Fleet Cards, Office Supplies, IT Hardware, IT Software Phase 2 : Lab Supplies Phase 3-4 : Building Repair, Utilities, Heating Oil, Industrial Equipment, Safety and Security, Bulk Fuel, Radios and Communication Equipment, Traffic Control, Books. Audit Services, Collection Services, Small Package Delivery, Legal Services, Advertising and Marketing, Telephone. Education Services

SUNY Initiatives:

• Hospitals • REMI (equipment maintenance) ($1.0MM savings, 13 campuses) • Memberships & Subscriptions • Advertising (display ads, line ads, web posting & interactive media). • University-wide Contracts: Technology, UB Micro (Microsoft)

These efforts are supported by procurement committees, focused on areas such as procedure revisions, MWBE, preferred sources, training, and best practices. It is critical to get the full support of campus presidents, and business officers and campus wide leadership. We can deliver cost savings contracts but if individuals are not held accountable for ensuring savings are consistently utilized savings will need to come through much more difficult decisions. It is recommended that SUBOA develop guidelines for when a campus would not be required to utilize a specific contract.

Project Team: Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley

System Administration Liaison:

Project Co-Leads: Chris Wade (RF System) and Tom Hippchen (SUNY System)

Team Members:

Terry Boyle, Upstate, RF

SHARED SERVICES PRIORITIES – PROJECT OVERVIEW

STRATEGIC SOURCING


14

Troy Caswell, SUNY System Kellie Dupuis, SUNY System John Grabowski, U Buffalo Pat Bates, Monroe CC Ken Jones, U Albany Jeff McGrath, SUNY System Mark Martinchek, Potsdam, Denise Straut, Oneonta, RF Kingsley Osei, SUNY System Dave Martin, RF System Michele Feathers, SUNY System Laura Stetson, SUNY System Robert Haig, Stony Brook Pam Swanigan, System Administration Business Rules

Michele Feathers, Laura Stetson and Tom Hippchen have drafted and submitted for senior review a proposal to reorganize System Administrative procurement, in part, to more effectively conduct strategic sourcing at the University-wide level. The recommended program centers around the framework of a comprehensive transformation plan which includes:

• formal, executive level directive and support; • a standardized process with strong central coordination and training; • sufficient resources (staffing and e-procurement system); and • an on-going formal program adopting a proven, well-documented methodology

with data transformation and analytic capabilities. Metrics

Specific metrics are being developed. This process is proving to be rather difficult because there are little or no benchmarks to which new pricing can be compared to determine real savings. Additionally, System Administration has reached out to E&I (a not-for-profit buying cooperative of which SUNY accesses through its membership in the National Association of Educational Procurement [NAEP]), for assistance in documenting the administrative and operational efficiencies of strategic sourcing projects.

State Initiative

SUNY continues to work with the NY State Strategic Sourcing Team (SST) to identify opportunities for the University’s participation in collaborative buying categories. Originally, SUNY had committed to co-lead (Michele Feathers) with the consultant (Accenture), the sourcing project for safety & security; however, after the State revised the scope of the initiative, it was mutually decided that SUNY would not benefit from participation in this category.

SUNY Initiative

The SUNY Hospitals Integrated Delivery Network (IDN) Downstate Medical Center, Stony Brook Hospital and Upstate Medical Center have proposed forming an IDN. The proposed plan is awaiting final approval by System and campus senior leadership. The purpose of this initiative is, where possible, to aggregate the spending of the three hospitals on commonly purchased commodities and services to achieve cost savings (and possibly operational efficiencies) and identify opportunities for the hospitals to standardize commodities and services, without jeopardizing patent care, for additional savings opportunities. While awaiting final approval, the hospitals have implemented some of the strategies


15

characteristic of an IDN structure. In its initial stage, the IDN has realized approximately $2M in savings. Strategic Sourcing Supporting Projects The OBP is developing a Procurement Newsletter (first issue April 2013) to support strategic sourcing, shared services and procurement training and communication. Additionally in order to support communication, consistency and access to opportunities and resulting contracts, OBP with System IT is expanding the “University-wide Contracts” page to include all campuses’ contracts and adding a “Bid Opportunities” page to the SUNY Means Business Website (estimated completion date in June 2013). Campuses will be responsible for inputting their own bid opportunity and contract information. Electronic Bidding & Reverse Auction In February, SUNY issued an RFI to acquire information regarding the potential options and strategies that are available in the marketplace for electronic bidding and reverse auction services. It is anticipated, but not guaranteed, that SUNY will use the information received from this RFI to develop a future procurement for these services.

Team

Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley

System Administration Liaison: Tom Hippchen

Project Co-Leads: Chris Wade (RF System) and Tom Hippchen (SUNY System)

Team Members:

Pat Bates, Monroe CC Terry Boyle, Upstate, RF Troy Caswell, SUNY System Kellie Dupuis, SUNY System Michele Feathers, SUNY System John Grabowski, Buffalo Robert Haig, Stony Brook Ken Jones, Albany David Martin, RF System Mark Martinchek, Potsdam Jeff McGrath, SUNY System Kingsley Osei, SUNY System Laura Stetson, SUNY System Denise Straut, Oneonta, RF Pam Swanigan, System Administration


16

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TRANSFORMATION One of the most promising areas for cost savings can be attributed to information technology. Not only are there savings in IT, automation allows us to drive efficiencies in other areas. Without consistent systems and processes it would not be efficient or effective to create hubs or transaction processing centers. There is also need to leverage currently available system-wide services. An assessment of their performance, cost effectiveness, governance and funding should be completed . Not every campus uses these services and the decision to do so (or not) is often left in the hand of the campus IT functional managers. Current system-wide services included: • SICAS Center at Oneonta - Banner Support & Enhancements, Remote Services • Center for Professional Development - Educational Technologies, Professional Development • ITEC at Buffalo State - Software/Hardware Support, Remote Services Hosting, DR services etc • Office of Information and Technology (OIT) and Office of Admisitrative Systems (OAS) - SUNY

business systems, DR services, Contracting etc. • SUNY Learning Network - Online learning, Training, Help Desk/Support

We need to be clear when we answer the following - What system-ness means for systems? • Not re-inventing things over and over but rather re-use (systems) • Very little modification by each campus • Shared resources • Shared support • Shared process • Shared policies Assessment & Process Control The starting point needs to be a complete assessment of the current landscape and controls need to be in place to ensure we do not make anything worse (buying new systems, upgrading those that will go away). This includes the following: Systems Inventory - There is a desperate need for a complete assessment, including an IT System-wide Inventory. This effort was started by the CCIO group, but after about 2-3 years approximately 2/3 of the campuses have voluntarily provided an inventory. Not every campus that provided information fully completed the process and most have not kept the inventory current. This inventory would serve as a vehicle for communication to campus presidents about opportunities for each campus based on their current structure through the lens of a system-wide assessment. Spending and Headcount - How much do we actually spend? How many people are there at each campus? What about System IT? Planning & Implementation – In order to not allow things to get worse, and to develop an implementation plan it will be important for each campus to provide a three year technology plan that would include system upgrades and new system implementations. Examples of shared information technology services include:


17

• Banner • Networking and Datacenters • VoIP implementations • Virtual Desktop (VDI) • Learning Management Systems • Data Warehouse & Business Intelligence reporting • Backup Support • Information Security • Software acquisition and consistency • Helpdesk • Institutional Research

o Reporting o Compliance

IT Transformation Team The IT Transformation Team (ITTT) made specific initial recommendations over a year ago. These were prioritized over dozens of suggestions and need to be moved forward.

Student Information Systems (Banner)

Banner is the predominant administrative student information system in use locally across the campuses with forty-two (43) institutions currently utilizing the software. A well established support structure (at SICAS and ITEC Centers) exists to provide guidance, training, support, hosting and common application development for the collective advantage of all. A critical mass of schools using the same software for a common purpose leverages a more effective and efficient use of shared development and support resources, functional expertise, best (standardized) business practices, and common reporting.

Recommendation:

• Banner is established as the SUNY standard for campus student administrative software systems. • Host in a shared environment the hardware infrastructure necessary to operate Banner at the

University-wide Data Centers to take advantage of SUNY’s existing technical support expertise/experience and to contain and control costs.;

• Use SUNY expertise, upon system deployment, to supplement vendor baseline training with specialized training emphasizing SUNY specific functionality, SUNY best practices, and to advise/assist with special campus specific issues;

• Enhance existing support centers (SICAS & ITEC) to provide ongoing technical and functional support and training to the campuses.

• And most importantly, increase the level of business definition and coding standards required by all campuses to further leverage the standard software efficiencies and reduce the data inconstancies between campuses.

November 2012:

• Established goals, objectives, and a framework for the SUNY Seamless Student Information System (S4) initiative.


18

• The foundation of the S4 initiative is to create university-wide consistent data at the campus source; Phase I of the SUNY-wide Consistent Data project is underway.

Standardization of Campus-Based Software

Campus-based administrative student software systems (Banner) provide primary mission critical functionality that an institution needs to run its business, but do not supply all capability needed to fully support and service campus constituents. Examples include:

• a web credit card payment gateway, • advanced dormitory/housing management, • classroom/resource scheduling, and, • degree planning and audit.

Recommendation:

• Campuses standardize on administrative software systems. • University-wide support for such software be established.

Business Intelligence and Data Warehousing

Information in SUNY that is critical to strategic and operational decision-makers exists in multiple, disparate campus and University-wide locations. Although significant progress has been made in the development of university-wide data warehouses and some campuses have begun to explore the use of business intelligence, a coordinated and focused ongoing program is necessary to support decision making.

Recommendation:

• SUNY increase the level of business definition and coding standards required by all campuses to further leverage the standard software efficiencies and reduce the data inconstancies between campuses (also recommended within SIS Banner standard).

• The SunGard ODS is the standard for the Banner student and academic “operational” data. • The university-wide financial, HR and payroll data is expanded and maintained in the SUNY D/W

accessible to all campuses and System Office. • Comparable data stores for RF, SUCF, etc. should be established. • Use existing Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) Plus as the standard

software for business intelligence/reporting. • A SUNY Center of Excellence for Business Intelligence should be established to oversee

implementation of data stores/warehouses, promote best practices, support campus and university-wide reporting efforts, and encourage the adoption of business intelligence strategies/techniques in the campus curriculums.


19

Data Center Consolidation

The Information Technology Exchange Center (ITEC) and the Office of Administrative System’s Data Center have become the cornerstone to the delivery of technology and services for the University, even with the decision for usage and participation of many services resting with each campus.

Recommendation:

• State-operated campuses have appropriate information technology services hosted by these Data Service Centers, while expanding the hosted services provided.

• SUNY expand hosted services and consider the possibility of alternate prime locations for those University Data Service Centers.

• Institutions should be encouraged to collaborate on the provision of their services or participate in the hosted services when appropriate.

This strategy builds upon the historical success and savings of these offerings and synergies already realized. It is expected that the University Centers and Health Science Centers would continue to provide their technology services locally due to the combined complexity of their research and academic environments.

November 2012:

• Work has begun on a SUNY partnership with NYSERDA to provide financial incentives for energy savings resulting from student information system hosting, desktop or application virtualization, and data center consolidations.


20

Centers of Excellence:

Transaction Processing Centers Functional Expertise And Regional Hubs

Vision: We need to move beyond our traditional back office functions, becoming a strategic partner to the University by delivering services that solve end-to-end business problems, and by innovating to create overall business value in new ways by:

• Delivering upon continuous improvement, service enhancement and cost reduction targets.

• Enabling growth in existing and emerging markets without traditional investments in new facilities, new infrastructure and new people.

• Getting closer to our students needs and internal customers to provide the services they demand and truly value.

• Providing accurate and actionable information in real time.

• Innovating new services and solutions to enhance focus and growth.

• Attracting and retaining top talent.

There are endless opportunities that must be pursued SUNY-wide, regionally and campus to campus. There are three main areas of focus 1) Transaction Process Centers 2) Functional Expertise and 3) Regional Hubs. Potential opportunities exist to reduce and consolidate many forms of administrative services performed by individual campuses including:

• budgeting and accounting • human resources processes, including payroll and benefits • procurement • executive/administrative functions • policy and procedures • facilities planning and management • grant writing and management • fleet services • print shop • internal controls.

SOURCING Cost effective, high service, customer focused centers of expertise. Transactional based processing through a cost effective, service oriented regional hub or system-wide center will drive savings and improve efficiencies. An Integrated Business Service (IBS) model takes a basic service and creates a strategic high performance organization. Our centers will be “independent” services that leverage the geographic footprint of the overall System and its strategic partners to deliver consistent, high-quality services at a competitive cost while still maintaining proximity to the customer where required.


21

Assumptions & Expectations - There are very important assumptions and best practices that must be included as part of our overall strategy and implementation of every service center. These include:

• Operate as independent, high functioning, and sustainable businesses.

• Deliver broad service value by proactively identifying and shaping innovative new capabilities for the organization, based on an enhanced relationship that gives better visibility into the priorities and operational realities.

• Leverage a system-wide footprint, global talent pools, collaboration technologies and detailed standards to support system-wide needs.

• Engage business partners to deliver high-quality, market-competitive services with the use of hybrid service delivery models, with a mix of captive centers and strategic partners.

• Provide process excellence by executing global standard end-to-end processes with shared accountability and make use of common enabling technologies to reduce process complexity and have system-wide process owners in place to improve processes and monitor compliance continuously.

• Provide service excellence by simplifying the customer experience at all levels of the organization, from the end users of the services up to the top-level management teams. The simplified, one-stop-service based nature allows customers to resolve business issues without having to navigate the organizational complexities.

• Establish trust through a well defined Shared Services Governance Framework, which helps maximize shared services’ contribution to high performance.

• Have well defined service level agreements and cost sharing models.


22

Transaction Processing Centers Specific Areas for SUNY Integrated Business Services include:

Benefits Benefits transactions could be centralized through a multi-step approach. The first phase would be to implement self-service and allow for benefits transactions to be completed online and forwarded to the appropriate responsible parties. A Transaction Processing Center could then be established to create a central point of contact for the distribution of information and response to employee questions. • Benefits

• Questions will be directed to a single office providing consistent answers/service • Paper elimination and automating processes • Best practices can be implemented on a system-wide basis

• Considerations • Face-to-Face experience will be lost/changed • Resistance to changes in technology and easy electronic access for all employees

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: Bill Howard • System Administration Liaison: Curtis Lloyd • Project Lead: • Team Members:

Specific Goals: 1) Work with SUNY Optional Retirement Program and Voluntary Savings program investment providers,

the Office of the State Comptroller, and community college and non-SUNY agency payroll offices and IT staff to design and implement a multi-vendor coordination system.

a. The SUNY ORP MVC system will reduce campus staff workload by introducing web-based employee self-service functionality for Retirement System and Voluntary Savings Plan enrollment and salary deferral changes. Direct file feedback into the applicable payroll systems will greatly reduce or eliminate the need for manual campus transaction processing.

b. Compliance monitoring, fiduciary oversight and System-wide reporting capabilities will also be greatly enhanced through data aggregation and enhanced plan level functionality.

2) Work with benefit plan vendors, control agencies, and SUNY Benefits Advisory Committee to develop online employee benefits orientations and enrollment functionality for each bargaining unit.

a. Online guided tutorial and/or video-based orientation programs will reduce the amount of time that campuses need to spend explaining and enrolling employees in the benefit programs for which they are eligible.


23

b. Automated orientation programs will increase efficiency for off-site or remotely located employees.

This will also ensure greater consistency of information dissemination and service delivery across the System. Scope of Work: Members of the SUNY Benefits Advisory group will comprise the Shared Services Benefits Committee. The committee will develop detailed requirements and implementation plans for the specific goals. The committee chair will communicate the operating requirements to the SUNY IT staff for system design. The committee will also identify pilot campuses who will be involved in testing all aspects of the technical system changes that will be implemented to automate the Benefits Orientation process. It is anticipated that campus practice and policy interpretation issues will arise and will be addressed with appropriate resources within System Administration. Progress reports will be developed and will be presented to the Shared Services Steering Committee and other appropriate parties. The Chair of the Committee will take responsibility for all communication. The work that will be done by this committee and related staff aligns very well with the Information Technology Transformation Team. Using technology we will automate and streamline current campus manual processes which will result in increased efficiencies in these departments. Policy changes will be addressed as they are identified by the committee. The current University-wide Benefits Administrator will serve as Chair of the Benefits Committee. Existing staff in the HR and IT office are expected to participate in various aspects of the goals. Additional support will be required, especially in the IT area, once the requirements are fully defined by the committee. Additional OTPS expenses to cover travel for meetings and training is anticipated. Milestones:

• E.g., process milestones: o Lead Group Formed – 1 Week o First Meeting of Lead Group and Agreement on Goals 3 Weeks o First report to Chancellor’s Executive Committee 4-6 Weeks o First report due to Board Committee 6-8 Weeks

The Lead Group will be formed by the end of May with the first meeting and goals to be discussed and agreed upon by mid-June. An initial report to the Steering Committee will be available by mid-July. Subsequent timelines will be developed by the committee as the project progresses.


24

HR & Payroll Vision: Significant campus efficiencies and best practices can be realized by automating the current manual and paper driven HR and payroll processes. A Human Resources/Payroll Transaction Processing Model could be completed with a multi-phased approach. Specific areas of focus should include: • Employment – Automate the campus HR and payroll transactions by developing access and

workflow down to the department level so that HR and payroll transactions (hires, separations, promotions, salary increases, etc) can be created and approved online and electronically posted in SUNY HR (subject to HR and payroll review/approval). This would also standardize campus forms and processes, leading to the sharing of campus best practices across the system.

• Employee Self Service – Develop employee self service functionality to allow employees to change addresses, update personal information, and complete certain tax and deduction forms online (subject to HR and payroll review/approval).

• Time & Attendance – Implement a uniform automated time and attendance system across all bargaining units to eliminate the current paper, labor-intensive process. The system will be implemented in phases and will ultimately electronically generate the associated payroll transactions directly from the automated timesheets (subject to payroll review/approval).

• Comprehensive Management Reporting - Redesign the existing SUNYHR Data Warehouse to create a comprehensive repository of the SUNY community. Develop the capability to provide state-operated campus employees and affiliates with operational, comparative and strategic reporting tools for all Human Resource and Payroll data.

• Interface – Develop electronic interfaces between existing campus systems and SUNY HR to further automate HR and payroll data.

• Security – Develop a flexible security strategy that could allow transactions to be processed in a shared environment.

Project Team: Sponsor/Champion: Bill Howard

System Administration Liaison: Curtis Lloyd

Project Lead: Julie Petti

Team Members: Denise Szelest (Albany), Vicky Metritikus (Binghamton), Debbie Toms (Brockport), Gary Evans (Cortland), Bonnie Martin (Delhi), Lisa Wenck (Oneonta), Mary Dolan (Potsdam), Michele Culligan (System Administration), Tina Vumbaco (System Administration)


25

The Project Team (SEAT – System Efficiencies and Automation Team) has identified a detailed listing of items to be included and addressed as part of the scope of this project to automate many of the current human resource and payroll processes. This listing was presented at the HR Directors meeting in Albany in June, 2012 and all campuses were encouraged to comment on the list. The list was also shared with all campus HR and payroll staff via email in August, 2012. There are currently 3 main areas of current focus: Time and Attendance, Employee Self Service, and Business Intelligence Reporting. Time and Attendance: The unclassified component of the Time and Attendance system was implemented in early 2012. 18 campuses are currently using this component of the time and attendance system and in the last year 75,000 timesheets were submitted electronically. The classified service component of the Time and Attendance system was tested by the pilot campuses in September and was presented at the Human Resources Conference in October. We are currently finalizing the necessary programming changes identified by the pilot campuses. Additional pilot system testing is being planned for April and May. A detailed implementation plan will be developed after a review of the second pilot testing results. Development work has begun on the hourly student assistant and college work study component of the Time and Attendance system. Employee Self Service: We have developed an employee home page which will serve as the focus point for all employee self service initiatives in HR and payroll. All employees will be able to view their paycheck and/or direct deposit advice online. We have also developed the ability for an employee to update their address directly online. Employees will be able to access this page directly from the suny.edu website and will use their current campus log on ID and password. This will allow seamless access for all employees. A demonstration of this new self service functionality was presented at the Human Resources Conference in October and pilot testing has been completed. The new employee home page will be implemented on April 22, 2013. The ability to update emergency contacts has been identified as the next self - service initiative and development work on that section is scheduled to begin shortly. Business Intelligence Reporting: Initial development of the new data warehouse tables and the security structure for creating HR and Payroll Business Intelligence dashboards and reporting has begun. A select number of HR dashboards are being created for a July rollout. A committee comprised of HR, Finance, and Campus Business Officers will be providing input on the process. The majority of both the functional and high level summary dashboards are scheduled to be completed by April, 2014.


26

Procurement The decentralized procurement process in place at each campus has resulted in a lack of standardization of procedures and documents, limited information sharing, and the duplication of purchases, processes and efforts. Shared Services – Procurement effort use Regional Workgroup Meetings to develop collaborative relationships between the procurement staff on both the state-operated and community college campuses. The Regional Workgroups will work with the project manager to develop, design and implement SUNY’s Transaction Processing Center (TPC) for procurement. The project team is also working to identify inefficiencies and advise the Chancellor, Board of Trustees and System Administration Executive team of policies and practices that can be instituted to eliminate redundancy and produce savings. In addition to identifying potential methods for cost savings related to the procurement process, the Shared Services – Procurement works with the campuses on collaborative procurements designed to leverage volume discount savings; and make recommendations to the SUNY Strategic Sourcing Team. Transaction Processing Center (TPC) Using a multi-phased approach, the Transaction Processing Center will allow procurement staff to dedicate time to the developmental stages of procurement process, while allowing TPC staff to focus on the transactional stages. The first phase requires the creation of all purchase requisitions at the department level. Using existing Workflow system, requisitions would then follow the ‘normal’ campus approval structures until they were ready to be turned into purchase orders. Instead of the purchase requisition going to each primary campus Procurement Office, the requisitions would be forwarded to a Transaction Processing Center for completion and sent to the vendor. In a future phase of implementation, the Transaction Processing Center may combine campus orders by vendor, which will further reduce the number of purchase orders required to order goods and services. This also provides SUNY the opportunity to reduce shipping costs and achieve higher discounts for consolidated ordering. This would also allow us to further develop the Strategic Sourcing Initiative, as well as expand activities in University-wide contracts, contract management and the RFP process. Accounts Payable Once the campuses are using the online, integrated SUNY applications to the fullest extent, Procurement, Receiving, Payment Authorization, Invoice Collection, etc., then Workflow allows the generation of the “payables voucher” anywhere within the University. The Transaction Processing Center could then provide complete accounts payables functionality to all participating campuses. • Benefits

o Provides greater opportunity for leveraging State-wide Strategic Sourcing o Standardize data classifications o Potential for aggregate buys o Standardization on vendors o M/WBE procurement standardization o Establish a Vendor self-service for payment verification (also utilize OSC’s self service portal)

• Considerations

o Local buying knowledge will be lost for a period of time (M/WBE) o Standardization on vendors (local vendors may lose potential business) o Campuses will no longer receive their invoices


27

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley • System Administration Liaison: Kellie Dupuis • Project Lead: Laura Stetson • Team Members: Shared Services – Procurement Regional Workgroups • IT Liaison: Dave Powalyk Status Update as of 4/9/13:

• The TPC – Procurement project document has been updated to include a revised approach to the project entitled “Standardize, Centralize, and Support”. The revised approach incorporates best practices documented by experts from the public and private sector, including other institutions of higher education.

o The revisions include the creation of the Procurement Training Program (PTP). The PTP includes the utilization of both existing resources and new resources (such as a Center for Professional Development procurement training course and a newsletter).

• Formation of a Campus Advisory Procurement Team for TPC development is underway. Standardization Effort – The decentralized procurement process in place at each campus has resulted in a lack of standardization of procedures and documents, limited information sharing, and the duplication of purchases, processes and efforts. Shared Services – Procurement effort use Regional Workgroup Meetings to develop collaborative relationships between the procurement staff on both the state-operated and community college campuses. The Regional Workgroups will work with the project manager to identify inefficiencies and advise the Chancellor, Board of Trustees and System Administration Executive team of policies and practices that can be instituted to eliminate redundancy and produce savings. In addition to identifying potential methods for cost savings related to the procurement process, the Shared Services – Procurement project will work with the campuses on collaborative procurements designed to leverage volume discount savings; and make recommendations to the SUNY Strategic Sourcing Team. Savings will be recorded and reported for all procurements. Shared Transaction Processing Center (TPC) – Using a multi-phased approach, the Transaction Processing Center will allow procurement staff to dedicate time to the developmental stages of procurement process, while allowing TPC staff to focus on the transactional stages. The first phase requires the creation of all purchase requisitions at the department level. Using existing Workflow system, requisitions would then follow the ‘normal’ campus approval structures until they were ready to be turned into purchase orders. Instead of the purchase requisition going to each primary campus Procurement Office, the requisitions would be forwarded to a Transaction Processing Center for completion and sent to the vendor. In a future phase of implementation, the Transaction Processing Center may combine campus orders by vendor, which will further reduce the number of purchase orders required to order goods and services. This also provides SUNY the opportunity to reduce shipping costs and achieve higher discounts for consolidated ordering. This would also allow us to further develop the Strategic Sourcing Initiative, as well as expand activities in University-wide contracts, contract management and the RFP process. Accounts Payable - Once the campuses are using the online, integrated SUNY applications to the fullest extent, Procurement, Receiving, Payment Authorization, Invoice Collection, etc., then Workflow allows the


28

generation of the “payables voucher” anywhere within the University. The Transaction Processing Center could then provide complete accounts payables functionality to all participating campuses. • Benefits

o Provides greater opportunity for leveraging State-wide Strategic Sourcing o Standardize data classifications o Potential for aggregate buys o Standardization on vendors o M/WBE procurement standardization o Establish a Vendor self-service for payment verification (also utilize OSC’s self service portal)

• Considerations

o Local buying knowledge will be lost for a period of time (M/WBE) o Standardization on vendors (local vendors may lose potential business) o Campuses will no longer receive their invoices


29

Functional Expertise

Financial Aid

Vision: Based on the campus level needs, resource constraint and technical nature of financial aid enhanced support through a center of expertise is recommended. This would include: • Financial Aid Compliance: provide support on operational and regulatory provisions of all federal

and state financial aid programs. Serve as a resource to both campus offices responsible for proper administration of the programs and to those System Administration offices responsible for oversight or policy related matters. These include University Counsel and the University Auditor. Provide review and update relevant SUNY policy manual entries. Represents University’s position on proposed program regulations, provide guidance to Washington Office staff and, if appropriate, serve on USDE negotiated rulemaking committees.

• Training: Provide training including financial aid regulations, communications and on-site and web-based delivery of technical training. Design of SUNY specific financial aid curricula for both new and experienced campus staff including bursars, admissions and registrars as well as financial aid office staff. Drives improvement in customer service, outreach, publications, enrollment recruitment and guidance counselor relations as well as compliance. Creating and packaging financial aid web and print based materials.

• Data/Policy Analysis: Provide background in student financial aid administration, history and operation of the major state and federal aid programs and is also skilled in data manipulation and analysis. Provide national and state financial data sets and resources. Additionally, this position will provide analytic support for the default prevention initiative by using SUNY and federal data to identify the characteristics of a student borrower who is likely to go into delinquency or default. These predictive analytics will be used to develop and implement targeted interventions to reduce the likelihood of default and increase retention and student success.

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley • System Administration Liaison: Patricia Thompson • Project Lead: Patricia Thompson • Team Members: Diane Corbett, (Albany), Daniel Tramuta,(Fredonia), Sandra Friedman (Nassau),

Kristina Delbridge (Empire State), Tom Panettiere (Purchase)


30

Financial Aid shared services topics to be explored include:

• Expanded use of webinars for financial aid training • Banner training for multiple topics • Sharing of Best Practices for implementation of new and continuing federal and state regulations

relating to financial aid administration including loan verification

Financial Aid initiatives currently underway: SUNY Award Letter The SUNY Award Letter has been released to the Financial Aid community and will be announced to Campus President and week. Each campus will be asked to submit an implementation plan outlining the date they expect to begin using the new form for 2013-14 Pilot Campus Meetings All six pilot campuses have been visited and have participated in planning sessions with campus staff and staff from System Administration. These introductory meetings have involved a diverse group of campus staff including financial aid, bursars, registrars, academic affairs, academic counseling and admissions. Campus personnel from all levels of administration were represented including the campus President at two of the pilot campuses. The initial meetings have been very effective in discussing the mission of Smart Track and discussing the implementation plan for each campus. These meetings have also provided the opportunity to begin development of the campus Student Engagement Communication Plan. SLSC expansion Expansion of the SUNY Student Loan Service Center (SLSC) continues. Recruitment for one professional and three clerical positions has begun. The SLSC can accommodate the staff physically with enough space to add additional staff in the future if necessary. Staffing levels will be evaluated as more campuses are on boarded into Smart Track. Two major components of Smart Track will be handled by the SLSC; Student Engagement and Delinquency and Default Resolution. The SLSC will be the hub for implementation of the unique campus Student Engagement Communication Plan. This plan, which includes emails and other communications, originated at the SLSC, will connect student loan borrowers with customized messages informing them of campus activities including academic counseling and financial aid deadlines. Thus far, Student Engagement Communications Plans have been developed in collaboration with three of the pilot campuses and delivered to the campuses for their review. The plans for two additional campuses are currently being drafted. These plans will be implemented for the fall 2013 semester. The SLSC has begun receiving Student Loan data from the National Student Loan Data System for one pilot campus. This data is currently being used to develop an interface for staff at the SLSC to view and assist students in a variety of ways. Ultimately, staff will view Perkins Loan data and Direct Loan data in the same dashboard thus allowing for delinquency and default resolution. This month, all pilot campuses will be asked to begin the process to authorize the SLSC to receive student loan data from NSLDS on behalf of the campus.


31

Financial Literacy Currently, we are developing a procurement to secure the best financial literacy tools which will be used by all campuses. Financial Aid staff along with, members of the Default Prevention and Financial Literacy sub committees, has investigated the many financial literacy tools that are available by participating in numerous webinars and sessions with vendors outlining their offerings. This research ensures a solid understanding of what tools are best for SUNY students and their families. Smart Track Partnership with Consumer Protection Bureau A partnership with the NYS Consumer Protection Bureau has begun. Outreach staff from CPB is eager to begin working with SUNY students at all campuses to provide training and guidance on topics including Identity Theft and Responsible Credit Card Management. Additionally, we are developing financial aid and student loan related training for CPB staff along with comprehensive Smart Track training. SUNY’s website will be updated with appropriate links to CPB online resources. Statewide Smart Track Webinar A statewide webinar will be held on March 11, 2013. All campuses will be invited to participate with all campus stakeholders included. The webinar will provide a comprehensive introduction to the initiative and discuss the campus on boarding process for non pilot campuses. Shared Services Committee The Financial Aid committee has been expanded to include additional campus Directors. The next meeting will be in Albany on February 6, 2013. Topics to be discussed include Open SUNY, verification and EOP verification. April 2013:

• Implementation of SUNY Award Letter continues across the system. The SICAS Center released the newly programmed form to their campuses this week and provided a webinar to train them on the set up and implementation. All 44 Banner campuses are expected to be fully operational this month.

• Statewide Smart Track webinar was held on Monday, March 25 at 10:00a.m. The webinar discussed all components of the initiative and will serve as a kick off to on boarding non pilot campuses. Over 100 campus personnel participated in the webinar.

• The financial literacy RFP process will move to the evaluation stage next week and is expected to be completed by late April. Once the successful bidder is chosen, the process of integrating these new comprehensive tools onto SUNY.edu and onto campus websites will begin.

• Staff continues to collaborate with campus personnel at the pilot campuses to develop the Student Engagement/Communications Plans. These engagement plans will be used to send communications to student loan borrowers beginning this fall.

• Expansion of the SLSC continues as recruitment of one professional staff position and three clerical positions has begun. The professional position will be a shared position between Smart Track and the current Perkins servicing unit at the SLSC.

• The SLSC is working on expanding the current Perkins servicing platform to include the Direct Loan information. New staff will be trained to provide information to student loan borrowers through a new toll free number or via email.


32

Library Services Leverage existing tools and process and further expand automation.

• SUNY Office of Library and Information Services, which currently provides management of the

Aleph 500 Library Management System for 55 SUNY libraries. Activities include planning and management of application upgrades, management of significant record loads and extractions, report creation, and monitoring of automated processes.

• SUNYConnect

o Library Automation

o Digital Resources • On Demand Library Initiative (SUNYOne)

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: • System Administration Liaison: Cary Hatch • Project Lead: • Team Members: • IT Liaison:

Currently, 59 SUNY libraries run the same library management application with 55 of the campuses running on infrastructure provided and managed by the Information Technology Exchange Center (ITEC) at Buffalo State College. While every campus runs the same application, each has a separate data file of their bibliographic records and each runs a separate instance of the application. At the April meeting of the SUNY Council of Library Directors (SCLD), the Directors agreed to consolidate the 55 separate files and instances of the application to a single bibliographic file and one installation of the application. This was done with the understanding that it would then be practical to move forward with a common discovery system that would allow all campuses to provide a standard interface to allow users to discover both traditional print resources and electronic resources. At the April SCLD meeting, the Library Directors of the University Centers agreed to investigate possible services, such as cataloging and digital preservation, that could best be done at the University Centers for the benefit of the SUNY System. A decision was also reached to continue and enhance our University-wide access to electronic resources through EBSCO. This agreement results in the following additional 7 databases being available to all SUNY campuses as of July 1: Applied Science & Technology Full Text, Education Full Text, Energy & Power Source, Entrepreneurial Studies Source, Humanities Full Text, LGBT Life with Full Text, Social Sciences Full Text More than a dozen SUNY libraries (across all SUNY campus sectors) have agreed to contribute to a pool of monies that will be used to purchase a first copy of a title requested by a SUNY library patron (student, faculty or staff); these materials will be available for use by any and all SUNY libraries. The project is called SUNYOne.

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/applied-science-technology-full-text�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/education-full-text�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/energy-power-source�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/entrepreneurial-studies-source�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/humanities-full-text�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/lgbt-life-with-full-text�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/lgbt-life-with-full-text�

http://www.ebscohost.com/academic/social-sciences-full-text�


33

Update – November 2012 The Office of Library and Information Services (OLIS) is in the process of developing charges for the following Taskforces:

• Cataloging and Authority Control - to investigate workflow, guidelines and policies in a shared cataloging environment.

• Library Discovery Systems - to engage in an analysis of the current vendor offerings to better understand the implications of a University-wide Library Discovery system (benefits, expense, features, etc.)

Update – January 2012 1. The Cataloging and Authority Control Taskforce has been established and has had an initial planning

meeting. The Shared Cataloging and Authorities Task Force committee charge and membership can be found at http://scld.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/shared-cataloging-and-authorities-task-force_201200912.docx

2. The Library Discovery Systems Task Force has been established and has had an initial face to face meeting and subsequent conference call. This group has heard from SUNY libraries that have implemented discovery systems; vendor demonstrations are scheduled in February; price proposals from the vendors are being received. The Discovery Systems Task Force committee charge and membership can be found at http://scld.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/discovery-task-force-charge-rev.docx

3. The Office of Library and Information Services has been working with the staff at the Environmental Science and Forestry library to migrate their library management system and primary digital resource databases from Syracuse University’s environment to SUNY’s.

http://scld.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/shared-cataloging-and-authorities-task-force_201200912.docx�


http://scld.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/discovery-task-force-charge-rev.docx�



34

Print Matters

Professional printing services are, and will continue to be, essential to the operation of colleges and universities. Historically, SUNY’s State-operated campuses have provided themselves with certain level of internal printing capability, and have supplemented these capabilities through the use of external vendors, able to meet the needs that cannot be satisfied with internal equipment and staffing. Additionally, some campuses have ceased using internal print shops in favor of out-sourcing all of their printing needs. A preliminary analysis of SUNY’s combined State-operated printing related expenditures (typesetting, design, labeling, inserting, printing, supplies, and advertising) indicates that in 2010 – 2011, SUNY spent approximately $6.4 million with private vendors.

The SUNY Print Matters project team believes this preliminary analysis provides a low estimate, as it is unable to account for printing services purchased with other methods such as P-cards or those purchases not recorded as printing related. The project team believes that utilizing SUNY’s existing internal printing resources will result in significant savings the system.

The SUNY Print Matters effort is working to identify the State-operated campuses that presently have the necessary equipment and staff required to accommodate the printing needs of other campuses. The team will use this information to develop and implement a SUNY-wide print shop utilization plan designed to provide improved services, reduce outside expenditures and produce savings through the efficient use of campus resources across the system. Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley • System Administration Liaison: Kellie Dupuis • Project Lead: Laura Stetson • Team Members: • IT Liaison: Dave Powalyk Status Update as of 4/9/13: • The project team continues to meet monthly at the Oswego Metro Center in Syracuse. • The project team will present information to the SUNY Purchasing Association at their spring meeting

on April 19, 2013. Further outreach to SUNY CUAD and SUBOA is planned. • The e-mail address for the project [email protected] has been established.

mailto:[email protected]�


35

Regional Hubs

MWBE Vision: System-wide and regional expertise is required for SUNY to take a leadership position across the State. Providing central support and coordination but using regional experts located at campuses will allow us to best serve all of the campuses.

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley • System Administration Liaison: Pamela Swanigan • Project Lead: • Team Members:

Basic Business Needs The Governor has established a State-wide goal of 20% utilization of MWBEs by State agencies. SUNY has, for a variety of reasons, consistently fallen short in reaching its MWBE utilization goals. However, over the past three years we have consistently increased the total payments made to MWBEs, increasing by 47.8% in 2011-12 and by 65.2% in 2012-13.

• Due to new demands being made (e.g., emphasis from the Governor’s office, legislative and regulatory changes) there is a need for a standardized and more centrally coordinated MWBE program.

• To facilitate program improvement five key areas will be the focus of system improvements: (1) System and Process; (2) Communication; (3) Program Implementation and Training; (4) Regional Support; and (5) Procurement Procedure and Boilerplate Language.

Process Assumptions MWBE regulations state that the agency’s MWBE officer approve the goals assigned and the resulting utilization plan submitted by the vendor on each contract prior to its execution. The law and regulations also presume that the State agency has a centralized MWBE program, with sufficient staff to handle the monitoring of contracts executed. Business Rules The MWBE Director, with the Offices of the University Controller and Administrative Services (IT), has have successfully updated new business rules for reporting MWBE utilization to DED. SUNY business rules to implement a successful MWBE Program have been developed and published to facilitate standardization. (MWBE Guidance Bulletin, Vol.04, 2013) Approach A University-wide approach is being developed which will feature regional shared services for MWBE business development, monitoring and compliance. Financial Plan/Fund Development


36

Based on the MWBE Assessment led by the MWBE Director, a proposal for revisions to the University-wide MWBE Program has been presented to the SUNY Board of Trustees on January 17, 2013. Funding need for staff augmentation has been presented. Requirements to create and implement a MWBE database and management system are under development. Open

• The Office of Capital Facilities is searching for an MWBE Procurement Specialist to assist campuses with compliance in the construction field, especially with campus let projects.

• MWBE Director, the Offices of the University Controller and Administrative Services will assess the SUNY financial management system (and make any necessary upgrades) to comply with the State’s MWBE reporting requirements.

• SUNY has been invited to participate in a T-12 group with staff from ESDC and the Governor’s office to identify strategies, measurable goals and targets to reach 20% MWBE goal participation.

• The MWBE Program office will schedule regular MWBE webinars with campuses on a variety of topics to enhance their understanding of 15-A, the regulations and guidance provided to implement the new program modifications. These program modifications will be phased in over the next year.

Close

• A MWBE Program assessment was completed at SUNY’s six largest campuses (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, Downstate, Upstate and Stony Brook) and a report was delivered to the Board of Trustees at their January 17, 2013 meeting.

• MWBE Director developed appropriate training materials on the MWBE program modification and delivered enhanced MWBE training (Executive Law compliance & best practices) for all 30 campus procurement and facilities staffs.


37

Legal Services The OGC is one of the best and most longstanding examples of shared services within the SUNY system. The office provides direct legal services to all campuses and other operating units of SUNY, and to System Administration and the Board of Trustees, primarily through attorneys who share multiple client assignments, and/or perform both campus-focused and system-wide functions. OGC is also a unique office within System Administration because it spans and includes central office and campus-based individuals, all reporting directly up to a System official, with only indirect or functional supervision at the campus level. This mode of delivery of legal services for the units within the State University is cost-effective, efficient and protective of the University’s legal interests. It minimizes the duplication of support and administrative expenses in that each campus does not have to fund a library, electronic research services, paralegal and secretarial support, etc. In addition, it enhances the benefits of collaboration, exchange of information and consistency of legal advice by creating larger groupings of attorneys and ensuring communication about and oversight of legal interpretations and guidance. OGC salary costs are currently funded from at least 9 different payroll sources, through a variety of mechanisms. Seven individual campuses or units [Stony Brook, Binghamton, Downstate, Albany, Upstate, UB (Health Sciences Center) and the Charter Schools Institute] and have over time decided to support attorneys directly on their own budgets and payrolls. There are also two campus sharing arrangements currently in place—the well established and more formal “West Cam” arrangement among UB and five other western campuses (Buffalo State College, Fredonia, Geneseo, Brockport, and Alfred State), currently for the sharing of three attorneys and a paralegal; and the more recent and smaller scale sharing arrangement between Upstate and ESF for the partial sharing of two attorneys. These campuses collectively pay over 70% of the salary costs within OGC. The remaining salary costs within OGC have traditionally been paid out of the System Administration budget; these costs are really of two distinct types: direct campus service and system-wide or shared services. Seventeen campuses (and the community colleges) do not make any direct payments for legal services, despite being assigned attorneys to work directly with and for them, all located in the System Administration office.


38

Regional – Campus Alliance Networks Vision: Through partnerships across the system additional savings and best practices will be generated. Though specific partnerships have been communicated it is expected that realignment will occur based on regional and campus needs and expertise. A systematic assessment must be completed through the Campus Alliance Network process. Opportunities include: • Student Services

o enrollment and recruitment o tutoring o housing and food services o library services o athletic facilities and staff o student activities

• Employee Services, Diversity, and Inclusion

o leadership development; o diversity programming and training

• Advancement

o Economic development initiative o Grants writing and support. o System-wide Alumni support

• Academic Affairs

o academic programs and course offerings o develop collaborative plans o faculty development o international programs/study abroad o training in grant writing

Project Team: • Sponsor/Champion: • System Administration Liaison: • Project Lead: • Team Members:


39

Communications

Shared Services Mission SUNY’s Shared Services initiative is about creating efficiencies, reinvesting in academic and student support, enabling better service, identifying cost avoidance, improving quality, and allowing the campuses to concentrate on their core competence – education. Communications Plan Goals and Approach The goal of SUNY’s Shared Services Communications Plan is to reinforce this mission statement at every opportunity in which we share information. We will do this by developing tools to distribute information about the broad initiative-based goals, as well as the project-specific goals, to both internal and external stakeholders through multiple mediums. Additionally, SUNY seeks to capture and report out on successful campus projects and best practices across the System. In order to achieve these goals, we have developed a structure and process for the collection and distribution of this information. SUNY’s Shared Services Communications Plan will approach information sharing on two fronts: earned media and owned media. Earned media is the favorable publicity gained through communications and promotional efforts generally found in print, television, or online. Owned media is information created, maintained, and distributed by the organization. We currently have no plans to engage in paid media, which refers to publicity gained through advertising. Earned Media Garnering positive press coverage for shared services will depend on raising up exceptional campus victories as examples, rather than just talking about shared services in general. The Office of Communications will work with the Office of Shared Services to engage the campuses on these stories and assist them in pitching to local and national press. Press releases will be issued at major milestones (such as the $6 million in shifted costs announcement), again highlighting actual campus successes with dollar figures and results. Social media will also be utilized to promote word-of-mouth message distribution. Using Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and LinkedIn, SUNY’s New Media Team will share news articles, blog posts, videos, and other materials with the general public and targeted online audiences. Owned Media SUNY’s Shared Services owned media strategy consists of the following elements used to gather and communicate information:

• Information Collection • Regional Showcase Events • Newsletter • Video and Blog Series • Webinar Series • Web Presence

Project Plans


40

Information Collection The collection of information about the implementation of specific System Administration-led projects, as well as campus-based shared projects is essential to the success of the SUNY Shared Services Communication’s Plan. System-wide Projects Point of Contact: Project Managers System–wide projects should be continuously updated through the use of the Shared Services project document, which has been distributed to all project managers. All project managers should continue to provide the most recent version of their project document to the Shared Services Project Director on a bi-monthly basis, prior to the meeting of the Shared Services Steering Committee. In addition to the current version of the project document, all project managers should provide a project status report. The report should represent a high-level overview of the project, including its goals and deliverables; and a status update, containing any significant progress or delay. All project status reports will be cataloged together to provide an easy update to the Steering Committee and interested stakeholders. Campus-based Projects Point of Contact: Shared Services Liaisons In the fall of 2012, the Shared Services Project Team worked to collect reports from all campuses indicating the Shared Services projects in which they are engaged, as well as any savings associated with the projects. This information will be regularly updated and shared during Regional Showcase Events, in the Newsletter, and on the Shared Services Website, as discussed in further detail below. Campuses will be asked to provide updates on the projects previously reported, as well as information pertaining to any new projects according to the following schedule. 2013 Reporting Schedule (two months prior to the corresponding Regional Showcase event): January – Central NY May – North Country July – Metro NY/Long Island September – Capital District/Hudson Valley November – Western NY Web Presence Shared Services – Strategic Planning Team Webpage The Strategic Planning Office maintains this page in order to provide the Shared Services Steering Committee with the committee’s mission, announcements, meeting and event information, and membership. The Shared Services Project Director is responsible for the content. Kaitlyn Beachner is the Strategic Planning liaison to the Shared Services project and requests to update the information should be sent to her attention, at [email protected]. Shared Services Project Website


41

The Shared Services Project Director will work with the Office of Communications and SUNY’s web manager to design and manage the Shared Services project website. The site will contain links to the Shared Services catalog as well as other resources related to SUNY Shared Services. Additionally, this site will link with SUNY’s soon-to-be launched IdeaLab, which will enable students, faculty, staff, and the general public to comment and provide their own ideas toward the process. Regional Showcase Events The Shared Services Project Director will work with campuses to deliver a series of regional showcase events entitled Harnessing Systemness: Regional Discussions on Efficiency and Excellence. These events are an opportunity for campuses to learn from neighboring institutions and foster greater regional collaboration. Participants will have a forum to share stories, celebrate successes, and discuss creating greater operational efficiencies and improving service excellence. The events feature breakout roundtable discussions. Facilitators encourage participants to discuss best practices, efficiencies, and service improvements. Participants are also asked to select a representative to take a leadership role in coordinating regional Shared Services initiatives. Each region must designate a participant to report the major themes and discussion points back to the larger group after the conclusion of the breakouts. The following campus constituencies will be invited: presidents, provosts, business officers, information officers, campus liaisons, faculty, and student government representatives. Campus Liaisons should perform outreach to ensure the attendance of all identified populations and the local media. Tentative Regional Showcase Event Schedule: January – Central (held at Cortland) June 4, 2013 – North Country (to be held at Canton) August 6, 2013 – Metro NY/ Long Island (campus to be determined) October, 2013 – Capital District/Hudson Valley (campus to be determined) November 20, 2013 – Western (to be held at UB) Newsletter An electronic newsletter will be produced by the Shared Services Project Director. The newsletter will use information submitted by the Campus Liaisons and System Administration project managers; and will highlight successes, with a focus on dollar savings, process improvement, and resulting investments from identified efficiencies. The newsletter will be published bi-monthly, following each showcase event and will deliver information about shared campus-based projects, internal projects, upcoming events, key dates, and other important information. The newsletter will be distributed to all campus presidents, business officers and shared services liaisons. It is the responsibility of Campus Liaisons to share the newsletter with the campus community. Video Series and Blog Posts The Office of Communications will work with the Shared Services Project Director to create and distribute a series videos designed to communicate information about the broad initiative-based goals. The video series will feature senior level decisionmakers and will address the “5 W’s” – who, what, when, where, and why. The videos provide SUNY an opportunity to widely distribute the Shared Services message directly from senior leadership to the stakeholder populations, eliminating the need to rely on middle


42

messengers and preserving meaning universally. Each video will also be accompanied by a corresponding blog post, providing the video’s message in a written form. The proposed topics, messages, and participants are listed below. Upon completion of production, the schedule will be distributed to Campus Liaisons, with the expectation that they will promote the opportunity to view the video and blog posts. Topic Message Video Chat Blog Post What is Shared Services?

Services will be delivered with greater efficiency and excellence, and will align with others or all within the system.

Brian Hutzley David Lavallee

Who does Shared Services effect?

Everyone. Kevin Rea Ken O’Brien

When will this happen?

A 5 percent shift is expected at every campus over the next 3 years. Specific changes will depend on campus-level progress and decision making.

Harvey Stenger Hubert Keen

Where are these decisions being made?

The initiative is being guided by a representative steering committee. Decisions are made at the campus level, with input from students, faculty, staff, and leadership.

Natalie Higley Pierre Alric

Why are we doing it?

The goal is to leverage SUNY’s systemness by promoting collaboration among campuses for administrative functions while increasing efficiency and enhancing educational opportunities and reinvesting in academic instruction and other student-support services at campuses.

Nancy Zimpher Carl McCall

Webinar Series We view these webinars as a major opportunity to directly address particular stakeholder groups with the information they are interested in, from the point of view of someone who can relate to their needs. The Shared Services Project Director will work with the Center for Professional Development to develop and deliver a series of informational webinars for campus stakeholders. The webinars will provide project-specific information about the implementation of shared services. Suggested audiences have been identified for each webinar and targeted notifications will be sent. Campus Liaisons will also receive notification of the webinar schedule and suggested audiences, and are expected to notify the appropriate campus participants.


43

Date Time Presenter Topic Wednesday, March 20 12 PM – 1:00 PM Brian Hutzley Shared Services Webinar

Series Kickoff Friday, March 22 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM Joe Gardiner Business Intelligence (BI) Monday, March 25 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM Patricia Thompson Statewide Smart Track Tuesday, April 16 11:30 AM – 1:00 PM Jean Boland SUNY-wide Data Dictionary Thursday, April 18 12:00 PM – 1:30 PM Pam Swanigan MWBE Wednesday, April 24 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM Julie Petti HR and Payroll Wednesday, May 8 11:00 AM – 12:00 PM Laura Stetson Transaction Processing Center

(TPC) Wednesday, May 15 10:00 AM – 11:30 AM Tom Hippchen &

Michele Feathers Strategic Sourcing


44

Introduction/Executive Summary Working with the State of New York’s Division of Budget (DOB) and Office of General Services (OGS) and Accenture Consulting Group, SUNY will use its combined buying power to allow savings in commodities and services that we buy. Additionally, SUNY System Administration, RF central office and campuses will work collaboratively to identify additional opportunities and, where feasible, pursue University-wide or multi-campus contracts to achieve cost savings and increase procurement efficiencies. The largest savings that we must support as a system and at every campus will be achieved by leveraging our purchasing power. Similar efforts have failed in the past for a variety of reasons; NYS Finance Law is onerous and often has conflicting agendas, campuses were resistant to forfeit some purchasing autonomy and adopt a SUNY-wide approach, and individuals that ultimately made purchases continued to buy what they always had from whomever they always had. The need for change was unknown or not reinforced from the top. Leadership, process controls, reporting and accountability will be required to optimize savings while ensuring quality. Scope In 2010 SUNY established a Strategic Sourcing committee (SSC), co-led by Chris Wade, SUNY Research Foundation, and Tom Hippchen, SUNY System Administration, which was charged with two tasks:

(1) Develop an RFP to contract with a firm experienced in providing strategic sourcing services in a state government setting. This vendor will assist SUNY and the RF to:

i. identify potential procurement savings by reviewing, categorizing, evaluating annual spend data and benchmarking current pricing;

ii. pursue immediate strategic sourcing savings; and iii. develop and implement a strategic sourcing plan that can be sustained into the

future. (2) Explore membership(s) in GPOs (group purchasing organizations) or consortia for potential

cost-saving benefits. In cases where SUNY is already a member of a GPO, evaluate those contracts to ensure SUNY (and the RF if applicable) is fully realizing their benefits.

Initial SUNY Initiatives investigated:

• Hospitals IDN (Integrated Delivery Network) • REMI (equipment maintenance) • Memberships & Subscriptions • Advertising (display ads, line ads, web posting & interactive media). • University-wide Contracts: Technology, UB Micro (Microsoft)

During the exploration stage of the process (RFQ), SUNY learned that NYS had solicited, through an RFP, for a similar scope of work. The SSC put the SUNY RFP on hold until the NYS contract was approved and, if applicable, SUNY’s participation was determined. In anticipation of participating with NYS, Business Operations & Procurement (OBP) was permitted to hire a full-time person to work on strategic sourcing. In November, 2010, the NYS Division of Budget partnered with Accenture to develop and implement a NYS strategic sourcing program for NYS Executive Agencies. SUNY was not included the scope of work with Accenture and therefore, efforts led by Accenture and DOB were focused solely on Executive Agency spending. After Accenture began looking more closely at the data, the value of including SUNY expenditures to further leverage NYS buying power was apparent. In 2011, SUNY was approached by NYS to participate in identified strategic sourcing opportunities.

Strategic Sourcing


45

Initial NY State Strategic Sourcing Team (SST) Initiatives: Phase 1: Fleet Cards, Office Supplies, IT Hardware, IT Software Phase 2: Lab Supplies Phase 3-4: Building Repair, Utilities, Heating Oil, Industrial Equipment, Safety and Security, Bulk Fuel, Radios and Communication Equipment, Traffic Control, Books. Audit Services, Collection Services, Small Package Delivery, Legal Services, Advertising and Marketing, Telephone. Education Services SUNY decided to initially focus its strategic sourcing efforts on participating in the NYS initiative. SUNY, along with the SUNY RF, agreed to participate in the NY SST medical/laboratory supply project. SUNY committed a System Administration liaison and 3 campus procurement staff and the RF committed a central office liaison and a campus representative to the project’s extended team. At that time, SUNY and the RF did not have the resources to provide cleansed transactional data, category analytics and to participate in vendor data enhancements (vendor data requests). Due to the lack of resources, SUNY and the RF entered in to an agreement with DOB to amended Accenture’s scope of work to include the above deliverables. As such, SUNY and the RF reimbursed DOB for $204,922 to have Accenture cleanse SUNY data and incorporate SUNY data and requirements into the solicitation for Medical/Laboratory Supplies. During her 2011 State of the University speech, the Chancellor announced a major initiative – Shared Services – with a two-fold goal; increase administrative efficiencies and shift $100M in administrative savings to student instruction. The SUNY Purchasing Association, working with Laura Stetson (Procurement Specialist, Strategic Sourcing), formed Regional Work Groups (originally five but reduced to three) to identify potential shared services opportunities. Laura Stetson’s duties were shifted from strategic sourcing to “Shared Services, Procurement;” specifically IT transformation and “Transaction Processing Centers.” Business Operations & Procurement was given permission to hire a temporary position (Michele Feathers) to support NYS strategic sourcing efforts through data analytics and participation as an extended team member on the NYS “medical/laboratory supply” project and possibly serve as a co-lead position for another project in the future waves. As the Shared Services Regional Work Groups met to discuss “shared services” opportunities, the purchasing staffs’ attention became more focused on strategic sourcing. Their suggestions were about buying or contracting on a regional or University level. Each region brainstormed at their meetings and made suggestions to Laura Stetson, who in turn brought those ideas to the SSC. While there were plenty of ideas on areas to explore for strategic sourcing, there were not enough people to handle the work. While some campuses volunteered to lead a project, Michele Feathers at System Administration needed to spend considerable time to cleanse the SUNY data for each project. Simultaneously other departments within SUNY (campus and system administration) were identifying other strategic sourcing opportunities (e.g., student health insurance, advertising and marketing, etc.). In November 2012, there was a decision by the SUNY and RF co-chairs of the Strategic Sourcing committee to redesign SUNY’s approach to strategic sourcing. The Strategic Sourcing Committee became an ad hoc advisory group. Ideas on commodities and services to target for strategic sourcing came from data analysis by Michele Feathers (Procurement Specialist, Strategic Sourcing) and projects identified to Laura Stetson (Procurement Specialist, Shared Services), by the Shared Services Regional Work Groups. Thomas Hippchen, Director of University-wide Procurement, Michele Feathers and Laura Stetson drafted a strategic sourcing process and vetted it with the Strategic Sourcing Committee. The Committee saw value in the approach and appreciated the freeing up of their time to devote to campus specific responsibilities.


46

Basic Business Needs The State procurement process is highly regulated. While SUNY has recently enjoyed some administrative relief through legislative means, the University is still subject to State Finance, Economic Development, Education, and Executive Laws when purchasing goods and services. Coordination of the proper purchasing methodology including, but not limited to, solicitation, vendor communication, MWBE compliance, negotiations (where applicable) and procurement record documentation requires considerable staff time. While aggregating individual campus spending into a single or a few contracts will produce some efficiency, it will still require full-time professionals to conduct the procurement and manage the resulting U-wide and multi-campus contracts. Process Assumptions It is critical to get the full support of campus presidents, business officers, purchasing agents and campus wide leadership. We can deliver cost savings contracts but if individuals are not held accountable for ensuring the proper procurement avenues are consistently utilized, savings will probably not be realized. Those anticipated saving will need to come by way of much more difficult decisions. In order to capture potential savings it should be expected that all state-operated campuses, and when feasible the RF and all statutory and community colleges:

• provide necessary data (e.g., historical spending, needed specifications) to the project leads; • educate their campus community about the specific strategic sourcing projects and the required

process(es) to follow; and • utilize the required contracts that result from a strategic sourcing effort.

It is recommended that campus leadership (e.g., Presidents, SUBOA) develop guidelines to determine when, on the rare occasion, a campus would not be required to participate in a strategic sourcing project or utilize a resulting contract. Business Rules Michele Feathers, Laura Stetson and Tom Hippchen have drafted and submitted for senior review a proposal to reorganize System Administrative procurement, in part, to more effectively conduct strategic sourcing at the University-wide level. This document memorializes a standard strategic sourcing process; how specific projects are identified, what will be taken on, who will be the lead department or campus, etc. The recommended program centers around the framework of a comprehensive transformation plan which includes:

• formal, executive level directive and support; • a standardized process with strong central coordination and training; • sufficient resources (staffing and e-procurement system); and • an on-going formal program adopting a proven, well-documented methodology with data

transformation and analytic capabilities. General Program Structure:

• Reorganization of University Procurement: o Seven new Strategic Sourcing positions would be established; an Assistant Director for

Strategic Sourcing (Assistant Director/SS) and six Procurement Specialists (Specialists); o A new Shared Services position would be established: Assistant Director of Shared

Services/Training (Assistant Director/Training);


47

o Specialists will create on-going, cross-functional sourcing teams for major categories within each procurement area. Teams will consist of campus/departmental end-users, Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and procurement staff from various campuses and System Administration.

• Necessary cultural change (initiated through the following change management practices): o a System Administration, Executive Level announcement which communicates the vision

for the Strategic Sourcing Program, obtains agreement by all campus presidents, and adopts formal procedures to address disagreements regarding participation, such as review of determination by SUBOA;

o relationship building through continued Shared Services Regional Workgroups and developing new relationships through existing multi-campus workgroups (e.g., student affairs officers, chief information officers, network security administrators, etc.);

o a formal University-wide procurement training program (separate plan to follow); and o on-going communication in the form of monthly newsletters and a dedicated strategic

sourcing webpage. • Implementation of an e-Procurement System:

o Current SUNY financial data is unreliable due to miscoding and lack of detail; o A centrally managed e-Procurement system will provide reliable data, standardize

procurement practices, and drive contract compliance and conformity with procurement law.

SUNY Mission Connection Strategic sourcing is connected to several aspects of SUNY’s Mission. First, having the campuses and System Administration working collaboratively on certain procurements speaks directly to the concept of “Systemness.” Secondly, with the goals of strategic sourcing being cost savings and increased efficiencies, the project is perfectly aligned with the Shared Services initiative. Finally, Governor Cuomo and Chancellor Zimpher have described the SUNY system as the “economic engine” that will drive economic revitalization and help enhance the quality of life for the State of New York. The strategic sourcing strategy of more efficient use of funds is an integral part of achieving this goal. Approach SUNY will continue to use a two-pronged approach to strategic souring; actively participate in projects identified by the NYS SST while investigating a variety of SUNY–specific opportunities. A formal University-wide strategic sourcing program has been proposed. Financial Plan/Fund Development A budget has been drafted. Part of the Strategic Souring Project plan that was proposed, suggested that additional full-time staff be “phased in” to the project. Two funding models were proposed. Metrics Specific metrics are being developed. This process is proving to be rather difficult because there are little or no benchmarks to which new pricing can be compared to determine real savings. Additionally, System Administration has reached out to E&I (a not-for-profit buying cooperative of which SUNY accesses through its membership in the National Association of Educational Procurement [NAEP]), for assistance in documenting the administrative and operational efficiencies of strategic sourcing projects.


48

• Timelines and potential savings for contracts under the State’s initiatives will be determined by the State’s process. These are the original estimates for the State’s Waves 1 and 2 projects in which SUNY participated.

• For SUNY specific strategic sourcing, the timelines will be determined by specific commodities and services being suggested and evaluated.

Team Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley System Administration Liaison: Tom Hippchen Project Co-Leads: Chris Wade (RF System) and Tom Hippchen (SUNY System) Team Members:

Pat Bates, Monroe CC Terry Boyle, Upstate, RF Troy Caswell, SUNY System Kellie Dupuis, SUNY System Michele Feathers, SUNY System John Grabowski, Buffalo Robert Haig, Stony Brook Ken Jones, Albany David Martin, RF System Mark Martinchek, Potsdam Jeff McGrath, SUNY System Kingsley Osei, SUNY System Laura Stetson, SUNY System Denise Straut, Oneonta, RF Pam Swanigan, System Administration

System Administration Approvals Brian Hutzley, Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer Kellie Dupuis, Director of the Office of Business Operations and Procurement Open and Closed Issues Open State Initiative

1 Saving targets for State-wide initiatives based on initial projects by Accenture.

Initiative Savings Targets1 Potential Savings Fleet Cards 1 – 3% up to $100K Office Supplies 10 – 40% $1.1 - 4.3M IT Software 11- 15% $1.0 – 1.4M IT Hardware 7 – 12% $1.2 – 2.0M Med/Lab supplies 5- 23% $ 3.0 – 12.0 M


49

SUNY continues to work with the NY State Strategic Sourcing Team (SST) to identify opportunities for the University’s participation in collaborative buying categories. Originally, SUNY had committed to co-lead (Michele Feathers) with the consultant (Accenture), the sourcing project for safety & security; however, after the State revised the scope of the initiative, it was mutually decided that SUNY would not benefit from participation in this category. SUNY has provided data to DOB as requested in other categories (e.g., advertising & marketing, industrial equipment). Additionally, based on our years of buying for the University and other agencies, there is a possibility that SUNY may act as a SME with OGS for DOB when the Utilities category is strategically sourced. As stated previously, timelines are difficult to determine at this point because SUNY is a participant and is not controlling the pace of the projects. Savings estimates can only be done once more detailed scopes of work are finalized. Based on conversations with the State’s SST, here are (1) the status of the State’s Wave 1 & 2 projects and (2) a list of potential Wave 3 & 4 and Quick Hit initiatives:

SUNY Initiative

• The three SUNY Hospitals (Downstate, Stony Brook and Upstate) have proposed forming an Integrated Delivery Network (IDN). The proposed plan is awaiting final approval by System and campus senior leadership. The purpose of this initiative is, where possible, to aggregate the spending of the three hospitals on commonly purchased commodities and services to achieve cost savings (and possibly operational efficiencies) and identify opportunities for the hospitals to standardize commodities and services, without jeopardizing patent care, for additional savings opportunities. While awaiting final approval, the hospitals have implemented some of the

Description Status Link

Wave 1 Software (1 of 2) Enterprise software, packaged software VAR Awarded (Executive Agency only)Fleet Cards Point of Sale fuel purchases Awarded http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/snt/awardnotes/7900822445can.htm

Office Supplies Pens, Pencils, Stationary, Paper, Toner Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.state.ny.us/purchase/biddocument/22438BID.ASP

Payment Processing (EVT) Lockbox services, credit card payment processing Awarded http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/snt/awardnotes/7900822419can.htm

IT Services HBITS Staff Augmentation for programmers, program managers Awarded http://ogs.ny.gov/BU/PC/hbits/default.asp

IT Hardware Storage, servers, , PCs and peripherals Awarded http://ogs.ny.gov/purchase/PCPurchase.htm

Auto Service ARI oil changes, maintenance Negotiating

Auto Parts Specific Parts Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.state.ny.us/purchase/biddocument/22523BID.ASP

Administrative Services Light industrial, clerical temporary labor Awarded http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/snt/awardnotes/7300322559can.htm

Office Equipment Copiers, printers, fax machines, MFDs, Equipment maintenance Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.state.ny.us/purchase/biddocument/22418BID.ASP

Security Guards Armed and Unarmed guard services Awarded http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/snt/awardnotes/7101122436can.HTM

Food (Regional Awards) Bulk food and groceries Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.state.ny.us/purchase/biddocument/22407BID.ASP

Automobiles 1 (light duty up to 11,000 GVWR)

Alternate Fuel Passenger Cars, Sport Utility Vehicles, Passenger and Cargo Vans, Pick-up Trucks and Law Enforcement Vehicles. Awarded http://www.ogs.state.ny.us/purchase/spg/awards/4045122539CAN.HTM

Automobiles 2Miscellaneous Light Duty Vehicles including Law Enforcement (Model Year 2013) Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.state.ny.us/purchase/biddocument/22648BID.ASP

Road Salt Classification Codes: 25 and 46 Awarded http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/spg/awards/0180022287CAN.HTM

Wave 2 Med/Lab Supplies Medical and laboratory supplies Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/biddocument/22563BID.ASP

MRO Supplies Light bulbs, hand tools, batteries, flashlights. Evaluation- Award expected soon. http://www.ogs.ny.gov/purchase/biddocument/22584BID.ASP

Wave 3 Industrial EquipmentSafety and Security

Telecom Equipment and ServicesLandline and cellular equipment & service, landline service, data service,

Road Salt (2nd Procurement)

UtilitiesOGS is in strategy development and including SUNY.

Wave 4Heating Oil

OGS is in strategy development and including SUNY.

Bulk FuelOGS is in strategy development and including SUNY.

Audit ServicesAdvertising and Marketing* agency and media buys

Quick Hits

P-Card (Renegotiate)

OGS is developing slides for SUNY to communicate findings of their analysis of P-card spend.

PaperSmall Package Delivery

NYS Strategic Sourcing Projects

Wave ProjectCompleted and Current Projects

Projects Under Consideration


50

strategies characteristic of an IDN structure. In its initial stage, the IDN has realized approximately $2M in savings.

• SUNY is working with the Preferred Sources (IBNYS, NYSID & CorCraft) to possibly standardize certain commodities (e.g., toilet paper, trash bags, gloves, cleaning supplies) across regions or the System to increase utilization of the Preferred Sources and get better pricing from them.

• Representatives from Business Operations & Procurement and University Counsel met with representatives from E&I and Procurex (a company contracting with E&I). Discussions centered on SUNY’s participation in reverse auctions for commodities which are being done by Procurex for E&I. Along with the commodity categories that E&I will be procuring, SUNY will suggest other procurement opportunities. E&I also offers additional services (most with a fee) that SUNY may be interested in:

• Spend Analytics • Business Process Redesign • Organizational Transformation & Operational Assessment • Strategic Sourcing • Technology Evaluation • Return on Investment (ROI) Analysis • Marketing & Communications

SUNY is exploring Spend Analytics, which will help with data analysis & categorization, leveraging organizational spending and supplier management. At no cost to SUNY, E&I will review current SUNY contracts to determine that we are getting the best price, all campuses are paying the same price (if applicable) and where buying off an existing E&I contract may save us additional money. Data analysis being done by System Administration on:

• MRO Supplies (Grainger, Corr, Graybar, MSC Supply) o SUNY, through data analysis being done by E&I is verifying (1) campuses are getting

the proper pricing for items on the State’s MRO contract and if campuses could get better pricing or access to additional items through the E&I contracts. This process has initially focused on Grangier and its MWBE authorized reseller (FM) and may lead to an examination of other MRO vendors. There is no charge to SUNY for this work done by E&I.

o There appears to be the possibility of getting better pricing for some items on the current State contract and expanding the number of items that SUNY can purchase from Grangier at a discounted price.

o SUNY (System Administration and Stony Brook) with E&I have a meeting scheduled with Grangier to negotiate better pricing.

• Public Relations/Advertising Firms • Promotional Products • Lab Animals

o SUNY was planning on using an E&I contract that was being solicited for lab animals. E&I found that this area is not conducive to strategic sourcing because (1) standardization is difficult and (2) the large vendors do not want to bid on a large scale solicitation. SUNY spoke with E&I experts who said that our pool of vendors is the same as theirs.

Current SUNY-specific strategic sourcing opportunities (lead department or campus):

• Athletic Uniforms (UB) All SUNY Campuses with Athletic programs and 16 community colleges are interested participating

o Mid-February: RFI was issued


51

o Mid March: RFI responses were received o Currently drafting the IFB o Mid April: Issue IFB o Mid May: Evaluate and Award

• 3rd Party Elevator Inspections (Plattsburgh) - Using information from Elevator Maintenance participating campuses for preliminary needs assessment. Will canvas other campuses for interest and requirements. SUNY learned that OGS currently has a solicitation for 3rd Party Elevator inspection, SUNY needs to determine if it will meet campuses needs.

• Electronic Bidding & Reverse Auction (System Administration) – The purpose of this RFI is to acquire information regarding the potential options and strategies that are available in the marketplace for electronic bidding and reverse auction services. It is anticipated, but not guaranteed, that SUNY will use the information received from this RFI to develop a future procurement for these services.

• Cable TV (Cortland) Initial meeting with Subject Matter Experts held on September 20. A preliminary survey will be sent to all campuses soon.

• Resident Internet (TBD) Initial meeting with Subject Matter Experts held on September 20. A preliminary survey will be sent to all campuses soon.

• Student Health Insurance (Student Life) potential RFP for consultant to help with insurance complexity.

• Printing Services [also shared service, see Centers of Excellence] (nine participating campuses).

SUNY Strategic Sourcing Supporting Projects

The OBP is developing a Procurement Newsletter (first issue April 2013) to support strategic sourcing, shared services and procurement training and communication. Additionally in order to support communication, consistency and access to opportunities and resulting contracts, OBP with System IT is expanding the “University-wide Contracts” page to include all campuses’ contracts and adding a “Bid Opportunities” page to the SUNY Means Business Website (estimated completion date in June 2013). Campuses will be responsible for inputting their own bid opportunity and contract information. Here is a summary of SUNY strategic sourcing initiatives and their status:


52

Closed State Initiative The following State strategic sourcing projects have been completed:

o Administrative Services o Automobiles o Electronic Value Transfer (EVT) o Fleet Card o IT Services o Road Salt o Security Guards o PCs o Mobile Communications

SUNY may utilize the resulting agreements. Campus procurement staffs have received details about these new contracts. SUNY Initiative

SUNY System Administration has entered into a two-year University-wide contract with the Minority Commerce Weekly, which is a one-of-a-kind weekly journal designed exclusively as a conduit through which federal, state and city agencies, municipalities and prime contractors can effectively target advertisements of procurement, construction and purchasing opportunities to

Phase StatusElevator/Escalator Maintenance Campus-Led At OSC for approval

Preferred Source Maximization Procurement CompliancePlanning meetings held with all Preferred Sources

Student & Athlete Health Insurance SUNY (student life)Informational meetings with Student Life

Athletic Apparel, Footwear & Equip SUNY Pilot Project RFI Issue Date 2/25/2013

Electronic Bidding and Reverse Auction To Support Strategic Sourcing Program RFI Issue Date 2/25/13

Grainger SUNY Quick Hit (Consortia)

Price comparison analysis complete. Waiting for NYS contract execution to finalize.

Hospital IDN IDN Continuous opportunities

Advertising and Marketing (PR Marketing) SUNY Wave 1 (proposed)

Analysis and needs assessment completed. Pending feedback from communications

Promotional Products SUNY Wave 1 (proposed) Analysis completeCable TV SUNY Wave 1 (proposed) RFI for multi-campus pilot (drafting)

Strategic Sourcing ProgramTo implement holistic, comprehensive strategy towards strategic sourcing. Pending executive feedback

e-Procurement To Support Strategic Sourcing -Contract compliance and data integrity Pending executive feedback

Procurement NewsletterTo Support Strategic Sourcing, Shared Services and Procurement Traning and Communication. First Issue April 2013

Changes to SUNY Means Business Website (Bid Opportunities webpage)

To Support communication, consistency and vendor access to opportunities.

With IT expected Completion June 2013

Supporting Projects

Project

Current Projects

Projects Under Consideration

SUNY Strategic Sourcing Projects


53

certified small, minority and women-owned business enterprises. All campus advertisements over $50K that are placed in the NYSCR will be automatically entered into the Minority Commerce Weekly. Campuses do not need to contact the Minority Commerce Weekly or pay for the placement of the ads in the publication. Based on the potential cost to campuses if all these advertisements were entered into the Minority Commerce Weekly individually by campuses, we anticipate savings to be approximately $90K over the two years.

Executive Search and Recruitment Services (Human Resources) – four contracts were awarded and OAG and OSC have approved them.

Professional Advertising Services (Human Resources) – contract awarded, with OSC for approval.

Elevator Maintenance (Purchase) – award made in 4 lots (all the same vendor), vendor has signed the contract, campuses are signing and then will be sent to OAG and OSC for approval.


54

Information Technology Transformation

Student Information Systems (Banner) SUNY Seamless Student Information System (S4)

Executive Summary

The SUNY Seamless Student Information System (S4) is one of the nine initiatives described in the resolution recommended by Chancellor Zimpher to the Board of Trustees on January 25, 2012 and is further described as one of the Strategic IT Transformation initiatives in Vice Chancellor Hutzley’s memo to the campus presidents, dated June 29, 2012. The goal of the S4 initiative is to provide seamless, consistent, and improved system-wide services for students, faculty, and staff. Achieving this goal will assist with future university-wide implementations such as, Degree Planning and Audit, Smart Track, Single Student Identity, Seamless Student Transfer, Common Catalog, and Resident Hall and Housing Management and will also provide consistent information for improved analytics and decision-making at the campus. The S4 initiative begins with creating university-wide consistent data at the campus source. The final objective of the consistent data project is to create a SUNY-wide standard data dictionary. Consistent data is the foundation upon which all phases of the S4 initiative will build.

Scope

The S4 project will consist of three sub-projects: • Consistent data or creating a SUNY-wide standard data dictionary • Seamless student information system solutions • Core business processes with limited campus configurations

In addition, the S4 project includes an open application with NYSERDA to provide financial incentives for energy-savings achieved in any of the S4 sub-projects or other SUNY Transformation Office data center initiatives.

Basic Business Needs

1. Service Excellence a. Seamless access to system-wide services b. Enable consistent student services broadly across the University c. Provide consistent information and improved analytics for decision-making at the

campus and at SUNY

2. Functional and Operational Efficiencies a. Facilitate System-Wide Use Cases Including:

i. Seamless transfer ii. Reverse transfer iii. Cross-registration iv. Single University identity v. University-wide degree planning vi. SUNY-wide student tracking through graduation


55

vii. Smart Track viii. Common student billing ix. Early Warning x. LMS integration xi. Part time Financial Aid

b. Enable Shared Services 3. Cost Avoidance and Cost Reduction

Key Stakeholders

1. SUNY System Administration 2. All SUNY Colleges

Process Assumptions

None.

Business Rules

None.

SUNY Mission Connection

The first paragraph of the SUNY mission states: “The mission of the state university system shall be to provide to the people of New York educational services of the highest quality, with the broadest possible access, fully representative of all segments of the population in a complete range of academic, professional and vocational postsecondary programs including such additional activities in pursuit of these objectives as are necessary or customary.”

The S4 project will help provide seamless access to all of the educational services of SUNY and will facilitate seamless transfer, university-wide degree planning, a single university identity, and student tracking through graduation.

ROI

To be determined and validated with the assistance of a consulting firm.

Value Proposition

See Executive Summary above.

Approach

Standard project management will be used and collaboration/input will be sought from all SUNY colleges. A confluence website has been created and is being maintained for this project. The S4 confluence website can be found at this location: https://confluence.itec.suny.edu/confluence/display/cs43/Home

https://confluence.itec.suny.edu/confluence/display/cs43/Home�


56

Financial Plan/Fund Development

Metrics: Measurements of Success

For each of the following three sub-projects: 1. Consistent data or creating a SUNY-wide standard data dictionary

The measurement of success will be the existence of a production version of a SUNY-wide standard data dictionary, complete with data elements, a definition of the data element, and a set of allowable values for each data element.

2. Seamless student information system solutions The measurement of success is to be determined.

3. Core business processes with limited campus configurations The measurement of success is to be determined.

In addition, the measurement of success for the open application with NYSERDA is to achieve some financial savings and assist in providing an energy-smart SUNY.

Team

Executive Sponsor

Project Manager - Jean Boland Functional Lead Technical Lead – Hilda Hardy

System Administration Approvals

Open and Closed Issues

Open

Closed


57

Business Intelligence Executive Summary In response to the need to better analyze and manage information at the campus and System Administration levels, a joint campus/System Administration team is looking to leverage the University of Buffalo’s Oracle Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE) implementation to deliver similar functionality to all campuses. System Administration has acquired OBIEE for use by all campuses thus positioning us to develop campus and U-Wide managerial/analytical dashboards. The team will be using UB’s dashboard design, flow, subject matter and look and feel as a basis for developing campus and U-wide management reporting/analytical dashboards against the SUNY Data Warehouse and in conjunction with SUNY existing federated security approach. One of the fundamental goals of the SUNY Business Intelligence Initiative (SBII) project is to support planning, forecasting, and decision-making processes at campuses and System Administration. The SBII solution supports an implementation of a decision support (DS) model addressing business problems. The OBIEE tool has enabled the University to produce reporting, charts and graphs for all campuses and System Administration in flexible user friendly formats. Phase 1 of this project will now build on what Institutional Research has implemented by expanding the data repositories to include financial information for the state operated campuses. At the same time, we have identified several other phases to be started just after or in parallel with phase 1. These phases will add new repositories to include information from the Campus Foundations, Research Foundation, Construction Fund, Human Resources and other campus specific information. The Business Intelligence Management Reporting project will encompass financial transactions entered at the state operated campuses. Information such as Supplier Spend, Allocations, Encumbrances, Expenditures, Pending transactions (not yet approved by OSC), Revenue, IFR and Payroll will be included in this phase. The goal of this multi-phase project is to deliver to the campuses and System Administration a multi-year, ‘all funds’ analytical tool so that the campuses have one management reporting tool. Scope This project will consist of multiple phases with the intention of providing campuses with pre-defined dashboards and the ability for campus personnel to create and run their own analysis. Currently this project is broken into four phases. Phase I – State Operated financial information (as defined in the Basic Business Needs section) Phase II – SUNY Human Resource information Phase III – SUNY Research Foundation information Phase IV – Campus Foundation and other campus specific information (yet to be defined) Phase I deliverables, as identified within the project plan, will be available in production as of April 1, 2013. There will be a three month training effort beginning April 1, 2013 with the anticipated roll-out to all campuses as of July 1, 2013.


58

Basic Business Needs The State University of New York campuses have requested to proceed with the joint development of a U-Wide management reporting tool. This tool should have the capabilities to display information in graphical as well as data form

1. Warehouse updates will be nightly. 2. Snapshots will be taken to capture financial information on a monthly and yearly basis. 3. Phase I financial data will contain State Operated transactions only. 4. Phase I Data Types will include:

• Allocations • Encumbrances • Expenditures • Supplier • Income Fund Reimbursable (IFR) • Dormitory Income Fund Reimbursable (DIFR) • Hospital Income Fund Reimbursable (HIFR) • State University Tuition Reimbursable Account (SUTRA) • Revenue • Payroll • FTE • Procurement (Purchase Orders, Requisitions, Vouchers, P-Card) • Pending activity (Transactions not yet approved by OSC) 5. “All funds” will be added in a later phase and include:

− Research Foundation − Campus Foundations − ASC − Housing Corp.’s − Construction Fund − Human Resource − etc.

6. The campuses, upon completion of training, will have the ability to create their own reports/queries. This will be a small group of “power users”.

7. Minimal 5 years of information will be retained. The ultimate goal is to retain 10 years of information.

8. Unit level data is required. (Transactional information) 9. Pending (Not yet OSC approved) transactions will be loaded

Process Assumptions

1. The Financial data warehouse will be loaded on a nightly basis 2. Phase I Security will be at the campus level. 3. Phase I will consist of State Operated information. 4. Phase II will consist of SUNY Human Resource information. 5. Phase III will consist of SUNY Research Foundation information. 6. Phase IV will consist of Campus Foundation and other campus specific information (yet to be

defined)


59

Business/Process Rules

1. Campuses will be responsible for validating their data by utilizing existing functionality within the web and legacy applications. (I.e. SMRT, SCAJ)

2. Security will be at the campus level. 3. All data, accept for pending transactions, will be OSC approved. 4. Financial information will be loaded on a nightly basis and reflect the prior day’s close of

business. SUNY Mission Connection ROI For this project we are looking at the financial impact as not only a return on investment but also as a cost avoidance. By System Administration delivering a U-Wide solution to the Universities analytical needs, we are reducing/eliminating the need for each campus to develop and maintain their own reporting instance. The initial costs for a campus are estimated as follows: Start-Up BI app server (Dev, Test, Prod - $5,000 per environment) $15,000 Business Analyst $80,000 System Admin Data Feeds $50,000 Data Warehouse Developer $75,000 BI Developer $70,000 $290,000 On-Going Hardware Maintenance per year $500 Support FTE (Server, Data Warehouse, BI, Analyst, etc.) $80,000* $80,500 *It is anticipated that a full FTE in any area identified within the On-Going category will not be necessary so an average FTE salary will be used for cost calculations. Based upon the efficiencies achieved during the SMRT rollout (Estimated 2.25m annually), it is expected that similar efficiencies savings will be realized with this initiative.


60

Estimated Development Costs


61

Value Proposition SUNY System Administration will provide to the campuses a means of data management and a single source of management reporting in the following ways: Value: Analytical Development

1. Provide a cost effective method for analyzing business transactions spanning multiple years of information utilizing a common set of tools. .

2. Provide not only a campus view but also a U-wide view of University information. Value: Efficiency and Utility

− Reduces the cost of data collection, storage, and dispersal. − Reduces system complexity. − Decreases system to system variations, leading to decreased ‘learning curves’. − Manages data content and definition across the University. − Simplifies/standardizes data translation and data scrubbing activities for operational data stores /

data warehouses. − Advocates University data standards which ensure consistent definitions and values for

enterprise data elements. − Ensures the quality of the enterprise data. − Promotes the interoperability of data and databases.

Value: Strategic Planning

− Participates in the development of an enterprise data vision and strategy. − Monitors external activities and reports on potential impact.

Value: Compliance

− Protects the privacy and confidentiality of the enterprise data. − Ensures compliance with data reporting laws and regulations. − Represents the University to local, state and federal agencies.

Approach SUNY System Administration will utilize a combination of its operational data stores, campus data feeds and agency data feeds to build one common U-Wide data warehouse. The Extraction, Transformation and Loading (ETL) processes will enforce one common set of business rules to ensure data commonality across the University thus allowing for cross campus analysis. The delivery of this information back to the campuses will utilize Oracles’ Business Intelligence Enterprise Edition (OBIEE). This tool will provide a standardized set of dashboards that will allow the campus customer to enter parameters to narrow the search and analysis of their data. This information will be delivered in graphical and/or raw data formats allowing the customer to download the result set into several different media. (Excel, PowerPoint, PDF, etc.) Financial Plan/Fund Development At this point, the financial plan has yet to be finalized. It is the expected that a combination of System Administration and Binghamton University funding and resources will ensure this project is resourced at the appropriate levels to meet the March 31, 2013 deliverables. Metrics: Measurements of Success


62

System Administration will measure the success of this data warehouse and BI project using several different categories. Actual defined metrics have yet to be defined. Usage Measures

− The number of Mainframe/Legacy reports that are eliminated. − The number of Dashboard hits that are registered.

Product Measures

− Information quality: The data warehouse should provide accurate, complete and consistent information.

− System quality: The data warehouse should be flexible, scalable and able to integrate data. − Individual impacts: Users should be able to quickly and easily access data; think about, ask

questions, and explore issues in new ways; and improve their decision-making because of the data warehouse and BI.

− Organizational impacts: The data warehouse and BI should meet the business requirements; facilitate the use of BI; support the accomplishment of strategic business objectives; enable improvements in business processes; lead to high, quantifiable ROI; and improve communication and cooperation across the University.

Development Measures

− Development cost: By providing a centralized and standardized solution for the University this will reduce the costs of developing and maintaining the data warehouse.

− Development time: The time to develop the initial version of the U-Wide data warehouse should be appropriate.

Team Executive Sponsor Jim Van Voorst – Vice President for Administration, Binghamton Brian Hutzley – Vice Chancellor and CFO Key Stakeholders (Pilot Phase I) Jim Van Voorst – Vice President for Administration, Binghamton John Homburger – Vice President for Administration, Plattsburgh Mike LeVine – Vice President for Finance and Management, Buffalo State Todd Foreman – Vice President for Finance and Administration, Oneonta Brian Hutzley – Vice Chancellor and CFO Dave Powalyk – Chief Transformation Officer, System Administration Project Manager Charlene Deno – Director of Budget, Potsdam Joe Gardiner – Director, Applications Development, System Administration Functional Lead Charlene Deno – Director of Budget, Potsdam. (Representing key stakeholders) Technical Lead John Leirey – Team Leader, Senior Programmer/Analyst – Finance Gail Alguire – Business Analyst, Senior Programmer/Analyst – Human Resources


63

System Administration Approvals Dave Powalyk – CTO, System Administration Brian Hutzley – Vice Chancellor and CFO Pilot Group Charlene Deno – Director of Budget, Potsdam Jim Van Voorst – Vice President for Administration, Binghamton Clark Foster – Budget Officer, Plattsburgh Julie Roseboom – Budget Director, Oneonta Debra Hayes – System Administration


64

Project Plan


65

Open and Closed Issues Open Questions: Process Related:

− What are the security requirements? o Beyond campus level security, what attributes will drive security? o Who will be in charge of maintaining the security? o How will security be maintained?

− What data attributes will be required to make this a successful implementation? − Will there be a data review/approval process or will the data be loaded as-is? − Are campuses required to provide the data?

Closed


66

HR Data Warehouse Redesign and BI Initiative

Introduction/Executive Summary

Redesign the existing SUNYHR Data Warehouse to create a comprehensive repository of the SUNY community. This population currently is comprised of state-operated campuses and includes, but is not limited to faculty, staff and individuals that provide meaningful contributions to SUNY. Historical, current and future data will be maintained for purposes of reporting and analysis at the detail and summary levels. Campus and System Administration will have the ability to view current information and historical trends and also provide input for future projections. Position, Personnel, Employment, Payroll and Time and Attendance information will be made available using Oracle Business Intelligence (OBI) dashboards. These dashboards will be available to executive management, functional offices and department mangers to assist in day-to-day operations as well as providing planning and decision-making tools. Management will have accurate information to set goals, evaluate benchmarks and redirect funding and resources when appropriate.

Scope

The initial scope of the SUNYHR Data Warehouse will be limited to providing state-operated campus employees and affiliates with operational, comparative and strategic reporting tools. It is anticipated that in the future community colleges may be represented. Reporting capabilities will allow for securing and appropriately limiting data access to potentially all campus and u-wide decision makers. Access within a campus can be made as granular as department level and employee affiliation role (Chemistry dept, graduate assistants) or as broad as a comparative summary reporting across campuses with similar attributes. Campus data –privacy and confidentiality will continue to be of the highest importance when designing data access. The breadth of Personal Service reporting will be comprehensive, spanning all aspects of SUNYHR data for all campus personnel regardless of affiliation: position and funding , employment, affiliate commitments, compensation history and time and attendance. Additionally, the SUNYHR warehouse will be designed to seamlessly integrate with other SUNY warehouses to meet management reporting needs. The implementation of the SUNYHR warehouse for the state-operated campuses will occur in Phases.

• Phase I Enhancement of the existing SUNYHR Transactional System • Phase II Warehouse requirements gathering, design, development and implementation • Phase III Initial Dashboard Creation • Phase IV Integration with other SUNY Data warehouses • Phase V Additional Dashboard Creation based on campus and U-wide need • Phase VI Department and Role level data access • Phase VII Investigation of interest and business needs for potential Community College

inclusion


67


Key Stake Holders State University of New York state operated campus community including but not limited to:

1. University-wide Executive Offices 2. Campus Executive Management 3. Campus Functional Offices 4. Campus Departmental Offices

Process Assumptions

• 20+ years of data will be maintained

Business Rules

• All state operated campuses will be represented • All campuses must actively manage their transactional SUNYHR data to guarantee quality BI

reporting results • Pilot campuses will be responsible for final validation of dashboard reporting accuracy • Security will be maintained at the campus and potentially to the department and role level • SUNYHR transactional information will be loaded on a nightly basis and contain future, current and

historical transactional data. • SUNYHR biweekly warehouse will be a reconciled snapshot representation of SUNYHR data.

Reporting will deliver consistent repeatable results when all parameters are the same.


Approach The HR Warehouse Redesign and BI Initiative is a multi-phase approach. Enhancement of the existing SUNYHR Transactional System

• Identify additional data needs as defined by both the campuses and System Administration • Provide for more robust data collection on campus non-employee affiliates including their

commitments to the campus, representation within the campus organization and supervisors. This will allow for future tracking of non-employees in the Time and Attendance system.

• Allow for Shared Service employees to be clearly and accurately represented by effort and funding within the respective campuses.

• Evaluate existing data quality, cleanse data programmatically or via campus data maintenance OBIEE personnel training and resource alignment

• Identification and reassignment of existing HR technical resources • Identification of additional resources and technical expertise needed • Formal and informal training in OBI warehouse and dashboard development tools


68

Warehouse requirements gathering and design • Understanding campus and U-wide reporting needs resulting in a flexible, efficient design

methodology • Gap analysis and resolution of data and system integration with other data warehouses (IR,

Finance etc) • Dashboard and query identification and design (initial and subsequent rollout) • Data Dictionary definition and ER design diagrams • Design physical, business and presentation layers of the data warehouse

Proof of Concept • Design a warehouse in OBI using the current Nightly and Pay Period tables • Load the existing Nightly and Pay Period tables into the warehouse • Develop and run selected queries using the warehouse • Determine what design strategies will work best for the long-term solution • Where possible, use the resulting warehouse as a foundation for the long-term solution

Warehouse development • Create Data Warehouse tables and views (Stars Schema of fact and dimension tables)

Data conversion

• Mapping of transactional SUNYHR data to the data warehouse tables • Derivation of new data by evaluating multiple data elements and creating a single composite data

element for efficiency of dashboard reporting across functional areas • Validate data integrity • Conversion of 20+ years of HR data to the data warehouse tables, use ODI or other tool to load

Implementation OBIEE Repository

• Create RPD Physical Layer • Create RPD Logical Layer • Create RPD Presentation Layer • Test and Validate Results • Performance Test

Implementation

• Migrate to Test Environment • Migrate to Production

Initial Dashboard Creation • Evaluate existing frequently used Discoverer queries and convert when possible those queries to

OBI dashboards • Work with the campuses to identify and develop additional queries that would provide efficiencies

and a quick return on investment at the functional and managerial levels

Integration with other SUNY Data warehouses • Assist other functional areas in accurately and efficiently referencing HR data to provide robust

reporting at the summary and detail levels (i.e. finance and Institutional Research etc)

Additional Dashboard Creation based on campus and U-wide need • Develop additional executive management dashboards as users recognize the flexibility and

potential of the HR warehouse information


69

• Provide additional functional office reports as end users become more sophisticated

Department and Role level data access • Create security access and campus organizational structure to provide campuses the option to

allow departmental access to SUNYHR information.- • Build on much of the existing information the campus is currently maintaining, therefore limiting

the amount of administrative overhead while providing the necessary access to departmental staff for viewing and requesting personnel actions.

• Provide department managers with the capability to request HR actions and workflow those requests through the appropriate approval chain ultimately arriving at the campus HR functional office for final review and decision.


Metrics

Team

Executive Sponsor William Howard - Senior Vice Chancellor & General Counsel, System Administration Curtis Lloyd – Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, System Administration Dave Powalyk - CTO, System Administration

Key Stakeholders Julie Petti - Director of University-wide Human Resources, System Administration State Operated Campuses Human Resource offices

Project Manager Joe Gardiner – Director, Applications Development, System Administration Michele Culligan – Assistant Director HR/Payroll Processing, System Administration

Functional Lead Sandra Butterworth – Sr. Personnel Associate University-wide Human Resources, System Administration

Technical Lead Gail Alguire – Business Analyst, System Administration Sandra Butterworth – Sr. Personnel Associate University-wide Human Resources, System Administration

System Administration Approvals Dave Powalyk – CTO, System Administration Curtis Lloyd - – Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, System Administration

Pilot Group

• TBA


Open and Closed Issues Open Closed


70

Centers of Excellence: Transaction Processing Centers

Functional Expertise And Regional Hubs

Transaction Processing Centers

Time and Attendance


The SUNYHR time and attendance system will keep a record of the vacation, holiday and sick leave accrual and absences of each employee, and the reasons therefore, whether from sickness, vacation, or leave of absence without pay. In addition, the hours worked each workday and the total hours worked each workweek and absences from work by employees in certain negotiating units or hourly workers must be recorded to ensure the employee's receiving proper payment for hours actually worked or for leave entitlements.

Scope

The SUNYHR Time and Attendance system(TAS) will replace the existing TIMA legacy system. It will provide a comprehensive system where state-operated campus employees can maintain vacation, holiday and sick leave accrual and absences. Additionally TAS will track deficit reduction balances. Employees will be notified of approaching limitations or expirations of accruals. TAS will be the new source (previously TIMA) of the annual accrual liabilities in SUNY’s year-end financial statement. TAS will be developed and implemented in a phased approach based on time and attendance common business rules. Phase I Unclassified Service, non-hourly employees Phase II Classified Service, non-hourly employees Phase III Hourly employees Phase IV Generation of Payment/Payroll Approval Rosters Phase V Investigate Non-Employee time entry Phase VI Financial Reporting Basic Business Needs • Provide a user friendly online process to allow employees to manage accrual and charges of time off • Provide campuses with a database of time and attendance that allows for recording, tracking and

evaluation of employees time charges • Provide campuses with reporting tools that identify accrual issues such as time charge abuses • Provide supervisors with notifications of subordinates time requests and ability to respond • Allow for categorization of employees for purposes of editing time and attendance rules

Process Assumptions

1.) All Time and Attendance functionality is available over the WEB 2.) The application must be available 24/7


71

3.) Security system is developed and available to secure access by organizational hierarchy down to the individual level

4.) All users will have access to computers or have assigned proxies (designees) 5.) Organizational hierarchies established by the campus will allow dissemination to the employee

supervisor or the department (personnel, payroll) responsible for approval 6.) A common audit trail process will be attached to all recorded actions 7.) Campuses will have a reporting tool for queries with the ability to download reports and data to their

local systems for operational use and analysis 8.) Campuses will provide initial time accruals for uploading into TAS Business Rules

• Provide for a replacement for the current TIMA system. • Full integration with Personnel, Employment, Position, Payroll and Finance Systems. • Provide for a consistent set of time and attendance business rules.

o Enforce all regulations including: SUNY Board of Trustee policies, negotiated union contracts, federal, state, NYS Civil Service, NYS Dept of Budget and Corporate

• Ability for multiple methods of time entry. o Accessibility over the WEB. o Provide for the ability for periodic uploads of data for campuses using local systems. o Provide for alternative system of entry of data for employees not able to use WEB.

Individual Bulk Interface

o Other methods of time entry: paper, Kronos, punch clocks • Ability to provide for all employee and pay basis types: annual, biweekly, full time, part time,

hourly, fee, grad students, student assistants, and college work study • Method for generating payroll transactions to be sent directly to OSC • Ability for System Admin to maintain global academic and campus calendars and schedules.

o Option of assigning biweekly work schedules for employees in civil service negotiating units.

Option of assigning lunch break times. • Ability for Employees and Appropriate Personnel to access current and historical time and

attendance information via the organizational hierarchy. • Ability for Facilitator (Individual(s) responsible for Time and Attendance) to make corrections

or adjustments. • Ability to make adjustments to both current and/or historical transactions • Ability for system to allow for the storing of future dates and transactions • Ability for the campus to process Multi-agency Employee Time Sheets. • System should provide notifications of pending or delinquent transactions to employees and

supervisors. Notifications should roll up the organizational hierarchy if not approved or denied in a timely manner.

• Ability for agencies to transfer ownership of time and attendance balance data when employees transfer from one SUNY campus to another. o Method for transferring balances from other state agencies.


72

• Ability for Employees to: o See detailed information at any time during time sheet period.

time sheets balances time used time accrued holidays accrued

o Enter time used on a daily basis. o Enter holidays worked. o Submit time sheet electronically to appropriate individual or department with or without

comments. o Print a timesheet or individual report

• Ability of system to handle: o Multiple categories of time used.

Vacation • Bonus Vacation Days

Holidays. • Track floating holidays as separate from regular holidays. • Allow for a list of holidays accrued and expiration dates. • Handle compensatory holiday.

Sick Regular Family Sick Personal Leave for specific negotiating units Military leave. Compensatory Straight Time if eligible Compensatory Overtime if eligible Bereavement, jury duty and other special categories of time used. Deficit Reduction

o Determine who and when an employee is eligible to accrue and use time. Automatic calculation of accrued time based on appropriate accrual schedules.

• Type of Employee • Negotiating Unit • Appointment Percent (FTE) • Salary Range • Service Years • Hour Obligation • Actual hours worked in payroll period • VRW

o Apply maximums based on dates and/or accumulations Allow for warnings in advance.

• When holidays or other is due to expire. • When vacation or sick is about to hit maximums. • When personal leave is due to expire

Allow for a confirmation when the time is lost. o Ability to mass add/delete/change accumulations both system wide and by agency. o Ability to handle lost time.

• Accommodate differences in requirements for Professional and Classified Employees o Professional Employees.

Time Sheets Submitted on a Monthly Basis as Exception Entry. Minimal action when no time used. Time is accrued by days or as a decimal thereof.

o Classified Employees. Time is accrued by hours or as a decimal thereof.


73

Ability for employees to enter multiple times in and out on a daily basis. Ability to calculate Comp Time and Overtime.

• Ability to send Over Time after approval via a workflow process to payroll.

Provide for the approval on a biweekly basis. Provide for holiday waivers – cash or time earned.

o Ability of Approving Individual to either correct employee timesheet with notification to employee or to reject time sheet and send it back to employee for corrections with comments.

• Provide for update reminders to employees/supervisors when timesheets or approvals are tardy.

• Provide for a mechanism for leave donations. Donations should be able to be university wide. • Ability of system to track Family Medical Leave (12 weeks maximum). • Provide for a reporting interface

o Employee o Department o Supervisor o Time and Attendance Office o Adhoc


ROI

Time and Attendance Project Cost Summary: Original estimates: Build Initial Cost: $1.0 M Annual ongoing: $240,000 Purchase Initial Cost: $4.12M Annual Ongoing: $520,000

Approach

Time and Attendance will be developed and implemented in a phased approach. Each phase will undergo quality assurance by the U-wide functional offices. Upon completion and revision of functional office test results, the pilot campuses will participate in extensive testing of time and attendance scenarios. The cycle of testing and revision will continue until final approval by the pilot campus is given. Campus roll-out and implementation will be staggered. Once a state-operated campus finalizes their organization structure, assigns positions and employees to departments and revise their internal business practices, they can transition their targeted employees to the automated time and attendance system. This will provide a gradual, organized and well managed implementation and allow for responsive refinement of business rules as necessary.


74


Metrics

• All SUNY state operated campuses will have access; use will be frequent • Approximately 75,000 employees will be using the system on a daily, weekly or monthly basis

Team

Executive Sponsor William Howard - Senior Vice Chancellor & General Counsel, System Administration Curtis Lloyd – Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, System Administration Dave Powalyk - CTO, System Administration Key Stakeholders Julie Petti - Director of University-wide Human Resources, System Administration State Operated Campuses Human Resource offices Project Manager Joe Gardiner – Director, Applications Development, System Administration Michele Culligan – Assistant Director HR/Payroll Processing, System Administration Functional Lead Tina Vumbaco – Assistant Director University-wide Human Resources, System Administration Technical Lead Gail Alguire – Business Analyst, System Administration System Administration Approvals Dave Powalyk – CTO, System Administration Curtis Lloyd - – Vice Chancellor for Human Resources, System Administration Pilot Group

• Binghamton University • Brockport • Cortland • Plattsburgh • Maritime • System Administration



Open

Closed


75

Procurement


The decentralized procurement process in place at each State-operated campus has resulted in a lack of standardization of procedures and documents, limited information sharing, and the duplication of processes and efforts. The Shared Services – Procurement effort is working to identify these inefficiencies and advise executive leadership of tools, policies and practices that can be instituted to eliminate and/or minimize redundancy and produce savings.

Presently, all procurement transactions are processed by the campus generating the transactions. The level of available staff time, experience, and expertise varies by campus. The Transaction Processing Center (TPC) plan will begin to migrate processing of transactions from individual campuses to a virtual transaction processing environment. The TPC will provide campuses with a dedicated staff to process transactions for all participating campuses, thereby providing improved service and efficiencies. In addition to these immediate benefits, the TPC will build a foundation upon which SUNY can continue to develop economies of scale and leverage the benefits associated with standardization.

Scope


The procurement process on SUNY’s State-operated campuses is governed by the variety of laws and constraints associated with public sector purchasing. The procurement process begins when an end-user determines the need for a good or service and utilizes the appropriate procurement vehicle to obtain a vendor to provide that good or service. State-operated campuses then use SUNY’s Web Procurement application to transmit information related to the purchase of the goods or services to the New York State Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) for encumbrance and payment.

Within the Web Procurement application, workflow is the electronic means of routing a procurement document from the originator (campus) to its final destination (OSC). A procurement document is created and then moves, within the workflow application through a level of approvals until it reaches the final destination of the workflow tree. Web Procurement allows each campus to determine the level of workflow creation and approval.

In the TPC environment, campuses will continue to originate purchases and create purchase requisitions. However, a change in workflow will route all of the purchase requisitions to the TPC for processing, thereby decreasing the staff-time required for processing at the campus level, and allowing procurement staff to focus on the more complex and strategic development stages of the procurement process.

Process Assumptions

The TPC will exist in a virtual environment. Participation in the initial implementation of the TPC will be voluntary.

The TPC will have signatory authority for all participating campuses and is responsible final vendor selection; including for all issues related to OSC’s Vendor Management Unit. The TPC staff will only have access to the participating campuses accounts and functionality as it pertains for the job duties of the TPC. TPC staff will log off and log on to the appropriate campus prior to conducting business and will be placed into the campuses workflow final destination node.


76

Campuses utilizing the services of the TPC will have the Web Procurement application in-use at the Department level. Department staff will contact the TPC for assistance in resolving their purchasing issues. The TPC will act as a liaison between the Department staff and the vendor.

Business Rules

Procurement Process

The work of the Transaction Processing Center does not represent the procurement process in its entirety.

In addition to the work completed by the Transaction Processing Center, the complete procurement process includes:

• The determination by the end-user that a good or services is needed • The development of a scope of work • The determination of a procurement method • The execution of the procurement method (solicitation, single-source, or other) • The selection of a vendor • The negotiation of a contract and verification of compliance with all legal requirements

The work of the transaction processing center begins after all of these steps have been completed at the campus (or collaborative-procurement) level.

Create Requisition

Create all purchase requisitions at the department level. The purchase requisition would be placed in the Procurement Offices Work List (final destination – Create Purchase Order) for completion and sent to the vendor. The Requisition approval process is the only application that requires a workflow tree be established.

Campus Workflow

Requisition approvals would follow the campus approval structures until the requisition was ready to be turned into a purchase order. As departments change personnel, it is critical that the Workflow Administrator maintain the trees so that requests do not get ‘lost’ or delayed during the approval process.

Receiving

The departmental user or Central Receiving will receive the goods and/or services. The accounts payable office will be notified that either the invoice can now be paid or the goods must be returned to the vendor.

Payment Authorization

The departmental user has the ability to utilize this application to ‘flag’ a purchase order invoice so that the accounts payable office knows that it can be paid.

Accounts Payable


77

The accounts payable office will enter the invoice information and create the SUNY voucher so that it can be sent to OSC for vendor payment.

A campus can choose to have the departmental user enter the invoice information. In this model, the campus has the option to utilize the ‘Invoice Collection’ function, allowing the end user to enter the vendor’s invoice information into the Web Procurement. After which, the Accounts Payable office would convert the invoice information into a Voucher and forward to OSC for payment.


The TPC represents a change in both business process and culture that will further unite the campuses and harness the power of ”Systemness”, reducing costs and providing more efficient service. The savings in costs can be reinvested in academic programs and student services that will allow SUNY to accomplish the goals and tasks associated with its mission.

Approach

SUNY’s approach to the processing of routine back-office transactions, entitled “Standardize, Centralize, and Support”, is designed to allow for the necessary geographic variations; and use a standardized process, centralized management, and customized support in order to succeed.

Standardize

Successful shared services endeavors begin by standardizing the processes at all participating locations. In order to begin to standardize SUNY’s decentralized procurement process, a Procurement Training Program (PTP) has been designed. The PTP will provide campuses with the skills needed to achieve operational efficiencies and service excellence. The PTP has two main components – outreach and education.

The outreach component included both interactive and web-based outreach. Interactive outreach is currently being achieved through Regional Workgroup meetings and annual conferences. Web-based outreach includes the use of the SUNY Means Business website (www.suny.edu/meansbusiness), Confluence Collaboration Space, and the Purchasing Listserv; as well as the launch of the new procurement newsletter.

The education component proposes the development and implementation of a Center for Professional Development (CPD) certification program for purchasers. System Administration’s Office of Business Operations and Procurement and University Counsel's Office is currently meeting with CPD to design three levels of procurement training – basic, advanced and expert. Basic training will provide all purchasers with the basic knowledge required to make discretionary purchases. Basic training will also provide “train the trainer” materials to be used to train campus staff members with purchasing responsibilities, located outside of the purchasing department. The advanced level purchasing training will provide more detailed information to staff responsible for making purchases within the purchasing department. Expert training will be required of procurement managers and executive decision makers in order to provide a detailed understanding of all aspects of the procurement process.

Procurement training will provide attendees with knowledge about the laws and regulations governing the procurement process. Additionally, it will present each campus with information about best practices, standard operating procedures, and other means to achieve the standardization required to build the successful shared procurement environment in which the TPC will operate.


78

Centralize

Successful shared services models require a fine balance between centralization and autonomy. Decentralization results in redundant, inefficient and non-standardized processing; however autonomy can provide a more customer-focused experience for end-users. Fully centralized services allow for economies of scale and standardized processing; but they can result in detached, unresponsive and inflexible business practices. Centralization in the context of shared services retains the responsive customer-focused environment, while eliminating redundancies and creating economies of scale. It does so by using communication, professional development, and performance measures such as Service Level Agreements.

The implementation of the TPC will begin with the selection of a specified number of campuses to participate in a pilot launch. Campus volunteers will be selected to both staff the TPC (provide services to other campuses) and utilize the TPC (purchase services from the TPC). The TPC will exist in a virtual environment, allowing TPC staff will remain on their home campuses. SLA will be utilized to transfer the services of the employee from the home campus to the TPC.

A communications plan is in development, including the use of webinars and large group meetings, in order to announce the TPC and solicit campus volunteers for the TPC Pilot Program. Upon the determination of campus participation, employee SLA’s will be developed and executed; and workflows and approval routing options will be finalized, and processing will begin.

Support

SUNY’s Web Procurement application provides the IT solution required to support the TPC. Web Procurement can be programmed to allow the necessary workflow and approval process required for the centralized processing of procurement transaction.

An outline of these technological and business systems processes associated with the TPC was developed in collaboration between information technology and procurement staff at SUNY System Administration. The outline was then shared University-wide with State-operated campus procurement staff. Staff identified issues and questions associated with the plan; and were asked to provide feedback. The feedback has been considered in the development of the implementation approach. The feedback was largely related to the procurement process, lack of standardization, and concerns surrounding centralization. These issues are now being addressed in the revised approach “Standardize, Centralize, and Support”.


In Development.

Preliminary calculations associated with the required costs have been performed based upon the number of transactions that must be processed by the TPC in order for the initiative to be self-funded

Metrics

To Be Determined.


79

A formal method of measurement will be developed to determine cost savings, for example, the costs savings associated with the number of transactions processed using the staff costs associated with the TPC, versus the number of transactions processed with previous staff costs.

Team Laura Stetson, University-wide Procurement Specialist Dave Powalyk, CTO Regional Work-groups from all State-operated campuses System Administration Approvals Kellie Dupuis, Director of the Office of Business Operations and Procurement Brian Hutzley, Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer Open and Closed Issues

Open

Formation of a Campus Advisory Procurement Team for TCP development remains underway. A preliminary list of participants will be contacted no later than April 12, 2013.

The original timeline associated with the Shared Services – Procurement project must be revised to include the design, development and implementation of the TPC; including the time required for standardization and centralization.

Closed

The project approach has been revised to address comments received from campus procurement staff on August 31, 2012. The project manager, the Office of Business Operations and Procurement, the Regional Workgroups, and Campus Advisory Procurement Team for TCP continue to design the development and implementation of the TPC using this revises approach.


80

Functional Expertise

Financial Aid SUNY SmartTrack Initiative


SUNY Smart Track is an innovative and transparent system wide approach to promote awareness and understanding regarding college choice, college financing options and responsible loan borrowing. The average indebtedness of a SUNY graduate is $22,575, below the national average student indebtedness of $26,600. SUNY is proud our students borrow less to attend our campuses and want to encourage students to make sound financial decisions by borrowing only what they need. Smart Track is aimed at assisting students in making informed decisions beginning with their college selection and continuing throughout their tenure at a SUNY campus. This initiative creates powerful tools for students and their families to ensure making the right college choice and understand all educational costs. Additionally, these services promote smart loan borrowing and responsible loan repayment. If borrowing is part of a student’s plan for paying for college, SUNY‘s initiatives will assist students in understanding all rights and responsibilities associated with successful borrowing.


This initiative is in line with Healthy New York and the efforts to assist students to make solid decisions regarding student loan borrowing. This new approach will likely have a positive impact on student’s attitudes towards borrowing and could potentially reduce their overall indebtedness at time of graduation. Additionally, the initiative reinforces student retention and completion efforts.

Approach

The SICAS Center is developing the new SUNY Student Award Letter on behalf of its member campuses. Non Banner or SICAS campuses will produce the new form using campus resources. The Student Loan Service Center will be expanded to include new Direct Loan services including student engagement activities for each campus as well as delinquency and default avoidance communications with students. Financial Literacy tools and resources will be available to all SUNY students and their families.

Metrics

The new standard award letter will be reviewed and monitored in the coming months following release. Changes, modification or enhancements will be made as needed I the coming months and academic years. Additionally, all student engagement efforts will be measured to review success and impact on campus retention. Delinquency and default avoidance activities will be measured for effectiveness in reducing the number of students who remain in delinquent status or who fail into default. The overall goal of reducing the SUNY default rate by 5 % in the next five years is evidence of commitment to all efforts. Approach As the federal calculation of the Cohort Default Rate (CDR) transitions from a 2-year to a 3-year cohort calculation in less than two years, the U.S. Department of Education anticipates a nationwide increase in CDRs. SUNY expects a significant increase in campus wide CDRs. In anticipation of this increase, the threshold for penalty with the federal government with respect to CDRs will increase from 25% to 30%


81

and campuses that exceed that rate will be required to take corrective actions. Exceeding that threshold for three consecutive years results in the loss of federal Title 4 eligibility for the campus. To address this challenge and mitigate SUNY default risk, SUNY has partnered with the U.S. Department of Education’s Student Financial Aid (FSA) Delinquency and Default Prevention Office to develop a proactive and measurable campus-wide, system-wide default prevention initiative. The initial default management plan focuses on our community colleges and will be carried to all SUNY campuses once the plan is developed and the methodology is tested. The primary focus of the initiative will be the use of SUNY enrollment data and federal student loan data to identify and focus on the root causes of default. This data will allow SUNY to develop effective, measurable intervention strategies to promote student and school success. The U.S Department of Education is following the SUNY initiative very closely and providing support and assistance as needed. The SUNY model is unique and has the potential to be used as the model for other colleges and universities and public systems across the nation. Addressing the default problem/Changing perceptions Default rates are often seen as a Financial Aid problem. However, default rates are the end product of many factors that have occurred throughout a student’s time on campus. While some of these factors cannot be controlled, such as the current economic conditions in New York State and across the nation, other factors can be impacted by intervention at the campus level SUNY’s initiative will develop a campus wide, system wide default prevention initiative which focuses on the root causes of default as evidenced by predictive data. The goal of this initiative is to develop a collaborative campus wide effort to work with identified students in a positive and proactive manner to achieve the best result for the student and thus the campus. System Administration Team A team comprised of staff from SUNY System Administration Offices of Student Financial Aid Services, Office of Community Colleges, University Life and Academic Affairs, Institutional Technology, Institutional Research and Diversity Affairs has been established. This project team continues to collaborate with campus representatives on program development and implementation. Discussions continue with community colleges who intend to become pilot campuses and the first to participate in this effort. Data Analysis To create the foundation for determining who is defaulting and then to determine why they are defaulting, a data driven approach will be used. Using data from the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) as well as data submitted to SUNY via the SIRIS reporting project, a campus profile of a student most likely to default will be established. Understanding who is defaulting, and why, is key to developing effective default prevention strategies. Once we understand the “who” and “why” of default risk on campus, we will be enabled to develop targeted interventions. The vast majority of students who receive loans will not need extraordinary assistance to reduce default risk. In some cases, however, certain students will need direct help and intervention by the campus.


82

It is anticipated that the data component of this project will be completed by SUNY Institutional Technology and Institutional Research. Data fields for analysis have been identified within both the SUNY and federal data.

Team

SUNY Financial Aid Award Letter Task Force Members Dan Tramuta, Fredonia John View, ESF, Kerrie Cooper, Canton, Susan Tripp, Herkimer Debra Bouabidi, Rockland Scott Atkinson, Brockport Diane Corbett, SUNY Albany Karen Taylor, Cortland Bill Cavin, SICAS Center Mike Williams, System Administration Financial Aid Shared Services Committee Members John View, ESF Kerrie Cooper, Canton Susan Merchant. Potsdam Dan Tramuta, Fredonia Sandy Friedman, Nassau Susan Romano, Finger Lakes Dennis Chavez, Binghamton Diane Corbett, Albany James Trimboli, Niagara Tom Panettiere, Purchase Jacque Pascariello, Stony Brook Scott Atkinson, Brockport (NYSFAAA President) Mark Hill, ESF, (SUNYFAP President) SUNY Award Letter The SUNY Award Letter represents a strong collaboration between campuses from different sectors with an obvious dedication to the students they serve. The team was established to meet the Chancellor’s directive that all SUNY campuses adopt a commitment to transparency for college costs by use of the federal Shopping Sheet by 2013-14. To meet this goal, the group recommended SUNY adopt the data contained in the Shopping Sheet as a SUNY Award Letter to be used by all campuses. The SUNY Award Letter was developed based on the federal Shopping Sheet with modifications required to adopt the form as a useable award letter. It uses standard language and incorporates data fields to display Graduation Rate, Cohort Default Rate and Median Borrowing. The back of the form can be used by a campus to define financial aid terms and conditions, or other unique campus facts and/or directions for the student, such as directing the student to a campus web link. The form also includes space at the bottom for campus customization


83

The SUNY Award Letter was shared with Directors of Admissions and Chief Enrollment Managers to gather feedback. Additionally, input was gathered from campus staff, students and their families throughout the design process. Implementation It is recommended that SUNY Campuses be granted flexibility with regard to implementation timeframes, such as starting the initiative with a freshman cohort. Flexibility is particularly important where implementation will result in major programming changes. An example of a major programming concern is when campuses have student portals that need to be updated. Additionally, each campus will determine, as they currently do, the award letter distribution method to their student population. The award letter can be a paper form or developed into an electronic process. It is recommended that each campus be required to submit an implementation plan outlining campus needs. Federal Data Fields The Department of Education has stated they will provide campuses with data to populate the Graduation Rates and Median Borrowing Amounts. However, this data is not yet been made available to campuses. If it is not provided, campuses may need to populate these fields using data from IPEDS, NSLDS or campus institutional data. In this case, some clarification will be needed regarding whether colleges have to compare data against all schools nationally, by sector nationally, or by sector within the state. New Services: Expanded Role of SUNY’s Student Loan Service Center The Student Loan Service Center (SLSC), located at the University at Albany, is a nationally recognized leader in the servicing of Federal Campus Based Loans. They are currently responsible for servicing all of the Federal Perkins, Health Professions and Nursing Student Loans awarded at the 29 SUNY State Operated Campuses. The SLSC’s mission is to provide quality and courteous service to all SUNY student loan borrowers and the 29 SUNY State Campuses that they serve. Given their current experience working with several federal programs and thousands of student borrowers, the SLSC is poised to assist in the default management effort. Cost considerations will be established and will include a shared cost approach. An expansion of SLSC services will allow SUNY to properly evaluate the effectiveness of SUNY provided, student retention and default prevention efforts. The core of all new services provided by SLSC will begin with the predictive modeling discussed earlier in this document, that is, an analysis of federal data and SUNY data to identify at-risk loan borrowers. Using predictive analysis, centralized efforts to assist all SUNY federal loan borrowers will result in improved student persistence rates and default rates. SLSC uses Educational Computer Systems, Inc. (ECSI), a long-time industry leader in student loan management as their loan servicing provider. ECSI’s ability to interface with NSLDS will be critical in the development of new SLSC services to assist SUNY Federal Stafford Loan borrowers during periods of enrollment, their grace period, and during various stages of loan delinquency. Here is an overview of the types of student contacts we anticipate implementing at different points throughout the student’s college career and beyond. In-School Borrower Contacts


84

The SLSC will initiate and maintain e-mail communications with all SUNY student loan borrowers starting immediately after enrollment, until they leave SUNY. Predictive analytics will allow the SLSC to initiate and alter student engagement contacts, or touch points, based on specific at-risk factors of loan borrowers. Communications will vary, and will include the following:

• Welcome to SUNY message with a request to provide additional contact information to the SLSC

• Ongoing messages throughout the academic year regarding the availability of on-campus academic assistance, including direct links to the institution’s Academic Advisory Office, the student’s academic advisor, or other available on-campus academic resources

• Reminders regarding the wise use of credit while in college, including links to available financial literacy and debt management resources

• Mid-semester student engagement messages, such as study tips for mid-term exams, and

• Ongoing messages regarding on-campus or local events to increase social connections on campus

Borrower Contacts during Grace Period Similar to the SLSC’s loan servicing responsibilities for the Federal Perkins Program, the SLSC will offer During Grace services. Communications would be sent to Federal Stafford Loan borrowers during their 6-month grace period that would include the following:

• Information on how to re-enroll in college for borrowers who failed to graduate • Information on the borrower’s repayment start date and available repayment plan

options • Links to SFA’s Repayment Plans and Calculators, including links to available financial

literacy and debt management resources • Deferment and forbearance options for borrowers who are experiencing financial

difficulty Delinquency and Default Avoidance The SLSC will perform delinquency resolution services at various stages of loan delinquency, eliminating the need for contracts with private vendors. This will establish a consistent and standard practice of default intervention procedures, allowing SUNY to effectively measure the success of SLSC intervention services for loan borrowers. Financial Plan/Cost Currently, SLCS is funded by federal administrative cost allowances based on the Pell and Perkins portfolio for the SUNY campuses they serve. SLSC and System Administration continue development of a comprehensive cost structure for the new services. In order to fund expanded services, SUNY campuses will share the cost of SLSC’s expanded role as SUNY’s loan servicer. Along with the development of the cost structure, discussions continue between SUNY Administration and SLSC on the development of a new predictive analytics model, and SLSC’s capacity to service Federal Direct Loans for SUNY campuses. However, it has been determined that there will be no charges assessed to pilot project campuses until such time that system-wide cost considerations have been established by SUNY.


85

Additionally, it is suggested that given the additional services provided to students, the SLSC create a new entity called the SUNY Student Service Center to more accurately describe the additional services that will be available to all SUNY students.


86

Library Services


The SUNYConnect library initiative is continually evolving shared services for libraries by better leveraging existing tools and process and further expanding automation and associated processes. The SUNY Office of Library and Information Services (OLIS),coordinates activities associated with SUNYConnect. The OLIS was created in 1989 to oversee a process for the comprehensive colleges to bar code their library materials in preparation for the implementation of library circulation systems. The Office has evolved to support various library technologies such as library management systems, Open URL linking software, a digital repository and University-wide and group purchasing content. • Library Automation

o The OLIS currently provides management of the Aleph 500 Library Management System for 55 SUNY libraries. Activities include planning and management of application upgrades, management of significant record loads and extractions, report creation, and monitoring of automated processes.

• Digital Resources o The OLIS provides contracting, contract negotiation and ongoing vendor management for

electronic library resources purchased collectively by SUNY libraries or for select resources for specific groups of SUNY Libraries.

Scope

Currently, 59 SUNY libraries run the same library management application with 55 of the campuses running on infrastructure provided and managed by the Information Technology Exchange Center (ITEC) at Buffalo State College. While every campus runs the same application, each has a separate data file of their bibliographic records and each runs a separate instance of the application. At the April meeting of the SUNY Council of Library Directors (SCLD), the Directors agreed to consolidate the 55 separate files and instances of the application to a single bibliographic file and one installation of the application. This was done with the understanding that it would then be practical to move forward with a common discovery system that would allow all campuses to provide a standard interface to allow users to discover both traditional print resources and electronic resources. The Office of Library and Information Services (OLIS) is in the process of working with a Task Force to to investigate workflow, guidelines and policies in a shared cataloging environment. A Task force has also been established to engage in an analysis of the current vendor offerings to better understand the implications of a University-wide Library Discovery system (benefits, expense, features, etc.) The Office of Library and Information Services has been working with the staff at the Environmental Science and Forestry library to migrate their library management system and primary digital resource databases from Syracuse University’s environment to SUNY’s.


87


• Our current structure of every campus on its own application and database is too labor intensive. The consolidation will allow us to be more nimble going forward.

• A University-wide approach to a Discovery System will be more cost effective and provide our students with a standard tool across campuses.

• The move for ESF is required as they our severing relationships with the Syracuse University Library and our option is less costly.

Process Assumptions – NA Business Rules - NA


Implementation of a single library management application instance and associated bibliographic file, and a common library Discovery System will allow us to move forward as a system of library more easily. Approach We are utilizing teams of SUNY librarians to develop processes and procedures for the new library management environment and review functionality and pricing for the discovery system.


In Development.

Metrics

To Be Determined.

Team

Carey Hatch, Associate Provost Maureen Zajkowski, SUNY OLIS John Schumacher, SUNY OLIS Kathleen Gundrum SUNY Academic Technology and Information Services The Shared Cataloging and Authorities Task Force membership can be found at http://scld.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/shared-cataloging-and-authorities-task-force_201200912.docx The Discovery Systems Task Force committee charge and membership can be found at http://scld.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/discovery-task-force-charge-rev.docx


David Lavallee, SUNY Provost Brian Hutzley, Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer (?)


Open - NA




88

Closed – NA


89

Print Matters


In addressing their own printing needs – past, present and future– each State-operated campus has reached its own level of printing capabilities, using vendors to meet the needs that cannot be satisfied with internal equipment and staffing. An initial check of the OCS report on expenditures dealing with print across SUNY (typesetting, design, labeling, inserting, printing, supplies, and advertising) shows that campuses spent $6.4 million in 2010-2011. The task force considers this a low estimate, not taking into consideration services purchased with P-cards, etc. We believe the potential savings can be quite higher across the system, when all schools, departments and initiatives are factored in for recruitment and outreach, as well as development. The Shared Printing Services effort is working to identify which State-operated campuses have the necessary equipment and staffing to handle the printing needs of other SUNY institutions, to reduce outside expenditures within SUNY and produce savings through efficient use of campus resources across the system.

Scope


While the procurement of printing by SUNY’s State-operated campuses is governed by the variety of laws and constraints associated with public sector purchasing, the processes and procedures of internal print production or purchase through outside vendors, varies from campus to campus. How copying and printing internally is determined, governed and funded also encompasses a wide range of options and practices. Through the Shared Printing Services initiative, SUNY’s campuses will be able to market their own printing capabilities internally and externally, providing others in the system with an alternative to outside vendors, and keeping moneys expended within the system for substantial savings and reallocation in funding other critical initiatives in student support and academics. After data collection of each institution’s printing needs and capabilities is complete and analyzed, a system to order and supply print materials/documents/stationery statewide will be developed and implemented for each campus to use.

Process Assumptions

A set of surveys were conducted across the state-operated campuses to determine the print capabilities at each institution, as well as its ability and desire to share printing services with other SUNY schools. Each campus providing print services will continue to determine rates and chargeback costs for its own internal clients, as well as those outside the college and university, such as local nonprofit agencies.

Business Rules

Educating Ourselves, Educating Others


90

To help ensure that the initiative works, an education process must occur on each campus, outlining clearly what first can be done internally for the various departments, programs and schools of an institution. This “Getting to Know Your Print Shop” facet will show what does not have to go to outside vendors, resulting in internal savings from the start. Campuses that have experience in this can share their best practices as part of this stage. The second stage involves showing other SUNY colleges what the printing capabilities are available at some of their sister institutions. A catalog of capabilities and examples of work will be created to share with the client SUNY institutions. As a precursor of this initiative, several presentations will occur to major stakeholders and players in the success of this project. A brief presentation was done for business services personnel in the western region of the state near the end of 2012. A formal presentation will be made to SUNY business services representatives from across the system when they gather for their conference April 17-19 , 2013, in Saratoga Springs. Other possible presentations being explored/planned include one to marketing, communications and publications personnel across SUNY through the annual SUNYCUAD conference June 5-7 on long Island, and one to SUBOA at their conference, near the end of May.

Varying Forms of Funding Printing Operations

A quick tally of the print shops throughout SUNY show that there is no uniform funding for these services. Some shops are set up wholly as an IFR, with zero or negative budgets, and expected to recoup all costs, including salaries, as well as make a profit to keep equipment and staff as current as possible to meet their printing demands. Others are a combination of state funding and IFRs, using their chargeback amounts to handle equipment improvements and purchases. There is no one system that can work equitably for all, and this must be taken into consideration before any discussion occurs on pricing, etc. As seen through the years across the admissions offices of the SUNY colleges, while we are part of one large family, there is still a healthy, collegial competition for students. This will not change in the near future, and on the printing side of things, that friendly “competition,” being neighborly and helping other institutions out in a pinch, does not supersede the main responsibility and loyalty to one’s own campus and its needs and budget. Since printing services are funded differently throughout SUNY, an equitable chargeback system of costs and guidelines is being developed to make those State-operated campuses who wish to be internal SUNY printing vendors all equal potential providers in pricing.

Ordering, Approval and Communications Process

An online ordering system, such as a Web “storefront” is being explored, to make ordering between campuses easy and standardized. The system will also allow clients to review and approve projects prior to printing and delivery. While this is in development, a simple Excel form will be created for clients to use to provide answers to basic questions on a job, touching on all possible aspects of project (quantity, size, due date, colors, stock, finishing, etc.). A single point of contact, through an email address ([email protected]) has been created and tied into a listserv of SUNY print providers and other members of the committee. This allows all to review each job request as it comes in and determine whose shop can best meet the needs of the client. The plan calls for this to roll out as a pilot project in late spring and through the summer. The plan is to “go live” with the project statewide in the fall. Also, to increase the speed and accuracy of communications within the project, a Confluence site has been created to house the various documents and decisions of the task force.


mailto:[email protected]�


91

Shared printing services represents an opportunity to keep SUNY funding within SUNY, resulting in substantial savings that will further connect the campuses and harness the power of ”Systemness,” reducing costs and providing more efficient service. The savings in costs can be reinvested in academic programs and student services that will allow SUNY to accomplish the goals and tasks associated with its mission, particularly in the areas of access, completion and success.

Approach

An outline of the printing capabilities and processes associated available at colleges willing and capable of accepting other SUNY work is being developed in collaboration between various SUNY print production staff and members of SUNY System Administration. The approved outline will then be shared university-wide with state-operated campus print production and procurement staff, as well as major clients at each institution. Feedback from these groups will identify issues and questions associated with the plan. The feedback will be considered in the development of the implementation approach.

The implementation of the shared printing services plan will begin with the selection of a specified number of campuses to serve as print production providers. These campus volunteers will help develop a marketing and communications plan to inform other SUNY institutions of what services are available, at what locations, as well as other aspects of the initiative, such as submission process, pricing, etc. As stated earlier, a beta-testing phase of this project will occur June through the summer, followed by the expected roll out of this initiative in the fall, after any adjustments are made following feedback from the trial phase.


While a pricing structure is being developed to be equitable and cost efficient, a decision and plan must be formulated to address how costs associated with this initiative will be handled. For example, how will SUNY fund the Web storefront for this project, and where will it be housed? How will amortization and replacement of equipment be handled? The use of journal transfer as one form of payment (as well as the P-Card) will go a long way in making this initiative seamless and less costly in processing and payment time. Time will be saved that would normally have been used in go9ing out for bid on a piece. Through efforts of one of the task force’s subcommittees, the journal transfer process was made more transparent and easily explained.

Metrics

A formal method of measurement will be developed to determine cost savings by printing internally, versus the amount spent using outside vendors. To support that, a tracking and reporting system, done on a monthly basis by those SUNY print shops providing shared services, will be used, providing the data for increased “in-SUNY” printing. Team I know I don’t have all the names and titles, so review to see who’s missing, titles, etc. (And this was done in reverse alphabetical order, for all of us down there at the end of the alphabet.) Laura Stetson, University-wide Procurement Specialist, SUNY System Administration Emily Schwartz, SUNY System Administration Dan Wilson, Director of Campus Services, SUNY Potsdam Jim Whedon, Director of Print and Mail Services, Alfred State College


92

Rose Throop, Director of Publications, SUNY Oswego Joe Tesoriere, Director of Purchasing, SUNY Plattsburgh Kirk Starczewski, Director of Publications, SUNY Empire State College Ron Phillips, Director of University Print Services, University at Buffalo Tim Ngo, Buffalo State College Jim Kanous, Manager of Printing Services, SUNY Brockport Tim Hoyle, Assistant Manager, Copy Center, Buffalo State College Barry Haney, Supervisor of Print and Mail, SUNY Oneonta Dan Dippel, Print Shop Manager, Upstate Medical Center Warren Costantine, Printing Services Manager, Morrisville State College


To Be Determined.


Open

A number of issues need to be addressed before SUNY can go public with this venture. These include:

Buy-In From the Design Side at Each institution In order for this initiative to work, those responsible for design and layout at SUNY campuses need to be brought into the discussion as soon as possible, to remove any concerns they may have, and gain their insights, suggestions and approval for the initiative and its many facets. Too often in business and higher education, decisions are made at the 50,000-foot level, with no consultation with those on the ground floor, creating the real possibility that what was conceived and approved in theory, does not work as easily as expected in reality. The users need to be part of the creative solution process for this to work smoothly and efficiently. Priority of Campus Projects and Workflow For those campuses accepting printing projects from other SUY institutions, a clear-cut delineation of priority needs to be established, so the providing institution’s local clients work does not suffer. The flip side of this is to ensure that other SUNY clients’ work is not held hostage by delays or missed deadlines by the regular clients on the printer’s campus.

Championing and Support From Administration Visible, vocal support for this initiative must come, not only from the SUNY Chancellor and System Administration, but from the presidents and administration at each of the SUNY campuses. Achieving a Balance Between Individual Campus Needs and Common Commodities While getting a “best contract or bulk price” is beneficial, this aspect cannot be expanded so far as to limit the choices of stock, materials and design features/specifications at a campus. System Administration needs to be seen as a willing supporter and friendly supplier of materials and services that a campus can choose to use, but not be viewed as an inflexible demander that only certain papers, inks, supplies, collateral dimensions must be employed. The uniqueness and individuality of each campus needs to remain, so each can feel comfortable with the look it portrays to its publics and prospective students.


93

Closed

Survey of Capabilities and Willingness to Accept SUNY Colleges’ Printing Requests Initial Survey completed.


94

Regional Hubs

MWBE


The Chancellor and SUNY Board of Trustees have re-emphasized the importance of System-wide compliance with Executive Law, Article 15-A (Participation by Minority Group Members and Women (MWBEs) with Respect to State Contracts). System Administration has restructured procurement operations to create a new University-wide MWBE Program office. The goal is to hire two new MWBE positions, University-wide MWBE Director and Office of Capital Facilities’ MWBE Procurement Specialist. The University-wide MWBE Director position has been filled.

Scope


The Governor has established a State-wide goal of 20% utilization of MWBEs by State agencies. SUNY has, for a variety of reasons, consistently fallen short in reaching its MWBE utilization goals. However, over the past three years we have consistently increased the total payments made to MWBEs. See chart below:

State University of New York

Minority and Women Business Enterprises (MWBE) Report Expenditures For Contracts, Purchase Orders and No Orders

YTD For the Quarter Ended December 31, 2012 (Compared with same period 2011-12 and 2010-11)

SFY Quarters 1-3 Total MWBE Payments

MWBE Percent Utilization % Change

SFY 2010-11 19,611,965.02 4.74 SFY 2011-12 28,986,287.45 4.87 47.8%

SFY 2012-13 47,873,956.00 10.04 65.2% SOURCE: SUVS 7810

Like general procurement, the SUNY MWBE has become increasingly decentralized over time. Due to new demands being made (e.g., emphasis from the Governor’s office, legislative and regulatory changes) there is a need for a standardized and more centrally coordinated MWBE program.

To take a leadership position in MWBE utilization across the State, SUNY will improve five key areas which were identified as a result of University-wide assessment of the University Centers. Those areas are: (1) System and Process; (2) Communication; (3) Program Implementation and Training; (4) Regional Support; and (5) Procurement Procedure and Boilerplate Language.

System and Process: The SUNY campuses use a wide range of systems for processing and tracking expenditures that qualify for MWBE credit. The array includes a customized version of a standard financial management software package (Lawson, Oracle, etc.), with some system support from SUNY central or State systems, and with variations of the same processes and forms. This decentralized approach complicates efficient management of the MWBE program, and consistent data collection across


95

all campuses. SUNY and its campuses, combined with NYS OSC’s State Financial System and NYS ESDC’s certification database makes for a complex processing environment.

The business need of better level of consistency on MWBE reporting and information analysis, the MWBE Program office and OIT will explore options for automating and pushing the edited entry of key data to the sources (campuses and primes in particular), and present tools to primes, campuses, and SUNY central to enable a proactive approach to managing MWBE compliance. Web-based interfaces for entry and access, and integration of disparate databases of key MWBE information, as well as use of BI technology would all be a part of a total solution.

Communication: Chancellor Zimpher and Chairman McCall have consistently communicated a firm commitment to Executive Law Article 15-A. Today’s challenge is ensuring that middle and lower level managers are also communicating a deep resolve to increase MWBE participation. SUNY will organize venues to share best practices among campuses. In addition, recognize and honor successful campus level MWBE goal attainment.

Program Implementation and Training: A significant business need is a streamlined MWBE infrastructure which standardized the implementation of the core functional areas of 15-A such as MWBE goal assignment, utilization plan approval and waiver consideration. These three functions are foundational to effectively monitor executed contracts for compliance. The MWBE Program office will realign the program to ensure adequate oversight and accountability of the critical areas. Enhanced training at each campus on a regular basis is a strategic component to successful program realignment. Regional Support: System-wide and regional expertise is required for SUNY to take a leadership position in MWBE utilization across the State. Providing central support and coordination but using regional experts located at campuses appears to be the most efficient use of resources and allow us to best serve all of the campuses.

Procurement Procedure and Boilerplate Language: MWBE guidance bulletins will provide additional instructions to the campuses to assist in appropriate application of procurement procedures.

Process Assumptions

Executive Law Article 15-A requires MWBE goals to be assigned to all procurements exceeding $25,000 for labor, services, supplies, equipment, or materials and for procurements exceeding $100,000 for the acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair or renovation of real property and improvements. MWBE regulations state that the agency’s MWBE officer approve the goals assigned and the resulting utilization plan submitted by the vendor on each contract prior to its execution. The law and regulations also presume that the State agency has a centralized MWBE program, with sufficient staff to handle the monitoring of contracts executed.

Business Rules

SUNY, like other State agencies, is required to demonstrate a Good Faith Effort (GFE) in allowing MWBEs to participate in SUNY contracts (either as a prime or subcontractor). A GFE includes, but is not limited to, solicitation of opportunities, goal setting, contract compliance and reporting (as outlined in Department of Economic Development (DED) Regulations 5 NYCRR Part 140).

The MWBE Director is working with the Director of University-wide Procurement and the Office of University Counsel to make appropriate revisions to SUNY procedures 7553 (Purchasing and Contracting (Procurement)) and 7557 (Participation by Minority Group Members and Women (MWBEs) with Respect


96

to State University of New York Contracts), which will address changes in Executive Law and MWBE regulations and standardize the goal setting and reporting requirements for the University.

The MWBE Director, with the Offices of the University Controller and Administrative Services (IT), has have successfully updated new business rules for reporting MWBE utilization to DED.


Due to the decentralized nature of SUNY procurement, taking a regional view of the University-wide MWBE Program aligns with the concepts of “Systemness” and “Shared Services.” Also, because the majority of MWBEs are NYS small businesses SUNY’s commitment to the MWBE supports Governor

Cuomo and Chancellor Zimpher plan to have the SUNY system serve as the “economic engine” that will drive economic revitalization and help enhance the quality of life for the State of New York.

Approach

A University-wide approach is being developed which will feature regional shared services for MWBE monitoring and compliance.


Based on the MWBE Assessment led by the MWBE Director, a proposal for revisions to the University-wide MWBE Program has been presented to the SUNY Board of Trustees on January 17, 2013. Funding need for staff augmentation has been presented. Requirements to create and implement a MWBE database and management system are under development.

Metrics

M/WBE utilization is calculated by dividing the SUNY-wide total MBE and WBE expenditures by SUNY’s total base expenditures (which excludes TPS and DED approved exclusions and exemptions).

Additional metrics are being developed to establish MWBE compliance report card for the campuses.

Team

Sponsor/Champion: Brian Hutzley

System Administration Liaison: Tom Hippchen

Project Lead: Pam Swanigan

Team Members: Pam Swanigan. Tom Hippchen, Bob Haelen, Lois McLaughlin (SUCF; temporary until

Office of Capital Facilities hires an MWBE Specialist)


Brian Hutzley, Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer Kellie Dupuis, Director of the Office of Business Operations and Procurement


97


Open

The Office of Capital Facilities is searching for an MWBE Procurement Specialist to assist campuses with compliance in the construction field, especially with campus let projects.

The MWBE Director will continue to work with the Director of university-wide procurement and the Office of University Counsel to make appropriate revisions to SUNY procedures affected by Executive law, article 15-A.

MWBE Director, the Offices of the University Controller and Administrative Services will assess the SUNY financial management system (and make any necessary upgrades) to comply with the State’s MWBE reporting requirements.

SUNY has been invited to participate in a T-12 group, composed of State agencies working one-on-one with staff from ESDC and the Governor’s office to identify strategies, measurable goals and targets to reach 20% MWBE goal participation. The MWBE Program office, University-wide Procurement and Counsel’s office meet weekly with ESDC staff to discuss progress on this action plan.

The MWBE Program office will schedule regular MWBE webinars with campuses on a variety of topics to enhance their understanding of 15-A, the regulations and guidance provided to implement the new program modifications. These program modifications will be phased in over the next year. Phase I was rolled out on April 1, 2013.

Closed

The Chancellor recommended and the Board of Trustees issued a Resolution on MWBE program.

The Chancellor and VC/CFO have followed up with letters to Presidents and Business Officer respectively.

SUNY System Administration hired Pamela Swanigan as University-wide MWBE Director, a new position, to oversee the SUNY MWBE program.

At the direction of the Chancellor and the Chairman, the new Director formed a team to assess the current MWBE programs at SUNY’s six largest campuses (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, Downstate, Upstate and Stony Brook), who account for approximately 80% of SUNY’s OTPS expenditures. A report was delivered to the Board of Trustees at their January 17, 2013 meeting.

MWBE Director developed appropriate training materials on the MWBE program modification and delivered MWBE training (Executive Law compliance & best practices) for all 30 campus procurement and facilities staffs.

r April 2013 - SUNY Information Technology Services Status 1 - Shared Services...AUXILIARY ENTERPRISES: Auxiliary enterprises furnish goods or services to students, faculty, and staff

Documents