Chair: Ranell Holmes
Present: Joseph Bielanski, Joyce Brown-Willis, Adela Esquivel-Swinson, Calvin Madlock.
|Agenda Item||Discussion||Follow-up Action||Decisions|
New members were introduced to the PRT team;
Fathia Mohamed, Linda Sanford, and Tom Wong
|Review Agenda from January 22, 2015
|Agenda was reviewed with revisions|
|II. Update on PeopleSoft
II. Issues Priority List
III. PeopleSoft Resolution Team Administrative Procedure
IV. Report out from PRT Team
|The director of enterprise Ranell Holmes explained about the four main priorities lists;
· Financial Aid
· Human Resource
· Campus Solution
– The director of enterprise Ranell Holmes’s shared with the PRT team members’ documents that describe the departments and roles for each four items. Resources to be discussed at the next meeting.
-AVC Madlock suggested that the PRT Team should discuss the purpose of this meeting.
-Bielanski made a recommendation to everyone to get involved more as a functional team and come to the meetings because most of the people in the list were never around.
-AVC Sanford suggested that we should meet once month so we could have an accreditation report because we will have a site visit in March.
-AVC Madlock suggested that Bielanski should discuss with the PRT Team the significance of this meeting so we could move forward and get back were we started.
-Bielanski mentioned six years ago when the accreditation came here there was a lot of dissatisfaction and the issues were so significant that the accreditation team wanted us to meet with the team. They wanted to tell them about the things they were angry about. There were no process within the PeopleSoft Model, people just stepped down and told the accreditation team. As a result, we received three recommendations from the accreditation team to fix the issues and find a way to get people involved so that people are being taking care of. For example, issues like, I can’t post my grades, I can’t send emails to my students. What happen then we had the functional team to help back up and running with the Finical Aid Model in PeopleSoft.
-AVC Sanford suggested that each one of the resolution team supposed to meet independently to discuss their issues, and then elect a chair to come to the resolution team meeting here to put forward those issues their supposed to be an overall matrixes for the priorities issues, but one over all that is posted and available to the public. I believe we have said that we will provide monthly reports. Those are the kind of the things we need to do by highly lighting the importance. Now when the cite site team comes, they are not just going to look what we have done now, but they will look at the entre six years since they were last here including all of the follow up of all the recommendations.
– Chair Holmes mention about the master priority list, and how is it done.
-AVC Stanford mentioned that it is done by the PRT Team. Hayat should have the list but she is in medical leave.
However Joyce and Karen were involved in it.
-AVC Stanford mentioned that we were going to address the higher priorities on the list.
-Brown mentioned that priorities will go to the cabinets and to the District Technology Committee.
-AVC Madlock asked who shared the committee.
-AVC Stanford mentioned the PeopleSoft Resolution Team, and Associate Vice Chancellors.
– Bielanski mentioned that accreditation visiting team picked out Audti Reports, Financial Aid were problems with the functional team in the PeopleSoft system.
-AVC Stanford mentioned that one of the issues with financial aid was dropping students, and we need to address that.
-Chair Holmes mentioned that is existing PRT documentation for instruction.
-Bielanski suggested that he will send the PRT PowerPoint that has the PRT chart that listed all the functionality teams.
-AVC Sanford mentioned that it should be an official that will go to the administrative procedure that will go to the broad for approval.
– Bielanski mentioned that we have to address to the broad if it is an administrative procedure or an operation procedure because there is a difference between the two.
-AVC Sanford mentioned we need to inform the broad with the current date because the last document was dated back in 2007.
-AVC Madlock suggested on the next agenda is to have Bielanski to get the document that he had spoken about, and update that document, and how we should organizing it, and then move it forward.
– Bielanski suggested that we could even look ahead time a little bit of these functionality teams, and do an individuality reach to these teams.
-AVC Madlock suggested the next meeting we should focus on the structure not just tickets.
– Bielanski mentioned that the PRT is not a committee we represent our peers who have PeopleSoft issues.
-VC Rinne mentioned that in the past we use to have groups who voted, but now we should have the PRT team to vote.
-AVC Madlock asked if there any functionality team representatives.
-AVC Swinson mentioned that we do have the Counseling Functionality Team who meets regularly twice a month.
-AVC Madlock mentioned it has been very difficult to get a counselor to represent to one of the DTC Committee Meeting. Maybe now we could get one of them to represent. I want them here just in case we have to take it to the cabinet.
– Bielanski mentioned that we could have one of the counselor’s functionality team to vote on who could come.
-AVC Swinson suggested if we could have schedule of meetings for the whole semester because the counselors need two weeks in advance to be prepared for the meeting.
-AVC Madlock suggested the next time we meet we should schedule a structure of all the meetings. We should also have a Functional representative from there side to take minutes not just from the IT department.
-VC Rinne suggested and I agree it’s the team thing not just IT department.
-Chair Holmes mentioned in terms of identifying team members how we go about doing this? Are we going nominate, vote or is one person going to take a lead on that for the next meeting.
-Bielanski suggested in putting together a schedule through PeopleSoft.
-Chair Holmes mentioned the priority list HR, Finance, Payroll, A&R, and Campus was all developed by the Analysts for the developers. He had also mentioned that there might not be the final list, but is something to start with. For example, Kyu is developing the A&R.
-VC Orkin suggested that priority list could be more organized so it could be clearer.
-Chair Holmes mentioned that he will email everyone the three priority list. For example, my group is structured in to three different priorities that includes footprint.
-Nguyen mentioned in terms of the first item (enrollment ) that they have meet for the past few weeks, which includes: Financial Aid, Human Resource, ED Services with Amany in terms of how they going resolve these items. He said that these items are not just for accreditation but finding Audit Report that includes: College of Alameda program review and Laney College Audit and our annual Audit. He said that is not just for March 9, 2015 but for March 5, 2015 and it is a serious issues that hopeful we could resolve in working together with IT. He also said that he is concerned not making that progress to meet the deadline base on the four tickets that we got from the A&R side by updating the Academic Plans for the Zip codes.
– Bielanski mentioned that the accreditation team will go look for it on the web.
-Wong suggested that some of the PeopleSoft Functionality tickets that have been summit that we have talked about will impact future Audit if we don’t resolve the issues there is high risk of being cited again with future Audits.
|February 23, 2015 @ 3:00Board Room
Minutes Taken: Fathia Mohamed
Filed under: Meeting Minutes