Selected work / KU-IDMS / NEP
Governance · Information architecture · Workflow Working prototype
Governing the NEP return
Translating institutional accountability into a working reporting model.
Responsibility, by design.
A university-wide reporting obligation. Information distributed across schools. One clear chain of accountability.
The problem
A university-wide return had to pass through one institutional login, while the information belonged to different schools and departments. The challenge was establishing who could assert a figure, who should verify it, and what should happen when an approved record needed correction. The response began with ownership mapping and standardised workbooks, then developed into an interactive portal prototype.
My contribution
Governance diagnosis, requirements, workflow and information architecture, and direction of AI-assisted implementation through iterative review and correction.
Deliverables
- Stakeholder ownership and access matrix
- School workbooks and central consolidation structure
- Twelve-area reporting model
- Interactive portal prototype
- Implementation brief and synthetic demonstration
Process
Decisions that shaped it
Assign responsibility before collecting data.
Map the people who supply, review and approve each part of the return. A form becomes useful when everyone understands who is accountable for its contents.
Make approval a distinct action.
Separate submission, verification, approval and final locking. Each stage represents a different responsibility, with a visible handover to the next.
Keep a history of corrections.
Model changes to an approved record as correction requests with reasons. Preserve the approved baseline instead of silently replacing it.
Outcome
The work turns an ambiguous reporting obligation into explicit operating rules, structured records and a demonstrable review process. It provides concrete material for a university to evaluate before implementing a shared service.
Takeaway
The ability to translate an institutional problem into precise responsibilities, usable workflows and an executable implementation brief.
Honest limits
The exhibited portal is a front-end prototype. Its workflow figures are synthetic. Shared server state, institutional authentication and record-level evidence attachments remain implementation work; no deployment or adoption outcome is claimed here.
What would come next
- Institutional validation of roles and approval rules
- Backend identity, persistence and evidence integration
- A controlled pilot using authorised records