1	"Document Imaging Solution" Document Imaging Solution for Michigan Tech University
2	Why Document Imaging Now? Paper record retention and retrieval is a serious problem at the University. The University is at risk because it is not compliant with federal privacy and security regulations for the safeguarding of customer information. Document Imaging is inevitable – the question is “when,” not “if.” Document Imaging is the #1 priority in the University’s DRAFT e-commerce plan.
3	Document imaging perceptions Fact or Fiction? Document imaging will solve our record retention problems.
4	Two Groups of Users Data history Workflow process
5	Benefiting Departments Academic departments Administrative departments Auxiliary units Library
6	Recent Lessons Learned Post Mortem from TouchNet implementation – Look at the benefits of the recent TouchNet implementation. The university has strengthened internal controls, increased processing efficiency, is better safeguarding customer personal information, and is avoiding risk. Now ask. . . Why did it take 4 years to decide that we should implement?
7	Key features Accessibility (web) Feature rich Integration with SCT Banner Look and feel Low risk Minimal training Minimal support Portability to BMX Scalability Security (front end and back end) Value
8	Proposed MTU Records Imaging Strategy Image the “FY06 forward” records Image the “Exceptions only” for pre-FY06 documents. Backload “old” documents as time permits Let the old paper records lapse through the record retention cycle over the next 7 years. Address the archival storage problem of the digitized documents at a later date.
9	Alternative Imaging Solutions Document Imaging Alternatives considered In house imaging Contract Service On-site imaging Offsite imaging Hybrid / combo alternative We scan/they scan We archive electronic files / they archive electronic files We archive paper records / they archive paper records
10	Today’s Risks Purchase In-house Imaging system Initial purchase price may go down May switch vendors in the future, especially if we don’t initially go with the BMX system. We would have to create cross walks or keep both the new and the old systems available for the users. Contract Service Imaging Portability of digitized images Distance from an imaging vendor Offsite transfer of records
11	In-house Imaging Issues Banner Xtender Solutions Accessibility Integration Scalability (not) Security (transparent) Other In-house Turnkey Systems (Possibly) less cost of initial purchase, but MTU responsible for cross walks Present Future MTU responsible for security maintenance
12	Vendor Selection In-house Imaging Vendors BMX Documentum ImageNow Xerox DocuShare Contract Service Vendors EDS JPMorgan.com/ivault
13	Features & Benefits – General Phased–in approach to federal security and privacy compliance Partially resolves Space problem for retention of old records Departmental process review(s) – similar to transition from Unisys to SCT Banner Why are we doing this process? What are we doing? What should we be doing? Do we really need to be doing this? Centralized departmental imaging No additional FTE’s
14	Future Benefits – Specific example (Virtual auditing) We pull paper accounts payable vouchers out of file cabinets and boxes for review by independent auditors. We hope they don’t lose it before they return it. We re-file the voucher. We give auditors a read-only password and they review their A/P documents electronically. They print or save as they see fit.
15	Timeline Elimination of Paper Records
16	References – Banner schools In house imaging vendors BMXtender Solutions 200 licenses 100 installed Xerox DocuShare tba ImageNow tba Contract Service vendors EDS Tba Tba JPMorgan.com/ivault Tba
17	References – Non Banner schools In house imaging vendors Xerox DocuShare Stanford Tulane Contract Service vendors EDS Tba Tba JPMorgan.com/ivault Tba
18	Applications - Real User Examples Accounting services Purchasing Accounts Payable Accts Rec / Loans Cashiers Admissions and Registrars Financial Aid Human Resources Payroll Services Other departments
19	Workflow Changes
20	Current A/P Process
21	Current A/P Record Retention Process
22	In-house Imaging A/P Process
23	In-house Imaging A/P Record Retention
24	Contract Service Imaging A/P Record Retention
25	Credit Card Receipts
26	Contract Service Specifications On-site vs. Off-site imaging On site imaging is expensive Off site imaging has inherent risks of shipping our confidential records hundreds or thousands of miles away.
27	System price is tied to functionality The system cost increases progressively as functionality increases Key is to determine the necessary functionality requirements and then balance to the available budget
28	Initial Costs
29	Operating Costs – Year 2 and beyond
30	Pay-to-Play Funding Initial software purchase Core group of departments to fund Direct charges to the departments Scanners, scanner workstations, or scanner cards for the photocopiers Conversions or other unique needs Workflow plan Pro-rata charges to the users Scanning software license fee Document mgt software license fee Implementation visit Implementation specialist Document repository costs Annual maintenance fee
31	Accounting’s Competing Priorities Employee turnover and replacement DS-2 F&A report
32	ACS’s Competing Priorities Work-in-Process Emas Employee turnover and replacement Enhanced web presence Enhanced wireless Social Security Number conversion New Content Management System Document imaging and management Enterprise portal Self service Web for HR
33	Proposed Implementation Phase 1 (Admin Building [FY06]) Purchasing + Accts Payable + General Accounting + Research Accounting workflow Ditto for MTF Accounting HR workflow Internal Audit workflow Budget Office workflow Admissions + OSRR+ Financial Aid + Student A/R + Cashiers workflow Graduate School workflow Research Services + Research Accounting workflow Phase 2 (All others [FY07]) Academic units Library
34	The Next Step Agree in principle Obtain Executive Council Approval Create Working Group of participating departments Determine product/service specifications Compute final costs of the proposed product/service
35	Paper Record Retention History
36	Approach We are looking for the BEST Value solution, not the CHEAPEST solution