Thursday, November 1, 2007
Agenda
- Approval of minutes from October 5, 2007
- Overview of new budget model & expectations for ITS Advisory Committee - Ellen Rasmussen, Provost's Office
- Evolution of the new ITS budget - David Popelka, Assistant CIO
- Allocation Flowchart [PDF]
- ITS Merger Consolidation [XLS]
- Service Summary FY08 [XLS]
- IT Study Recomendations [DOC]
- Good of the order
Attendance
- Attendees included
- Phil Spike (chair), Roger Baer, Tony Townsend, Chris McCoy, Pam Elliott Cain, Kathy Jones, Floyd Davenport, Ryan Meyers (for Jason Carroll), Debra Lauterbach & Trevin Ward (for Ian Guffy), Steven Jungst, Steve Hernstadt, James Alleman, Theresa Windus, Eldon Uhlenhopp, Karen Larson, and Jim Davis
- Absent members
- Sree Nilakanta and Ann Thompson
- Visitors in attendance were
- Ellen Rasmussen, David Popelka, Diane Beckman, Rhonda Fiscus, Angela Bradley, Cheryl Langston, Mike Bowman, Rich Jones, Michelle Stotts, and Jim Twetten
Minutes
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Minutes from October 5, 2007 meeting were approved.
Overview of new budget model & expectations for ITS Advisory Committee - Ellen Rasmussen, Provost's Office, answered questions regarding the Advisory Committee's role and the new budget model. Transparency is the goal of the RMM. The budget model philosophy determined that administrative services were to be included in the changes. The model is similar to cost accounting models. The advisory groups are intended to provide input and advice to the administrator about level and quality of services as well as priorities. Advisory committees will provide additional input into the hierarchical budgeting structure. Unit director does not have to follow the advice of the advisory groups, but may use it as part of budgeting discussions. The priority of the Advisory groups should be on the services instead of the accounting structure. They should be talking about the broad suite of services. Hopefully, this budget model will cause departments to begin to think in longer terms for planning.
Evolution of the new ITS budget - David Popelka, Assistant CIO shared 1) The four IT departments funding before the merger and examined how the funding pattern has emerged through the merger, and 2) current costs and funding source. Previously, ATS & Telecom were under the VP for Business & Finance and were primarily self-generated funding (funds that are charged from one unit to another). These funds (state or other sources) come to the administrative unit and are paid to the service unit based on usage charges. AIT & ITC were under the Provost and primarily centrally funded (not rebilled to get the funds). These four departments came together organizationally on July 1, 2005, but kept the same funding sources. On July 1, 2006, a new funding structure was created for IT Services. Even though IT Services merged organizationally, they are still fragmented funding wise. It's not that either models (cost recovery or centrally funding) is bad, it needs to be consistent and make sense. The department funding prior to merger was appropriate for each department, but the merger has provided different perspectives. The goal is to have similar services funded similarly. A summary document of services that IT Services provides by area and what it costs to provide the services was distributed.
The advisory group agreed that they will focus on the services and if appropriate, comment on the funding model. The advisory group is not intended to micromanage the operations. IT Services will be establishing a baseline and sharing initiatives and projects. The group may like to hear from IT specialists as to trends, short-term projects, and long-term projects. At the next meeting IT Services may share the new model for administrative systems charges.
