Skip to content
  • Print


Office of the President
University of the Pacific
3601 Pacific Avenue
Stockton, CA 95211

July 13, 2009

ISPC Meeting Minutes

July 13, 2009

Library Community Room

Call to Order: 2:05 p.m.

Present: Bergstrom, Brodnick, Denney, LeGreco, Frederick, Gilbertson, Griffen, Jacobson, Johnson

Not Present: Glassman, Lynn Fox, Lydia Fox, Yelpaala, Zumout

Guests: Scott Christensen, Peggy Kay

Minutes: The minutes from June 15th were approved as amended with one correction.

Announcements: The ISPC schedule for 2009 – 2010 may change due to scheduling conflicts.

Deborah Denney will send an email to ISPC regarding the red flag issue. She will relay any comments or proposed changes to Pat Cavanaugh, who will then meet with Cabinet about the issue.

Report on IT Staffing and Funding Benchmark Pacific vs. Official Peer Group Based on 2008 Educause CORE Data:
Larry presented the report to the group which is partly in response to the presidential transition. The peer group is the official group on the Institutional Research website. The report shows that Pacific is in the middle or the lower half of the lists in the multiple categories. Larry concluded that an institution should spend about 5% of expense budget on Information Technology, which means that Pacific is either above or below par depending on how Law and Dental are counted, and we may not be spending enough on IT.

Strategic Plan for Information Technology, 2008-2015:
Questions for discussion have been added to some of the pages of the strategic plan. The planning process section was moved to the front of the document. Edits to the unresolved strategies are in this version. The Coordination Policy requires that items are coordinated through OIT when technology is necessary, but not everyone knows about the policy or when OIT should be involved in the process. The group discussed incorporating this into the strategies, but that may not work because of flexibility and manageability. The diagram on page two needs some clarification and new terminology of evaluation criteria and feedback. Number seven of the planning assumptions may not be useful as phrased. Items three and five are important and accurate. They are assumptions about how Pacific is and the rest is guided by them. To have them listed as assumptions means that ISPC believes the accuracy of them. The group discussed parity and how it is referred to the benchmark document. It might help to state that the parity is among peers. The group discussed number three in detail mentioning aspects of both administrative and teaching and learning needs for cyberinfrastructure and enterprise applications. It is a challenge to find a balance between the administrative and academic side. Phil suggested adding a statement about the degree of parity and how it is fundamental to technology systems.  It was determined that number seven will be taken out of the assumptions.

Tenets are the next step after assumptions towards informing the execution strategy. Larry explained why it is necessary for numbers one and three to be included and how the statements will assist in moving forward with user assessment to attain basic IT needs. There is not a formal IT assessment process, but there are multiple venues to discuss the needs. It may be a good idea for each unit to have a staff member with knowledge of the unit’s business procedures to analyze what is needed, or create an analysis related to the annual goals of the units. The group discussed listing number three as an assessment goal and number two as an assumption. Number five of the tenets gives a simple central statement and the group discussed adding “specific to their needs” to the statement. Rob suggested adding two tenets to the document; 1. State when the planning period is, 2. Provide a management planning strategy behind IT. Larry made proposals of a budget reform list, and to change the IPC planning assumptions to provide a standardized 5% to IT. An issue of adding a statement related to customer service was raised; Larry and Peggy will discuss the language to include pertaining to this issue. Rob suggested focusing on the revised mission and vision. The mission in the document is a complexity of missions from ISPC, OIT and the TSPs. The group discussed the structure of the strategic goals and expressed the need for changes, and how to communicate the values of the goals. The unresolved strategies do not constitute a plan and they may need to be reprioritized. The strategies will be discussed further at the next meeting.

Student Email:
Janice Johnson presented a document to ISPC regarding a meeting that was held at McGeroge School of Law about student email.

Adjourned: 3:42 p.m.

The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, August 17 at 2:00 p.m., in the Library Community Room.