Information Systems Advisory Committee
April 25, 2011
I. Call to order
Steve Vieira called to order the meeting of the Information Systems Advisory Committee at 1:00 PM on
April 25, 2011 in the IT Conference Room.
The following persons were present: Steve Vieira, Becky Sheldon, Michelle O’Brien, Donna Mesolella,
Deb Aiken, Bill LeBlanc, Sharon Picard and Jaime Nash. Absent were Peter Woodberry and Martin
Minutes from last meeting were pre-approved through email exchange earlier.
II. Sharing the Prioritization Results
A spreadsheet of the IT Governance collective rating of priorities for new projects for 2011 – 2012 was
distributed to the group. An explanation of the ratings was provided and the ratings are attached below.
The lower the average number, the more important the project to the IT Governance team.
The question was asked as to projects that are still in the queue and are progressing. Those continue to
be ongoing and in many cases, are near or at completion. Some have had significant delays due to the
processing of requisitions and bids and some have also suffered from a lack of resources both internal
The CIO stated that another tool was going to be incorporated into the prioritization model moving
forward to further involve more participation and understanding among the IT Governance team. A
weighted rating system is going to be introduced at the next ISAC meeting that will address the issue of
providing different ratings to projects based upon additional criteria.
Project Name Ave.
Blackboard Enterprise Learn Course Delivery 5
Disaster Recovery Build Out 7.6
Network Infrastructure Update 7.8
Classroom Video Switchers 8.8
Acquiring two (2) Dell 710 servers 10.2
Classroom Crestron Media Control 11.2
Banner Network Support Equipment 11.4
Wide Area Network Electronics Upgrade 12.2
Centers for Instructional Technology Application License Renewals 12.2
Second Internet Connection Design for Providence and Newport 12.4
Additional Storage Disks 12.6
ADA Support 13.2
Mobile Technology Support 13.8
Media Services Equipment 14.6
Desktop Replacement Plan 15.8
System Center Configuration Manager 16
Classroom Projection Systems 16.2
Expanding the Collaborative Technology Suites 17
Avaya Telephony Upgrade 18
IT Conference Room Technology Upgrade 18.2
Virtual Desktop Initiative 19.6
Lincoln Closet Upgrades 19.8
TechSmith Camtasia Relay Pilot Expansion 20
Power Rack Management through Power Distribution Units 20.8
Low Level Electronic Systems Support 21.2
Knight Campus Data Center “Green” Initiative 21.4
Headphone and Camera bundles 22.6
Additional Track-It licenses 23.6
Office Communicator Systems High Availability 23.8
Projector Security Mounts 24.2
Thin Client purchases 29
III. Resumption of the CIO Newsletter
An announcement was made that the CIO newsletter, published monthly in the past, was going to
resume in May. With the proper collaboration and cooperation, the second or third week of May will
see the beginning of regular update of projects, special information, security knowledge transfer and
other related items of interest to the College community at large.
Designed to be a communication vehicle of all things IT, this newsletter will feature the work of IT staff,
non-IT personnel and external consultants who are working behind the scenes to bring better service to
the constituents of the college.
If anyone has an interesting piece of technology news that they would like to be included in the monthly
release, please send it to the CIO at email@example.com.
IV. Policy on dating (and back dating) graduates term of graduation
Bill LeBlanc introduced a document concerning graduates reported to IPEDS (Frozen) and current
actual graduates by year for the last 7 years. Due to policies in place at CCRI, he stated that our
graduation rate was adversely affected by students graduating but missing from those IPED-related
statistics. Bill states that the total number could be as many as 549 total lost degrees issued at CCRI that
are not counted into our graduation rate in our national statistics.
Handling late graduates is a complex process because of the many interrelated facets of financial aid that
might affect some of the “missing” graduates. As a result, ISAC was not ready to deal with this
question in the body of the meeting.
Deb Aiken and Bill will meet separately to review current policies and analyze how it might affect late
graduating students who get back dated graduation dates currently. A report and potential motion/policy
are expected from that meeting to further delineate how CCRI will move forward with late graduating
Action Item: Bill and Deb to meet to review and discuss current policies and how they might be
altered, if possible, to avoid losing almost 100 graduates every year.
V. Address Purge Process
Becky Sheldon introduced the possibility of considering purging addresses marked as Inactive or
Expired. She stated that these addresses are marked in either of these states when an address has
changed and is recorded. Undeliverable mail is another item that puts a “BA” hold (Bad Address) on a
Currently CCRI has a total of 968,000 addresses in Banner of which 475,000 are in an Inactive or
Expired state. IT proposes using the gppaddr.pc process to purge these addresses since keeping them
slows many search and reporting processes. Additionally ridding the system of these unnecessary
addresses would enhance the operational data store (ODS) load and creation of student reporting tables
taking an estimated 14 hours to run.
While the idea of purging unnecessary addresses was obviously popular, a number of members of the
committee felt that they needed to check with appropriate parties to determine their compliance with the
many guidelines governing this data. The proposal to purge Inactive an Expired addresses was put on
hold until the affected parties could determine the resources that the College has.
Action Item: All interested parties are going to check on compliance and data retention cycles and
report back to the next meeting with proposed outcomes for the purging process.
VI. DSS Proposal
Becky Sheldon introduced a conceptual proposal (nothing in writing yet) from Shelly Olausen
concerning about 1200 students currently being tracked in a Microsoft Access database. The request is
based around the use of the Banner Support Services Forms to image documentation provided by
students and is built on a similar process evident at Valencia Community College.
This proposal would incur some security concerns about shared data and limiting access to data on a
particular form based upon the user’s role. These forms are used by multiple groups and thus the
concern for access to data that is both confidential and restricted. IT would need to investigate role-
based security; something that has never been instituted at the college.
Action Item: Becky to get the written proposal from Shelly and deliver it to ISAC members before the
next meeting for their review.
Action Item: Becky to investigate and report on the requirements of the level of security necessary to
satisfy the needs of the proposal while reflective of the various data that might be stored in that
collection of tables and seen through those forms.
VII. Human Resources Report
Michelle O’Brien reported that great progress had been made on the 19 Hour Hiring workflow based
upon the significant assistance of Nick Ortiz and SGHE consultants. In fact, she stated that it would be
launching soon after a couple of small bugs were fixed. Michelle offered to do a demo for the
committee indicating that it was “pretty slick”.
Discussion followed concerning the development of further workflows outside of HR and how that
could be satisfied as well. The CIO suggested that we could use the same process being employed now
to construct future workflow requirements. While the expertise is not yet internal to CCRI to develop
complex and demanding workflow processes, the college will continue to utilize SGHE consultants in
collaboration with MIS resources to continue to grow that ability over time. At some point, it is
expected that the workflow skill set will grow within MIS to attempt more development with
supplementary or no assistance from SunGard.
Action Item: The CIO to collect a list of all potential and known workflow development requests from
the ISAC membership.
VIII. Operational Data Store (ODS)
Becky reported that the ODSP (Production) is ready for consumption. Through the conscientious and
diligent work of Brian Walsh, working through several issues with SunGard, she states that there are but
a few tables to be repaired, some data checking of minimal errors to resolve and 99.9% occurring as it
should be. Brian applied several patches and has resolved all the Oracle Streams issues that plagued this
version of ODS.
IX. Financials Report
Sharon Picard stated that Banner testing of Finance 8.5 is complete and that testing is still ongoing for
Payroll. The annual audit is scheduled for August 15 – 22 with the first draft due on September 1st.
ACH payment for Accounts Payable is now in production. Email type DIRD for Direct Deposit has
been setup and us going to be used for Direct Deposit confirmations to vendors.
In regard to the Argos project and the end of year close, Gary Houck from SGHE will be on campus
May 9 – 12 to assist the group in setting up GASB (Governmental Accounting Standard Board) yearend
close procedures. This could all be accomplished in a week. Much thanks to Terry Lefebvre and Jeanne
Savastano in discovering the attributes necessary to get this moving.
X. BUG Report
Deb Aiken stated that much discussion centered on duplicate PIDMS in the last meeting. Through ISIR
loading, hundreds of IDs that cannot be matched are created resulting in labor intensive cleanup of the
data. The Financial Aid team has been expanded to provide additional support in this effort.
Deb and Jaime Nash agreed that OES and CWCE have to support each other in the origination and
cleanup of this information and returning to the GOAMATCH rules.
Jaime Nash reported that common matching also becomes an issue with Flexible Registration. He stated
that maiden names are still an issue and that overall matching is not the problem but instead people
entering the data are the problem.
Deb introduced the Transfer Evaluation System that is being built that translates courses taken into
CCRI credit with 220 equivalencies already built. This will aid in acceptance of students with prior
credit earned from other colleges.
Deb also stated that the OES wish list still contains automated no show drops.
She also indicated that wait listing is being piloted this summer on 770 sections for summer classes. If
all goes well, Spring 2012 will see a full implementation of the wait list processing for all sections.
Finally the override permit function is being released for all faculty members to do overrides
XI. Reporting Team
Due to the efforts of the reporting team, led by Jeanne Savastano, several datablocks and significant
reports have been developed. ISAC will invite Jeanne in the coming months to share her work to date
with the committee. Both Jaime Nash and Michelle O’Brien are running datablocks that are providing
options of closing out legacy databases and creating labels and certificates.
Action Item: The committee will invite Jeanne and her group to demonstrate what has been developed
XII. Other Topics
Sunday is the first Sunday of the month and is being used by IT to do upgrades communicated to the
entire community. This was provided by a President’s Council motion.
Steve Vieira adjourned the meeting at 2:10 PM.
Minutes submitted by: Stephen A. Vieira