Meeting Minutes

Monday, August 6, 2012, 11 a.m. – noon

Room 412, State Farm Hall of Business

Present: Voting members: Jonathan Rosenthal, Sam Catanzaro, Scott Johnson, Dane Ward, Deb Smitley, Greg Alt, Barb Blake, Tammy Carlson, Larry Lyons, Dwayne Sackman, and Jill Jones. Ex-Officio: Andrea Ballinger and Mark Walbert.InvitedGuests: Wendy Smith, Robert Blemler, Mike Davis, Judy Johnson, and Connie Barling.

  • Announcements and Updates. Deb Smitley introduced and welcomed Connie Barling to the meeting. Connie was present to present information on master data access plans. Deb Smitley noted that Jim Jawahar is out of town and Sri Vuppuluri was not available today. She also made note of additional business cases that would be discussed but were missing from the Agenda and that the First Annual Report would not be discussed at the August meeting due to a full agenda. The September and October meetings are scheduled but in the future the Council will move toward longer less frequent meetings.
  • Notes fromCouncil Meetings. The minutes of the June 2012 Council meetings were approved as presented.
  • Master Data Access Plan. Andrea Ballinger introduced Connie Barling who presented a PowerPoint on the Master Data Access Plan.
  • Data Security for the University should be organized and implemented based on roles, and individuals are given access via a role. Job responsibilities are assigned to roles not to individual people.
  • Establishing an efficient Data Access Request process provides a way to track and audit accesses.
  • There are different levels of access. These are General users, Application users (run queries etc.), Department administrators (create roles), and System administrators (ESS and BITS).
  • The Budget Wizard Master Data Access Plan was provided as an example
  • Andrea Ballinger noted: This is just a small example of an actual Master Data Access Plan. An actual Plan is very large, technical, and detailed.
  • The Request Fulfillment Process was explained.
  • The first screen a Unit Security Liaison would use to request data access prompts additional screens. These screens will change based on what type of data access you are requesting.
  • A Master Data Access Plan must be in place before any application is rolled out to the university.
  • Jonathan Rosenthal: This system will work wonderfully for 98% of the University. What about Julie Huber or the individuals in Planning, Research, and Policy Analysis that need access to greater amounts of data.
  • Andrea Ballinger: They will have additional accesses approved.
  • The next step in the process is to identify the Unit Security Liaisons as described in Implementing Procedures Documents 9.8.3 and 9.8.4.
  • Andrea Ballinger:
  • Two meetings ago I asked you to start thinking about a stewardship liaison. Right now all access is granted on a 1 on 1 basis but we want to train liaisons to grant access for their own units. We will bring all of the Unity Security Liaisons together, train and support them for a time. By nominating these individuals as Liaisons you are vouching for them.
  • We decided the best starting point is with each unit’s organizational charts.
  • Preferably your Unit Security Liaison will not be an IT person but sometimes the IT person might know the unit best and what the functions of each individual are.
  • Wendy Smith:Are there any rules we need to follow in determining the Liaison?
  • Andrea Ballinger: The Functional Owner (reports to the Steward) and Steward (people on council) cannot be the same person.
  • Deb Smitley: It would help us as we go forward to have a condensed point of reference that reminds us “this is what a Steward is and this is what they do, this is what a Liaison is and this is what they do”
  • Looking at the time line our goal is to have the Access Data Form completed by October 1st.
  • The soft roll out date is to have the Budget Wizard Master Access Data Plan mid- September.
  • Andrea Ballinger: What would be the best form to collect the data in?
  • Deb Smitley: Put a template matrix on the SharePoint Site and let everyone know when it is out there and ready to be completed.
  • Deb Smitley thanked Connie for her presentation.
  • Student Information System (SIS) Application Development. Mike Davis presented an overview of the proposal to Freeze current Student Information System applications. As the project moves forward it is now necessary to “freeze” the functionality in these applications as much as possible to allow for a thorough analysis of the business processes as well as the application functionality in place to support these processes. If not then the applications become a moving target. The Proposal is that all SIS application development requests submitted to the Business Intelligence and Technology Solutions department must meet one of the following criteria: 1. Defect without Reasonable Workaround or 2. Meet Compliance Standing.
  • Deb Smitley: If it is a change that is required by law but there is a reasonable work around what would be done?
  • Mike Davis: That would be determined by the request and what we need to do to correct/change the current situation.
  • Andrea Ballinger: We have brought the proposal to the LEAPForward team and they have endorsed the Freeze proposal.
  • Jonathan Rosenthal: We ought to realize that this is a major decision that will affect everything else down the road. The Office of the Provost has a General Education Rewrite initiative that is getting ready to be released. What will happen if application changes need to be made once the General Education rewrite is released?
  • A change in General Education will be an institutional priority.
  • Andrea Ballinger: There is a cost associated with each change to an application.
  • Jonathan Rosenthal: The General Education Rewrite does not go through the Board of Trustees. It is passed by the Academic Senate.
  • Deb Smitley: If it is a University policy then it requires cabinet approval, correct?
  • Change the proposal to read as follows:
  • Remove “or the Illinois State University Board of Trustees” from item #2.
  • Add #3 to read: University Priority: University Priority is defined as a policy or program initiative determined by the President and Cabinet or Board of Trustees.
  • The Proposal was accepted unanimously by the Council with the change.
  • Business Case – Lettered Athletes Data Feed. Agreed to table until next meeting
  • Business Case – Adding Cardinal Court Apartments to the Room Selection Application.
  • Dwayne Sackman?: This is a compromise between Housing and Student Affairs
  • BITS is reviewing the best way it should be handled. They have removed the most complicated solution and moved over to an easier, less intensive workload for everyone.
  • It will require some manual data entry by Housing but they are will to do this.
  • Greg Alt: How are the project prioritized that are presented to the Council? I understand that sometimes it is a resource issue but is that always the case?
  • Mike Davis: Sri and I have been working on a chart for the Council that details how long each project will take and how much resources it will use and what we feel we are able to tackle.
  • Greg Alt: How are we prioritizing the new projects as they come in verses the projects that are already in a high priority bubble?
  • Mike Davis: We bring you the information and the Council ultimately determines what is done.
  • Deb Smitley: We endorsed the priority methodology which results in the priority bubbles. In a prior meeting we determined what projects would be a priority. Can we come back to this in September with a list of projects and where we are on them?
  • Greg Alt: It seems some projects are stacking up. We have a rating scale but we have to have a way to move project along.
  • Deb Smitley: Certainly. Is there further discussion regarding the Fell and School Street housing in relation to Cardinal Court?
  • Dwayne Sackman: They are all full. We are at 105%. Fell and School Street housing are not the focus. They were meant to be a short term solution. Housing is well aware that once the Student Information System is running they may need to make changes in how housing is determined. Cardinal Court is our priority. If we can add Fell and School Street without additional concerns then that is great but Cardinal Court is the priority.
  • Deb Smitley: Are we ready to endorse the project as it?
  • Business Case was unanimously endorsed by the Council.
  • Business Case – Mandated Crime Reporter Training
  • Deb Smitley: Is there a time line regarding the Mandated Crime Reporting Training?
  • Wendy Smith: There was not a time line given when the law was passed but there are criminal charges that can be brought if crimes are not reported timely and correctly.
  • Deb Smitley: If there is no compliance issue is the business case ready to be endorsed?
  • Business Case was unanimously endorsed by the Council.
  • Business Case – Access Request Fulfillment Form
  • Deb Smitley: Is the Access Request Fulfillment Form ready to be endorsed?
  • Business Case was unanimously endorsed by the Council.
  • First Annual Report – Draft outline. Due to time constraints this outline was not discussed. A draft report will be presented for review and endorsement at the next Council meeting.
  • Project Updates Due to time constraints this was not discussed.
  • Other MattersThe meeting in September will be for 90 minutes.