Transcript Slide 1

Kuali Financial System – Kuali
Coeus Research Administration
Pat Burns, VPIT
Kathi Delehoy, SAVPRA
Allison Dineen, VPF
March 18, 2009
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
1
Themes

Carpe diem

CSU is the ‘low-priced spread,’ but because
of the quality of CSU contributions & staff,
you can’t tell that ‘it isn’t butter.’

Change, although difficult at times, is to the
long-term benefit of the institution
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
2
Background – Financial Management
System (FMS)

Board in Q3 2006 reviewed financial mgmt.
software at CSU & CSU-Pueblo


A financial system upgrade was explored,
encompassing both campuses
Decision against an integrated system:



CSU-Pueblo’s system is home grown, and finance is
integrated; deconstruction infeasible
CSU financial environment much more complex than at
CSU-Pueblo, an integrated system is not a good ‘fit’
Mandate to upgrade CSU FRS by Jan. 1, 2009
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
3
Research Management System (RMS)


During the same time period, Research Services was
exploring strategies for the future of its systems
 Current RMS is home grown, with areas of very good
processes, but not integrated across functional areas,
and difficult to scale to meet future needs
 Current system is not sustainable due to growing
research volume, need for additional functionality,
reporting, auditing, and emerging requirement for CSU
PI’s and others to integrate with grants.gov
Solution: a formal Research Mgmt. System
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
4
Perspective


Current finance system - FRS
 17 years old
 Only records transactions, little business intelligence
or ability to manage our finances
 Not interactive
 Does not support collaborative research (multi-year,
multi-project budgeting & accounting, purchasing, etc.)
 We need an FMS that supports and integrates with an
RMS
Explore an integrated approach
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
5
FMS Software – All Vendor Products




Three products developed for other markets
 Oracle, SAP – private sector
 PeopleSoft – purchased by Oracle, higher ed product
 Sungard/SCT – “small schools”
All four products have significant gaps
 Financial gaps & little or no research functionality
Landscape remains very uncertain
 Risks high, especially with Oracle and PeopleSoft
 Should we invest in products that are ~End-of-Life?
No vendors have solutions that:
 Provide good performance in large-scale, real time environments,
 Solve the identity management imbroglio, and
 “Throwing” massive consulting in does not work, e.g. CBMS
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
6
Analysis

Now may be the worst time to purchase large
administrative software applications






High costs of licensing and inflation
Low functionality, numerous “gaps”
Extraordinary integration efforts required
Managing vendor consultants very labor intensive
Even worse for a “best of breed” approach
High risk, low benefit for vendor software
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
7
The “Landscape”

These factors are ubiquitous in higher education,
especially in R1 institutions, and a thriving “community
source” movement has emerged, that offers (See It
Takes a Community, NACUBO, January 2009)
 Lower overall cost
 Better functionality
 Unconstrained, less complex integration with other
systems
 Easier implementation
 A good risk to accept
 By and for higher ed with promise of sustainability
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
8
However, Community Software


Requires local expertise
 Functional and technical
Requires local programmers, as we participate in the
Kuali Foundation



An opportunity to influence the development so we do not take a
step “backwards,” particularly from current research systems
To Collaborate with our partners to assure best practices in
meeting federal requirements
As a Resource to implement local business rules
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
9
Kuali Characteristics



Only systems that integrate research &
finance
Full-featured functionality in both areas
A modern, modular Service-Oriented
Architecture



Positions CSU for the future
Opportunity to influence functionality
Much less expensive than commercial
products
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
10
Decisions

Implement community source products



Process




Supported unanimously by a campus committee of 24
with broad representation & discussion
Approval by CSU administration
Kuali Financial System – go live July 1, 2009
Kuali Research Administration (now Kuali Coeus) –
engage in a multi-year development effort, and
implementing modules as they become available
Define two functional project teams and
Implement jointly, with IS’ support
Include reporting from the beginning
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
11
KFS-KC Project Structure
SVP/Provost
KFS
KC
A. Dineen,
VPF
P. Burns,
VPIT
K. Delehoy,
AVPR
T. Fluharty,
B&FS
D. Hesser,
IS
R. Splittgerber,
RS
J. Hunter,
B&FS
K. McHenry,
IS
P. Harrington,
OVPR
E. Kissam,
OVPR
Executive
Sponsors
Executive
Directors
Project
Managers
Steering Committee
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
12
Reality Triangle – the Constraints
Functionality
All three” trade off”
against each other
Time
March 18, 2009
$$$
Kuali Upgrade Status
13
CSU – the ‘Low-priced Spread’


Staffing in administrative areas much lower than
peer institutions
Implementations of administrative systems are
far less costly at CSU

No backfill for staffing – ‘day’ and ‘night’ jobs


Calls for new skill sets—challenge/opportunity
Examples of project implementation costs:



March 18, 2009
CSU SIS - $5.7M; CU SIS - $49M
CSU KFS & KC - ~$3.5M; CU Finance &HR - $50M; UA
Finance &HR ~$80M
CU Project Manager – ‘You guys are crazy!’
Kuali Upgrade Status
14
Budget Encompassing Both Projects

Base project budget





One-time project budget





KFS - $218k/yr
KC - $338k/yr
Reporting - $90k/yr
Total = $646k/yr.
KFS - $688k
KC - $655k
Reporting - $90k
Total = $1,433k
Significant departmental investments to complement
the project budget above
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
15
What’s Ahead

KFS kick-off April 28, 2009


Kuali Financial System ‘go live’ July 1, 2009



KC foreshadowed
Initial alpha training in January 2009
Formal campus training to begin in late May 2009
Reporting


Delphi data warehouse to be decommissioned 7/1/09
Currently in conversation with CAAG and others about
a functional replacement
 eThority and Oracle Discoverer in place
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
16
Campus Impact



Greatly improved functionality & access
 Direct web access
 Administrative staff
 Faculty/PIs
But, new: cultural & operational changes
 FMS – a big change from FRS
 Reporting systems – a change from delphi
 RMS – a systematic approach to grant submission
and management
New learning curves during time when staff and budgets
are shrinking, overlaid with year end financial closeout
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
17
Request





KFS: Encourage staff, especially faculty, to attend
training
KC: Encourage staff, especially faculty, to participate in
development, testing, and training
Understand the cultural changes and stress introduced
into our environment
 Wholesale change in the financial environment
Support your staff and the new systems as they come on
line
Encourage feedback to [email protected] and to the
project team
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
18
The Project Hype Cycle – for All Large
Software Projects
Peak of
Inflated
Expectations
Positive
Hype
Negative
Source: Mike Zastrocky,
The Gartner Group
Hype
Plateau of
Productivity
FRS
Trough of
Disillusionment
Slope of
Enlightenment
Technology
Trigger
Functionality
Maturity
Time
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
19
Questions

Are most welcome!
March 18, 2009
Kuali Upgrade Status
20