ePayment Core Service Team

ePayment…a

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

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.

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

Team Membership

• Lana Dyer, I&MT (Team Lead)• Michael Hostad, I&MT & 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, L&S• Kathy Heath, OIT• John Grozik, I&MT• Wendy Luljak (joined 5/05)

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.

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

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

Vendor Presentations

• Met with TouchNet• Attended day-long seminar on TouchNet’s

Marketplace module• Held conference call with U.S. Bank• Conducted in-person meeting with U.S.

Bank

Option: TouchNet API

• UWM builds custom web applications for each department requesting ePayment

• Use APIs to connect to existing TouchNet infrastructure for transaction processing

Option: TouchNet Marketplace

• Use APIs to connect to existing TouchNet infrastructure

• Purchase TouchNet’s ‘Marketplace’ software which provides a pre-built front-end for electronic transactions and online storefronts

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

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

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

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 University’s financial

infrastructure

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!

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

Next Steps

• Account setup with U.S. Bank• Configuration, branding, and integration by I&MT

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

Next Steps – Reality

• Account setup with U.S. Bank • Configuration, branding, and integration by I&MT 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, I&MT 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 Foundation’s 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

An Update: 9/27/05

• 3 sites currently using ePayment system– UWM Foundation

http://www3.uwm.edu/org/alumni/foundation.epay.cfm

– Panther Prowlhttp://www.pantherprowl.net

– Katrina Reliefhttp://emergencyfund.uwm.edu

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

Pros of the System

• Security

• Check processing

• Real-time processing

• Fast development turnaround time

• Transaction fees covered by State

• Minimal setup fees

Cons of the System

• Inflexibility

• Lack of training/documentation

• Many steps to make a payment

• Duplicative data entry

• Unresponsive U.S. Bank reps

Developing New Apps

• Development should be handled by I&MT 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