May, 2008 Summary of ITC Meetings:

May, 2008 Sum= mary of ITC M= eetings:

The IT Committee has been meeting weekly and discussin= g the following topics:

1. Flex Self-Reporting Portal

2. Security access control issues for LACC campus and satellites

3. Ncomputing - a solution= that is cost effective for providing greater computer access to students.

______________________________________________________= ___

June, 2008 Re= ports:

Summary of the meeting notes:

1. Telephone and Voicemail Upgrade IT announcement

2. Web-based HelpDesk Solu= tion

3. Technology Plan Update:

from Amy Sirott:

Informational technology Update from June 4, 2008 mee= ting

In attendance: =

Va= ughn Obern, Pamela Atkinson, Juan Mendoza, Pamela Atkinson, Amy Sirott, Evan Ken= dall, Hong, Mickey

Technology Plan Update

SGC re= quested a copy of the technology pla= n. The technology plan is currently on moodle.lacitycollege.edu under technology plans. The technology committee reviewed the education master plan. The committee examined the technology portion of the educational master plans material and the review of the technology goals

Ncomputing

We had Ncomputing representative Romulo Perez attend the information technology meet= ing remotely . He said they have sold over $6,000 devices to school districts

Everywhere you go, school IT directors face the same challenge: trying to expand computing access within= the bounds of a fixed annual IT budget. When the money for new computers is not there, the PC lifecycle gets stretched out and students must deal with limi= ted access on aging equipment. Shared computing addresses this dilemma by dramatically cutting the costs of giving students access to the latest computing technology.

Ncomputing Solution

NComput= ing harnesses the unused power of a PC and shares it among up to 30 users. They= can all run their own applications, and all at the same time. And the cost star= ts at $70 per additional student. NComputing also requires much less power to = run, generates less heat, and dramatically reduces maintenance time. In short, i= t is ideal for schools.

Products L330 connect through network Choose the L-series if your users need to be more than 10 meters away from the shared = PC. Because the L-series connects across a standard Ethernet local-area network, they just snap into place and can be just about as far away from the shared computer as you like.

Your us= ers can simultaneously share standard applications—including web browsers, instant messaging , e-mail, office suites, and b= asic multimedia. Of course, additional software licenses may be required by your application software providers (be sure to check your software license agreements to ensure you have the appropriate number of licenses).

L-series benefits<= o:p>

Share one PC with up to 30= users
Dramatically reduce acquis= ition & support costs
Easy to set up, maintain, = and secure
Flexible Ethernet networki= ng
Supports Windows and Linux=
Compact, reliable, and energy-efficient

Every user has their own keyboard, screen, settings, applications, and data files, so their experience is just like it would be if they were working at= an independent machine. For tight security, you can lock the shared computers behind closed doors. And for harsh environments like factories, you can move the PC away from dirt, dust and vibration. In both of these cases, you need the flexibility of an Ethernet network. That way, the virtual desktops= can be located in another room or clear across your facility.=

How ma= ny users can share a single computer? It depends on your applications and expectations. An entry-level computer comfortably supports up to 10 typical users. An entry-level server supports about 30. An enterprise-class server = can be configured to support more than a hundred.

www.ncomputing.com . Other schools using Ncomputing ar= e :

Palm Beach Community College - Michael Merker<= /p>

Director, Technology Infrastructure

= merkerm@pbcc.edu

(561) 868-3252

Yale University - LoriAnn Higashi

Mgr, Student Technology Collaborative

loriann.higashi@yale.edu

(203) 432-9549

Fresno Pacific University<= /st1:PlaceType> - Andrew Bodine

Technology Director

andrew.bodine@fresno.edu

(559) 453-3404

Pepperdine University - Thomas Hoover

Dir of Instructional Technology

thomas= .hoover@pepperdine.edu

(310) 568-5547

(This is actually in the L= A area)

The group reviewed the benefits of Ncomputing. Juan had several questions and asked about multimedia, use of Mac’s. = Mr. Perez will send a quote for the l series with licensing information for different size labs. He will give a quote, using existing computer keyboard= and mouse. CDW will give the quote.

Informational techno= logy Update from June 11, 2008 meeting

In attendance: Vaughn Obern, Pamela Atkinson, Juan Mendoza, Kathleen Beaufait; Amy Sirott, Evan Kendall,

Several items were discussed

DSX to Lenel

Juan Mendoza discussed the memo from Jack Black regarding Lenel for the shared governance meeting. Juan will di= scuss this at the District technology meeting.

Lenel is committed to delivering exceptiona= l security solutions and services. They

provide innovative solutions that enable organizations to protect their people, operations and information.

It is very important for the future that LACC upgrade their current access control system standard from DSX to Lenel. TRC has designed numerous campus security systems in southern California such as USC, LATTC. Lenel i= s a good choice for LACC as a system supports appropriate integration for management= by Sheriff’s department personnel and will provide a sustainable platfor= m to support emergency response on campus and off campus satellite facilities. However, some DSX equipment is existing, being installed (Parking Structure= , MLK Library) or planned and this decision therefore, requires formal approval. = Our design of the campus head end systems supporting LACC security systems will precede when the direction is confirmed by the College. TRC offers the following talking points to convey generally the benefits and estimated cos= ts of proceeding with this recommendation.

Pros:

This is more of an enterprise solution, Enterprise class capabilities (designed= to support IT management and support)

Off the shelf integration with video camera system (Currently DSX d= oes not support integration with the campus network video recording standard)

Off the shelf integration with Fire Alarm (DSX does not integrate w= ith EST or Notifier)

Single server for ease of maintenance, updates and management (mult= iple servers for DSX)

Single password login (DSX requires multiple passwords)<= /span>

More compatibility and support (DSX supports fewer operating systems and database management schemes)

Fault and disaster tolerant systems (DSX offers basic back up and server swapping)

Remote campuses self-contained and not vulnerable to communications failure between sites (DSX must operates in degraded mode when communicatio= n to main campus is lost; Local machines and functions may not remain online)

Compatibility with emergency response, mass notification systems and building management systems

Costs of system standard revision now will be far less than any fut= ure upgrade.

Easier integration with future District wide access control system = for employees when they go from campus to campus

Cons:

DSX is for smaller business. It is not an enterprise level system. = Cost of removing and replacing existing equipment (Parking Structure & MLK panels already mounted), revising project under construction (CDC, Science)= and re-engineering construction documents in development (Others) Cost: is estimated between $150,000-$300,000.<= /span>

Recommendation =

The IT committee recomme= nds that the campus adopt an “Ent= erprise class” access control system that will be capable of interoperating w= ith the District’s future access control system. This would require the eventual replacement of the currently implemented solution (DSX) which is n= ot an enterprise level solution. The LACCD is currently investigating a system from Lenel which would meet the campus’ r= equirements.

Information Technology Work Order Priority Syst= em – Draft #2=

Juan Mendoza submitted a document to this committee for review for a new work order priority system for the IT department. It is the system they are using at southwest college. In essence this would established an service level agreement (SLA) so that all parties have the same understanding of how the work requests are processed,= the priority levels assigned and the response time to

= The following is an attempt to prioritize work re= quests made for IT services that arise outside of regular duties or planned installations or projects. The potential demands on the Information Technol= ogy Department staffs’ time greatly exceeds availability. Requests may not be resolved immediately, and some solutions may be more appropriately provided by other means.

The approximate priority for, and the estimated time it = will take to begin working on a resolution response of the Information Technology Department will be as follows:

Priority Number	Description	Examples	Estimated time to begin work*
<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>1 - core	<= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Network infrastructure, i.e. main hubs, servers, and connections between college sites <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; >20% of lab or classroom down.<= /p>	<= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Network down from campus to Internet Service Provider;<= /span> <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Network down between classroom servers and main hubs. <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Class Server Down <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Hardware software or network	<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>1 hour
<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>2	Business critical operations down Major systems down (telephon= e, email, connectivity to District Systems; SAP, DEC, etc)=	Registrar, Admissions, Financial Aid, Business Office,=	<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>4 hour
<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>3	Individual faculty, administrator, or staff computer down	Single station down in office setting where other comp= uter can be used via internet to access critical functions such as email, ERPA, budget.	<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>48 hours
<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>4	Individual student use computer down=	Single station down in lab or classroom including hardware/software/networking problems	<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>72 hours
<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>5 – Lowest** <= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> = ; =	<= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Non-critical computer upgrades; <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Non-critical addition of software applications;<= /span> <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Support of unauthorized software applications; <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Moving computers from one location to another; <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Planning/consulting for new hardware and software	<= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Additional RAM or storage space; added peripherals such as scanner= s, digital cameras; <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Adding new software unless for classroom or instructional purposes with adequate lead time <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Applications not licensed by college or authorized for use in acad= emic or other settings. <= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>o&= nbsp; Moving computers because staff is being moved within an office location.	<= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Varied based on workload. <= span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>

* Initial Respon= se time is the time for service call to make initial diagnosis of problem. Actual repair may take longer depe= nding on type of problem, ordering of parts, reprioritization based on critical nature of problems and its affect on instruction or college work. Altiris work order system will be used to communicate approximate timelines and status of work orders.

** This priority is done on an as possible basis with no guarantee that= it can be done at all. If staff = is not currently available to perform this function the can be hired on overtime if funding exists to cover the costs.

New card for copiers

Implementing July 2008, it will use the cub card and has a password. Don’t need a = new card. Department chairs will use the same process. Juan will send an email = on the new system.

____________________________________

July, 2008 ITC Meetings:

1. IT Plan for Accreditation - Standard IIIC.

2. Web based Help Desk Solution from IT

3. Flex Self-reporting Portal

_____________________________________

August, 2008 ITC Meetings:

1. Telephone and Voicemail Upgrade starting 8/4/8

2. Wireless priorities on LACC campus

3. Consider a 2nd Data Center

4. Technology Design Standards (from Vantage Technology Consulting Group)

_______________________________________

September, 2008 ITC Meeting:

Vaughn's notes from 9-3-8

IT committ= ee Sept 3 2008 Notes=

Attendance: Vaughn Obern, Pam Atkinson, Kathleen Beaufait, Lisa Fitch, Kalynda Webber (guest), Juan Mendo= za, Rebecca Tillberg, Sol _____, Joe Meyers (guest)

The IT Committee discussed the following topics:

1. Counseling= :

&nbs= p; a. Counseling needs to get the sars link on their = home page. A license will be issue= d to counseling

&nbs= p; b. Student Assistance Page- will be updated as per counseling info.

2. IT Department:

&nbs= p; a. IT help desk on-line is still in pilot mode and will be up for general use within a month.

&nbs= p; b. The IT Work Order request priority will be presented and announcement that = IT will be on line will be made at SGC

&nbs= p; c. Wireless policy (map) by IT has been approved by the committee See link

&nbs= p; d. Juan will send out email about the wireless policy after presentation to SG= C.

&nbs= p; e. IT will have a new FAX (Ex Medius (sp?)) system= where fax will be sent automatically to the faculty inbox and not handled manuall= y.

3. Accreditation Tech Plan - Standard= III C:

&nbs= p; a. Add a 7^th goal to the IT Plan - Seek Partnerships where ava= ilable to increase resources”

(3C)

&nbs= p; b. We need to get our IT plan done this semester (per Joe Meyers).

&nbs= p; c. 1/3 of all identified SLO’s<= /span> have to= be assessed by 2010 (per Joe Meyers).

4. Omni Updat= e

&nbs= p; a. We’ll have Omni Update training in October

&nbs= p; b. All Web pages must be done and functional

5. Renaming o= f the IT Committee

&nbs= p; a. Revised Purposes of Technology Steering Committee will be presented to SGC committee.

&nbs= p; b. IT committee will be changed to Technology Steering Committee (per approval= of SGC)

&nbs= p; c. Minutes of IT will be p= ut on the internet (Vaughn will send minutes to Pam)

Agenda for 09/10/08:

1. Report on what happened at SGC

2. Incorporate additional language on IT goals.

3. Omni Update training date determination

4. IT Committee meeting time - all put their schedule = on Outlook Calendar