Kuali Coeus Implementation Steering Committee Meeting June 10, 2011

1. Kuali Coeus ImplementationSteering Committee MeetingJune 10, 2011

2. Agenda • Introductions • Background • KC Implementation plan • Current Status • The role of the Steering Committee • KC Demo • Questions

3. “Research Administration” (RA) • The necessary and enabling “non-scientific” activities required to conduct research • Successfully compete for, negotiate, and manage research projects • Provide compliance and support functions to ensure integrity and safety of research • Inform management decision making and planning • Deliver required government and regulatory agency reporting

4. Cornell’s Need for a RA System • Administrative burden on faculty at all-time high impeding ability to spend time on research • Processes performed manually or with disparate systems • Limited self-service – requires inefficient interactions with staff • Processing and information not designed to support researchers • Lack of meaningful and integrated data, and of intelligent workflow poses significant barrier to meeting compliance requirements • Higher education under growing scrutiny • Number, complexity of regulatory requirements continues to grow • Cornell must ensure the integrity of its research and protect the reputation of its faculty, students, and other researchers • Lack of information necessary to support researchers in meeting regulatory requirements • Gap in meaningful data for faculty and management • No modern workflow or process management tools

5. Best Available Solution • KualiCoeus • Built to meet needs of higher education • Cornell a founding development partner, Mellon Foundation Grant - $2.5M; now 10 university contributors • Based on proven MIT Coeus system currently used by 48 research institutions • Leverages Kuali Financial System (KFS) infrastructure • Built to interface with KFS which provides post-award financial management functionality • Sustainable business model using best of Coeus and KFS models

6. KC Provides • Single system and interface, automated workflow infrastructure • Reduce administrative burden for faculty and staff; improve processing and approval timelines • Functionality to support life cycle of research projects • Ability to monitor and manage regulatory compliance • Meet current and emerging regulations and federally mandated electronic processes • Greatly improved management information • Data delivered accurately and in a timely manner to support business decisions

7. Project Goals • Deliver an integrated research administration system that meets researcher and institutional needs • Work collaboratively with faculty to deliver a tool that works for them • Develop processes that increase efficiency and reduce administrative burden • Ensure an efficient and economical implementation

8. Project Scope • Functionality • Data Warehouse, Reporting • Custom and standard reporting for campus and central users • Interface to KFS to facilitate financial reporting

9. KC @ Cornell: Planned Implementation • Total budget estimated at this time: $11.96M • Capital budget $10.46M, Reallocated department staff $1.5M Five modules over six years • Generally follow KC development product releases • Phased Rollout of modules as they (and CU) are ready • Proposal and Budget Development scheduled for 2011 • Readiness Assessment & Discovery- Q1 through August 2011 • Pilot Go-live – Target Q4 2011

10. KC @ Cornell • BetterResearch Administration @ Cornell • Interconnected • Consistent • Streamlined • User friendly features • Enable compliance with policies/regulations • Reporting to enable decision making • Vanilla “out of the box” product • Meets critical needs common to all institutions • Development based on maximizing cost-benefit for all- consensus, compromise • Backed by the Foundation infrastructure • Core product documentation • Make KC & Cornell work together • Understand the Product • Functionality • User interfaces • Terminology • Assess Campus needs • Functionality • Workflow • Reporting • Training and Documentation • Develop solutions to meet campus needs

11. Project Team Project Sponsors Robert Buhrman Ted Dodds Cathy Long Steering Committee Faculty Advisory Council Andy Bass (Chair) Project Director Amita Verma Project Manager Christopher Lyons Functional Team Technical Team

12. Proposal and Budget development-before and after

13. Institutional Proposal and Awards -before and after 13

14. KC Implementation at Cornell Key Participants and Stakeholders • Faculty and other researchers • Associate Deans for Research • College and department research administrators • Directors and staff of OSP, ORIA, Research IT • Compliance committees (IRB, IACUC, IBC, FCOI) • Other Enterprise System executives (HR PS, Finance KFS, etc.) • Sponsored Funds Accounting • College and department IT • Other

15. KC Implementation Project- Principles Campus Engagement: • Engage Campus stakeholders from the beginning • Engage faculty early, seek advice and guidance • Listen, document, validate • Develop solutions collaboratively • Communicate: right message to the right people at the right time Product: • Configure product to meet reasonable campus needs • Enable and promote consistency in processes and reporting • No (or minimal) Customization of the core product • Integrate with KFS where needed • Develop and deliver timely, effective training and documentation

16. KC Implementation -Risks • Availability of technical resources • Ability to integrate to other enterprise systems when in flux • Ability to acquire campus resources in light of multiple enterprise projects • Ability to effectively and efficiently engage faculty • Ability to effectively configure KC for the Cornell campus • Implementing a successful post implementation dept/central staff support model • Part of KC success tied to KFS effectiveness of data/mgmt information delivery

17. First KC Implementation:Proposal and Budget Development A complete system solution for the collaborative development, automated review and limited online submission for proposal and budgets. Route for OSP review Develop the budget Submit to sponsor Develop the proposal Route for Internal review Web application Role based permissions and access Ability to track progress and status Links to external and internal resources

18. Project Status and immediate plans • Assessing campus and product “Readiness” • Does KC have the essential functionality to meet Cornell needs? • What is the overall solution- system, processes, workflow management, reporting? • What are the key processes on campus that KC must support, and which processes will need to change? • What is the minimum functionality needed for a pilot? • What is the project plan for the rest of the implementation? • Key activities • Engage campus stakeholders from most colleges engaged in sponsored research- processes, pain points, reporting needs, etc. • Benchmark with other KC implementing schools to learn from experiences- successes and difficulties • Learn the intricacies of system

19. Steering Committee (SC) • Provide guidance to the team in making the key decisions on the major issues and key project decisions that will impact the campus community, such as- • The overall objectives for the project • Project roll out strategy and timeline • Making the critical go-live decisions • Effective outreach, communications and training strategies • Decisions involving large expenditures • Partner with the project leadership in negotiating effective solutions to issues that have a potential to impede progress of the project • Serve as an ambassador for the KC project to the University administration and research communities • Meet approximately once a month, unless there is a critical project need

20. Kuali Coeus Tour

21. Menu

22. Proposal

23. Proposal Personnel

24. Narratives (Science)

25. Budget

26. Special Review

27. Workflow: Approval (Form 10)