Upcoming meeting materials will include agenda and any presentation decks/information submitted prior to meeting. *Minutes will be posted upon approval at the following meeting which includes all presentation materials.

Previous Working Group Agendas and Meeting Minutes dating back to 2019 can be found at the following link: https://www.sbctc.edu/colleges-staff/it-support/ctclink-governance/working-group-meeting-minutes

Quorum:

Previously, the Working Group was composed of 15 voting members constituting 11 votes. Seven of the 11 votes constituted a quorum, of which four must be representative of the colleges.  

In the new Operational Governance model, the working group has 15 voting members, 9 college and 6 State Board votes. Ten of the 15 votes constitute a quorum, of which 6 must be representative of the colleges.

Voting:

In general, the ctcLink Working Group will strive for consensus as it engages in decision-making and issue resolution. However, it may not be possible to attain 100% consensus on all topics and alternatives.

If consensus cannot be reached, votes will be taken by the Chair, or their designee, as required.

Votes are distributed as defined under the Working Group Composition section. A two-thirds majority vote of those attending (with a minimum of seven votes required for a quorum) will constitute a final decision.

No alternates or shared votes.  A member who cannot attend a specific meeting may review the materials provided in advance via the listserv and ask a specific voting member to vote on their behalf by proxy.

 Appeals of decisions by the Working Group can be brought to the Working Group by a sponsor:

• ctcLink College Collaboration Group
• Commissions (Chairs)
• Data Governance (Co-Chairs)
• College President or designee
• SBCTC (Deputy Executive Directors)

The appellant must provide written documentation via the sponsor, to include:

• Why the appeal is compelling.
• Any budgetary and cost/benefit impact of the appeal.
• Why alternatives are not possible and why reconsidering the decision is the only available option.

The written appeal goes to the co-chairs of the Working Group. It will be placed on the next agenda for discussion and the person appealing will be invited to attend. An appeal may be approved, denied, or escalated.

Appeal decisions that are not approved can be escalated to Strategic Technology Advisory Committee (STAC) and will follow the STAC appeal review process.

The new Working Group Charter was approved and adopted by system-wide presidents' group (WACTC) in April 2022.

Working Group Charter

Working Group Formation:

ctcLink Working Group roles, responsibilities and authority were established in the charter approved by the Washington Association for Community and Technical Colleges Technology Committee (WACTC-Tech) in October 2017.

Charter (May 2019):

• Make decisions regarding functionality of PeopleSoft Modules within scope, including new projects, configuration changes and/or code modifications
• Coordinate with Data Governance Committee on state and federal reporting and other enterprise wide solutions
• Make decisions on changes to the implementation schedule that do not impact the current project budget or timeline
• Provide oversight on changes to configuration
• Identify and help mitigate risks
• Provide oversight for training, communications, and Organizational Change Management (OCM)
• Prepare escalated decision packages regarding functionality or changes to the implementation schedule for review and decision by the ctcLink Steering Committee
• Prepare completed decision packages for communication to stakeholders and for filing in the issue and decision log

Past Voting Members:

• ctcLink Production and Project Campus Solutions (one vote)  designated
• ctcLink Production and Project Finance (one vote)  designated
• ctcLink Production and Project Human Capital Management (one vote)  designated
• Data Services Director  Data, Reporting and Data Governance (one vote)  assigned
• Application Services Director  Technical and Development (one vote)  assigned
• College Representatives  Six representatives, selected for a minimum of two years, with appointments preferably staggered based on deployment cycles (six votes)
• Alternate college representatives  two alternates will serve as needed to ensure meeting quorums

Ex-officio non-voting members:

• ctcLink Project Director  assigned
• SBCTC Security  designated
• SBCTC Training/OCM  designated
• Ad hoc representatives based on meeting agenda

Authority/Decision Making:

• Decisions and issue resolutions that impact multiple pillars and functions within PeopleSoft for both implementation and production areas
• Changes to the implementation schedule that do not impact the current project budget or timeline
• Decisions regarding functionality of PeopleSoft Modules within scope
• Appeals of Working Group decisions
• Makes decisions on:
• Implementation plan within budget and overall timeline
• Configuration management within scope
• Training plan
• Organizational Change Management (OCM) plan

Working Group Meetings:

Initially, the Working Group was intending to meet every week for two hours. Based on actual experience,

the Working Group meeting frequency was revised to every other week, for two hours, or as long as needed to complete discussion on the agenda items provided the Friday before each Wednesday's scheduled meeting. Special meeting were scheduled, as needed. Agenda and meeting materials were provided to committee members the Friday prior to the next meeting.

The Chair designated a facilitator to run the meeting and determine the agenda. Committee attendees were asked to be present at the SBCTC office in Olympia (and online via WebEx for those who cannot attend in person). Minutes from the meeting documented any decisions that are made and were approved at the next meeting.