Review of Information Technology Expenditure Summary 16 November 2011 Dr John Hogan Registrar
Recap on scope The objective of the review was to recommend ways to improve the University s value for money over Information Technology (IT) expenditure. The University identified the following areas as being in scope of the review: Review IT expenditure and benchmark this against other universities; Consider the options for how each major element of IT could be performed; Identify areas for cost reduction where little or no detriment to service may result in improved ways of working; Review the IT strategy to identify potential areas for improvement; Review the approach undertaking to social media and mobile computing; Review the use of cloud, data storage, outsourcing and the approach to sustainable IT; and Review IT procurement.
Recap on scope cont d ISS, the Library, Schools and Institutes were reviewed, therefore this included technologies such as SAP, NESS, Blackboard and MyProjects. Items excluded from the review included University printing and research on computing.
Review of IT Expenditure KPMG approach involved understanding how technology is used and delivered across the University, including ISS, the Library, Schools and Institutes. Perform IT maturity assessment Understand IT effectiveness Understand and benchmark IT costs Understand the use of technology Reporting
Review of IT Expenditure Summary of Findings Key findings from the review are: Strengths Weaknesses Stable and scalable ISS provided core infrastructure. Examples of IT being used as an enabler to support effective teaching, learning and research. Skills and capabilities of some staff across ISS, the Library, Schools and Institutes. Examples of local responsive service delivery within Schools and Institutes. Examples of using outsourcing to deliver improved technology and services to staff and students. The approach to IT service delivery is incurring unnecessary cost and does not represent good value for money. Inconsistent service delivery. Low IT maturity across the University is reducing the overall effectiveness of IT to support: - learning and teaching; and - research. The current approach to IT service delivery is exposing the University to significant operational, financial and legislative risk.
The Good The core University infrastructure that is provided by ISS is determined as being fit for purpose and has 99.85% uptime. This is unique amongst the large number of other universities KPMG work with and should be further exploited through continued investment. Effective IT service delivery model is being used by the Schools, Institutes and the Library, however with weak governance arrangements.
The Not So Good NSS Q17 feedback scores have declined from 92% in 2006 to 82% in 2011. NSS feedback identifying that the student IT experience is inconsistent. Students unable to obtain a financial statement from SAP. Spend on IT is low at 4.3% of total expenditure. Single points of failure within academic units due to resourcing arrangements Computing Officers are waiting 3 days for a response to calls logged with the ISS Service
The Not So Good cont d Only 19% of ISS research data storage capacity is currently used, however a schools/institutes are contracting with third parties to provide similar services. University intellectual property rights are at risk (e.g. storage with Google and Amazon). Reduced research focused activity (research staff are involved in delivering IT systems and services). Research staff are unable to access key SAP research budgeting reports. Data is not always backed up, confidential data not fully protected. Research grants may be withdrawn or lost due to the data storage and curation arrangements.
The Not So Good cont d Over 422 unsecured entry points exist to the University network. 18 server rooms exist across the University. Staff and student data security is being compromised (e.g. third party drop box software and non-eu processing of data). Aged School hardware is causing interruptions to learning and teaching (e.g. 7054 desktops have no replacement cycle, 180 servers are over 4 years old and 42% of all laptops are out of support). Duplicated systems are established, including service desks, content management and other systems.
The Not So Good cont d Significant price purchase variances (e.g. a laptop was purchased by one School at 1,317, whilst another identical laptop was purchased at 640). 23 different types of desktop build were purchased during 2010/11 and are now required to be supported and maintained. Key University systems not working as expected. Systems lack robust testing and are being developed in programming languages that are difficult to support and maintain.
And the physically unattractive An example of why IT maturity needs to improve:
Key recommendations The recommendations address the University wide use and provision of IT, not just that provided by ISS. They should not be considered in isolation and strong dependencies exist between each. 1. Establish a common University infrastructure Undertake a discovery phase to understand and agree the requirements of the infrastructure with each Faculty, ISS and the Library. Migrate servers and data storage responsibility to the new Newcastle University IT team (NU-IT). Establish and agree the IT disaster recovery arrangements that will be based on the University business impact assessment.
Key recommendations cont d 2. Rationalise the IT staff model Establish a NU-IT organisational model, including a number of important new roles such as Faculty relationship managers and an enterprise architect who is able to link the University objectives and processes to the IT strategy. Transition University wide IT staff to an NU-IT reporting line, however IT staff who support local academic systems could continue to be based locally. This should not include the transition of staff who support specialist equipment (e.g. microscopes and specialist scanners
Key recommendations cont d 3. Professionalise service management The University should continue to implement a service management framework, however this should ensure that appropriate consideration is given to key service processes, including incident, event, service catalogue, service level, configuration, release and change management. New technologies should be considered and implemented. This should include remote assistance and increasing self service for staff and students
Key recommendations cont d 4. Develop a University wide IT strategy and governance model Agree an Executive Board member and develop a University wide IT strategy through detailed discussions with each Faculty, ISS and the Library. Provide a clear mandate and supporting budget for NU-IT, by clarifying the type of IT services that they should provide to the University. Develop an overall understanding of the University wide systems and how these support University activities. Develop a high level architecture vision and a supporting set of standards that should be adhered to by all. Strengthen the existing governance arrangements and establish a Change Control Board that is able to support SISG and effectively prioritise NU-IT effort in the future.
Key recommendations cont d 5. Realise IT procurement efficiencies Short to long term activities will include regularly consulting with each Faculty, ISS and the Library to agree a standardised list of IT hardware that is fit for purpose (e.g. Apple ipads and laptops), however allowing variation with justification. The University IT procurement policy should be enforced.
Timescales 5 key recommendations and a number of other important recommendations. They will need strong Executive Board level sponsorship to implement successfully. Work programme 0 Establish programme governance 1 Establish a common University infrastructure 2 Rationalise the IT staff model 3 Professionalise service management 4 Develop a University wide IT strategy and governance model 5 Realise IT procurement efficiencies 6 - Other recommendatio ns 0 to 6 months 6 to 12 months 12 to 18 months Establish Steering Group and programme of work Implement service management processes Strengthen University governance Implement change management Infrastructur e Discovery Phase Establish programme of work and quick wins Establish IT disaster recovery Migrate the IT infrastructure Establish organisationa l model Establish relationship managers IT strategy, framework and architecture development Appoint enterprise architect 18 to 24 months 24 to 36 months Revised roles and phased transition of IT staff Implement new service desk software and remote solutions Medium to long term efficiency activities Project and programme management Information security Ongoing programme governance and assurance IT strategy update Continue with tactical business projects / maintain architecture SAP management / green IT / cloud computing / social media and mobile computing 36 to 42 months Update and maintain infrastructure and IT disaster recovery IT procurement strategy update IT strategy update IT procurement strategy update 42 to 48 months
Cost Review of IT Expenditure IT maturity will make the University's approach to IT more professional. Over a period of time it will release resources from day-to-day activities to support the strategic and tactical initiatives of the University, thereby enhancing the value that IT is perceived to be delivering, and is actually delivering to the University. 2 - Quick wins will deliver early improvements and savings (e.g. IT procurement and infrastructure). 1 - Historically, running effort and costs are growing at the expense of new projects that could enhance teaching, learning and research. 3 IT maturity will initially eat into transformational change investment (i.e. new projects). 4 - As IT maturity takes hold, longer term benefits and savings will be realised. Review of IT Expenditure 5 - Total effort of delivering transformational change will reduce as a result of IT maturity. 6 - The outcome is a University IT service and investment that is focused far more on transformational change, whilst reducing operational risk and increasing effectiveness. Current Implementation of recommendations Future Costs to keep the lights on Costs to improve IT maturity Costs of delivering transformational change (i.e. new projects)
How much? The spend on University IT during 2010/11 was 16.4m. This presents 4.3% of total University expenditure. External benchmark data identifies that the wider education sector spend is between 4.8% to 8%. The analysis identified that the University spent 16.4m on IT during 2010/11. Cost type Information Systems and Services ( ) Medical Sciences ( ) Science, Agriculture and Engineering ( ) Humanities and Social Sciences ( ) Central Departments ( ) Total ( ) Hardware (e.g. desktops, servers, handhelds) 1,518k 570k 1,175k 397k 250k 3,910k Software (e.g. licenses and media) 1,305k 170k 190k 100k 60k 1,826k Third party services (e.g. consultants and contractors) 588k 178k 46k 27k 0k 839k Staff pay costs (University staff only) 5,761k 1,437k 998k 710k 900k 9,806k Total 9,172k 2,354k 2,409k 1,234k 1,211k 16,381k Figure 15 Total 2010/11 IT Spend Breakdown: Spend by University area and cost type. 56% 14% 8% 15% Medical Sciences Humanities and Social Sciences Science, Agriculture and Engineering Central Services 7% ISS Figure 17 Total 2010/11 IT Spend Breakdown: Spend by University area.
How many? The University wide spend on IT staff in 2010/11 was 9.8m. University IT staff costs as a percentage of total IT expenditure is high. ISS staff costs are 63% of the total ISS IT expenditure and the wider University cost is 56% The Gartner 2010 education sector benchmark is 51.3%. But there is no recommendation to reduce staff numbers just change the way we work. This is due to the current IT service delivery model that is established across the University, the overall low maturity of University processes, duplication of activities and the investment that has been made to develop and support a number of IT systems inhouse, including SAP. IT is provided using a devolved model across the University, including staff from across Schools, Institutes, the Library, Finance and ISS being responsible. 142 ISS Full Time Employees (FTEs) and 118 FTEs across the wider University are responsible for IT. 998k (25 FTE) 900k (27 FTE) Medical Sciences Humanities and Social Sciences 710k (23 FTE) 6,661k 5,761k (142 FTE) Science, Agriculture and Engineering Central Services 1,437k (43 FTE) ISS Figure 25 2010/11 IT Spend Breakdown: Staff costs by University area with non Faculty IT spend exploded (inc. FTE figures)
Questions? Yes, lots of them but the answers will take sometime to evolve. It is essential that we act as a joined-up organisation one university.