Completion Report
Project Summary:
IS Applications Disaster Recovery plans have not been reviewed over the last few years. While infrastructure and software components have been delivered with Disaster Recovery thoughts and procedures, there is a lack in having an overarching Disaster Recovery plan.
This means for IS Applications, by not having an up to date Disaster Recovery plan, will be a major risk to the University’s priority services.
To fit with the University's strategy, Infrastructure updates are required:
- to ensure infrastructure components are maintained and supported to ensure capacity, security and performance requirements
- for rationalisation of architecture where appropriate to enable easier maintenance and reduced costs
- to standardise delivery of the various operating system, database and application layer technologies across the enterprise IT estate.
We will look to ensure we are providing a stable, secure and available infrastructure by ensuring adequate maintenance for the hardware and supporting software required to provide the University services. This is seen as an on-going factor of our work where these elements are continually maintained year on year.
As part of the project an offsite sharepoint site to store all Disaster Recovery relevant documentation has been created.
Scope
This project’s focus to review the University’s priority services managed by IS Applications, this is to include Top and Medium Priority Services. Please note where any of these services are managed by 3rd party supplier (e.g. Cloud based) we will document components that are shared and collaborate with the owning infrastructure area, such IT Infrasructure, to link to their documented Disaster Recovery Plans.
| Top Priority Services (1) | Medium Priority Services (2) |
| Central WIKI Service | EBIS |
| DiscoverEd | EdWeb |
| Electronic Journals | E-Financials |
| EUCLID Web | eRecruitment |
| Kinetix (KX) | Events Booking |
| Learn | Hosted Websites |
| Moodle | HR/Payroll |
| MyEd | ID Management |
| Office 365 | Network Shared Drives (managed by USD) |
| Staffmail (managed by ITI) | PURE |
| University Website | Report & Analytics (BI Suite) |
| Timetabling | |
| Unidesk | |
| Worktribe |
Please note that there are other services which are not classed as top or medium priority, these were not reviewed as part of this project.
Out of scope: This project was not tasked with completing a DR test for a Top or Medium priority service, it is envisaged that a future project will complete this activity based on information collated from this project.
|
Objective |
Deliverables |
Success Criteria |
Benefits |
Priority |
Achieved |
|
|
1. To establish the set of components which are used by the priority services Applications |
1. Review all applications and components which make up the top and medium priority services 2. Establish a DR position for each application 3. Have a written document on how to recover that application. This may link to existing documentation.
|
|
1. Disaster Recovery plans have not been reviewed over the last few years. While infrastructure and software components have been delivered with Disaster Recovery thoughts and procedures, there is a lack in having an overarching Disaster Recovery plan. This project aims to assist with bridging this gap. |
1.1 Review all applications and components which make up the top and medium priority services (Must Have) |
Completed |
|
|
2. To produce Disaster Recovery plan, where required, for each of the applications noted as top and medium priority services |
2.1 For each Top and Medium priority service have a DR document/plan. This may link to existing documentation
|
|
2. This project will identify any potential gaps in project and /or support documentation and inform possible changes to process for completion of technical documentation.
3. Reduce any reputational risk to IS Applications to support Top and Medium Priority Services in the event of a Disaster recovery situation |
2.1 Establish a DR position for each top priority application, where required (Must Have) 2.2 Establish a DR position for each medium priority application, where required (Should Have) 2.2 Produce a written document, if none already available, on how to recover each application - which may link to existing documentation (Must Have) 2.3 For each Top and Medium priority service, if none already available, have a DR document/plan. - which may link to other documents (Must Have) 2.4 Create a Priority Services DR template document to be completed when a new Priority Services has been agreed and communicate the process to key operational areas (Should Have) |
Completed
|
|
|
3. To store Disaster Recovery plans in a central repository and communicate to appropriate support teams
|
3.1 A master DR document which can be stored off site |
|
4. All key technical resource within IS Applications and IT Infrastructure have a central information source with up to date application and component relating to Disaster Recovery |
3.1 Review storage options for a master DR document which can be stored off site (Should Have) 3.2 Agree options for storage of Master Documentation containing DR position for each component and detailing each Top and Medium priority Service DR Document / Plan (Should Have) 3.3 Create DR Documentation Storage Area (Should Have) 3.4 Communicate DR plans to appropriate areas within University e.g. IS Applications, IT Infrastructure (Must Have) |
Completed |
Analysis of Resource Usage:
Staff Usage Estimate: 100 days
Staff Usage Actual: 35 days
Staff Usage Variance: -65%
Other Resource Estimate: 0 days
Other Resource Actual: 0 days
Other Resource Variance: 0%
Explanation for variance:
- PICCL 1 -The project milestones were extended to allow additional time to review and complete an initial high level DR plan documentation which will be taken forward via IS Change theme of Service Based Culture and update of new Disaster Recovery Plan SharePoint to upload current versions of Technical Architecture documentation which will then be used as 'golden copy' versions going forward as agreed by IS Applications Operational Guidance Group (OGG).
Revised milestone dates were agreed by Project Sponsor, Programme Manager, Technical Lead and Project Manager.
As this project has been predominantly a paper exercise, and no technical changes required, there was a surplus budget available, to return back to the INF programme, this meant 25 days being returned in 16/17 financial year:
- Original overall approved budget = 100 days
- Unspent budget 16/17 as at Dec 16 returned = 25 days
- Approved budget = 75 days
- Approved 16/17 budget reduced from 79 days to 54 day
2. Any further surplus resource days will be returned at project closure = 19 days
Key Learning Points:
1. On review of the top and medium priority services Technical Architecture Documentation, it was noted that 6 applications were still held on old versions of the TAD templates (i.e. pre August 2014) :
- Kinetix (KX) – there is a separate DR plan held in Kdrive
- Learn – There is a separate DR plan held in Kdrive
- Office 365
- University Website (Ed Web) – DR plan is appended to the current version of the TAD
- Timetabling
- Unidesk – this was raised to the Project Manager assigned to SMI017 UNIDESK project for the TAD to be transferred to the latest document format
2. There was also an example of a document whereby information was noted as 'tbc' e.g. Worktribe. This review also highlighted where some documents were written in more depth than others. A recommendation would be for an exemplar TAD document to be reviewed by the Development Technology Team to help provide a consistent approach to complete documentation especially if a new resource joins the team they can use the exemplar example as a training guide.
Please note the examples provided above, may now have been updated, as it is several months since our review took place, but the project team felt it was worthwhile noting to ensure TADs are created / updated at the start of project and then reviewed and approved at acceptance / production handover, ensuring all changes have been incorporated and adopted by the project and production teams.
3. Involvement from ITI as a stakeholder has been useful as they also have a Business Continuity project ENT013 currently in progress therefore we have been able to share project outputs with them. They have agreed to use the template format we have created as part of this project and also the SharePoint site.
Outstanding issues:
Recommendations
1. Agreed a policy regarding priority of applications when evoking a Disaster Recovery
2. Initiation of new project there requires to be a focus on 1) co-ordination and execution process for Disaster Recovery 2) technical understanding allowing the initiation and managing of Disaster Recovery test
3. Instruct regular DR reviews to ensure documentation, colleague awareness and guidance is up to date with current and relevant information