Wednesday, November 7, 2001

U. of Cambridge Report Criticizes Online Accounting System By KATE GALBRAITH A computer system that handles accounting at the University of Cambridge has been an expensive, bug-riddled failure, according to a sharply worded report released last week by the university. The two-part report, submitted to both the university's Audit Committee and its Board of Scrutiny, starkly concludes that the problems with the system, called CAPSA, caused "significant disruption to the working of the university." CAPSA went live in August 2000 at a cost of over $13-million -- more than double early estimates. Oracle, the principal supplier for CAPSA, and KPMG, the university's external auditor, are both heavily criticized in the report for their roles in delivering a flawed product. The report details a cascade of managerial and governance lapses that led to the adoption of what it calls a flawed system. It states that the CAPSA situation is "a symptom of a wider problem" and goes on to say: "The CAPSA difficulties have illustrated the lack of clearly defined principles of accountability or of a culture of accountability within the university." Criticisms include little vetting of potential suppliers, inattention to how much the system would cost, a "weakness in staffing procedures" in the finance department and other departments, a persistent lack of oversight, and an unwillingness to postpone CAPSA's activation despite awareness that serious bugs remained. KPMG is considering mounting a legal challenge to the report's findings, according to a company spokesman. The University of Cambridge is reportedly considering a lawsuit against some of the companies involved. CAPSA's highly publicized woes are an embarrassment for the university, which has a reputation as a pioneer in information-technology research in Britain. The area around Cambridge, full of start-up businesses connected with the university, is known as "Silicon Fen." The university's finance department has little alternative to CAPSA, which remains in place. The report states that while "usability remains poor -- the situation is no longer chaotic and there is a good basis for moving forwards." A full ironing-out of the system, the document says, may take at least two years. The report was written in separate parts by two professors -- Michael Shattock, a visiting professor at the University of London's Centre for Higher Education Studies, and Anthony Finkelstein, a software-systems specialist at University College London. Easy-to-print version E-mail this article

Senate approves spending bill: NIH would see increase, Pell Grants would stay at current level Senators demand tighter security of university labs Lawmakers from both parties condemn Bush's restrictions on release of presidential papers Nursing professor fired for leaving job to help terrorism victims Auburn U. considers expelling 2 fraternities after party with mock lynching, blackface Federal judge backs Florida State U. in patent dispute President of Roxbury Community College resigns, denying accusation of mismanagement Scholar issues defense of his history of guns in America Mellon Foundation announces recipients of new award for humanities scholars  Israeli university reaches compromise with Arab students over protests Company identifies student downloaders and complains to their colleges Does "digital divide" rhetoric do more harm than good? In about-face, U. of Pennsylvania limits some student use of computer network U. of Cambridge report criticizes online accounting system 2 scholars debate the future of online distance education Senate vote effectively kills a distance-education grant program U. of South Africa seeks to gag faculty dissent over chairman's actions