Completion Report
Project Summary:
Background
Were the project goals met? Yes.
Were the project deliverables fully or partially accomplished? Fully
The goals of the projects were:
The scope of this analysis project:
- articulate the options and recommendation to replace the current IT systems used by the Student Disability Service.
- taking the current risks of the SDS applications and the cost/benefits into account.
The following deliverables were achieved (from project brief)
A paper with options and the recommended approach to replace the SDS applications, emphasising on the benefits . It includes details of how this will be achieved, how and when the systems will be replaced. For each application being replaced, how it would interface or/and be manually managed with the existing ones. It also includes a high level plan for implementation projects.
The following deliverables were not described in the Brief but were delivered: n/a
Not Delivered: n/a
Did the project deliver a solution to the problems being addressed?
Yes. The paper addresses the replacement of the SDS application in two phases, focusing on the unsupported applications 1st as they cary a high risk for the business. The 1st phase will also enable to lay the foundation for the 2nd phase when additional functionality will be moving into EUCLID.
The paper also provides a high level plan, which has been agreed with the SSP Board and prioritised accordingly.
What are the benefits for the business?
The paper identifies a range of options with their evaluation. It then makes a preferred recommendation. It finaly provides details of how and when the current functionality curently on SDS Systems, some unsupported, will be moving into EUCLID and BIS. This gives reassurance to the Disability Service how the recommendation maps their roadmap and how they will be able to start using some of the new functionality on new supported systems by Dec 2016.
Does the Project Sponsor agree that this project can be closed at this time?
Yes
| Cost Summary | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
Analysis of Resource Usage:
Staff Usage Estimate: 15 days
Staff Usage Actual: 5.5 days
Staff Usage Variance: -63%
Other Resource Estimate: 0 days
Other Resource Actual: 0 days
Other Resource Variance: 0%
Explanation for variance:
Delay to complete/sign off the recommendation paper due to other work for BA and availability from stakeholders, as well as the Student Systems Board to agree priority was only held in December. No impact on follow up project.
Fewer resources used in IS Apps. This was partly achieved as a result of agreeing with Finance, SDS and IS Apps, that the integration from EUCLID to eFinancials will be a partially automated process due to volume and benefit achieved (reduced SDS effort and possible mistakes while keying ), therefore requiring less analysis to a fully automated process.
Key Learning Points:
Outstanding issues:
None