STRATEGIC PLANNING

SOFTWARE SEARCH

ABSTRACT The charge for the Planning Software Search Team

was to find a tool to capture the college-wide

strategic plan, campus plans, and division plans, and

support the college’s SACSCOC compliance

requirements including assessment of program

learning outcomes.

Prepared by Karen Borglum, Assistant Vice President, Curriculum and Assessment, and Noelia Maldonado, Program Support Specialist, on behalf of the Planning Software Search Team.

Team Members:

Alex Larzabal Gomez (Director, Enterprise App Services Collegewide)

April McGuire (IT Manager, Collegewide)

Deidre Holmes DuBois (Professor, Speech Osceola)

John Niss (Professor, Math Winter Park)

Karen Marie Borglum (Assistant Vice President, Curriculum and Articulation, Collegewide)

Laura Blasi (Director, Institutional Assessment, Collegewide)

Michelle Foster (Dean, Academic Affairs, East)

Mike Bosley (Executive Dean, Lake Nona )

Nicholas Bekas (Dean, Academic Affairs, West)

Noelia Maldonado Rodriguez (Program Support Services, Collegewide

Patti Smith (Assistant Chief Information Officer, Collegewide )

Background:

Prior to beginning this work, the committee conducted an analysis of the college’s level of preparedness for a new

planning software using the Community College Research Center’s Evaluating Your College’s Readiness for Technology

Adoption (2014).This self-assessment tool is designed to encourage conversation to identify any additional steps that

Valencia might need to take prior to beginning any new adoption. The tool has four areas of readiness: technological,

project, organizational, and motivational. For each area the rubric lists whether the institution is “minimally ready” or

“poised for action.”

Our analysis determined the following:

Technological Readiness

Component Self -Assessment

IT System Maturity While IT systems can sustain additional products, cloud hosting is preferable to alleviate impact on staffing. Vendor to provide training in train the trainer model.

IT System Stability We have recently made system changes and end-users are still learning new technology, and the concern was that there may be too many new system updates for employees to learn

Compatibility of New and Existing IT The system should be accessible via Atlas but would not be housed in Atlas.

Current Pattern of IT Use We offer an array of services online; staff typically opt for electronic versions of services

Past Experience with IT Implementation We need to determine the needs of the end user and be more involved on the front end. We have had some experiences where we know what went wrong with implementation, but not with all new implementations A statement of work from the vendor should be required to address these concerns.

Project Readiness

Component Self-Assessment

Administrative and Technical Resources Need simple, streamlined resource that is aesthetically organizing for documentation

Training We have not yet identified an approach for providing training; we prefer the vendor provide the training to the end user (It is likely they will provide train the trainer option – most often vendors do not train all end users – perhaps recorded sessions are an option).

Ongoing Support We need to plan how we will provide ongoing support for technical issues. This should be part of the contract

Incentives They are not part of our project plan

Organizational Readiness

Component Self-Assessment

Clarity of Mission Our mission is concrete enough to guide our decision making

Communication We will need to send our “Save-the Dates” for trainings. We will need to put all strategic planning process information on our website, and make announcements in the Grove

Decision-Making Process An array of represented areas were part of the recommendation process; we need to engage more stakeholders,” in the “next step” of our final decision making process for this software. One of the problems we faced with WEAVE was that it didn’t provide the framework we needed – and it was difficult for those who entered the data, to navigate.

Openness to Change Stakeholders are ready for something other than Weave

Motivational Readiness

Component Self-Assessment

Need for reform There is a clear rationale for our reform, and it advances our goals

Vision of Benefits We need one system that manages the whole process of strategic planning, outcomes assessment, and SACSCOC reporting

Perception of Functioning We need language alignment within the system. We also need to weigh the benefits of cloud-based versus campus based functioning

Survey:

To get a better understanding of the college’s software needs, a survey was sent to all academic deans, deans of

students, campus presidents, marketing, finance, human resources, information technology, student affairs, academic

affairs, and continuing education on 12/02/14. Results indicated end-users were in need of a software that was:

1. Easy to use

2. Customizable to our needs

3. Simple to navigate

4. Accessible on-campus and off-campus

5. Clear in the connections between planning, budgeting, and progress

6. Able to generate reports inclusive of those sent to SACSCOC. Please see attached for complete survey results

These general needs became the principles for our decision making and our recommendations.

Excerpts from survey: “What features would you like to see in a new planning tool?”

Easy to use

Ability to customize to make it "fit" Valencia's systems and terminology

Connection between planning, budgeting, and personnel requests

Ability to easily update information and progress

Ease of "read only" access and easy-to-read layout for faculty and staff to read updates

Easily accessible,

Simple to navigate

A simple system that flows in a linear method: each goal, objectives, measures all on one screen

User friendly

Ability to edit/update with ease

Archive/Records Retention

Ability to "proxy" input of information

Ability to "fit" Valencia vs. Valencia "fit" the product

Access from anywhere, opportunities to collaborate

Simple and elegant

Communications inside the tool. Reporting features.

Cascading goals, ease of use, multiple purposes (not just a place to store plans...some other value add)

Process management software capabilities to stay on track with completion of jobs

User friendly, intuitive

Multiple editors within a division

Ability to be updated as needed

Visual enhancements that allows you to clearly see what is going on at any given point of time

Make it easy to use

Pre-fill information whenever possible

Allow access to view other departments’ information

User friendly

Limited enough to provide structure, but flexible enough to allow variance as needed

Software Selection Process:

Members of the task force met with several vendors at the SACSCOC annual meeting to discuss Valencia’s needs and

scheduled follow-up webinars with the whole task force when the software aligned with our goals.

Software Description Feedback

Cornerstone Cornerstone OnDemand’s integrated talent management solution ensures recruiting, performance, and succession activities that work together on one platform.

Valencia currently uses this system within the Human Resources department. System does not offer necessary modules for strategic planning, assessment, and accreditation. Current modules cannot be customized to fit these areas.

Taskstream Taskstream can define learning outcomes at all levels and align them to organizational goals, strategic plans, general education principles, and other goals. Can create outcomes-based assessment plans that include clearly defined measures, targets, and findings. Can align program-level initiatives with your strategic plan or document the execution of strategic initiatives and manage the process at a macro level. Manage accreditation documentation and data in a central repository.

This tool is dedicated mostly to outcomes, assessment, and student development. Planning area is not robust.

Tk20 Tk20 offers a holistic design to optimize the assessment process. Supports the assessment and planning efforts of the institution’s senior administration, both internally and externally. Offers an integrated planning and budgeting solution. Offers various assessment methodologies and an extensive list of reports to support compliance with accreditation standards.

Biggest drawback is that the system’s planning and assessment modules currently run completely independent of each other, and are not integrated to “speak” between the two. Has the potential to cause duplicated work.

TracDat/ Nuventive

TracDat system that helps institutions align planning initiatives, review and reflect on academic and non-academic outcomes, and takes action to improve performance. Supports data-informed strategic planning, program review, accreditation, and managing academic and administrative outcomes. Web-based interface makes it easier to get faculty and staff involved in planning and assessment. Assign tasks via email and collect data and findings from infrequent contributors without requiring them to access or log into the system. Ability to use your existing processes and the terminology of your assessment culture.

The team participated in a webinar presentation on 3/27/15. There is a separate software for compliance reports, and then they get sent to the software. Strengths

The system generates email notifications when a person needs to update something in the software

We can use our own nomenclature Gaps

The visualization is redundant to SAS Visual Analytics

Software Description Feedback

Strategic Planning Online (SPOL)

Strategic Planning Online is a cloud-based strategic planning software solution that takes strategic planning from the executive team to each department in a collaborative way, allowing everyone to participate in planning, budgeting, and measuring the results of the strategic planning effort. In the assessment module, department managers can develop outcomes, share information, and collect evidence while guiding the planning team to develop strategic planning objectives that will help to improve assessment results. In the accreditation module, SPOL can organize teams, prepare compliance reports, catalog the documentation, and publish accreditation compliance reports on paper and electronically. The system is pre-loaded with many regional, professional, and vocation standards.

The team participated in a webinar presentation on 01/16/15. Strengths Modules cover all our institutional

software needs. Planning module makes clear connection

between initiatives and campus, division, strategic plans, and budget requirements.

Able to edit modules to fit our institutional vocabulary. Customizable.

Org chart capabilities a plus. Able to share information within system by assigning to appropriate faculty/staff.

Makes clear connection between initiatives, timeline, budgets, and planning efforts.

Gaps Visually crowded. Too much on one page. System has many areas that we’re not

using as an institution. Concern on growing our work to fit the software’s capabilities vs. actually needing these capabilities.

Xitracs Xitracs places strategic plans and other plans online for ease of data gathering and reporting. The planning module can manage plan timeframes, include budget data, link objectives from one plan to objectives or goals in another plan, link plans to departments and groups, engage faculty in the planning process with a simple interface, and use the simple survey tool to augment plan information or to gather information from faculty and other portal users. Flexible field-set design can gather plan input using terminology that we choose. The credentials module allows end users to manage faculty and staff qualifications and associated information. Faculty and staff members can view their own information via a secure portal. The assessment module allows for the development and storage of outcomes assessment, curriculum mapping, peer feedback, link to collegewide plans, faculty input, use of nomenclature at program level, and storage of supporting evidence and artifacts. The compliance module contains pre-installed standards, allows for the development of compliance reports, set internal timelines and due dates, use built-in reviewing tools and reports, produce interim reports to show progress, and finally preview and publish entire

The team participated in a webinar presentation on 02/20/15. Strengths By far the most complete system that

meets or exceeds college’s needs. Covers all modules necessary for planning, assessment, and compliance.

Visually a much cleaner system. Clear location of modules and areas within modules.

Appears to be easy to use. Customizable options allow to integrate

Valencia language into system. Credentialing tab a plus. Repository for

faculty documentation that can later be linked to compliance reports.

Outcomes/Assessment module is clean, mirrors our internal Online Organizer.

The “Library” repository allows for a centralized location where documents can be stored.

Faculty workloads – can be uploaded into PDF and back into the Xitracs library.

Software Description Feedback

compliance report that allows for peer review comments and responses.

Gaps Layout looks dull. Visually low on quality.

Finalists:

Strategic Planning Online

o List of current clients in Florida:

Florida Gateway College

Florida State University

Gulf Coast State College

Daytona State College

Edward Waters College

Florida A&M University

Florida Gateway College (Lake

City)

Florida Keys Community College

Florida State College at

Jacksonville

Florida State University

Gulf Coast State College

Helping People Succeed

Indian River State College

Pasco-Hernando State College

Polk State College

Seminole State College

South Florida State College

St. Thomas University

University of West Florida

o Costs: $15K to $50K for web hosted environment. $40K to $150k for site license, plus annual support

fee.

Xitracs

o List of current clients in Florida:

Florida Polytechnic

Saint Leo University

Florida State College Jacksonville

Barry University

Daytona State College

Everglades University

Florida Atlantic University

Florida Institute of Technology

Jacksonville University

Tallahassee Community College

o Costs: $23,163 for web hosted environment. $50, 031 for site license, plus annual support fee.

Final Recommendation:

The committee overwhelmingly supported the Xitracs software, because it was the most complete system that

meets or exceeds college’s needs; it covers all modules necessary for planning, assessment, and compliance. The

software is visually much cleaner and customizable to allow the integration of Valencia’s language.

Appendix A: Tech Specifications

IT Follow-up Questions to Xitracs:

1. Graphical User Interface

a. W e b -based? Yes

i. If so, responsive to tablet-level, mobile phone-level? Tablet

In the current release the Faculty Portal uses a responsive deign; the main Xitracs user

interface is planned to migrate to a responsive design in 2016.

ii. iOS mobile devices compatible?

b. Mobi le app available? No

i. If so, which features are available through the mobile app?

c. D e s k t o p /laptop client?

i. Windows (7, 8, 10)? Yes ii. Mac? Yes

2. Hosted or on premise?

a. W h a t is their strategy (e.g. do they plan to have only the hosted option in the future)?

Xitracs is available as either a hosted or locally installed system

b. I f hosted:

i. Is the environment managed, too? Yes ii. Who owns the

underlying servers?

Servers are owned by a FERPA/HIPAA compliant SAS 70 Type II certified commercial data center

company. Concord leases dedicated VM private resources both in a primary datacenter and in

a DR site.

iii.How is security handled?

1. For the application

In the hosted environment, each customer has a separate instance of the application.

All access to the application is via a secure SSL browser interface using a user logon

and password.

2. For the servers

Database and database connection are encrypted.

iv. FERPA-compliant? (student data)

Yes. Minimal PII (personally identifiable information) is stored: First/Last Name,

email, ID.

v. PCI-compliant? (credit card data) N/A. No CC data is stored.

vi. How is business continuity ensured?

1. In other words, how is Disaster Recovery handled?

VM images and data at the primary site are backed up multiple times a day to the DR

site. In the unlikely event primary site is inoperable, routing would be switched to DR

site. Note also that VMs are switched automatically to alternate physical servers in the

event of a hardware problem using VMWare VMotion. This ensures maximum

resilience and continuity.

2. Are there SLAs? What are they?

Included in the hosted service agreement.

vii. If the hosted system(s) need to integrate with internal systems, then:

1. How is that done (VPN, SFTP, Web Service, etc)? N/A

c. I f on premise:

i. What type of server infrastructure do we need?

1. What types of servers? See attached Install Guide.

a. W e b (Apache, Apache Tomcat, WebLogic, etc.)?

b. Database (Oracle, MS SQL, MySQL, etc.)?

c. O p e r a t i n g System (Windows, Linux, UNIX, etc.)?

d. Any specific version(s) or are any and all versions supported?

2. How many servers? See attached Install Guide.

3. What are the hardware specifications for the server(s)?

See attached Install Guide.

ii. Will the vendor need access to such on premise servers? How about other internal

servers?

Only require remote access for initial install.

3. Application Security

a. A b i l i t y to authenticate against Active Directory?

Yes. LDAP password authentication is available for local installations or SSO for hosted using CAS, SAML

or Shibboleth.

i. If not, then how is password complexity and expiration handled?

ii. Who sets that up?

b. SSO available? Yes

i. If so, through what mechanisms?

1. Specifically, is CAS supported for SSO purposes? Yes.

c. D o e s the vendor handle the creation of user profiles, or we do? Customer.

d. How granular can we get?

i. Who handles who gets access to specific features? Customer.

ii. Is security role based? Yes

1. If so, who creates and maintains the roles, or are they provided?

Roles are provided. A user with Administration rights can assign and maintain roles

via the web interface.

4. Implementation

a. W h a t is the timeline for implementation?

For hosted installs, system can be available with 2 days notice. For local installs, Concord will

schedule a remote install with customer’s IT staff. Subsequent setup involves importing users,

courses, enrollments, user roles. This can be down by the customer’s administrator via the web

interface.

b. I s implementation covered? Yes

i. If so, is the software configured during implementation by the vendor?

Yes

ii. What will not be done during implementation? N/A

Iii.Will there be knowledge transfer? Yes

c. H o w is user training handled? Online. On-site available for a fee.

d. How is customer service handled and for how long?

24/7 online ticket system plus phone support during business hours.

e. W i l l a Statement of Work (SOW) be provided?

Not typically, unless implementation involves non-standard work. However, an

SOW can be provided if customer prefers.

f. W h a t is the anticipated duration of implementation?

2-3 weeks, depending on schedule for training.

5. Licensing

a. H o w is licensing handled (per user, per CPU/core, per FTE, etc.)?

Licensing covers one instance of the application and is priced based on institution size using

the IPEDS enrollment data. There is no limit to the number of users.

b. See question #2 – if both options are available, what is the difference in licensing between

hosted and on premise?

The hosted license is annual. The ASP (Application Service Provider) fee includes the software license, hosting service, upgrade assurance and technical support. The local (on premise) license is perpetual. There is an associated annual maintenance fee which

includes upgrade assurance and technical support.

c. I s supported included?

i. If so, see question #4.b, what is the difference in support going from hosted to on

premise?

None, other than application updates are installed by customer for an on premise systems (see below), plus customer is responsible for OS and

DBMS updates.

ii. What is the support model?

24/7 online ticketing system via a Client Portal with ability to specify priority. Telephone

support during business hours.

6. Future Upgrades

a. H o w are upgrades handled? (This will depend on question #1, e.g. desktop clients may need

more work to be upgraded)

For hosted systems, updates/upgrades are managed and installed automatically outside of normal

business hours. For local installs, updates are initiated by the customer via the web Administration

interface; installation is then automatic via a wizard; the application will be offline for approximately 5

minutes during the update process.

b. How often?

Point releases/patch rollups: every 3 months; major releases: approximately every 15-18 months.

c. H o w soon do we need to upgrade after an upgrade is released?

Generally within 2 months.

d. D o we get notified when upgrades are available? Yes

7. Day 2 support – Roles & Responsibilities a. W h o will administer the application moving forward?

The designated Xitracs system administrator(s). Administration can all be performed through the

administration web interface.

b. What role will IT play?

For hosted systems, probably minimal. For local installs: server management, backups, application

updates.

c. W h a t role will the functional area play?

Functional area roles will depend on the module. For example, in the Standards module a user can be

designated as managing a compliance report or editing a section of the report.

IT Follow-up Questions to SPOL:

1. Graphical User Interface a. Web-based? – Yes, Strategic Planning Online is web-based. i. If so, responsive to tablet-level, mobile phone-level? Tablet-level access is supported though a web browser. Mobile-phone level is not listed as supported but is responsive. Mobile-phone screen size and resolution may limit the user experience, but the system is functional and responsive on all platforms. ii. iOS mobile devices compatible? Yes, Safari for iPad and iPhone b. Mobile app available? Not available i. If so, which features are available through the mobile app? N/A c. Desktop/laptop client? i. Windows (7, 8, 10)? – Strategic Planning Online supports Windows 7, 8, and 8.1 operating systems using Internet Explorer versions 9, 10, or 11. SPOL is a browser based software platform as such Chrome for Windows is also supported. i. Mac? – Strategic Planning Online supports Apple OSX v10.5 (Leopard) to v10.9 (Mavericks) using Safari versions 5, 6, or 7, and Chrome for Macintosh. 2. Hosted or on premise? a. What is their strategy (e.g. do they plan to have only the hosted option in the future)? We offer both hosted and on-site licenses. b. If hosted: i. Is the environment managed, too? Yes, backups (Full and Incremental), security, upgrades, Software updates, and all server maintenance is included in the Cloud Application Service Plans. ii. Who owns the underlying servers? Strategic Planning Online, LLC iii. How is security handled? 1. For the application – Secure Socket Layer (SSL) with encrypted Password. LDAP, ADSI and CAS authentication are also avaible for single sign-on support. 2. For the servers – Data Center: Host.net Firewall: SilverSky. The Servers are protected with a SilverSky firewall with intrusion detection and intrusion monitoring services deployed. iv. FERPA-compliant? (student data) – N/A – Our System does not handle data of this nature. v. PCI-compliant? (credit card data) – N/A – Our System does not handle data of this nature. vi. How is business continuity ensured? 1. In other words, how is Disaster Recovery handled? – Our disaster recovery plan includes a near line backup to disk of all application websites every 24 hours and full database backups executed every six hours. We also deploy SQL UTTMR (Up To the Minute Recovery) which records SQL transaction log states (database changes) every 5 minutes to an off-server disk (SAN), then lazy-writes the transaction logs to tape nightly. Full backup jobs are run weekly and incremental backup jobs are run daily with all data being written to our LTO robotic tape drive with a 10.8TB capacity. 2. Are there SLAs? What are they? – We do not offer an SLA as a part of our standard agreement, however, we can provide an SLA rider at an additional cost. SLA’s are essentially pre-paid refund policies where: if a service level breach exists (e.g. < 99.9% uptime), monies for the excess down-time are refunded to the customer on a pro-rata basis. Given that we have a proven track record of 99.99% uptime (with managed downtime notifications by Monitor.us), we feel that an SLA is unnecessary and would offer little value. We are however, happy to offer an SLA rider for an additional fee, if needed. vii. If the hosted system(s) need to integrate with internal systems, then: 1. How is that done (VPN, SFTP, Web Service, etc.)? – Data integration is accomplished using import files or export files in excel (CSV) format. Single sign-on authentication integration is available using CAS, ADSI, or LDAP. c. If on premise: i. What type of server infrastructure do we need?

1. What types of servers? a. Web (Apache, Apache Tomcat, WebLogic, etc.)? - Windows IIS 7 or 7.5 Web Servers with .Net 4.0 installed. b. Database (Oracle, MS SQL, MySQL, etc.)? - Windows SQL Server 2008 R2. c. Operating System (Windows, Linux, UNIX, etc.)? - Windows Server 2008 R2 d. Any specific version(s) or are any and all versions supported? Windows Server 2008 R2/Windows SQL Server 2008 R2 SP 2 2. How many servers? Minimum: 1 Server can run both the Web / Application Server environment and the database server. Most onsite installations host the application server and the database on different servers. Both configurations are supported. Virtual Server environments are also supported. 3. What are the hardware specifications for the server(s)? (See attached System Requirements) ii. Will the vendor need access to such on premise servers? How about other internal servers? Access to on premise servers is not required (but preferred). RDP (remote access desktop sharing) is typically used for installation and/or troubleshooting assistance. 3. Application Security a. Ability to authenticate against Active Directory? Yes, our system can authenticate using ADSI, LDAP or CAS. i. If not, then how is password complexity and expiration handled? Password complexity requirements are configurable within the SPOL Application ii. Who sets that up? SPOL Technical Support works with the institution’s appointed technical contact to establish these rules. b. SSO available? Yes i. If so, through what mechanisms? LDAP, CAS, or ADSI 1. Specifically, is CAS supported for SSO purposes? Yes c. Does the vendor handle the creation of user profiles, or we do? The creation of user profiles is handled as a component of Implementation Services, it is then maintained by the institution’s SPOL administrator or system administrator. d. How granular can we get? - SPOL permissions are user / role / right based and can be very granular. i. Who handles who gets access to specific features? Access control is handled as a component of Implementation Services, it is then maintained by the institution’s SPOL administrator. ii. Is security role based? Yes iii. If so, who creates and maintains the roles, or are they provided? - Access control is handled as a component of Implementation Services, it is then maintained by the institution’s SPOL administrator. 4. Implementation a. Is implementation covered? Supported Implementation (Virtual or Onsite) is available for an additional fee and is highly recommended. i. If so, is the software configured during implementation by the vendor? The software is configured by us and the system administrator during implementation. Supported Implementation of SPOL takes place through a series of conference calls between your implementation team and the SPOL implementation consultant. During this time, system administrators will be setting up the data that provides the framework for carrying out your processes through SPOL, and you will be customizing your system to support these processes and the culture of your institution. ii. What will not be done during implementation? See “System Implementation Guidelines” attachment for details. iii. Will there be knowledge transfer? Yes, see “System Implementation Guidelines” attachment for details. b. How is user training handled? User training is usually conducted by your college’s implementation team after going through our Virtual Supported Implementation. We offer On-Site End User training to assist your team with a smooth

roll out. SPOL Onsite Training consists of onsite user training provided by our one of our experienced software trainers. Typical on-site training days consist of up to four, two-hour training sessions onsite at the Licensee’s chosen location. The goal of SPOL Onsite Training is to provide technical training on the Software and theoretical training within the context of the Licensee’s processes and frameworks. The cost of training is exclusive of any travel costs (travel costs are an additional cost added to the consulting fee). Travel cost for the trainer will be the responsibility of the Licensee and will be billed at the actual costs of travel. Licensee will be provided a detailed account of all travel costs and the associated receipts upon final billing of travel costs. c. Will a Statement of Work (SOW) be provided? Yes, please see the attached a document entitled “System Implementation Guidelines” for more details. d. What is the anticipated duration of implementation? We estimate that full service including data implementation and training delivery will span approximately 3 months. This allocates time for the assembly of data to be imported by the institution, the analysis and importing of that data by the SPOL Implementation Consultant, and the scheduling and delivery of training to the various departments. The SPOL Implementation Consultant will coordinate with your institution's implementation team leader to manage the project timeline, however the institution is ultimately in control of the implementation process and the project timeline. The institution’s implementation team will be responsible for assembling the data to be input into SPOL, the SPOL Implementation Consultant will then coordinate with your institution's implementation team to analyze and import the provided data into SPOL. College deadlines, such as the planning, assessment, and budget calendars, as well as accreditation reporting dates, may cause us to accelerate the process. 5. Licensing a. How is licensing handled (per user, per CPU/core, per FTE, etc.)? Pricing is determined upon by three factors. 1. The number of users 2. The number of modules implemented (Full System vs Per Module) 3. Installation Type (Cloud vs Onsite installation). Please see pricing documentation for more details b. See question #2 – if both options are available, what is the difference in licensing between hosted and on premise? The Site License is a one-time licensing fee. The only recurring annual fee is for technical support and software updates. The software is installed on your server. The Hosted Solution allows institutions to start using SPOL immediately in a stable hosted environment. Technical support and software updates are included for all levels. The Hosted Solution pricing is based on a 3 year agreement. c. Is support included? Yes i. If so, see question #4.b, what is the difference in support going from hosted to on premise? There is no difference in the level of support by choosing a Hosted vs. On-Site installation. The hosted solution includes technical support and software updates in the annual subscription. On-site is a lower annual fee each year for technical support and updates to help maintain your site. ii. What is the support model? Support its unlimited (hours) but limited to question or issues with the operation of the software (not IT system issues in the case of a Site License), the help desk line is manned Mon-Fri 9am to 6pm. However the online support center is 24/7 which has knowledge base articles and you can also report problems, create tickets and view videos. Response times are as follows: Designated Support Response Times – The following is the schedule of designated support times per our standard operating procedures: Priority 0 (Critical) – Priority 0 status is reserved for production stopping issues with no work-around. We will make best efforts to respond to Priority 0 bugs within 8 working hours (1 Working day). Priority 1 (High) – Priority 1 status is reserved serious issues that are not production stopping or production stopping bugs with a work-around. We will make best efforts to respond to Priority 1 bugs within 24 working hours (3 Working days). Priority 2 (Medium) – Priority 2 status is reserved for medium priority issues or issues that have limited impact on system usage. We will make best efforts to respond to Priority 2 bugs within 40 working hours (5 Working Days).

Priority 3 (Low / Enhancement) – Priority 3 status is reserved for low priority issues (issues that have negligible impact on system usage) or enhancement requests. We will make best efforts to respond to Priority 3 bugs within 30 Working Days. We will respond to enhancement requests in time frames set at our discretion. Priority 3 (Low / Enhancement) – Priority 3 status is reserved for low priority issues (issues that have negligible impact on system usage) or enhancement requests. We will make best efforts to respond to Priority 3 bugs within 30 Working Days. We will respond to enhancement requests in time frames set at our discretion. 6. Future Upgrades a. How are upgrades handled? (this will depend on question #1, e.g. desktop clients may need more work to be upgraded) Depending on license type (hosted or on-site) upgrades are applied by SPOL (hosted) or by the institution’s appointed technical contact (on-site). Updates and upgrades are applied on the server through a configuration / update manager (utility). b. How often? Upgrades are generally release bi-annually. Updates and hotfixes (patches) released as needed. c. How soon do we need to upgrade after an upgrade is released? Upgrades are generally applied before or following heavy use cycles. Updates and/or hotfixes (patches) should be applied upon release. d. Do we get notified when upgrades are available? Yes 7. Day 2 support – Roles & Responsibilities a. Who will administer the application moving forward? – This is a question best answered internally. b. What role will IT play? – This is a question best answered internally. c. What role will the functional area play? – This is a question best answered internally

Appendix B: References

Xitracs Reference Check:

Florida Polytechnic – Kevin Calkins, Director, Institutional Research & Effectiveness, kcalkins@flpoly.org (863)

874.8545

1. Are you hosting or licensing the system?

Hosting 2. How long have you had and used the software?

Since late 2013. We are a new university and going through the SACS COC process. I had used Xitracs prior to this university and felt it would best meet our accreditation support needs.

3. How was the support after installation?

Howard Taylor is the primary contact person for us at Xitracs. He is great in listening to us, advising us, and reviewing our work in Xitracs – offering improvements. I have found Xitracs to make changes with their software based on user interest.

4. How long did it take to implement the system?

We primarily use the “Standards” module, although some in the Planning module. It does take some time to learn the set up and assigning teams to projects. The training was good, but I found that the additional help provided as needed is even more helpful. It’s hard to say how much time; maybe two weeks full time.

5. How was your experience with training? What types of training did you receive from vendor?

We received online training for two full days. This worked well for us and it was cheaper. They also offer help as needed at no cost. The manual and system help is useful.

6. How long before folks “got it?”

Depending on how much the user uses Xitracs – minimal users require reminders while more super users got it in a matter of a couple of weeks.

7. Who are your most frequent end-users? (i.e. administration, executives, support staff, etc.)

The most frequent users are the Writing and Compliance Committee members (for accreditation application and compliance audit). These are primarily administrators.

8. Now that you’re using the system, what do you really like/dislike about the system? How have you adjusted for the areas you don’t like?

I like the Standards module a lot. The Planning module is not used as much and therefore I’m not as comfortable with it. At some point we will use it more. I would also like to purchase their new assessment module.

Saint Leo University – Trish Parrish, Co-Director Reaffirmation, trish.parrish@saintleo.edu (352) 588-8417

1. Are you hosting or licensing the system?

The system is hosted by Xitracs 2. How long have you had and used the software?

We have been using the system since our 2010 Compliance Certification with SACSCOC 3. How was the support after installation?

Support has been very strong. We have not needed to ask for much because the system has worked well, but when a need arises support is quick and helpful.

4. How long did it take to implement the system?

I don't really remember, but it was quick and easy. 5. How was your experience with training? What types of training did you receive from vendor?

Howard was onsite for training on two occasions and was available to answer questions as needed. 6. How long before folks “got it?”

Those with experience using technology "got it" immediately. Others took a bit longer, but it was not difficult for anyone.

7. Who are your most frequent end-users? (i.e. administration, executives, support staff, etc.)

The SACSCOC-related staff at our institution are the most frequent users. We tend to pull reports to share with others as needed because that fits our needs best.

8. Now that you’re using the system, what do you really like/dislike about the system? How have you adjusted for the areas you don’t like?

We are using the system for accreditation purposes only. We do not use the strategic planning or faculty credentialing modules. There are no portions of the system that I really dislike. I find it easy to use and intuitive.

SPOL Reference Check:

Florida Gateway College – Becky van Hoek, CCP, Coordinator, Planning & Accreditation. rebecca.vanhoek@fgc.edu.

(386) 754-4491

1. Are you hosting or licensing the system? Hosted system

2. How long have you had and used the software? Using the system for about 12 years. System was implemented prior to her arrival at Florida Gateway College.

3. How was the support after installation? Support is always great. Erin (SPOL) has come to campus to help system startups. Continually check-in to ensure

system is running smoothly. Assists in improving the system to accommodate needs. Always listen to needs and

try to match it as much as possible.

4. How long did it take to implement the system? Implementation took place prior to person in charge.

5. How was your experience with training? What types of training did you receive from vendor? Training typically takes about an hour’s workshop for basic usage. Thorough training from SPOL, receptive to

make system meet needs. We’re at a point where we have internal workshops to train new users. There is a bit

of a learning curve from staff, but ongoing. Easily able to explain to others.

6. How long before folks “got it?” With regular usage, users can take about a month to go from beginner to intermediate/advance. There is a bit of

a learning curve from staff, but ongoing. Easily able to explain to others.

7. Who are your most frequent end-users? (i.e. administration, executives, support staff, etc.) Mostly being used by administrators and down to coordinator levels. Some administrative assistants are using

the system for their executives, but not as common. Most end-users are in charge of their budgets and planning

for their respective areas.

8. Now that you’re using the system, what do you really like/dislike about the system? How have you adjusted for the areas you don’t like? Likes: Everything is in one system (Planning, budget, assessment, accreditation modules). Good all-around

planning tool. SACSCOC institutional level of assessment, and can pull one report from the system to show them.

Helped in the process of approving baccalaureate portion with SACSCOC.

Dislikes: programs cannot be linked to go directly to planning unit. But you can click on an objective that is

within the planning unit and can go to the objective. A bit of difficulty linking between modules. i.e. from

objective to an outcome in different modules.

Note: System currently cannot be paired with Banner. Data from Banner can be downloaded into Excel, then

uploaded into SPOL. Working with OIT to improve this area.

Florida State University – Matthew Earhart, FACET Director, Office of Institutional Research.

mearhart@admin.fsu.edu. (850) 644.0398

1. Are you hosting or licensing the system? We are hosting our own system on a virtual Windows 2008r2 server.

2. How long have you had and used the software? We’ve had the software since late 2011. We purchased specifically for assistance with our SACSCOC 10-year reaccreditation process.

3. How was the support after installation? Support was acceptable. A benefit was the ability to work closely with the SPOL development team to identify and correct bugs we discovered. A negative was the speed of responsiveness to produce updates that solved our bugs. They have/had a small dev team, which required more time to produce updates, but they were able to eventually address our every issue.

4. How long did it take to implement the system? I performed the actual installation and setup process. Physical installation took most of a single work day. I also set up approval groups and membership for our reaccreditation process, which we pre-defined before I setup the organizational structure in the system. Pre-planning took additional time prior to the setup process. Overall, I would say the system was ready for data entry within 2 working days.

5. How was your experience with training? What types of training did you receive from vendor? I generally have an expert understanding of .NET based software applications (as I am professional developer myself). I did not require much more than a walkthrough of the system capabilities by a representative and studying the user manuals. The majority of the knowledge I gained from the system was through directly working with it to observe its behavior for common tasks. One primary source of training the vendor provided was attending an SPOL conference in their home location (Ft. Lauderdale) which allowed me to ask specific questions I had about using the system, as well as get tips and information from other end users.

6. How long before folks “got it?” Depends on the population were are discussing. I got it immediately, as it was my primary duty to teach other user groups how to interact with the system. I developed custom documentation for our end users and provided hands-on training sessions. Our core accreditation management team were able to interact fairly quickly and efficiently with minimal guidance. Our narrative writers/researchers who submitted information to the system generally need a reasonable amount of guidance and repetition of process steps (outlined in the documentation I provided) before they were comfortable with the system. I also stepped in to provide any assistance for anyone who was really struggling with “how to use the system”. Generally, we saw very few individuals incapable of understanding how to interact with the system.

7. Who are your most frequent end-users? (i.e. administration, executives, support staff, etc.) Most frequent user was me, followed by members of our core accreditation management team, followed by narrative writers and approvers for each accreditation standard.

8. Now that you’re using the system, what do you really like/dislike about the system? How have you adjusted for the areas you don’t like? We purchased the system exclusively for use in our reaccreditation process. To that end, we have not utilized any other system module (assessment, budget, etc.) to any significant extent. The system has not received much use after our successful reaccreditation process. We may look into utilizing its assessment functionality to

replace our in-house solutions, but no serious research has been done yet in that regard. I would say the system definitely improved our ability to collaborate, compile, review, and manage our reaccreditation submission documents. Prior to SPOL, the previous reaccreditation process relied primarily on email exchanges to develop and update accreditation narrative drafts, which caused significant logistics issues (primarily keeping track of documents/changes/status of reports). SPOL helped us organize this in a very useful way that made the process easier. The approval workflows and email notifications built into the system were one of the biggest draws for us, and they worked very well in actual practice. The system is not without flaws (as is any system): we encountered several issues with the built-in text editor (text formatting issues primarily) and I personally had to “hand polish” the final report that was generated out the system to meet our exacting standards for how we wanted our final report to SACS to look. Last I was aware, all of the issues we encountered in the text editor were resolved with updates long ago, and I am unsure if anything has updated with the report publishing process. The publishing process got us a generated report document out of the system that was about 80-85% of what we needed. I was required to tweak the formatting to get us to 100%. That entire process took about two weeks after all narratives were fully approved by our management team, but most of that time was spent ensuring everyone’s needs for the final report structure, look, and content were met. For an organization looking for a management tool to help compile, review, store, and publish documents for accreditation processes, I would be willing to recommend SPOL. It was a useful tool that made our reaccreditation process much easier.

Gulf Coast State College – Amber Coker, Institutional Effectiveness. acoker@gulfcoast.edu. (850) 913-3293

1. Are you hosting or licensing the system? We host ours since we are not on a cloud based system. We have 200 user licenses that are set for people to

have access to the system.

2. How long have you had and used the software? The program was here when I started this position 5 years ago, but looking at the system, we have information

back from 2008-09.

3. How was the support after installation? Very good. SPOL is always very quick to respond to a question or schedule a system update with the IT

department.

4. How long did it take to implement the system? Not sure.

5. How was your experience with training? What types of training did you receive from vendor? We received 1-2 days of training for the Assessment module, but no action has been taken since.

6. How long before folks “got it?” Our faculty and staff still struggle with SPOL from time to time. Since the planning module is the only module we

are really using right now, people are not in the system frequently enough to feel comfortable using it.

7. Who are your most frequent end-users? (i.e. administration, executives, support staff, etc.) Administration

8. Now that you’re using the system, what do you really like/dislike about the system? How have you adjusted for the areas you don’t like? Since the Planning module is the only one I’ve had much experience with, it’s hard to give a review of the whole

system. Personally, I like the Planning module, it has lots of flexibility as far as customizing it to fit your college

(using “objectives” instead of “goals”; removing sections that aren’t used; etc.) It’s easy for me to navigate but

I’m also one of the main administrators of the system. While it may be useful to have multiple ways of doing one

thing, I think it can cause confusion for the users (Create New Objective or New Objective Wizard?) There are

some parts of the system that require one click, while others require two. I get more phone calls of people

saying they can’t see their objective details and it’s simply because they weren’t double clicking the objective (I

can’t blame them since they could single click everything else).

One of the biggest things for us is that since we are not cloud based, we have to buy the entire software product

(all of the modules) even though we only use one, so it make it very expensive. It also requires us to set up

appointment times convenient for our IT department to be on the phone with SPOL to do a system upgrade. If

we were on the cloud, SPOL would update automatically and we would only buy the Planning module. Because

of this, we are also looking into other planning tools. Would you be so kind as to share with me the information

you receive about other planning tools? We would greatly appreciate it!