Kuali Financ

ial

System – Kuali Coeus Research Administration

IAC Briefing April 9, 2009 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 10



Decisions

Implement community source products  Supported unanimously by a campus committee of 24 with broad representation & discussion  Approval by CSU administration  Process  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 April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 11

KFS-KC Project Structure

SVP/Provost KFS A. Dineen, VPF P. Burns, VPIT K. Delehoy, AVPR KC Executive Sponsors T. Fluharty, B&FS J. Hunter, B&FS D. Hesser, IS R. Splittgerber, RS Executive Directors K. McHenry, IS P. Harrington, OVPR E. Kissam, OVPR Project Managers Steering Committee

April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 12

Reality Triangle – the Constraints Functionality

All three” trade off” against each other April 9, 2009

Time

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:    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!’ April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 14

Budget Encompassing Both Projects

   Base project budget  KFS - $218k/yr    KC - $338k/yr Reporting - $90k/yr Total = $646k/yr.

One-time project budget     KFS - $688k KC - $655k Reporting - $90k Total = $1,433k Significant departmental investments to complement the project budget above April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 15

What’s Ahead

   KFS kick-off April 28, 2009 (1/2 day)  KC foreshadowed Kuali Financial System ‘go live’ July 1, 2009  Initial alpha training in January 2009   Formal campus training to begin in early May 2009 Detailed training in June 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 April 9, 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 April 9, 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]

project team and to the April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 18

The Project Hype Cycle – for All Large Software Projects

Peak of Inflated Expectations

Source: Mike Zastrocky, The Gartner Group

Positive Hype Negative Hype Plateau of Productivity FRS Functionality Trough of Disillusionment Slope of Enlightenment Technology Trigger Maturity Time

April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 19

Questions

 Are most welcome!

April 9, 2009 Kuali Upgrade Status 20