Functional User Group (FUG): Difference between revisions
Updated member list to show change in MAR representative |
added the recently assigned SWR representative |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| North Central Region || Col William E. Kay | | North Central Region || Col William E. Kay | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Southwest Region || | | Southwest Region || Maj Jon Moser | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Rocky Mountain Region ||Lt Col Kent Hopkins | | Rocky Mountain Region ||Lt Col Kent Hopkins | ||
Latest revision as of 20:35, 30 August 2021
Functional User Group (FUG)
The FUG consists of a Chairman and a Representative from each Region
How it works
- The primary responsibility of the FUG to identify, evaluate and assist in the prioritization of field generated requirements based on their functional expertise and broad experience with eServices.
- Help desk tickets for IT enhancements and fixes with viable workarounds are automatically routed to the FUG Chair who will coordinate the group’s evaluation.
- Each request will be evaluated by at least 2 FUG members and discussed during the bi-weekly FUG meeting.
- Recommendations regarding viable project proposals will be provided to the ITSC for scoring and prioritization.
| Region | Name |
|---|---|
| Chair | Lt Col Timothy Medeiros |
| Northeast Region | Lt Col Michael Sperry |
| Mid Atlantic Region | Lt Col Timothy Day |
| Great Lakes Region | Lt Col Mike Bodnarik |
| Southeast Region | Lt Col Joe Knight III |
| North Central Region | Col William E. Kay |
| Southwest Region | Maj Jon Moser |
| Rocky Mountain Region | Lt Col Kent Hopkins |
| Pacific Region | MSgt Ira Rosenberg |