1. IT Governance Committee on Business Technology December 9, 2010

2. Meeting Objectives  Introductions  Review overall IT Governance structure  Discuss roles of Steering Committee and Sub-committee  Charge of Committee  Review of membership  Review of subgroups  Discuss expectations and critical success factors  Discuss incorporating existing governance Committees 2

3. Components of IT Governance  Effective governance is critical to the cohesive management of enterprise information technology  IT governance is needed to:  monitor and adjust strategies  establish annual priorities  lead efforts to change culture and practice in concert with technology change  support continuous exploration of new developments in technology  IT governance organizes who has decision-making rights and coordination responsibility  There are three major components to IT Governance for the campus:  IT Governance Steering Committee  Committees on Research, Education and Business Applications and Technology and Architecture  Technology/application specific advisory groups 3

4. Components of IT Governance Steering Committee Committee on Research Technology Advisory Groups (e.g., Informatics ) Committee on Education Technology Advisory Groups (e.g., Support) Committee on Business Technology Advisory Groups (e.g., Financial) Project Committees Committee on Technology and Architecture Advisory Groups (e.g., Identity Management ) Project Committees Committee on Clinical Technology 4 Governance Advisory Align IT with Institutional Priorities Coordinate IT and Process Change Input Evaluate and recommend IT strategies

5. Core IT Governance Committees Proposed Roles  IT governance will be carried out by five standing committees  Proposed roles for the IT Governance Steering Committee and the Committee on Business Technology are included on the following pages 5 IT Governance Steering Committee (ITGSC) Chaired by Clay Johnston Meets monthly  Focus on all significant areas of information technology  Guide and advise senior-level IT decision-making for UCSF  Recommend annual investment priorities, policies and changes to IT services to Senior Executives (Jeff Bluestone and John Plotts)  With sub-Committees, solicit and prioritize project proposals for new innovations or uses of technology  Identify points of integration and potential collision between the sub-Committees

6. Proposed Roles, continued 6 Committee on Business Technology (CBT) Chaired by Anja Paardekooper Meets monthly  Focus on technology related to administrative services, campus operations and the effective use of data to support decision-making  Develop a consolidated vision and strategy for enterprise administrative applications  Recommend policy changes that impact the use of administrative technologies to the ITGSC  Identify emerging needs or potential administrative applications of new technology that are shared across UCSF  Form advisory groups, as needed  Evaluate input and advice received from IT advisory groups (e.g., HR, Finance, Research Admin, Student, Data Warehouse, Portals and CMS, Projects)  Recommend priorities for investment to the ITGSC  Sponsor initiatives to improve administrative efficiency and effectiveness through the use of technology

7. Business Application Landscape by Domain 7 In place:  Post award financials  CHR Underway:  PreAward Future possibilities:  COI  Study Management  Clinical Trial In place:  Core Financials  P2P Blackline (recon for balance sheet accounts)  ImageNow Underway:  New P2P (SciQuest)  COA redesign/ reimplementation  Budgeting Application  Financial Reports (PI portfolio) Future possibilities:  Blackline/ other tool for departmental reconciliation In place:  PPS  Advance Phase 1  HBS Underway:  PeopleSoft core HR  MPM  Advance Phase 2 Future possibilities:  PETs Current state: Weblinks, Ad Hoc, Data Warehouse for central users Implementations Underway: Business Intelligence, Expanded Data Warehouse, Financial and Operational Reports BI / REPORTING Research HRMS Financials

8. Discussion  What are the key issues/priorities that must be addressed by this Committee?  How will we collectively ensure the success of the Committee and IT Governance at UCSF?  What are your expectations for the types of issues and decisions that will be discussed by the TSC vs. the CBT?  What are expectations for individual contribution and participation of the Committee members?  How will we incorporate existing governance Committees and structures? 8

9. Next Steps  Develop monthly meeting schedule  Establish website and communications strategy for overall IT Governance  Next meeting January 2011 (exact date TBD) 9

10. Appendix I Roles of Other Committees 10

11. Proposed Roles, continued Committee on Educational Technology (CET) Chaired by Joseph Castro Meets monthly  Focus on technology related to teaching and learning  Develop and align educational technology vision and strategy with effective pedagogy, faculty interests and student expectations  Monitor and recommend strategies to sustain the technology in classroom and non-classroom based learning spaces  Advise on changes to technologies or services that impact teaching, learning and research  Form advisory groups, as needed  Evaluate input and advice received from IT advisory groups (e.g., Student Support, Classroom and online learning)  Recommend annual technology investment priorities to the ITGSC  Sponsor initiatives to expand the use of technology in education 11

12. Proposed Roles: Committee on Technology and Architecture Committee on Technology and Architecture (CTA) Chaired by Opinder Bawa Meets monthly  Focus on technology related to underlying IT architecture, support, security and policy  Develop a vision and strategy for architecture for full breadth of IT - applications, middleware and infrastructure  Provide technology support to the four other IT Governance Sub Groups – Education, Research, Clinical and Business Applications  Evaluate and recommend changes to IT policies  Recommend and Sponsor initiatives to improve efficiency, effectiveness and security of the UCSF IT architecture  Form advisory groups as needed; evaluate input and advice received from advisory groups  Recommend priorities for investment and identify opportunities for collaboration for campus IT to the ITGSC 12

13. Proposed Roles, continued 13 Committee on Research Technology (CRT) Chaired by Tom Ferrin Meets monthly  Develop and align vision and strategy for research technology with faculty interests  Focus on technology related to research (e.g. cyber infrastructure, informatics, data and curation, etc)  Identify emerging needs or potential research applications of new technology that are shared across UCSF  Form advisory groups, as needed  Evaluate input and advice received from IT advisory groups  Recommend priorities for investment to the ITGSC Advisory Groups  Specific advisory groups have been suggested to support each of the sub-committees (CRT, CET, CAT and CAS)  The role of each committee will be to confirm the chair, membership of the group, and to clarify and set expectations for their roles and responsibilities

14. Appendix II Example of Existing Governance Structure 14

15. Consolidated Budgeting System PI Portfolio Management and Financial Reporting and Budgeting Project MRBP Executive Oversight Group Proposed Members Chair: C. Hamilton A. Hawkins, M. Chrisman, E. Lium, S. Moore, A. Paardekooper, S. Schultz Ex-Officio: M. Fellouris, E. Harel, Z. Nelson Role Set program vision, strategy and direction Monitor status Resolve resource and priority conflicts Ensure appropriate integration of complementary projects Meeting Frequency Bimonthly shifting to quarterly MRBP Senior Steering Committee Proposed Members: Chen EVC TBD Forman Hamilton Hawkins Hildebrand-Zanki Ireland Kure Nelson Nordberg Paardekooper Panion Perry Rein H. Wong Role Define requirements Review and approve solution designs Set Implementation Strategies Identify and provide SME resources Meeting Frequency Monthly Other BSR will transition from the Link Steering Committee that oversees all implementations to this group Link will remain apprised of progress to provide campus holistic perspective across implementations particularly regarding change management COADW Reporting and Analytics Business Roadmap Infrastructure Roadmap SMEs for requirements and design workshops and Work Groups as needed Legend: Blue=underway; Purple=to start August 2010; White: to start upon completion of business roadmap