USU committee weeds out vendors for new universitywide data system
As Utah State University contemplates a migration to a new data processing system, SCT Banner, a committee is reviewing three vendor proposals.
Each proposal contains the vendors’ views on USU’s readiness to migrate, as well as a plan of action, a timeline and a budget overview.
Banner will integrate data for the university’s finances, students, financial aid and human resources. It will aid in recruitment and retention efforts.
Fred Hunsaker, vice president for Administrative Services, said, “[Banner’s] value will be measured in more timely information, increased convenience and consistent access, and most importantly more accuracy. These are huge issues for everyone.”
Rory Weaver, Enterprise Resource Management project manager, said, “All three [vendor] finalists have been very professional and thorough in their readiness assessment and response to the RFP [request for proposals]. Such professionalism and thoroughness makes it both difficult and rewarding for the evaluation team.”
Barbara White, vice president for Information Technology, said many groups on campus have put forth time and money to help with the SCT Banner project. For example, “Students have had faith and believe in the need for a better system with [24-hour, seven-days-a-week] access.”
The Associated Students of USU agreed to one-time funding from Tier II Tuition projected moneys of $1 million to help with the migration.
The SCT Banner migration is part of a statewide license agreement.
Jerry Fullmer, director of Information Technology for the Utah System of Higher Education, said the decision to choose SCT Banner “really was a no-brainer.”
The state made the decision based on two facts. First, Gartner, a firm known for its analysis of systems vendors, ranks SCT as the No. 1 provider. Second, the SCT Banner cost for the state was projected as being significantly less expensive than similar products.
“[SCT Banner] is used at many institutions,” Fullmer said. “It takes a whipping and keeps on ticking. The migration is the right thing to do, or I wouldn’t have supported it. It’s time for that major change.”
One thing USU is doing differently from many state universities is the RFP process, which calls for the vendor to give a specific budget and allows the university to do a business process analysis.
“The BPA gives USU a chance to clearly know which processes we need to hold on to and which are out of date,” White said. “Here’s a chance before we implement the system to clearly know what we do well, what is not necessary and what is unique to Utah State University. There will be changes in the way we do business.”
She said this relates directly to one of President Kermit L. Hall’s desires, which he said is to “adopt new business models that embrace accountability, responsiveness and efficiency, and a budget process that is responsive to university goals.”
White said, “This does mean change in the way we think, how we meet the business functions, in the way we operate and our expectations. It will change the way we ask questions. It will provide a more reliable and consistent management of data that we know we can count on. Institutions are data-driven.
“Consistency, reliability, commonality and accuracy are essential. We need to provide the very best we can provide,” she said.
Bryan Snow, director of special projects for Information Technology at Utah Valley State College, said, “Your president should be commended on the closed pricing model [in this case, RFP].”
He said although other state colleges are further along in the implementation than USU, “I don’t think USU is behind. There are different driving issues for different schools.”
UVSC is executing a smaller BPA process.
“It is very empowering,” he said. “It’s like walking around with a great big can opener. The BPA gives you the right to examine the insides of the can. It is a positive experience for everyone and a lot of hard work and a lot of time.”
Fullmer said, “One of the things Utah State is doing right is the BPA. They need to do a re-engineering of their business processes before they implement the new software. It is very important.”
Bud Covington, director of Purchasing Services, said the RFP process allows the committee to ask for responses from qualified vendors and then grade the proposals.
Covington acts as an adviser to the Banner evaluation committee. He said his responsibilities include guaranteeing that the public funds involved are used appropriately and making sure the decision is objective.
“We have a good crew doing the evaluation,” he said. “[It] runs across all gamuts of the university. This is not one-sided. Everybody needs to have a voice. This is a decision we will live with for years.”
In accordance with state law, once a vendor is selected, most of its response will be open and available to the public. The cost associated with the decision will “never be hidden,” Covington said.
“It’s public money. It’s everybody’s money, and everyone has a right to see how it is used. It takes time when dealing with public money to make sure there is fairness to everyone,” he said.
However, “Even when the contract is signed, the first cost may not be the last cost. We try to do the best job we can, but there’s always either additions or subtractions,” Covington said.
Weaver said once the evaluation team adequately reviews each of the proposals, it will make a recommendation of one of the three vendors to Hall, who will make the final decision.
For more information about the USU’s SCT Banner migration, visit www.usu.edu/cio/banner.htm.
–dhegsted@cc.usu.edu