Committee on IT and Infrastructure (CITI) Meeting
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
2 – 4 p.m.
Murphy Hall 2121
Agenda/Background

1.  CITI’s Review Process - FY 2006-07 (Jim Davis)

For the first time in FY 06/07, existing and new IT institutional and enterprise level project requests for funding were reviewed by a campus committee. Projects included those identified in B&AS’ 2006 UTIPP2 Report, as well as other Academic and Research projects / initiatives. For this first-time campus review, the plan was to focus on providing input on all projects and to identify and address those projects that required cross-unit considerations for prioritization within the Chancellor’s office. Criteria for rating and ranking the IT requests were not well-defined with the intent of building the current experience toward a more systematic criteria-driven process.

To establish some criteria and then more systematically provide input as well as expedite this year’s process, a CITI Subcommittee was formed in April 2007 to complete the review of campus IT funding requests based on the discussions that took place sequentially over a number of CITI meetings. This Subcommittee included Mitch Creem, Glyn Davies, Rick Greenwood, and Gary Strong (and supported by both Craig Gill and Marsha Smith). The primary role was to assess the list of proposed projects and initiatives and provide recommendations for the prioritization and rationalization of IT investment requests for campus funds for FY 2007 - 11.

The subgroup reviewed the details of the UTIPP2 report and all other institutional projects and discussed how the investment requests should be evaluated and prioritized.  It has recommended an expedited but more structured process involving specific criteria and all of CITI based on a successful model currently in use in the Medical Center. Steve Olsen and Jim Davis concur with the recommendations and recommended new time frame for finalizing CITI recommendations by mid October 2007 but after accommodating certain projects or projects elements that need to go forward and can do so without implied commitment.

Steve and Jim have committed to the subcommittee’s recommendation for a more structured IT investment review and prioritization process on the use of Chancellor funds for campus IT initiatives. CITI is asked to endorse and commit to the Subcommittee’s process and schedule recommendations.

2.  Review prioritization framework and available funds - FY 2007-11 (Steve Olsen)

3.  List of Proposed Projects / Investment Requests (Steve Olsen)

4.  Proposed New IT Review Process (Glyn Davies)

Subcommittee Report and Recommendations                                                                                                                                      

5.  IT Investment Review and Approval Process (Jim Davis)