CCFIT > Discussion Topics > UC Davis IT Planning

UC Davis IT Planning

UC Davis Information Technology Plan

10/11/2004: Dave Shelby, Vice Provost for Information and Educational Technology, provided an update on the campuswide information technology planning effort initiated last year by Vice Provost Bruno (see March minutes). Shelby went over two handouts: the list of seven IT projects currently in the planning/analysis phase as well as the Proposed IT Project Plan for 04-05 through 07-08. Shelby noted that proposals have been completed for four of the projects on the list of IT projects (IT security, Electronic Research Administration, Faculty Merit and Promotion, and Webcasting). The spreadsheet identifies one-time as well as ongoing costs (including software, hardware, maintenance, etc.) for FY 04-05 through 07-08 for each of the seven IT projects in the planning phase. Both the spreadsheet and the list of IT projects will be submitted to Provost Hinshaw, along with the four budget proposals already completed, for her consideration. Shelby indicated that the Provost has set aside $2M in one-time funds for IT projects. Of the four proposals already submitted, the Electronic Research Administration and the Faculty Merit and Promotion projects are expected to require the most funds. (See http://itstrategicplan.ucdavis.edu for a description of these and other campus IT projects.)

01/10/2005: The Campus Information Technology Projects handout (see Campus IT Projects) is the result of last year's IT planning process. The Academic Merit and Promotion (AMP) project and the Electronic Research Administration (ERA) project both received funding for the first year. John Meyer stated that the list of IT projects and corresponding budget plan provide a great foundation for campus IT funding decisions. Next steps include discussing ongoing funding for the proposals. John Bruno and Dave Shelby have completed the individual meetings with the Deans and Vice Chancellors regarding IT planning for 2005-07. A summary from those meetings will be available for the February meeting. VP Bruno provided an overview of the process for IT planning (see IT Planning at UCD Overview).

02/14/2005: The following is a list of the IT planning projects recommended by CODVC.

• Banner Enhancements
• Central email exchange server between IET & OOA
• Central internet payment gateway - AFS
• Computer forensic services
• Degree Navigator - permanent funding?
• Online graduate admissions
• Space management
• Teaching & learning tools
• Wireless networking

Priorities for Campus IT funding

11/14/2005: Chair Bledsoe went over the draft memo to Provost Hinshaw and Interim Vice Provost Yellowlees regarding the funding proposal for key campus IT initiatives. The memo offers comments on the IT initiatives proposed by Interim Vice Provost-IET Peter Yellowlees and identifies four additional topics discussed by CCFIT in 2004-05. (Note: The Funding Proposal for Key Campus IT Initiatives was presented and discussed at the October 2005 meeting.)

In the draft CCFIT memo, Council members reiterated their support for four of the campus IT initiatives proposed for funding: the Faculty Merit and Promotion System (MyInfoVault software system), the Electronic Research Administration System (InfoEd software system), the expansion of wireless on campus, and the implementation of a new set of course/learning management tools (MyUCDavis 2.0 based on ‘Sakai’ open source software). Three of these topics were discussed extensively last year. Wireless expansion, identified as a top priority by undergraduate students and the Graduate Student Association, will be the focus of further discussion this academic year. Council continues to support these four initiatives.
The CCFIT memo identifies four additional IT initiatives for campus funding: (1) online review of graduate applications and graduate student tracking; (2) online system for the review and approval of new courses; (3) online course evaluations; and (4) educational technology support. These topics have received support in concept from several campus constituencies, but unlike the initiatives featured on the current IT funding proposal, no implementation proposals or budget estimates/projections have yet been developed for these four additional topics. These topics will be the continued focus of presentations, updates, Council discussion and recommendations during 2005-06.

The first section of the memo outlines four major concerns about funding for campus information technology needs. These concerns point out the insufficiency of current campus IT funding; the need for more matching resources (personnel, funds) from sponsors; the need for maintenance plans identifying long-term costs; and the need to continue to actively engage students, faculty and staff in the campus IT planning discussion process. Council members expressed concern that some groups may not have matching funds. The suggestion was made to expand the nature of what a sponsor can bring to bear on any given project to include funding as well as other resources, such as FTEs, professional expertise, programming support, etc. Chair Bledsoe agreed and noted that this change will be included in the memo to the Provost and Vice-Provost of IET.

Associate Vice Chancellor Meyer noted that one option for re-thinking campus IT funding might be to centralize more systems and services, thereby freeing departmental staff and decentralized IT funds.

There was some discussion of the purpose of the memo. Bledsoe reiterated the advisory nature of the Council’s charge and noted that this memo represents the opinions of a cross-section of the campus community. The memo offers advice to the Provost and Interim Vice Provost for IET, particularly as decisions are made regarding the central IT funds ($5M over the next three years).

Interim Vice Provost Yellowlees gave Council members copies of an article entitled “Envisioning a Transformed University” (published in Issues in Science and Technology, Fall 2005). The article examines the impacts of societal change (initiated by rapidly evolving information technology) on learning institutions. The article points out the need for institutions to confront these dynamics in order to remain ‘rich, relevant, and accessible.’ Yellowlees emphasized the parallels between current transformations in higher education and earlier 19th century changes:

Many in the university community believe that a similar period of dramatic change has already begun in higher education. In fact, some are even willing to put on the table the most disturbing question of all: Will the university, at least as we know it today, even exist a generation from now? Perhaps the focus of our study should not be "the impact of technology on the future of the research university" but "the impact of technology on scholarship and learning, wherever they may be conducted."

Yellowlees encouraged Council members to share with him their thoughts on the radical changes this article outlines for higher education and priorities for the future. (Note: This article is expected to be available online at http://www.issues.org/issues/ in a few weeks.)

Chair Bledsoe thanked Yellowlees for this article and Council members for their feedback on the memo re: funding of campus IT initiatives. She will make the adjustments suggested today, and will submit the memo to Virginia Hinshaw and Peter Yellowlees on behalf of the Council. An update will be provided at the next meeting.

12/12/2005: Chair Bledsoe announced that she met with Provost Hinshaw recently to submit and discuss the memo from CCFIT regarding proposed funding priorities for key campus IT initiatives. A copy of the memo was also submitted on CCFIT’s behalf to Peter Yellowlees, Interim Vice Provost for IET. Bledsoe directed members’ attention to the copy of the memo in their packets and outlined adjustments made to the draft version discussed in November (see November minutes). Provost Himshaw was receptive to CCFIT’s comments, thanked Caroline for bringing them forward, and indicated the Council’s feedback will be taken into consideration as funding decisions for major IT projects are made.

01/09/2006: Kelly Ratliff, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Resource Management and Planning, provided a Budget 101 overview of the campus funding, funding sources, and funding allocations. She drew on two documents available from the UC Davis Facts Web site. The first document shows the campus annual revenue by source of funds for 1998-2005 (http://facts.ucdavis.edu/documents/annual_revenues_by_source_of_funds.pdf). The second identifies the student population headcount for 1995-2004 (http://facts.ucdavis.edu/documents/student_population_headcount.pdf). Highlights from the presentation:

• Campus total funding is approximately $2.3 billion. This includes $515M in permanent funds for 05-06, which represents a 4% (~$22.5M) increase (achieved through the Governor's decision to fund the Compact with UC). Three-quarters of this money was earmarked for salary increases.



• The largest increase in funding source over the last few years was in student fees ($269M in 04-05), the smallest increase being in state support ($476M in 04-05).



• The campus student population grew steadily between 1996 and 2003 (from 24,163 to 30,229). The last two years, however, enrollment started to drop, first by 300 students in 2004 (anticipated), and then again this academic year when the campus expected 50 more students than actually enrolled (current total student population: 29,637). The campus has planned a ~1% annual enrollment increase over the next five years (through 2010).



• Eighty-five percent of campus core funds (i.e., student fees, state general funds, and indirect costs) is spent on salaries and wages.



• Discretionary funds amount to ~ $4M, or less than 1% of campus funding. The Chancellor's investment (discretionary) fund is fairly modest; it is used most commonly to pay off debts.