Union ($500 million, 48,000 members), Starling Heights- based Sterling-Van Dyke Credit Union, now rebranded as The Local Credit Union ($100 million, 4700 members and the supplier’s third taker in the Greater Detroit area), and Wyoming-based Discovery Federal Credit Union ($127 million, 10,000 members). Desert Schools is scheduled to go live in early 2015; the other three were due to be live before the end of 2014. By the end of 2015, the implementation was competed successfully. This also included forming of custom processes around new approaches to member service, and delivery of training was delivered to over 1,000 employees across 50 branches.
Desert Schools signed to replace Fiserv’s Signature, which had only been in place since 2009. Given the largest live site at the time of signing was below the $1 billion asset mark, this $3.3 billion asset player took things to a different level in terms of scale (a number of higher-end credit unions that had earlier rejected Keystone did so based on the size of the supplier, relative to their own size). By mid-2014, three members of a New Jersey-based Credit Union Service Organisation (CUSO) had also been signed. These were Aspire Credit Union ($185 million in assets), United Teletech Financial Federal Credit Union ($325 million) and Credit Union of New Jersey ($335 million). All were due to be live by the end of 2015. Also signed by this time were University of Hawaii Federal Credit Union ($550 million) and Pleasanton, CA-based SafeAmerica Credit Union ($310 million). Clearly, this will present the next challenge for Corelation, to manage this clutch of parallel projects, particularly given the significant leap in size of customer with Desert Schools. Corelation has been an interesting entrant, albeit limited
to the credit union space, at least at present. Its system appears to represent a leap forwards in relation to most of the platforms that underpin this sector and the supplier’s expertise is also a clear strength. Its track-record to date is good, with the larger players in the sector no doubt encouraged by the success of the project at Desert Schools to portray the scalability of Keystone and the supplier’s ability to deliver at this markedly larger player. Since 2015, Corelation has been able to draw a significantly
strong clientele, with good rate of implementation of its system. In the first quarter of 2015, Corelation announced signing of seven credit unions for Keystone. These were Sidney Federal Credit Union, Bellwether Community Credit Union, First Service Credit Union, PennEast Federal Credit Union, NW Preferred Federal Credit Union, and Riverfront Federal Credit Union, all of whom were eventually converted by mid-2016. Besides this, Corelation also converted three clients i.e. Chula Vista City Employees Federal Credit Union, Aspire Federal Credit Union and Safe America Credit Union. Towards the end of 2015, the company announced signing of three new customers i.e. Reliant Community FCU, Nutmeg
32
State Financial FCU and Industrial CU. In the first quarter of 2016, Corelation announced conversion of 30 clients to its Keystone core, with another 18 scheduled for 2017. Some of the new customers garnered in 2016 and 2017 are Capital Educators FCU, Camino FCU, True North FCU, Pacific Marine CU, People First FCU, Lehigh Valley Educators CU, Argent FCU, Greater Alliance FCU, Lone Star FCU, Western Vista FCU, Oregon State FCU, Park View FCU, Lower Valley FCU, DuGood FCU, Fivepoint CU, Coca-Cola CU, CommunityWide FCU, Blue Eagle CU, Central Willamette Community CU, Long Beach City Employees FCU, Streator Onized Credit Union, Brazos Valley schools CU, Advantage Plus FCU, Sandia Laboratory FCU and Diamond CU. In particular, in the second quarter of 2017, the company
declared signing of clients with assets ranging from $129 million to $2.3 billion, portraying its rising ability to deliver to the key market players. The uptake for Key stone has continued to be strong. The
company reported that it in 2017, a total of 17 credit unions implemented the Keystone system, while at least 6 more signed for the implementation. Of them, the signing of $5 billion, 429,000+ member Pennsylvania State Employees Credit Union (PSECU) in July 2017 was a notable one as it is the largest taker of Keystone currently. Another noteworthy event in 2017 was the launching of a new information technology credit union service organization (CUSO) known as SwitchThink Solutions by one of Corelation’s largest clients, Desert Schools Federal Credit Union. The CUSO that was created in partnership with Corelation provides other credit unions running on the KeyStone platform with a suite of services to complement their processing environment and expand their capabilities. The motivation for the CUSO was reportedly the “success of improving member experience and streamlining operations through its own implementation of the KeyStone platform”, as per Dessert School’s statement. SwitchThink offers a suite of services, including development and consulting, disaster recovery, infrastructure hosting (platform-as-a-service) and a managed services solution. SwitchThink’s hosted solutions are delivered via a “community cloud” for Corelation clients, and SwitchThink has been named the preferred hosting partner to Corelation.
US Financial Services Technology Market Report |
www.ibsintelligence.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132
