Skip to content
  • Print


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

December 3, 2009

ISPC Meeting Minutes

December 3, 2009

Library Community Room

Call to Order: 1:04 p.m.

Present: Denney, Frederick, Gilbertson, Griffen, Hetrick, Jacobson, Johnson, Yelpaala

Not Present: Bergstrom, Brodnick, Fox, LeGreco, ASUOP Representative

Guests: Scott Christensen, Rod Cook, Rob Henderson, Peggy Kay

Minutes: The minutes from November 5th will be reviewed at the next meeting. The minutes from November 19th were approved as amended with two corrections.

Final Review of FY11 Budget: The order of the priority list has changed due to discussion during the last meeting. As Cabinet has been working on the budget assumptions, it is clear that the IT priorities will not be fully funded, so the order of the priorities is critical. About $1M in funding will be available for all of the units and $500K will be set-aside for technology funding. The $500K will only cover the first three priorities. Risk mitigation may not be funded since it is listed fifth on ISPC’s list. The $1M may help with funding, but it depends on the needs of other departments. Rob Henderson summarized what would happen if there were a disaster. TEC feels that ten days is reasonable for downtime of classroom technology. Rob proposed looking at the most critical components of disaster recovery. SunGard provides disaster recovery service, and Peggy will request information from them regarding business continuity and cost. OIT has a contract in place at a remote site for Sacramento. The site can be used for other campuses as well. This will be looked at this year along with SunGard for a comparison during hardware refresh. The group discussed insurance and policies regarding disaster recovery. There is business continuity insurance, and Larry will consult with Sue Sharp for more information.

Jim explained that the classroom technology initiative is the second step in a multi-year strategic plan to address academic concerns. Faculty ranked risk mitigation low because they are used to a long period of downtime when there is a problem. OIT ranks risk mitigation as a high priority because of what auditors and the Board are requesting. The probability of a disaster is somewhat low but the impact is high. ISPC would assume risk if the priority is not moved up on the list for the funding and a disaster were to happen. The group discussed security testing and why funding is necessary if components for continuous availability are separated for funding. The group discussed technology in the classrooms in correlation with video conferencing to possibly use distance learning. Larry mentioned an initiative for Advancement Services to locate sponsors for a three-campus tele-presence. With the proper request an MUR could arise from the initiative. It may be possible, but some of the group felt that it would be difficult to receive donations for technology. Rob explained the funding request for video support. The funding is to replace the bridge and for maintenance of existing conference technology. Expansion is needed for additional rooms and staff to support video conferencing systems.

The group discussed Document Management and how the FTEs changed due to moving it into the top priorities. A lot of units are interested in document management, and a request for a contribution of funding was sent to the units. Deborah felt that more planning is needed before units should contribute funding. An assessment was done identifying all of the units affected by the lack of digital documents. Consultants will be hired to help implement document management. Institutions that use Banner are willing to provide information to the University regarding document management. Some units may have to wait for the service as others may have a higher priority. There is funding for temporary services to help with scanning and preservation of documents. Some units are using a form of document imaging, but they do not integrate with Banner as enterprise document management would.

Phil mentioned requesting that President Eibeck mandate a 5% reduction from each division’s operating budget to build a pool for IT funding. The group discussed this option in detail. Phil suggested adding a paragraph to propose that IPC investigate this option with the President. The group expressed their concerns regarding the 5% mandate. The Law and Dental Schools would not be included in the allocation. Kojo inquired about the accuracy of the figures to ensure ISPC is asking for the least amount of funding necessary. Larry explained that the figures are the best analysis of the cost at the time of research. Scott mentioned that surveys have shown that enrollment is being affected by the lack of technology in classrooms. Deborah expressed the need for an outside study for prioritizing and structuring a strategic plan; Phil informed ISPC that the new Vice President would do that. Phil asked for votes regarding the order of the priorities, and none of the committee members were opposed. Revisions will be made to the memo and sent to the group for comments.

Adjourned: 2:38 p.m.

The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, January 7 at 1:00 p.m. in the Library Community Room.