UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
PCG/13/22
PROJECT CO-ORDINATION GROUP
Minutes of the meeting held at 11.00 on Wednesday 24th April 2013 in Xfi Seminar B.
Present:
Ms L Tucker (Chair)
Mr P Beerling (Chair of the Academic Systems Group)
Dr Khurram Wadee (Chair of the Technical Infrastructure Group)
Ms R O’Neale (Head of IT Partnerships & Service Delivery, Academic
Services)
Mr N Burden (IT Programme Manager, Academic Services)
In attendance: Dr S Trowell (Research Systems Project Manager – attending for L Bridger)
Dr L Gould (Secretary)
Apologies:
Ms K Best (Chair of the Corporate Systems Group)
Dr L Bridger (representative of the Research Systems Programme Board)
Ms G Preston (Assistant Director, Strategic Change)
Action
13.12
Minutes of the Last Meeting
The minutes of the meeting held on 16th January 2013 (PCG/13/08) were
APPROVED.
13.13
Matters Arising
(a)
MINUTE 13.02(c): PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESOURCE
It was noted that Andy Spedding had been appointed as Project
Manager to work on the Identity and Access Management (IAM)
project. Nathan Burden, IT Programme Manager, had commenced
employment at the beginning of April 2013. The 0.5 fte post to work
on the Mobility programme had not yet been advertised. Sam Daly is
current taking a leave of absence. Paul Lightowlers is working on the
UEMS project in the intervening period, reporting directly to Ruth
O’Neale.
(b)
MINUTE 13.02(d): MOBILITY PROGRAMME PID –
PRIORITISATION OF VPN ON THE PROJECTS LIST
VPN had been prioritised and a PID would be considered at this
PCG meeting.
(c)
MINUTE 13.03(b)iii: PRE-AWARD SOLUTION
The project did not need to be entered on the RKT SIP as it would
be funded from the Research Systems Programme budget. The
decision regarding the choice of system had yet to be made, and
further work is being carried out on assessing the technical
requirements across the University. Any additional maintenance
charges would create pressure on the Academic Services budget
and require consideration.
Page 1 of 6
Action
(d)
MINUTE 13.05(d): STUDENT-FOCUSSED IT VISION FLYERS
The flyers had been widely circulated at key events such as offer
holder visit days, roadshows, etc. and also placed in various
buildings. Additional work on distribution is planned (action RO).
(e)
RO
MINUTE 13.06: REVISED TERMS OF REFERENCE
The revised Terms of Reference had been approved by the Group
and added to the website.
(f)
MINUTE 13.07(a)i: NETWORK RESILLIENCE AT ST LUKE’S PID
The PID had been approved by ICG on 07/02/13, and the project is
now in progress.
(g)
MINUTE 13.07(a)ii: RESNET PROJECT PID
It was noted that the budget figures in the PID had been updated.
The code for expenditure had not yet been set up and RO would
follow this up with Ian Toogood (action RO).
(h)
MINUTE 13.07(b): DATABASE SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PID
It was noted that the PID had been submitted to ICG for information
on 07/02/13, and had previously been approved by ICG via email on
17/12/12. The first phase for the hardware installation had been
completed, and installation of the remaining machines is underway.
13.14
Reports from the Information Systems Groups and Research
Systems Programme Board
(a) Oral updates from the most recent ISG meetings were provided. It was
noted that:
(i)
ASG
 A number of PIDs had been considered including MACE,
Mobility Programme and Library System. Following
discussion of the MACE PID, the document had been
updated to incorporate points raised at the meeting.
 The Group also received the Enterprise Applications
Enhancements 2013/14 report, and an update on the
Enterprise Applications Strategy which would be submitted
to the May 2013 meeting.
(ii)
CSG
 The meeting had been well attended. A DARO member
had now joined the group, and a new Campus Services
member will join from the next meeting (following Barry
Clark’s retirement).
 General updates on Aptos, Business Intelligence and inflight projects were received.
 The Exeter IT Governance Groups & Systems paper, and
the Enhancements Schedule were reviewed.
Page 2 of 6
RO



(iii)
Action
The on-line expenses end of project report was submitted
for discussion.
The CSG projects timeline was reviewed.
There were no major issues or actions arising.
TIG
 A large number of PIDs had been submitted to the Group
for consideration.
 The Voice Over WiFi PID had been rejected as this
proposal had since been superseded by developments in
technology.
The minutes of the ISG meetings were available to download from the
web at: http://as.exeter.ac.uk/divisions/exeterit/governance/approval/
(b) The group received the minutes from the Research Systems
Programme Board held on 14/02/13 (PCG/13/09), and an update on
the latest Research Systems developments. It was noted that:
(i)
The project costing tool is now live in CLES and is being rolled
out in CEMPS.
(ii) iPAC v2: extra features had been added following academic
feedback, and this system had now been embedded in CLES.
(iii) Equipment asset register: the logging of existing equipment was
now complete and searches could be carried out for existing
equipment before making additional purchases. Discussions were
underway regarding introducing levels of access to the system
depending on user requirements. The process of how the
database would be maintained (in terms of adding new
equipment, and deleting old equipment following disposal) is
currently being explored.
(iv) Pre-award solution: further work is required as detailed in minute
13.13(c).
(v) The commercial aspect of work currently being carried out with
Globus Solutions could also be applied to HPC use and other
areas where large datasets are involved. The Terms and
Conditions with Globus Solutions should be formulated in such a
way to allow for this flexibility (action ST).
13.15
ST
Information re Capital/Revenue Spend
Following on from the PRG exercise, it was noted that all projects to be
funded from the Infrastructure Strategy Fund (regardless of cost) now
require onwards submission to the Infrastructure Coordination Group
(ICG) for approval, for the time being. RO/LT would attend the next ICG
meeting (9th May 2013) to present the PIDs as detailed in minute 13.16
(action RO/LT).
Clarification on the differences between capital and revenue funding was
provided. For the purposes of identifying the source of funding, in the past
Page 3 of 6
RO/LT
Action
‘capital’ has been used to describe those projects funded from the
Infrastructure Strategy (IS) Fund, whilst ‘revenue’ has been used to
describe those projects funded from recurrent departmental budgets.
However, it was noted that the IS Fund can be used for projects that are
denoted as capital or revenue expenditure.
Finance have advised that a project can be classified as a capital project
when one of the following characteristics is associated with it:
 Over £25k and lasting longer than one year.
 Adding value to an existing asset.
 Prolonging the life of an existing asset.
It was agreed that there were certain grey areas that would need further
clarification, in particular whether a managed service could be considered
an asset.
13.16
Project Initiation Documents (PIDs)
(a) The Group considered the PIDs for the following projects:
(i)
Research Network Infrastructure PID (PCG/13/10). It was noted
that this PID focuses on the core infrastructure required to
enhance network provision to 10GB for research purposes. The
project is being proposed in tandem with enhancements to ‘the
edge’ infrastructure which would be funded by re-purposing
budget from the Exenet project. A Revised Request for Authority
(RRFA) is being considered by ICG on 9th May 2013 for the repurposing of Exenet monies. The Group agreed that this project is
important for academic purposes. However, it was decided to
await the outcome of the consideration of the RRFA by ICG, prior
to making a decision on how best to proceed with this PID.
(ii) Cloud Programme: Applications in the Cloud PID (PCG/13/11). It
was noted that:
 If approved, the new service for students should be in place
for the new student intake in September 2013.
 A staged introduction for staff is anticipated, and more
consultation would need to be carried out prior to the
introduction of this service.
 The service for students would be free and would include
email, office applications, file sharing and storage. An
enhanced service for staff would be provided which would
involve additional cost.
 Data would be stored within the EU and standard terms and
conditions with Microsoft had been negotiated by JaNET.
 RO would revise the costs in the PID to show the two options:
1. students only; 2. staff and students together. RO also to
include the savings resulting from not having to carry out a
refresh of the email infrastructure (action RO).
 The Group agreed to submit the revised PID to ICG for
approval.
(iii) Windows 7 PID (PCG/13/12). It was noted that this is a revenue
Page 4 of 6
RO
Action
project to be funded from the Exeter IT recurrent budget. RO
would discuss updating the finance section in the PID with
Carolyn Jarvis, so that it accurately reflects the source of funding,
and then circulate the revised PID to PCG (action RO).
Submission to ICG is not required, therefore PCG approved the
PID.
RO
(iv) Mobility Programme: Content (PCG/13/13). The Group agreed to
submit the PID to ICG for approval.
(v) Mobility Programme: Infrastructure (PCG/13/14). RO to discuss
with Roger Snelling whether the costs can be brought together in
one year, rather than being spread over three years (action RO).
The Group agreed to submit the PID to ICG for approval.
(vi) Library Management System (LMS) Replacement PID
(PCG/13/15) and the LMS Project Timeline (PCG/13/15a). The
Group agreed to defer this project, so that the details can be
reviewed.
(vii) Review of Module and Course Evaluation (MACE) PID
(PCG/13/16). It was noted that:
 This project had been flagged up by audits and is closely
linked to the NSS.
 The new system is designed to provide real-time feedback,
targeted questions for different modules, and overall end of
year feedback for students.
 The proposal for the new system had been generated from
the working group which examined survey overload for
students, with the intention that the new system would replace
some of the other surveys already being undertaken.
 Real-time feedback would prove advantageous for current
students who would then benefit from any improvements
made as a result.
 A large amount of work is being carried out with academic
staff to address the project risks that have been identified.
The Unions and Guild have also been involved.
 The Group agreed to submit the PID to ICG for approval.
(viii) Academic Expertise Database PID (PCG/13/17). It was noted
that:
 This is a capital project to be funded from the Research
Systems budget.
 The group confirmed that the project should be categorised as
‘B’ priority project, as already detailed in the PID.
 An additional £20k from external sources had been secured to
fund the project. The project will involve relatively small
expenditure and produce considerable benefits.
 The project has widespread academic support and is being
driven by Professor Tim Lenton and the Sustainability
academic group.
 The database will gather information from a number of
sources, including personal web pages for academic staff. It is
therefore anticipated that the project will provide an incentive
Page 5 of 6
RO
Action
for academic staff to regularly update their profiles, once this
information becomes more widely available via the database.
 PCG approved the project.
(ix) Enhancing Computer Aided Assessment PID (PCG/13/18). It was
noted that:
 Costings were yet to be finalised and there was currently no
comparison of costs depending on whether or not a hosted
solution would be used.
 The project would include additional licences, expansion of
the infrastructure, integration of ELE and SITS, staff training
and development and the purchase of additional laptops.
 The timing of the project may need to be examined as an
upgrade to ELE is planned for June/July, so this may impact
on the availability of staffing resources (action Matt
Newcombe).
 The sentence in ‘Business Need’ that reads “The increase in
the use of online assessments....” should be amended to read
“The increase in the use of online assessment as referenced
in the College planning process....” (action Matt Newcombe).
 The Group agreed to submit the PID to ICG for approval.
(b) It was noted that the Online Recurring Card Payments for Students
and One Payment Gateway PID was circulated to PCG via email and
approved on 22/03/13. The PO had been raised with WPM who were
on site on 23/04/13 for project initiation. It was agreed that NB would
add this project to the SPTF spreadsheet (action NB).
Part 2: For Information
13.17
Schedules
The group received the SPTF projects schedule (PCG/13/19).
13.18
2012/13 Project Approval
The Group received the 2012/13 project approval table (PCG/13/20).
13.19
Completed Projects
The Group received the list of projects completed in this academic year
(PCG/13/21).
13.20
Next Meeting
The next meeting of the Group would be held on 18th July 2013, 10.00 –
12.00, XFi Seminar B.
Page 6 of 6
MN
MN
NB