Integrated Reporting Governance Committee. February 14 th, 2014

(1)

Integrated Reporting Governance Committee

(2)

 Confirm Terms of Reference (20 mins)

 Program Updates (40 min)

 Financial Analytics Reports

 Tuition Allocation Model

 IR Roadmap (30 mins)

 FY14/15 Funded Projects

 Proposed Projects :

 SEoT, Marianne Schroeder

 PAIR, Marcela Hernandez

(3)

 Financial Analytics Reports  Tuition Allocation Model

 FY14/15 Funded Projects  Proposed Projects :

 SEoT, Marianne Schroeder  PAIR, Marcela Hernandez

(4)

(5)

User Acceptance Training (UAT)

Testing of

Foundational

Platform: Replicate

Nquery Reports and

prove data.

Arts & Science Pilot

Focus on “look and

Feel” of FAR, Test

intuitiveness, get

feedback from non

accounting type

users

CFBA/NUBO Pilot

Focus on

Visualizations and

new Home Page.

Reinforce financial

functionality with

power finance users.

(6)

Project Gates: Finance R1 Completion Schedule

March 2014

March 3-7 Mar 10-31

Using Current Production Environment User Setup

New Home Page

Reinforce Financial Functionality

Request Feedback for Improvement

Iterative Approach with All Users Improve Navigation

Additional Dashboards Summary Visualizations

Move Executive dashboards to R2

Request Feedback for Improvement

(7)

Current Issues / Risks: Finance R1

Risks Priority

H-M-L

Comments 1. Oracle BI Apps – Financial package. Found significant

immaturities in the package and the vendor has not been responsive in addressing these.

H Impacts: UBC has experienced significant impacts to project time-lines due to immaturity of product. Currently, we have issues with crossing fiscal year boundaries – the feature does exist in parallel product.

Mitigation: Work with Oracle (not successful), review feature in parallel product, work with consultant for interim custom solution.

2. Planned changes may impact to campus during year end timeframe.

M Mitigation: Review impact with UAT for recommendation.

Issues Priority

H-M-L

Comments

1. Financial Analytics Historical Chart field attributes. M Action: Custom work – post effective dated trees solution (might have a combined solution with #2 as an option.

2. Financial Analytics Effective Dated Trees. H Action: Working with Oracle and consultant for custom solution. Feature is in parallel product, but not in our version. See risks.

1. Operations and Support Resources M Action: Technical skills availability is limited. Project manager still supporting FMS and IR.

(8)

Home Page Summary level Graphics - Executive Summary level Graphics – Finance user (Nquery) Summary level Graphics – Casual, Non Finance or Research User General Ledger Dashboard _{AP Dashboard} Payroll Dashboard PO Dashboard Commitments Dashboard New

(9)

Graphic of most relevant Information

Use Different Views for different Users (within the same homepage)

Links to existing Dashboards Links to Graphic

Summaries

FAR (Financial Analytics) TAM (Tuition Allocation)

HOME PAGE

Use Different Views-

(10)

Home Page Summary level Graphics - Executive Summary level Graphics – Finance user (Nquery) Summary level Graphics – Casual, Non Finance or Research User General Ledger Dashboard _{AP Dashboard} Payroll Dashboard PO Dashboard Commitments Dashboard

(11)

Summary level Graphics - Executive Summary level Graphics – Finance user (Nquery) Summary level Graphics – Casual, Non Finance or Research User

• A summary level can be created to facilitate navigation from the homepage as well as offer users new management tools

• Set up would be similar to Homepage with selectable views for different user groups

• This level can have different areas (dashboards), presenting Management focused summaries (Performance, time comparison, variance analysis, etc) • Passing of filters can be helped by having this summary level

• Use of Views can be used to switch between summary and detail, tables and graphs, and high level summary to lower level summaries

• This level can be accessed directly from link on Homepage, or navigated to from the Homepage graphic

(12)

Home Page Summary level Graphics - Executive Summary level Graphics – Finance user (Nquery) Summary level Graphics – Casual, Non Finance or Research User General Ledger Dashboard _{AP Dashboard} Payroll Dashboard PO Dashboard Commitments Dashboard

(13)

General Ledger Dashboard AP Dashboard Payroll Dashboard PO DashBoard Commitments Dashboard

• Existing Dashboards can be improved to include Views that can toggle between summary and detailed reports

• Currently Dashboards were designed to replicate Nquery and are detail oriented and facilitate troubleshooting at the transaction detail

• Views can let users select between all fields or few fields (similar to customizations) • This view can be accessed directly from Homepage, or navigated to from

Homepage

• Since these existing Dashboards are resource heavy, having the Homepage present users with relevant summaries may help direct traffic away from detailed reports (Saving system resources, and load)

(14)

(15)

 PAIR, Marcela Hernandez  SEoT, Marianne Schroeder

(16)

 Deconstruction of XLS model

 To automate what we can

 To operationalize what we cannot automate

 Better Visibility into TAM Information

 Analytical Access to TAM results for Projection Run and Final Run

• Drill into the detailed information behind the TAM • To enhance understanding, increase insight

• To use for other purposes, e.g. allocation within the faculty

 To compare results from one run to another

 Eventually to monitor how changes in registration impact TAM

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

(21)

(22)

(23)

(24)

24

Project Scope: Student R1

Original Scope In Scope Out of Scope

Tuition Allocation Model (TAM)

• Per Faculty Allocation

• Driver Detail Views

• Summary Dashboard

• ISI Dashboard

Tuition Allocation Model (TAM)

• Per Faculty Allocation

• Driver Detail Views

• Summary Dashboard

• ISI Dashboard

• Central Finance Dashboard

TAM Monitoring Analysis NEW (Daily/Weekly/Monthly)

Annual Operational Reviews:

Next Fiscal Year Templates including any New Functional Work – i.e., TAM for UBCO; Vantage College; Use of Course Ownership Table. Can also include Future Report Decommission Exercises.

Undergraduate Admissions Undergraduate Admissions

• R2: FY2014/15 Funded

Registration & Student Finance Foundation

Residual Registration & Residual Student Financials

(25)

Project Gates: Student R1 Completion Schedule

25

PROG Pre-Prod

February 2014 March 2014 April 2014

Feb 5 TA/QA Feb 20 TA/QA Mar 31 TA/QA Apr 15 TA/QA

Full PROG/SECT Pre-Prod

PROG FY 2013 Data

Per Faculty Allocation Driver Detail Views

PROG-SECT Bugs/Fixes

FY 2014 Rules & FY2014 Data Summary Dashboard

Remaining SECT Bugs/Fixes Integrity Cleanup

ISI Dashboard

Central Finance Dashboard

Base TAM Dashboards

TAM Monitoring Analysis

√

Early UAT Feb 18-19

- Student Finance

Early UAT Mar 4-14

- Student Finance

- Select Users (Mar 10-14)

UAT Apr 10-14

- Student Finance - Select Users

UAT Apr 24-28

- Student Finance

Change Management Strategy Training: April 29/30

End User Access and Handout Material

Support & Service Transition

Continued Development UAT Sign-off – Go / No Go Approval

Integrity Cleanup Pre-Prod

Production Rollout

Early Look and Feel

- Governance Committee and Working Committee Demos - Student Finance Access

(26)

Current Issues / Risks: Student R1

Risks Priority

H-M-L

Comments

1. System Performance Monitoring.

2. Evolution of Business Processes and

Integration with other Systems.

M

Mitigation: (1) Began

monitoring in February 2014. (2) Determine a performance testing strategy moving into March-April 2014.

Mitigation: (1) Engage business for direction (2) Revisit design model once complete Student R1.

(27)

 Financial Analytics Reports  Tuition Allocation Model

(28)

FY 10/11

FY 11/12

FY 12/13

FY 13/14

FY 14/15

FY 15/16

Phase 0 (Initiation) Phase 1 (Discovery) Phase 2 (Foundation) Phase 3 (Transformation) •Conduct RFP to choose BI vendor

•Secure approval & initial funding from program sponsors •Mobilize program team •Establish program governance •Establish solution blueprint •Prototype solution •Confirm Release 1 Detailed Scope •Implement enterprise data warehouse foundation • Initial integration of core Student & Financial base data

• Tuition Allocation Model & Financial Analysis

Release 1:

• Finance (FMS)

• Student Bio (SIS)

• Student Records & Reg. (SIS)

• Student Revenue (SIS) • Admission (SIS) •Continue integration of remaining core Student •Integration of HR data • Integration of Budget & Planning data Release 2: •Employee (HRMS) •Budget & Planning (Hyperion) •Recruitment (SIS) •Begin integration of broader sets of campus data subject areas and analytics *Release 3: •Learning (SEoT) •Classroom Scheduling •Grad Studies •Continue integration of broader sets of campus data subject areas and anayltics

*Release 4:

•Research (RISE)

•Land & Building

•Alumni

IR Program Roadmap: Originally

* Phase 3 Funding and Scope to be confirmed with Governance committee in FY13/14

(29)

IR Program Roadmap

Phase 0: Initiation Procure Funding Vendor Selection Phase 1: Discovery Team Mobilization Program Governance Solution Blueprint Foundation Scope Student Prototype: ISI

Phase 2: Enterprise Data Warehouse Foundation

Finance R1 Finance R2 Student R1 Student R2 HR R1 FY 10/11 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 FY 13/14 FY 14/15 FY 15/16 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Not Started (timeline tbc) Completed In-Progress • Student Bio • Registration • Student Financials

• Tuition Allocation Model (TAM) Reports • CFBA, Budget Office roll-out • Finance (FMS) data integration

• nQuery online operational report replacement • Chartfields, JV, Payroll, AP, PO, Commitments • Multi-Ledger GL Summary

• Plan & Forecast Ledger • Arts, Science, CFBA/NUBO roll-out

• Undergraduate Admissions • Residual Registration • Residual Student Financials • Researcher Report

• nQuery Decommission • Broader roll-out

Today Where we are & What is funded for FY14/15

• Integrate Foundation HR data • Subject Areas TBC

(30)

(31)



CTLT supports and advances scholarly and innovative

approaches to teaching, learning, curriculum and educational

technology practices.



New Senate Policy on Student Evaluation of Teaching enacted in

May 2007; monitored by Senate annually



CTLT tasked with implementing online evaluation; all Faculties on

both campuses use it



CTLT and PAIR were charged with responsibility for the

institutional data

(32)



SEoT data is confidential, requiring high levels of

security; access is defined by Senate Policy. The data

is used for high stakes decision making.



The SEoT Reporting database design does not follow

best practices, and to offer this service in a sustainable

way would require substantial new investment.

Problem Statement

(33)



PoC was funded as part of the SiTP project, using IR

resources. Implementation was never scheduled.



It is inefficient and ineffective (as well as risky from a

data security point of view) to duplicate services.



In order to follow best practices in research and

evaluation methodology, to ensure data security, to

make effective and efficient use of UBC resources, the

data needs to be moved to SERA.

(34)



Extend license for current software for another six

months



Work with IR Team to determine when roadmap

permits moving from PoC to production



Present results at next Governance meeting

(35)

(36)

Agenda

1. PAIR Mandate

2. PAIR Data sets – Problem Statement 3. Proposed Solution

(37)

PAIR Mandate

Foster an environment where PAIR staff work effectively, efficiently, and collaboratively, sharing best practices,

strengths in research methodology, access to resources, and knowledge of critical issues in higher education.

To transform data into information, knowledge and strategic intelligence in support of the goals of the University of British Columbia

To fulfill our mandate:

(38)

Problem Statement

To work effectively:

 Single source of data

 Agree on data definitions and best practices

 Eliminate security risks

 Collaboration and knowledge transfer

 Appropriate ETL tools

The EDW currently doesn’t contain all the datasets required by PAIR.

(39)

Problem Statement

To work effectively with Tableau:

 Define and implement a Tableau server environment

 Define and implement proper Security

 Best practices and use of UBC data definitions

Tableau is a tool for data analytics to be used to query departmental data sets.

(40)

Proposed solution

Two projects:

Project 1: Tableau Implementation

Establish a vision for Tableau in the UBC Community

• Working with IR team and faculties to source a proper Tableau Server environment

• Project management

• Ongoing server and application support • Tableau security

(41)

Proposed solution

Two projects:

Project 2: PAIR Database

Single source of data for PAIR combining data from various systems across campus:

• Shared data definitions

• Best practices and collaboration

• Security and database administration IT functions should reside in IT

(42)

Proposed Solution – Integrated Reporting

 In collaboration with the Integrated Reporting Team

 Work performed for implementation of the PAIR database will be

used in the IR project when new data sources are incorporated

 Tableau implementation will be in collaboration with the IR Team

to ensure best practices, minimize security risks and ensure proper ownership and administration of Tableau is in place.

(43)

Proposed solution – Next Steps

 Initiate the project and establish a roadmap to incorporate PAIR

data sets into IR.

 Initiate the implementation of Tableau Server in collaboration

with the IR team.

(44)