It consolidation study @ csu status report april 15 2011
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 32

IT Consolidation Study @ CSU Status Report – April 15, 2011 PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

IT Consolidation Study @ CSU Status Report – April 15, 2011. P. Burns , B. Carney, D. Carpenter, J. Folkestad , T. Hadley, A. Horn, E. Peyronnin, R. Scott, and S. Wolvington . Agenda. Background & Benefits Approach Challenges Areas of Study Consolidation Opportunities

Download Presentation

IT Consolidation Study @ CSU Status Report – April 15, 2011

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

IT Consolidation Study @ CSUStatus Report – April 15, 2011

P. Burns, B. Carney, D. Carpenter, J. Folkestad, T. Hadley, A. Horn, E. Peyronnin, R. Scott, and S. Wolvington


  • Background & Benefits

  • Approach

  • Challenges

  • Areas of Study

  • Consolidation Opportunities

  • Next Steps

IT Consolidation

Background and Benefits

  • Began when we were planning for significant budget cuts, motivating a desire to retain faculty positions

  • We expect, and other institutions are reporting:

    • Substantial cost savings

    • Freeing up of departmental IT staff to focus on unique, discipline-specific needs, e.g. instructional technology, faculty support, research support, etc.

    • Reduced risk

    • Better customer service

IT Consolidation


  • Engage via RFP an objective entity for analysis

    • Enter Adams-Gabbert, November, 2010

    • Exit Adams-Gabbert one week later

  • Per Provost, continue analysis internally using:

    • Information gathered by campus for AG analysis

    • Huron Consulting report (Purchasing, 2010)

    • Facilities Management report on server rooms

  • Report due to Provost March 15, 2011

    • A “framework for discussion”

IT Consolidation

If at first you don’t succeed…

IT Consolidation

Committee Members

  • Pat Burns (VPIT), co-chair

  • Bryan Carney (Director, University Advancement)

  • Dave Carpenter (IT Director, CAHS)

  • Jim Folkestad (Faculty, CAHS)

  • Thom Hadley (Director, CVMBS)

  • Allison Horn (Director, Internal Auditing), co-chair

  • Ed Peyronnin (IT Director, CAS)

  • Rusty Scott (Assoc. Director, ACNS)

  • Stephanie Wolvington (Internal Auditing)

IT Consolidation

Inherent Challenges

  • The departmental view:

    • Loss of control, flexibility, agility

  • Level of trust in central IT varies across campus

  • Can central IT ‘ramp up’ to support a higher level of consolidated services?

IT Consolidation

Areas of Study for Possible Consolidation

  • Data Center & Associated Hardware

  • Applications and Licensing

  • Web Design and Programming

  • Identity and Access Management

  • Purchasing

  • Helpdesk & Desktop Support

  • Networking and Networking Support

IT Consolidation

Building a Framework for Discussion

  • Theme: “Simplify the IT environment”

  • Consider savings, benefits, and risks at varying levels of consolidation for each area:

    • Tight and/or tighter collaboration

    • Hybrid approach, some consolidation

    • Complete consolidation

IT Consolidation

Narrowing the Scope

  • Considering savings, value & risk to campus:

    • Data Center & Associated Hardware

    • Applications and Licensing

    • Web Design and Programming

    • Identity and Access Management

    • Purchasing

    • Helpdesk & Desktop Support

    • Networking and Networking Support

IT Consolidation

Data Center and Associated HardwareBackground

  • Dozens of server rooms exist on campus today

  • Although there are a few excellent server rooms, the environment for most systems would improve by accommodating them in the main Data Center.

  • Consolidation would take advantage of

    • Central access controls, security, monitoring

    • Environmental controls (backup power, cooling)

    • High speed connectivity

IT Consolidation

Data Center and Associated HardwareTight Collaboration

  • Relocate hardware ‘as is’ to central data center

  • Benefits

    • Better overall control of physical environment

    • Recovery of space & facilities costs

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Need adequate disaster recovery facility as well

    • Insufficient space in central data center

  • Savings

    • Primarily facilities costs (cooling, power, etc.)

    • Projected at $200K/year

IT Consolidation

Data Center and Associated HardwareHybrid Approach

  • Migrate servers to central, virtualized environment

  • Benefits

    • Same as ‘collaboration’ option, plus:

    • Very scalable (and greener!)

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Same as ‘collaboration’ option

  • Savings

    • Facilities costs, hardware economies of scale, staff efficiency

    • At 75% of servers, up to $700K/year

    • Requires initial investment of $110K?

IT Consolidation

Data Center and Associated HardwareComplete Consolidation

  • Migrate servers and storage to central data center

  • Benefits

    • Same as hybrid model, plus

    • Simplification of environment for users

    • Collaborative spaces, compliance for researchers

  • Risks

    • Storage: ‘Eggs in one basket’, albeit a good basket

  • Savings

    • Additional economies from storage

    • Up to $780K/year

IT Consolidation

Data Center and Associated HardwareObservations

  • Some server rooms on campus are very robust

  • Complete consolidation is inadvisable

    • For reasons of backup and disaster recovery

    • Units with well established, efficient data centers could use central facilities for backup and DR

  • With some initial investment, substantial improvements & savings are possible

IT Consolidation

Identity and Access Management (IAM) Background

  • Managing electronic identities and access to resources; an administrative simplification

  • Centrally, this is ‘eID’

  • This has been an ongoing area of study

  • Campus has identified gaps in our IAM profile:

    • Some users need multiple systems to conduct campus business

    • eID does authentication, not authorization

    • Need better support for external constituents

    • Increased need for federated logins

    • Support for Levels of Assurance (LoA)

IT Consolidation

IAMTight Collaboration

  • Communications campaign

    • Minimize confusion regarding multiple credentials

    • Assist in leveraging eID (CVMBS model)

  • Benefits

    • Some simplification, less confusion & frustration

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Does not address the problem of multiple credentials

    • Does not provide authorization services

  • Savings

    • Efficiency of users

    • Hard to quantify, but considered low

IT Consolidation

IAMHybrid Approach

  • Consolidate authentication

  • Extend existing IAM to include distributed authorization

  • Benefits

    • Simplifies environment with single credential

    • Extends functionality for provisioning services

    • Minimize (or eliminate) child domain confusion

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Normalization of rules & processes across campus

  • Savings

    • Efficiency of users and IT staff

    • Hard to quantify, but considered MUCH higher

    • Substantial effort to implement (personnel)

IT Consolidation

IAMComplete Consolidation

  • Consolidate systems, operations and staffing related to IAM

  • Benefits

    • Same as hybrid, plus;

    • Facilitates more consistent operations

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Same as hybrid, plus;

    • Lack of agility and responsiveness to user’s needs

  • Savings

    • Same as hybrid approach with incremental added efficiencies for IT staff

IT Consolidation

Identity and Access Management (IAM) Observations

  • Making real headway in IAM will require initial investments in the areas of:

    • Aligning processes and policy space

    • Developing a mechanism for authorization

  • However, this is considered to be highly important as a simplifying, ‘enabling’ technology improving efficiency, privacy, and security

IT Consolidation

Purchasing Background

  • Scope of analysis; Windows-based desktops and laptops

  • Currently ‘distributed’ with some ad hoc aggregation efforts

  • CSU has contracts with multiple vendors

    • $5M+ annual spend on desktops & laptops

    • 80% is for standard/administrative models

IT Consolidation

PurchasingTight Collaboration

  • Coordinated group purchases for admin. computers & ‘zero clients’

  • Benefits

    • Group purchasing has greater efficiencies

      • simplifies purchasing processes

      • standardizes systems and support

      • achieve additional quantity discounts.

    • Zero clients are

      • Cheaper than thin or thick clients

      • Less effort to manage

      • Less susceptible to technical obsolescence

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Difficult to implement

    • Video and software licensing an issue with zero clients

  • Savings

    • Approximately $400K/year

IT Consolidation

PurchasingHybrid Approach

  • Strategic business alliance with single vendor (SBA RFP)

  • Benefits

    • Even greater efficiencies for purchasing and technical support

    • Scholarship & internship potential

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Need a liberal exemption process for faculty, research, …

    • Specific product line issues could be significant

    • Service and support issues need to be considered and specifically addressed

  • Savings

    • Approximately $700K/year

IT Consolidation

PurchasingComplete Consolidation

  • Centralize ALL purchases, likely within Purchasing dept.

  • Benefits

    • Single point of purchases

    • Simplify purchasing

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Inflexible. Won’t respond to user needs.

    • Enforcement may be impossible

  • Savings

    • Approximately $700K/year (?)

IT Consolidation

Purchasing Observations

  • Of all of the consolidation opportunities, likely the best hope for short-term savings

    • And the savings are substantial!

  • The easiest to implement

IT Consolidation

Networking and Networking SupportBackground

  • ACNS currently responsible for:

    • Our connections to the ‘outside world’

    • Campus fiber & copper (wire) infrastructure

    • ‘Core’ network switches

      • Building and distribution switches are the responsibility of distributed IT staff

      • However, many are centrally operated and managed

    • Life and safety devices attached to the network

    • Wireless network

  • Network dependency on the rise

    • Life and safety devices

    • VoIP!

IT Consolidation

Networking & Networking SupportTight Collaboration

  • Formalize/enforce network operations, distributed management continues

  • Benefits

    • Improves network availability

    • Clarification of responsibilities

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Additional effort to communicate/coordinate/train requires FTE

    • Complexity of distributed model hampers management of life and safety devices, VoIP

  • Savings

    • Very low in $

IT Consolidation

Networking & Networking SupportHybrid Approach

  • Single unit responsible for switch operations

    • Non-central staff continue to make some changes in closets

      • Rapid response time

    • Central management is responsible for switch operation/mgmt.

  • Benefits

    • Improves network availability (‘hardens’ the network)

    • Increases effectiveness and efficiency of network operation

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Some inconsistencies may persist

  • Savings

    • Efficiency savings, considerably higher than ‘collaboration’ and , may significantly reduce liability risk

IT Consolidation

Networking & Networking SupportComplete Consolidation

  • Single unit responsible for switch operations including connections to the end user

  • Benefits

    • Greatest possible network availability

  • Risks & Constraints

    • Slow response time during high activity

    • Telecom -> Networking staff reallocation required

  • Savings

    • Departmental staff are freed up from network responsibility

IT Consolidation

Networking and Networking SupportObservations

  • As our dependency on the network grows

    • ‘Hardening’ becomes critical

    • We must move to a more effective and efficient operational model

    • Should also explore models for funding edge switch replacement from the monthly telephone chargeback as we deploy unified communications via VoIP

IT Consolidation

Final Thoughts

  • Areas of additional savings and greater efficiencies should be explored:

    • Consolidating in house or outsourcing faculty & staff email

    • Outsourcing basic services, including virtual platforms

    • Centrally supporting open source, dynamic web services (LAMP infrastructure)

    • New models for delivering next gen telephony

IT Consolidation

Feedback Solicited

  • Data Center & Associated Hardware

  • Identity and Access Management

  • Purchasing

  • Networking and Networking Support

IT Consolidation

  • Login