SHARING MODELSCOIT SEPTEMBER 2013

Playground Sharing

High Demand Lots of Kids & Pets

Limited Capacity Few Desirable Toys, Snacks

Mandates Right thing to doMom made us

Models & Tools Take Turns, Fight, Straws

Agenda

• Our Problem: High Demand, Limited Capacity, Mandates

• Sharing Models including Shared Services

• Update: OU Shared Services• Possible IT Sharing for COIT

Institutional Sharing

High Demand Near-record EnrollmentsHigh Expectation of Services

Limited Capacity Funding, Facilities, Infrastructure, Services

Mandates Graduate more students at lowest possible cost

Models & Tools

Service Frameworks, Purchasing Contracts, Committees, Collaboration, Cloud, Outsourcing

*Fall enrollment has increased by more

than 14,000 students since 2008.

*Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education

OU Norman Unique Network Devices

Wifi Concurrent Peak

May 2013 Sept 2013

32,404 37,475

2011 Higher Ed Compromise

• Exempted from Consolidation • Created a State Regents’ CIO• Accomplish Governor’s goals:– Accountability– Transparency– Cost-efficiencies– OversightAcross 25 Oklahoma HE public institutions

Recent Oklahoma Legislation

Open Source and Open Standards Purchasing PolicyHouse Bill 2197 (Murphey - Breechen)

Shared Services Agency ConsolidationHouse Bill 3053 (Steele - David)

Creation of Unified IT Purchasing SystemHouse Bill 2939 (Derby - Brinkley)

Using Higher Ed Spend to Increase Purchasing SavingsHouse Bill 2197 (Murphey - Breechen)

Determining the Performance of Government AgenciesHouse Bill 3053 (Steele - David)

State CIO (2013)House Bill 2062 (Derby)

Governor Mary Fallin:Two years ago, I asked you to work with me and our state’s Chief Information Officer Alex Petit to consolidate and improve IT. As I said in my state of the State address then, state government can’t continue to operate like an 8-track in an iPod world.

Rep. Jason Murphey:The consolidation of information technology among agencies has been beneficial. But the lobbying strength of higher education institutions has been successful in exempting itself from reforming information technology.

Higher education’s reluctance to give up control is a huge stumbling block in that effort.

Higher education fought consolidation efforts last year so it could charge state agencies more money.

“Push for state IT update targets Higher Ed” The Edmond Sun, Feb. 5, 2013

Restructure and reorganize administrative offices, academic departments, and other units (e.g. IT services,…) resulting in fewer personnel

Consolidate and outsource services such as email and other information technology when cost-efficient

Outsource all or selected IT functions; contract to use off-site servers; contract to use Blackboard’s servers; share and consolidate IT services

“For the last two to three years, our board is working closely with institutions on cost efficiency. We recognize that if we’re going to maintain the same level of access and service at our institutions, we have to bend the long-term cost curve.”

-Dominic Chavez, Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board

It is critical that we make sure that college is affordable for every single American who’s willing to work for it. Families and taxpayers can’t just keep paying more and more and more into an undisciplined system where costs just keep on going up and up and up. We’ll never have enough loan money, we’ll never have enough grant money, to keep up with costs that are going up 5, 6, 7 percent a year. We’ve got to get more out of what we pay for…

President ObamaJuly 24, 2013

Across the Public Sector

Public Sector SharingFactor Institutions

High Demand Near-record EnrollmentsHigh Expectation of Services

Limited Capacity

Funding, Facilities, Infrastructure, Services

Mandates Graduate more students at lowest possible cost

Models & Tools

Grants, Services, Contracts, Committees, Collaboration, Communities, Clouds, Outsourcing

State of Oklahoma Shared Services Center

*Source: Harvard Shared Services Summit

OU Shared Services

• IT Function Only• Significant Investment by OU• Virtual Shared Services Center• Cross-Campuses• External Institutions and Affiliates• Private Cloud Solution Building Blocks• Insourcing: “Outsourced to ourselves”• Local Campus Budgets

Virtual Shared Services Center

• People First - No Consolidation• Management Team + Fractional

Resources• Availability determined by local Director• Collaboration Tools• No Physical Workspace currently• Work Aligned to ITILv3 Design,

Transition, Operations

Shared Services

S2 Program Timeline

August 2011

October 2011

March 2012

March 2013

April 2013

October 2012

OU-Tulsa Data Center Live

Norman Data Center Live

A Private Cloud for OU

Virtual Operations TeamTri-campus designGeo-RedundantPurpose-Built for University-wide servicesStandardizedDe-duplicatedCost efficient

OU IT Shared Services

Live• Data Center Co-

Location• Data Center

Connectivity• Block Storage (SAN)• File Storage (NAS)• Sharepoint• Virtual Server Hosting• Professional Services

Pipeline• Data Protection (Fall

2013)• SQL Cluster (Fall 2013)• Oracle Cluster (Fall 2013)• Virtual Desktops (Fall

2013)• Log Management (tbd)• Archive Storage (tbd)• Voice Services (tbd)

S2 Acquisitions 5 Year

Campus To-Date FY 14-18 Total % Annual

Norman 6,853,998 5,980,025 12,834,024 54% 2,566,805

HSC 5,909,973 4,017,805 9,927,778 42% 1,985,556

Tulsa 693,045 167,923 860,968 4% 172,194

TOTALS 13,457,016 10,165,753 23, 622,769 100% 4,724,554

S2 Acquisitions By Category 5 Yrs

Category 5 Year TotalBackups $1.6M

DHCP/DNS $0.6M

Facility $1.2M

Network $7.7M

Security $1.9M

Storage $3.1M

SQL Server Licensing $1.0M

Tools $1.7M

Virtualization $1.3M

Voice $2.8M

Cost Efficiency Goal (5 Years)

Cost Efficiencies

StaffingDatacenter PurchasesDe-DuplicationVolume Discounts

Energy Savings External Chargeback

License PoolingMaintenance Savings

*Business Process Efficiencies

Efficiency ExamplesActivity Type 5 Yr Projection

Storage Sharing Data center purchases 1.5M

VMWare ELA License Pooling 300K

Microsoft ELA Volume Discount 2.2M

Avaya Contract Maintenance 400K

Initial Cisco DC Purchase Volume Discount 1M

Border Router Consolidation De-duplication 1.6M

Sharepoint (5 departments) De-duplication 50K

DC Network sharing De-duplication 275K

One-Net Lambdas Enhanced Value 4.6M

CommVault Maintenance 200K

Example Totals: $12,125,000

Efficiency ExampleActivity Type 5 Yr Projection

Storage Sharing Data center purchases 1.5M

VMWare ELA License Pooling 300K

Microsoft ELA Volume Discount 2.2M

Avaya Contract Maintenance 400K

Initial Cisco DC Purchase Volume Discount 1M

Border Router Consolidation De-duplication 1.6M

Sharepoint (5 departments) De-duplication 50K

DC Network sharing De-duplication 275K

One-Net Lambdas Enhanced Value 4.6M

CommVault Maintenance 200K

Example Totals: $12,125,000

Initial Cisco DC Purchase

List Price $7,129,950

Discount Rate 40%

Total Discount $2,851,980

OU Price $4,277,970

List Price $7,129,950

Discount Rate 55%

Total Discount $3,921,473

OU Price $3,208,478

Savings $1,069,493

Best OU Discount Before S2 S2: Standardized, Volume

S2 Staffing: Example Plan

Admin Design Transition Operations Total Budget32,982 18,513 437 33,128 85,061 71%

June2013June2013

S2 Staffing: Example Impact

Before S2

Before S2

After S2After S2

Staffing: Driving to Versatility

Defining Work UnitsRestore a Server from Backup CommvaultRestore a VM from Backup CommvaultConfigure Backup Job CommvaultDeploy Backup Agent on a Server CommvaultAdd a LUN CompellentGrow a LUN CompellentDelete a LUN CompellentConfigure Dedupe CompellentConfigure Storage Tiers CompellentModify Storage Tier for a LUN CompellentUpkeep and maintenance of CyberArk services CyberArkHot a Port DCNMAssign a VLAN to a Port DCNMCreate a Port Trunk DCNMAdd a VLAN to a Port Trunk DCNMConfigure Duplex & Port Speed Settings for Port DCNMManage SharePoint content and site migrations DocAveCreate an Upgrade Policy EmminentwareManually Upgrade a Machine EmminentwareInstall SSL Cert F5Renew SSL Cert F5Create Load Balancing Rule F5Create Port Redirection Rule F5Monitor Security Optical Taps GigamonOpen a Support Ticket GLUUProvision a Certificate InCommonRemove a Certificate InCommonRenew a Certificate InCommonCreate a Scope InfobloxCreate a DHCP Reservation InfobloxCreate DNS Alias Infoblox

Staff Skills

1 2 3 4 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 2 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 3 1 2 1 4 1 1 3 4 1 1 1 5 1 5 3 1 2 1 4 2 4 2 21 1 2 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 11 3 2 3 1 1 1 4 1 5 5 5 2 2 1 4 2 5 2 1 2 5 4 1 4 2 5 3 5 5 5 4 5

McA

fee

Mo

ve

Mic

roso

ft A

ctive

Dir

ecto

ry

ISIL

ON

Jun

iper

CLI

Jun

iper

SP

AC

E

Lase

rfich

e

McA

fee

EPO

Gig

amo

n

GLU

U

InC

om

mo

n

Info

blo

x

Dat

a C

ente

r C

ablin

g St

and

ard

s

Do

cAve

Emm

inen

twar

e

Equ

ipm

ent

Man

agem

ent

F5Cis

co N

exu

s C

LI

Cis

co D

CN

M

Co

mm

vau

lt

Co

mp

elle

nt

Cyb

erA

rk

Ava

ya M

od

ula

r M

essa

gin

g

Ava

ya S

essi

on

Man

ager

Cis

co A

SRs

Cis

co D

WD

M

Cis

co W

ISM

Alle

n-B

rad

ley

AP

C

Ava

ya C

om

mu

nic

atio

ns

Man

ageR

Virtual Badging• Tied to Cross-Training

Goals• Performance Management• “Gamification”

• Social Media Feeds• Learning Times /

Badge Stack• Project Kicked-off

Operations Team Members (orig)

Name Campus Day 0 Name Campus Day 0

Clasby, Aaron HSC 0.4 Knipfer, Josh Tulsa 0.1

Coldwell, Gray HSC 0.2 Wisby, David Tulsa 0.1

Duree, Christopher HSC 0.2 Walls, Steve Norman 0.4

Fairless, Daniel HSC 0.4 Gehrman, Bill Norman 0.2

Ledford, Yvonne HSC 0.1 Simpsen, Paul HSC 0.2

Little, Amanda HSC 0.4 Ma, Rosa Norman 0.6

Miller, Tony HSC 0.2 Keller, Cherry Norman 0.2

Alcock, Bruce Norman 0.4 Farha, Andrew Norman 0.2

Sabatino, Chris Norman 0.4 Cox, Jim Norman 0.4

Mumma, Randy Norman 0.2 Goforth, Mark HSC 0.2

Robertson, Elliot Norman 0.4 Johnson, Micheal Norman 0.4

Fox, BJ Tulsa 0.1 Qian, Gensheng Norman 0.2

6.6 FTE6.6 FTE

vOps Scheduling

Monetizing Services

• Key Differentiator of Shared Services• Difficult for IT as an industry• True costs within an university are

elusive• Consumption Model is a new approach• Transparency• Sustainable• Don’t make money; don’t lose money

3 New Datacenters

Data Center Space

Facility Cabinets Rack Units *Reserved Available

OKC 127 5,334 1,856 3,478

Norman 124 5,208 1,604 3,604

Tulsa - - - -

TOTAL 251 10,542 3,460 7,082

*Reserved cabinets and rack units are for the data center network

Data Center Co-Location Cost

Co-Location Rack Unit Cost Monthly %Building Construction Cost 11.15 60.27%

Rack/PDUs 0.97 5.24%

Mechanical Maintenance 1.16 6.27%

Safety & Monitoring 0.21 1.14%

Diesel 0.25 1.35%

Labor: Facility Management 2.35 12.70%

Admin Overhead 2.41 13.03%

Total without Utilities: $18.50

Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 10.50

Total with Utilities: $29.00

Data Center Connectivity

Facility 1 Gig Ports

1/10 Gig Ports

10 Gig Ports

Total Ports

OKC 1,378 768 608 2,754Norman 1,532 1,402 0 2,934

Tulsa - - - -TOTAL 2,910 2,170 608 5,688

*Projected after full build-out and includes ports used by IT

Data Center ConnectivityData Center Network Port Cost 1 Gig 1/10 Gig 10 Gig %

Data Center Network Hardware 5.15 8.78 8.73 19%Network Hardware Maintenance 1.86 1.86 1.93 5%Cross Campus Connection 1.80 1.80 1.80 4%Data Center Network Cabling 1.15 1.15 0.96 3%Labor: Data Center Network Management 6.99 6.83 7.08 17%Load Balancers, DNS/DHCP 0.93 0.93 0.95 2%IDS/IPS, Taps, Spans 2.52 2.52 2.61 6%Firewalls 0.78 0.78 0.92 2%Internet Bandwidth 1.74 1.74 1.54 4%Monitoring 0.56 0.56 0.56 1%Facility Charge 8.27 8.27 10.76 23%Admin Overhead 4.76 5.28 5.67 13%

Total without Utilities: $36.50 $40.50 $43.50

Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 4.50 4.50 4.50

Total with Utilities: $41.00 $45.00 $48.00

Enterprise Block (SAN) Storage

Tier 3 Per Gig Cost Initial % *2.5X %Storage Hardware and Software 0.032 24.85% 0.017 25.45%Vendor Maintenance and Support 0.017 12.78% 0.013 19.28%Network Port Charge: Storage 0.006 4.72% 0.002 3.65%Facility Charge 0.002 1.18% 0.001 1.94%Monitoring 0.013 10.06% 0.005 7.66%Labor: Storage Management 0.043 33.36% 0.020 28.99%Admin Overhead 0.017 13.04% 0.009 13.04%

Total without Utilities: $0.130 $0.068

Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 0.03 0.03

Total with Utilities: $0.16 $0.098

*2.5X price projection based on initial purchase of 429TB growing to 1,072TB

Enterprise BackupPer Gig Cost *Avg Cost %

CommVault Enterprise Software 0.09 31%Compellent Disk Arrays 0.06 20%Servers 0.01 5%Network Port Charge: Enterprise Backup 0.01 2%Facility Charge 0.01 2%Monitoring 0.01 2%Labor: Backup and Restore 0.07 25%Admin Overhead 0.04 13%

Total without Utilities: $0.30

Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 0.01

Total with Utilities: $0.31

*Average Cost Blended over 5 Years with 2X Compellent Growth

Retention Price/Gig15 Days $0.25

30 Days $0.35

45 Days $0.45

60 Days $0.55

Virtual Server HostingPer Hosted VM Base VM* Upgrade** %

Server and Blade Network Hardware 3.73 2.79 6.72%Hardware Warranty Extension (48 mos) 0.38 0.28 0.68%VMWare Licensing 1.94 1.45 3.50%VMWare Software Support 2.33 1.75 4.20%Virus Scan Solution 0.44 0.33 0.79%Network Port Charge: VMWare Cluster 0.45 0.34 0.81%Facility Hosting Charge 0.23 0.17 0.42%Bandwidth 3.91 2.93 7.05%Monitoring 3.78 2.84 6.83%Labor: VMWare Cluster Administration 27.59 49.77%Storage Bundle 50 Gigs 3.43 6.19%Admin Overhead 7.23 1.93 13.04%

Total without Utilities: $55.44 $14.82

Utilities: Power and Chilled Water 1.84 0.08 Total with Utilities:

$57.38 $15.00

*1,350 Base Capacity OR **1,800 Upgrade Capacity

Virtual Server PricingConfiguration

Shared Max. Resource Use Price

vGig vCPU vNIC Monthly 3 YR Total 4 YR TotalVM (1vGig/1vCPU/1vNIC) Shared Max 1 1 1 55 1,980 2,640

VM (2vGig/1vCPU/1vNIC) Shared Max 2 1 1 70 2,520 3,360

VM (3vGig/2vCPU/2vNIC) Shared Max 3 2 2 85 3,060 4,080

VM (4vGig/2vCPU/2vNIC) Shared Max 4 2 2 100 3,600 4,800

VM (5vGig/2vCPU/2vNIC) Shared Max 5 2 2 115 4,140 5,520

VM (6vGig/3vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 6 3 2 130 4,680 6,240

VM (7vGig/3vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 7 3 3 145 5,220 6,960

VM (8vGig/4vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 8 4 3 160 5,760 7,680

VM (9vGig/4vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 9 4 3 175 6,300 8,400

VM (10vGig/5vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 10 5 3 190 6,840 9,120

VM (11vGig/5vCPU/3vNIC) Shared Max 11 5 3 205 7,380 9,840

VM (12vGig/6vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 12 6 4 220 7,920 10,560

VM (13vGig/6vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 13 6 4 235 8,460 11,280

VM (14vGig/7vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 14 7 4 250 9,000 12,000

VM (15vGig/7vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 15 7 4 265 9,540 12,720

VM (16vGig/8vCPU/4vNIC) Shared Max 16 8 4 280 10,080 13,440

Custom Shared or Reserved Resources Contact us

S2 5 Yr Value ProjectionInvestment $29MOriginal Purpose Value $43MUpfront Cost Efficiencies $15MIT Staff Return $15MExcess Capacity Return $10M

Total Return:$68M2.3 : 1

Department Value TBDUniversity Value TBD

Institutional Sharing

High Demand Near-record EnrollmentsHigh Expectation of Services

Limited Capacity Funding, Facilities, Infrastructure, Services

Mandates Graduate more students at lowest possible cost

Models & Tools

Service Frameworks, Purchasing Contracts, Committees, Collaboration, Cloud, Outsourcing

Possible COIT Sharing Model• Continue to Build Shared Key Contracts• Develop Framework for Sharing Services• Web Catalog

– Service Description– Pricing– Contact– OSRHE Hosts? – Capture Savings for Von

• Each Institution Contributes & Consumes as Desired– “Big” and “Little” services, resources, expertise

• Some services will require common IdM• Cross-Jurisdictional Sharing Common in Public Sector but

NOT in Higher Education

QuestionsDiscussionThank you!

HORTON@OU.EDU@HORTONHEARSYOU