Exhibit 300 (BY2009) for Grants.gov - Find and Apply

1. Date of Submission:

2008-02-04

2. Agency:

009

3. Bureau:

00

4. Name of this Capital Asset:

Grants.gov - Find and Apply

5. Unique Project Identifier:

009-00-01-99-01-0160-24

6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2009?

Multi-Agency Collaboration

7. What was the first budget year this investment was submitted to OMB?

FY2002

8. Provide a brief summary and justification for this investment, including a brief description of how this closes in part or in whole an identified agency performance gap.

Grants.gov's mission is to provide a single website for the public to electronically find and apply for federal discretionary grants. Prior to this initiative, grant processes varied widely across agencies and programs. As a result, the process of finding and applying for Federal grant opportunities was complicated, burdensome and costly. Grants.gov, mandated by the 2002 President's Management Agenda (PMA) and Public Law 106-107, has transformed the federal grants environment by streamlining and standardizing public-facing grant processes, thus facilitating an easier grants submission process, simplifying grants management and eliminating redundancies. Grants.gov enables the grant community, which includes over 1 million organizations, to search for grant opportunities and download, complete and electronically submit applications for the over $450 billion worth of grant awards distributed annually by 26 Federal agencies. Grants.gov empowers smaller agencies with limited resources to expand their grant making capabilities and improve their reach, while enhancing larger agencies with process standardization, cost savings and increased visibility. Given the government-wide scope of the initiative, costs are distributed among the 26 federal grant-making agencies, each providing support commensurate with its size. The FY09 funding algorithm was approved by the Grants Executive Board (GEB). Additionally, the GEB is developing a fee for service model, to better reflect each agency's utilization of Grants.gov. Grants.gov is a mixed life cycle program, steadily progressing towards steady-state service. Enhancements to the system through FY 2009 will include the creation of new grants related forms and improvements in system-system functionality for both agencies and applicants. These enhancements, building upon the existing, distinguished service of Grants.gov, will ensure that the program continues to advance the objectives of Public Law 106-107 and the PMA, promote the goals of the agencies and programs, and champion the public as they seek to find and apply for federal discretionary grants.

9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request?

yes

9.a. If "yes," what was the date of this approval?

2007-06-26

10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit?

yes

11.a. What is the current FAC-P/PM certification level of the project/program manager?

Senior/Expert-level

12. Has the agency developed and/or promoted cost effective, energy-efficient and environmentally sustainable techniques or practices for this project.

yes

12.a. Will this investment include electronic assets (including computers)?

yes

13. Does this investment directly support one of the PMA initiatives?

yes

If yes, select the initiatives that apply:

Initiative Name
Expanded E-Government

13.a. Briefly and specifically describe for each selected how this asset directly supports the identified initiative(s)? (e.g. If E-Gov is selected, is it an approved shared service provider or the managing partner?)

Grants.gov advances the Expanded Electronic Government agenda by simplifying the Federal government grant process. Grants.gov is a one-stop site for 26 agencies' discretionary grant opportunities. The site minimizes agency redundancies and maximizes agency interoperability. This investment has made citizen's access to grants simple and more efficient with more than 150,000 grant applications received electronically in 2007.

14. Does this investment support a program assessed using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)?

no

15. Is this investment for information technology?

yes

16. What is the level of the IT Project (per CIO Council's PM Guidance)?

Level 3

17. What project management qualifications does the Project Manager have? (per CIO Council's PM Guidance)

(1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment

18. Is this investment identified as high risk on the Q4 - FY 2007 agency high risk report (per OMB memorandum M-05-23)?

yes

19. Is this a financial management system?

no

19.a.2. If no, what does it address?

Grants.gov's mission is to provide a single website for the public to electronically find and apply for federal discretionary grants, funded by the 26 federal grant-making agencies. Grants.gov enables the grant community, which includes over 1 million organizations, to search for grant opportunities and download, complete and electronically submit applications for the over $450 billion worth of grant awards distributed annually by 26 Federal agencies.

20. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2009 funding request for the following? (This should total 100%)

Area	Percentage
Hardware	4
Software	42
Services	54
Other	0

21. If this project produces information dissemination products for the public, are these products published to the Internet in conformance with OMB Memorandum 05-04 and included in your agency inventory, schedules and priorities?

yes

22. Contact information of individual responsible for privacy related questions.

Name	Suzi Connor
Phone Number	202-260-5528
Title	OS Senior Privacy Official
Email	Suzi.Connor@hhs.gov

23. Are the records produced by this investment appropriately scheduled with the National Archives and Records Administration's approval?

yes

24. Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas?

no

1. Provide the total estimated life-cycle cost for this investment by completing the following table. All amounts represent budget authority in millions, and are rounded to three decimal places. Federal personnel costs should be included only in the row designated Government FTE Cost, and should be excluded from the amounts shown for Planning, Full Acquisition, and Operation/Maintenance. The total estimated annual cost of the investment is the sum of costs for Planning, Full Acquisition, and Operation/Maintenance. For Federal buildings and facilities, life-cycle costs should include long term energy, environmental, decommissioning, and/or restoration costs. The costs associated with the entire life-cycle of the investment should be included in this report.

All amounts represent Budget Authority

Note: For the cross-agency investments, this table should include all funding (both managing partner and partner agencies).

Government FTE Costs should not be included as part of the TOTAL represented.

Cost Type	Py-1 & Earlier -2006	PY 2007	CY 2008	BY 2009
Planning Budgetary Resources	5.495	0.250	0.200	0.200
Acquisition Budgetary Resources	16.859	2.450	1.790	1.402
Maintenance Budgetary Resources	26.011	9.256	10.058	9.947
Government FTE Cost	2.800	1.100	1.400	1.437
# of FTEs	29	7	9	9

2. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's?

no

3. If the summary of spending has changed from the FY2008 President's budget request, briefly explain those changes.

Changes reflect the estimated FY09 budget, which mirrors the FY08 budget with downward adjustments due to the diminishing need for new development. The FY09 budget supports a more robust and fully functional website, expansion of grants programs and growth of collaborative grants and fellowships. It will promote continued growth of grantee organizations utilizing the Grants.gov system, including the use of Applicant and Agency System-to-System (S2S) functionality and web services. The budget includes key services to support this growth, including system hosting and maintenance, Contact Center operations, an auxiliary system for testing and to ensure Continuity of Operations (COOP), and outreach and support activities. The budget also supports improvements to the system performance and usability derived from forecasted growth, agency and grantee feedback (received through user satisfaction surveys), the Grants.gov Contact Center, the Grants.gov User Group and the Grants Executive Board. The FY08 and FY09 budget will support the following work: E-Authentication for Grantees, Development and Clearance of New Forms, Standardization and Conversion of Existing Forms, Community Outreach, and Program/System Operations and Maintenance.

Agencies must use the following table to report performance goals and measures for the major investment and use the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Performance Reference Model (PRM). Map all Measurement Indicators to the corresponding Measurement Area and Measurement Grouping identified in the PRM. There should be at least one Measurement Indicator for each of the four different Measurement Areas (for each fiscal year). The PRM is available at www.egov.gov. The table can be extended to include performance measures for years beyond FY 2009.

Row	Fiscal Year	Strategic Goal Supported	Measurement Area	Measurement Grouping	Measurement Indicator	Baseline	Planned Improvement to the Baseline	Actual Results
1	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	# of grants announcements posted in Grants.gov (Active Postings)	1,481 (6/30/04)	Maintain within 5% (1,407 - 1,555 Active Postings)	2,026 (8/28/05)
2	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	# of grant applications received electronically	796 (6/30/04)	15,000	15,296 (8/30/05)
3	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	# of grant-making agencies publishing grant opportunities on Grants.gov	26 (6/30/04)	Maintain 100% (26 agencies)	26
4	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of agencies posting Apply packages	12 (6/30/04)	26	24 (8/30/05)
5	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of grant programs available for electronic application through Grants.gov	143 (6/30/04)	300 grant programs available	1,456 (8/30/05)
6	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of visitors to Grants.gov	1,388,209/mo (6/30/04)	2,000,000/mo	11,034,627/mo (7/30/05)
7	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	Average # of hits per day	174,329 (6/30/04)	250,000 per day	342,669 /day (7/30/05)
8	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of Email messages sent per week	430,158 (6/30/04)	630,000 per week	1,187,323 /week (7/30/05)
9	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of Grants.gov registered users (AOR)	1,018 (6/30/04)	2,000	14,005 (7/30/05)
10	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of Grant Community Members that feel Grants.gov makes the grant application process better	57% (6/30/04)	70%	59% (7/30/05)
11	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of Grantors that feel Grants.gov makes the grant application process better	31% (6/30/04)	50%	44% (7/30/05)
12	2005	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	% of reusable information per grant application	83% (6/30/04)	Maintain within 10% (73% - 93%) reusable information	88% (7/30/05)
13	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of grants announcements published in Grants.gov per fiscal year (Active and Archived Postings)	3,300 (EOY FY05 Estimate)	Maintain 100% (3,300)	2,417 (8/6/06)
14	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of applications received electronically	15,296 (8/30/05)	45,000	90,045
15	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of agencies posting Apply packages	24 (8/30/05)	26	26
16	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Frequency and Depth	# of discretionary grant programs available for electronic application through Grants.gov	1,456 (8/30/05)	2,400	3,098
17	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of Grant community who are satisfied with Grants.gov	59% (7/30/05)	80%	56%
18	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of Grantors who are satisfied with Grants.gov	44% (7/30/05)	65%	56%
19	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of applications received electronically in the Fiscal Year	75,566 (8/7/06)	130,000	153,930 (7/16/07)
20	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	# of agencies posting Apply packages	26 (8/7/096) Maintain	26	26 (7/16/07)
21	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Compliance	# of discretionary grant programs available for electronic application through Grants.gov for the Fiscal Year	1,895 (8/7/06)	3,200	2,604 (7/16/07)
22	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Customer Services	Overall customer satisfaction with the Grants.gov site. (Foresee Tool)	.57 (7/24/06)	60	61 (7/16/07)
23	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Participation	Likeliness of the Grants Community to use Grants.gov as their primary resource (Foresee Tool)	.63 (7/27/06)	70	64 (7/16/07)
24	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	New Customers and Market Penetration	Likeliness of the Grants Community to return to the Grants.gov site (Foresee Tool)	.75 (7/27/06)	85	78 (7/16/07)
25	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Retention	Users ability to accomplish what they wanted on the Grants.gov site (Foresee Tool)	.60 (7/27/06)	70	63 (7/16/07)
26	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	% of discretionary grant opportunities available for electronic application through grants.gov	83%	100%	TBD
27	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	Score based on 0 to 100 scale using ACSI's scientific methodology- index from multi-item satisfaction questions & weightings to maximize causation between the drivers of satisfaction and satisfaction outcomes- not a percentage of satisfied visitors	60	65	TBD
28	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Participation	# of Authorized Organization Representatives (AOR) on Grants.gov	52,106	70,147	TBD
29	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Compliance	% of agencies posting discretionary grant opportunities of Grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
30	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of grant applications received electronically on grants.gov	160,000	170,000	TBD
31	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	% of discretionary grant opportunities available for electronic application through grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
32	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	Score based on 0 to 100 scale using ACSI's scientific methodology- index from multi-item satisfaction questions & weightings to maximize causation between the drivers of satisfaction and satisfaction outcomes- not a percentage of satisfied visitors	65	67	TBD
33	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Participation	# of Authorized Organization Representatives (AOR) on Grants.gov	70,147	73,654	TBD
34	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Compliance	% of agencies posting discretionary grant opportunities of Grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
35	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of grant applications received electronically on grants.gov	170,000	180,000	TBD
36	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	% of discretionary grant opportunities available for electronic application through grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
37	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	Score based on 0 to 100 scale using ACSI's scientific methodology- index from multi-item satisfaction questions & weightings to maximize causation between the drivers of satisfaction and satisfaction outcomes- not a percentage of satisfied visitors	65	67	TBD
38	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Participation	# of Authorized Organization Representatives (AOR) on Grants.gov	73,654	77,336	TBD
39	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Compliance	% of agencies posting discretionary grant opportunities of Grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
40	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of grant applications received electronically on grants.gov	180,000	190,000	TBD
41	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	% of discretionary grant opportunities available for electronic application through grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
42	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	Score based on 0 to 100 scale using ACSI's scientific methodology- index from multi-item satisfaction questions & weightings to maximize causation between the drivers of satisfaction and satisfaction outcomes- not a percentage of satisfied visitors	65	67	TBD
43	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Participation	# of Authorized Organization Representatives (AOR) on Grants.gov	77,336	81,202	TBD
44	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Compliance	% of agencies posting discretionary grant opportunities of Grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
45	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of grant applications received electronically on grants.gov	190,000	200,000	TBD
46	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	Information Management	% of discretionary grant opportunities available for electronic application through grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
47	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	Score based on 0 to 100 scale using ACSI's scientific methodology- index from multi-item satisfaction questions & weightings to maximize causation between the drivers of satisfaction and satisfaction outcomes- not a percentage of satisfied visitors	65	67	TBD
48	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Participation	# of Authorized Organization Representatives (AOR) on Grants.gov	81,202	85,262	TBD
49	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Compliance	% of agencies posting discretionary grant opportunities of Grants.gov	100%	100%	TBD
50	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	External Data Sharing	# of grant applications received electronically on grants.gov	200,000	210,000	TBD

1. Is this investment included in your agency's target enterprise architecture?

yes

2. Is this investment included in the agency's EA Transition Strategy?

yes

2.a. If yes, provide the investment name as identified in the Transition Strategy provided in the agency's most recent annual EA Assessment.

Grants.gov - Find and Apply

3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture?

no

4. Identify the service components funded by this major IT investment (e.g., knowledge management, content management, customer relationship management, etc.). Provide this information in the format of the following table. For detailed guidance regarding components, please refer to http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/.

Component: Use existing SRM Components or identify as NEW. A NEW component is one not already identified as a service component in the FEA SRM.

Reused Name and UPI: A reused component is one being funded by another investment, but being used by this investment. Rather than answer yes or no, identify the reused service component funded by the other investment and identify the other investment using the Unique Project Identifier (UPI) code from the OMB Ex 300 or Ex 53 submission.

Internal or External Reuse?: Internal reuse is within an agency. For example, one agency within a department is reusing a service component provided by another agency within the same department. External reuse is one agency within a department reusing a service component provided by another agency in another department. A good example of this is an E-Gov initiative service being reused by multiple organizations across the federal government.

Funding Percentage: Please provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount used for each service component listed in the table. If external, provide the funding level transferred to another agency to pay for the service.

Row	Agency Component Name	Agency Component Description	Service Type	Component	Reused Component Name	Reused UPI	Internal or External Reuse?	Funding %
1	Online Help	Grants.gov website includes a help function with links, faqs, and automated flash tutorial sessions to assist customers.	Customer Initiated Assistance	Online Help			No Reuse	0
2	Reservations / Registration	Grants.gov uses CCR to determine a users organizational affiliation	Customer Initiated Assistance	Reservations / Registration			No Reuse	6
3	Self-Service	Automated federal grant application process	Customer Initiated Assistance	Self-Service			No Reuse	0
4	Alerts and Notifications	Users establish profiles to receive updates via email (Find and Apply)	Customer Preferences	Alerts and Notifications			No Reuse	0
5	Personalization	Profile is maintained with stored preferences	Customer Preferences	Personalization			No Reuse	0
6	Call Center Management	Contact center is available weekdays from 7am - 9pm EST	Customer Relationship Management	Call Center Management			No Reuse	12
7	Customer Feedback	Focus groups and phone calls and email through contact center are used to elicit stakeholder and customer feedback	Customer Relationship Management	Customer Feedback			No Reuse	5
8	Surveys	Implemented real-time, on-line user surveys to collect user opinions using American Customer Satisfaction Index	Customer Relationship Management	Surveys			No Reuse	0
9	Content Publishing and Delivery	Strict configuration management processes in place to manage content	Content Management	Content Publishing and Delivery			No Reuse	17
10	Inbound Correspondence Management	Agencies can post application packages and potential applicants can download, fill out, and submit the packages back to agencies	Routing and Scheduling	Inbound Correspondence Management			No Reuse	5
11	Outbound Correspondence Management	Agencies can post application packages and potential applicants can download, fill out, and submit the packages back to agencies	Routing and Scheduling	Outbound Correspondence Management			No Reuse	5
12	Quality Management	E-Forms provide business rule enforcement of data	Management of Processes	Quality Management			No Reuse	5
13	Content Authoring	Agencies can create customized application packages using a variety of existing forms and also create customized opportunity postings	Content Management	Content Authoring			No Reuse	5
14	Content Review and Approval	E-Forms (IMB Workplace Forms) provide real-time edits on the data that is entered	Content Management	Content Review and Approval			No Reuse	0
15	Content Publishing and Delivery	Agencies can control the publication of opportunities and grant applications on Grants.gov	Content Management	Content Publishing and Delivery			No Reuse	0
16	Library / Storage	Agencies can select from a file of various e-forms to be used to create customized application packages	Document Management	Library / Storage			No Reuse	0
17	Information Retrieval	System allows access to grant opportunities across 26 grant making agencies	Knowledge Management	Information Retrieval			No Reuse	0
18	Information Sharing	Agencies can provide access to the e-form applications by providing the file, which can be shared with multiple users	Knowledge Management	Information Sharing			No Reuse	0
19	Query	Find mechanism allows potential applicants to search for funding opportunities based on specific query selection criteria	Search	Query			No Reuse	0
20	Identification and Authentication	Grants.gov uses E-Authentication Federation credential services	Security Management	Identification and Authentication			No Reuse	6
21	Access Control	Grants.gov supports user role assignments to control access	Security Management	Access Control			No Reuse	6
22	Cryptography	Crypotography information is encrypted via SSL/TLS	Security Management	Cryptography			No Reuse	0
23	Forms Creation	System provides agencies with the ability to create standard templates incorporating various forms which can be reused within the agency	Forms Management	Forms Creation			No Reuse	2
24	Forms Modification	System provides agencies to modify the forms used in a template or modify a template for a single use when publishing a grant application package	Forms Management	Forms Modification			No Reuse	2
25	Meta Data Management	System contains data that defines data collected through the system	Data Management	Meta Data Management			No Reuse	6
26	Data Integration	System-to-system integration allows data to be transmitted from separate sources into a single source	Development and Integration	Data Integration			No Reuse	17

5. To demonstrate how this major IT investment aligns with the FEA Technical Reference Model (TRM), please list the Service Areas, Categories, Standards, and Service Specifications supporting this IT investment.

FEA SRM Component: Service Components identified in the previous question should be entered in this column. Please enter multiple rows for FEA SRM Components supported by multiple TRM Service Specifications.

Service Specification: In the Service Specification field, Agencies should provide information on the specified technical standard or vendor product mapped to the FEA TRM Service Standard, including model or version numbers, as appropriate.

Row	SRM Component	>Service Area	Service Category	Service Standard	Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name)
1	Customer Feedback	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	American Satisfaction Survey (ForeSee)
2	Surveys	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	American Satisfaction Survey (ForeSee)
3	Content Publishing and Delivery	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Database	Apache
4	Content Authoring	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	BM Workplace Forms
5	Content Publishing and Delivery	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Hardware / Infrastructure	Embedded Technology Devices	HTML, Java Server Pages
6	Online Help	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	HTTP
7	Smart Documents	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	IBM (IBM Workplace Forms)
8	Content Review and Approval	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Format / Classification	IBM Workplace Forms
9	Business Rule Management	Service Interface and Integration	Interoperability	Data Types / Validation	IBM Workplace Forms
10	Inbound Correspondence Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Software Engineering	Test Management	IBM Workplace Forms (formerly PureEdge), JAVA(JSP)
11	Meta Data Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Storage	IBM Workplace Forms, Oracle
12	Data Integration	Component Framework	Data Interchange	Data Exchange	IBM Workplace Forms, Oracle(SQL), EMC, XML
13	Forms Creation	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Storage	IBM Workplace Forms, UFS, EMC
14	Forms Modification	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Storage	IBM Workplace Forms, UFS, EMC
15	Access Control	Component Framework	Security	Supporting Security Services	J2EE role-based access control
16	Online Help	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Microsoft Internet Explorer
17	Information Sharing	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Microsoft Internet Explorer, XML
18	Reservations / Registration	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Authentication / Single Sign-on	Oblix (SAML), Verisign
19	Identification and Authentication	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Authentication / Single Sign-on	Oblix (SAML), Verisign
20	Query	Component Framework	Data Management	Database Connectivity	Oracle (SQL)
21	Library / Storage	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Database	Oracle (SQL), EMC
22	Inbound Correspondence Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Hardware / Infrastructure	Servers / Computers	Oracle (SQL), SUN MicroSystems (Sun 280R), EMC, Apache
23	Outbound Correspondence Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Hardware / Infrastructure	Servers / Computers	Oracle (SQL), SUN MicroSystems (Sun 280R), EMC, Apache
24	Outbound Correspondence Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Software Engineering	Test Management	PVCS Tracker, Microsoft SharePoint, W3C(Online Link Validator), N-Stalker(N-Stealth), and freeware: Apache ab, JMeter, Nessus, Nmap,
25	Call Center Management	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Other Electronic Channels	Seibel
26	Cryptography	Component Framework	Security	Supporting Security Services	SSL
27	Information Retrieval	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Hardware / Infrastructure	Servers / Computers	SUN MicroSystems (Sun 280R), EMC
28	Self-Service	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Collaboration / Communications	Unix (Send Mail)
29	Alerts and Notifications	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Collaboration / Communications	Unix (Send Mail)
30	Personalization	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Collaboration / Communications	Unix (Send Mail)

6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?

yes

6.a. If yes, please describe.

This investment leverages: Grants.gov, Grants Management Line of Business. The Grants.gov system provides a component that is leveraged across the federal government. The Grants.gov program maintains a global XML schema (data dictionary) that enables: *Applicant System to System support. 151 distinct organizations have submitted applications using XML and Web Services. *Agency System to System support. 37 federal agencies system are integrated with Grants.gov for pulling application to their agency systems *Grants.gov to receive more than 150,000 grant applications electronically The Grants.gov program reuses existing components provided by other Agencies: *E-Authentication E-Gov - Grants.gov works with the E-Authentication E-Gov initiative to implement SAML technology to fulfill organization/agency authentication requirements. Grants.gov is the first E-Gov client for another E-Gov initiative. *Central Contractor Registration (CCR) - Grants.gov utilizes CCR for credentialing services - the primary vendor database for the U.S. Federal Government. *Contact Center Services - Grants.gov utilizes FirstGov.gov's USA Services for Tier 1 support by leveraging an existing HHS contract. *American Customer Satisfaction Survey - Grants.gov utilizes Department of Treasury's American Customer Satisfaction Index tool (ForeSee), which is used by other initiatives such as FirstGov.gov, GovBenefits.gov and USAJobs.gov. The ForeSee tool allows Grants.gov to survey the Grants.gov users to better understand usage of the website by the grantee community.

1. As a joint exhibit 300, please identify the agency stakeholders. Provide the partner agency and partner agency approval date for this joint exhibit 300.

Row	Partner Agency	Joint exhibit approval date
1	009	2007-08-16
2	021	2007-08-16
3	018	2007-08-16
4	025	2007-08-16
5	005	2007-08-16
6	012	2007-08-16
7	184	2007-08-15
8	024	2007-08-16
9	422	2007-08-16
10	020	2007-08-15
11	007	2007-08-16
12	011	2007-08-15
13	019	2007-08-15
14	006	2007-08-16
15	026	2007-08-15
16	010	2007-08-16
17	485	2007-08-16
18	029	2007-08-07
19	474	2007-08-07
20	014	2007-08-16
21	028	2007-08-16
22	418	2007-08-16
23	417	2007-08-15
24	016	2007-08-15
25	015	2007-08-16
26	393	2007-08-15

1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

yes

1.a. If yes, what is the date of the plan?

2007-07-01

1.b. Has the Risk Management Plan been significantly changed since last year's submission to OMB?

yes

1.c. If yes, describe any significant changes:

The risk management plan has been updated to reflect the identification and mitigation of new risks, including those arising out of technical issues with Adobe Reader, dependencies on external systems (E-Authentication, CCR), and business implications of the 2007 System deployment strategy. Technical issues with Adobe Reader v8.1 primarily relate to improper handling of conditional mandatory elements in the application packages. Accordingly, Grants.gov PMO decided to launch the 2007 Grants.gov system with version 7.0.9 of Adobe Reader, which does not suffer from these issues. It may cause some applicant organizations and agencies to roll back their Adobe Reader deployment on user desktop machines to this release but it mitigates the risk of an unsuccessful deployment. In addition, Adobe is working on a new version of Reader, which will undergo formal testing using Grants.gov application forms before general release to Grants.gov customers. This version of the reader, 8.1.1, is scheduled to be released in Sept, 2007. Grants.gov depends on CCR and E-Authentication for successful operations. These are external systems. All applicant organizations that wish to submit grant applications through Grants.gov must be registered with CCR (Central Contractor Registration). CCR is managed by DoD. Agency users must get their credentials from E-Authentication portal, a GSA managed web site. Grants.gov PMO identified that an outage in these external systems will adversely affect a dependent component in Grants.gov. In addition, the PMO now receives immediate incident reports from the Systems Integrator of any outages so external systems, if responsible, can be notified for corrective action. The 2007 Grants.gov system is based on Adobe forms platform while the 2006 system uses PureEdge forms technology. The PMO identified the need to run both the systems in parallel to ensure uninterrupted availability and adequate time for migration for applicants and agencies. As a result, the PMO identified additional design objectives for the 2007 system. These objectives were then incorporated into the final design by the Systems Integrator to mitigate the risk of any usability issues when running the two systems in parallel. Further risk mitigation will result from the near-term acquisition of an auxiliary system to ensure Continuity of Operations(COOP) and for system development testing.

1. Are you using EVM to manage this investment?

yes

1. Does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard 748?

yes

1.c. If N/A, please provide date operational analysis was conducted and a brief summary of the results?

2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%?

no

3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?

no