Bobetta Burns, Andrew Christie, Cheryl Coe, Carol Crader, Kathleen Dinse, Marie Fofi, Theresa Harkins, William Moore, Dianne Olla, Linda-Marie Schulz
Guests Present
No guest attendance has been recorded.
Item # 1:
Review of June 2012 CORE Minutes
Presenter
Andrew
Discussion
June 2012 CORE Meeting minutes were approved. [bb, mf]
Item # 2:
Vendor Email Address
Presenter
Purchasing
Discussion
The 'VEN' email address type was created in ''Live'' on June 15. However, there have been two delays to implementing direct deposits to vendors: (1) Security for authorized Purchasing personnel to add vendor email addresses, and (2) Questions over the ''hierarchy'' of email addresses, and whether or not the direct deposit notifications should go to all of the vendors email addresses or only the one associated with the vendor email type. Theresa volunteered to take the lead on resolving issue #1, and Kathy D volunteered to take the lead on resolving issue #2.
Item # 3:
Review of Software Update Installation in Collive
Presenter
Discussion
Discussion
There were two HR/Payroll software updates of Colleague that had negative impacts on production operations after the most recent monthly installation. One of them involved a fine-tuning of payroll-related security.
IT is trying to set up an Ellucian-led demo of a couple of their popular products: Student Recruitment and Retention Alert. It was reported that UT recently purchased Student Recruitment. Given the decrease in enrollment for Summer 2012 and, so far, Fall 2012, this might be an important product to research for possible future adoption.
Retention Alert may also be a helpful tool in resolving a couple of recent developments: (1) Given recent incidents at various colleges, there are increasing calls for colleges to have software applications dedicated to attempting to identify students whose behavior warrants tracking and monitoring; and (2) SACS recent request for ACC to acquire a ''complaints'' database.
Enrollment Management and Admissions & Records, as well as other departments, will be invited to the scheduled demos.
A ''side bar'' to this discussion expanded upon the hidden costs of departments purchasing 3rd party products without the consent of IT, and then ''encouraging'' IT to quickly purchase support hardware and develop software solutions to resolve the integration challenges presented by the newly purchased products. The result of the discussion led to a positive result: The Purchasing department will now be communicating more directly with IT when other departments request new software.
Item # 5:
Data Clean-Up Committee Update
Presenter
Andrew
Discussion
An introductory meeting was held. The second had to be postponed due to SACS-related requests. An auditing/tracking Google document has been created that will store the data clean-up operations being waged. The document was presented at the CORE meeting.
The date for the next Data Clean-Up subcommittee meeting will be reset soon.
Item # 6:
Informer Performance
Presenter
Andrew
Discussion
The recent increase in Colleague licenses triggered an automated shut down of Informer as Entrinsik structures its licensing cost on the number of Colleague licenses an institution has.
This hard-line approach generated a ''comment'' from IT to Entrinsik, and this included concerns about Informer's performance capabilities. This led to Entrinsik sponsoring a conference call between IT and Entrinsik's top developer to discuss specific concerns. The call is scheduled for Thursday. At the CORE Committee, we touched upon these concerns:
> Once an Informer report is triggered, there is no way to cancel it.
> Once an Informer report is triggered, there is insufficient feedback to tell the operator the status of the reporting request.
> One poorly-formed query can not only degrade system performance for other Informer users, but can also degrade performance on the production transactional systems.
> The number of records that exist for a big college like ours is such that it over-taxes the abilities of Informer.
Item # 7:
QAS & UI4 for NAE, ADR
Presenter
Andrew
Discussion
QAS provided a nice webex-demo last month.
Realistically, ACC cannot really go ''live'' with QAS Pro until after the SACS visit.
QAS Batch is something we also want to use and are waiting for QAS to send us information (perhaps even the programs) that Hampshire College is using to integrate QAS Batch with Colleague/UniData.
Austin Community College
5930 Middle Fiskville Rd.
Austin, Texas
78752-4390
512.223.4ACC (4222)
