The Transition from Accountability
pdf ’s to a Business Intelligence Suite
within the University of Texas System
Office of Strategic Initiatives
Dr. Alicia Betsinger, Assistant Director for Strategic Initiatives
Annette Royal, Business Intelligence Research Analyst
Jennifer Carnes Whitman, Systems Analyst
November 2012
UT System is a public institution of higher education and is prohibited by law and regulations from endorsing commercial
vendors. This presentation is a demonstration of a UT System Electronic Accountability System. Any mention of a specific
commercial vendor is not an endorsement by UT System and is for informational purposes only.
UT System By the Numbers
• 15 institutions


9 academic institutions
6 health institutions
• 214,861 students (Fall 2011)


74% undergraduate
40% Hispanic
• 46,094 degrees/certificates awarded (AY 2011)



66% undergraduate
~35% of degrees awarded by public universities in Texas
~63% of degrees awarded by public health-related institutions in Texas
• 19,099 faculty, including 7,621 T/TT faculty
• $2.54 billion in research expenditures (FY 2011)


54% federally funded
65% by the health-related institutions
• $13.1 billion in budgeted expenses (FY 2012)
• $17.6 billion in endowments (FY 2011)
2
Driving Forces
• Board of Regents
• Chancellor
• State and national trends
• Calls for increased transparency and accountability
• Calls to demonstrate productivity, efficiency, and
impact
• Increases in requests from internal and external
constituents for more data
• Desire to streamline and automate office operations
3
Framework for Advancing Excellence
• Framework for Advancing Excellence adopted in
May 2011.
• Framework Action Plan adopted in August 2011.
1.
Undergraduate Student Access & Success
2.
Faculty/Administrators/Staff Excellence
3.
Research
4.
Productivity and Efficiency
4
Framework for Advancing Excellence (cont.)
• Framework Action Plan continued.
5.
Strategic Information Technology Infrastructure Investments
The action plan prioritized the creation of an interactive data warehouse that
would support the management of the UT System and its institutions.
The Dashboard will support the Framework by providing an accessible,
customizable tool for monitoring institutional performance and progress
towards goals related to the nine areas in the action plan.
6.
Enhance Philanthropic Success
7.
Ph.D. Programs
8.
The Health of Texas
9.
Expanding Educational and Health Opportunities in
South Texas
5
Dashboard Overview
• Purpose: Many

Transparency, Accountability

Management Tool

“Fact Book”

Streamline Data Collection/Distribution Process
• Audience: Everyone

Internal leadership and staff; campus leadership and staff; government;
private industry; media

Unchallenged Public Access for almost every data point.

Although available as context, this is NOT intended as a primary source of
information for perspective students or their parents
6
Technical
7
Data
• Data Sources
 IPEDS
 THECB
 NSF
 System and Institutional submissions
 Other federal and state
• Data Structure
 Star Schema with slowly changing dimensions.
8
Server Environments
• Three separate SAS environments

DEV (development)

TEST

PROD (production)

Three environments ensure security and facilitate
• extracting / cleaning data
• developing reports
• pushing data and reports to internal/external users

Promotion Workflow
DEV
TEST
PROD
9
Server Environments
Public
Access
Unit Record
Level Data
Purpose
Server Structure
DEV
Extraction, Transformation
and Load (ETL) processes;
De-identification of datasets
for promotion; initial staging
ground for developing
reports, dashboards, and
portals; work promoted to
TEST for review
1 virtual server
No
Strictly Limited –
small number of
analysts in the office
Yes. ID
information only
available to a
very limited
subset of staff
TEST
Cleaned datasets; place to
develop and run reports &
analysis; review reports &
dashboards for promotion to
PROD
3 dedicated virtual
servers:
JBOSS web server,
metadata server,
application server
No
Limited – office staff
and internal users
only
Yes. Deidentified
PROD
Cleaned datasets; finalized
reports & dashboards
3 dedicated virtual
servers:
JBOSS web server,
metadata server,
application server
Yes
Open – public access
Login (single sign on)
– authenticated
secure access for
authorized users w/
role-based
permissions
Yes. Deidentified
10
Server Environments
• Virtualized server environment (Vmware)
• 7 virtual machines running 3 Business
Intelligence environments
WEB Server
(JBOSS)
Metadata
Server
Application
Server
PRODUCTION ENVIRONMENT
Development
Environment
Web,
Metadata &
Application
Servers
WEB Server
(JBOSS)
Metadata
Server
Application
Server
TEST ENVIRONMENT
11
Server Environments
• Data Storage

Each environment has a Network Attached Storage Device
with 150 GB
 Current projections for storage are for 15 GB of data for
each academic year
• Security





During implementation, conducted scan for potential
security threats
Threats were addressed on a case-by-case basis to
mitigate risk
Reverse proxy server
InCommon Secure Socket Layer certificate for additional
encryption and security
Shibboleth will allow single sign-on capability across
organizational boundaries
12
Dashboard Demo
data.utsystem.edu
13
Dashboard Expansion: Beyond the Core Indicators
14
Lessons Learned…So Far
1) Document processes as you go along,
especially those that are executed
regularly
2) Create a security model for OS and
application permission
3) Ensure that big picture is translated into
the appropriate detailed steps
4) Participate in training at the optimal point
in your process. Too early is ineffective!
15
Lessons Learned…So Far (cont.)
5) Accept that you will never have enough
time
6) Understand that data warehouse is built
for end-user rather than technical user
7) Accept that there will be intermediate
steps needed between your data
warehouse and analyst end users
8) Anticipate mid-course adjustments on
weekly, if not daily, basis
16
Conclusion: The Benefits
• Easy Access to Information
• Ability to Access Multiple Years of Historical
Data
• Standardization of Data Across a Large
Higher Education System
• Ability to Answer Complex Questions
• Transparency Results in Better Outcomes
17
Questions?
• Alicia Betsinger, Assistant Director

[email protected]
• Annette Royal, BI Research Analyst

[email protected]
• Jennifer Whitman, Systems Analyst

[email protected]
data.utsystem.edu
18