1 / 18

UW Enterprise Portal Evaluation

UW Enterprise Portal Evaluation. Report to Sponsors 18 February 2010. Project Charter Goal.

fidelio-langan
Download Presentation

UW Enterprise Portal Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UW Enterprise Portal Evaluation Report to Sponsors 18 February 2010

  2. Project Charter Goal “Evaluate and make a recommendation on a portal platform that could be used for all University populations and to propose a high-level implementation plan that would include research administration as an early pilot.”

  3. Project Organization

  4. Drivers / Needs • Improve the research administration and compliance experience • Integrateadministrative systems and applications • Integrate more UW information and services – leverage the community • Provideexperience based on UW role(s)

  5. An Enterprise Portal • An integration platform that securely provides a central point for accessing, personalizing, and configuring information and applications appropriate to your role in the University. • A standards-based integration and/or presentation platform.

  6. High Level Requirements • Consume identities and roles and groups • Tailor presentation based on roles • Easy to publish content • User discovery and choice • User layout control • Provide themes • Display current data, refresh on changes • Unified notification system • Admin forcing of some content • Two factor authentication • Display personalization • Customizable authentication levels

  7. Candidate Platforms • Primary Candidates included: • uPortal • Liferay • iGoogle and SharePoint were also considered. • Our preliminary investigations quickly revealed neither consistently met our portal definition and criteria.

  8. Candidate Platform Comparisons

  9. Platform Recommendation • Liferay will require some custom work to integrate Shibboleth.

  10. Long-Term Recommendation: Establish an Enterprise Portal Program • Develop the foundation to support a long-term, sustainable enterprise portal program. • Position the UW to evolve its application and information aggregation strategies.

  11. Foundations of a Successful Program • Executive sponsorship and management support • Community participation and governance • Appropriate resource mix and allocation • Processes for quality assurance, deploying new content, and content evaluation • Data driven decisions on organization and content • User interface and technical standards • Ongoing technology renewal

  12. Proposed Structure

  13. Recommended Next Steps • Perform Proof-of-concept IAM Integration • TIMELINE: 2-3 weeks (40-80 hours) • RESOURCES: Software engineer, IAM engineer, test & development infrastructure • Complete foundation Setting and Discovery • TIMELINE: 3-6 months • RESOURCES: Program manager, UX designer, database administrator, QA engineer • Implement Governance Model • Implement Communication Plan • Portal Infrastructure Planning and Development • Plan for Initial Release • TIMELINE: Unknown at this point • RESOURCES: Additional software engineer, support, production infrastructure, training • Develop a migration strategy for current MyUW content • Decide on new content to include • Implement production system • Develop a change management and communications strategy

  14. Ongoing Resources (in addition to community participation) • 1 FTE Program Manager • 2 FTE Software Engineers • 1 FTE User Experience Designer • 0.25 FTE Quality Assurance Engineer • 0.25 Database Administrator • .25 - .50 FTE Support (student hourly) • .2 FTE Identity and Access Management engineering

  15. Cost Estimates • Initial Costs (not including staff time): • Hardware & Licensing: $103,000 - $126,000 • Dev/eval/test: $34,000 • Prod: $47,000 – $70,000 • Business continuity: $22,000 • Implementation consulting: $40,000 • Vendor custom enhancement: $42,000 - $117,250 • Technical training: $31,000 • Ongoing Costs (maintenance & tech support): $43-65K/yr • Dev/eval/test: $19,000 • Prod: $16,000 - $39,000 • Business continuity: $8,000

  16. Discussion • Questions about recommendations or evaluation criteria? • What resources are required when? • OK to proceed with next steps? • Who is the portal service manager/owner?

  17. Resources • Project Report:https://wiki.cac.washington.edu/x/9BQPAQ • Project Web Site:https://wiki.cac.washington.edu/x/obbt • Liferay Portal: http://www.liferay.com/

  18. Acknowledgements Rupert Berk, Leman Chung, Dan Comden, David Cox, JelenaCurless, Jennifer Dobbelaere, Nathan Dors, Frank Fujimoto, Janice Granberg, Brad Greer, Alisa Hata, Chris Heiland, Gina Hills, Marcus Hirsch, Bob Hurt, Bob Jamieson, Jim Kresl, Jim Laney, Tom Lewis, Fang Lin, Ping Lo, Jim Loter, Erik Lundberg, Mark McNair, Todd Mildon, RL (Bob) Morgan, David Morton, Clara Nic Mhathuna, Paul Prestin, Gary Prohaska, AmmyPhuwanartnurak, Paul Schurr, Mike Seibel, Oren Sreebny, Scott Stephenson, Dan Trippel, Ann Testroet, Darcy Van Patten, Jennifer Ward, David Wall, James Werle, Charles Wesley, Sean Vaughan, Bill Yock

More Related