ePayment Core Service Team

1
ePayment Core Service Team
ePaymenta
2
Outline

• About the team
• Explored options
• MILER consultant
• TouchNet and U.S. Bank
• Pros Cons
• Determined campus needs
• Made vendor recommendation
• Defined pilot project
• Reviewed vendor requirements
• Next steps

3
Justification

• Project
• UWM departments seek a common electronic payment
  system that supports web access.
• Team
• Provide coordinated guidance and assistance in
  developing departmental e-commerce solutions.

4
About The Team

• ePayment Core Service Team
• Mission Plan for and implement a consistent,
  fully supported core electronic payment
  environment for UWM faculty and staff, community
  partners, alumni, students, and the general
  public.
• Kick-off meeting October 1, 2003

5
Team Membership

• Lana Dyer, IMT (Team Lead)
• Michael Hostad, IMT UWM Webmaster
• Ed Nieskes, BFS
• Ken Buelow, Graduate School (replaced alan Swatek
  5/05)
• Carol Edquist, Center for International Ed.
• Sue Thomas, Peck School of the Arts
• Bud Majkowski, Auxiliary Services
• Tom Bjornstad, Foundation
• Jason Lusk, Alumni Association (left UWM Spring
  05)
• Kathy Clark, School of Continuing Education
• Ed Rodriguez, Nursing/Social Welfare/Health
  Sciences
• Andy Ritter, UWM Libraries
• John Bartelt, LS
• Kathy Heath, OIT
• John Grozik, IMT
• Wendy Luljak (joined 5/05)

6
Team Requirements

• It was required that the team build upon software
  and practices already in place to develop a plan
  to provide core ePayment services to the campus
  community.

7
Team Expectations

• Review and document the existing ePayment
  infrastructure
• Make recommendations on a core supportable
  service that addresses customer needs
• Develop a communication plan
• Develop a plan that is consistent with the UWM
  portal
• Be sensitive to differences on campus
• Follow a phased approach

8
Exploring Options

• Options explored by MILER consultant, Warren
  Alkire
• Using the delivered APIs (application program
  interface) to access the TouchNet Payment Gateway
  already owned by UWM
• Use the ePayment option provided by U.S. Bank
• Purchase the TouchNet Marketplace to leverage the
  existing Payment Gateway

9
Vendor Presentations

• Met with TouchNet
• Attended day-long seminar on TouchNets
  Marketplace module
• Held conference call with U.S. Bank
• Conducted in-person meeting with U.S. Bank

10
Option TouchNet API

• UWM builds custom web applications for each
  department requesting ePayment
• Use APIs to connect to existing TouchNet
  infrastructure for transaction processing

11
Option TouchNet Marketplace

• Use APIs to connect to existing TouchNet
  infrastructure
• Purchase TouchNets Marketplace software which
  provides a pre-built front-end for
  electronic transactions and online
  storefronts

12
Option U.S. Bank

• U.S. Bank hosts web pages that support electronic
  transactions
• All credit card information stored at U.S. Bank,
  not UWM
• Integrates with Shared Financial System
• Online storefronts built by UWM

13
Option Comparison
License Cost Effort Timeframe Risk
TouchNet API High development costs. Significant in-house development efforts Not determined High Credit card numbers stored in-house.
TouchNet Marketplace High licensing costs. Medium level in-house development efforts Less time to implement than API solution High Credit card numbers stored in-house.
U.S. Bank Minimal - Pricing contract exists between U.S. Bank and State of WI Medium level in-house development efforts 1 month for U.S. Bank setup. Unknown development time Low Credit card numbers stored offsite at U.S. Bank
14
Determine Campus Needs

• Input from each represented area of the Core
  Service Team
• Made presentation to Unit Business
  Representatives (UBR)
• Built online survey to solicit campus needs
• Solicited input from colleagues at the State level

15
Vendor Recommendation

• Recommended U.S. Bank as most viable partner
• Reasoning
• Existing contract with State
• Positive working relationship with other State
  agencies
• Provided most secure solution
• Eliminated transaction fees for credit card and
  ACH payments
• Minimal initial setup cost
• Easily integrates with existing campus web
  applications
• No hardware purchase necessary
• Fast turnaround time for setup and service
• Flexible enough to accommodate Universitys
  financial infrastructure

16
Define Pilot Project

• Pilot Project UWM Foundation
• Reasoning
• Small, but encompassing scope
• Familiarity with e-commerce solutions
• U.S. Bank solution provides significant cost
  savings
• Understanding of Core Service Team objectives
• They volunteered!

17
Partnering with U.S. Bank

• Assigned U.S. Bank account and technical
  representatives
• Assigned Core Service Team liaisons
• Completed 50-page vendor Implementation
  Questionnaire
• Reviewed State contract with vendor

18
Next Steps

• Account setup with U.S. Bank
• Configuration, branding, and integration by IMT
  Web Development team
• Targeted pilot go-live Mid-August 04
• Targeted pilot end date December 04
• Develop second pilot project in parallel with
  Foundation project
• Evaluate outcomes of pilot projects
• After evaluations of pilot projects, determine
  procedure for campus-wide rollout

19
Next Steps Reality

• Account setup with U.S. Bank
• Configuration, branding, and integration by IMT
  Web Development team
• The first two Next Steps took much more time
  in development than anticipated. Work was
  continually in progress among U.S. Bank, IMT Web
  Development and the UWM Foundation. The rest of
  the team did not meet.
• Targeted pilot go-live Mid-August 04
• Go-live happened May 05
• Targeted pilot end date December 04
• Foundation pilot will continue as a feature of
  the Foundations Web site.
• Core team will resume meetings in May 05 to
  choose next projects and begin assessment of
  project to date
• Develop second pilot project in parallel with
  Foundation project
• Two to three additional pilots will go-live
  mid-July.
• Evaluate outcomes of pilot projects
• After evaluations of pilot projects, determine
  procedure for campus-wide rollout for Fall
  Semester 05

20
An Update 9/27/05

• 3 sites currently using ePayment system
• UWM Foundationhttp//www3.uwm.edu/org/alumni/foun
  dation.epay.cfm
• Panther Prowlhttp//www.pantherprowl.net
• Katrina Reliefhttp//emergencyfund.uwm.edu

21
Progress since Foundation Pilot

• Application to merge data from U.S. Bank with
  data collected at UWM
• Test instance created
• Improvement (maybe?) in U.S. Bank response time
• Ability to handle multiple return URLs
• Automatic remittance file transfers

22
Pros of the System

• Security
• Check processing
• Real-time processing
• Fast development turnaround time
• Transaction fees covered by State
• Minimal setup fees

23
Cons of the System

• Inflexibility
• Lack of training/documentation
• Many steps to make a payment
• Duplicative data entry
• Unresponsive U.S. Bank reps

24
Developing New Apps

• Development should be handled by IMT Web
  Development department
• Minimum 2 week lead time for standalone ePayment
  apps
• What the client needs to provide
• Valid UDDS
• Merchant ID
• Return URL
• Document detailing form to be created
• Desired go-live date