1.
Mills College Information Technology:
An Evaluation of Financial Aid Services
Client: Mills College IT Department
Option C: Technology Management Evaluation
Shanti Jensen
Alia Luqman
Leanna Pearson
MGMT 266
Professor Secor
Professor Meader
April 28, 2016
Contacts: Bruce McCreary, Alison Ross, Victoria Jenner,
Mills College IT Department, Lucie Stern Hall 21
5000 MacArthur Blvd, Oakland, CA 94613
1

2.
Table of Contents
Targeted Technology: Higher Education Enterprise Resource Planning for Student Finance
and Financial Aid​……………………………………………………………………………..1
History and Evolution of Higher Education ERP​…………………………………………...1
Mills IT Structure and Service Integration​………………………………...…………....2
History and Evolution of Banner at Mills​…………………………………………….....3
Financial Aid and Student Accounts in myMills​………………………………………...3
Evaluation Plan​…………………………………………………………………………….....5
Data Collection​…………………………………………………………………………....6
Evaluation Criteria for Financial Aid and Student Account Functions of Higher Education
ERPs​………………………………………… …… …………………………………..6
Recommended for Complementary Use with Focus Groups​………………………....6
Matrix Instructions​………………………………………………………………….....6
Evaluation of the Top 2 Education ERPs​………………………………………………….....9
The Future of Higher Education ERPs​…………………………………………………......17
Appendix​…………………………………………………………………………………..19
Interviews​………………………………………………………………………………..19
​Survey Questions and Responses​………………………………………………...21
​Student Focus Group Recommendations​………………………………………...23
Exhibits​……………………………………………………………………………………...24
Figure 7 Screenshot of Mills Portal​…………………………………………………...24
Figure 8 Screenshot of Current myMills Resources​……………………………….....24
​ ​Figure 9 Step­by­Step Mills eRefund Tutorial​…………………………………......25
Figure 10 ​Step­by­Step CSU eRefund Tutorial in PeopleSoft​……………………....30
Figure 11 Mills Online Services Flow Chart…………………………………………..33
2

3.
Scoresheet
Value
Points Criteria
10% 1. Targeted Technology X: describe the targeted technology in technical detail
20% 2. History and Evolution of X: describe its history and evolution, its current capabilities
and use, including a discussion of the social impacts, positive and negative.
20% 3. Evaluation Plan for X: create a set of criteria and an evaluation plan with which you
(or another practicing manager) could use to evaluate both the technology, in general, and
a particular implementation of it, which could be a vendor's offering, or an organization's
own creation.​ These criteria will be based on feedback from a student survey that we
craft and administer. ​This should look like a table for easy “apples to apples”
comparisons with weights, scoring, and user instructions. Important: be very detailed and
clear about how to use this plan and criteria, make it so that you could hand it off to
someone and they could figure out how to use it from your report. Social impacts should
be included.
20% 4. Evaluating The Top X: use your criteria and evaluation plan to evaluate the top 2­4
product offerings.
10% 5. The Future of X: predict the next 2­5 years of the technology, where it will likely add
business value, where it will likely cause more problems than value, etc. (you may wish
to blend points 2 and 5)
20% 6. Writing (see following pages)
3

4.
Executive Summary
This report provides an overview of the history and functionality of higher education
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems as well as an evaluation plan for institutions to
choose an appropriate product. Forecasts predict that the global market for higher education
ERPs will grow from $6.4 Billion in 2015 to $14.22 Billion in 2020 . Higher Education ERPs 1
became prevalent in the 1990’s by providing integrated data management and communication for
diverse administrative and academic departments in universities. Linked departments typically
include ​admissions, registration, billing, financial aid, student services, course management,
alumni development, and fiscal management. ​ERPs​ eliminate the need to enter data in multiple
systems, reduce data entry errors, and allow for real time updates and instant access to
information. Increasing school are implementing cloud­based ERPs which provide more ​data
storage capacity, security, and control.
During the first periods of higher education ERP implementation,​ approximately 50% of
all ERPs failed. ​ Implementation guidelines which developed from those initial failures 2
recommended that universities ​identify specific functionality requirements before changing
systems. This report details the specific functionality requirements of Mills College, taking into
account the unique needs and preferences of the student body. Online surveys and a focus group
were used to determine the most important capabilities that an ERP should have in its financial
aid and student finance modules. The ranking of functions was used to create a weighted criteria
matrix which can be used for future ERP evaluations. An example evaluation was done to
compare student finance and financial aid services in Banner and PeopleSoft ERPs. The
evaluation showed PeopleSoft to be a much more user­friendly and efficient system.
Despite widespread dissatisfaction with its current ERP, Banner, Mills College will
maintain the legacy system indefinitely. Financial and logistical costs associated with
transitioning limit the ability of the IT department to switch to a more user­friendly product.
However, the department is taking steps to make as many modifications as the Banner
framework can support in order to improve the Mills student user experience.
1
http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/education­erp.asp
2
Educause. ERP Systems for Higher Education: Evaluating and Selecting The Best Fit For the Institution
http://www.eduserveinternational.com/documents/EduServeEASEmodel.pdf
4

5.
Targeted Technology: Higher Education Enterprise Resource Planning for Student
Finance and Financial Aid
This project presents an evaluation of ERP functional applications used in higher
education with a focus on student finance and financial aid functionality. A functional
application is a​ program or computer system, particularly a real­time system, that deals with the
primary, ongoing operations of a business enterprise. Turban & Volonino explain that an ERP is
the software infrastructure that links an enterprise’s internal applications and supports the
external business processes. In higher education, the internal and external processes revolve
around the following areas of business; admissions, registration, billing, financial aid, student
services, course management, alumni development, and fiscal management. A well designed
and integrated ERP can create capacity for all parts of the higher education system to
communicate and support each other. Integration should (1) eliminate the need to enter data in
multiple systems, (2) reduce data entry errors, and most important for our financial aid­specific
inquiries, (3) allow for the posting of transactional data in real time for instant access to
up­to­date information.
​Banner is used by Mills College in conjunction with the payment software CashNet, a
Higher One product, to provide comprehensive student finance services. Banner is the most
popular higher education ERP software on the market. Some form of Banner is used by more
than 1,400 institutions worldwide. A product of Ellucian, Banner’s functional areas include:
recruiting and admissions, enrollment and retention, academic administration, student finances,
financial aid, degree advising, human resources, and finance. Banner is offered through both
cloud­based computing and downloadable software. Banner provides different interfaces for
students, staff and faculty.
History and Evolution of Higher Education ERP
Enterprise Resource Planning systems have a far reaching history. In the years leading
up to the new millennium, business and industry began to realize they had a problem: Y2K.
Research discussing the anticipated Y2K crash and efforts to forego any data loss highlights how
many companies investigated new data management software to replace their outdated legacy
systems before January 1, 2000. This new software need led to the market growth for ERP 3
software, designed to replace legacy systems and envelope all facets of a business under one
software “umbrella.” As new modules were developed and new uses were found for the different
capabilities of ERP software, companies invested millions of dollars into these new systems,
hoping for a competitive edge. 4
Looking more specifically at ERP for higher education, a select number of organizations
have created guidelines higher education institutions use when choosing and adapting an ERP.
The purpose of the guidelines is to increase the likelihood of success in the adoption. It is
estimated that during the first periods of ERP implementation, approximately 50% of all ERPs
3
Davis, Huang, ERP in Higher Education: A Case Study of SAP and Campus Management
http://iacis.org/iis/2007/Davis_Huang.pdf
4
ibid
5

6.
failed. The guidelines are meant to provide CIO Chief Information Officers at higher education 5
institutions a formula for success:
● Develop a Strategic Vision for the College
● Develop Objectives for a new system
● Identify Specific Functionality Requirements
● Understand the Technical Requirements
● Create a Budget for the Total Cost of Ownership
o Purchase Price
o Implementation
o Hardware Implications
o Maintenance of Staffing 6
Most research and information on the targeted technology addresses ERP in general for higher
education and does not specify financial aid services. The reason for this is the expectation of
higher education institutions is for one ERP to integrate all or most operations, including the
financial services.
Mills IT Structure and Service Integration
The Mills IT Department is organized into seven important sub­departmental functions
that serve the entire campus (See Appendix Figure 11):
● Systems/servers
● Managing the Portal and Banner/ERP
● Desktops on campus
● Training of faculty/staff/new students and Purchasing
● Mills email
● Network infrastructure: cabling and the wireless services
● Audio/Visual services
Many IT services are housed outside the IT department, making the service structure at
Mills unique. For example, the Mills College website is managed by the school’s Marketing
Department and the Blackboard system is run by the Provost. In addition to the school’s main
website, the Marketing Department manages web pages for most individual departments on
campus. The Housing Department manages its own website due to the large departmental size.
In an interview (see Appendix for full interview), Bruce McCreary, Mills College Senior
Director of ITS, provided history and context for the IT Services offered at Mills. Currently,
Mr. McCreary and his colleagues implement and adapt systems to meet the needs of the Mills IT
Services. Mr. McCreary does not make all decisions about which software is purchased for the
various needs of Mills students and staff in the many different departments. The Mills Cafe for
example purchased their own software to manage the purchases of food and beverages. Mr.
McCreary explained that the Financial Aid portion of IT is managed by two system
administrators, Alison Ross of the M­Center and Victoria Jenner of the Finance Department.
Ross and Jenner are two of four “funky techs” that work at Mills. Funky Techs are the
functional technicians that manage the code and hook ups specific to their respective portions of
the Banner and CashNet services.
5
Educause. ERP Systems for Higher Education: Evaluating and Selecting The Best Fit For the Institution
http://www.eduserveinternational.com/documents/EduServeEASEmodel.pdf
6
Swartz, Orgil. Higher Education ERP: Lessons Learned ​https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/eqm0121.pdf
6

7.
One of the great challenges facing the Mills IT Department, and in turn, the IT financial
aid services, is decentralization of Mills IT. Mr. McCreary explained that, many higher
education institutions have a Chief Information Officer (CIO) who sets the course of all IT plans
on campus. Mills does not have this structure. Mills allows for each department to decide which
programs suits its needs and each program purchases its own applications. Once the applications
are purchased, the various departments rely on the IT department for product integration.
Unfortunately, without a centralized plan, utilizing various applications makes for a disjointed
and disrupted user experience. Mr. McCreary explained that a CIO position has been in the
budget many times, but one has never been hired. Mr. McCreary has been acting informally as a
de facto CIO for 8 years.
History and Evolution of Banner at Mills
Banner was first introduced at Mills College in 1995. It was used only by administrators
until 1998 when a self­serve version became available for students to access their accounts.
Banner is known by the customized name “myMills Resources” to Mills students. It is through
Banner that students access their financial aid and view their finance accounts. In order to make
payments, students must navigate out of Banner to a site run by CashNet, a HigherOne bill
payment and online banking company. Students also complete registration and access their
academic records through myMills Resources.
By today’s standards, Banner is considered a legacy system because it has not been
updated in 15 years. The interface is challenging to navigate by the standards of a modern
computer user. Mr. McCreary explained that replacing Banner has been discussed for many
years however, the expense is a huge deterrent. If the school adopted Work Day, which is a
superior ERP, but includes less functions than Banner, it would cost $750,000 a year. Currently,
the school pays $200,000 a year for both Banner and the Oracle system it runs on. Savings in
choosing an alternative ERP could be made by laying off current employees, but McCreary
considers that a net loss to the university. He sees that ​there is always an advantage to having
local staff rather than relying on remote staff. ERPs usually must be adapted because higher
educational institutions frequently have many nonstandard needs and ways of doing business.
He considers local staff vital to navigating these anomalies and better supporting the Mills
campus.
Financial Aid and Student Accounts in myMills
Students may access their financial aid information through two different clickable links
on the myMills Resources page; Financial Aid Information and Account Billing and Payment
(See Figure 1). Clicking on Financial Aid Information brings the user to a page with numerous
tabs, Admissions, Financial Aid, Registration Information, Student Accounts, Student Records,
and Personal Information (See Figure 2). Each of these tabs can also be reached by clicking on
buttons on the myMills Resources page. This is one instance of redundancy on Banner. If a
student wants to see their current financial aid status they must go to myMills Student Accounts
(Figure 2), and if a student wants to pay a bill, they must go back to the myMills Resources page
and click on Accounts and Billing which brings the student to a CASHNet site entitled Student
Accounts (Figure 3). The process is convoluted and anything but seamless. Generally speaking,
each task on the myMills Resources site can be performed through several different series of
navigations. This results in confusion and inconsistency.
7

8.
When asked about CashNet and its usability, Victoria Jenner, Mills College Finance
Information Systems and Applications Administrator, explained the history of CashNet (See
Appendix for full interview). CashNet was adopted in 2010. Prior to 2010, the school used TMS
Tuition Management Service and Lock Box, which were very antiquated and not user friendly.
ACH (​Automated Clearinghouse­an electronic payment​ ​delivery)​ and credit card payments were
processed on different sites, and it took 4 weeks for payments to post to accounts. From Ms.
Jenner’s perspective CashNet is a huge improvement and she does not feel it is problematic. Ms.
Jenner did state however, that she would greatly value student feedback about CashNet and its
usability.
Our evaluation does not include a formal assessment of CashNet. However, In our
group’s assessment of the CashNet service, major pain points include: (1) Students’ ability to
collect their eRefunds is confusing, (2) When making a payment students are expected to recall
the amount due and key it into the system, (3) Payment alerts and reminders are not distinct,
meaning students receive the same reminders for bills they have already scheduled payment on
and bills they have not yet scheduled payment for, and (4) CashNet and myMills are not fully
integrated and once payments are made in CashNet they are not immediately reflected on
myMills.
Figure 1: Screenshot of myMills Resources
8

9.
Figure 2: Screenshot of myMills Student Accounts
Figure 3: Screenshot of CashNet Student Accounts
Evaluation Plan
To keep our project focused and within a reasonable scope, we created an evaluation plan
for the Student Accounts and Financial Aid sections of higher education ERPs. Therefore our
evaluation criteria should be considered one important part of an evaluation plan that would
include rating the full array of ERP functions: Registration, Human Resources, Enrollment and
Retention etc.
9

10.
Data Collection
To create an evaluation plan for higher education ERPs, we first listed our team’s current
dissatisfactions with the myMills system. We then designed an online student survey to collect
feedback from the larger student body about myMills. At the suggestion of Alison Ross, a
systems administrator for Student Accounts, Financial Aid and the Registrar, we also ran a focus
group including 5 graduate students on the topic. The focus group, which Ross attended,
allowed us to collect student commentary and ideas with a level of detail that would have been
difficult to gather via the survey. In addition to helping determine ERP evaluation criteria, the
focus group served a secondary purpose of guiding Ms. Ross to make modifications to myMills.
She has taken the lead among staff in making system changes to improve the student user
experience. It was the focus group which highlighted the benefit of having a step­by­step tutorial
for students to reference as they maneuvered through Banner. The focus group also brought to
Ms. Ross attention that much of the terminology used is very industry specific and useful for
administrative process however does not present itself as natural to students.
We found through our survey of 30 participants that a majority of students had a very
neutral response to the general myMills system itself. However, when asked about specific
functions, all students responded that information regarding Financial Award, Bill Payment,
Loan Acceptance and eRefunds should be much clearer for students to access and understand.
The focus group participants concurred that it was important to make that information clearer
and more concise for students to understand.
Criteria and weights for our evaluation matrix were constructed using feedback from the
student survey, focus group, online research, and our individual experiences. We made great
efforts not to lead students into finding issues with Banner in our survey and focus group. When
asking students to rate their experience with Financial Aid and Student Account resources, we
presented them with options to say that all their needs had been met and that they were not
having issues.
Evaluation Criteria for Financial Aid and Student Account Functions of Higher Education
ERPs
Recommended for Complementary Use with Focus Groups
Considering the many variables that come into play when choosing an ERP, including
changing student populations and changing product offerings, our team recommends that this
matrix always be used in conjunction with focus groups for final decision making. The nuances
of student user experience are best captured and evaluated in a setting where the ERP is in live
use. Future ERP products may have functionality that is not evaluated in this matrix, therefore
the matrix should be considered as a complementary tool to focus groups.
Matrix Instructions
Rate each criterion on a scale of 1­5 with 1 being the lowest score (a poor score
indicating a challenging function to use) and 5 being the highest score (a good score indicating
an easy function to use). Multiply each score by its corresponding weight to find the weighted
10

11.
score. Add the weighted scores together to calculate the final score of the ERP. Divide the
weighted score by the total possible weighted score to find the percent score. Compare percent
scores of multiple ERPs to determine which score best on Student Account and Financial Aid
services functionality.
Criteria Weight
Score
1­5
Weighted
Score
Cost ­ ­ ­
Cost to students: Will the ERP result in higher tuition and
fees, lower fees, or is the ERP budget neutral?
.07
General Usability ­ ­ ­
A step­by­step tutorial is available to teach students how to
access their finance and financial aid information
.03
FAQs are available and relevant .03
The interface has a modern look and feel with visually driven
navigation (as opposed to being text­driven)
.03
The color scheme of the interface contributes to user
understanding. Important links and information appear in
more noticeable colors
.03
Once inside a student account, less than four clicks are needed
to access current financial aid or student finance information
.05
Financial aid and student account information can be seen in
the same tab/page
.07
Bill Payment ­ ­ ­
It is easy to understand how much a student owes to the
university and when it is due
.05
The payment function is easily located on multiple pages .03
Easy to make a payment .03
11

12.
System provides real­time updates of payment and billing
information.
.05
Students enrolled in automatic payment plans receive
notifications of payment instead of reminders to pay. Their
notifications are distinct from students who are not enrolled in
autopay.
.03
If payment requires transfer to an external system or website,
the transfer out of the ERP is clearly communicated to the
student user
.03
Due amounts automatically appear as suggestions when
students key in their payments
.03
Financial Aid Award ­ ­ ­
A calendar showing expected loan disbursement dates is
prominently available
.03
The most up to date and recent financial aid information is
shown first (i.e. information for current semester and year)
.03
Dates of past and future financial aid disbursements are
clearly displayed
.03
Key information is available on a single page .05
The cost of attendance is clearly labelled as an estimate that
determines a student’s allowance for financial aid
.03
The system sends accurate notifications about requirements
for scholarship and access
.03
Electronic refunds are easy to sign up for .03
Refund dates are easy to find and understand .03
Loan acceptance links ands instructions are prominent .03
Grants and scholarships are clearly and understandably
labelled by source
.03
Refunds are clearly and understandably labelled .03
The interface shows funding from student assistantships .03
12

13.
Mobile Access ­ ­ ­
Students account/financial aid information is easy to access
from Android and IOS mobile devices
.03
Students account/financial aid information is mobile
responsive
.03
=100%
Total Weighted Score X
Total Possible Weighted Score 5.00
Weighted Score as a Percentage of Possible =X/5.00
Evaluation of the Top 2 Education ERPs
Evaluation of Banner
Criteria Weight
Score
0­5
Weighted
Score
Cost ­ ­ ­
Cost to students: Will the ERP result in higher tuition and
fees, lower fees, or is the ERP budget neutral?
.07 N/A in
this
example,
info not
available
for
competitor
N/A in this
example,
info not
available for
competitor
General Usability ­ ­ ­
A step­by­step tutorial is available to teach students how to
access their finance and financial aid information
.03 1 .03
FAQs are available and relevant .03 1 .03
The interface has a modern look and feel with visually
driven navigation (as opposed to being text­driven)
.03 2 .06
13

14.
The color scheme of the interface contributes to user
understanding. Important links and information appear in
more noticeable colors
.03 2 .06
Once inside a student account, less than four clicks are
needed to access current financial aid or student finance
information
.05 1 .05
Financial aid and student account information can be seen
in the same tab/page
.07 1 .07
Bill Payment ­ ­ ­
It is easy to understand how much a student owes to the
university and when it is due
.05 2 .1
The payment function is easily located on multiple pages .03 1 .03
Easy to make a payment .03 1 .03
System provides real­time updates of payment and billing
information.
.05 1 .05
Students enrolled in automatic payment plans receive
notifications of payment instead of reminders to pay. Their
notifications are distinct from students who are not enrolled
in autopay.
.03 1 .03
If payment requires transfer to an external system or
website, the transfer out of the ERP is clearly
communicated to the student user
.03 1 .03
Due amounts automatically appear as suggestions when
students key in their payments
.03 1 .03
Financial Aid Award ­ ­ ­
A calendar showing expected loan disbursement dates is
prominently available
.03 1 .03
The most up to date and recent financial aid information is
shown first (i.e. information for current semester and year)
.03 2 .06
Dates of past and future financial aid disbursements are .03 1 .03
14

15.
clearly displayed
Key information is available on a single page .05 1 .05
The cost of attendance is clearly labelled as an estimate that
determines a student’s allowance for financial aid
.03 1 .03
The system sends accurate notifications about requirements
for scholarship and access
.03 1 .03
Electronic refunds are easy to sign up for .03 1 .03
Refund dates are easy to find and understand .03 1 .03
Loan acceptance links ands instructions are prominent .03 2 .06
Grants and scholarships are clearly and understandably
labelled by source
.03 2 .06
Refunds are clearly and understandably labelled .03 1 .03
The interface shows funding from student assistantships .03 1 .03
Mobile Access ­ ­ ­
Students account/financial aid information is easy to access
from Android and IOS mobile devices
.03 1 .03
Students account/financial aid information is mobile
responsive
.03 1 .03
=100%
Total Weighted Score 1.13
Total Possible Weighted Score​ (in this scenario, without
taking cost into account)
4.65
Weighted Score as a Percentage of Possible 24.3%
15

16.
Evaluation of PeopleSoft
Criteria Weight
Score
1­5
Weighted
Score
Cost ­ ­ ­
Cost to students: Will the ERP result in higher tuition and
fees, lower fees, or is the ERP budget neutral?
.07 N/A in
this
example,
info not
available
N/A in this
example,
info not
available
General Usability ­ ­ ­
A step­by­step tutorial is available to teach students how to
access their finance and financial aid information
.03 1 0.03
FAQs are available and relevant .03 1 0.03
The interface has a modern look and feel with visually
driven navigation (as opposed to being text­driven)
.03 5 0.15
The color scheme of the interface contributes to user
understanding. Important links and information appear in
more noticeable colors
.03 5 0.15
Once inside a student account, less than four clicks are
needed to access current financial aid or student finance
information
.05 5 0.25
Financial aid and student account information can be seen
in the same tab/page
.07 5 0.35
Bill Payment ­ ­ ­
It is easy to understand how much a student owes to the
university and when it is due
.05 5 0.25
The payment function is easily located on multiple pages .03 3 0.09
Easy to make a payment .03 4 0.12
System provides real­time updates of payment and billing .05 5 0.25
16

17.
information.
Students enrolled in automatic payment plans receive
notifications of payment instead of reminders to pay. Their
notifications are distinct from students who are not enrolled
in autopay.
.03 5 0.15
If payment requires transfer to an external system or
website, the transfer out of the ERP is clearly
communicated to the student user
.03 3 0.09
Due amounts automatically appear as suggestions when
students key in their payments
.03 5 0.15
Financial Aid Award ­ ­ ­
A calendar showing expected loan disbursement dates is
prominently available
.03 5 0.15
The most up to date and recent financial aid information is
shown first (i.e. information for current semester and year)
.03 5 0.15
Dates of past and future financial aid disbursements are
clearly displayed
.03 5 0.15
Key information is available on a single page .05 5 0.25
The cost of attendance is clearly labelled as an estimate that
determines a student’s allowance for financial aid
.03 5 0.15
The system sends accurate notifications about requirements
for scholarship and access
.03 3 0.09
Electronic refunds are easy to sign up for .03 5 0.15
Refund dates are easy to find and understand .03 5 0.15
Loan acceptance links ands instructions are prominent .03 5 0.15
Grants and scholarships are clearly and understandably
labelled by source
.03 5 0.15
Refunds are clearly and understandably labelled .03 5 0.15
The interface shows funding from student assistantships .03 4 0.12
17

18.
Mobile Access ­ ­ ­
Students account/financial aid information is easy to access
from Android and IOS mobile devices
.03 1 0.03
Students account/financial aid information is mobile
responsive
.03 1 0.03
=100%
Total Weighted Score 3.93
Total Possible Weighted Score​ (in this scenario, without
taking cost into account)
4.65
Weighted Score as a Percentage of Possible 84.92%
PeopleSoft
Banner’s primary competitor is PeopleSoft Campus Solutions which is produced by
Oracle. It was founded in 1987 by Dave Duffield, currently of PeopleSoft and Ken Morris.
PeopleSoft too was created to streamline business functions for companies. Due to the
acquisition of PeopleSoft by Oracle it has added to the strength of the company and through its
corporate success has been able to create tools for the Higher Education market. The California
State University system began using a variety of PeopleSoft products in 2012 to manage its
technical systems and operations. The CSU system consists of 23 campuses and is the largest
public university system in the United States proving that PeopleSoft now has a key portion of
the market.
Peoplesoft Campus Solution focuses more on the student and their ability to easily and
effectively maneuver through needed menus. The package for Higher Education includes:
Enrollment and Degree Planning, Student Financing, Learning Management Integration, Mobile
Campus, Oracle Campus Analytics, and Alumni Management and Integration. It is with these
packages PeopleSoft has made it easy for the campus to “​automate the sharing of information
between any learning management systems used on their campuses with their student
information system.” By doing this information remains easy for students to understand and 7
remains the most accurate and up to date. Examples of the ease of PeopleSoft for students
included below:
7
"PeopleSoft Campus Solutions | Applications | Oracle." 2011. 27 Apr. 2016
<​http://www.oracle.com/us/solutions/052356.html​>
18

19.
Figure 4
This image shows the ease
of use of PeopleSoft for the
student. The information is
presented in a clear fashion
which allows students to
see what they owe now and
in the future.
Figure 5
The College also has
the ability to format
the home screen so
students can see their
class schedule right
away.
Figure 6
Student’s have the
ability to effectively
track when charges
have occurred, when
payments were made
and if a Refund took
place. It gives detailed
information so that
students can better
manage their funds.
19

20.
Workday: An Important Competitor
The newest ERP on the market in higher education is Workday. Workday was created in
2005 by the former founder of PeopleSoft, Dave Duffield and a former PeopleSoft VP, Aneel
Bhusri. The company’s first product to market was Workday Human Capital Management in
2006 and followed by Workday Financials in 2007. As a result, the company has had time to
strengthen its ability in working with HR and the Finance & Payroll divisions of various
companies. Over time as the Workday Human Capital Management tool became a success the
company added Talent Management which now serves in conjunction with the Human Capital
Management package so that HR teams can maintain a better hold on their employees and
company needs. It was not until July 2011 when Workday “unveils an administrative solution
for higher education.” In our investigation the Higher Education solutions appears to be the 8
company's original packages of HR, Finance and Payroll but for the education space allowing
for school administration to better navigate those areas including Student Admissions. At this
time Workday does not have packages available for students to navigate so we were unable to
evaluate it using our criteria matrix. However, it’s popularity merits mentioning the program
here.
8
"About Workday." 2010. 27 Apr. 2016 <​http://www.workday.com/company/about_workday.php​>
20

21.
The Future of Higher Education ERPs
The higher education ERP business is booming. A worldwide market research firm,
Markets and Markets, forecasts that the global education ERP market will grow from $6.4
Billion in 2015 to $14.22 Billion in 2020 . It is very clear that like most software, the future of 9
higher education ERPs, including online financial services, is with cloud computing solutions.
Banner and its primary competitors, PeopleSoft and WorkDay are already offered as rentable,
cloud­based services. In a cloud­based ERP, the software, the school’s data and other related
infrastructure are hosted remotely via the Internet. Increasingly, institutions are choosing to use
cloud­based ERPs because they provide more data storage capacity, security and control. They
are also usually faster and easier to install than an on­premises ERP. Additionally, cloud­based
ERPs save schools money because they do not require expensive investments in IT hardware and
servers. The need for IT staff is also reduced because there is less need for management of the
new system.
IT transitions are never easy though and some schools, including Mills are waiting until
the benefits of cloud­based ERPs outweigh the costs. A cloud­based ERP has been already
considered by Mills IT Director, Bruce McCreary, but he has decided to leave the system as it is
now, reasoning that 1) Mills is currently under contract with Banner until 2022 at a low cost
2)Transitioning the whole campus community to a new ERP would be an immense and tedious
task 3)Using a SaaS ERP would result in the decreased need for IT staff on campus because
much of their work (generating reports, coding to integrate Banner with additional software)
would be done by the ERP company. Although a cloud­based ERP may save Mills money on
salaries and benefits, the tradeoff would be having less IT staff on campus to address urgent
issues and provide face­to­face support to students, faculty and staff . Using a cloud­based ERP
would result in most IT support being provided over the phone or internet, which he thinks
would result in inefficient resolution of complex on­the­ground problems for IT staff retained on
campus.
The strategic plan for Mills IT department includes completing the Banner contract for
the current on­premise software. At that time, the IT department will assess the costs and
benefits of renewing the contract or choosing another ERP, possibly cloud­based. Many other
universities who are in long term contracts with their ERP provider will likely follow the same
path as Mills in the near future. As old contracts expire, the costs of newer ERPs go down, and
their quality goes up, schools will abandon outdated systems like Banner because the work of
transitioning to a new ERP will be worth it.
Apart from transitioning to cloud­based services, higher education ERPs will continue to
expand their functionality over the next two to five years. For Banner though, it will be at a
snail’s pace. Ellucian is in the process of upgrading the current version of Banner to Banner XE,
resulting in the first user interface change in more than 15 years. This update was announced 6
years ago and still has not been rolled out. It is expected to be complete by the 2016­2017
academic year. The update will make Banner easier to user and enhance certain functionalities,
such as registration and faculty grading. The new version will allow students to map their
academic plan for graduation, and easily view how taking specific courses would change that
plan. ​Importantly for this project, the upcoming Banner upgrade will not change the
9
http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/education­erp.asp
21

22.
functionality of financial aid or student accounts.​ The upgrade will, however, require more
servers, Java skills, and web application servers. Banner XE also requires its own authentication
mechanism which will be implemented through Ellucian’s free Identity Service offering. The
Identity Service will also streamline the ability for users to do single sign­on with other
applications.
In universities such as Mills, where cloud­based ERPs may be more than five years away,
the future of ERPs also lies in the hands of on­campus programmers who make constant tweaks
and modifications to fulfill the unique needs of individual institutions. For example, Mills IT
Director McCreary and key systems administrators, Allison Ross and Victoria Jenner plan to use
our projects recommendations to make changes to Banner and improve the flow of the student
account and financial aid student interface. Planned adjustments include:
● Reducing the number of tabs student must navigate
● Making tabs with the most relevant information show up first
● Reducing the amount of clicks it takes to see financial aid information
Another important expansion of functionality for higher education ERPs is the
improvement of mobile­based services. Many companies, including Ellucian, the producer of
Banner, offer complementary apps for students to access their grades and schedules on
smartphones. The newest strategy in the higher education ERP market is to “design for mobile
first”. It is now standard for higher education ERP producers to design their interfaces using a
responsive grid layout which allows for easy viewing on phones, tablets, laptops, and large
screen monitors.
The future of higher educational ERPs is multifaceted, but the overall trend toward
cloud­based solutions is definite. The benefits of lower costs, higher data storage capacity, and
easier management will make cloud­based ERPs the predominant systems adopted by
universities worldwide during the next five years and beyond. Institutions who may be late
adopters of cloud­based ERPs will continue to integrate their systems manually with
complementary software as needed until their old ERP contracts expire. Current on­premise
ERPs will be updated sporadically, but it will not be able to compete with the agility of SaaS
solutions.
22

23.
Appendix
Interviews
Interview with Bruce McCreary, Mills College Senior Director of ITS
Bruce McCreary provided history and context for the IT Services offered at Mills.
Currently, Mr. McCreary and his colleagues implement and adapt systems to meet the
needs of the Mills IT Services. Mr. McCreary does not make all decisions about which
software is purchased for the various needs of Mills students and staff in the many
different departments. The Mills Cafe for example purchased their own software to
manage the purchases of food and beverages. Mr. McCreary explained that the Financial
Aid portion of IT is managed by Administrators, Allison Ross, who manages the
M­Center, and Victoria Jenner, who manages the IT services offered in the Finance
Department, ie, Cash Net. Allison Ross and Victoria Jenner are two of four “funky
techs” that work at Mills. Carla Robinson handles IT for Human Resources, and Kaitlyn
Ngo handles IT for the Office of Student Affairs. The Provost office manages
Blackboard.
IT Services Currently Offered:​ ​Currently the Mills IT department manages MyMills,
which is run using Banner. MyMills is run under the Oracle Cloud Banner ERP. The IT
department manages the admissions process using Slate. Additionally, the Mills IT
Department manages all wifi and internet services on campus.
Concerns: ​The primary concerns voiced by Mr. McCreary were the decentralized
structure of IT at Mills, and the lack of feedback from the students at Mills regarding the
services offered by the IT Department. Many higher education institutions have a Chief
Information Officer (CIO) who sets the course of all IT plans on campus. Mills does not
have this structure. Mills allows for each department to decide which programs suits its
needs and each program purchases its own applications. Once the applications are
purchased, the various departments rely on the IT department for product integration.
Unfortunately, without a centralized plan, utilizing various applications makes for a
disjointed and disrupted user experience. Mr. McCreary is aware of ways in which the IT
services can be improved, yet he is also aware of the organizational and financial barriers
posed by most solutions. Mr. McCreary would like feedback from students about their
experience with IT. He explained that occasionally surveys are given to students but
there is little response.
Areas for Growth: ​Mr. McCreary explained that a CIO Position has been in the budget
many times, but one has never been hired. Mr. McCreary has been acting informally as a
de facto CIO for 8 years. Replacing Banner has also been discussed for many years
however, the expense in a huge deterrent. If the school adopted Work Day, which is
superior, but not complete, it would cost $750,000 a year. Currently, the school pays
$200,000 a year for Oracle and Banner. The savings would only be in laying off current
employees, which, as Mr. McCreary pointed out, is a very difficult conversation to have.
23

24.
Interview with Allison Ross, Mills College SIS Applications Administrator
Ms. Ross’ primary tasks involve IT programming for Financial Aid, Student Accounts
and the Registrar’s Office. Ms. Ross is the sole programmer in the M­Center. Ms. Ross
reported that generally in her role she is so consumed with day to day tasks that she is
unable to focus on strategic planning. Ms. Ross described an overall lack of
communication with students in the design and functionality of the M­Center’s IT
Services. Ms. Ross explained that in her work with Banner, she would benefit
significantly from a survey of the students regarding their experiences with MyMills. In
considering the changes that will be made to the new Banner site, Ms. Ross feels that
student feedback could play a crucial role in helping the M­Center prioritize areas for
change.
Concerns: ​Ms. Ross identified many limitations to the Banner application. These
limitations include, 1) difficulty generating reports, 2) difficulty generating emails to
students, 3) updates and improvements to Banner result in time consuming Mills specific
updates, 4) difficult to manipulate data in Banner using SQL queries, 5) The impossibility
to see the “student view” as an administrator, and 6) the general lack of programmers in
their ability to create IT services that are truly student friendly.
Areas for Growth: ​Ms. Ross identifies many areas for growth. Primarily, Ms. Ross
feels the Student Services could benefit greatly from more centralized governing. She
feels that lack of representation at the Mills College cabinet level has resulted in
disjointed IT Services and strategic planning. An important area for growth would be the
development of a CIO position; this is something the school is currently considering.
The school has also planned the following new additions to increase usability and
security for students: 1) MAP (Mills Academic Plan) which would help students keep
track of how they are progressing in their degree, 2) Campus Logic, which allows for
uploading documents for financial aid verifications, 3) enhancing overall aesthetic and
usability of the MyMills/ Portal site, and 4) New Registration using Banner XE/Degree
Works which would allow students to create a course schedule draft in preparation for
course registration. Some of these new services are available but Mills is waiting to see
what bugs come up when bigger schools use the programs before adopting them.
Interview with Victoria Jenner, Mills College Finance Information Systems and
Applications Administrator
Ms. Jenner’s primary responsibility is the management of Cashnet. Cashnet is the
system used for all online money transactions with Mills College (including, Parking,
Public Safety, Mail, Gym Facilities, and more). Ms. Jenner explained the history of
Cashnet. Cashnet was adopted in 2010. Prior to 2010, the school used TMS Tuition
Management Service and Lock Box, which were very antiquated and not user friendly.
ACH and Credit card payments were processed on different sites, and it too 4 weeks for
payments to post to accounts. From Ms. Jenner’s perspective Cashnet is a huge
24

25.
improvement and she does not feel it is problematic. Ms. Jenner also noted that Cashnet
was an application was chosen for three important reasons: 1) local company, 2)
inexpensive, and 3) small company.
Concerns: ​Ms. Jenner’s primary concerns centered around wanting feedback from
students about the CashNet service.
Survey Questions and Responses
Link to survey: ​https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/MHRBS3L
Student survey results: desired changes and improvements
● What is your general experience with Financial Aid Services at Mills?
● What is your level of satisfaction with using the MyMills Resources Section of the Portal
for Financial Aid Services?
● Of the following services, which have you needed assistance from Mills staff in order to
navigate? Please select all that apply.
o Other issues were around eRefunds, disbursement, renewal of student loans, graduate
assistantship payments and understanding account balance & statement.
● Please select all that apply to your experience of MyMills Resources:
25

26.
● If improvements were to be made to MyMills Resources, what should be prioritized?
Please rank in order of importance.
● Which of the following improvements would make the site more user­friendly?
o Other was described as Accuracy, Modern look, feel, and interface, and Emphasis on
visual navigation (pics & graphics) rather than text/link driven, this would translate well
to mobile.
● Please provide any suggestions for the improvement of MyMills Resources, the Portal, or
the Billing and Financial Aid processes here at Mills?
o Money from my graduate assistantship
26

27.
o Increased customer service training for anyone who interfaces with students.
Presently, we are treated as if we are annoyances or distractions instead of the
main reason they work here.
o Send notifications about turning in scholarship information so we stop getting late
fees for processing errors.
o Look at how a CSU does it. They're much better at it.
o Explicit explanation of when loan refund will hit account.
o Every single bill has been wrong and misleading. Please get the numbers right.
Student Focus Group Recommendations
Initial Portal In General Page Responses:
● MyMills Main Menu should be a main destination.
● Confused by the Registration, how to get classes added.
● (Our team suggestion: Create step by step guides) ​Develop a pdf sample outline with
images for students to as a reference in order to help them better navigate Financial Aid
and Student Accounts, a how­to­guide.
MyMills Menu Page Responses:
● The grants from the department don’t show up, adding confusion. Other participants say
they do see their grants.
● A lot of clicks to even see the award. Need way less tabs. The key info should take up
one page. (Also true for the entire Portal).
● Difficult to differentiate which years’ information you’re accessing.
● TOO MANY TABS
● Font Size and text: Times Roman easier to read.
o Alison: Color of font is possible, but most things we’d like to change we don’t
change because then that feature won’t be supported by Banner.
● Student Accounts ­>Account Summary­> A more accurate picture of your personal
finances.
o Alison: Financial Aid and Student Accounts must be separate from Cost of
Attendance tab
Student Refunds:
● Not clear where you would get refund.
● Headers and footers easy to change.
● Charge or refunds not clear.
● Attaching dates to the charges.
● Not clear the first time. Eventually after talking to the M Center I was told to sign up for
the e­refund. Cashnet takes forever to become current.
o Alison: Cashnet statements are not in real time. Cashnet is not readable.
Participants: Make a link between Cashnet and the Student Accounts.
● Where do you look to show when loans and financial aid are dispersed.
● Alison: we could publish a ballpark calendar for this issue. Would be interested in seeing
what could be done in terms of coding for this problem. She will go back and have a
look to see if there’s a way to make “expected disbursement” work.
27

28.
Pain Points:
● Too many clicks
● Relationship between CASHNet and student accounts
● Make clear the movement of one system to the other
● Portal Homepage: Clicking one (picture) will have you logged in, Clicking the other (the
words) is not logged in.
Alison Ross shared that it would be possible to update terminology for students in Banner. It
currently uses industry specific terminology which Financial Aid and Student Accounts have
used but are not easily understandable to students.
Exhibits
Figure 7
Screenshot of
Mills Portal
Figure 8
Screenshot of
Current myMills
Resources
28

29.
Figure 9 Step­by­Step Mills eRefund Tutorial
29

30.
30

31.
31

32.
32

33.
33

34.
Figure 10 Step­by­Step CSU eRefund Tutorial in PeopleSoft
34

35.
35

36.
36