Euclid Technical Legacy - Other
  1. Home
  2. Projects
  3. Euclid Technical Legacy - Other
  4. Project Brief
  5. Organisation

Organisation

Project Plan

Please see Project Plan

Work/Task Breakdown

Phase of work

Objective

Task(s)

Who is involved?
Initiation O1&O2
  • Agree start date and kick off project

Project Team
Planning O1&O2
  • Define scope
  • Produce project brief
  • Create JIRAs for build work, grouping individual updates under parent JIRAs or epics for each package, e.g. UG Admissions
  • Draw up testing timeline, e.g. can any testing be covered in regression testing for other annual work, estimate time needed to test all development
  • Assess scale of work and testing required against planned release date and prioritise work packages

Project Manager

Project Team

 
Analysis O1
  • Identify usage of fields moving from STU to MCI, in SITS / EUCLID and downstream feeds e.g. EUGEX, BI - discussion to be had / work to be done on impact on reporting, would it be more or less work to update individual reports or to create a new consolidated view that feeds common views?
  • Confirm which records need to be updated and which are now deprecated, e.g. old Student Hub, old Online Registration, legacy HESA return SRFs
  • Group records by business / usage area, e.g records in UG Admissions, or in the Student Hub
  • Consolidate discrepancies between STU and MCI values and identify which value is most recent, and which need to be migrated
  • Identify workflows that use identified configuration
  • Up front analysis covering processes/integrations (WS02, EUGEX) reading student details on STU tables
  • Consult with users, where necessary, to discuss impact and understand any additional requirements
  • Analyse the BI reports using STU tables
  • Analyse the staff access to MCI
  • Identify criteria for population of MCI data from STU e.g. all students or only those within retention period

Business Analysts

SSP Dev Team

DevTech
  O2
  • Review the SITS database to identify the large tables, review processes creating large data volume
  • Prioritise actions: how we address the size of the tables/data retention policy required
  • Engage with stakeholders to agree data retention policy for the prioritised actions
  • Measure performance expected: take baselines, then review
  • Identify which tables can be deleted without the data retention policy
  
Build O1
  • Update SITS configuration to read data from MCI fields where legacy STU fields are referenced:
  1. EUCLID screens (web users)
  2. background processes such as HESADR, XVCR
  3. WSO2 integrations to Dynamics and People & Money
  4. the Direct Admissions application form
  • Review field-level validation (FLD) and Institution Field Definitions (IFDs) to ensure that any new values are included and legacy values are removed
  • Update references to legacy fields in EUGEX VWs and MVs
  • Migrate data from STU to MCI:

    - Write script to map and migrate values from STU to MCI for student population to be migrated (current students and applicants only?)

    - Identify most recent values where student may have completed online registration and data not present on MCI, or vice versa, and ensure correct values used

  • Update the BI universes and reports

  • Make required changes to configuration as per work packages

 SSP Dev Team
  O2
  • Build the deletion process as per agreed retention policy
  
Build Peer Review O1&O2
  • Peer review the above

SSP Dev Team

Project Manager

SSP
Test O1
  • Test & check the migrated data. Requires test plan with success criteria for each migrated field.
 SSP Dev Team
  O2
  • Test the deletion process in TEST environment as per agreed retention policy
 SSP Dev Team
Documentation & Comms O1&O2
  • Implementation plan including appropriate roll back steps and any SOP updates
  • Handover the deletion process to student systems so that they are run as BAU

BA team

SSP

Project Manager
Acceptance O1&O2
  • Check changes in TRN Environment and sign-off
 Student Systems Operations
Implementation O1
  • Agree downtime if applicable
  • Arrange an IS alert via change control
  • Communication plan for users outlining any downtime etc.
  • Release builds in keeping with planned schedule, releasing packages iteratively to minimise risk to processes such as annual registration, direct admissions, reporting et al
  • Once last release is live and signed off, disable MCI to STU sync

SSP Dev Team

BA team

Project Manager
  O2
  • Implement the deletion process in Live environment as per agreed retention policy
  
Delivery O1&O2
  • Deployment checklist

Production

Technology Lead
Post-LIVE checks & sign off deployments O1&O2
  • Post-LIVE support

Student Systems Operations

Production

Technology Lead
Closure O1&O2
  • Closure report

Project Manager

Project Team

Resources, Skills and Costs

The initial budget for this project was medium size (120 days) and only accounted for IS APPs and not USG resource. This was a placeholder figure pending estimations that were to be completed throughout the planning stage of the project and the development of its project brief.

We have now reviewed and re-estimated the required work. The analysis completed related to the data migration work highlighted extra strands of required work; such as the downstream integrations.

The project is larger and over a longer duration, although there is a dependency in agreeing the new data retention policy as part of Objective 2.

Total Project Budget is now estimated at 327 days and includes the following:

  • 204 IS APPs (including SSP Development), split as follows:
  1. 23/24 - 100.2
  2. 24/25 - 84.9
  • 123 SSP Business Analysts/Tester, split as follows:
  1. 23/24 - 64.6
  2. 24/25 - 58
  • Resource from the Reporting Team and Student Systems Operations are not included in this budget.
  • Objective 2 estimation for development work is 30 days, based on previous work deleting unsuccessful applicant data which took 10 days to run. Based on the initial anlysis of large tables, we are expecting to run 3 X deletions.

Project Governance

This project will follow the standard project governance in Project Services.

Any changes to major milestones (Initiation, Planning, Delivery, Closure) will be approved by the Project Sponsor, Project Team and Apps Review.

Major milestones achievements and changes will be submitted to Apps Review for approval/noting as necessary.

Project Stakeholders

Name Business Area Role Communication Plan
Anastasia Mezecka (PROJECT TEAM) SSP Business Analyst

Weekly catch-up meetings
Andy Crossland (PROJECT TEAM) SSP Senior Business Analyst

Weekly catch-up meetings
Craig Warrack (PROJECT TEAM) Student Systems Operations Business Lead

Weekly catch-up meetings
Defeng Ma (PROJECT TEAM) SSP Developer

Weekly catch-up meetings
Douglas Adamson (PROJECT TEAM) Apps Production Management Apps Lead

Weekly catch-up meetings
Ewan Wilson (PROJECT TEAM) SSP Developer

Weekly catch-up meetings
Franck Bergeret SSP Programme Manager

Weekly catch-up meetings
Gillian Simmons SRA Director's Office SRA Admissions

Ad-hoc
Jack Ross (PROJECT TEAM) Project Services Project Manager  
Jamie Morton Student Systems Operations BI Reporting Manager

Ad-hoc
Jim Galbraith Governance and Strategic Planning Governance and Strategic Planning

Ad-hoc
Julie Gifford Student Analytics, Insights and Modelling HESA Return

Ad-hoc
Luke Manley (PROJECT TEAM) SSP Tester

Weekly catch-up meetings
Mark Lang (PROJECT TEAM) Apps Development Services Technology Lead

Weekly catch-up meetings
Peter Donoghue (PROJECT TEAM) SSP Developer

Weekly catch-up meetings
Stefan Kaempf Applications Directorate Senior Supplier

Ad-hoc

 

 

 

This article was published on

Project Info

Project
Euclid Technical Legacy - Other
Code
SAC102
Programme
Student Systems Partnership SSP
Management Office
ISG PMO
Project Manager
Jack Ross
Project Sponsor
Lizzie Beattie
Current Stage
Close
Status
Closed
Project Classification
Run
Start Date
01-Apr-2024
Planning Date
31-May-2024
Delivery Date
28-Feb-2025
Close Date
31-Jul-2025
Overall Priority
Normal
Category
Compliance

Documentation

Plan