3A Shields Building
University Park, PA 16802
Phone: 814-863-7342
Fax: 814-865-3504
Administrative Information Services
A unit of Information Technology Services
AIS Project Charter
Template V.11
Project Name:
Matching process improvement
Person Submitting Charter:
Kathy Plavko
Phone:
863-8907
Sponsor(s):
Rob Pangborn
Priority Category:
External Tactical
Email ID:
kjp1@psu.edu
Stakeholders:
Term, Abbreviation or Acronym
Definition
AIS
Priority Category
Administrative Information Services (the organization)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
External Strategic Projects: multi-year, multi-unit, funded
Internal Strategic Projects: infrastructure, possibly funded, 40 hr
min
General Projects: Multi-AIS dept., possible external
participation, 40 hr min
External Tactical: Task oriented, involves non-AIS personnel
(20-40 hrs)
Internal Tactical: Task oriented, multi-AIS dept. (20-40 hrs)
Business Need and Project Goals/Outcome
To dramatically reduce the number of mis-matched and un-matched records that occur when adding new
records (and creating new PSU IDs) to central business and student systems. Various offices spend 100s
of hrs per week resolving records.
To implement a select list of process improvements identified in Item #1 by the CIDR Match Process
Review Committee report which is attached. Other items in the report will be dealt with as separate
projects. The sub-committee can present these findings to the study team identified for this project. They
are: Chris Brown and Vince Timbers.
This is a set of tactical activities needed in a short term to reduce risk associated with mis-matches. It
may be replaced later by identity access management project work impacting University strategies in this
area.
Administrative Information Services
A unit of Information Technology Services
3A Shields Building
University Park, PA 16802
Phone: 814-863-7342
Fax: 814-865-3504
Time Constraints
There are a few big load times during the year; prospect load in February, applicants Nov, Dec, SAT load
Nov, Dec, spring there are larger loads.
This implementation does not have a specific business cycle date tied to it. The committee might be able
to identify specific measures that would improve the larger loads. In item D the committee might need to
add detail.
Alternative Solutions Considered with Costs
(If known – includes outsourcing or off-the-shelf solutions)
What will happen if it is not done?
We anticipate that without this project, there will be unmanageable growth in un-matched and mismatched records. The workload will not be acceptable.
Number of Users Affected:
??
Clear Benefits to the Users
1. Fewer students experiencing interruption in their services.
2. Less risk to the University due to possible litigation.
3. Less risk of privacy issues as a result of mis-matches.
4. Significant staff time savings currently spent resolving matching issues. Below is a summary of
time spent now in offices dealing with duplicate PSU IDs which indicates that there is more than 1
FTE of resource time to be saved.
Registrar’s Office:
As an average throughout the year, our staff spends approximately five (5) hours a week on
duplicate PSU ID issues. There are certain times throughout a semester that there is more time
spent than other times through the semester.
Administrative Information Services
A unit of Information Technology Services
3A Shields Building
University Park, PA 16802
Phone: 814-863-7342
Fax: 814-865-3504
Undergraduate Admissions:
Spends around 30 hours a week working on duplicate records.
Outreach:
Our office currently spends an average of around 7 hours per week. We also have staff that
dedicate each day to review this work. That average number may increase during busy
enrollment periods, so may not be reflective of week-to-week or daily activity during those busy
times.
Graduate School:
There is one full-time worker who devotes six hours every day (i.e. 30 hours per week) to
examining and matching records. In addition to this staff person, another full-time worker
devotes anywhere from 30 minutes to three hours a day to merging records and sending
information to Larry Yingling in AIS. The fluctuation in her time is in relation to where we are in
the admission cycle. December, January and February are the busiest months because of the
number of applications and test scores being received.
Bursar:
Approximately 1.5 hours per week.
Administrative Information Services:
One FTE (40 hours/week) devoted exclusively to resolving duplicate PSU IDs
Project Assumptions
1. The Dataflex Intelliserver software will be used through at least June 2009.
2. We will continue using the same general matching approach.
3. The practices implemented in CIDR should be made available to the IAM group or others who
need to know the best practice.
3A Shields Building
University Park, PA 16802
Phone: 814-863-7342
Fax: 814-865-3504
Administrative Information Services
A unit of Information Technology Services
Project Leader / Manager:
(If already known)
Study Team members: Recognized specialist, Sara Conkling
*Approval Gate: AIS Management Team and the AIS PMO
Document Revision Log
Created/Modified By
K. Plavko
K. Plavko
Reason
As a result of meeting
with stakeholders.
Added information
Dawn Boyer provided
about time spent
resolving duplicate
PSU IDs now.
Date
11/1/08
Version
11/5/08
2
1
Attachment: CIDR Match Process Review Committee Report
Committee Goals:
The committee reviewed the process CIDR uses to match incoming records to existing
records. The objective was to identify process improvements that would decrease the
creation of duplicate records, decrease the number of incorrect matches, and identify
potential duplicates at the time of PSU ID creation.
Committee Members:
Tom Alterio, Masume Assaf, Scott Bitner, Chris Brown, Sara Conkling, Tillie Convery,
Carol Findley, Laura Garver, Mike Hartman, Sharon Howell, Amy Pancoast, Vince
Timbers, Jimmy Vuccolo
Recommendations:
Recommendations requiring the least resources for implementation and the highest return on
investment are listed first. It is important to note that many of the recommendations are
Administrative Information Services
A unit of Information Technology Services
3A Shields Building
University Park, PA 16802
Phone: 814-863-7342
Fax: 814-865-3504
mutually exclusive, require different resources for implementation and could be implemented
concurrently.
1. Enhancements to existing matching logic
a. Reject match if there is an SSN mismatch
Incoming record has SSN  no matching SSN found  logic then evaluates
Name/Address matching  if rank of match is high enough that incoming record
matches to existing record with a different SSN.
 Should reject on SSN mismatch and display on error report 
b. Enhance birth date match – do not ignore IBIS DOB, force partial match check
(month and day).
c. Secondary check on gender, suffix, prefix, middle initial
Perform secondary check on middle initial/suffix/prefix of incoming record and
existing record  if both contain middle initial/suffix/prefix  reject if not equal.
d. Review ranking logic
After matching data elements have been finalized, review the Match Logic
Ranking grids and recommend changes to scoring.
e. Add PSU ID match like SSN match
The PSU ID should be collected and used as a matching criteria the same as the
SSN is used  if a match  check for name match and reject if different check
for birth date full/partial match and reject if different.
f.
Add Digital ID match like SSN match
The Digital ID should be collected and used as a matching criteria the same as
the SSN is used  if a match  check for name match and reject if different 
check for birth date full/partial match and reject if different.
g. Create and monitor potential duplicate reports
Administrative Information Services
A unit of Information Technology Services
3A Shields Building
University Park, PA 16802
Phone: 814-863-7342
Fax: 814-865-3504
Create new eDDS reports for each area that identify rejected matches that may
actually be good matches. Scenarios A, B, and C above are good examples.
Other examples would be when SSN, PSU ID or Digital ID matches are rejected
for Name or DOB mismatch. Evaluate why matches are not occurring and make
modifications to Matching Logic accordingly.
2. Update CIDR affiliate data from affiliate systems (FPS, …)
3. Ensure that records merged in CIDR are merged in other
systems (FPS).
4. Update match code software
Evaluate the potential improvement from latest software, recommend implementation
and annual maintenance/upgrades.
5. Investigate use of international match codes
The current matching software does not include any specialized components for
matching international information. Evaluate the potential of international matching logic
components and recommend implementation.
6. Add data elements to CIDR and matching process
a. Mailing address (possibly other addresses)
b. Email address
c. Name history
7. Address validation/standardization
Standardize address collection and update by implementing Generalized Interface
Services that will standardize the address information. Also, validation of the zip code
matching the city and state should be implemented.
8.
Review practice of removing addresses from ISIS (and CIDR) for
USPS returns