Anthology Student consulting
Hands-on help with Anthology Student (formerly CampusNexus and CampusVue) from someone who has worked in it since 2007, first as a user and then building on it.
Higher-education reporting and analytics: Reports your staff trust, because they match the system
SSRS reports, Power BI dashboards and the data models behind them, including Crystal Reports rebuilt in SSRS for the web client. I have been the person waiting on these reports, so I build the ones that get opened.
The problem
In my experience, schools have the same three reporting complaints. The numbers in two reports do not match. A report that should take a minute takes a day of exporting and pasting. And the one person who understands the report library is about to leave.
Underneath all three I usually find the same cause: reports written by people who know SQL but have never had to use the report to do a job.
What I do
- Operational reports in SSRS. The lists and exception reports that registrars, financial aid and student finance run every day, written against the student system’s data as it is really stored.
- Dashboards in Power BI. Enrollment, retention, aid and finance views for leadership, on a model that reconciles to the system of record.
- Data models. SSAS Tabular and Power BI models, so a new question does not mean a new project.
- Reports about the system itself. For example, a self-service audit report that classifies and documents every production workflow, so nobody has to remember what is running.
Most of this work is on Anthology Student (formerly CampusNexus and CampusVue), the system I have worked in and around since 2007.
Why these reports get opened
I have been a registrar, a senior registrar and a financial aid administrator. I know the difference between a report that is technically correct and one that answers the question a staff member has at the counter. I name columns the way the office names them, I put the exceptions at the top, and I make sure the total at the bottom is one somebody can check.
How it runs
I start with the decision the report is for and the person who will make it. Then I build against a copy of your data, show you real output early, and reconcile it to the screens your staff already trust before it goes live.
Self-check
How healthy is your reporting?
Eight yes, no or not sure questions about the reports your offices run, each with one line on why it matters. The answers score into one of three bands, with the pages on this site that speak to the gaps. It runs in your browser and sends nothing anywhere.
Nothing leaves your browser. The scoring runs on this page, and no answer is sent or stored anywhere. These are eight general good-practice checks for the reports a school's offices run on its student system, not a description of any one school.
What drove this result
Show the text that will be copied
Your answers stay in this browser tab. The Copy button puts the text on your clipboard for you to paste wherever you choose, such as a message to Zak through the contact page. This page sends nothing on its own.
How the score reads
Healthy
The habits that keep reports trusted are in place: you know what exists and who owns it, reports read from one place, and changes are tried before staff see them. Keep the list current, and treat each not sure as a small task.
Worth a look
Nothing here is an emergency, but a few gaps are the kind that make two reports disagree or leave one person holding the library in their head. The answers listed with the result are the ones to look at first. Most close with a list, an owner and a test copy.
At risk
Several answers, or several not sures, point at a report library that is hard to describe with confidence. That is common after years of reports written by different hands, and it is fixable. Start with a list of what is live and who owns each report, then put test copies and a change record in place.
Where the fixes live
- The workflow inventory case study: a self-service report that lists and classifies what is running, read from the system itself, so what is running does not depend on memory.
- How the reporting service runs: start from the decision the report is for, build against a copy of your data, show real output early and reconcile it to the screens your staff already trust before it goes live.
- The article on both sides of the screen: why a report that staff export and fix by hand is telling you something, and why a report should use the words the office uses.
Show how the score is worked out
Each question has a healthy answer. The other answer is the risky one and scores the question's weight: 4 trust questions (an owner for each report, checked parameters, a trail for a changed number, and test copies) score three points each, the rest score two. Not sure scores one point, and a question left blank counts as not sure. 2 points or fewer reads Healthy; 3 to 7 reads Worth a look; 8 or more reads At risk, out of a possible 20. The answers that scored are listed under the result, risky answers first, then the not sures.
Common questions
Questions people ask
How small or large a project do you take?
Small is welcome. Many engagements start with one painful report, one process that causes rework each term, or one task chosen so that success is easy to check. At the other end I have built whole-population migrations and the integration layer that keeps several systems in step, and larger programs move to a monthly retainer once the first piece is live. DataZak is one person alongside a full-time role, so I do not take on more than I can deliver to the agreement we sign. See services.
Can you train our staff?
Every handoff includes a walkthrough for your team along with the documentation and runbooks, and I build reports and validator checks that your staff run for themselves rather than tools only I can use. For technical staff, I can set them up with the same agent tooling I use for my own work. If your team needs more than a walkthrough, say so on the first call. See applied AI.
How do you price the work, and what does a first milestone look like?
Three ways, and you choose: a fixed price for a defined deliverable, a monthly retainer for a block of specialist hours, or hourly for investigation and rescue work, with the hours shown to you every week. I do not publish a rate card; the free call and the written plan that follows it set the price. The first milestone is small and easy to check: a rehearsal on a copy of your data, a check-only run, one report or one process, in days or weeks rather than months. See services.
Other services
SIS integration
Connect your student system to everything around it, as changes happen, with a record of every change.
Data migration
Move student and financial aid data between systems with a rehearsal first and proof for every record.
Financial aid automation
Automation around financial aid data, built by a former aid administrator, with the evidence an auditor asks for.
Workflow automation
Take the manual steps out of admissions, registrar, aid and finance work with Workflow Composer and FormsBuilder, inside the system your staff already use.
Applied AI
Put AI agents to work on real operational tasks, with the controls and the audit trail a college needs.
Managed hosting
Nowhere to run an integration? I host and maintain it on Azure, in your subscription or a dedicated one.
All services
The full list, and the three ways an engagement can run.
Have a system that needs untangling?
Tell me what you run and where it hurts. The first call is 30 minutes, free, and you will leave with a clear next step whether or not we work together.