Table of Contents

  • Common



    BASIS Steering committee
    Gerry Bomotti, Gene Buckley, Dick Cottrill, Tom Dorre, Allen Lacey, David Martinson, Susan Unger, and Bob Zimmerman


    W. David Wimberly


    Bill Moody, Colleen Briney, Bill Overby and William Rains
    BASISONE and BASISII discussion lists


    BASIS November status

    Since I am again officially on the BASIS Steering Committee, I will redirect my report to that body while continuing to share it with other interested persons. Progress during November was limited, primarily by the number of balls we are trying to keep in the air at one time: we are pursuing our phase 1 modules for BASIS I and II while continuing our on-going long term work with those systems, partially due to existing momentum. In addition, we are developing standards, program models and program generation capabilities and need to get on with TARGET development. I know I am having difficulty focusing attention and prioritizing time between all these efforts. On the brighter side, we are on the brink of cranking out some prototype functions. We will then need to train our core project teams in the features and use of these screens, and then collect feedback which will really determine where we are.



    1. The Steering Committee has approved the Leave Accounting module as the first phase of BASIS I. The efforts of the central project team have been focused on defining the scope and requirements of this subsystem. This group met four times during November. The current plan is to include short term leave accounting, over-time reporting, and comp-time accounting. It is less certain if and to what extent this module should initially deal with catastrophic leave and long term leave (where an individual's pay is adjusted via a PAF). A summary of the requirements defined to date include:

      Katrina, Joy and I have been working on the file design and interface requirements to support this system. We have also prepared numerous screen layout examples for evaluation. The layout of screens is a problem since we need something that will be easy to use, simple to understand, but capable of collecting a great deal of detail data on a large number of people.

    2. Analysis of the requirements to convert data from the existing Title-Occupation table to the new title tables was performed. This conversion and the screens to access this data will be used for training and evaluation, both within Computing Services and outside.

    3. Katrina, Joy and I attended two of the Human Resource training sessions recently conducted. These were very helpful in understanding the current systems and procedures.

    4. We have two, and possibly three, good applicants for a Systems Analyst II position that will be assigned to BASIS I. I hope we can make a hiring decision soon.

    Major issues

    I removed the item from this list lamenting my lack of time to adequately direct this project and BASIS II. This does not mean this is no longer a problem or major concern, it is just acceptance of the situation.

    1. Hire and train a new person to assist in this project.

    2. Determine the requirements, and methods to be used, for defining, storing and applying the Company/Cost Center distributions for use in charging out salary expenses.

    3. The means of performing available funds checking for salary/budget activity and for projecting future salary expenses requires further analysis.

    4. Specifics need to be defined regarding summer school budgeting and summer teaching appointments.

    5. Accommodation within the system needs to be planned for extra compensation and overloads.

    6. Security by value requirements, if they exist, must be defined.


    Due to our focus on the leave module, I have removed many of the other BASIS I needs that still require investigation. The following represent our immediate plans.

    1. Define the requirements for the leave accounting module.

    2. Obtain consensus for some initial leave entry screens and develop prototypes for evaluation.

    3. Involve departmental leave representatives in the project to obtain feedback on the initial concepts.

    4. Update file and data element definitions as needed for functional changes and standardization.

    5. Develop programs to maintain the tables related to titles, occupations, and possibly billets.



    1. There was a meeting on the 16th to discuss project issues that had been documented for Gerry Bomotti and to review his written response. In attendance were Tom Dorre, David Martinson and the lead office representatives from the core project team (Colleen Briney, Bill Moody, William Rains and David Wimberly). The intent is to identify all policy and procedure changes that will be required by the system to ensure that they have the necessary management support. A meeting with Vice Chancellor Bomotti is now scheduled for December 10th.

    2. There were five meetings of the central project team held during November. These meetings addressed the following topics:

    3. The Financial Affairs Advisory group met in November and discussed the transfer module, internal orders, tolerances on internal and vendor orders, tolerances at the level where funds are checked, and the paperless system concept.

    4. Paul and Sandra continued work on our Requisition, Bid, Contract, PO and transfer (adjustment documents?) files during the month, although no new documents defining these files were released. A summary description for requisition processing is also close to being published.

    5. We did initiate some programming efforts by defining an application and building a start-up, a menu, and an attribute maintenance program. All programs were generated using the ISPF macros Kathryn has written. Work in this area was postponed until after the MVS/ESA installation, when Data Base Administrator resources would become available. Everyone is getting anxious to crank some code and see how all this hocus pocus is going to work.

    Major issues

    The only change to this list is the first item, which is an addition.

    1. The library currently issues its own purchase orders for books and periodicals, and there are no plans to change this procedure. It is in the process of implementing its new Infolinks system, which tracks these orders and encumbers funds (separate from the university central system) and at a departmental allocation level. To complete this process, orders are received into this system and invoices are recorded. It appears that an automated invoice interface from Infolinks to BASIS will be very doable, and with appropriate controls, is acceptable to Campus Audit. The issue is, do the library's POs have to be recorded within BASIS? Due to the types of activity that occur with purchase orders, keeping the two systems in sync would be a nightmare.

    2. The core project team feels that it has worked out a compromise solution for inter-departmental order processing. The latest document summarizing these ideas is dated December 3. The next step is to sit down with the major service departments and review these ideas face to face. Recommendations to management will be based on the input received from the service departments.

    3. A method of identifying and reporting federal expenditures by the period of the obligation needs to be identified.

    4. We plan to develop a general purpose facility to provide word processing-like capabilities for requisition and purchase order descriptions, but need some time to do the work.

    5. The requirements of the system remain chock full of exceptions and special handling requirements. We hope we can document all of them and develop a system that takes them into consideration.

    6. There is a need to replace or interface with various inventory systems. The areas that have a possible interest in such a facility include: Scientific Supplies, Dining Services, Physical Plant and Cooperative Extension Service.


    The following represent our near term plans:

    1. Reach a firm decision regarding the processing of internal orders.

    2. Finalize and release the overview document for requisition processing.

    3. For the transfer module:

    4. Initiate development of the programs to process vendor related data.

    5. Review internally within Computing Services the data requirements for purchase orders so that this documentation can be shared with the project team.

    6. Define an Available Funds File, tolerances to be employed during funds checking, and the company/cost center attributes that will govern how funds are checked. We hope to do this in a manner that will be somewhat flexible regarding the methods employed for funds checking.

    7. Design the system components for maintaining encumbrance balances and performing funds checking.

    8. Meet with more departmental "bookkeepers" regarding some of the basic concepts we plan to incorporate into our system and solicit their opinions and feedback.



    1. The BASIS Sneak Preview provided at the Finance and Administration training sessions served very well as a means of getting the word out and asking for input. If we can get good campus wide input and involvement we will have the most critical part of the project in hand. Many thanks to David Hyatt for organizing and conducting these presentations.

    2. We have developed a standard input routine to be used for all dates that allows entry in any one of six formats: MMDDYY, MMDDYYYY, MM/DD/YY, MM/DD/YYYY, MM-DD-YY or MM-DD-YYYY. Dates will be displayed as MM/DD/YYYY, but any format of entry will be permitted.

    3. I met with Financial Affairs to discuss the TARGET routing definitions and the options for establishing these. A new concept that emerged from this discussion, one that was not part of the original TARGET proposal, is an ability to provide a "complimentary copy" of a transaction to someone. This request presents some unique problems which will require further analysis. We will also need to consider alternative solutions that may address the basic need.

    4. The functional specifications for the updated NSM Maintenance System have now been completed and released.

    5. The two "effective dated data" program models were further refined, and the macros to generate programs using these models were developed.

    6. Further refinements were made to our element naming standards, causing us to go back and update the names within files already defined. Though this is causing more work now, I believe the investment in developing and implementing these standards now will pay dividends throughout the life of BASIS.


    The following items can be generally considered as "to dos" for Kathryn and myself.

    1. Implement the modifications to the NSM Maintenance System in production.
    2. Develop a TARGET administration system to be used to maintain the routing tables and other definitions required for the operation of TARGET.
    3. Develop a basic TARGET function module model program and update the TARGET functional specifications.
    4. Develop a function module model program to perform maintenance on data that occurs multiple times within an ADABAS data record (either within MUs or PEs).

    Please feel free to raise any questions or concerns prompted by this report.