xml cod e-sign stan - immagic.com€¦ · xml cod e-sign stan EDUCATION FINANCE COUNCIL CONFERENCE...

A special thank you to EFC’s Affiliate Member Sponsors

e-signcodxml stan

E D U C A T I O N F I N A N C E C O U N C I L

CONFERENCEA l e x a n d r i a , V A

m a y 5 – 6 , 2 0 0 3

digitalmeteorcommon record

1155 15th Street, N.W. Suite 801 Washington, DC 20005 tel 202.466.8621 fax 202.466.8643 www.efc.org

Theresa S. Shaw, Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid

Theresa S. (“Terri”) Shaw assumed leadership of Federal Student Aid (FSA) in the U.S. Department of Education on September 16, 2002.

Shaw is FSA’s second chief operating officer since the office was designated the federal government’s first Performance-Based Organization (PBO) in theHigher Education Amendments of 1998. The PBO’s mission, as outlined in thelegislation, is to improve service, reduce costs, and modernize and integrate the information and delivery systems. FSA administers Title IV federal studentloans and grants totaling about $61 billion a year to about 8.7 million people.

Before entering federal service, Shaw served as executive vice president andchief operating officer of eNumerate Solutions, Inc., a start-up technology firm in McLean, Virginia, from 2000-2002.

Prior to that, she worked for SLM Corporation (Sallie Mae) of Reston, Virginia, one of the largest private student loan providers in the country. Shaw started at Sallie Mae in 1988, advancing to the position of senior vice president andchief information officer in 1999.

She brings to FSA more than 22 years of experience in student aid, strong lead-ership skills, and solid technical expertise. Her results-oriented style has provensuccessful for creating and implementing effective systems solutions, and build-ing strong alliances among diverse business and technical constituencies.

Shaw earned a Bachelor of Science degree from George Mason University in 1980and completed the Executive Development Series at The George WashingtonUniversity in 1991.

She and her husband and two children live in Oak Hill, Virginia.

Keynote Speaker Bio

t e c h n o l o g y c o n f e r e n c e


agenda

committee

ma

y

5m

ay

6

E d u c a t i o n F i n a n c e C o u n c i l S t a f f

7:00 a.m. – 8:00 a.m.Breakfast

8:00 a.m. Real-Time Transactions

Speakers:Bill Connor, Director of ELMnetServicing, ELM Resources

Jon Jones, Senior Director,Information Technology, Sallie Mae

Bob Bevers, Vice-President ofMarket Development, Sigma Systems, Inc.

8:30 a.m.QUESTIONS/Open Dialogue

9:00 a.m.An E-CommunicationsCenter

Ken Schaffer, Assistant VicePresident E-Commerce, E-Communications, AmericanEducation Services (AES)


9:45 a.m.Break

10:00 a.m.Web Services — SecurityIssues — MeteorImplementation Issues

Speakers:Tim Bornholtz, Director,Technology Services, PriorityTechnologies, Inc. (PTI)

Jim Kuhlen, Vice President,Connecticut Student LoanFoundation Representative


11:15 a.m.CommonLine — CommonRecord and the Move toXML

Speaker:Kim Shiflette, Research andDevelopment Industry Analyst,USA Funds


12:00 noonAdjourn

5:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.PESC Reception Sponsoredby EFCAll EFC Conference Attendees Invited

C o n f e r e n c e C o m m i t t e e

Adele Marsh, American Education Services (AES)

Steve Biklen, American Student Assistance

Jennifer Ball, Arkansas Student Loan Authority

Jim Olick, Rhode Island Student Loan Authority

Wayne Kirby, South Carolina Student Loan Corporation

Mark Powden, President

Joanna Acocella, Director of Government Relations

Conwey Casillas, Director of Communications and Technology

Gail daMota, Director of Operations and Federal Relations

Renee Burchard, Director of Human Resources

Kerry Rhoden, Administrative Assistant

7:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.Registration — Continental Breakfast

9:00 a.m.Latest Developments

Speakers:Karl Ross, Chief InformationOfficer, American EducationServices (AES)

Anthony Humphries, Project Manager, Financial Aid &Government Relations, Datatel


10:15 a.m.Government E-CommerceInitiatives and E-Sign Developments

Speakers:Charles L. Coleman, Director ofE-Commerce and Innovations,Office of Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of Education

Tanya Vittitow, WebProjects/Marketing Manager,Oklahoma Student Loan Authority


11:30Break

11:45 a.m.Shibboleth Update and Authentication Demonstration

Speaker: Mark Wilcox, WebCT andInternet2/MACE

12:15 QUESTIONS/Open Dialogue

12:30 noon Lunch with Keynote Speaker– Update on the PBO andModernization Initiatives

Speaker:Theresa S. Shaw, Chief OperatingOfficer, Office of Federal StudentAid, U.S. Department of Education

2:00 p.m. A Schools’ Experience WithCommon Origination andDisbursement (COD)

Speakers:Roberta Johnson, Interim Director, Office of StudentFinancial Aid, Iowa State University

Steve McCullough, President &CEO, Iowa Student Loan LiquidityCorporation

2:30 p.m.QUESTIONS/Open Dialogue

3:00 p.m.COD — Common RecordConvergence

Speakers:Holly Hyland, ManagementAnalyst, Office of Federal StudentAid, U.S. Department of Education

Adele Marsh, Vice President, E-Commerce, American EducationServices (AES)

3:30 p.m. QUESTIONS/Open Dialogue

4:00 p.m.The PostsecondaryElectronic StandardsCouncil’s (PESC) EvolvingRole

Speaker:Michael Sessa, Executive Director, PostsecondaryElectronic Standards Council

4:15 p.m.QUESTIONS/Open Dialogue

4:30 p.m.Adjourn

Technology Developments

Karl RossEducation Finance Council -

Technology ConferenceMay 5, 2003

Latest DevelopmentsCOTS/ERPE-SignAuthentication/Authorization/SecurityXML/CODIndustry/USDE StandardsReal-Time ArchitecturesCustomer Service Channel ExpansionWeb Services/Meteor

Discussion Agenda

Technology TrendsBusiness GoalsIssues in Reaching Those Goals

Technology Trends

Digital EverythingDevice ConvergenceAuthenticationIntegrationCOTSSpeed

Technology Trends Digital Everything

Redefines “Data” in Data ExchangeEnables Data Processing

Device ConvergenceVery little in our industryExcept - Integration with other services

Technology TrendsIntegration

Solve the Competition DilemmaLimit the need for mega-system projectsFaster delivery of functionality

COTSAllows focus on real businessSimpler convergence / standard-settingThird-party provider becomes “Customer”

Technology Trends Speed

The ultimate enablerOvercomes poor technology Allows for better security

AuthenticationCan do for the FAO what ATM did for the bank employee

Business Goals

Faster - All electronic, including error/exception handlingBetter - Easier, Simpler, More FlexibleCheaper - Little or no manual intervention, no paper!

The technology exists to support those goals Choose Architectures that minimize critical path players,

and points of failure Support standards - This will enable choice and support

the business goals

Old Architecture

Student

SCHOOL

STATE GRANTAND

SCHOLARSHIPAGENCY

GuarantorAGENCY

LENDER

INTERNALREVENUESERVICE

NATIONALCOLLECTION

SERVICE

COLLECTIONAGENCY

DIRECT LOANSERVICING AGENCYFEDERAL RESERVE

ED OFFICE OFCHIEF FINANCIAL

OFFICER

BillsLoan applications and corrections

FFELP Consolidation Applications

Loan Payments

Bills

Loan Payments

DefaultedLoans

Loan and Portfolio InformationLoan Insurance Confirmation

Interest,Special

Allowances

DefaultedFISLLoans

Loansfor

Consolidation

DefaultedFISLLoans

FFELP:Defaulted Debt

Collection,GA & Lender

Payments

PEPS:School Title IV

eligibility,Program Reviews,

Audits

NSLDS:Student Loan Database,

Default Rates,Enrollment Tracking

LSS:Direct LoanServicing

CDS:Direct LoanAccounting

LOS/LCS:Direct Loan

Origination andConsolidation

PGR/FMS:Pell Grant

Processing

CBS:Campus Based

Program Processing

MDE:Imaging &Corrections

ISIR

Student Aid ReportsFinancial AidApplications

Direct LoanConsolidationApplications

FAFSAInfo

ISIR

CPS:ApplicationProcessing

Pre-screeningDemographic

Info

FFELPLoanInfo

Loansfor

Consolidation

AEA andReinsurance

DefaultedLoan Info

Address Info

Repayments

Updated LoanInfo

Direct Loan Info

UpdatedLoan Info

Direct LoanRepayments

SubsidiaryLedger

Information

Drawdownand PaymentAuthorizations

PaymentAuthorizations

FundAuthorization

FundAuthorization

Direct LoanPromissory

Notes

Campus Based Applicationsand

Disbursement Information

Direct Loan Origination Notices,Disbursement Records &

Adjustments

Pell Grant Origination Notices,Statements of Account

Perkins Loan Info

Financial Aid Transcripts,Enrollment Information

Student FinancialAid Reports

StateGrantAward

Adm

issi

on A

pplic

atio

n,ai

d pa

ckag

e ac

cept

ance

Fina

ncia

l aid

, aid

pac

kage

,ad

mis

sion

pac

kage

Institutional Eligibility Applications

Defaulted Perkins Loans

FFEL Origination RecordsFFEL Funds

Promissory Notes

StudentEligibility

Info

School Info &Default Rates

Lender andGA Info

DefaultedDirectLoans

DirectLoanInfo

BookedLoans &

Adjustments

Program Management and Oversight

Aid Repayment

Aid Origination and Disbursement

Aid Application

3/25/99

U.S. Departmentof Education,

Office of StudentFinancial Assistance

Programs

Architecture Goal

User

CapitalSourceDept of Ed StateGuarantor

Internet

How Do “We” Get There

Enabling TechnologiesXMLWeb ServicesTransport Mechanisms

StandardsIndustry-wideData, Description, DiscoveryTransport, NetworkSecurity

Standards Setting - The Key Process

OpenLearning from past disappointments

DCE, CORBA, Messaging, EDI

UniversalX is always X, Use existing standards when possibleKeep Data Standards Away from Transport Standards and Away from Architecture Standards

GovernedSingle Entity, if possibleSolid Change Control

We Are Part Way There

Common RecordCommon Origination and DisbursementCommon LineCommon Account MaintenanceCommon Claim Initiative

Common Record <CommonRecord>

Document InformationReceiptResponse

Entity InformationStudent Information

PersonResponse

Award InformationDisbursement

Response Response

ResponseResponse

</CommonRecord>

Source - Dept. of Education

Interim Architecture - I

User

Internet

Pass-Through Data Aggregator (Gatekeeper)

CapitalSourceDept of Ed StateGuarantor

Interim Architecture - II

User

Internet

Data Aggregator + Major Business Contact(Gatekeeper)

CapitalSourceDept of Ed

StateGuarantor

Business Issues

Legal ConsiderationsGatekeeper IssuesSecurityHuman “Frailties”

Legal

GLB+USA Patriot+Privacy LawsWet SignaturesIndemnification

Gatekeeper Issues

Adds CostsAdds Layer of ComplexityRestricts CompetitionNot Faster, Cheaper - Better?Security and Privacy Issues

Security Perceptions Can be More ImportantWith data at multiple sites and moving at light speed, can we avoid problems and liability?Risk is the Key

Cannot have 100% SecurityRisk = Probability of Occurrence X Cost of Occurrence

Human “Frailties”Inability to Effectively Merge Business Goals with Technology250 Meg/person/year Added InformationNeed for Physical Accommodation

Device Size and SoundInput Device Problems“Need” for Hardcopy Not 24X7 “Real Time”

Cautions

DCE/CORBA/JavaDeath of the Legacy SystemsLast Mile Panaceas - CLECs/CableNetwork Applications - Client Server, N-Tier, Network ComputersTQM, ISO - “Management” Solutions

Cautions

NASDAQ NYSE

4041 123132873 115852689 115651922 100171887 95362950 110605048 116881735 9042.4011436 8313

-50.0%

0.0%

50.0%

100.0%

150.0%

200.0%

Jan-98 Jan-99 Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03

NASDAQNYSE

Latest Developments

Anthony R. Humphreys, MOBDatatel, Inc.Product Manager, Financial Aid and Government [email protected]

Topics Covered

• Form must follow function

• Higher Ed Devel/Trends• Customer Service Gap• Service Transformation

• Evolution of Decentralization

• Outcome vs. output

• ERP SIS what do we do?

• ERP SIS Devel/Trends

• Final thought on future

• Q & A

Form Follows Function

• Have we forgotten that form should follow function?• Ex: auto shows of the 50s compared to today.

• 50’s – All form little new functionality• Today – all about new functionality and form

• We can get caught up in the “wonder of newness”• We get caught up in “what it is” or “it’s new” instead of

focusing on “what it does for me” and “is it better”• Form first focuses on “what is it” and “what does

it look like.” Unfortunately , function is built within the constraints of form

• Function first enables multiple tool use and clear requirements and user expectations. Form is constrained by function and user experience

Higher Ed Devel/Trends

• Constituents demanding more and better services• Students• Faculty• Administrators• Staff• Business Partners

• All of this leads to a widening service gap

Higher Ed Devel/Trends - ContY-

Axis

X-Axis

Increasingdemand for

more services

Stagnant levelof staff

resources

Service Gap

Higher Ed Devel/Trends - cont

• How do we narrow the gap w/o more resources• Technological Innovations such as Karl mentioned:

• Digital Everything• Device Convergence• Authentication• Integration• COTS• Speed

• AND a Service Transformation (both must exist) (faster is not enough)


• Services Transformation• Continued Evolution of Decentralization – Step 1

• Constituents to consider• Students• Faculty• Staff• Administrators• Business Partners

• Data used to come from FAO or trading partner and now it comes directly from all the constituents listed above

• Must be real time and completely interactive• Must be seamless to each group

• Different learning speeds• Different comfort levels with change & new tech.• Different delivery methods


• Services Transformation• Outcome vs. output – Step 2

• According to: Transforming Student Services by Robert B. Kvavik & Michael N.Handberg, Educause Quarterly

• ATM anology• Steer all appropriate service provision to self-help• Re-allocates professional resources for true need and

special need provision• 75 – 90% of manual paper-based transactions can be

done electronically via self-help


Output Focused Model


Outcome Focused Model

ERP SIS What do we do?

• Student • Financial Aid• Human Resources• Financials• eLearning• Portals

• eCommerce• Bookstore• Library• Smart Card• Alumni Affairs• eTutoring

All for national & international clients

ERP SIS Devel/Trends

• Data exchange standards are proliferating • IMS – vagueness abounds• COD• CommonLine Common Record

• Convergence • Automatic data exchange• Real time data exchange• Workflow engines • The User Experience

• Now much more critical with speed of innovation

Final Thought on the Future

• What do we do when our customers/constituents want to own and control all personal data?

• In other words, forget my credit card number, I don’t want you (us) to store any personal data about me anywhere.

• I will provide it to you (via blue tooth?) when and how I want to.

• What if government regulations become an issue

• Same example in terms of constituent data never being stored. (FERPA on steroids)

EFC Technology Conference

Gov’t E-Commerce Initiatives and E-Sign Status

Charlie ColemanFSA / Education

May 5, 2003

Today’s Outline…

Gov’t E-Commerce InitiativeseLoansE-Authentication

E-Sign StatusQ & A’s … ???


E-Gov Initiatives

Original Release Date 10/25/01, Status As of 12/02


E-Gov’t Act of 2002

• “…Put Legislative Teeth Into [President Bush’s] Goals…for More Internet-friendly Government Services.” – Paul Festa, CNET News

• Established an OMB / Office of Information, Run by a Federal CIO

• Established a CIO Council to Improve Interagency Information Sharing Around Required Standards

• “We want to get to a point where e-government means government, and there’s no distinction” – Harris Miller, President, Information Technology Association of America

Became Public Law 12/17/02


How Might This Affect You…

August, 2002


eLoan Opportunities

1. eLoans Gateway2. B2G Lender Reporting Improvements3. Electronic Lender Payments to

Agencies (pay.gov)4. Sharing Lender / Citizen Data


eLoans Gateway

Lead Agency: ED, Lynda Folwick, 202-377-3514


B2G Lender Reporting Improvements

Sharing best practices to enhance current lender reporting processes.

SBA, Steve Kucharski, 202-205-7551Lead Agency

• Share best practices for improving lender data collections• Explore opportunities to coordinate and automate lender reporting around

common technologies and processes.• Explore opportunities to develop common data definitions

Approach

USDA, SBA, VA, HUD, EDUSDA, SBA, VA, HUDInterested Agencies

A mix of paper-based and electronic. USDA, SBA and HUD receive loan level reporting. ED receives summary level data initially with loan level data submitted later through guarantee agencies. VA does not require regular reporting.

Primarily a paper-based process. VA offers EDI capability, but only 14% of lenders participate. SBA drafted standards and negotiated agreements with lenders/software vendors for XML data library. HUD has plans to automate. ED does not process/issue guarantees.

Current Status

(2) Portfolio Status Reporting(1) Loan Guarantee Application


Electronic Lender Payments

Exploring coordination of and sharing best practices for electronic collection of lender payments to agencies.

Current Status:• Agencies use a variety of methods to collect payments from lenders (e.g.,

VA uses pay.gov). Possible payments considered under this best practice include guarantee fees (VA, USDA, SBA) and loan consolidation rebate fees, overpayments, etc (ED).

Interested Agencies: ED, HUD, SBA, USDA, VA

Approach:• Explore opportunities to coordinate implementation of electronic processes

and systems (such as pay.gov) to automate/simplify the collection of lender payments

Lead Agency: VA, Bill White, 202-273-7372


Sharing Lender / Citizen Data

Sharing citizen default data and lender performance dataCurrent Status:

• Citizen data – HUD developed CAIVRS for the purpose of tracking and reporting borrower government credit history. All agencies use CAIVRS in some capacity in their loan programs.

• Lender data – HUD’s FHA has an automated process to notify VA and USDA when a lender loses program eligibility so that other agencies can determine if similar action is warranted.

Interested Agencies: All Agencies Approach:

• Maximize effective use of CAIVRS, (i.e., reporting defaults and using CAIVRS to identify at-risk loans in an agency’s portfolio)

• Enable online access to CAIVRS • Explore opportunities to automate the sharing of lender performance

information across agencies.Lead Agency: HUD, Kathy Picot, 202-708-0614 ext. 2290


E-Authentication

E-Authentication Objective:To allow the public to obtain electronic government services with a credential (based on OMB’s 4 assurance levels) across government agencies.

Participating Agencies (14):• GSA• DoC• DoD• DoED

• NASA• HHS• SSA• Treasury

• USDA• HUD• DoL

• VA• EPA• State


Possible E-Authentication Pilot

Possible Pilot w/ Student Aid:Test the benefits of the E-Authentication Gateway using

the FSA PIN to obtain Title IV and HHS Title VII and VIII nursing and health professions loans.

Participants: ED, HHS, GSA, SSA, OMB…and a few schools,

lenders, and students

Lead Agency: ED, Neil Sattler, 202-377-3513

Now…Let’s Go To…

E-Sign Status


E-Sign Laws / Standards

GPEA –Government Paperwork Elimination Act (10/98)

E-Sign –Electronic Signatures in Commerce (6/00)

ED Loan Standards (04/01)

FUTURE STANDARDS…?Non-Loan Transactions

Etc.

UETA –Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (1999)


Direct Loan E-Sign Processhttps://lo-online.ed.gov/empn/unsecure/index.jsp


DL eMPN Transaction History


STAN Hits

Monthly FFEL and DL Volumes

0

2 0 ,0 0 0

4 0 ,0 0 0

6 0 ,0 0 0

8 0 ,0 0 0

10 0 ,0 0 0

12 0 ,0 0 0

14 0 ,0 0 0

16 0 ,0 0 0

Month

Volu

me

D L C o ns o l

D L Orig

F F EL

Total STAN Hits1,417,416

As of 04/30/03


Top STAN Clients

Guaranty Agencies

• AIU Online• Educaid• Great Lakes

Higher Education• Kentucky Higher

Education• NYS HESC• PHEAA• University

Accounting Service

Banks

• Bank of America• Student Loan

Corp (Citibank)• Wells Fargo

FSA

• Direct Loan Origination

• Direct Loan Consolidation

EFC Member / Affiliate


DL Paper vs. E-MPNs

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

160000

Jul-01

Aug-01

Sep-01

Oct-01

Nov-01

Dec-01

Jan-02

Feb-02

Mar-02

Apr-02

May-02

Jun-02

Jul-02

Aug-02

Sep-02

Oct-02

Nov-02

Dec-02

Jan-03

Feb-03

Mar-03

Apr-03

Electronic

Paper


Other E-Sign Business

• FAFSA• Perkins• Direct Loan eServicing

– Electronic Bill Presentment and Payment (BPP)

– Electronic Correspondence– Electronic Debit Account (EDA)– Deferments – Forbearances


Perkins E-Note

Overview: In July of 2002, FSA worked with COHEAO to provide HTML and PDF versions of the Perkins Loan promissory notes. Early Notes Notes % Technology Adopters Signed E-Signed

Penn State 4,991 4,059 81% ColdFusion 5.0, (Since 7/02) running on

Windows 4.0 and IIS 1.1servers

U of Minnesota 3,054 2,210 72% Java 1.1.8 with an (Since 8/02) Oracle back end


Future…???

• STAN II

• Future E-Sign Uses

• eGov / E-Authentication


Charlie Coleman202 377-3512

[email protected]

…that’s all folks!

Exceptional Service. Resourceful Solutions.

Implementing STAN & STAN II


May 2, 2003

Presented by:Tanya VittitowWeb/Marketing Projects [email protected]


OSLA – Oklahoma Student Loan AuthorityServicer for 32 Network Lenders

Alternative Loan Product – SHELF

55K Applications Processed in ‘02-’03

Over 641 Million Dollars Serviced

58 Employees


Decision to Implement E-Sign ProcessPaperless Environment

Faster Disbursements

Competitive Internet Solution


Evaluation of Authentication MethodsNCS Pearson - STAN, Student Authentication Network

National Credit Bureaus – Various Products

Proprietary System – Shared Secret


Why STAN?Meets USDE Guidelines for Safe Harbor

Open Process Already In Place

Pricing Structure


Implementing STANRISLA Shared E-Sign Process Architecture

Tailored System Security

Implemented RSA Security Decryption Software

Provided “Pass” and “Fail” URLs NCS Pearson

Passed STAN Testing Requirements

Moved STAN to Production


Authenticating on STAN User is Redirected to STAN Authentication Site

User Enters: SSN, First 2 Letters of Last Name, DOB and FAFSA PIN

User Information is Verified with the USDE FAFSA Database


Once AuthenticatedUser is Redirected back to Our “Pass” URL

Encrypted Query Stream Contains: authentication status, date, time stamp, information used for authentication excluding the FAFSA pin and a unique verification string


Once Authenticated Cont.Information is Decrypted and Stored in a Secure Data Depository

XML Representation of the Entire Document, including STAN Data is Generated


STAN BenefitsMost Users are Authenticated on First Attempt

Redirection to and from STAN Seamless

Entire Process Takes Only Seconds


Why Then STAN II?FAFSA PIN Not Required

Private Loans, The PLUS MPN, Servicing Documentation

Returning User ID and Password Option


Authenticating on STAN IIUser is Redirected to STAN II Authentication Site

User Enters: SSN, Drivers License Number,Full Name, Current and Previous Address, DOB and Phone Number

User Information is Verified with Trusted Third-Party Sources that Include: National Credit Bureaus, State Motor Vehicle Agencies and Government Databases


Once AuthenticatedReturning Data Stream Contains All Required Information to be Stored - Like STAN

Contains the Additional Information Required to Authenticate the User


STAN II Benefits98% of Users can be Authenticated with No PIN

Redirection to and from STAN II Seamless

Can be used for PLUS, Private, Non-Loan and Servicing Activity


No more STAN II?Client Volumes Lower Than January 2002 NCS Pearson Market Predictions

Low Adaptation Rate - Client Agreements Signed but Have Not Been Placed Into Production


Save STAN II CampaignNCS Pearson Government Solutions Wants to Hear from You

Susan O’Shaughnessy, 319-665-7843 or School Services 800-654-8341


STAN II AlternativesProprietary Solution – Outside of Safe Harbor

RSA Security - e-Forms Signing Solution

Equifax – eIDverifier and eIDcompare

Experian - Authentication Solution


STAN & STAN II Simple to Implement

Valuable Resource for the Student Lending Community Provided by NCS Pearson

Keeps Us All In a “Safe Harbor”

A special thank you to EFC’s Affiliate Member Sponsors

e-signcodxml stan


CONFERENCEA l e x a n d r i a , V A

m a y 5 – 6 , 2 0 0 3

digitalmeteorcommon record

1155 15th Street, N.W. Suite 801 Washington, DC 20005 tel 202.466.8621 fax 202.466.8643 www.efc.org

Theresa S. Shaw, Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid

Theresa S. (“Terri”) Shaw assumed leadership of Federal Student Aid (FSA) in the U.S. Department of Education on September 16, 2002.

Shaw is FSA’s second chief operating officer since the office was designated the federal government’s first Performance-Based Organization (PBO) in theHigher Education Amendments of 1998. The PBO’s mission, as outlined in thelegislation, is to improve service, reduce costs, and modernize and integrate the information and delivery systems. FSA administers Title IV federal studentloans and grants totaling about $61 billion a year to about 8.7 million people.

Before entering federal service, Shaw served as executive vice president andchief operating officer of eNumerate Solutions, Inc., a start-up technology firm in McLean, Virginia, from 2000-2002.

Prior to that, she worked for SLM Corporation (Sallie Mae) of Reston, Virginia, one of the largest private student loan providers in the country. Shaw started at Sallie Mae in 1988, advancing to the position of senior vice president andchief information officer in 1999.

She brings to FSA more than 22 years of experience in student aid, strong lead-ership skills, and solid technical expertise. Her results-oriented style has provensuccessful for creating and implementing effective systems solutions, and build-ing strong alliances among diverse business and technical constituencies.

Shaw earned a Bachelor of Science degree from George Mason University in 1980and completed the Executive Development Series at The George WashingtonUniversity in 1991.

She and her husband and two children live in Oak Hill, Virginia.

Keynote Speaker Bio

Common Origination and Disbursement

A First Year School’s Story

Roberta JohnsonInterim DirectorIowa State University

Iowa State University •Enrollment: 27,898•Pell recipients: 5,412•Stafford recipients: 14,550

A history of firsts. . . • First school to participate in electronic Pell• First school to participate in electronic

transmissions with the MDE• First Iowa school to develop electronic FFEL

transmissions and EFT• First year Direct Loan participant• Access America participant• First year COD participant

Technology concerns

• Difficulty with file specifications• Examples not clear• Initially files sent with wrong XML just

vanished; now a response is sent• Changing of tag names: 02-03 files

came back with 03-04 tags• School use field has disappeared

Technology concerns

• One record vs. multiple records has caused some problems

• Difficult for school to identify where the problem may be due to lack of flow chart

• COD web site invaluable in reviewing data although not always consistent

Technology concerns

• Upgrade conversions• Testing• Customer service

Origination concerns

• Electronic signatures: signatures didn’t always link to loans

• No confirmation to borrower that electronic signature received/processed

• Credit check concerns• Missing paper promissory notes• Customer service

Reconciliation concerns• Have to call to request Pell cumulative

file• Receive Direct Loan monthly detail, no

cumulative file• No SL-732 report• Many unknowns as we haven’t closed

out 2002-03.• Customer service

Customer service concerns

• Customer service representatives don’t understand “big picture”

• Customer service representatives don’t have authority to fix the problem

• Issues fall off the list without resolution• No follow-up• School does all the work

Suggestions for improvement• Functionality of web site• Allow schools to check status of issues

via web• Send e-mails to schools as issues are

resolved• Send e-mails to students to confirm

receipt of e-MPN• TEST, TEST, TEST

Questions

Common Record: A Story of Convergence

Paving the Way for Electronic Standards in Higher Education

Common Record –COD

Common Record –CommonLine

Common Record –

ISIRCollaboration

GO

Conv

erge

nce

Common Record Goal

Members of the community have come together to build an XML standard for higher

education

Convergence

Community participants worked together to come to agreement on schema structure, tag names, element definitions, lengths and valid codes.

Importance of Standards

Better, Faster, CheaperEvery year it becomes more expensive to upgrade systemsEvery organization is expected to do more with lessStandards make training easierReduce change for the sake of changeMake cross-training easier

PESC

PESC - Postsecondary Electronic Standards Council - Brings interested parties together to develop needed industry standards. PESC XML Forum for Education -Participants are working together to develop common Names (“Tags”) and XML Format (“Schemas”).

XML Forum Participants

From the fields of Admissions, Registrars, K-12, and Financial Aid. Within Financial Aid, participants include FSA, NCHELP, EFC, Financial Aid Administrators, software developers and more.

Terminology

ESC - NCHELP Electronic Standards Committee -

Sets standards for exchange of FFEL and Alternative Loan data. Collaborative effort of more than 50 organizations including representatives from schools, lenders, guarantors, loan servicers, secondary markets and software vendors.

Terminology

CR - Common Record - Standard XML “names” (tags) and “formats” (schema) for exchanging data within Higher Education.COD - Common Origination and Disbursement - FSA process for originating and disbursing Pell Grants and Direct Loans, and Campus-based awards using the Common Record – COD.

Convergence

PESC (XML Forum) working in conjunction with the Financial Aid and Admissions/Registrar communities is developing the data standards. ESC will continue to collaboratively set the standards for the business process flow of FFEL electronic loan information.

Work Products

XML Technical Specification for Higher EducationCore Components DictionaryCore Components Schema

XML Tech Specification for Higher Education

The “roadmap” for building the Core Components Dictionary and schemasIncludes best practices

Core Components Dictionary

Standards were set by the XML Forum for Education Technical Team (XML Technical Specification for Higher Education)Core Components were gathered from Admissions and Registrar community (Academic Transcript) and Financial Aid community (FSA, CommonLine and Meteor)

Core Components Schema

The Core Components Dictionary was used to develop the Core Components SchemaContains reusable components that can be used for any data exchangeThe Core Components Schema is the basis for the development of all business process schemas

XML: The Technology Solution

Why did FSA Adopt XML?

The Common Record was defined in XML on the basic principle that COD should support what was clearly becoming the default language of eBusiness. XML gave us flexibility. XML was future-oriented

The Common Record

Document Structure allows you to send data for:

Multiple SchoolsMultiple YearsMultiple Awards

In ONE Transmission!

’02 ’03 ’04

Common Record Expansion

ORIGINAL VISION: Use XML Technology to create financial aid data packet standards.

Financial Aid OfficeFinancial Aid Office

ISIRFFEL

PELL

DL


REVISED VISION: Use XML Technology to create higher education or cross-industry data packet standards.

Educational InstitutionEducational Institution

Admissions Registrars Financial Aid

Educational InstitutionEducational Institution

AddressLineAddressCity

Admissions Registrars Financial Aid





Common Record ExpansionConvergence of Standards

XML Forum Core Components

XML Forum Core Components

Financial Aid Core

Components

Financial Aid Core

Components

Admissions/Registrar

Core Components

Admissions/Registrar

Core Components

ASC X12EDI

ASC X12EDI

CommonLine

CommonLine MeteorMeteor

Common Record

COD

Common Record

COD

ebXMLebXML


Core Components

Data Dictionary

Core Components

Data Dictionary

Sector Library

Sector Library

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

ApplicationSchema

Sector Library

Sector Library

Sector Library

Sector Library

The Common Record –Community Development

Core Components Dictionary – PESCSchemas

Common Record Common Record – CODCommon Record – CommonLine -2003Common Record – ISIR (Draft published)

Admissions/RegistrarAcademic Transcript – 2003K-12 Academic Transcript - 2003

Next Steps for FSAUsing XML and Developing Standards will:Using XML and Developing Standards will:

• Simplify business process and technology for Schools• Map data to business processes• Utilize open technology supporting future

enhancementsISIR

Institutional StudentInformation Record

CODCommon Origination

And Disbursement

NSLDSNational Student Loan

Data System

Award Year2004-05 Schedule and

Phase-in process forthe LendingCommunityand Schools to bedetermined

Award Year 2002-0350 Schools

Award Year 2003-041,000 or more

*FFEL ExpansionImplementation 2004-2005

Award Year 2004-05All Schools

Phase-inprocess for schools to bedetermined

* Effort led by FFELP

Data Strategy Framework

The Framework will help FSA define its standards and approach for:

• Access Methods• Data Standards• Data Quality• Data Architecture• Data Ownership

Overview - XML Framework

Objective: The FSA XML Framework will outline FSA’s target state and implementation strategy for using XML across the enterprise. The XML Framework will provide standards, processes, and a toolset for implementing XML.

Current State Vision Target State

Fragmented XMLApproach

Ad-hoc XMLDevelopment

Minimal XMLTechnology

Presence

First-GenerationXML Tools and

Facilties

XML Methodologyand Standards

StrategicAssessment and

Enterprise Vision

XML Toolset

Standards andGuidelines for

consistent schemadevelopment

Core ComponentLibrary

Registry andRepository

Data CleanupStrategy (using

Core Components)

XMLFramework

Vision/Where are we going?

Define FSA’s XML Strategic Assessment and Enterprise Vision.

Analyze current XML environment at FSA –strategy, standards, and technology.

Based on industry proven practices for guidance.

Provide standards and guidelines for consistent XML schema development.

Define the governance process for XML standards.

Vision/Where are we going?

Develop a Core Component Library.

Implement a Registry and Repository for storing and accessing XML documents.

Identify implementations that may leverage XML.

Architect an enterprise Data Quality Approach (using Core Components).

Comments, Questions, and Feedback

<Presenter Number=“1”>

<Name>Adele Marsh</Name>

<BusinessName>AES</BusinessName>

<BusinessPhone>7177202711</BusinessPhone>

<Email>[email protected]</Email>

</Presenter>

<Presenter Number=“2”>

<Name>Holly Hyland</Name>

<BusinessName>FSA</BusinessName>

<BusinessPhone>2023773710</BusinessPhone>

<Email>[email protected]</Email>

</Presenter>

Thank You!!!

Paving the Way for Electronic Standards in Higher Education

Common Record –COD

Common Record –CommonLine

Common Record –

ISIRCollaboration

GO

Conv

erge

nce

EFC Technology ConferenceEFC Technology Conference

UpdateMonday May 5, 2003

Michael Sessa

Executive Director

Michael Sessa

Executive Director

May 5, 2003EFC Technology Conference

AgendaAgenda

Overview of PESCIndustry RelationshipsCurrent ActivitiesFuture Activities


Overview of PESCOverview of PESC

MissionEstablished in 1997 and located in Washington, D.C., PESC is a non-profit

association of colleges and universities; professional and commercial organizations; data, software and service providers; and state and federal government agencies.

PESC’s mission is to guide the higher education community in leveraging the value of electronic standards for data exchange with the overall goal of improving service, controlling costs, and attaining interoperability.

PESC supports and promotes the use and adoption of existing electronic standards set through official standards-setting bodies, as well as open industry collaborations, and sets new industry standards where there are no national or international bodies to do so.



Board of DirectorsMichael Berberet NCS PearsonSteve Biklen NASLAJerry Bracken AACRAOJudith Flink University of Illinois @ ChicagoMark Jones National Student ClearinghouseJackie Kessler SCTDallas Martin NASFAAKeith Riccitelli Sallie MaeMichael Sessa PESC


Overview of PESCOverview of PESCMembersAACRAO, American Education Services, Campus Management Corporation, Citibank, COHEAO, CollegeBoard, Datatel Inc., Educaid, ELM Resources, George Washington University, Miami-Dade Community College, Miami University, NASFAA, NASLA, National Student Clearinghouse, NCS Pearson, Northern Illinois University, Oracle, Purdue University, Sallie Mae, SAP, SCT Corporation, SLSA, Temple University, University of Illinois at Chicago, University of Miami at Coral Gables, University of Minnesota, University of Northern Iowa, University of Texas at Austin, University of Wisconsin at Madison, USA Funds, US Department of Education, Virginia Polytechnic Institute

AffiliatesACT Inc, ACE, EdFund, EFC, EDUCAUSE, infiNET Solutions, Lumina Foundation, NACUBO, NCHELP, RDA Corporation, SIF



Annual ScheduleBoard Meetings Monthly

Membership Meetings Twice per year

XML Forum for Education Quarterly (fall meeting held in conjunction with AACRAO’s Technology Conference)

Annual Conference May(held in conjunction with EFC’s annual Technology Conference)


Industry RelationshipsIndustry Relationships

US Department of Education – Office of Federal Student Aid

AACRAO’s SPEEDE CommitteeNCHELP’s ESC CommitteeANSI ASC X12EFC


Current ActivitiesCurrent Activities

Focus on MembershipWeb Services WorkgroupSingle Institutional ID WorkgroupXML Postsecondary TranscriptCommon Record



XML Postsecondary Transcript– Summer 2002: version 0.01 released for public comment

– Winter 2003: version 1.0 submitted to ANSI ASC X12

– Spring 2003: presented at AACRAO’s annual conference

– Fall 2003: presented at EDUCAUSE’s annual conference ?

– Winter 2004: approved by ANSI ASC X12?



Common Record– 2002: launched by FSA for Pell, Direct Lending, and Campus-Based*

– 2003: FFELP and Alternative Loan schemas developed

– 2004: FFELP and Alternative Loan service providers implement expanded Common Record


Common RecordCommon RecordFAFSA - ISIR Graduation Sales

Certification Repayment Delinquency

MPN Payoff Cure - Claim

Disbursement

Guarantee

Changes

Deferment

Consolidation

Forbearance

NSLDS

Subrogation

799 - LARS

Life of the Loan


Common RecordCommon Record

v 1.0 v 2.0 v 3.0 v 4.0

?

?

Phased out

Phased out

Phased outEa

rly A

dopte

rs

Optio

nal

?

Begin

Migr

ation

?Re

quire

d

Begin Migration ?

Phases out CL95, CL96, CL3

CommonLine 4

CommonLine 5

Common Record

PELL

Direct Lending

Campus-Based

FAFSA/ISIR

Servicing/CAM

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005


Future ActivitiesFuture Activities

Formation of liaison relationships with OASIS and HR-XMLExpansion of work efforts in XML ForumReauthorization of HEAANSI accreditationStandards maintenanceWebsite repository


Additional InfoAdditional Info

www.StandardsCouncil.orgThe StandardPESC Annual ConferenceMay 6-8, 2003XML Forum for Education


UpdateUpdateMichael Sessa

Executive Director

PESC

[email protected]

EFC Technology ConferenceAlexandria, Va

May 6, 2003

Real-Time Transactions Session

Panel Members

Bill ConnorELM Resources

Jim FarmerSigma Systems, Inc.

John KennedySallie Mae

ELM Resources

Bill Connor

ELM Resources

• What is ELM• What is ELM doing with real-time• Why is real-time important• What are the key next steps

– Schools• SIS/FAMS vendors

– Business partners

What is ELM Resources?

• Mutual Benefit Corporation – Alliance of lenders, guarantors, and servicers– Cooperative venture, open to all

• Non-Profit company• Free services to schools• Single Point of Data Exchange• Provider Neutral• Technology Bridge

ELM is Open

• ELM members represent over 90% of FFEL volume• All guarantors interfaced• Provider neutral• 700 schools using ELM

– Choice of lenders, guarantors, & servicers– Choice of providers based on service– Control over loan process

• Supports all standard application flows

ELMNet and Real-Time Inquiry

• ELMNet real-time inquiry in production since Oct. 1999

• Real-time access to remote production systems• Inquiry index has 12 million borrowers• Approx 85-90% of all loans available

ELMNet and Real-Time Transactions

• ELMNet loan transactions since May 2002• Current Real-Time Transactions participants

– Citibank– Educaid– Wells Fargo

• In development/testing– Sallie Mae - Bank of America – Southwest Student Series - Nelnet

• XML Messages using CommonLine 4

ELMNet Real-time Transactions

• Real-time means– Right now!– Estimated 10 – 12 seconds

• Messaging and XML• Uses CommonLine transactions and

XML• XML Messages will use Common Record for

FFEL and Alternative Loans (Spring ’04)

ELMNetReal-time Loans

ELMNet Lender

School

4 Sec1 Sec

1 Sec

Why Real-Time is Important

• Quality of service• FFELP is based upon competition• Service quality is a competitive tool• Cost savings – schools and lenders

Real-Time Technology

• Availability and acceptance of the Internet

• Lowering costs of components– Hardware; software; communications

• Multiple real-time uses – spread the costs

School ELMNetLender

GuarantorServicer

SIS

Real-Time Transactions

Batch Batch

Real-Time Real-Time

Schools

• Moving to real-time for other applications

• Admissions/enrollment management• Registration• Courses• Bill presentment

Schools

• SIS/FAMS vendors• Largest schools – most sophisticated

systems• Web-based systems• Financial aid

– 40-50% rely upon financial aid– Cash flow

Schools

• Financial aid = Loans• Loan are over 50% of all aid• Loans are critical to schools and students• Schools are demanding more from

SIS/FAMS vendors• Loan processing is expensive for schools• Changes to loans are expensive

Real-Time Business Partners

• Lenders, guarantors, servicers• Most already doing real-time internally• Many offer real-time externally• Competitive forces raise service levels

EFC Technology ConferenceAlexandra, Va

May 6, 2003

Real-Time Transactions Session

Real Time Infrastructure

John D. KennedyManager - Information Technology

SLM Corporation

Real-Time Infrastructure

The Real-Time Infrastructure (RTI) is inevitable, rolling out in phases through 2010 (0.8 probability), driving lower IT costs, greater quality of service and greater agility. Those IS organizations and service providers that are not embracing them will risk survival because their costs will be much higher than their competition. - Gartner Group

Today’s Challenges

• n-tier / multi-tier architecture spans multiple platforms….and groups

• no single person who understands the picture from end to end

• problems cause multiple groups to come together (nw, db, sec, server, app, etc.) when a problem occurs.

• Business doesn’t care about the components, they care about end-to-end.

• Oh…and reduce cost of IT

Real-Time Means...

• Consolidation of islands of unshared, underutilized, resources

• RTI is about sharing and leveraging peaks and valleys in utilization

• Increasing agility in provisioning IT resources• Enabling a quicker response to changes in

business demands

Provisioning

• Intel RFP - reduced intel server costs by 25%• VMWare - 8:1 Consolidation of Intel Servers• SAN - Pooled storage to increase storage utilization• Asset Management

– Software Delivery (2000 jobs monthly)– AMO - Asset Management Option– eTrust Admin - for user account provisioning – RCO - Remote Control Option

• Service-based integration architectures

Optimization

• Exploring Unix alternatives (linux, wintel, etc.)• MS SQL Consolidation• Consolidated enterprise backup solution (3TB nightly)• Performance Management

– agent technology deployed on every server– automated notification– auto-ticket generation– auto-escalation to meet SLA’s

• Re-negotiation of service contracts• Charge-back of IT to business area’s

Availability

• Horizontal change management• Frequent post-mortem / root cause analysis• SPOF (single point of failure) evaluation at all levels

– firewalls– load balancing– web servers– application servers– databases– network connectivity

• Application developers must become “operationally aware”

Recommendations

• Implement best practices for service-level management

• Enable automated server provisioning through server configuration management

• Consolidate servers and storage and evaluate workload consolidation

• Force programmers to be “operationally aware”• Include business area in setting IT priorities

Sigma Systems, Inc.Real-Time Transactions

James Farmer, Chairman

substituting for

Bob Bevers, Vice President Market Development

EFC Conference on Technology

May 5-6, 2003 Alexandria, Virginia

Sigma Systems, Inc.

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Why Real-Time Transactions?

• Students expect real-time

Part of their eCommerce experience with banks, airlines, on-line stores, government

• Colleges and universities view real-time as a symbol of technology

Colleges and universities are investing in portals, wireless, and real-time Web Services as symbols of technology and expertise

• Real-time technology reduces IT costs

Loosely-coupled applications reduce maintenance costs, vulnerability

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Is the technology available?

Web services standards, reference implementations, and software are now available.• Meteor, California eTranscripts applications

• Shibboleth, Liberty Alliance, SAML security in pilot implementations

• JA-SIG uPortal (XML/XSLT/SOAP, WSRP) and SCT Luminis, iAssessment, and Unicon Academus products

• XML Forms (Bureau of the Census)

• For financial aid, the Common Origination and Disbursements and CommonLine XML standards

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Sigma’s commitment to FSA COD

153,900Total

2,500University of Texas Health Science Center

9,200University of Northern Colorado

21.500Western Michigan University

21,000Ohio University

41,300Ohio State University

32,500Michigan State University

14,400Johns Hopkins University

17,300Colorado State University

15,700Bowling Green State University

ApplicantsCollege or University

Cliff Clevenger, FSA CIO Technology Update, 30 September 2002

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Some perspectives on COD

“I believe [the COD experience] was worth it. We expect the greatest benefit when FSA continues its move to real- time open standards based data exchanges with the schools.”

Tom Biedscheid, Colorado State University, September 2002

“SFA's COD initiative provides an opportunity to advance both the technology and the standards in higher education and Sigma's product line.”

Raymond Timmons, Sigma Systems, Inc., September 2002

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Department of Education Strategy

The core standards are already defined:Discovery• Web Services are registered in central registries

(UDDI) and can be discovered thereDescription• Web Service provider describes its services with all

details via a standard XML document called WSDLMessaging• Use of XML as the basis for document centric

messaging protocol. SOAP is establishing itself as the foremost message protocol for Web Services

Transport• Defines the protocols used to transport messages.

HTTP is the de facto standard network protocol for Internet-available Web Services

Transport: HTTP, HTTPS,SMTP, FTP, M essage Queuing…

Packaging:HTTP GET/POST, SOAP

Description: WSDL

Discovery: UDDI

Core Stack

Web Services technologies are driven by standards supported by all vendors to maximize interoperability.

Core Web Standards

From “Web Services Strategy,” FSA Software Developers Conference, 4 March 2003

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.



Web services:• are based on Internet

standards• are platform agnostic• are widely available• have complete vendor

support• are a key enabler of

SOAs (Service Oriented Architectures)

Web Services are a developing capability that build on both existing and new technologies /standards. Rarely is a web service mentioned without discussion of XML. Other protocols such as SOAP are viewed as the most likely standard for wrapping XML - but the technologies are still evolving.

Web Services Technologies

Core Web service standards

Core Web service standards

Network and Transport ProtocolsTCP/IP, HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, SMTP

Data RepresentationXML

ServiceDescription

WSDL

Discovery &Publication

UDDI

Data Exchange Protocols

SOAP

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.



Web Services - How do they compliment FSA Strategies?

• Build/Leverage in place XML Schemas• Ease Data Integration concerns• Assist in the movement from batch process to web based “real-

time” information exchange• Provide means for accessing FSA internal systems as well as

joint development of standards and access with external parties

• Further FSA’s ability to match customer expectations - parallel convenience/accessibility of commercial industry

• As Messaging Maturity and Capability increases Web Services are a clear next step

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Web Services Security

Shibboleth (US), Athens (UK)

Journal Access

(anonymous authentication)XML Signature, PKI, XKMS

Digital signature

Liberty AllianceFederated security

Gleason’s “Transitive Trust”

WS-SecurityReal-time Web Services

MethodUse Case

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Gleason’s “Transitive Trust”

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Design drivers

• Industry development of Web Services standards and reference implementations

• Emerging consensus on enterprise architecture for higher education

• Enterprise academic systems

• Enterprise business systems based on best-of-breed applications

• U.S. federal government’s enterprise architecture and associated standards

• The “open standards/open source” community activity

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Leaders in implementation

College and university “early adopters,” through their interests, affiliate with the following organizations:

• HEKATE - Higher Education Knowledge and Technology Exchange

• JA-SIG – Java Architecture Special Interest Group

• Common Solutions Group

• National Student Clearinghouse

• Postsecondary Electronics Standards Council

Sigma Systems Inc. follows the work of all of these organizations.

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Barriers to real-time processing

Steve Hawald, “A Vision for Real-Time Application and Award,” EDUCAUSE, 2 October 2002

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Next steps for the community

• Production implementations of Web services

• Continued cooperation by the leaders

• Coordination with standards bodies

• Cooperation among higher education software vendors – a “new approach”

• And if possible, commitment by U.S. Department of Education, Immigration and Naturalization Service, and Department of Veteran Affairs to common standards

• Inter-departmental coordination with higher education participation

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

Are there new business models?

• Open source software in products: IBM’s Web Sphere, SCT Luminus, iAssessment

• Open source/proprietary: Sendmail and Sendmail’s High Volume Mail

• Open source and support: Red Hat Linux, Unicon’s uPortal

• Proprietary software

Sigma Systems Inc. will incorporate open standards/open source into its product line and will support selected open source software all based on a real-time Web services architecture.

The end

jim [email protected]

1-202-296-2807

Sigm

a Sy

stem

s, In

c.Si

gma

Syst

ems,

Inc.

The campus IT environment

“Real-time in the Real-world, a personal observation”

• IT resources are very limited with budgets being reduced 10 to 20% per year while software licenses are going up sharply.

• Colleges and universities are in the middle between students and the recording industry.

• The SEVIS experience eroded “trust” in the U.S. federal agencies.

• An intense demand for academic IT investments in learning management systems, digital repositories, and wireless access.

Education Finance CouncilTechnology Conference

AES eCommunications CenterMay 5th - 6th, 2003

eCommunications Center

Web enabled, inbound/outbound, single point of contact, 24/7 customer contact centerInbound Customer Service & Online technical support, outbound marketingLive May 1st, 2001Supporting 21 unique web sites– AES Corporate; Mentor; CampusChamps,

MYF, AES Business Partners

ECommerce Organization

eCommunicationsCenter

WebBusiness Unit

Interface


MentorAES Outreach


ECommerceMarketingInitiatives

ECommerceDivision

CRM Network

Existing AES infrastructure – AVAYA PBX– AVAYA Call Management System– MS SQL 7 Database– Mosaix Autodialer

CRM NetworkAvaya ICCAES Homegrown Systems– ‘DigDash’

operating system

– ‘InfoWare’knowledge ware application

– Help Deskinternal; for web users

– “AESMailer”outbound email administration

CRM NetworkExisting AES infrastructure – AVAYA PBX

Vector Routing of medium channels per web site– 51 current Vector

– AVAYA Call Management SystemClient Based CMS Split/Skill Assignments

– MS SQL 7 DatabaseNetwork Power

– DigDash, InfoWare

– Mosaix AutodialerOutbound Marketing

Internet Call Center - ICC

ICC– Live Chat

Option for VoiceWeb Collaboration

– ‘MessageCare’Email Administration

– Subject Matter Expert routing– History archive search capability– Reporting Functions

Internet Call Center

ICC– “Call Me”

Consumer scheduled call back

– Traditional Toll-free Service

“ContactUs”

http://www.aessuccess.org/contact/index.shtml

http://www.aessuccess.org/contact/index.shtml

Digital Dashboard Homegrown Application– Designed with ‘single-point of contact’ in mind– Non-traditional AES Customer data warehouse– Integrated with multiple host systems

legacy, databasesearch capability; history notationsemail and chat archived to imaging

– Easily AdministeredTailored data fields for AES Partners

– Contact Classification Reporting

DIGITAL DASHBOARD

Info-Ware

Specific SS#Search

General SearchAdministrative

DIGITAL DASHBOARD

DIGITAL DASHBOARD

Customer Relationship Management (CRM) Account Notation

DIGITAL DASHBOARD - Search Results

Knowledge Ware

‘InfoWare’– Homegrown application– Customized information– Point-and-click agent access to information– Easy to administer– Enhances quality of response through

consistent delivery of information

DIGITAL DASHBOARD - Info-ware

Help Desk

Tool in providing Technical Support to web surferReal-time technical assistanceReplicates end-user configurationFeedback to AES web developers

Technical Support

Up-front Agent Support – Review user configuration/software versions– Reset Security to Default Settings– Clear Cache– Adobe Acrobat upgrades/review web enable option

• Create User Profile for Escalated Help Desk Support

• Back Door Access to Portal - User Account Information

Help Desk

Real-Time Technical AssistanceReplicates End-User ConfigurationHelp Ticket Tracking via Dig DashUser Issue Resolution ReportingFeedback to Agents & AES Web Developers to improve web functionality

Inbound Time of Day Distribution

Inbound Medium Distribution

Vendor Services

eCommunications acts as 3rd party service provider for AES Business Partners– Dedicated Management Liaison– Disciplined Transfer Protocol– Flexible Reporting– Inbound Customer Service– Online functionality technical support– Marketing opportunities

AES Marketing Support

Email Campaigns/Monthly eNewsletters– TrustE

Disciplined Internal Processes

Outbound Calling Campaigns‘Do Not Call lists’

Snail Mailtailored collateral material

Individual Loan ClosureAppSent, AppRcvd Follow-up proceduresData Mining

Discussion

Ken SchafferAssistant Vice President

AES EcommerceeCommunicationsCenter

[email protected]


Web Services

• Web applications that use programmatic interfaces for application to application communications.

• Most definitions include these technologies:– XML– SOAP– WSDL– UDDI


Concerns

• Using web services for basic system integration and XML interfaces is relatively stable

• Largest concern today is on securing web services


Security Requirements

• Three capabilities must exist for secure web services:– Credential Transfer– Message Integrity– Message Confidentiality


Why isn’t SOAP secure?

• SOAP is simply a standard for sending messages over HTTP using XML

• The SOAP specification does not address security at all.

• SOAP contains no protocol limitations– Can use HTTP or HTTPS – Can use just about any known protocol


Security Standards

• The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)• Organization for the Advancement of Structured

Information Standards (OASIS) • World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)

Have worked on at least 13 different web services security standards.


WS-Security

• W3C standards used– XML Encryption– XML Signatures– Other extension

functions

• Joint effort of many standards bodies and industries– IBM– Microsoft– Verisign


WS-Security

• Generally considered to be the best bet to emerge as the standard.

• WS-Security interoperability exists for– Web Services Enhancements 1.0 for Microsoft

.NET – IBM Web Services ToolKit 3.3.2 – Apache Axis with Apache XML Security


Interoperability

• Interoperability exists depending on which algorithms are used.– Common algorithms such as RSA and DSA

work fine– Each vendor may support algorithms that may

not be interoperable with other toolkits


XML Encryption

• Encrypt XML documents and use an XML syntax to represent:– Encrypted Content – All encrypted content is

still well formed XML– Information that enables the intended recipient

to decrypt the data


XML Signatures

• XML syntax for representing the signature of a document

• Procedures for computing and verifying the signature.

• XML Encryption and XML Signatures are different standards and the use of one does not necessarily imply the use of the other


Security Assertion Markup Language (SAML)

• Framework for exchanging security information– Assertions about subjects (people or

computers) which have an identity in the network.

– Assertions are issued by SAML authorities -authentication authorities, attribute authorities, and policy decision points.


SAML Assertions

• Authentication– Previous authentication acts– Assertions should not usually contain passwords

• Attributes– Profile information– Preference information

• Authorization– Given the attributes, should access be allowed?


Typical Assertion

• Issuer ID and issuance timestamp • Assertion ID • Subject • Name and security domain • Conditions under which the assertion is valid • Assertion validity period (NotBefore and NotOnOrAfter) • Audience restrictions • Target restrictions (intended URLs for the assertion) • Application specific conditions


Meteor Security

All security in Meteor is through the use of industry standard technologies.

• Centralized registry• SAML• XML Signatures• SSL


Centralized Registry

• Meteor uses a centralized LDAP server to contain:– Public keys of all participants– Network status information (active, pending,

suspended)– Contact Information


SAML Assertions

• Meteor SAML Assertions contain– Authentication Statement

• Timestamp, Creator, and Locality (machine)

– Attributes• Subject (Creator)• Attribute Name• Attribute Namespace• Attribute Value


Authentication Statement

<saml:AuthenticationStatement AuthenticationInstant="2002-08-27T03:12:01CDT"AuthenticationMethod="nchelp.org/meteor">

<saml:Subject><saml:NameIdentifier Name="ED.TIM"

SecurityDomain="nchelp.org/meteor"/></saml:Subject><saml:AuthenticationLocality

DNSAddress="meteor.prioritytech.com"IPAddress="10.110.1.48">

</saml:AuthenticationLocality></saml:AuthenticationStatement>


Attributes

<saml:AttributeStatement><saml:Subject>

<saml:NameIdentifier Name="ED.TIM"SecurityDomain="nchelp.org/meteor">

</saml:NameIdentifier></saml:Subject><saml:Attribute AttributeName="Role"

AttributeNamespace="nchelp.org/meteor"><saml:AttributeValue>BORROWER</saml:AttributeValue>

</saml:Attribute></saml:AttributeStatement>


Multiple Security Assertions

• One SAML Assertion may contain authentication, authorization, and attribute information from several different authorities.

• Not necessary to have separate assertions for each different SAML authority.


XML Signatures

• The SAML assertion is signed by the entity that created it.

• When signed, all irrelevant white-space is removed.

• Sample: Signed Assertion• Once signed, the document may not be

modified in any way.• The entire request is not signed.


Encryption

Meteor does not use XML Encryption• The Specification was not available when

we began development• Plan to move to this as the technology

matures• Currently all communication is over SSL


Meteor Security Requirements

Three capabilities must exist for secure web services:

• Credential Transfer– SAML Assertions

• Message Integrity– XML Signatures and SSL

• Message Confidentiality– SSL


Planning an Implementation

• When planning your own Web Services:– Gain a detailed understanding of the potential

risks (viruses, hackers, natural disasters)– Make a proactive analysis of the consequences

and countermeasures in relation to risks– Create an implementation strategy for

integrating security measures into your enterprise network.

“Real World” METEOR Implementation Issues

Jim KuhlenConnecticut Student Loan Foundation

What is Meteor? Meteor is a collaborative effort within the student aid industry to simplify and consolidate access to student financial aid information. Meteor software provides open, non-

proprietary, real time access to all available aid information for a student from all participating organizations, and consolidates it for display to students and Financial Aid Professionals.

“Who” is Meteor?

The Meteor Project was initiated by NCHELPOver 40 Student Aid Industry organizations support Meteor Representatives of these organizations make up the Meteor Advisory Team, which manages ongoing Meteor issues related to business requirements, software design and development, participant registration, etc.

usingSOAP/HTTPS

Meteor Architecture

Access ProviderAccess

Provider

AuthenticateAuthenticate

XML RequestXML Request

XML ResponseXML Response

XML RequestXML Request

XML ResponseXML Response

DataProviderData

Provider

CustomCode

Portal orWeb SiteRequest

Portal orWeb SiteRequest

XSLT Transform

XSLT Transform

XMLResponse

XMLResponse

IndexProviderIndex

Provider

CustomCode



Lightweight D

irectory A

ccess Protocol (LDA

P)

GenericRules

Engine

HPC

Meteor Roles

Access Provider– Provides inquirers with a connection to the

Meteor Network through the Meteor Access Provider software.

Data Provider– Returns student aid data in response to

inquiries from Access Providers.

Meteor Roles

Index Provider– Streamlines network performance by

supplying a list of participants holding data for a student

– Currently the National Student Clearinghouse is the Meteor Index Provider.

– Design will accommodate additional Index Providers

Meteor Roles

Authentication Provider– Designed to be used by schools – Allows school’s authentication of an FAP or

student to be passed to a Meteor Access Provider to gain access to Meteor data

Implementation Issues

Business Issues

Security and Privacy Concerns– GLBA Compliance– Authentication of Inquirers– Security of Data– Potential Misuse of Data

Privacy

The Meteor Advisory Team received input and expertise regarding privacy from sponsoring organizations and the NCHELP Legal Committee.Analysis was provided in relation to GLBA and individual state privacy laws.Meteor complies with both GLBA and state privacy provisions.

Inquirer Authentication

No central authentication processUtilizes transitive trust modelEach Authentication or Access Provider uses their existing authentication model (single sign-on)Each participant’s authentication techniques are reviewed as a part of Meteor RegistrationEncrypted authentication information is passed with all Meteor messages using SAML in compliance with Shibboleth

Data SecurityTrusted network– Participants certify that Meteor data is

protected at least as well as their own – Meteor Technical Team verifies that

new participants have adequate security in place (firewalls, etc.)

SSL & Encryption– All Meteor messages are encrypted

and verified for authenticity

Meteor Participant CertificationApplies to all Meteor ParticipantsMajor points:– Protection and use of data– Authentication– Technical and Security requirements– Terms of participation– Conditions of Use

Participation currently limited to FFELP community (ED issued Ids)

Technical Issues

Technical InfrastructureTechnical Staff SkillsInstallation & TestingNew Releases

Technical Infrastructure

Web Application Server– WebSphere, Tomcat, others

Real time access to loan data – CICS Gateway, JDBC, others

Java Development Environment– VisualAge for Java, other JDK

Support for HTTPS/SSL

Technical Staff SkillsWeb application server installation and configurationFamiliarity with Java Working knowledge of XMLInstallation and configuration of Firewalls Knowledge of HTTPS/SSL and Certificate AuthoritiesProgramming to provide necessary data via Database/Gateway

Installation and TestingCustomize software if desiredCompile and deploy on Web Application Server(s)Program to supply required dataSupply information to populate Meteor RegistryTest across Meteor Network via Meteor Test Bench Final testing with Clearinghouse

Installation and Testing

Meteor Technical Team will assist participants with problem resolution at any stage of the process.

New ReleasesParticipation in pre-release testing of new releases is encouraged.Releases are backward compatibleProgram to new requirements if necessaryCompile and deploy new release on test serverTest across Meteor Network via Meteor Test Bench Deploy on production server

Steps to Meteor Participation

Steps to Meteor Participation٭ Contact the Meteor Registration

Coordinator, Tim Cameron, at 202-822-2106 or by e-mail at [email protected].

٭ The Meteor Registration Coordinator will send you the following forms for you to complete:

– Meteor Participant Certification– Registration Profile– Authentication Profile(s)– Technical Profile


٭ Download the Meteor Implementation Guide and Meteor Setup Guide at www.nchelp.org/meteor.htm

٭ Return completed forms to:Meteor Registration Coordinator c/o NCHELP1100 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 12th FloorWashington, DC, 20036-4110

Steps to Meteor Participation٭ The Meteor Registration Coordinator will

provide your designated primary contact with instructions for downloading the Meteor software.

٭ A Meteor Technical Team representative will contact your designated Technical Contact to establish a dialog on a technical level, coordinate testing, and provide assistance and guidance.


٭ When successful testing has been accomplished in the Meteor test environment, the National Student Clearinghouse will conduct final testing with your organization.

٭ Upon successful completion of final testing, you will be ready to go live.

Questions?

More Accessible DataWith New Internet Technologies

Education Finance Council Technology Conference

May 5, 2003

Who is enumerate?

enumerate is a software company whose product, Numerator! Publish, enables the effective communication of business critical metrics and financial data.

Numerator! Publish enables individuals and organizations to post numeric data online in an interactive way making it easier for end-users to analyze the data and make critical business decisions.

Who is enumerate?

enumerate is a software company whose product, Numerator! Publish, enables the effective communication of business critical metrics and financial data.

Numerator! Publish enables individuals and organizations to post numeric data online in an interactive way, making it easier for end-users to analyze the data and make critical business decisions.

Where did enumerate come from?

Wall Street spreadsheet jock meets2nd generation Internet technology.

Bottom line…

enumerate is focused on two things:

1. Making data more accessible by providing user friendly presentation layers.

2. Ensuring it is fast, easy, and cheap to present data in this more accessible way.

Three themes for today’s presentation…

1. Making data accessible provides significant business benefits.

2. It is fast, easy, and cheap to turn multiple data sources into more accessible formats.

3. More accessible data has very broad applicability.

Who could benefit from more accessible data?

Investment Bankers CEOs Technology Professionals Investment Bankers

Hockey FansFederal Agency Executives

Theme 1:Making Data Accessible Provides

Significant Business Benefits

What are the benefits of more accessible data?

“Even the most accurate, relevant, and complete information would be all but useless for management decisions if it were presented on stone tablets at corporate headquarters. The same is true for information reported to investors and other stakeholders.”

– from Building Public Trust,by Samuel A. DiPiazza, CEO, PricewaterhouseCoopersand Robert G. Eccles, President, Advisory Capital Partners

The “enumerate curve”…K

now

ledg

e

BusinessTodayis Here!

RAW Data

Current formats have limitations for presenting data…

SpreadsheetsPowerful tools for modeling

Powerful tools for analyzing your own models

But, a poor communication and presentation format:

– “Fat fingers”

– Data overload

– Hidden context

Current formats have limitations for presenting data

PDF

Excellent for sharing finished text and graphics-based documents in a platform-neutral format.

But, a poor communication and presentation format for analytic data… data must be cut and pasted, or manually re-keyed, into a spreadsheet

More accessible data through “analytic presentation” software…

Call up data instantly on the Web or intranet.

Cycle through chart and table views.

Apply calculations – even complex analytics.

Import new data sets for comparison.

Download data or export charts and tables for use in other presentations.

Data Integrity

End-

Use

r Fle

xibi

lity

Theme 2: It is fast, easy, and cheap to turn multiple data

sources into more accessible formats.

New Internet technologies address the data dilemma…

First generation Web technology enabled mass communication and instant access

Second generation Web technologies – especially XML – add more:

– XML enables transmission of files containing more information than simple HTML

– Now presentation layers can automatically render data for easy consumption

How does this type of technology work?

<XML>

Database

ODBC

Numerator!Publish® Interactive Data ViewExcel

Text File

How easy is it?

“The functionality provided by enumerate’s software is terrific; the ease of implementation makes providing that functionality to our users a no-brainer.”

– Mike Smith, CTO Forbes.com

Not your parents’ business intelligence…

Number of Users

Anal

ytic

Pow

er

Analytic PresentationOLAP

Enterprise Reporting

Theme 3:More Accessible Data Has Broad Applicability

What are some relevant scenarios?

Critical data currently presented in old, inaccessible formats

Lots of data in Excel files inaccessible to management

Department or function-specific databases currently not being tapped

Large scale business intelligence implementations with a weak presentation aspect

Before and after: Corporate financial information

AfterBefore

Conclusion

Features of a next generation data system…

Simple to use

Flexible – serves varied audiences simultaneously

Incorporates disparate information

Platform independent

Powerful for end-users

More than data distribution – a robust tool for communication

Restating the themes…

Relevant to anyone who uses data – that means everyone

Can be deployed by business users and technologists alike – Fast, easy, and cheap

Scales across multiple project sizes and types

THANK YOU

Contact Information:Jeff Erberenumerate

[email protected]

www.enumerate.com

Requirements for a data standard…

Measure

Format

Provenance

Value

Structure

Semantics

How does an IDV relate to other architectures?

An IDV is a manageable data set that can be used to answer more questions than a traditional report, meaning end-users no longer have to reference multiple reports to get the information they need.

Interactive Data View

ReportsReports

ReportsReports

ReportsDatabase

1

Jim Farmer

From: Conwey Casillas [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 6:11 PMTo: [email protected]: RE: EFC Conference

EFC Tech.Conf FINAL.pdf

Bornholtz.ppt Coleman.ppt Conner.ppt erber1.pdf

I appreciate your contributions. Attached are the first set ofpresentations and the agenda. I will follow up with a couple moremessages with presentations attached.

The one major change on the agenda was that Mark Wilcox was replacedwith Jeff Erber of enumerate.

-----Original Message-----From: Jim Farmer [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2003 4:00 PMTo: Conwey CasillasSubject: EFC Conference

I thought the presentations at the EFC Conference would be interestingtothe colleges and universities. Would it be possible to get a copy of thepresentations (PowerPoint files) and the agenda so I could distributetheseto the higher education developers?

I believe it would give visibility to your efforts.

I thought your conference agenda was relevant and timely. I have hadseverale-mail with the same view.

jim farmer202 296-2807

xml cod e-sign stan - immagic.com€¦ · xml cod e-sign stan EDUCATION FINANCE COUNCIL CONFERENCE...

Documents

Transcript of xml cod e-sign stan - immagic.com€¦ · xml cod e-sign stan EDUCATION FINANCE COUNCIL CONFERENCE...