Facilities & Infrastructure Committee10/12/11 4:25Pm

FACILITIES & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE10/12/11 4:25PM

Consolidating or better utilizing instructional computer facilities (smart classrooms, labs, etc.)
1) providing computer support 2) providing software
Open labs (i.e., CSSE and Alumni) and specialized labs (e.g. ASC) where there are no classes scheduled and POS is not collected
What can be consolidated
Cost to consolidate
Cost to maintain (Per cost PC * no. of PCs)
Savings due to consolidation
TLC – This is the only teaching and training lab for faculty, staff and leadership. This lab is necessary for the following reasons: 1) It is secured on the Admin side of the VLAN to access Datatel, Galaxy, Portal and the users’ own PC (remote in). Also this lab is used for video conferences, datatel testing, demonstrations, etc. Studentsdo not have access to this lab. All student labs are on separate VLAN.

Pros and Cons of outsourcing Labs and other options
Possible Dollar savings – get quotes for an off campus lab (i.e., Mecca, EVC) to verify this; also get quotes for long-term (5 years) so that the District is aware of the total cost (There are two District labs PACE (Westfield) and DEEC (Palm Springs) that are outsourced directly to computer techs (not to a company) at approximately $35/hour. It would cost significantly more to go through a vendor. The pros are, ITIR is not spending the District funded staff’s time to support categorically and self-funded programs. The technicians work under the direction as well as under the standards of ITIR. The cons are the two areas, PACE and DEEC have to work around the technician’s time schedule. If the same technician is not available, retraining is involved and standards may not be met and the rates may not be the same. The project has to be scoped out again every time there is a change in configuration/number.
Current Cost to support all 40 Academic labs totaling 960 computers and laptops:

Approximate cost: Current 30% of one Computer Support Specialist (CSS) tech; 20% of second and 75% of the 3rd = 1.25 CSS to support app. 960 systems (computers & laptops) (1.25% CSS salary + plus cost of ISAs – 3 lab ISAs?)

Need to be aware of the rules and regulations of SB 1419 for outsourcing:

Outsourcing is allowed for some services if they can show

They will save money
The companies who get the contracts have skilled workers who are qualified for the jobs
Proper background checks are in place so criminals won’t be working around our children, and
The firms are awarded the contract through a competitive bidding process
Cons:
Lose control
Lose quality
Timeliness of service
What happens if the scope increases (change orders with additional cost – need to be factored in)
Checks and Balances on the outsourced functions – time needed to monitor this
Other Options:
Super ISAs (combine the functions of current ISAs and Computer Support Specialists) to assist more with hardware repair and software maintenance (It will continue to do the regular ghosting every semester and continue to remotely deploy antivirus and other upgrade patches)

Consider outside services for new projects – E.g., new labs in West and East valley
Include some services as part of the initial cost of setup of the lab (hardware and software installation) especially if this is coming from restricted funds. Also, require to put aside 20%/year of the cost of the hardware (PC, media, telephone, etc.) allocated for scheduled maintenance.
Dummy terminals/refurbished systems
Look at if other schools outsource and if so why and why not.
San Bernardino Valley College District – outsourced and brought it back in-house a year ago.
Claremont Graduate School – Was outsourced before (2009 ?) and brought it in-house due to the following reasons as per their CIO

-Cheaper to do the functions in-house

-The outsourced company went to a new model for service – All requests/resolutions go to “Practice leader” of the outsourced company who was not onsite

-The outsourced company did not build a relationship with the client

-Scope of service was limited – no support of VoIP, No support of Macs, no student support, no infrastructure help, etc.

-Everything had to be re-scoped “Nickel and Diming” – The re-scoping took approximately 3 months, which was too long (time to write the addendum/changes to the contract and for the outsourced company to negotiate, respond and finalize)

-Had to setup different layers of security

-After hours support

Smart Classroom – App. cost & support (SP controls $8,500 - 13,000; AMX - $ 40,000 – 50,000) – paid by Bond; Support by one Systems Specialist (50% time) plus 10- 20% time of the IT Tech on app. 110 smart classrooms on campus (see handout)

Cloud computing
Pros:

On demand delivery of shared resources at the right time
Efficient and economical
Drives innovation (latest software and hardware)

Cons:

There are no global industry standards yet (still being perfected); servers are all across the world in a cloud environment
Cyber threats and security issues
Loss of direct control
Cloud will not replace all technology services
Responsibility is with the customer and the provider
Right people should have the right access at the right time
Should be encrypted and issues with decryption
Issues with using cloud over the public network (not highly secure) – Denial of service attacks
Public cloud may use vendors outside federal cyber initiatives
SLAs should indicate where the data resides in the systems
Migration path should be defined – contingency planning – if there is a fail over or the vendor dissolves, what is the cost and service to get data back to another cloud
Internet is changing and the challenge is to build a cloud on an changing environment
Concerns with external cloud with 3rd party vendors are: Security, Speed, Accessibility, Maturity and Stability – incidents (Denial of service attacks) with Google, Microsoft 360 and Amazon are good examples of how Cloud computing is not mature yet.

What should the customers do:

Need to align risks with benefits
Need to verify the claims of the service provider
Need to have the trust, transparency and should be audited
Need to have contingency plans
Issues are substantial but not insurmountable
Private cloud

Possible Current Solutions:

As an extension of the build out of EduStream 3.0, CO is currently exploring the need fora centralized cloud environment for the California Community Colleges
Currently we do some form of Cloud Computing at our campusas we host the student email in the cloud, and also host the following: Bb, People Admin (Silk Road), Parking (Credentials), Transcripts and Enrollment verification (Credentials), Payment Plan (NelNet), Galaxy, Lumens (CE), Assessment, and Printing Checks (KKI).
With the Bond projects, we are looking at the possibility of internal cloud computing also using a SAN (Storage Area Network) with a good backup solution, locally and at an off-site location

Virtualization
App. 6 physical servers with 30 virtual machines (5 * 6); As part of the NOC project, plans are underway to have a SAN (Storage Area Network) and virtualize more methodically and gradually. The goal is to have a SAN that will have the capacity to grow to incorporate data from other repositories/projects such as Imaging, Video streams from the Blue Phone project, etc. The data from the SAN should be backed up at an off campus center. Ultimately the goal is to have an internal cloud that would host 2 identical SANs at two locations for redundancy.

Providing software
Currently we get updated Microsoft site license from the Foundation of California Community Colleges (FCCC). 106 out of the 112 community colleges are part of this consortium. The greatest advantage is that we get discounted licenses for all Office products campus-wide, server licenses, Fore Front antivirus software along with all Microsoft products for home use for $9.95. Students also get Office 360 as part of the Microsoft@Live email privilege. In contrast, it costs approximately $6/person/month ($72/year for an app. cost of $50,400/annual for app. 700 employees) to have Google Apps.