LeadershipIn the Selection

ProcessGeorgia Kedrowski

Project Manager

Select and implement a replacement student information system beginning August 2010.

Project Definition

July 2008 – Spring 2011 Process Steps Identify Need Selection Criteria Involve Stakeholders Develop Communications Model System Selection

Process

Vision, Buy In, Action

Start Early

Identify why we need a change (Vision)

Needs Analysis

•Limited life for existing system• Implement a system that meets existing needs and is designed to grow with future student information needs

•Web-based SIS• Increase accessibility

• Improve teacher grade book functionality – SAVE TEACHER TIME• Improve integration with SIS for rosters and grade reporting• Improve parent communications and reporting through the portal•One log in

•Centralized database• Improve efficiency and decrease dual maintenance

•Single source system for student enterprise data management•Reduce multiple maintenance of data and improve accuracy of data sources

•Single system for community census tracking, State reporting and school site data management needs• Improve integration between HR, Finance and Student Information

• Improve user identity management•Create single sign on and identify management integration

Replace Student

Information System(s)

*Limited Life for current*Meet Future Needs

Project Team◦ Georgia Kedrowski, Assistant Director, Technology

and Information Services◦ Cheri Bondy, Information Systems Coordinator◦ Mary James, Educational Data Coordinator

Summer 2008, first review of market options

Identification of Project Team

Project Team - What are all of the options in the

marketplace?

Identify Solutions

Pearson, SASI Edupoint Genesis Skyward PaC

Pearson, PowerSchool

TIES, TSIS Sunguard, eSchoolPlus

AAL, eSIS Century, StarBase Olympia, SchoolMaster

Pearson, Chancery OnCourse, OnCourse SIS

Synthesis, SchoolWorks

Excelsior, Pinnacle Plus

Agile WebEIM

RenWeb Maestro Lumination

July 2008 – Spring 2011 Process Steps◦ Identify student system needs◦ Develop selection criteria◦ Identify and involve stakeholders◦ Develop communications model◦ Total Cost of Ownership Costing Proposals◦ System selection ◦ System testing and gap analysis◦ Identify District and School process changes◦ Implementation planning◦ System Setup◦ Custom development◦ Conversion◦ Training

Establish Project Timelines

Student Information – Mission Critical Hub

SASIxp School Sites

SIF Integration

PCS Revenue Child Nutrition

Follett Library System

T.I.E.SCensusFinance

HRState Reporting

School Center Web Presence

Viewpoint Data Warehouse

EEPR & DPRS Web Apps

EduLog Transportation

SASIxp District

Integration

Parlant Parent Link

A-Hconnect Parent Portal

•Parent Communication•Transportation•Child Nutrition•Media Services•Special Education•Parent Reporting•State Aid•Data to inform instruction•Instructional Management (attendance, discipline, etc)•Community Census

Stakeholder groups◦ Associate Superintendents

August 5, 2008 ◦ Business Services

August 11, 2008 ◦ Communications and Public Relations

Parents and Community◦ Elementary Principals

September 11, 2008◦ Elementary Admin Technology Committee

September 15, 2008◦ High School Principals

August 18, 2008◦ Information Services Advisory

September 5, 2008 October 23, 2008

◦ Middle School Principals August 18, 2008

◦ School Board August 25, 2008

◦ SIS Secretary User Groups August 8 - 12, 2008

◦ Technology Steering Committee August 20, 2008 October 23, 2008

◦ Secondary Technology Committee September 30, 2008

◦ Technology Teachers August 19, 2008

◦ All Staff News October 3,2008 October 24, 2008

◦ Technology, Curriculum, Finance, Benefits Directors October 21, 2008

Stakeholder Communications

Dr. Michelle Langenfeld, Associate Superintendent

Joe Bartsh, Assistant Principal, STEP Sean Beggin, AP Andover HS Cheri Bondy, Info Services Supervisor Jill Bourman, Network Services Supv Jeff Clusiau, Principal, Ramsey Elementary Melissa Doolittle, Educational Data Coor Randy Edinger, Elem Technology Facilitator Carol Gessert, MS Data Mgt Secretary Cynthia Hiltz, Nurse Lead Chuck Holden, Dir Admin Services Laurie Jacklitch, Principal, Northdale MS Mary James, Educational Data Coor Georgia Kedrowski, Asst Director, Technology Steve Kerr, Dir Community Education Sarah Kriewall, Dir Employee Services Sharon Mateer, Coordinator RET Jeff McGonigal, Principal CRHS

Diana Menster-Sullivan, Community Ed Lynn Montgomery, Asst Dir, Student Services

Esther Motyka, Asst Dir, Child Nutrition Mary Olson, Dir Communication & PR Cherie Peterson, Asst Dir Special Education Patrick Plant, CIO William Powell, Tech Teacher Laurie Resch, Dir Elem Curr & Instr Linda Rodgers, Coor Parent Involvement Johnna Rohmer-Hirt, Dir RET Nancy Schultz, Counselor, CPHS Sandy Skaar, AHEM Tom Skoglund, Technology Facilitator Randy Smasal, Dir, Secondary C, I & Assess Vicki Tjaden, Project Consultant Dale Zellmer, Dir Supplemental Services

Information Systems Advisory Committee

Patrick Plant, Chief Information and Technology Officer

Jill Bourman, Network Service Supv David Buck, Director Business Services Jeff Clusiau, Principal, Ramsey Elem Bruce DeWitt, Technology Facilitator Randy Edinger, Technology Facilitator Linda Fenwick, Director Labor Relations

and Benefits Chuck Holden, Director Operations Georgia Kedrowski, Asst Director,

Technology and Information Services Neil Klund-Schubert, Principal Johnsville

Elem John Koehler, Finance Director Hattie Leary, Technology

Communications Supv Mary Olson, Director Communications

and PR

Linda Perske, Technology Facilitator Cherie Peterson, Asst Director, Special

Education Laurie Resch, Elementary Curriculum

DirectorJohnna Rohmer-Hirt, Director Research, Evaluation and Testing

Tom Skoglund, Technology Facilitator Randy Smasal, Interim Director,

Secondary Curriculum Tom Sullivan, Principal Jackson Middle

School Barbara Theirl, Media Teaching and

Learning Specialist David Treichel, Technology Facilitator Bill Underwood, Special Education,

Teacher on Special Assignment

Technology Steering Committee

Information Gathering Initial Review with Project Team and State

User Group Members◦ Two Day System Demonstrations◦ Scripted Demo◦ Refinement of Initial Criteria

Initial Review

Request for Information (RFI) Identified Sub-Committees and committee

membership◦ Classroom Functionality◦ Scheduling◦ General Functionality◦ Technical◦ Integration and Reporting

Sub-Committees identified evaluation criteria

Half-day demonstrations of four systems

◦Classroom Functionality Chair, Laurie Jacklitch, Middle School Principal

Planning Meeting Date: September 22, 2008 Membership

Tim McLean, HS Science, CRHS Andrew Silmser, MS English SMS Doug Bakkum, Music ANDHS Tom Skoglund, HS Tech Facilitator Will Powell, Tech Teacher RMS Tim Sheie, Tech Teacher AHS Jackie Oakes, Technology Teacher CRHS Jill Blake, Data Management Secretary AHS Amy Storrick, MS Counselor JMS Lisa Sorenson, AHEM President Linda Perske, Elementary Technology Facilitator Judy Schlutze, Information Services Secretary

Feature Set Classroom Functionality Attendance and seating charts Student Information Secondary Gradebook functionality Secondary Grading Secondary Grading Setup, GPA, Rank, Transcripts

Identify Expertise Subgroups

◦Scheduling Chair, Jeff McGonigal, High School Principal, CRHS

Planning Meeting Date: September 16, 2008 Membership

Todd Zapzalka, MS Assistant Principal FMMS Carol Gessert, MS Data Management Secretary JMS Jayne Skiba, HS Data Management Secretary CRHS Nancy Schultz, HS Counselor CPHS Linda Larsen, Information Services

Feature Set Walk in Scheduling Mass Assign Scheduling Master Schedule Builder Master Schedule Loader

Identify Expertise Subgroups

◦General Functionality Chair, Vicki Tjaden, Project Consultant

Planning Meeting Date: September 17, 2008 Membership

Kim Borovansky, Information Services Anne Zouski, Information Services Phyllis Olsen, HS Data Management Secretary Jessica Sydness, MS Data Management Secretary Jeff Clusiau, Chair, Elementary Admin Tech Committee Tom Sullivan, Chair, Secondary Admin Tech Committee Jackie Turnquist, Elementary Principal’s Secretary Annette Grabowska, Elementary Principal’s Secretary Cindy Hiltz, Nurse Lead

Feature Set Overall Ease of Use Demographics Administrative Attendance Management Enrollment Census and Family Management Discipline Health and Immunization Activities and Eligibility Fines and Fees

Identify Expertise Subgroups

◦Technical Chair, Jill Bourman, Network and Desktop Services Supv Membership

Network and Desktop Services staff David Treichel, Technology Facilitator

Feature Set Hardware specification

Workstation requirements Database, application/reporting, and web server requirements

Hardware costing Identify technical support requirements Security analysis Implementation design

Identify Expertise Subgroups

◦Systems Integration and Reporting Chair, Mary James, Educational Data Coordinator

Planning Meeting Date: September 17, 8 - 12 Membership

Cheri Bondy, Information Services Supervisor Melissa Doolittle, Educational Data Coordinator Hattie Leary, Communications Technology Supervisor Debbie Hoenie, MS Data Management Secretary FMMS Robyn Mahlberg, Elementary Principal’s Secretary Claire Gazelka, Information Services Leslie Downing, HS Data Management Secretary, CPHS Tricia Bozell, Elementary Principal’s Secretary Sharon Mateer, Research, Evaluation, Testing, Coordinator Diane Kilmer, Labor Relations and Benefits Bonnie Taylor, Data Management Secretary, STEP

Feature Set Set up and customizability State Reporting SIF Import/Export Mass Change Query Security Finance, HR, data warehouse integration

Identify Expertise Subgroups

Planning Meeting◦ Identify stakeholders and invite members to a half day planning

meeting in September.◦ Send Georgia the meeting date, times and location◦ Make a copy of the starter spreadsheet for each member to use

during the planning meeting◦ Identify essential functions for the sub-committee’s topic. Use

the starter spreadsheet and add/delete functions as determined◦ Arrive at a composite list of essential functions◦ Email spreadsheet to Georgia ASAP to forward to vendors◦ Distribute vendor review dates and schedule with members

SubCommittee Planning Guidelines

1,432 Criteria Identified

Establish Criteria

Topic Areas:

Enrollment Demographics State Reporting SPED/ELL/503

Contacts Fees Census Attendance

Calendar Discipline Community Service

Secondary Grading

Grade Book Transcript Activities Fines and Fees

Counseling Teacher Classroom

Tests and Assessments

Administration

Fitness Groups Supplemental Programs

Transportation

Health Staff Reporting Scheduling

New Year Processes

Summer School SIF Security

Child Nutrition General Features Technical Specs Support

Product reviews with vendors ◦ Have a copy of the spreadsheet for member◦ Each member scores essential functions on the spreadsheet:

Meets essential functions Does not meet essential functions Comments

◦ Allow for 20-30 minutes at the end of the session for a debrief◦ Identify follow-up questions◦ Record debrief notes and follow-up questions on the spreadsheet

Vendor Product Review

Evaluation By Expertise Subgroup

Expertise Sub-Group Demos

Debrief Meeting ◦ Invite members to a half day debrief meeting◦ Discuss findings◦ Organize findings and prepare report, include all

relevant comments◦ Give one score per vendor:

Meets essential functions Meets with conditions Does not meet essential functions and why

Debrief Vendor Review

Use the information gathered in the process to write and evaluate the RFP

Identify Evaluation Procedure BEFORE

60% Cost40% Feature Set

10% Ease of Use

15% State Reporting Mandates

15% District Customizability

10% Meets Reporting Needs

10% System Integration

15% Feature Sets

15% Meets District Technology Standards

10% Vendor relationship and qualifications

Request for Proposal

Evaluation

Cost Comparison

Total Proposal

$$

Pts (60)

Functional/ Technical

Score

Pts (40)

Total Pts

(100)

2,789,200 47 2.04* 26 73

1,911,539 56 3.15 40 96

1,789,200 60 1.73* 22 82

2,706,648 40 2.46 31 71

1,926,635 56 1.84 23 79

*Will not operate in current A-H technical environment

Teachers group ranked System 1 as best fit School office/admin ranked System 2 as best

fit District Office staff ranked System 3 as best

fit

In-Basket

What do you do?

Vendor Comparison

Vendor Total Proposal

$$

Pts (60)

Functional/ Technical

Score

Pts (40)

Total Pts

(100)

eSIS 2,789,200 47 2.04* 26 73

Genesis 1,911,539 56 3.15 40 96

PowerSchool

1,789,200 60 1.73* 22 82

PaC 2,706,648 40 2.46 31 71

TSIS 1,926,635 56 1.84 23 79*Will not operate in current A-H technical environment