1 / 15

KRA/KFS Integration Team Report KRA/KFS Functional Council Aug. 21-23, 2007

KRA/KFS Integration Team Report KRA/KFS Functional Council Aug. 21-23, 2007. Steve Dowdy, COEUS/KRA Peter Asquith, KRA, MSU Aaron Godert, Kuali Rice, Cornell Brian McGough, Kuali Rice, IU Vince Schimizzi, KFS, MSU Rochele Cotter, KRA, MSU Jim Corkill, KFS, UCSB Rich Andrews, KFS, UCI

hakan
Download Presentation

KRA/KFS Integration Team Report KRA/KFS Functional Council Aug. 21-23, 2007

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. KRA/KFS Integration Team ReportKRA/KFS Functional CouncilAug. 21-23, 2007

  2. Steve Dowdy, COEUS/KRA Peter Asquith, KRA, MSU Aaron Godert, Kuali Rice, Cornell Brian McGough, Kuali Rice, IU Vince Schimizzi, KFS, MSU Rochele Cotter, KRA, MSU Jim Corkill, KFS, UCSB Rich Andrews, KFS, UCI Jim Becker, KFS, IU Damon Dorsey, KFS, IU Steve Martin, KRA, IU Barb Sutton, KFS, Cornell Lora O’Connor, KRA/KFS, IU Lori Schultz, KRA/KFS, KRA Functional Council Lead, Arizona Kathleen McNeely, KFS Functional Council Lead, IU Phil McKown, Kuali Projects Analyst, IU Jim Thomas, KFS Project Mgr, IU Andy Slusar, KRA Project Mgr, Cornell KRA/KFS Integration Team Members

  3. Presentation Objectives • Team Objectives: Guiding Principles • “Short” COEUS/KRA Primer (Terminology) • Team Activities & Tasks • Review of Team Findings (high level and/or details---depends on the session) • Work Remaining (Assignments, Action Items)

  4. Team Objectives, Guiding Principles • Identify integration requirements for review during August F2F. • Facilitate understanding whether or not there are opportunities to affect KFS or KRA functionality (related to integration) in time for KFS Release 3 or KRA Release 1. • Analyze integration requirements from the perspective of data first, then process. • Identify the data that really should be in one place (e.g., a shared table or service).  • Define the process time line so we can see at what point in the process the data is required by each system. The integration team should focus on WHAT AND WHEN. The technical team can focus on the how. • Make prioritization recommendation---how important is this? • Keep in mind the rationale for the integration analysis: Implementing KRA and KFS together should provide benefits to the schools choosing to do so.  

  5. PERSON: “internally validated and affiliated” individuals. They are employees, and non-employees (who are valid affiliates of the institution); USER (a PERSON who has access to the KRA system) USER: (who will also be fiscal officer, proposal initiator, etc.) COEUS/KRA---KFS Terminology COEUS/KRA KFS

  6. ROLODEX: external individuals who are associated with a proposal. Generally these are people identified with SPONSORS as Program Officers (sponsoring agencies); or other external ORGANIZATIONS (subcontractors or vendors). If a ROLODEX entry is to actually have access to the system, they need to be associated with a Proposal as a PI, and become a PERSON. ROLODEX attributes include an ADDRESS. VENDOR, SUBCONTRACTOR, AR CUSTOMER COEUS/KRA---KFS Terminology COEUS/KRA KFS

  7. ORGANIZATION: External entity having a relationship with a PROPOSAL but not a SPONSORing Agency. Usually these are subcontractors. COST ELEMENT SUB CONTRACTOR, VENDOR OBJECT CODE COEUS/KRA---KFS Terminology COEUS/KRA KFS

  8. UNIT/UNIT HIERARCHY: Organizational structures that are internal to the institution. Also the related “parent and child” units that form the hierarchy of the institution. SPONSOR: Agencies that fund proposals ORGANIZATION CODE (“ORG”) AGENCY COEUS/KRA---KFS Terminology KFS COEUS/KRA

  9. KRA/KFS Integration Process Flow

  10. Team Activities: Integration Points We Covered • Persons • Rolodex • Appointments, Job Codes • Sponsors • Organizations • Unit Hierarchy • Cost Elements, Rates, Budgets • Proposal (Institute Proposal) • Award (partially)

  11. Remaining Possible Integration Points (that we did not cover) • Address: Assume no change needed (for now) • Degree, training, salary: Data from KRA • IRB/IACUC components: KRA Only; out of scope for this group • Protocols • Committees • Queries • Training Records • Correspondence, Meeting Agendas, Notifications • More on Awards: Action Item/Assignment --cover required integration points in SME group at a later point • Conflict of Interest Components: Data from KRA • Negotiations: Data from KRA • Subcontracts: Later Phase: covered a bit with Organizations • Bio-Safety and Chemical Tracking: Most data in KRA; KFS groups to identify Connections w/Purchasing Later Phase • Export Controls: Most data in KRA; KFS groups to identify Connections w/Purchasing; Later Phase • Organization (Internal/External) Service: Assign at a later point. Simple service in the short term (Central Org definition table for now)

  12. Team Findings, Resolution/Action Items • KRA Person Attributes & KFS Person Attributes, and Core Person Attributes • Take fields that are common, use common terminology • Normalize the 2 (try to affect the least disruption possible to terminology and elements) • Internal Organization (KFS=Org; COEUS=Unit & Unit hierarchy) • Take fields that are common, use common terminology • Normalize the 2 (try to affect the least disruption possible to terminology and elements) • External Organizations: Use of KRA Sponsor Table, other tables kept in sync • Cost Element, Object Code: Use KFS Object Codes • KRA/KFS Glossary: Integration Team • Work Flow Integration between the 2 products: SME groups in KRA, may need to join w/KFS SME groups for understanding • Subcontracts: There are both data and process integration required related to invoices. The appropriate SME groups on each side will need to work on this.

  13. More Action Items… • Bio-safety (KFS required connections) More TBD • Export control (KFS required connections) More TBD • How to create a truly integrated version of KRA/KFS that appears as such to the user? (Related to the next point) • What components/functionality are in, what’s the timing and implementation scenario (get input from functional council on how they want to see this) • KFS only • KRA only • KFS/KRA together*** This is what we focused on • Conversion scenario to get to the KFS/KRA together version (KFS to KRA) • Conversion scenario to get to the KFS/KRA together version (KRA to KFS)

  14. Questions---Providing Some Direction • What is the next charge for this group? • Where is the integrated product going in terms of scope, resources and time? • What is the long term and short term value of developing the integrated product? • Do the analysis now, the coding later? (This is the approach we agreed to on 8/22/07. Does the KFS Functional Council agree with this strategy?) • Possible next steps • Tackle the detailed tasks for the LEVEL 1, RANK 1 integration points (Person, Organization, Cost Element, etc.) • Identify the tables involved in the new “services” (from KRA and KFS) • Agree to common terminology • Define rules for creating, retrieving, updating and deleting values • Identify process points where these services would be used and when

  15. Summary • Successful identification of a number of critical integration points • Identification of integration points where further work can be done • Councils and Board need to determine final priority and timing

More Related