1. technology and computing

ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT UNIT ASSESSMENT
SELF-STUDY REPORT SUBMISSION COVER SHEET
Cycle Year 2004-2005
University Computing and Communications Services
(UCCS)
William F. Paraska_
Department Head
7 December 2004
404-651-0881
Phone
Self-Study Report Primary Writer/Editor:
William F. Paraska
Self-Study Report Team Members:
June Moss
James Amann
Division or College:
Jason Berry
Charles (Lee) Brown
Information Systems and Technology
Department Head’s Supervisor:
J.L. Albert
Associate Provost and CIO
Number of subunits in Department:
Number of employees in Department:
none
64
Peer institutions used for comparisons:
University of New Mexico
University of Louisville
University of Missouri-Kansas City
University of Alabama/Birmingham
List of Appendices:
Appendix 1 - UCCS Goals Mapped to University and IT Strategic Goals
Appendix 2 – Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan for UCCS
Appendix 3 – Infrastructure Service Enhancement Opportunities
Appendix 4 - UCCS Performance Summary
Appendix 5 – IST Core Functions
Appendix 6 – IST Active Projects
Appendix 7 – Customer Survey Summary
Appendix 8 – UCCS Organization Plan
Appendix 9 – Criteria Based Job Performance Plan
Appendix 10 – Employee Survey Report
Appendix 11 – IST Civility Statement
Appendix 12 – IST Value Statements
Appendix 13 – Golden Rules of Customer Service
Appendix 14 – Peer Comparisons
1
I. Mission and Functional Responsibilities
A1. What is the Mission of the unit?
University Computing and Communications Services (UCCS) engineers, installs, operates,
maintains and ensures the integrity of the University enterprise network and centralized
computing environment. UCCS additionally evaluates and integrates network-based services
and capabilities to meet University-wide requirements.
A2. How does the mission support the present missions and strategic plans of the division
and the University?
The mission of UCCS is strongly tied to the strategic goals of the University in that the
individual activities of the department are planned and executed as support functions to larger
projects directly related to meeting or approaching stated University Objectives. Recently
developed unit goals and objectives are tied to both the University Strategic Plan and the IT
Strategic Plan (Appendix 1).
A3. How is the mission communicated to unit staff and constituents?
The mission of the unit is communicated directly to the unit staff through discussion during
weekly staff meetings and more particularly during the development and implementation of
support services for University projects. It is during development and implementation that the
exact functions of UCCS and the boundaries for activities are delineated for all involved
elements of IST as well as for participating constituent groups.
B. What are the functional responsibilities of the unit?
•
•
•
•
Development of the architecture for the overall campus network to include data, voice
and video service
Network and computing equipment selection, installation, operation and maintenance
Design, implementation and operation of the central campus email systems and network
operating system providing such common services as network printing and central file
storage
Back-up and recovery of centralized application software and data
C. What are the unit’s key indicators (performance outcome measurements)?
Beginning 1 July 2004, UCCS committed to tracking performance effectiveness for three distinct
Outcomes (Goals). Those Outcomes and their associated Effectiveness (Key) Indicators are as
follows:
•
•
Community participation in development of strategic and tactical technology goals
o Breakdown of requirement gathering opportunity participants by college and
department
o Measurement of number of identified requirements that are satisfied and how
well they are satisfied
o Value and risk analysis by external review team
Community access to highly available and current technology resources
o Availability of infrastructure elements
2
•
o Time to complete network installations
o Number of trouble reports and time to resolve them
o Time needed to return security compromised systems to use and the quality of
instructions provided
o Currency and availability of self-help procedures
Electronic mail as a reliable method of delivering official University communications
o Availability of the system
o Customer satisfaction
o Number of trouble reports and time to resolve each
o Frequency and depth of training and customer satisfaction with training
D. To whom does the unit report?
UCCS is a division of the Information Systems and Technology (IS&T) department. The UCCS
director reports to the Associate Provost and CIO.
II. Goals and Objectives
A1. What are the unit’s present goals and objectives?
Goals as presented in the 1 July 2004 Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan (Appendix 2)
are listed below. Corresponding objectives can be viewed in the Appendix.
•
•
•
•
Obtain University community participation in development and review of strategic and
tactical technology objectives
Provide access to high availability and up-to-date technology resources
Support electronic mail as a reliable method of delivering official University
communications
Open and maintain effective communication channels with the University community
A2. How do these goals and objectives support the defined mission and functional
responsibilities of the unit?
The goals selected for the first iteration of the Institutional Effectiveness Plan are a direct
reflection of the core competencies of UCCS as well as the primary concerns of the user
constituencies as indicated in prior year discussions with all Vice Presidents and Deans
(Appendix 3), and surveys of departmental IT representatives. The goals are focused in scope.
The organizational and technical construct needed to be successful in their attainment will
provide a strong, responsive and flexible basis for UCCS to directly support the Georgia State
mission and meet new challenges as the University grows.
By building an iterative and inclusive process that engages the constituency early and
continuously, the probability of proposing network and computing environment enhancements or
changes that will meet constituent needs and expectations will increase and therefore the
measured effectiveness of the organization will increase.
Providing high availability of current technology solutions demands integrating new capabilities
into the network and computing environment in order to meet University demands. Information
technology is continually changing as are the potential applications of those technologies. The
effectiveness of UCCS will be measured in how soon and how successfully these new
3
technologies can be brought to bear on the identified challenges presented by faculty, staff,
students and researchers.
The goal concerning email is a blend of both parts of the mission statement and addresses a
highly visible and critical application across the University environment.
The final goal is a common goal of the entire IS&T organization and therefore supports each
unit’s mission as well as the mission of the parent organization. By opening better
communication channels, both to and from the constituent groups, more effective solutions will
be defined and implemented.
A3. How were these goals and objectives developed and how were they communicated to
staff and constituents?
The set of goals stated above was developed late in Academic year 2003-2004 as the core of the
Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan for UCCS. Goals were developed by the UCCS
management team using brainstorming sessions with refinement of the most customer and
service oriented goals through discussion within the IST Directors meetings. Finalized goals
were distributed via email to the UCCS staff with additional instruction provided to Assistant
Directors and managers to communicate the content to their managed staff members.
Communication of stated goals to our supported constituencies is planned pending acceptance of
this ASUR self-assessment and its accompanying action plan. UCCS utilizes each and every
customer contact opportunity to obtain updated or new information on the requirements of those
customers, how the organization is doing in meeting their needs and how the organization could
be more effective in providing communication channels into and out of the organization.
B1. How is achievement of the unit’s goals and objectives measured?
The Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan contains suggested methods of both collection
and monitoring of metrics for each stated goal. (Appendix 2)
B2. Does measurement include feedback from the providers and recipients of the
service/product?
For the community participation goal, the process for community interaction has not been
developed. This process will include feedback that indicates the type and level of participation
in the variety of group sessions anticipated, the results of implementing requirements identified
through these processes, and the evaluation and recommended changes to University developed
plans and approaches suggested by external technical reviewers.
Availability and performance measurement results are currently provided back to the UCCS
technical staff for comment and explanation of both identified outage periods and development
of service improvement plans. Consolidated reports of performance are available to the entire
University community from the UCCS web pages (Appendix 4) and are currently published
twice per academic year. Additional information will be made available to both suppliers and
recipients to address new port installation elapsed times, trouble report time to resolve, perceived
effectiveness of information security responses, and perceived usefulness of published self-help
procedures.
4
Email effectiveness will be reported in terms of availability of the service, surveyed customer
satisfaction levels and availability, and effectiveness of available training on email system use.
B3. To what extent have the present goals and objectives been achieved?
These goals were accepted on 1 July 2004, consequently measurement against the suggested
metrics is not available. However, during the last two years, UCCS has been moving steadily
towards the expected outcomes. This is evidenced by the implementation of performance metric
reports available to the community, the direct solicitation of needed services from college deans
and departmental Vice Presidents, the realignment of and reclassification of available manpower
to provide higher skilled and more responsive service and the continuation of infrastructure
modernization projects that have provided capabilities such as wireless access and high
bandwidth network access ahead of the demand.
B4. What are the unit’s notable accomplishments?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Continuous upgrade of the network cabling and switching infrastructure has allowed user
access from anywhere on campus, elimination of the need for departments to locate
servers near their users and the speed and reliability needed to support classroom
technology, library resources and research computing.
Standardization and automation of configuration of the over 400 centrally managed
servers so that systems can be quickly expanded to meet changing requirements or
rapidly restored in the event of failure or disaster.
Implementation of an information security plan and continuous improvements in
protection of critical University resources resulting in repeated prevention of the
University being disabled by attacks or allowing compromise of sensitive information.
Leadership in the deployment of University of Georgia Library systems making “state-ofthe-art” resource searching, cataloging and circulation available to all schools within the
University of Georgia System.
Design of an infrastructure of unprecedented size and complexity in order to run the
GoSolar student information system.
Deployment of a campus wireless network that is capable of growing from a casual
access method to an integral part of the campus learning environment.
Expansion of the campus email system to handle the current volume of 31million email
messages per year and the annually expected growth of 40 percent.
Growth of the centrally managed data storage and data back-up capabilities from 26
Terabytes in 2001 to 106 Terabytes in 2004.
C. How does the reward structure within the unit (including recognition, promotion, and
merit salary increases) support the unit’s goals and objectives?
UCCS’ reward structure is consistent with University policy. With economic conditions limiting
monetary recognition, non-salary incentives are utilized. Professional development
opportunities, in conjunction with committee and special project assignments are the primary
incentives. These methods convey a correlation between individual performance and specific
tasks related to the University goals and objectives. Exceptional accomplishments are
acknowledged with congratulatory communications originated from any level between manager
and the CIO. These communications typically address how the staff member assisted the
organization in exceeding University expectations. Promotion opportunities reflect changes in
5
the scope of responsibilities within the department and are presented as reclassifications of
existing positions. Employees are encouraged to apply for open competition job postings. Job
series are constructed to promote upward mobility in an attempt to increase internal stability.
III. Services Provided
A1. What services/products does the unit provide?
UCCS provides a variety of technical services to the central IST organization and to the campus
community. Specifically the following major services are provided on a continuing basis:
Core Services
• Operation and maintenance of campus
central email
• Maintenance of campus network
operating system
• Around the clock monitoring and service
restoration for central servers and network
• Vendor product evaluation and selection
• Operation and maintenance of campus
data, voice and video transmission media
• Consultation to departments for system
selection and operation
• Operation and maintenance of institutional
servers
• Voice system connections and service
restoral
• Management of University assigned
Internet Protocol addresses
• Management of University electronic
identity directories
• Develop, test and distribute self-help IT
application instructions
• Maintain and safe-guard back-up copies
of central applications and data
• Installation of campus network ports
Non-Core Services
• Production of printed material from
digital media
• Duplication and distribution of sitelicensed software
• University information telephone operator
• After hours Level 1 HelpCenter services
• University information security to include
operation of central information security appliances
and applications
• University information security risk assessment
and defense planning
A2. Of these, which ones are the unit’s core functions?
The following core services are integrated with other IS&T services to build 22 unique Core Functional
areas (Appendix 5). The technical services provided by UCCS are currently significantly aligned within the
following 11 Core Functions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Organization Administration
Identity Management
Network (Voice, Data, Video)
Technology Planning and Futures
Financial Systems Support
HR Systems Support
•
•
•
•
•
•
E-Mail
NOC and System Housing
Information Security
Student Information Systems Support
Research Computing System Support
6
B1. How are services prioritized and scheduled and by whom?
The Associate Provost and CIO, in collaboration with IS&T Directors, prepares prior to the
beginning of each academic year a priority listing (Appendix 6) of those projects that enjoy
direction and funding for activity during the academic year. The division directors then evaluate
the availability of staff resources, equipment and funding, and coordination of internal and
external customers to schedule activity or the delivery of services as part of overall project or
implementation plans.
Within UCCS, the Assistant Directors for Networks and Systems and the Managers for Network
Operations Center and Network Planning are responsible for hiring, training and managing
skilled staff resources and scheduling the actual tasks that will be performed by each of their
assigned staff with knowledge of the overall project or implementation plan schedule and
requirements. Staff members are permitted some latitude in when tasks are actually performed
as they can best assess the availability of all resources and sufficient time to work effectively.
Staff members of the Assistant Director for Information Security are a dedicated resource and are
made available as matrixed members of project teams as required.
UCCS also makes every attempt to evaluate and respond to “ad hoc” requests to the degree it is
possible to address such unfunded and unplanned requests from the community.
B2. Do any laws, regulations, or other requirements external to the University impact the
provision of services/products? If so please identify.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) affects the way that the University is viewed in
terms of providing internet access services. This act requires that UCCS as the agent for the
University keep complete records of those users accessing the network for use in investigating
and resolving illegal activity such as copyright infringement.
The Georgia Open Records Act defines email and electronic documents as records and makes
these types of records subject to request for review. UCCS must ensure that processes for the
retention of these types of records are clearly stated and acceptable to the University Vice
President for Legal Affairs. If requests for records are made, UCCS must provide the resources
to extract and provide those records.
USA Patriot Act. Under the broad authorities provided by this Act to Federal officials, UCCS
must be ready to provide access to any and all information relative to use of the University
network and any attached, centrally managed systems.
C1. Who are the unit’s customers?
UCCS has three distinct categories of customer; direct support, external support, and network
end user. Direct support customers are defined as both the internal IST staff supporting specific
functionally aligned systems and departmental IT staff members supporting the IT needs of
individual college/department or administrative units. External support customers are defined as
those agencies such as the University System of Georgia Board of Regents or individuals not
associated with Georgia Staff who have contracted with UCCS to provide support for systems
dedicated to their use. Network end users are defined as a student, faculty or staff member of the
University that has permission to access the network resources of the University.
7
C2. How does the unit make potential clients aware of available services?
Communication to potential clients takes place through personal contacts, printed announcements, meetings
with constituent groups, IST Services Web Page, Email, Focus-IT publications, ITSS (a subcommittee of
the Senate ISAT committee), and NETSIG (an informal Network Special Interest Group comprised of
University staff with technology-centric skills and responsibilities).
C3. How does the unit make the community aware of priorities, policies, and procedures?
Community awareness occurs through Email Broadcasts, IST Website, printed materials, constituent
gatherings, and personal contacts via phone or office visits, ITSS, and NETSIG.
D1. How does the unit learn about the customer’s needs and obtain feedback regarding
service delivery?
UCCS uses a number of opportunities to interact with direct support customers (Constituent
gatherings and personal contacts, solicitation of feedback, Help Center Remedy tickets, outage
reports, email correspondence, ITSS, NETSIG and interactions with application owners).
During these interactions, UCCS is able to share with customers information on new
technologies being examined. The Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan for UCCS
includes objectives to move the current process for feedback collection from a situational,
specific individual experience basis to one based on repeatable data collection and analysis.
D2. How well are client needs defined and met? In this section include information
collected from your outcomes assessment.
We are building a process to track client requirements that will include measures of how well
they are first understood and defined and then how well they are delivered. The Institutional
Effectiveness Plan specifically addresses processes and indicators for outcomes in this area.
As part of the ASUR process, a Zoomerang web-based survey of non-IS&T NETSIG
membership (34 total members) was conducted. The survey evaluated accurate and timely
communication regarding planned and unplanned (network, security, system and application)
modifications and communication methods and interactions. Overall, seventy-four percent of the
NETSIG respondents rated UCCS’ communication and notification effectiveness as extremely
well/very well. (Appendix 7)
UCCS staff members indicated agreement (67 % rating 4 or 5 on 5 point scale) with the
statement “I am confident that my unit/department is meeting our customer needs.”
E1. Are there services/products that clients need which the unit cannot provide?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Automation of account creation and termination
Provision of security risk assessment services
Prevention of email SPAM
Collaboration with administrative, academic, and research units on potential institutional
projects
Delivery of security awareness training
Provision of reliable voice communications
Positive identification and labeling of network ports and connected devices
8
E2. What would the unit need to be able to provide these?
All these services would depend on establishment of enforceable policies and standards coupled
with adequate funding, additional staff, and user community consensus on functional
requirements for each service or product newly provided.
IV. Structure, Organization and Climate
A1. What is the unit’s organizational structure? (Please provide an organizational chart.)
UCCS is currently authorized 64 full time equivalent positions. The department is organized
along functional lines as described below and in Appendix 8:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Organization Support manages the administrative workflow for the department and
provides resource allocation, budget management, purchasing, human resources action
processing, office supply management and travel coordination for the entire department.
Technical Writing is the single point for review of all technical documentation created for
support systems and network based applications. This function also has responsibility for
testing of self-help procedures developed for campus use.
Information Security provides the function of the University Information Security Officer
and manages the centralized intrusion prevention and anti-virus applications. This
section also provides consulting services to the entire campus community.
Systems operates and maintains centralized processing equipment and network based
applications.
Network Operations maintains the network wiring connecting campus buildings and
provides connections and switching within the buildings. This section also coordinates
voice communication services for campus users and will implement our planned voice
system replacement.
The Network Operations Center maintains the physical location for all network and
central processing systems. It additionally provides the technical staff for 24 hour/7 day
per week performance monitoring and outage restoral for the entire IST organization and
campus community.
Network Planning provides the overall architecture for the campus network and
maintains connectivity to the Internet and the University System of Georgia Peachnet
Network.
A2. Is this form of organization appropriate to meeting the unit’s goals and objective?
As UCCS moves to a focus on customer service provisioning, the structure of UCCS will change
to an organization that is more identifiable with customer defined or requested services rather
than technical task skill areas. Changes needed to accomplish the above will be dependent on
refinement and definition of the service strategy that IST will develop in the future.
A3. How does the unit backup critical staff functions?
Ideally all critical staff positions would have at least one backup person; most do not. The
limiting factor is too few highly technical staff to cover those functions. As partial mitigation,
procedures are written and published to handle routine problems or tasks within critical
9
functions. Increased attention on cross-training and expanded use of NOC staff resources are
being used to mitigate as well.
B1. For any services/products provided by the unit in conjunction with other units within
the University, please describe the relationship.
Information security services (audits, reviews, incidents, security tool distribution) are
coordinated with departments to ensure minimal disruption of activities – especially those
involving critical periods. Information security staff efforts are closely coordinated with the
University Internal Auditing department. Such coordination ensures that a common set of
standards is used for assessment and evaluation, and ensures that affected units are not doubly
burdened by both security and audit functions.
Systems staff members depend on support from departmental IT representatives for assistance
with management of the campus email accounts, account creation and network printing services.
The systems staff also works closely with other divisions within IST to support central
applications (Spectrum, Banner, PeopleSoft HR) and several Board of Regents projects (New
Georgia Encyclopedia, GIL, GALILEO, GPLS, Jimmy Carter Presidential Library, and WebCT).
Systems provides full sever support to the Rialto Center and the College of Health and Human
Sciences on a contractual basis, and provides substantial operating system and server hardware
support to other campus departments.
Networks coordinates the University telephone service and repair requests with BellSouth and
the Georgia Technology Authority (GTA). The role of UCCS in this process is strictly
administrative; BellSouth and GTA provide technical support. Additionally, Networks works
closely with Design and Engineering and Facilities Management to recommend network
solutions for new and renovated facilities on campus.
Network Operations Center (NOC) and Systems provide system hosting services for University
organizations external to IST and external to the University. While the relationship and interface
with these customers is typically performed by Systems staff, the NOC provides physical access
to equipment and performs after-hours trouble management.
UCCS, in conjunction with other IST units, provides Service Level Agreement support for the
research computing hardware utilized by the Brains and Behaviors and Molecular Basis of
Disease Areas of Focus.
B2. How is the work coordinated between or among units?
Security staff members attend security related meetings with departments across campus. They
maintain a campus-wide contact list used to notify departments of security related occurrences.
Additionally, security coordinates with ITSS and NETSIG to provide overviews, training, and
security related information.
Networks staff members coordinate with BellSouth and the GTA via the IST Help Center, the
Remedy reporting system, email and telephone communications. Coordination with facilities
division is accomplished through in-person project reviews, construction plan reviews, and onsite observation of construction progress.
Systems staff members coordinate issues and solutions pertaining to campus email, account
creation, and printing via the Help Center, Remedy and meetings. Systems uses a mailing list
10
associated with each external Board of Regents project. Two mailing lists are used for
centralized applications coordination in addition to bi-weekly meetings with database
administrators. Special mailing lists are also used for short project specific related coordination.
The UCCS director has bi-weekly meetings with the other directors within IST to discuss
interdepartmental issues and projects. The UCCS director attends a monthly ISAT Senate
meeting to discuss funding, programs and policies that impact the entire campus.
B3. How can such relations be facilitated?
Continued communication with partner units, review of customer service feedback and use of
industry accepted methods of project management would allow for more effective use of
available resources.
C1. Are duplicates or parallel services offered within the unit or elsewhere in the
University?
Some services within UCCS are duplicated due to the differences in supported technologies
(server configuration and installation occurs in the UNIX team, the Windows team, network
planning, and Information Security). Many of the core services of UCCS are duplicated on a
smaller scale in departments throughout the University – in particular operation of departmental
servers (over 250 systems) and email systems (10 systems).
C2. Describe any potential or apparent overlap and discuss that changes might be
indicated (e.g. centralization, coordination, elimination of duplication).
Lack of institutional standards for common IT services allows duplication of services and
inefficiency in resource utilization across the University. Efficiencies could be achieved by
requiring conversion to centralized email, data storage, research computing, server equipment
and 24/7 systems and applications monitoring where centralization is shown to provide these
duplicated IT functions in a reliable, responsive and less costly manner while giving departments
the same (or better) level of control and service than they currently provide themselves.
D1. What are the unit’s (1) planning, (2) decision-making, and (3) individual and (4) unit
performance evaluation processes?
(1) Biweekly meetings in IS&T plan activities within the unit and coordinate functions
according to University and customer timetables. Agreed upon plans are then developed within
the IST divisions. (2) Decision-making is participatory, dynamic and driven by consideration of
institutional direction. (3) Individual performance is documented during annual performance
reviews in accordance with University policy. An IS&T standard Criteria Based Job
Performance Plan (Appendix 9) is used to establish expectations and rate performance.
Assessment as an on-going process throughout the year is encouraged. (4) Selected aspects of
unit performance are documented in semi-annual performance reports. Use of the formalized
processes of the Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan began 1 July 2004.
D2. Who is involved in each?
(1) UCCS Director, Assistant Directors, Managers and key Lead level personnel are primarily
responsible for project planning. (2) Decision making is performed by the Director and direct
report positions. (3) Individual performance is documented annually and involves the individual
11
and their immediate supervisor. (4) UCCS performance reports are prepared from automatically
collected information and amended with comments from the individual system or application
managers.
E1. How are individual and unit work responsibilities and expectations determined?
Unit work responsibilities are determined by the Director and Assistant Directors based on the
known capabilities of UCCS and the extent of responsibility assigned to the IS&T organization.
Expectations, derived by management from project taskings, are tempered by both the
availability of critical skills and competing project workload, and the clarification of complexity
of the issues and problems that are encountered as the project proceeds.
Individual work expectations are determined by managers based on their understanding of both
the tasks that have been levied on or accepted by the organization and the individual
competencies and availability of their staff members.
E2. How are they communicated to the employees of the department?
Each staff member is aware of the general responsibilities associated with his job title and skill
set as spelled out in the Criteria Based Job Performance Plan. Responsibilities and expectations
for specific projects are communicated by the Assistant Director and Manager at the start of the
project and modified as necessary as work flow and additional new projects are assigned.
F1. What are the general morale, attitude, and culture of the unit?
Survey results from the Office of Institutional Research indicate a positive overall morale and
attitude (Appendix 10). The survey reflects that UCCS compares favorably with other units
campus-wide. More specific attitudes and concerns, solicited from UCCS staff members in a
series of small discussion groups, indicated that the following areas should be addressed:
•
•
•
•
•
Improve upward and downward communication within UCCS
Implement and adhere to effective Project Plans
Provide adequate training and funding to accomplish assigned Projects
Improve respect, trust, and acknowledgement of employees and their capabilities
Remove “deadwood” employees and reward productive ones
F2. What measures are taken to ensure that the unit is appropriately sensitive to the
cultural backgrounds of staff and clients?
UCCS is committed to pursuing initiatives that enhance awareness and sensitivity to diversity by
creating a working environment guided by the following IST directives: Civility Statement
(Appendix 11), Value Statement (Appendix 12) and Golden Rules of Customer Service
(Appendix 13). UCCS’ diverse staffing is representative of management’s continuing practice of
assimilating quality employees based on proven skills into an inclusive staff. The majority of
UCCS staff has participated in diversity and civility training with the Office of Affirmative
Action.
12
V. Resources
A1. Provide a budget allocation and expenditure summary for the past three fiscal years
and a copy of your most recent internal audit.
UCCS receives operating funds from the FC10 appropriations, revenue from sales and service
activities, Service Level Agreement (SLA) transfers from both internal University organizations
and external Board of Regents activities. The budget allocation and expenditure charts below for
FY2002 through FY2005 reflect only the FC10 funding source for UCCS as indicated in the
original budgets for those years.
* Includes Student Assistants
Fiscal Year
FY 2002
FY 2003
FY 2004
FY 2005
Total FC10
$4,578,418
$4,586,562
$4,234,282
$3,762,056
Salaries
$3,547,851
$3,978,396
$3,513,560
$3,148,067
Equipment
$125,147
$125,147
$125,147
$101,322
Supplies
$896,495
$474,094
$586,650
$503,742
Travel
$8,925
$8,925
$8,925
$8,925
FTE *
86.40
91.86
74.60
65.60
UCCS is not financially audited as a separate organization.
For FY 2005, the entire IST division is operating from a restructured expenditure plan that
focuses on identification of Core Functions and all funding sources.
A2. Indicate how resources are spent on each of the core functional activities identified in
1B.
The core responsibilities listed in section IB cannot be tracked to particular dollar allocations
from the budget and other funding sources as those responsibilities are required in levels of effort
across 23 IST identified Core Functions. Instead, the table below shows details for 11of the Core
Functions that consume the majority of UCCS allocated resources. This chart reflects the actual
FY05 costs required for UCCS to provide the expected level of services in these Core Functions
and therefore the totals will not equal the budget allocation numbers provided in A1 above.
Core Function
Administrative
Security
Networks
Email
Identity
Management
NOC
Research Support
Finance Systems
Student Info
Systems
HR Systems**
Total
Resources
$357,890
$324,934
$1,579,821
$437,049
$628,570
Salaries
$264,390
$197,636
$907,559
$171,439
$110,934
Capital
Investment*
0
$50,000
$63,900
$232,000
$290,681
Deferred
Maintenance*
0
$33,600
$328,586
$24,860
$101,495
$2,725,359
$7,630
$137,362
$594,091
$1,202,551
0
$97,031
$126,863
$845,700
$6,000
0
0
0
0
0
Supplies
$85,250
$24,588
$241,126
$5,750
$107,460
Travel
Training
$8,250
19,110
$38,650
$3,000
$18,000
FTE
4.0
3.0
18.5
3.0
2.0
$74,300
0
$3,776
$24,070
$587,798
$16,380
$20,555
$443,158
$15,000
0
$16,000
0
26.5
0
2
2
0
0
0
0
*Capital Investment is defined as new equipment, contracts or software licenses that are required to either expand or initiate services
that are required by the University. Deferred Maintenance is defined as replacement equipment and repair for obsolete or out of
warranty equipment that is required to maintain current levels of service provided to the University.
**HR Systems will share manpower resources with Finance Systems. Supplies will be included in FY2006 as first year of operation.
13
A3. To what extent do the budget allocation and its utilization allow unit goals and
objectives to be realized?
The goal of providing high availability services is impacted negatively by omission of funding
for both capital investment and deferred maintenance and limits on training funds. No capital
funding limits the ability to replace equipment that ages past vendor specified end-of-life.
Deferred maintenance costs are not included as budgeted items and consequently the backlog of
needed equipment upgrades and replacement grows each year; the figures for FY05 shown above
are therefore cumulative, not new expenses for FY05 only.
Growth in the installed infrastructure and in the amount and complexity of software utilized by
institutional systems is not accounted for in the UCCS budget for continuing equipment
maintenance and software licensing. These two areas alone account for increases (due to new
system implementations) of over $500,000 in FY05 from FY04 without an accompanying
increase in the UCCS budget allocation.
Non-availability of continuing funding for technical training inhibits the ability of the unit to
maintain the skill level for current staff and does not allow upgrade training for new staff. For
the past several years, the UCCS staff has relied on limited training funding accompanying new
system implementations. Only 38.6% of UCCS staff members indicated that they received
enough training to do their jobs well.
A4. What is the decision-making process for the distribution of budget allocations?
Within the IS&T Department, the Associate Provost/CIO and Directors view the entire revenue
projection for the Fiscal Year in May of the preceding year. Each division within IS&T then
prepares a zero-based line item budgetary input to the Associate Provost/CIO. The Associate
Provost/CIO reviews the combined submissions and provides a line item allocation to each
division director. Each Director has discretion in allocating savings achieved by negotiation of
better pricing or implementation of alternative solutions. Unforecasted requirements, or changes
to scope of supported efforts, are discussed by the Associate Provost/CIO and Directors with a
suggested method of seeking additional funding identified.
B1. What are the space, facilities, and technology allocations (describe the quantity and
quality)?
UCCS occupies the 5th floor of Classroom South for its main office space (highly desirable
location for classroom expansion) and is physically separated from the rest of the IST
organization. Most of UCCS’ servers and network equipment is located in the Network
Operations Center in the basement of Library South (highly desirable location for library
expansion) adjacent to Classroom South. UCCS also has a test and evaluation area on the 4th
floor of Classroom South (Room 407/409; also highly desirable classroom space). Our current
allocated space for offices and equipment is not optimally configured for the destiny of technical
equipment needed for our current staff size.
The small staff authorized to perform the campus wide functions that UCCS is charged with
requires automation tools that allow quick assessment of situations and quick reallocation of
resources. The diagnostic, management, and reporting tools are available, but are not generally
funded.
14
B2. To what extent do the allocation and its utilization allow unit goals and objectives to be
realized?
Projects to which UCCS provides support typically only fund what is necessary to implement
that project. Since funding for infrastructure test equipment is not included, UCCS must use
spare, obsolete equipment as a test environment to duplicate and analyze problems being
encountered with the production systems. Lack of funding for a separate network test
environment limits our ability to evaluate and test new solutions before they are introduced to the
production network. This repeatedly results in turning on systems that require more maintenance
time and staff than would have been required if better testing and more attention to documenting
maintenance processes had been allowed before turning on these systems.
Space availability and condition of the NOC environmental support systems will - within the
next 2 years - limit the number and types of new systems that can be supported. Consideration is
needed for development of a conceptual plan for a future data center facility (specifically
designed as a network operations center from the beginning) that would meet the future needs of
the University.
Separation of UCCS from the rest of the IS&T organization introduces stress and opportunity for
mistakes in interpretation of direction and coordinated responses to system implementations and
restorations. Closer physical proximity of all IST staff resources and to operational equipment
would provide for more immediate communication and quicker problem resolution.
C1. Do employee skills match the unit’s foreseeable needs?
Because of the constantly changing availability of Information Technology, keeping or acquiring
staff with the necessary skills remains a challenge. UCCS management is well aware of the
realities of budget limitations and the low probability of additional staff approvals. To meet the
most critical requirements of the University, UCCS is prepared to reassess existing technical
positions to determine candidates for reclassification from least necessary skills to more-indemand skills as indicated in the recent reclassification, and subsequent elimination of eight staff
positions, in NOC.
C2. How is the need for training determined?
Training requirements are primarily determined by the individual technical staff managers. They
rely on their own expertise coupled with knowledge of recent and anticipated technology shifts
to determine gaps in the skill sets of their assigned staff. Training is also identified as part of
most major IT system implementations, but is limited to only those pieces of equipment or
software that are new with the project and only to those few staff directly assigned to the project
implementation.
C3. How is training and cross-training provided?
Lacking funded training, the following avenues are encouraged by managers across the
department: University courses, personal professional development, vendor training, mentoring,
on-line courses, conferences, seminars, application workshops and peer networking.
Cross-training is individually designed based on the skill levels of the trainer and the trainee.
Cross training consists of informal instruction, directed reading of technical material and handson configuration and trouble shooting.
15
C4. How is acquisition of new skills and knowledge encouraged?
Within the IT profession there is an expectation of a certain but an undefined amount of selfmotivation to supplement individual skills and knowledge. IST encouragement to go beyond this
individual drive is currently limited to increased probability of employee retention and
progression, promotion opportunities, performance-based merit raises, and managerial and peer
accolades. An often overlooked, but substantially motivating factor that UCCS is beginning to
utilize is project assignment progression that includes increased responsibility and complexity of
tasks.
D1. What changes could be made to produce greater efficiencies or economies of scale
(e.g., reduction, modification, or elimination of paperwork; structural reorganization)?
•
•
•
•
Defining core skills
Consolidating the resources necessary for core functions
Seeking qualified personnel and tap into existing resources
Managing according to accepted project management standards and methodologies
D2. What constraints (e.g., resources, personnel, technology) must the unit address to
achieve these?
•
•
•
•
Budgeting for annual training plans
Budgeting for refresh of diagnostic, management and reporting tools
Initial and continuing training for management level staff in how to effectively manage
technical resources within the guideline of the Board of Regents
Out-of-date technical and management skill sets in technical leadership positions
VI. Peer Comparisons
A. How does the office staff size compare with similar institutions?
B. Analyze the difference and similarities.
Appendix 15 shows comparison of the Georgia State UCCS organization to similar staff
functions at the University of Louisville, University of New Mexico, University of Missouri –
Kansa City and University of Alabama at Birmingham. Data was sourced from the EDUCAUSE
2003 Core Data Service Survey and confirmed through contact with each of the comparative
institutions. The four comparative institutions were chosen from the Urban 13 based on their
Carnegie Class and their Fall 2003 enrollment numbers. While this tabulation provides a
comparable assessment, it does not provide insight into the variations within staff responsibilities
and technical skill levels.
What the comparatives show is that there is not a set of common measure of staffing ratios that
can be applied across the various campuses to come up with a sense of what is good or what is
bad. What our interviews with each institution further indicate is that there is not a common
agreement as to job titles and associated functions with the areas in which UCCS provides
support. The general averages for Georgia State, New Mexico and Missouri-Kansas City are
very close for infrastructure spending/enrolled FTE, network ports/infrastructure FTE and
Student FTE/Infrastructure FTE but the other two institutions differ by orders of magnitude. No
other similarities or trends can be deduced from the data available other than to say that each
institution has organized to meet the unique requirements of that institution.
16
Only one institution indicated a continuing capital budget line for IT infrastructure and none
indicated a continuing budget line for IT staff training.
VII. Summary of Report and Strategic Directions
A1. Overall, what are the unit’s greatest strengths?
UCCS is a valuable technical resource to the University. That value is based primarily on the
high level of expertise found within UCCS staff members. UCCS management has clearly
articulated that skills must be kept up to date so that UCCS may remain a viable and competitive
entity at Georgia State.
A2. How can this unit leverage the strengths that already exist?
Strengthen and develop its greatest assets - the personnel and skills of UCCS. Restructure the
way projects are assigned within the department to create greater exposure between staff in
different groups and to enhance cross training and knowledge sharing. Automate repetitive tasks
to free up technical resources.
A3. Can the strengths be improved upon?
Additional training, training incentives, and inter-departmental cross-training would serve to
increase the range and depth of expertise. Inclusion of departmental IT resources as technical or
collaborating staff on institutional IT projects could introduce different perspectives and skills
into the resource pool that is currently available.
B. What areas need improvement and what recommendations can address these?
B1. What if any, changes are indicated in the unit’s current mission, goals, and objectives?
(Section 1)
Priority attention should be placed on defining, agreeing on and beginning work towards meeting
an initial set of IS&T goals and objectives that can then be further developed to complement the
outcomes identified in the UCCS Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Plan.
B2. What, if any, changes are indicated in the ways that the achievement of goals and
objectives is measured? (Section II).
Create meaningful metrics related to customer service expectations and develop a formal system
of gathering data for those metrics. Report on progress through customer accessible and
understandable presentation methods. Provide appropriately skilled staff to develop, collect and
report progress.
B3. What, if any, changes are indicated in the services/products provided to clients by the
unit? (Section III)
The UCCS division should concentrate on the core functions of operating, maintaining and
expanding the network and computing infrastructures of the University and either eliminate or
transfer non-core services. The specific deficiencies noted in Section III E1 and repeated below
17
should be reviewed with University constituencies and recommendation made to the
administration on which to pursue based on impact on the strategic capabilities of the University.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Automation of account creation and termination
Provision of security risk assessment services
Prevention of email SPAM
Collaboration with administrative, academic, and research units on potential institutional
projects
Delivery of security awareness training
Provision of reliable voice communications
Positive identification and labeling of network ports and connected devices
B4. What, if any, changes are indicated in the unit’s organizational structure,
processes, and climate? (Section IV)
Over the past five years, UCCS has been modified to react to changes in mission and
consolidation of effort where like skills and overlapping responsibilities exist. The need for
significant changes to the organizational structure will depend on the overall structure of
IS&T as defined by the Associate Provost/CIO. The following changes would increase
effectiveness of the services provided by UCCS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Change the name of the organization to better represent the core services provided
(i.e IT Infrastructure Division), reorganize the unit to be more reflective of
services provided rather than technology silos, eliminate non-core services and
skills, reclassify and reassign positions to meet current needs
Adopt industry standard project management methodologies and practices and
actively solicit and incorporate all possible technical resources of the organization
Mandate and fund staff member annual training plans
Mandate IS&T review for all IT requirements to ensure compliance with
established architecture standards, identify potential collaboration areas and
reduce inefficiencies
Create an IT infrastructure master plan review board with representation from
within and external to the University
Improve upward and downward communications within UCCS
Identify, train or separate low productivity employees within Board of Regents
guidelines,
B5. What, if any changes are indicated in the unit’s resources (budget, space, staffing,
technology, etc.)? (Section V)
•
•
•
•
•
Provide increased visibility to senior administration of the utilitarian nature of
significant portions of the UCCS funding responsibilities for contracts associated with
mission critical services
Identify of staff to support the central Research Computing function
Attract and maintain skilled staff to allow back-up of critical functions and
implementation of critical services needed by the University
Identify continuing funding for training according to annual training plans
Provide a continuing capital budget line based on industry standard equipment life
cycles to address the continuing deferred maintenance issue
18
•
•
•
•
•
•
Develop and gain acceptance of standardized and centralized services to replace
services being duplicated in colleges and administrative departments
Allow sufficient project implementation time to allow for proper system testing,
documentation, and for development of operations and maintenance life-cycle
procedures
Provide funding for equipping and refreshing a lab environment that more closely
reflects our current production environment that could be used to quickly and
relevantly proof new system, applications, and tools before they are brought into our
production environment
Fund design of criteria and specifications for a new data center
Increase promotional opportunities in the technical tracks through recognition and
advancement as options to traditional management promotions
Identify campus space for re-consolidation of UCCS with the rest of the IST
organization
C1. Define for your unit a reasonable time-frame for goal-setting (e.g., 3-, 5-, years), then
review the recommendations derived in B1-5 above.
C2. What priorities among these areas should be set?
C3. What is a realistic timetable for the achievement of the recommendations (1-, 3-, 5years)?
A three year time-frame would allow for necessary goal setting and subsequent progress
measurement. Sections B1 and B2 should be addressed immediately as the results of these
actions will determine how severe the affects of the other areas are in limiting unit effectiveness.
Given the current budget environment, many of the recommendations can be achieved in a 3 year
time period; however those recommendations requiring increased funding and staff allocations
can not be realistically expected to be achieved in even a 5 year period.
19
C4 / C5 Within each time frame prioritize the recommendations. How does the unit plan to
monitor progress?
One-year Goals Prioritized
1. Provide justification and funding amounts for consideration of
hardware and software maintenance utility accounts
2. IST and UCCS Goals and Objectives definition
3. Staff Authorizations for Research Computing and metric
development
4. Elimination of non-core functions
5. Organization name and structure changes
6. Satisfy unfulfilled services requirements
7. Mandatory IT solution reviews and infrastructure master plan
review board
8. Identification of IST reconsolidation space
9. Management training for dealing with low productivity staff
Three-year Goals Prioritized
Measures of Progress
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Formal process developed and accepted for validation,
documentation, budgeting and controlling
Implementation
IST development schedule approved by AP/CIO
Position classifications completed
Funding identified
Positions advertised, selected and hired
Determination of function candidates for elimination or
reassignment
AP/CIO approval
Customer education
Functions moved or eliminated
AP/CIO agreement on candidate name
Job title/responsibility change DRAFTs complete
Personnel actions complete
Web page changes published
Customer education
Candidate list of unfilled services
Governance committee review / commendation of unfulfilled
services to pursue
Constituency comment and prioritization
Standard and policy development complete
Funding available
Administrative approval to proceed
Policy developed
Administration approval of candidate structure, membership and
processes
Customer education
Implementation
Operational and technical requirements agreed to by AP/CIO
Candidate locations identified by CBSAC
Selection by AP/CIO and Provost
Funding available
Implement
Managers trained
Low productivity staff identified
Performance plans designed and implemented
Measures of Progress
1. Adopt project management standards
2. Mandate and fund staff training plans
3. Adopt formal process for capital investment and deferred
maintenance budget line approvals
4. Equip and refresh a test lab environment
5. Implement programs to solve the staff back-up problem
6. Standardize and centralize common service offerings for
departments
7. Prepare a new data center specification and design
8. Authorize and utilize technical track promotion opportunities
20
Appendix 1
The Correlation between the Georgia State University and Information Systems and
Technology Strategic Plans and the University Computing and Communications
Services (UCCS) Mission Statement
The nexus between the Georgia State University and Information Systems & Technology Strategic plans is
the driving force behind the UCCS mission statement.
Georgia State University Strategic Plan 2004-2005
http://www.gsu.edu/~wwwact/univ_strategic_plan/2000_2005_strategicplan.pdf
In Section - II A b 6 f, entitled “Technology” the Georgia State University Strategic Plan 20042005 states:
A goal is to become and remain current in the application of computing and information
technologies. All students should have ready access to computing resources and an opportunity to
develop information management skills for lifelong learning.
At a minimum, in order for the students to have ready access to computing resources a solid
computing infrastructure must be designed, implemented, and maintained. The technology section
further states:
“The educated citizen of the future will need to know how to access global databases.
Administrators will need easy electronic access to data on which to base decisions for execution
and continuous improvement of the University's activities. Faculty and staff will need the support
of human resources, equipment, and classroom facilities in the transfer and application of
technology to new learning environments. Out-of-class electronic connections between faculty
and students will be encouraged.”
Again, at a minimum, a dependable and available network and system infrastructure is demanded.
Furthermore, the section states:
“Because of the University’s growing dependence on the technology infrastructure, it is essential
to plan for and install adequate network and other infrastructure capacity in advance of when it is
needed. Regardless of whether courses are being offered with technology-enabled components or
completely on-line, slow response and outages are debilitating to the educational experience.
Similarly, adequate network and other infrastructure capacity are essential for administrative and
service functions. A goal is to complete the basic fiber optic backbone and the accompanying
vertical risers and horizontal in-building connections for networking campus academic and
administrative buildings. This will provide easier electronic access for faculty, staff, and students
to the University's library and information resources.”
UCCS is committed to providing this infrastructure as well as planning and revising procedures
needed to ensure a minimum of downtime that may affect the campus community.
Georgia State University / Information Systems and Technology Strategic Plan 2004-2005
http://www.gsu.edu/~wwwist/files/it052001.PDF
Sections and excerpts from the IS&T Strategic plan revealing the IS&T commitment to the
University’s technology related strategic plans:
“Guided by the University’s Strategic Plan, this document elaborates on five Strategic Goals for
successful use of information technology at Georgia State University that are necessary for
meeting the University’s goals.”
Information accessibility: “To produce a successful information utility, basic physical connectivity
and data transport mechanisms should be standardized, and proper capacity, or bandwidth,
should be available to meet the needs of the users. Resources like servers, office application
software, and e-mail should be available to all users in a broad and consistent fashion.”
See Sections:
5.1 A University Goal: Information Accessibility (p.9)
5.1.1 Enhance and Extend the University Network Infrastructure (p.9)
5.1.2 Ensure Appropriate Off-Campus Network Access (p.10)
Also see the section with the IS&T Strategic plan outlining the function of UCCS:
“University Computing and Communications Services (UCCS), that is responsible for all
institutional computing infrastructure, digital communications services (including data
networking, wireless and video distribution, radio frequency management and voice technology
services), twenty-four-hours-per-day and seven-days-per-week operational support staff for these
equipment items and operating systems support services.”
“As the supporting units for information technology at Georgia State University, the joint mission
of these IS&T units is: “To provide high quality, reliable, and responsive information and
instructional technology support services to the Georgia State University community that are
consistent with the strategic planning process of the University. This is accomplished through the
delivery of efficient, enhanced, and collaborative support and services. Also, these IS&T units
will foster the development of both innovative and proactive information technology expertise and
assist the University in planning for effective use of both current and future technologies.”
FY2004 IS&T High Priority Action Items Aligned with University Strategic Goals for Information
Technology
http://www.gsu.edu/%7Ewwwist/files/04Projects.pdf
Lastly, note the following items gathered from the IS&T Action Items as they apply to the mission
of UCCS.
Information Accessibility:
• Enhance and Extend the University Network infrastructure
• Establish Campus-wide standards
• Effectively manage and distribute servers
• Enhance support of Library initiatives
• Provide appropriate workstations support for faculty and staff
• Promote effective research computing
• Foster Technology Experimentation
• Provide effective IT services for students
• Establish appropriate levels of technology in the classrooms
• Ensure availability [edit] and reliability [/edit] of IT resources for Students [edit] and
campus community [/edit]
• Engage the academic community in the use of technology
Appendix 2
INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
ASSESSMENT PLAN – UCCS/IST
Department/Unit: UCCS (University Computing and Communications Services)
College/Division: IST (Information Systems and Technologies)
Date:28 May 2004
Mission Statement:
Engineer, install, operate, maintain and ensure the integrity of the University
enterprise network and centralized computing environment. Evaluate and
integrate network based services and capabilities to meet University-wide
requirements.
Intended Outcomes:
The University community participates in the
development and review of strategic and tactical
technology goals to support the University’s mission.
• The University community has access to highly
available, up-to-date technology resources.
• Electronic mail can be used as a reliable method of
delivering official University communications to all
faculty, staff and enrolled students.
• Effective Communications channels exist between the
University community and IS&T regarding technology
support for academic, research and administrative
activities.
•
Intended Outcome # 1: The University community
participates in the development and review of strategic and
tactical technology goals to support the University’s mission
Effectiveness Indicators: (What factors/variables/elements will be measured to gauge
success in reaching the intended outcome?)
•
•
•
Requirement gathering (demographics of participants)
Requirement satisfaction (customer survey, time/performance/cost
measures)
External evaluation/validation (risk, benefit)
Success Criteria: (For each indicator described above, what minimum score, value or
result will signal success? What score, value or result will signal a need for improvement? What
score, value or result will signal a need for immediate intervention?)
Variable
Success
Requirement
gathering
Successful when 70
percent of the
enrolled student
population is
represented by
college/department
participation and 70
percent of
administrative
population is
represented
Requirement
satisfaction
Successful with overall
rating of more than
3.5 on 5 point scale.
Requirement solution
implementation meets
contracted
time/performance/cost
criteria
Signals
Need for
Improvement
Need for improvement
signaled by repeated
under-representation
of any college or
administrative area
Need for improvement
signaled by overall
rating of less than 3.5
on 5 point scale. Two
or more solution
implementations in
one academic year do
not meet contracted
time/performance/cost
criteria
Immediate
Intervention
Immediate
intervention
needed when
no
requirements
are submitted
for
consideration
Immediate
intervention
needed for any
member
survey rated 2
or less. Any
solution
implementation
projected to
miss time,
performance,
External
Successful when
Evaluation/validation review board assesses
risk rating of 2 on 5
point scale and
weighted benefit of 3
on 5 point scale
Need for improvement
signaled by repeated
review board
assessments of
moderate risk (4) or
low benefit (2) for 50
percent of evaluated
solutions
or cost criteria
by more than
10 percent
Immediate
intervention
needed when
an single
solution
evaluation is
assessed as 5
on risk scale
and 1 on
benefit scale
Data Collection and Analysis Procedures: (How, when, and by whom will data be
collected? How will it be analyzed? What will be the product of the analysis?)
•
Requirement Gathering
o Data would be collected from the various meetings and forums
conducted either by IST or other departments. Collection would be
done at time of the meetings.
o Data would be analyzed to breakdown representation by
college/department or administrative unit. University demographics
would be obtained from IR.
o Analysis would yield a report showing involvement over the course
of the academic year.
•
Requirement Satisfaction
o Data would be collected as a part of normal project management
process for effort undertaken by UCCS as lead. Data would
normally be collected at the end of project as this milestone would
correspond with customer acceptance.
o Data would be analyzed to determine areas of customer
dissatisfaction, problems in project management, or particular
populations of the campus that were having more than average
success or failure with satisfaction
o Data would be compiled into a report to be published to the
campus.
External Evaluation/Validation
o Data would be collected by survey or group discussion by the
external advisors. Meetings of these advisors would be scheduled
twice each academic year.
o Data would be analyzed to determine the risk ratings (numerical
value) as well as particular aspects of high risk rated technology
that were of concern to the evaluators
o Result of these evaluations would be compiled and published t the
University as part of a report on the recommended technology
paths for the coming academic year
•
Utilization of Results: (How will results of the analysis be used in planning, decision
making, and continuous improvement? What type of actions will be taken based on the analysis
results?)
•
•
•
Requirement Gathering
o Data collected would be analyzed to determine where the most
impact or benefit to the entire university community could be
realized.
o Analysis could result in creation of specialized access zones on the
network, expansion of bandwidth, consolidation of department
capabilities into a centralized University capability.
Requirement Satisfaction
o Data would be analyzed to determine the root causes of success
and failure of IT project implementations
o Analysis may lead to decisions to involve more external
implementers for IT projects, place more emphasis on training in
project management skills, or university policies directing stricter
compliance with scope and resource issues related to IT project
execution.
External Evaluation/Validation
o Data collected would be analyzed to determine high promise but
high risk technologies that the University should pursue. Analysis
would also determine where like of duplicative processes and
capabilities exist. Analysis could also provide suggestion of
alternate technologies to meet stated requirements.
o Analysis may lead to intermediate steps in IT infrastructure
improvement that will lessen the overall risk associate with the
desired capability. Analysis will lead to more effective utilization of
institution funding as it will be directed to efforts that have a high
probability of success.
Intended Outcome # 2 The University community has access
to highly available, up-to-date technology resources
Effectiveness Indicators: (What factors/variables/elements will be measured to gauge
success in reaching the intended outcome?)
•
•
•
•
Availability (network, hosts, VPN, wireless)
New port installations (time to complete)
Trouble reports (number, time to resolve)
Security Incident Resolution (time to return to service, quality of
instructions)
• Application or service procedures – self help (currency, availability,
customer satisfaction)
Success Criteria: (For each indicator described above, what minimum score, value or result
will signal success? What score, value or result will signal a need for improvement? What score,
value or result will signal a need for immediate intervention?)
Variable
Availability
•
New Port
Installations
Signals
Success
Need for
Improvement
Successful when the
Need for
annual availability for
improvement
80 percent of provided signaled when
services and system
the mid year
exceeds 98.5 percent
availability rate
but no service or
for 80 percent
system is less than 97 of services
percent
and/or systems
is less than
98.3 percent
Successful with overall Need for
rating of more than
improvement
3.5 on 5 point scale.
signaled when
Requirement solution
30 day moving
implementation meets average of
contracted
completion
time/performance/cost times is below
criteria Successful
80% of SLA
when 80 percent of
installation are
completed within the
established Service
Level Agreement
Immediate
Intervention
Immediate
intervention
needed when a
single critical
service or systems
falls below 90
percent in a 30
day period
Immediate
intervention
needed when
single installation
exceeds SLA
timeframe by
50%
•
Trouble Reports
•
Security Incident
Resolution
(SLA) timeframe
Successful when
percentage of
reported troubles to
total port inventory is
less than 0.20% in a
30 day period and
average time to repair
is less than 3 work
days
Successful when all
affected servers or
workstations are
returned to service
within 3 days of
responsible party
notification and
customer survey
response averages 3.5
or better on usability
of provided
instructions
Need for
improvement
when
percentage of
reported
troubles
exceeds 1%
for a 30 day
period or
average time
to repair within
a 30 day period
is greater than
7 work days
Immediate
intervention
needed when
reported troubles
in a single
building exceed
10 or when time
to repair for a
single outage
exceeds 10
working days
Need for
improvement
signaled when
50 percent of
affected
servers and
workstations
are returned to
service in more
than 5 days or
customer
survey
response
average is 2.5
or less on
usability of
provided
instructions
Immediate
intervention
needed when
entire department
or staff
organization is
affected or when
a single incidence
of instruction
failure is reported
•
Application/Service Successful when
procedures for self
procedures -selfhelp are available 2
help
days prior to
availability of the
covered applications
or service and that
customer survey
averages 3.5 or more
on effectiveness
Need or
improvement
signaled when
procedures are
not available
until the date
of service
availability in
50% of times
or procedures
are out of date
on more than
10% of active
services or
customer
survey
averages 2.5 or
less on
effectiveness of
a single
procedure
Immediate
intervention
needed when
procedures are
not available for a
single instance of
a new
application/service
start or 25% of
active service
procedures are
out of date or
customer
satisfaction is 1
on a single
procedure
Data Collection and Analysis Procedures: (How, when, and by whom will data be
collected? How will it be analyzed? What will be the product of the analysis?)
•
•
Availability
o Collected through automated systems associated with hardware
and applications
o Analyzed monthly by Network Performance staff and each system
administrator. Data is accessible on-line.
o Monthly reports are prepared for System Administrators. These
reports are annotated with information on cause of outages and
maintenance as well as correctively actions recommended or being
taken to preclude recurrence or occurrence of similar outages.
Semi-annual and annual performance reports are prepared and
distributed to internal IST staff and posted on the UCCS website for
University community access.
New Port Installations
o Data is collected in Remedy through technician data entry.
o Data is analyzed daily and monthly by the Assistant Director for
Networks and the Manager for Network Operations. Data is
available on-line and can be extracted to meet customized
•
•
•
requirements.
o Weekly reports are prepared by the HelpCenter Manager showing
outstanding tickets. Custom report will be produced to show those
network tickets that have exceeded the SLA threshold.
Trouble Reports
o Data is collected in Remedy through technician and HelpCenter
data entry
o Analyzed monthly by the Assistant Director for Networks
Security Incident Resolution
o Data is collected in Remedy through Security technician, network
technician, HelpCenter and distributed IT staff data input
o Analyzed monthly by the Assistant Director for Information Security
and presented monthly to the ITSSS. Analyzed by Assistant
Director for Systems and Assistant Director for Network to
determine causal factors under their control.
Application/Service Procedures – SelfHelp
o Data will be collected through inclusion in a visit counter and
customer feedback option on procedures that are posted to the IST
service web pages.
o Data will be analyzed by the Senior Technical Writer and the
system administrators of the various systems and services provided
Utilization of Results: (How will results of the analysis be used in planning, decision making,
and continuous improvement? What type of actions will be taken based on the analysis results?)
•
Availability
o Analysis will allow for determination of revisions needed in the
availability thresholds for each system or service. Analysis will
also assist in identifying systems or services that consistently
not meeting customer expectations
o Actions may be initiated to: adjust maintenance windows,
revise service expectations to allow variation with academic
year schedules or workday schedules, identify systems that are
in need of technology refresh, expansion or replacement.
•
•
•
•
New Port Installation
o Reports will be used to identify contractors that do not meet
installation deadlines and also to identify performance issues
with internal Network staff members.
o Reports may indicate that SLA threshold need to be changed to
reflect realities of business processes. Reports may lead to
exclusion of contractors from further work assignment. Reports
may lead to changes in the process used for assessment and
installation of network ports. Reports may indicate that internal
provisioning of this type of service is no longer cost effective.
Trouble Reports
o Analysis will assist in determining particular campus locations or
groups of users that are exhibiting a higher than normal need
for additional data ports.
o This analysis could lead to development of infrastructure
upgrade or consulting on better use of available network
resources.
Security Incident Resolution
o Analysis will yield information on steps in the security incident
identification and remediation process that are consuming the
most time or resources. Analysis will indicate vulnerabilities or
communities of users that are repeat targets for compromise or
repeat offenders of established security practices.
o Actions may be initiated to: re-engineer business processes for
handling security incidents, identify incident types that are
candidates for pro-active protection methods, identify
departmental needs for disciplinary actions or for increased
security education programs, develop best practices and
standards for typical system or application uses.
Application/Service Procedures – SelfHelp
o Analysis will identify format, language and complexity issues
which may be interfering with customer ability to benefit from
them
o Action could be initiated to remove low visit frequency
procedures from the active display. Action could be taken to
incorporate different presentation technologies that would be
more relevant to the information that needed to be displayed
and used by the customer.
Intended Outcome # 3: Electronic mail can be used as a
reliable method of delivering official University
communications to all faculty, staff and enrolled students.
Effectiveness Indicators: ((What factors/variables/elements will be measured to gauge
success in reaching the intended outcome?)
•
•
•
•
Availability (equipment, software)
Customer Satisfaction Survey
Trouble Reports (number, time to resolve)
Training (frequency, customer satisfaction)
Success Criteria: (For each indicator described above, what minimum score, value or result
will signal success? What score, value or result will signal a need for improvement? What score,
value or result will signal a need for immediate intervention?)
Variable
Availability
Customer
Satisfaction
Training
Signals
Success
Need for
Improvement
Successful when
Need for improvement
equipment and
is signaled when
application software
availability of either
are available 99.5% or the hardware or the
better on an annual
application are
basis
available less than
98.5% on a 6 month
sliding scale
Successful when
Need for improvement
random customer
signaled when a
surveying yields an
random customer
average score of 3.5
surveying yields an
average score of 2.5
or less
Successful when
feature training is
available to all
customers 2 work
days prior to version
upgrades go into
production
Immediate
Intervention
Immediate
intervention is
needed when a
single post
office or
department is
unavailable for
1 hour
Immediate
intervention
needed when a
single
customer rates
service at 1 or
below
Need for improvement Immediate
signaled when training intervention
is available 50% of
needed when
the time on the date
training will
of version release
not be
available for
any scheduled
release
Data Collection and Analysis Procedures: (How, when, and by whom will data be
collected? How will it be analyzed? What will be the product of the analysis?)
•
•
•
Availability
o Data is collected through automated system accounting logs
o Data is analyzed to determine root cause of unplanned outages and
analyzed to determine equipment degradation, capacity issues or
response time issues
o Analysis is provided in the UCCS performance report provided to
IST internal users and the campus two times each academic year
Customer Satisfaction
o Data would be collected using customer satisfaction surveys.
These could be combined with other service related surveys
conducted by IST
o Data would be analyzed to determine which features of the
centrally managed email systems were both of concern to
customers and enjoyed by customers
o Analysis would be made available to IST internal users and to
decentralized IT contacts across the campus to be used for
customer education
Training
o Data is collected at the time of delivery of the training based on
system administrator indication of completeness of training
packages or information
o Data is analyzed to determine cause of late delivery and causes of
incomplete or ineffective instructional material
o Analysis is provided to IT internal users and to decentralized IT
contacts across campus for customer education
Utilization of Results: (How will results of the analysis be used in planning, decision making,
and continuous improvement? What type of actions will be taken based on the analysis results?)
•
•
Availability
o Analysis may be used to determine the needs for additional
hardware to improve performance or increase capacity. Analysis
may be used to determine the need for replacement of legacy
systems with new technology.
Customer Satisfaction
o Analysis may be used to add features to legacy email system or
may be used to determine the requirement for replacement
technology
•
Training
o Analysis may be used to identify features that are too frequently
changed and requiring too much recurring training. Analysis may
be used to identify alternative methods of providing training so that
it is more effective for the type of information that needs to be
provided.
Infrastructure Service Enhancement Opportunities
Appendix 3
Service Feature
Increase Internet
bandwidth
Increased bandwidth to
desktops
Wireless capability
across campus
Dial up desktop
videoconferencing
SMP engines for
research computation
Validation of Web
information
GRID architecture on
campus
Video on demand
Multi-media digital
storage
Capability
Provide a larger capacity for information
flowing into and from the general purpose
INTERNET access from the campus (including
Alpharetta)
Provide higher speeds and larger data
transfer capacity to individual desktops within
a department or room
Ubiquitous wireless capability to supplement
the existing hard wired network access. All
access would be authenticated same as
existing network.
Central switched and managed capability
enabling two users
conferences as well as multiple user
conferences on campus and with external
users.
Acquisition and operation of large multiprocessor engines necessary for real time
computation of complex sequences or very
large amounts of data
Capability to check the validity of information
that is generated by GSU web pages before it
is delivered to the end user
Capability to utilize the combined processing
power of multiple network devices to perform
large scale processing or simulations when
the devices were not being used for their
normal administrative or instructional
purposes
Centralized storage, management and
delivery of video media across campus and
potentially external to the campus
Centralized capability for the storage of
multiple varieties of digital files for retrieval
by students, faculty and staff.
A/S
5
4
RCB
COE
2
COL
1
3
2
5
5
5
10
4
7
6
CHH
SPS
5
3
1
8
9
8
9
9
6
7
9
2
LIB
UGS
Dev
RSH
STU
2
FIN
Infrastructure Service Enhancement Opportunities
Instant messengering
Universal messaging
Dedicated research
connectivity
Visualization/simulation
chambers
Robotics
HDTV production,
transmission and display
Clustered server
hosting
Information Security
services
Voice over IP
Voice recognition or
other biometrics
On-campus capability to provide real time
“chat” (similar to AOL and MSN messenger
services)
Capability to store and retrieve all individual
email mail, voice mail and fax messages
within a single system for retrieval by data
network connection or voice dial in
Acquisition and operation of fiber optic or
other media that provides direct connection
from Georgia State to identified sites or
organizations engaged in collaborative
research
Facilities designed to allow for visual/audio
and simulated tactile representation of variety
of complex structures and environments
Remote real time manipulation of controls
and instrumentation in hostile environments
or off-campus research activities
Utilization of very high definition video
presentation capabilities across campus
Provision of high capacity, very reliable
processing and storage devices to supplement
or replace department managed devices
Centrally managed information security
services to provide real time observation and
correction of potential intrusion and
degradation of departmental data
Utilization of existing data network to replace
and expand the current voice system
capability on campus
Techniques to allow options for user
identification other than by more common
user id and password combinations
4
10
9
8
8
7
1
7
1
6
3
10
6
5
Infrastructure Service Enhancement Opportunities
Portability of personal
desktop configuration
Single sign-on to all
central applications
Desktop archiving
Departmental server
back-ups
Capability for users to transport their personal
desktops preferences and authorized access
profiles to any campus network connected
desktop.
Reduction of the number of user id and
password combinations that an individual
would need to remember and manage for
access to University provided systems and
applications
Centrally managed capability to provide
routine back-up of individual workstations in
order to provide data recovery as well as
rapid conversion to replacement or upgraded
equipment
Centrally managed capability to provide
routine back-up of departmental servers in
order to provide data recovery
6
2
3
2
1
3
7
4
10
4
3
8
4
10
1
Appendix 4
FY2004
UCCS Performance Report
Prepared by:
James Amann
Network Technician Lead
Georgia State University
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
pp. 3
Preface – Availability Percentages vs. Hours of Availability
pp. 4
I.
Public Internet Availability
pp. 5
II.
Public Internet Usage
pp. 6
III.
Host Systems Availability
pp. 8
IV.
Host Services Availability
pp. 12
a. GoSOLAR Services Availability
pp. 12
b. DNS Service Availability
pp. 13
c. Novell Services Availability
pp. 15
Global Stackable Switches Availability
pp. 16
V.
2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In this mid-year report we continue to refine both the data collection
methods and the granularity of the root cause descriptions with the goal of
providing meaningful information that our customers can relate back to isolated
incidents where the network or a particular system was not responding as well as
expected. The data that is being collected is being analyzed in more near-real
time; this allows us to identify and correct problems before they grow into very
noticeable events. The data also is providing very good evidence of the value of
multiple platforms for our most critical applications.
We will continue to refine the methods that we both collect and report on Host
Service Availability as the graphics present a false representation of the true
availability of the services to our customers.
[EXECUTIVE COMMENTS]
WILLIAM F. PARASKA
Director, University Computing and Communications Services
3
Preface - Percentage Available vs. Hours or Days Not Available
When browsing the availability statistics it is easy to forget what time(s) they
represent. The following table is intended as a reference for estimating the
amount of hours a resource may have been available according to the
percentages provided. Not that the hours are rounded to the nearest whole
number.
Percent
Available
100.00%
99.99%
99.98%
99.97%
99.96%
99.95%
99.94%
99.93%
99.92%
99.91%
99.90%
99.89%
99.83%
99.77%
99.71%
99.66%
99.60%
99.54%
99.49%
99.43%
99.37%
99.32%
99.26%
99.20%
99.15%
99.09%
99.03%
98.97%
98.92%
98.86%
Hours Not
Available
0
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Days Not Available
0.00
0.04
0.07
0.11
0.15
0.18
0.22
0.26
0.29
0.33
0.37
0.40
0.62
0.84
1.06
1.24
1.46
1.68
1.87
2.09
2.31
2.49
2.71
2.93
3.11
3.33
3.55
3.77
3.95
4.17
4
I. Public Internet Availability
Executive Summary
Public Internet availability is represented by ICMP polling statistics of the
WAN interface of the border router.
Public Internet Availability
July 01, 2003 - June 30, 2004
Public Internet WAN
1
Interface
0.00
99.99
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
% Availability
Chart Interpretation
The availability presented is the amount of time that the WhatsUp Gold
application was able to successfully communicate from the GSU network core to
the outside or WAN interface of the border router for GSU. This availability does
not include Peachnet statistics or other non-GSU networks outside of the GSU
network.
Collection Methodology
Devices polled via ICMP every 1 minute and averaged over the reporting period.
5
II. Public Internet Usage
Executive Summary
Below you will find a graph for the period from July 1, 2003 to December
31, 2003.
Chart Interpretation & Notes
Administrator’s Notes –
Public Internet Usage - The outbound bandwidth increase that shows up
from December 2nd until December 9th of 2003 was due to an inadvertent
release of QOS restriction on the University Village and Lofts after the
BBSM system was bypassed due to problems. We observed the unusual
usage on the weekly Internet usage reports, and reapplied QOS
6
restrictions to the new path to bring utilization back to normal
expectations.
Collection Methodology
The public Internet interface was polled using Infovista via SNMP once
every minute. The data is aggregated every 1 week.
7
III. Host Systems Availability
Executive Summary
Enclosed are the availability statistics of the systems or groups of systems
on which the noted services reside. This is an indication of the availability of the
hardware and operating system on which the services are running at the network
level.
8
Host Systems Availability
July 01, 2003 - June 30, 2004
99.97
www.gsu.edu
99.84
WebCT for GSU
99.96
VPN
99.86
Student Email
99.52
Spectrum
99.68
NT Domain
99.75
Lab File Servers
99.9
Groupwise Email
99.05
GoSolar
GIL
99.96
File Services
99.97
[email protected]
99.98
99.9
EDIR
DNS
99.99
DHCP
99.99
99.9
BBSM
98.4
98.6
98.8
99
99.2
99.4
99.6
99.8
100
100.2
AvgOf% Missed
Chart Interpretation & Notes
Again, please note that these are NOT representative of the uptime of
individual services, but the uptime of the systems on which they reside as polled
from the GSU network core.
9
Administrator Notes –
BBSM - The BBSM system was removed from production in early
December due to repeated failures associated with successful Denial-ofService attacks that were causing database corruption and system
instability. The problem is being addressed by deploying a firewall in front
of the systems, and Code upgrades recently acquired from Cisco
Systems.
GoSOLAR - The GoSOLAR availability figure is brought down by the INB
and Web for server farms. These server farms allow servers to be
removed and replaced in the server farm for that service with little or no
impact to end users. There are no processes to keep the monitoring
system aware of which servers are actually in production. The monitoring
system is including servers in those server farms that were not in
production.
Lab File Servers - Lab file server outage are primarily attributable to
Scheduled operating system upgrades 12/22/04 and CSSLAB4 outages
due to Alpharetta Center WAN and power outages.
NT Domain - The Backup Domain Controller (BDC) otter suffered a
hardware failure in September and was rebuilt. This resulted in 2 days for
otter. Another server was temporarily pressed into service as a BDC.
Since the Primary Domain Controller did not fail NT domain services were
not interrupted during that outage.
Student Email - Multiple SMTP server problems required a reboot of the
server to correct. That SMTP problem has been addressed and SMTP
services are now stable.
10
Spectrum - Server Hardware and OS upgrade 4/10/04-4/11/04
WebCT for GSU - Scheduled outages for server hardware replacement,
application software upgrade and UPS testing.
Collection Methodology
Devices are polled once every minute excepting the case of Novell
servers that are polled once every 4 min via ICMP.
11
IV. Host Services Availability
Executive Summary
The graphs for general host services availability statistics are grouped into
3 categories, GoSOLAR, DNS, and Novell services.
Please refer to the “Chart
Interpretation” and “Collection Methodology” sections of each graph for additional
information.
GoSolar HTTP Availability
July 01, 2003 - June 30, 2004
99.98%
1
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Total % Available
INB Service Availability
July 01, 2003 - June 30, 2004
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Series1
Chart Interpretation & Notes
The Go Solar HTTP statistics are gathered by performing an HTTP
content scan, which verifies that the site is indeed serving HTML pages.
It is crucial that the viewer note that the bottom “service” statistic is
gathered by polling the INB service IP addresses via ICMP. This service address
12
is the “gateway” for the load-balanced servers that actually serve the information
requested by the client(s).
Also please note that the HTTP content scan for GoSolar.gsu.edu is only
representative of the period from July 1, 2003 to approximately Sept 1, 2003 due
a failure in monitoring procedures. The error has been corrected and proper
statistics are available from January 1, 2004 onwards.
Administrator Notes –
INB - INB service outage represent times when all production INB server
were not responding to HTTP requests.
These outages represent
application upgrade and or failures.
Collection Methodology
The INB and Web for Students services are polled via ICMP ping.
The GoSOLAR web service is polled using an HTTP content scan. WhatsUp
sends a simple HTTP request to and expects HTML code. If HTML code is
returned the service is considered “up.”
DNS
DNS Service Availability
100.00%
1
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
% Availability
13
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Chart Interpretation & Notes
Please note that the statistics for ns1 and ns2 have been averaged to
display the “Total DNS” availability. Also note that this does not mean that the
DNS service was down 0.05% of the time, as there are two devices hosting the
DNS service and an interruption in service on one device will be covered by the
service on the second device.
Collection Methodology
The DNS service is polled by a simple service monitor that checks for the
DNS server on port 53. If no DNS service responds on this port, then the service
is considered down.
WhatsUp Gold queries port 53 on ns1 and ns2 once every 1 min. Data was
averaged over the polling period in order to produce the above values.
14
Novell Services Availability
July 1, 2003 - June 30, 2004
% Available
99.10 99.20 99.30 99.40 99.50 99.60 99.70 99.80 99.90 100.00 100.10
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
100.00%
Mailsrv1.gsu.edu POP3
99.47%
Mailsrv1.gsu.edu SMTP
99.88%
Stuweb.gsu.edu HTTP
Stuweb.gsu.edu FTP
99.42%
100.00%
Student.gsu.edu SMTP
99.59%
Student.gsu.edu IMAP4
Mailsrv10.gsu.edu
Webaccess HTTP
99.69%
Chart Interpretation & Notes
Administrator Notes –
Mailsrv1 SMTP - Scheduled operating system upgrade 3/13/04 and AntiVirus upgrade 03/03/04
StuWeb (HTTP) - Scheduled Application upgrade 1/8/04
15
Stuweb FTP - Scheduled Application upgrade 1/8/04
Student IMAP4 - Scheduled Application upgrade 1/8/04
Mailsrv10 WebAccess HTTP - Scheduled operating system upgrade
3/13/04
Collection Methodology
All services above are polled using a simple script within WhatsUp Gold.
The devices are sent a string to which the service responds. If the response is
positive the service is considered “up.”
Note that the Novell services are polled every 4 min and averaged over
the reporting period as opposed to the default of 1 min.
V. Global Stackable Switches Availability
Executive Summary
The stackable switches have been grouped according to the building in
which they are housed. The following availability statistics are therefore the
average of all network switches in the respective buildings.
16
Stackable Switches Global Availability
July 01, 2003 - June 30, 2004
95.5
96
96.5
97
97.5
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
1P ark P lace
99.98
10 P ark P lace
99.95
158 Edgwo o d (Includes Central Receiving)
99.96
A derho ld
99.96
99.71
A lpharetta Center
99.94
A lumni Hall (Fo rmerly A rt & M usic)
99.98
A rt and Humanities
A thena / Village B uilding "B " / So uth East
99.83
Classro o m So uth
99.86
Co llege o f Educatio n
99.98
Co mmerce
99.96
Co unseling Center
99.99
99.99
Co urtland B uilding
99.88
General Classro o m
99.98
Haas Ho well
99.78
Ithaca / Village B uilding "C" / No rth West
Kell Hall
99.98
Language Reso urce Center Lansing B uilding B
99.79
Buildings
Language Reso urce Center M ain B uilding A
99.8
Language Reso urce Center Nasa B uilding E
99.3
99.95
Library No rth
99.98
Library So uth
Natural Science Center
99.98
Netwo rk Co re
99.96
Olympia / 'Village B uilding "D" / No rth East
99.84
Recreatio n Center
99.99
Ro binso n Co llege o f B usiness (RCB ) Fo rmerly COB A
99.98
Scho o l o f P o licy Studies
100
Science A nnex
99.98
Sparks Hall
99.98
97.17
Sparta / Village B uilding "A " / So uth West
Spo rts A rena (Fo rmerly P hysical Educatio n)
99.99
Standard B uilding
99.98
Student Center
99.98
The A tlanta P ro ject (TA P ) at City Hall East
98.72
University Center
99.96
99.89
University Lo fts
Urban Life
99.98
34 P eachtree St.
99.98
Capito l Hill Child Educatio n Center
99.98
17
100.5
Chart Interpretation & Notes
The availability statistics are the average of all network stackable switches
in the respective buildings. Please pay special attention to the scale on which all
charts are drawn.
Administrator Notes –
Alpharetta Center: This building service suffered from DoS attacks that locked
up the 3Com switches, the NMLI circuit failed on occasions and routine
maintenance.
The Dorms: Athena, Ithaca, Sparta, and Olympia buildings all suffered from
DOS attacks and power outages. Water Leaks in Athena contributed to switch
failures.
Language Resource Center: This group of buildings was regularly loosing its
lease Circuit connectivity, along with power shut downs by the users. Notable
this are is also prone to poor weather conditions.
City Hall East: Suffered from the constant DoS attacks that caused the 3Com
switches to loose there functionality.
Lofts: Regular maintenance and building Switch upgrade.
Collection Methodology
Devices and device interfaces are polled every 1 min via ICMP and the
data is averaged over the reporting period of FY2003.
18
Appendix 5
Information Systems and Technology Core Functions
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
Administrative Support
Student Systems
Classroom / Lab Support
Decision Support Systems
Desktop Management
Email
GIL / GALILEO / GPLS
GSU Instructional Support
GSU Web
Help Center
HR Systems
Identity Management
Independent Systems
Institution Software Licensing
Library Support
NOC and System Hosting
Network – Voice, Video and Data
Research Computing
Security
Financial Systems
USG WEBCT
Technology Planning and Futures
Appendix 6
IS&T Projects
Project # Project Name
Priority
FY04
Funding
FY05
Funding
1/2/3
$
$
Project
Finish
Date
Expected Expected
Project
Recurring
Funding Start Date
$
Current
Phase
I/E/C/T
Activity
Since
Update?
Y/N
Next Milestone
Milestone
Date
Needs
Stoplight
Executive
Color
Action?
G/Y/R
Y/N
Comments
APPROVED AND FUNDED
1.00
Backup Architecture
Y
1
2.00
3.00
$65,000
2/15/2004
Mainframe Decommital
Banner Imaging- Xtender
GSU Core Web
Software Setup Complete
1
$561,732
1
$703,471
1
1
1
$90,033
$0
2/15/2004
9/1/2004 Construction
3/1/2004
3/1/2005 Elaboration
5/1/2004
2/15/2004
12/31/2004 Inception
9/1/2004 Transition
11/1/2004 Construction
Building Deployment
$56,000
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
G
G
N
N
Y
$46,000
$25,000
5/1/2004
Y
Y
G
N
G
N
8/1/2004 Elaboration
Y
1
8.00
Campus-wide Wireless
9.00
10.00
Resource 25
CAPP
1
1
1
11.00
SSD Admissions Integrator
1
12.00
IP Telephony Pilot
9/1/2004
$200,000
C&T
?
?
Classroom installation
8/13/2004
Y
6/15/2004
Transition
Complete Evaluation and final report
7/25/2004
$100,000
7/115/2004: Testing in full swing. Over 100 IP sets are deployed
among various depts across campus. 6/23/2004: Pilot areas
identified; phones deployed and functional.
Funding depends on scope - not yet determined
?
Y
Y
2
7/15/2004: RedDot presentation scheduled for 7/20; Hardware
quotes ready; awaiting final decision and funding. 6/23/2004: LCMS
won't meet the needs of CoreWeb; investigating other products.
5/2004: Install scheduled for 7/5-7/9; SCT Professional Services and
training engaged at $46K; hardware estimated at $25K - need ASAP
to prep for install
6/23/2004: Funding obtained from Dr. Loius grant; requires
availability of Unix staff. 5/2004: Hardware costs only; requires
funding and availability of Unix staff
7/15/2004: BlueSocket boxes activated. 6/23/2004: Will order
BlueSocket boxes on 7/1/2004
?
Y
1
2
2
2
7/15/2004: We anticipate completion of all Building Aggregation
Upgrades by the end of July. Core upgrades should be complete by
Mid August. All of the Hardware arrived at the end of last week, and
we have already completed the migration of the Test lab and
LA000001. We anticipate LA000002 early next week, and Core
Access 1 and 2 by the end of next week. We are still coordinating the
transition of the Host Access Switches with VP Fin and
Systems.6/23/2004: Some fans are now in, and core upgrades will
start; 9/1/04 completion date questionable. 5/2004: Delivery of
wrong equipment delayed project start; further delay to avoid
disruption of EOY close-out
7/15/2004: Development HW in place and turned over to DBA for
application install & configuration. Prod HW ordered and beginning
to arrive. 6/23/2004: OK. 5/2004: Original fiscal year funding plan
changed; $125,319 pushed to FY05; an additional $297K approved
for FY04 EOY.
7/15/2004: Communication to go out this week; draft scope
developed; team meeting scheduled for 7/30
6/23/2004: OK. 5/2004: On target - GoLive 7/1/04
?
?
?
13.30
June 24, 2004
N
Y
$560,993
IRBWise
Oracle Portal
G
7/30/2004
Content Management
Data Warehouse
OIIT
GSU
N
8/2/2004
Y
1
13.00
13.10
13.20
11/1/2004 Construction
PeopleSoft HR
5.00
6.00
7.00
$213,634
Switch Upgrade
4.00
6.10
$525,985
G
7/15/2004: Hardware Infrastructure in place, Currently working on
software setup/configuration, scripts and documentation. 6/23/2004:
Have made up lost time due to earlier problems; still on target for
11/2004. 5/2004: Early FY05 funding is critical; Xtender storage and
schedule on target; UPS test failure and A&S email problems
impacted schedule by 2 weeks; vendor documentation failure caused
2 week delay; impact on schedule due to HR must be watched; 2 unix
resources dedicated - must watch new taskings to unix group.
$20,000
Inception
6/23/2004: Ordered for development servers - $20K. 5/2004: MFE
Servers not applicable here; HW = $40K for development and
production, consulting = $15K
Appendix 6
IS&T Projects
Project # Project Name
15.00
Electronic Theses and
Dissertations (ETD)
GSU Vista Migration
16.00
Audit Action Items
14.00
FY04
Funding
Priority
2
1
FY05
Funding
Project
Recurring
Funding Start Date
$75,000
Project
Finish
Date
Current
Phase
Activity
Since
Update?
Next Milestone
Y
5/2004: $260K estimated (router replacement = $225K); Machine
room cooling issue not included = ~$400K
Software Mgmt Process
Y
16.20
Server Reg. Process
Y
16.30
Update & Test DR
Inception
Initial meeting with functional
representatives
Network Security
16.60
WebCT Shared Designer
16.70
Fiber Hub Room Security
16.80
NOC Power and Cooling
6/23/2004: See Symantec implementation
6/23/2004: Meeting held with departmental IT - discussed naming
conventions
7/15/2004: Copies of existing plan have been provided to functional
reps. Contact information will be updated and discussion started to
identify a candidate system for use in testing procedures . 6/23/2004:
Meetings next week.
Y
7/13/2004
Reduce Direct BPROD
Access
16.50
N
Completion
$225,000
5/2004: BREPT hourly refresh needed
8/20/2004 Y
G
N
7/15/2004: This is tied to the deployment o fthe Supervisor 6500s,
but we have already created and tested the new configurations which
will be deployed as part of the upgrades. This will include switching
over to SSH from Telnet, Limiting access to Ping only for the local
router interfaces on campus, and conversion to per user AAA
authentication. New secure configs for SSH and local interfaces have
been deployed to School o fPolicy Studies, Test Lab, and LA000001.
Also testing IPS systems. 6/23/2004: Waiting on fans; funding also
needed for campus edge router firewall; $225K for SSH-deficient
routers
Y
Y
N
6/23/2004: Draft procedure completed
N
R
Y
Y
Y
C&T
$20,419
Construction
Complete wall construction to ceiling and
secure PVC conduit; Install already
acquired swipe readers
TBD
Y
$6,500
16.90
Installation of already purchased swipe
readers
NOC Access
$6,900
17.00
Housing Move-in - Network
Security
19.00
Symantec iCommand
$50,000
1
20.00
Remedy Upgrade
22.00
Desktop Intrusion Protection
$387,400
Y
TBD
Y
Elaboration
$161,000
$75,000
7/15/2004
Inception
Equipment receipt and installation
$90,000
7/15/2004
Inception
7/30/2004
9/16/2004 Inception
Installation of Evaluation
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
G
N
TBD
E and C
1
40.00
8/1/2004
PINV Assessment
G
1
PENDING
21.00
Shibboleth
June 24, 2004
Comments
6/23/2004: Awaiting HW purchase; will require Unix staff. 5/2004:
Requires availability of Unix staff
Y
Inception
C&T
16.10
16.40
Needs
Stoplight
Executive
Color
Action?
Equipment
$5,000
Customization
8/18/2004 Y
Y
N
7/15/2004: Awaiting funding ($21,000) and constructions
scheduling; awaiting funding and electrical installation scheduling depends on construction completion which involves rehanging the tobe-controlled door. 6/23/2004: Pending funding
6/23/2004: UPS testing done, but incomplete; UPS based cooling #7
on Facilities priority list ($400K); need funding for water monitoring
equipment ($6500)
7/15/2004: Awaiting funding and electrical installation scheduling.
6/23/2004: Received funding for security cameras ($5600) and
PantherCard reader ($1300)
6/23/2004: Received funding from Housing; testing solution;
ordered HW and SW.
7/29/2004: Discovery sessions held 7/27/2004 with Symantec
consultants; A. Pressley and MJ Casto current project managers.
7/15/2004: Equipment has been ordered. No project manager.
6/23/2004: Purchase in progress; planning for Steering and
Implemenation teams; Project Mgr (D. Coe) assigned.
6/23/2004: Client and WebApp functional; configuring for autoassign; 2nd demo to be scheduled.
7/15/2004: Pilot/eval to be conducted in July/early Aug timeframe,
followed by purchase and implementation in student labs, IS&T,
F&A, and distribution to housing residents mid Aug-September
2004. 6/23/2004: Evaluating products
7/21/04: Installation of U of Memphis PINV scheduled for 7/30/04;
MJ will do initial project load, all will evaluate. 7/29/2004:
Installation should occur by 7/30/2004.
6/23/2004 Pending equipment arrival; Unix install next
Appendix 6
IS&T Projects
Project # Project Name
23.00
CORE Credit Card Processing
24.00
IP Telephony Migration
25.00
26.00
27.00
LDAP Authentication
IT Services Pages
Re-FocusIT
28.00
Banner 6 Upgrade
29.00
SSN Elimination*
30.00
31.00
32.00
33.00
34.00
35.00
36.00
Identity Mgmt
MIF
Vista/Banner Integration
State IT Audit of BOR Projects
Upgrade to Crystal 10
Anti-spam/Anti-virus
Panther decommittal
37.00
Plan for Active Directory
Priority
Functional
Resources
Awaiting USG
CIO approval
Staffing
Staffing
Scope
FY04
Funding
FY05
Funding
Project
Recurring
Funding Start Date
Project
Finish
Date
Current
Phase
Activity
Since
Update?
Next Milestone
Needs
Stoplight
Executive
Color
Action?
Comments
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
$3,500
N
Scheduling
Y
Staffing
?
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Staffing
Staffing
N
Staffing
Technical discussion with Microsoft
UNKNOWN
5/2004: Need staff resources
5/2004: Need staff resources
5/2004: Current schedule shows July - Oct start; may conflict with
Content Mgmt
6/23/2004: Scope for plan being developed. 5/2004: Funding needs
not identified
5/2004: Solution not chosen
5/2004: Needs Unix staff to evaluate
5/2004: Needs Unix staff
7/15/04: No current activity, planning & research to resume in next
few weeks 6/23/2004: Needs hardware and Microsoft consulting and
staff resources
CAN'T GAIN MOMENTUM
38.00
Desktop Video Conferencing
39.00
Email Groups
FUNDING TOTALS
$2,475,021
$1,602,546
$196,000
COMPLETED PROJECTS
18.00
ThinkQuest
Y
6/8/2004
June 24, 2004
7/14/2004 Transition
6/23/2004: ThinkQuest is a learning opportunity and competition
conducted each year by the Georgia State University Educational
Talent Search Program. This year, ten middle and high school
students will work with Georgia State employees to develop
educational websites incorporating a variety of media elements. The
students will receive instruction from UETS design professionals and
Digital Aquarium student technology workers. The final product of
the students' work will be entered into a national competition.
Appendix 7
University Computing and Communications Services
Zoomerang Web-based Survey Results
Focus Group – NETSIG
October 22, 2004
Overall, how well has UCCS communicated changes (planned or otherwise) regarding Groupwise?
5
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
EXTREMELY
WELL
2
3
4
EXTREMELY
POOR
N/A
41%
24%
18%
12%
0%
6%
7
4
3
2
0
1
How important is it to your job that UCCS communicates changes (planned or otherwise)
regarding Groupwise?
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
1
5
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT
2
3
4
NOT AT ALL
IMPORTANT
N/A
59%
18%
0%
18%
6%
0%
10
3
0
3
1
0
How satisfied are you with the actions UCCS takes regarding Groupwise hardware
updates and consolidation projects?
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
5
EXTREMELY
SATISFIED
2
3
4
NOT AT ALL
SATISFIED
N/A
31%
19%
31%
0%
0%
19%
5
3
5
0
0
3
On a scale of 1-5, rate the UCCS communications in terms of how well the communications
regarding Groupwise do each of the following:
1
Contain the right
information
Contain the right
amount of
information
Easy to use
the information
5
SCALE
EXTREMELY
WELL
2
3
4
EXTREMELY
POOR
N/A
Respondent ratio
41%
7
29%
5
47%
8
41%
7
6%
1
18%
3
0%
0
6%
1
0%
0
0%
0
6%
1
6%
1
29%
5
41%
7
24%
4
0%
0
0%
0
6%
1
# Selecting option
Respondent ratio
# Selecting option
Respondent ratio
# Selecting option
How satisfied are you with the feedback you receive from UCCS regarding your input?
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
5
EXTREMELY
SATISFIED
2
3
4
NOT AT ALL
SATISFIED
N/A
7%
13%
27%
0%
0%
53%
1
2
4
0
0
8
Rate how important it was to your job that UCCS explain the benefits of the Netware OS upgrade.
5
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT
2
3
4
NOT AT ALL
IMPORTANT
N/A
35%
12%
6%
12%
6%
29%
6
2
1
2
1
5
Rate how well UCCS communicated the benefits associated with the Netware OS upgrade.
5
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
EXTREMELY
WELL
2
3
4
EXTREMELY
POOR
N/A
31%
6%
38%
0%
0%
25%
5
1
6
0
0
4
How satisfied are you with the timeliness with which you receive notifications from UCCS
Regarding security incidents affecting your servers and workstations?
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
5
EXTREMELY
SATISFIED
2
3
4
NOT AT ALL
SATISFIED
N/A
29%
29%
12%
0%
18%
12%
5
5
2
0
3
2
How satisfied are you with the methods UCCS uses to notify you regarding security incidents
affecting your servers and workstations?
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
5
EXTREMELY
SATISFIED
2
3
4
NOT AT ALL
SATISFIED
N/A
29%
29%
6%
12%
12%
12%
5
5
1
2
2
2
Rate how well UCCS communicates information regarding security incidents.
5
1
SCALE
Total
respondent
ratio
Actual # of
respondents
selecting option
EXTREMELY
WELL
2
3
4
EXTREMELY
POOR
N/A
24%
18%
29%
24%
6%
0%
4
3
5
4
1
0
Appendix 8
Director
Senior
Technical
Writer
Assistant Director,
Networks
Install
Engineer
Assistant Director,
Systems
UNIX
WIN/
Netware
Associate
To Director
Assistant Director,
Information Security
SUP
Manager, Network Operations Cneter
SUP
SUP
Manager,
Network Core
SUP
Performance
Appendix 9
Technical Writer
CRITERION-BASED PERFORMANCE REVIEW FORM
BASIC FUNCTION & RESPONSIBILITY Provide technical writing support for UCCS staff.
Translate technical information into clear, readable documents to be used by technical and nontechnical personnel both within UCCS and across the University. Provide consistency in format
and language level and comply with appropriate University standards.
STAFF MEMBER’S NAME
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
TITLE
DEPARTMENT
UCCS
DATES COVERED IN THIS
REVIEW
1 January 2002 – 31 December 2002
SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR(S)
Completing this review
Date:
SIGNATURE OF STAFF MEMBER
Acknowledging they have seen and
received a copy of this review
Date:
RATING SCALES
1
HOW IMPORTANT
Will this function or
responsibility be for
this position during the
next work cycle?
RATING SCALES
HOW WELL
Will the
individual’s
current
performance satisfy
the anticipated
needs for the next
work place?
2
Will not be very important
or relevant to this particular
position.
1
Current level of
performance is
not sufficient to
meet
expectations;
improvement
will be required
in this area.
University Computing and Communications Services
Management Evaluation Form
Calendar Year 2002
February 5, 2002
3
Will be somewhat relevant
and/or occasionally
important for this position.
2
Current level of
performance
generally meets
expectations
with several
incidents of
being
insufficient.
3
Current level of
performance
generally meets
expectations.
Will be an important and
essential function for this
position.
4
Current level
of
performance
consistently
meets
expectations.
5
Current level of
performance
consistently
exceeds
expectations.
Appendix 9
PERFORMANCE REVIEW FORM
Page 2
A Management
How
Important
How well
1. Report for scheduled work in a dependable and timely fashion in
order to be available to UCCS staff.
2. Develop reports as necessary to keep customers apprised of project
status so that they may adjust priorities or advise customers or
management of delays or scope changes.
3. Define and commit to technical writing tasks in projects involving
UCCS or being managed by UCCS. Update time and status of these
tasks using MS Project and Project Central.
4. Attend established UCCS status updates and staff meetings in order
to obtain and impart information on current and planned activity and
items of concern to UCCS staff.
SPECIFIC POSITIVE, DEVELOPMENTAL, OR CORRECTIVE COMMENTS ABOUT MANAGEMENT
RESPONSIBILITIES:
B. Project Accomplishment
1. Coordinate on a continuous basis with UCCS staff to determine
writing and documentation requirements. Develop project checklists
for each requirement. Provide status on each project to the requesting
staff member in order to meet the business objectives of the unit.
2. Gain a working knowledge of the proposed writing/documentation
subject and compile a reference base appropriate to the level of detail
requested for the project in order to ensure all necessary aspects of the
system, procedure or policy are covered. Use appropriate methods of
research such as on-line search, existing document review, interviews
or questionnaires.
3. Validate prepared documentation through testing on supported
operating systems and supported viewing applications to ensure that
ultimate customer can understand and follow the material or directions
contained in the documentation.
4. Establish with the requesting staff member a schedule for periodic
review of documentation to ensure currency of procedures and
compliance with related policies or regulations of the University.
5. Develop style guides for use in recommending or developing
recurring types of documentation in order to increase the efficiency of
documentation preparation and to present a uniform and familiar look
University Computing and Communications Services
Management Evaluation Form
Calendar Year 2002
February 5, 2002
How
Important
How well
Appendix 9
and feel to UCCS documentation.
6. Provide feedback to technical managers when complexity of
system or developed procedures cannot be clearly presented to
expected audience. Make recommendations on where clarification or
simplification is needed in order to reduce or eliminate confusion or
unnecessary information.
SPECIFIC POSITIVE, DEVELOPMENTAL, OR CORRECTIVE COMMENTS ABOUT PROJECT
ACCOMPLISHMENT RESPONSIBILITIES:
C. Technical Knowledge and Skills
How
Important
How well
1. Exhibit ability to understand information systems technologies and
instructional system technologies being used within the University in
order to provide sound documentation on how to use and operate
those technologies.
2. Exhibit proficiency in multiple forms of discourse in order to select
the best method of each assigned project.
3. Exhibit proficiency is the use of multiple methods for development
of documentation in order to provide the most efficient development
schedule while ensuring appropriate coverage of topic material.
4. Exhibit familiarity with multiple methods and formats of
documentation presentation in order to provide a product that is best
suited to the intended audience.
SPECIFIC POSITIVE, DEVELOPMENTAL, OR CORRECTIVE COMMENTS ABOUT TECHNICAL
KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS:
D. Effectiveness Skills/Interactive Skills
1. Independently contribute ideas and process improvements and look
for creative solutions and better ways of doing things, in order to meet
goals of continuous improvement.
2. Identify, analyze, and address problems in order to resolve issues
whenever possible in a way that minimizes the negative impact on the
organization.
3. Make appropriate, timely, and effective decisions, in order to
support the work of the department.
4. Adapt to new work situations, people, ideas, procedures, and
organization structures, in order to accommodate a constantly
evolving work environment. Exhibit willingness to learn new
methods, to be trained, to provide training, and to make job
improvements. Demonstrate personal confidence about knowledge of
the duties required to perform this job, as well as willingness to
openly and effectively share that knowledge with others.
University Computing and Communications Services
Management Evaluation Form
Calendar Year 2002
February 5, 2002
How
Important
How well
Appendix 9
5. Build successful relationships with customers, co-workers, and
administrators. Communicate and work effectively as a team
member, in order to maximize the effectiveness of the work group.
6. Demonstrate courtesy and consideration of others. Demonstrate a
consistent willingness to do more than one’s “fair share,” and go
beyond the call of duty in support of co-workers and customers.
7. Exhibit good listening skills. Demonstrate patience with others.
8. Exhibit willingness to accept differences among individuals, be
open-minded, and be willing to hear and accept others’ suggestions.
9. Follow through on responsibilities and commitments in a timely
fashion, and complete projects and other commitments when
promised.
10. Exhibit maturity, reliability, composure, and stability under
pressure in order to handle on-the-job challenges. Be able to give and
take constructive criticism well. Be gracious and slow to anger.
11. While at work, recognize that work is a priority and not let
personal matters interfere with one’s work obligations.
12. Demonstrate personal integrity and honesty
13. Work successfully with diverse others and uphold the University’s
commitment to equal employment opportunity and affirmative action,
in order to help the organization realize its commitment to excellence
through diversity.
SPECIFIC POSITIVE, DEVELOPMENTAL, OR CORRECTIVE COMMENTS ABOUT EFFECTIVENESS AN
DINTERCATIVE SKILLS:
Average Rating for the review period __________________
University Computing and Communications Services
Management Evaluation Form
Calendar Year 2002
February 5, 2002
Appendix 10
ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT UNIT REVIEW
UNIVERSITY COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES
EMPLOYEE SURVEY REPORT
Prepared by
Teresa Ward
Office of Institutional Research
August 9, 2004
Methods
Sampling
The Office of Institutional Research conducted an online survey of current employees in University Computer
and Communication Services. Completed questionnaires were submitted anonymously to Institutional Research
for analysis. The response rate was 81.01 percent.
Survey Instruments
The Employee Survey, designed to generate quantitative and qualitative data, consisted of 13 structured
questions utilizing a Likert scale and a “comment and suggestion” section. Questions were developed to
elicit attitudinal data associated with employee expectations, performance, job satisfaction, communication,
and unit goals based on the employee’s experience in University Computer and Communication Services.
Analysis of Data
The data were subject to descriptive analysis including, but not limited to, frequency distributions and descriptive
(mean and standard deviation) tabulations for the purpose of statistical inference. Frequency distribution and
descriptive data analysis allows for the recognition of trends and distributions within data.
All frequency and descriptive distributions are presented in the following tables and figures followed by the
qualitative data:
ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT UNIT REVIEW
UNIVERSITY COMPUTING AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES
EMPLOYEE SURVEY REPORT
Strongly
disagree
N
%
2
N
3
%
N
Strongly
agree
4
%
N
%
N
%
Don't
know/not
applicable
N
%
Table 1
Total
N
I have the materials and
equipment necessary to do
my job well.
1
2.0
6
11.8
13
25.5
22
43.1
9
17.6
51
Someone at work
encourages me to increase
my skills.
1
2.0
6
11.8
13
25.5
13
25.5
18
35.3
51
4
7.8
3
5.9
17
33.3
19
37.3
8
15.7
51
I clearly understand what is
expected of me in a typical
work day.
1
2.0
3
6.0
9
18.0
22
44.0
15
30.0
50
I get the training I need to
do my job well.
7
13.7
12
23.5
15
29.4
13
25.5
4
7.8
51
4
7.8
12
23.5
25
49.0
8
15.7
7
13.7
15
29.4
19
37.3
8
15.7
51
2
3.9
16
31.4
33
64.7
51
At work, my opinions matter.
I am confident that my
unit/department is meeting
our customer's needs.
I receive feedback on my
progress at work.
2
3.9
It is important to Georgia
State that I do my job well.
I am held accountable for
the quality and quantity of
my work.
2
3.9
51
1
2.0
7
13.7
16
31.4
27
52.9
51
People let me know when I
do a good job.
5
9.8
4
7.8
17
33.3
18
35.3
7
13.7
51
I have access to all the
data/information I need to
do my job right.
6
11.8
8
15.7
16
31.4
18
35.3
3
5.9
51
My job makes good use of
my skills and abilities.
4
7.8
6
11.8
10
19.6
19
37.3
12
23.5
51
Overall, I would recommend
my unit/department as a
good place to work.
2
3.9
3
5.9
15
29.4
17
33.3
14
27.5
51
Table 2
Descriptive Statistics(a)
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std.
Deviation
I have the materials and equipment necessary
to do my job well.
51
1
5
3.63
.979
Someone at work encourages me to increase
my skills.
51
1
5
3.80
1.114
At work, my opinions matter.
51
1
5
3.47
1.084
I clearly understand what is expected of me in
a typical work day.
50
1
5
3.94
.956
51
1
5
2.90
1.171
I am confident that my unit/department is
meeting our customer's needs.
49
2
5
3.76
.830
I receive feedback on my progress at work.
51
1
5
3.47
1.046
It is important to Georgia State that I do my job
well.
51
3
5
4.61
.568
I am held accountable for the quality and
quantity of my work.
51
2
5
4.35
.796
People let me know when I do a good job.
51
1
5
3.35
1.128
I have access to all the data/information I need
to do my job right.
51
1
5
3.08
1.111
My job makes good use of my skills and
abilities.
51
1
5
3.57
1.204
Overall, I would recommend my
unit/department as a good place to work.
51
1
5
3.75
1.055
I get the training I need to do my job well.
a Minimum/Maximum range denotes Negative/Positive range (1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Don't
know/not applicable and missing data excluded from analysis.
Graph 1
Graph 2
40.0%
50.0%
40.0%
Percent
Percent
30.0%
30.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
I have the materials and equipment
necessary to do my job well.
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
Someone at work encourages me to
increase my skills.
Graph 3
Graph 4
40.0%
50.0%
40.0%
Percent
Percent
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
disagree
Strongly
agree
3
4
Strongly
agree
I clearly understand what is expected of
me in a typical work day.
At work, my opinions matter.
Graph 5
Graph 6
60.0%
30.0%
50.0%
Percent
25.0%
20.0%
Percent
2
15.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
5.0%
0.0%
2
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
I get the training I need to do my job well.
Graph 7
3
4
Strongly
agree
I am confident that my unit/department is
meeting our customer's needs.
Graph 8
70.0%
40.0%
60.0%
50.0%
Percent
Percent
30.0%
20.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
0.0%
3
Graph 9
4
Strongly agree
It is important to Georgia State that I do
my job well.
I receive feedback on my progress at
work.
Graph 10
60.0%
40.0%
30.0%
40.0%
Percent
Percent
50.0%
30.0%
20.0%
20.0%
10.0%
10.0%
0.0%
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
I am held accountable for the quality and
quantity of my work.
Graph 11
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
People let me know when I do a good job.
Graph 12
40.0%
40.0%
30.0%
Percent
Percent
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
I have access to all the data/information I
need to do my job right.
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
My job makes good use of my skills and
abilities.
Graph 13
40.0%
Percent
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Strongly
disagree
2
3
4
Strongly
agree
Overall, I would recommend my
unit/department as a good place to work.
Appendix 11
Georgia State University
Information Systems & Technology’s Civility Statement
Prologue
The division of Information Systems & Technology (IS&T) has a very rich legacy. IS&T has
evolved into a highly technical and diverse environment. Hence, with the demographic
makeup of race, gender, education level and multiple skill levels, the division is committed to
the promotion of civility.
Purpose
It is our purpose to foster the development of both the individual and the division in an
environment where civility is valued and appreciated. While challenges of effective
communication, respect, shared vision, teamwork, recognition and a unified community may
appear overwhelming, IS&T is committed to the delivery of efficient and innovative support
services through the collaborative process. For this process to be successful, we must
capitalize on the diverse talents and abilities within the entire division.
Our Commitment to Civility
Our relations with one another should be predicated on an attitude of:
•
Building a civil community that:
o Respects opinions of others
o Respects knowledge levels
o Demonstrates a willingness to share
•
Extension of unconditional positive regard for all employees through:
o Listening
o Valuing opinions
o Opportunity for personal growth
o Rewarding excellence
•
Acceptance of differences represented by:
o Broad ages
o Skills
o Gender
o Nationalities
•
Promote the overall value of the division through:
o Teamwork
o Cross-Training
o Outreach and mentoring
o New employee orientation
o Personal/Professional growth and development
Appendix 12
Georgia State University
Information Systems & Technology’s Value Statements
IS&T Value Statements
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Our commitment to service is the basis for our relationship with the Georgia State
University community.
Change is constant; therefore, we plan for it with consideration for the interests of
those affected.
We believe in the dignity and worth of all individuals and value their unique
contributions.
We support each other, sharing successes and challenges.
We communicate in an accurate, timely and forthright manner.
We listen to and learn from each other and our customers.
We encourage consensus decision-making through a non-judgmental sharing of
ideas, including input from customers, staff and community.
We resolve conflicts proactively, working together as a cohesive team for the
good of the Georgia State University community.
We foster an environment that empowers the individual closest to the work to
make appropriate decisions.
We maintain a professionally attractive and vibrant organization to support the
University’s mission.
Appendix 13
Georgia State University
Information Systems & Technology’s Golden Rules of Customer Service
IS&T Golden Rules of Customer Service
1. Never give excuses; focus on resolving the problem. Use the phrase: “What I can
do is…”
2. Always be pleasant with customers. Focus on resolving the problem, not on
adjusting the customer’s attitude.
3. Customers are not interruptions of our work. They are the reason for it.
Customer relations are an integral part of your job, not an extension of it. Our
business is developing relationships through respect and trustworthiness, coupled
with appropriate technical expertise. People don’t care how much you know until
they know how much you care.
4. Always be responsive to customers. Return phone calls and e-mail in a timely
manner--- within one business day. Never have a full voice mailbox.
5. Honor your service and support commitments. Every customer has the right to
expect a commitment to an appointment time for scheduled services. Every
customer has the right to expect our rapid response to a crisis disruption of
service. If a commitment cannot be met, inform the customer immediately.
6. Take ownership of problems. If it is not your problem to resolve, involve the
appropriate party, and ensure that ownership of the problem is transferred with the
customer’s knowledge.
7. Every job is a self-portrait of the person who did it. Autograph your work with
excellence.
Appendix 14
Figure I.
Central IT Staff Totals
University of Louisville
University of Alabama at
Birmingham
University of MissouriKansas City
Georgia State University
University of New Mexico
Central IT and Infrastructures Staffing Levels of Comparable Institutions
201.8
145
74
173
197
38
29
40
0
29
239.8
174
114
173
226
Staff Functions and Totals
Administration
Director
Network
NOC
2
1
12
16
2
1
14
12
1
1
3
1
8.5
3
8
0
1
1
6
5
Security
3
2
1
22
0
Systems
21
14
14
18
10
Telco
5
16
6
60
12
Total
60
61
27
119.5
35
30%
42%
36%
69%
18%
Central IT Student Assistant
Totals
Total Personnel
Percentage Infrastructure Staff to
Central IT
Figure II.
Georgia State University
University of New Mexico
University of MissouriKansas City
University of Alabama at
Birmingham
University of Louisville
Budgeting Levels of Comparable Institution's IT Organizations
$10,795,458
$11,400,000.00
$5,400,000.00
$34,000,000.00
$26,000,000.00
Approx. % Budget allocated to
Infrastructure Group(s)
$3,767,056.00
$5,200,000.00
$1,500,000.00
$17,000,000.00
$10,000,000.00
Capital Budget line?
no
no
yes
no
Approx.Central IT Operating
Budget
no
Approx.Capital Purchases
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$6,000,000.00
$1,500,000.00
Approx. Salary Budget for
Infrastructure
$3,148,067.00
$3,900,000.00
$700,000.00
$4,500,000.00
$3,650,000.00
Figure III.
University of Louisville
University of Alabama at
Birmingham
Georgia State University
University of New Mexico
University of Missouri-Kansas
City
Comparative Ratio Analysis / Various Metrics
FTE Students Supported Per Central
Infrastructure Staff Member
313
305
324
95
436
Data Drops Supported Per Central
Network Infrastructure Staff Member
1,500
1,571
2,733
2,050
2,333
Voice Drops Supported Per Central
Telco Infrastructure Staff Member
3,200
1,375
700
300
742
University of Louisville
University of Alabama at
Birmingham
University of New Mexico
Georgia State University
Carnegie Class
Control
University of Missouri-Kansas
City
Figure IV.
DR EXT
Public
DR EXT
Public
DR INT
Public
DR EXT
Public
DR EXT
Public
18,766
28,163
18,576
32,696
8,754
14,244
11,337
16,357
15271
21,464
High Speed Network to Residence
Halls
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Percentage of Students with
personal computers
50%
35%
7%
10%
60%
Does the campus provide student
email accounts?
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Percent of classrooms equipped with
Wired Internet connections.
94%
100%
100%
10%
20%
Percent of classrooms equipped with
Computers.
64%
1%
60%
10%
20%
Percent of classrooms equipped with
Wireless Internet connections.
25%
10%
2%
15%
3%
Estimated number of FTE IT
personnel employed by departments
outside of central IT organization.
58
500
75
200
78
Operating appropriation to central IT
organization (2003).
$10,795,458
$11,400,000.00
$34,000,000
$26,000,000
Student FTE
Fall 2003 Enrollment
$5,400,000.00
Figure V.
Function Descriptions
UCCS administrative staff. Assistant to the Director and UCCS administrative
support.
Director of UCCS
Staff responsible for all data infrastructure related procurement, design,
implementation, and support. This includes routers, switches, network
appliances, terminal servers, wireless access points, and network management.
24x7 core network and system support, print services, backup rotation and
maintenance.
Central network security staff responsible for security consultation, intrusion
detection, security event tracking and resolution.
Unix, Novell, Linux, and MS system procurement, design, implementation, and
support for core campus host systems and limited consultation to departmental
admins.
Telecommunications cabling, office phone support, and GSU switchboard.
Figure VI.
Carnegie Class Definitions
DR EXT: Doctoral Research - Extensive: These institutions typically offer a wide
range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education
through the doctorate. During the period studied, they awarded 50 or more
doctoral degrees per year across at least 15 disciplines.
DR INT: Doctoral Research - Intensive: These institutions typically offer a wide
range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education
through the doctorate. During the period studied, they awarded at least 10
doctoral degrees per year across three or more disciplines, or at least 20 doctoral
degrees per year overall.
Source: EDUCAUSE Core Data Service 2003 Summary Report. Appendix E:
Carnegie Class Definitions. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub8001l.pdf