| | Exhibit 300 (BY2009) for HHS HR LOB ITPART ONE
OVERVIEW
- 1. Date of Submission:
- 2008-02-04
- 2. Agency:
- 009
- 3. Bureau:
- 00
- 4. Name of this Capital Asset:
- HHS HR LOB IT
- 5. Unique Project Identifier:
- 009-00-01-99-01-1126-24
- 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2009?
- Planning
- 7. What was the first budget year this investment was submitted to OMB?
- FY2006
- 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.
- As part of the PMA, HHS was selected as 1 of 5 federal HRLOB's. The HRLOB as defined by OPM is "A government-wide, modern, cost effective, standardized, and interoperable HR solution." Solutions identified herein should provide common core functionality and maximize automation of processes to support the strategic management of human capital. Specifically: 1. improve the government wide strategic management of human capital, 2. Achieve or increase operational efficiencies, 3. Achieve or increase cost savings, 4. Improve customer service. HHS HRLOB offers a unique value proposition to potential customers including: a system that accommodates Titles 5, 42, and 38 personnel (specific to the medical community); the benefits of HHS' experience as leaders in the OPM eOPF implementation; HHS' COTS HR system domain knowledge (HHS was the first HRLOB to migrate to current version); and the re-assurance of an efficient/effective project (HHS continues to achieve GREEN status for HCM). To date, HHS has assisted OPM with the Architecture, Concept of Operations, & the FY06 Business Case, participated in the HRLOB BRM V1/V2, Updated the BRM, FEA BRM, Data Reference Model, Technical Reference Model, Performance Reference Model, Service Component Reference Model, validated business processes, Concept of Operations Plan, Developed HRLOB Work Plan, Prepared and submitted the FY07 and FY 08 4 HRLOB BCA's. Currently, the HRLOB is in a planning stage due to the moratorium placed on providers by OPM to include private sector venders to compete with federal providers. The inclusion of private sector has delayed the build and migration phases of the project by 1 year creating the need to rebaseline this investment. HHS projects being able to provide HR services as described by OPM to additional customers in FY08. Currently, HHS has internal customers but must enhance the capacities of existing systems to manage the service requirements of additional customer. The approach for Phase I is to leverage existing technologies (e.g. Capital HR/EHRP investment) with minimal upgrades to meet OPM requirements. The HR LOB operating model moves toward an open architecture environment that is scalable, interoperable and portable. Some of the existing technologies include: Capital HR /EHRP (PeopleSoft v8.9), Time and Attendance system, MyPay, QuickHire, QuickClass, eOPF, EWITS, and LMS. Program risks will be managed and mitigated based on projects of a similar size and complexity.
- 9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request?
- yes
- 9.a. If "yes," what was the date of this approval?
- 2005-05-01
- 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?
- TBD
- 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
- 12.b. Is this investment for new construction or major retrofit of a Federal building or facility? (answer applicable to non-IT assets only)
- no
- 13. Does this investment directly support one of the PMA initiatives?
- yes
- If yes, select the initiatives that apply:
Initiative Name |
---|
Expanded E-Government | Human Capital |
- 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?)
- Human Capital - The solution allows for administration to leverage human capital in strategic planning, measurement, monitoring and evaluation and streamlines HR process, simplifies delivery of services and reduces costs. Expanded Electronic Government - The solution creates an easy-to-find single point of access and standarized systems. Internal HR processes will be standardized and automated to reduce costs and improve efficiency of the workforce.
- 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?
- Human Resources Line of Business
- 20. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2009 funding request for the following? (This should total 100%)
Area | Percentage |
---|
Hardware | 0 | Software | 9 | Services | 67 | Other | 24 |
- 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?
- no
- 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?
- no
- 24. Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas?
- yes
SUMMARY OF SPEND
- 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | Acquisition Budgetary Resources | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 13.040 | Maintenance Budgetary Resources | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 18.530 | Government FTE Cost | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 3.350 | # of FTEs | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 |
- 2. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's?
- yes
- 2.a. If "yes," how many and in what year?
- 31 - FY2009
- 3. If the summary of spending has changed from the FY2008 President's budget request, briefly explain those changes.
- Due to the delay placed on providers by OPM for the purpose of including private sector venders to compete with federal providers. The inclusion of private sector has delayed the build and migration phases of the project by 1 year creating the need to rebaseline this investment. As a result, FY 08 spending has been reduced to account for anticipated delays. Please note that the costs shown in the spending summary table reflect the IT specific cost(s) to the customer agency only and do NOT reflect any HHS funds. Milestones in the cost & schedule table for FY2008 involve only HHS funds and are therefore only schedule milestones since HHS costs are not included in this investment. While total costs have been factored into cost/benefit analysis they have been left out of this Summary of Spending table subject to future HHS ITRB discussions regarding the relationship between this investment and the current HHS HR system.
PERFORMANCE In order to successfully address this area of the exhibit 300, performance goals must be provided for the agency and be linked to the annual performance plan. The investment must discuss the agency's mission and strategic goals, and performance measures (indicators) must be provided. These goals need to map to the gap in the agency's strategic goals and objectives this investment is designed to fill. They are the internal and external performance benefits this investment is expected to deliver to the agency (e.g., improve efficiency by 60 percent, increase citizen participation by 300 percent a year to achieve an overall citizen participation rate of 75 percent by FY 2xxx, etc.). The goals must be clearly measurable investment outcomes, and if applicable, investment outputs. They do not include the completion date of the module, milestones, or investment, or general goals, such as, significant, better, improved that do not have a quantitative measure.
- 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 | 2006 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | Human Resources Development | Selected to be a HR SSC | 20 Agencies bidding for Service Center LOB | 5 to be Selected | 5 | 2 | 2006 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | New Customers and Market Penetration | Conduct Customer/Market Assesment | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2006 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Planning | Complete set of target requirements for SSC: | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2006 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | Functionality | Complete Business Case and CONOPS | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 2008 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | Human Resources Development | Requirements gathering and publication for core requirements functions: Personnel Actions and Compensation and Benefits Mgt. | 5 | 1 | | 6 | 2008 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | Service Efficiency | Consolidation of HRC Process | 0% as of 2007 | Improve Baseline by 90% | 0 | 7 | 2008 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Policies | Compress the 5 HRC Policies | 0% as of 2007 | Improve baseline by 90% | 0 | 8 | 2008 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | Compliance and Deviations | Consolidation of Physical HRCs | 5 | 2 | 0 | 9 | 2009 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | HR Strategy | Add new SSC Customer | 0 | 1 | 0 | 10 | 2008 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | Customer Impact or Burden | Implementation of Near Term SSC Requirements to new customer | 0% as of 2008 | Improve basleine by 100% | 0 | 11 | 2009 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Innovation and Improvement | Implementation of New Customer Near term SSC requirements | 0 % as 0f 2008 | Improve baseline by 75% | 0 | 12 | 2009 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | Compliance and Deviations | Reduction of Call Center Support personnel | 100 | 80 | 0 | 13 | 2010 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | Human Resources Development | Implementation of New Customer | 0 | 1 | 0 | 14 | 2010 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | Customer Impact or Burden | Reduce Response Time | TBD | 50% | 0 | 15 | 2010 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Innovation and Improvement | Implementation of New Customer Near ternm SSC requirements | 75% as of 2009 | Improve baseline by 25% | 0 | 16 | 2010 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | Data Standardization or Tagging | Percent of Processes Converted | 0% as of 2009 | Improve baseline by 100% | 0 | 17 | 2011 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | Information Management | % of Complete Long term Requirements | 0% as of 2010 | Improve baseline by 50% | 0 | 18 | 2011 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | Customer Satisfaction | % of Csutomer Issues | 0% as of 2010 | Improve baseline by 50% | 0 | 19 | 2011 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Innovation and Improvement | % of redundant process | 0% as of 2010 | Improve baseline by 50% | 0 | 20 | 2011 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | Availability | % of Uptime & Availability | 90% as of 2010 | Improve baseline by 99% | 0 | 21 | 2012 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | IT Infrastructure Maintenance | Implementation of Long-term SSC requirements for customer | 0% as of 2011 | Improve baseline by 50% | 0 | 22 | 2012 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | Customer Satisfaction | % Improvement in Csuotmer Satisifaction | 0% as of 2011 | Improve baseline by 100% | 0 | 23 | 2012 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Innovation and Improvement | Complete Long-term design document | 0 | 1 | 0 | 24 | 2012 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | IT Contribution to Process, Customer, or Mission | Established SLA for Long-Term requirements | 0 | 1 | 0 | 25 | 2013 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Mission and Business Results | HR Strategy | Implementation of Long-term SSC requirements for customer | 50% as of 2012 | Improve baseline by 100% | 0 | 26 | 2013 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Customer Results | Customer Impact or Burden | % Improvement of Customer Calls | TBD | Improve baseline by 100% | 0 | 27 | 2013 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Processes and Activities | Innovation and Improvement | Improvement Long-term processing flow | TBD | Improve baseline by 50% | 0 | 28 | 2013 | Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources | Technology | IT Contribution to Process, Customer, or Mission | Improve response time | TBD | Improve baseline by 50% | 0 |
Enterprise Architecture In order to successfully address this area of the business case and capital asset plan you must ensure the investment is included in the agency's EA and Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process, and is mapped to and supports the FEA. You must also ensure the business case demonstrates the relationship between the investment and the business, performance, data, services, application, and technology layers of the agency's EA. - 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.
- HHS Human Resources LOB IT
- 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 | Personnel Administration | Defines the set of capabilities that support the matching between an organization's employees and potential opportunities as well as the modification, addition and general upkeep of an organization's employee-specific information. | Human Resources | Personnel Administration | | | No Reuse | 100 |
- 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 | Personnel Administration | Service Access and Delivery | Access Channels | Web Browser | Microsoft | 2 | Personnel Administration | Service Access and Delivery | Delivery Channels | Internet | Internet Services | 3 | Personnel Administration | Service Access and Delivery | Service Transport | Supporting Network Services | HTTP | 4 | Personnel Administration | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Delivery Servers | Web Servers | HP |
- 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: Human Resources Line of Business. multi-OPDIVs and possible multi-Federal Agencies. Is 1 of 5 OMB-designated HR LOBs.
PART TWO
RISK You should perform a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of the investment's life-cycle, develop a risk-adjusted life-cycle cost estimate and a plan to eliminate, mitigate or manage risk, and be actively managing risk throughout the investment's life-cycle.
Answer the following questions to describe how you are managing investment risks. - 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?
- yes
- 1.a. If yes, what is the date of the plan?
- 2006-06-05
- 1.b. Has the Risk Management Plan been significantly changed since last year's submission to OMB?
- no
- 3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:
- Program risk management is an ongoing part of project management on the HR LOB IT investment. We have a very robust risk management capability in place that requires biweekly meetings with active participation spanning all aspects of the investment. The systems integrator and HHS actively work together to identify, manage and track risks that could adversely impact the program. Costs associated with the risk capability are captured in individual task orders and included in the cost estimated throughout the lifecycle. Due to the complexity of the HR LOB program there are several identified areas of high risk. Schedule and cost risks are continously monitored and mitigated through our established processes. In some cases, scope and/or schedule must be adjusted to avert cost overruns. Risks associated with added functionality to HR LOB IT are assessed and mitigation and/or contingency plans are developed as necessary. Risks relative to government mandates are managed within existing risk management processes.
COST & SCHEDULE
- 1. Does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard 748?
- yes
- 2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%?
- no
- 3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?
- no
|
|
|