Skip directly to: Main page content

Administrative Computing Policy

Key Roles

Project Sponsor (or delegate)

  • Submits project description for review
  • Provides additional information as needed in response to reviewer questions and feedback
  • Along with appropriate management officials, ultimately decides whether and how to proceed with a given project

IET

  • If requested, consults with sponsor regarding project planning and submission
  • Coordinates the 200-45 review process, gathering information from campus reviewers and facilitating discussions at relevant venues
  • Contributes IET-specific insights on a variety of project issues, such as campus middleware integration and Cyber Safety compliance

Reviewers

  • Provide candid feedback and recommendations to the project sponsor
  • Optionally, assist sponsor in addressing issues raised during the review and in working toward successful implementation of the project

Administrative Computing Coordinating Committee (ACCC)

  • Details regarding this role are still emerging, and will be informed by governance structures developed as part of the IT Roadmap process.

Review Process

The 200-45 review process is intentionally flexible, designed to provide comprehensive yet timely feedback appropriate to each project's scope and potential impact. It is not a formal approval nor a funding process, but it can inform both. The process revolves around the following main components:

Review Components

  1. A project description, developed by the project sponsor in consultation IET, provides a structured overview of functional goals, technical approaches, timeline/budget, and risks/mitigations.
  2. The plan is reviewed by campus technical leads, functional experts, relevant standing committees, and potential staff and faculty users.
  3. The project sponsor responds to reviewer comments and recommendations.
  4. A final report—summarizing the findings, recommendations, and sponsor’s responses—is provided to the Administrative Computing Coordinating Committee (ACCC) and posted on the Web.

Use of SmartSite for Project Reviews

In order to facilitate open dialog among project sponsors and reviewers, we have established a SmartSite for 200-45 project reviews. For those who have not yet joined, directions for signing up and participating are as follows:

To access the 200-45 Review SmartSite

  1. Go to SmartSite and select the Log In button in the top right corner.
  2. Enter your UC Davis LoginID and password.
  3. The first time you access the site, you will need to join the 200-45 Review site so you can participate in the discussion forum.
    • To join, click Membership under the My Workspace tab in the top left corner.
    • Select Joinable Sites at the top of the Membership window.
    • Select Join under the 200-45 Review entry. (The site list is alphabetical, so it should be near the top.)
    • You now should see a 200-45 Review tab to the right of the My Workspace gold tab (or in the More pull-down menu in the upper right corner).
  4. Click on the 200-45 Review tab to enter the site.

If you have questions as you join the 200-45 Review SmartSite or as you start using the site, please contact the IT Express Help Desk at (530) 754-HELP or send e-mail to smartsite-help@ucdavis.edu.

To provide feedback or ask questions regarding a project under revie

  1. Within the 200-45 SmartSite, choose Project Forums.
  2. Select the specific project (called a Topic in SmartSite) that you would like to discuss.
  3. Within a Topic, you can choose Post New Thread to add new comments or questions.
  4. To contribute to an existing discussion or respond to a question, select the item of interest and choose Reply.

Current Status of the 200-45 Review Process

As implemented to date, PPM 200-45 provides a single venue and format for describing and vetting significant IT projects, and has provided useful feedback to a number of project sponsors. Other aspects of the policy remain to be implemented and will be informed by both experience with the policy and by intersecting programs such as the IT Administrative Roadmap.

The "Administrative Computing Coordinating Committee" (ACCC) envisioned by the policy has not yet been developed, nor have there been requests for more detailed project descriptions, described in the policy as "comprehensive plans." Since the IT Roadmap process also suggests development of a group similar to the ACCC but with expanded responsibilities, it is likely that a single group will be formed to accommodate both needs.

In addition, the current procedures have been expanded to include optional "conceptual" reviews, allowing sponsors to submit abbreviated project descriptions very early in their developmen. This additional feedback can inform and help improve the full project plans.

Supplemental Materials

The following documents provide additional information regarding the 200-45 review process:

Groups and others to be consulted