Board of Governors - APPENDIX IV - October 28, 1999
REPORT OF THE AUDIT COMMITTEE
Recommended: That the Board of Governors approve the audited financial statements for the
University for the fiscal year ended April 30, 1999 (Annex 1, tab 1).
The University of Western Ontario, supplementary financial statements for the year ended April
30, 1999, are available on request.
The financial statements for the following related companies and other organizations of The
University of Western Ontario for the fiscal year ended April 30, 1999, are provided for the
information of the Audit Committee (Annex 1, tabs 2-15).
- London Museum of Archaeology, as presented by the Museum's auditors, Ernst and Young,
and as approved by the Board of Directors of the Company on June 22, 1999.
- Lawson-Jury Heritage Foundation, as presented by the Foundation's auditors, Ernst and
Young, and as approved by the Foundation's Board of Directors on September 7, 1999.
- Platt's Lane Estates Inc., as presented by the company's auditors, Ernst and Young, and as
approved by the Board of Directors of the Company on September 30, 1999.
- Foundation Western, as presented by the Foundation's auditors, Ernst and Young, and as
approved by the Directors of Foundation Western on October 4, 1999.
- The University of Western Ontario Foundation Inc., as presented by the Foundation's
auditors, Ernst and Young, and as subject to approval by the members of the UWO Foundation
Inc., at their annual meeting in April 2000.
- The University of Western Ontario Foundation for the fiscal year ended March 31,
1999, as presented by the company's auditors, Ernst and Young, and as approved by the
Directors of the company on September 8, 1999
- The University of Western Ontario Research and Development Park, as subject to
approval by the Directors of the Company on a date to be determined.
- Ivey Management Services Group of Companies Combined Financial Statements and
statements from Ivey Management Services, Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation,
and Richard Ivey School of Business (Asia) Limited, as presented by the Ivey Management
Service's auditors, Price Waterhouse and as subject to approval by the Board of Directors of
the company on October 27, 1999.
- The Siebens-Drake Research Institute, as presented by the Institute's auditors, Ernst and
Young, and as subject to approval by the Institute's Board of Directors on a date to be
determined in October 1999.
- Combined Pension Fund for Members of the Academic and Administrative Staff - for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 1998, as presented by the Pension Funds auditors, Ernst
and Young, and as approved by the Joint Pension Board on June 22, 1999.
The Audit Committee received the following Y2K Project Committee report on October 6, 1999.
Merger of Plans A & B
- The contingency planning efforts and ITS Y2K corrective efforts were merged August 1999 to
create the UWO Y2K Project Committee. The two groups were merged to streamline the
management of the Y2K project and to develop clear channels of authority and reporting.
Creation of UWO 4 Month Plan - version 3.0
- The 4 Month Plan has been approved by the Project Committee and PVP. The salient portions
of the plan were presented to the Board of Governors September 23, 1999. The scope of the
plan is to only address the Y2K status of the significant business functions (those ranking 5 or
greater on the priority scale) of all areas of the University under the jurisdiction of the
President's Office, Deans and Directors.
- The plan was drafted to fully delineate and articulate the following:
- Organization of the project
- Roles and responsibilities of the various individuals and groups tasked with addressing Y2K
- Timelines for completion of tasks
- Reporting format and lines of communications
Formation of Dedicated Teams
- Two areas of significant risk were recognized to be the development of contingency plans and
the Y2K status of researchers equipment and data files. To address these risks dedicated
groups were formed, the Contingency Planning Committee and the Researcher Resource
Team. Both groups have full time project leaders. Both groups were launched in August
- The Contingency Planning Committee has reviewed the 2 volumes of the contingency
worksheets submitted and has developed a core outline for the University's contingency plan.
The Committee anticipates having a working draft of the plan by October 8, 1999.
- The Researcher Resource Team has the approval of PVP, SOGS and UWOFA. The ground
work is in place to launch the team in short order, however, to date there has been difficulty
recruiting team members. The Researcher Resource Team had planned to start offering
assistance October 1, 1999; it is unlikely this date will be met.
Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry
- As of September 27, the Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry had not submitted any formal Y2K
reports. Those at the Faculty involved with Y2K are willing to cooperate, however, they are
significantly overburdened and have not been able to comply. The Project Committee has been
in regular communications with the Faculty and met with Faculty members on September 29 to
develop a mini Y2K Project Plan for the Faculty.
Implementation of Phases I, II, III & Contingency Worksheets
- The three Phases address the identification and correction or "fix it" portion of Y2K readiness
across the University. They are based on, but separate from the Contingency or Plan B efforts
that were started earlier.
- Phase I - September 17,
- Completion of Phase I of the Y2K Status Report.
- List each Budget Unit or Department and assign a Y2K Unit Contact for each one.
- Status: as of September 27, 1999 - 60% of targeted Units have responded. The University
Organization Chart was used to target communications to Units. 41 Units were contacted, 16
have not responded.
- Phase II October 1, 1999 -
moved to October 8, 1999
- Completion of Phase II of the Y2K Status Report.
- Generation of inventory and assessments as they relate to identified business functions which
rank 5 or above on the Johnson priority scale.
- Sign-Off by Dean/Director
- Status: as of September 27, 1999 - 15% of targeted Units have responded.
- Phase III - November 1,
- Completion of Phase III of the Y2K Status Report.
- Conclusion of remediation, implementation and certification of the items listed in Phase II.
- Contingency Worksheet
- Identification and ranking of business functions per Unit. Development of contingency plans to
ensure the continued operations of those business functions in the event of an emergency.
- Status - as of September 27, 1999:
- 56% of all targeted Units have submitted worksheets,
- 75% of all Mission Critical & Medium Risk Faculties have submitted worksheets. - see
attached Triaged Faculty Chart (Annex 2)
- Note: With the implementation of Phase I, a number of Administration Units were added to the
original Contingency Planning Unit list and this had an effect on the percentage complete.
Spot Review of Researcher Contracts
- A legal review of researcher contacts, as identified by the Director of Research Services, was
conducted July 1999, to assess what potential legal exposure the University had with regard to
- Major Findings:
- The University is a primary contracting party to all contracts and as such liable for damages in
the event of a breach of the contract
- The primary deliverable is the research data - regardless of the outcome of that research the
data must be provided to the funding party. Data corrupted by Y2K problems would be of
- The research is to be conducted in a professionally competent manner and according to
- Ownership of the research data is vested or licensed to the funding body, with the exception of
Tri-Council grants wherein the University owns the data.
PeopleSoft Administrative Application
Status of Implementations
Human Resources System (HRIS)
The HR system has continued to function well and improvements in the operation of the system
and production processes has continued. The HRIS was upgraded to version 7.5 Public Sector in
The Financial System was successfully used to carry out year-end processing in May. Work over
the summer has focused on increasing the stability of the system and resolving many of the minor
problems. Speed codes, short forms for account numbers, were implemented during the summer
and have begun to be used throughout the campus.
Student Administration System (SAS)
The Student Administration System was successfully used to admit first year and senior students
this summer, and to generate schedules and fees for students. Though there were some delays in
some of the processes, the SAS team worked through and were able to resolve them in a timely
fashion. Historical student records for inactive students were also successfully converted from the
legacy mainframe to the new Student System over the summer; over 225,000 inactive records
Plans are underway to upgrade the Student System to version 7.6 to take advantage of web-based
facilities that are provided by that version.
Advancement System (AS)
The Advancement System became operational in May 1999 and has been used over the summer.
Ongoing work in improving the reporting available from the system continues.
The PeopleSoft Resource Group will be moving to a process oriented organization from the
current system oriented organization.
The Advisory Team consisting of R. Harris (Registrar), E. Del Maestro (Finance), K. Gee
(Human Resources), R. Chelladurai (IPB) and M. Bauer (ITS) continues to work with G.
Growden on the priorities of the Resource Group.
Legacy Mainframe Environment
Decommissioning the legacy mainframe, originally planned for August 31, 1999, has been delayed
until October 31, 1999. September is being used as a buffer month to ensure that any remaining
conversions, typically of historical data, can be completed. Backups of the system and data will
stop at the end of September as plans are put into place for decommissioning at the end of
Plans are underway for a Y2K compliance test for the administrative systems in October and
November. While PeopleSoft has confirmed the Y2K compliance of their applications, there have
been a number of customizations and modifications made during the implementation and these
tests are to ensure that there are no unexpected problems.
Expenditures for PeopleSoft Implementation
The following summarizes expenditures to date for the PeopleSoft implementation; figures are in
<a> 1999-2000 are preliminary estimates