I think technology is readily understandable if you focus first on the “what,” and then on the “how.” The State of West Virginia has lost millions of dollars because people didn’t take the time to figure out technology basics. Indeed the very first thing I did when I came to state government in 2001 was unravel a multi-million dollar technology debacle. Despite the terrible circumstances, I had a wonderful opportunity to meet outstanding technology people in various corners of K-12, higher education, and state government, including several extremely helpful WVNET staffers.
As for today, WVNET does far more than I possibly could describe here – and light years more than you’re reading in the news articles and reports discussing WVNET. By way of illustration:
- WVNET supports institutions’ Sungard Banner data systems to various degrees. Sungard Banner is back office software for our colleges and includes student record, financial aid, and finance modules, just to name a few.
- WVNET hosts WebCT for numerous institutions. WebCT is higher education’s primary distance learning system.
- WVNET supports K-12 and others with internet and other comparable services and ensures that K-12 maximizes e-rate discounts (federal discounts provided thanks in significant part to Senator Rockefeller, by the way).
- WVNET manages significant segments of the state telecommunications infrastructure, which combines K-12, higher education, state government and other technology traffic. K-12 is the largest user, followed by higher education, followed by state government.
- WVNET serves as WVU’s major back-up site and provides similar services for others.
- WVNET coordinates cross-institutional procurements.
While I could continue with my list, the real issue is that each service that WVNET provides needs to be analyzed thoroughly: (1) What is provided? (2) For whom is it provided? (3) At what cost? (4) Does someone else provide the same service? (5) Is it something that’s needed, and will it be needed in two years/five years? (6) Is the charge reasonable and could the services be obtained elsewhere more cheaply? (7) Are there other economies of scale that should be taken into consideration?
A thorough analysis, I am sure, would find things that should change, but it also would find that WVNET provides important services that are not readily replaceable, particularly by smaller institutions. Although the proposals to shut down WVNET have been on the frontburner for a long time, nobody has undertaken a thorough analysis of WVNET’s portfolio of services. And until they do, no one can argue effectively that WVNET should be shut down, moved, or merged.
Finally, any analysis of WVNET should address the significant logistical challenges and costs involved in a move. On the logistics front, WVNET has a lot of equipment and circuits that must somehow be transferred seamlessly if higher education, K-12 and state government in West Virginia are not to come to a grinding halt. (Insert joke about whether anyone would notice here. But the truth is they would.) This probably means creating additional redundancy in advance of a move. On the cost front, it is possible that significant moving costs should be incurred for the greater good, but those costs will be far more significant than political and education leaders currently realize.
I have been critical of late of many poorly-thought-out plans for major change. The WVNET proposal provides yet another case in point. Fortunately, the House of Delegates appears poised to make higher education perform its due diligence before tearing WVNET asunder.






Technology is certainly the buzzword. Witness the techpark and the misdirected desire to put people there who can actually work anywhere there is a common line. And the $126M Federal broadband funds that will be used to increase existing pipes rather than run pipes to places they did not run before as was originally intended.
Plus the Broadband Deployment Council that will spend $1M to create a map of where broadband is available and where it is not, despite that having been done a year or two ago. And which may pay some of the Federal funds to Verizon, which has categorically shown no interest in the last mile in West Virginia. Bad for the ROI.
As with people being moved to the techpark, WVNET staff can actually work from anywhere and their equipment room could run “dark” as do so many corporate server farms. The techpark is a nice shot for the last century, not for this one.
So why move WVNET? One reason could be a simple power grab for control of the access “throat” of the state – the higher ed, K-12, and judicial communication infrastructure. Another could be the governor rounding out his resume from Friend of Coal to what he considers, inaccurately, a forward looking technology person.
Last, but not the least, is the land WVNET sits on. While we West Virginians are quick – no, lightning fast – to spot what appears to be a sweetheart deal made all the juicier by political shenanigans, it could be this instance is simply serendipitous. But being a native myself, I can’t count it out.
[...] not the people who seek to shutter the place and give away sell the land to Mylan are full of shit. I direct you here: A thorough analysis, I am sure, would find things that should change, but it also would find that [...]
Good grief…I knew WVNET was important from working in the school system, but I had no idea until I read your blog what a fiasco it would be to move it and merge it. You’re right, the media has done a “once over lightly” analysis of the consequences of such a decision.
I am a retired WVU IT person who worked in conjunction with WVNET for over 25 years and I speak solely for myself. My dog in this fight is as a taxpayer who firmly believes WVNET provides the best bang for the state’s buck in the most timely manner in the services it provides.
I do, however, believe it healthy to examine regularly how the state and its departments provide IT services based on some carefully reasoned metric. That does not appear to be the case in this instance.
The HEPC “Transforming WVNET for the Future” document is curious.
- It states “It is no secret that WVNET has failed to reach its potential”. Yet the organization has reformed itself to keep abreast of technology over its entire life and brought services to K-12, the judicial system, the legislature, and the lottery system all while being downsized and operating on shoe string budgets. Where in that is any failure to reach potential?
- It states WVNET and the WVOT are competitors in serving the state of WV which is not completely accurate. Higher education needs are not the same as those of government nor are they as predictable. Higher education by its nature seeks to remain in step with technology, if not a step ahead. Government’s goal is providing the same services repeatedly, changing when absolutely necessary. The “ability to maximize resources” is not readily available to the state by combining two disparate entities.
- The document notes renegotiating contracts could save money. Contracts handled via WVNET, e.g. Oracle and others, are based on WVNET being an education organization. Discounts to education are significantly greater than those available to state government. Were WVNET’s current “ownership” changed, such discounts might not be available and the $900K figure cited by the WV Office of Technology could be completely inaccurate.
- WVNET was created as a consortium of WV’s public colleges and universities. Most use WVNET for one or more services. What opportunity have they had to provide input to this proposed change? So far, it appears they will be asked to take a “trust me” approach vis-a-vs the WVOT since data and specific proposals from that office have not appeared for discussion.
- Moving WVNET, its communication lines, servers, and related equipment to any other location – even on Morgantown – will be costly and could exceed the rumored $6M+ evaluation of the value of the current property. Such a move also implies a cessation of service for some time period – a cessation that would perhaps not have been necessary had the state funded complete redundancy over the years.
- At several document locations, it appears the WVOT has not provided supporting data for its claims. While WVOT mentions overlapping staff and duties, solid information has not been provided to back up that claim. So far, I have not been able to find any trace of the WVOT documents on the Internet.
- The HEPC document notes a mid-March deadline related to the sale of the land where WVNET sits. The document infers via its footnotes this discussion was opened in early February, yet has only seen the public light in the last week or so. Claims of “openness” do not seem to be precise.
If there has been a fault, it is the result of a situation all infrastructure organizations face. When they do their job right no one ever hears about them and they do not toot their own horn often, if at all.
If carefully reasoned analysis has been carried out with supporting data, it does not seem to have been placed in the public light for discussion by all affected parties. It seems to me such an important change that impacts such a vast constituency deserves more than a couple of months of surface analysis.
Lew,
Thanks for the excellent commentary and analysis. For the record, this “discussion” started in the summer of 2007.
Dennis
[...] an earlier post on WVNET, I referenced logistical challenges if WVNET were to move from its current location, as well as [...]