Exhibit 300 FY2009

 

 

 

 

 

Exhibit 300 FY2009  

 

 

PART I: SUMMARY INFORMATION AND JUSTIFICATION  

In Part I, complete Sections A, B, C, and D for all capital assets (IT and non-IT). Complete Sections E and F for IT capital assets.

 

 

 

Section A: Overview (All Capital Assets)  

The following series of questions are to be completed for all investments.

 

 

 

I. A. 1. Date of Submission:   

 

 

 

2007-09-10

 

 

I. A. 2. Agency:   

 

 

 

005

 

 

I. A. 3. Bureau:   

 

 

 

03

 

 

I. A. 4. Name of this Capital Asset:   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

Human Resources Line of Business: Service Center

 

 

I. A. 5. Unique Project (Investment) Identifier:   

 

For IT investment only, see section 53. For all other, use agency ID system.

 

 

005-03-01-01-01-1226-24

 

 

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

 

Please NOTE: Investments moving to O&M in FY2009, with Planning/Acquisition activities prior to FY2009 should not select O&M. These investments should indicate their current status.

 

 

Mixed Life Cycle

 

 

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

 

 

 

FY2006

 

 

I. A. 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:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

This business case addresses the implementation of a Human Resources Line of Business (HRLOB) Shared Service Center (SSC) by the National Finance Center (NFC) that offers standardized HR services on a Federal Government-wide level. In September 2005, NFC was selected as an HRLOB SSC. To be consistent with the managing partner's, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), business case, this business case also incorporates the completion of the e-Payroll migrations. In the near-term, the NFC SSC will provide integrated HR, personnel, and payroll system services to Federal agencies. In addition, NFC will leverage its HR system technology platform to offer a full range of optional employee-centric services to Federal agencies, such as position management, classification, staffing, personnel action processing, employee-relations, labor relations, employee development, benefits administration, Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) case management processing, and other related services. In the long term, OPM anticipates that the Shared Service Centers will utilize a "common solution" that identifies systems, best practices, migration strategies and key interfaces to develop common HRLOB business processes and system solutions. This NFC business case fully supports the OPM near-term and long-term common solution visions. The NFC HR system suite consists of EmpowHR, a PeopleSoft-based Human Resource Management Information System and the Payroll/Personnel System (PPS). This system suite is a solution of integrated applications enabling customer agencies to obtain the core HR system services while supporting HR operational services. Near-term PPS plans for this initiative include only minor enhancements and modifications required to ensure system reliability and to meet customer requirements. NFC is currently implementing Forest Service (FS) into the EmpowHR system for HR processing. Approximately 9,000 FS employees have been migrated to EmpowHR. The remaining 46,000 have phased implementations which is scheduled to complete in September 2007. FS and NFC are working close together to ensure that EmpowHR is integrated with the ConnectHR investment. FS employees and managers will be able to access EmpowHR through the FS portal. USDA has established an initiative to analyze and select a department-wide T&A system that meets all USDA agency requirements. NFC and FS have representatives on this department-wide team.

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

 

 

2007-08-29

 

 

I. A. 10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. A. 11. Contact information of Project Manager  

 

 

Name   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

Penny Forbes

 

 

Phone Number   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

504-426-1000

 

 

E-mail   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

penny.forbes@usda.gov

 

 

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

 

 

 

TBD

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. A. 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

 

 

I. A. 12. b. 1. If "yes," is an ESPC or UESC being used to help fund this investment?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. A. 12. b. 2. If "yes," will this investment meet sustainable design principles?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. A. 12. b. 3. If "yes," is it designed to be 30% more energy efficient than relevant code?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. A. 13. a. If "yes," check all that apply:   

 

 

 

Human Capital

 

 

I. A. 13. b. 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?)   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

The HRLOB initiative provides opportunities for agencies to collectively identify and adopt best practices to standardize business processes and eliminate redundant systems. OPM's envisioned common solution is citizen centered, results-oriented, and market-based, allowing it to directly support the strategic management of human capital, competitive sourcing, financial performance, expanded e-Government, and budget performance integration PMA initiatives.

 

 

I. A. 14. Does this investment support a program assessed using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)? (For more information about the PART, visit www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part.)   

 

 

 

no

 

 

I. A. 14. a. If "yes," does this investment address a weakness found during the PART review?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. A. 14. b. If "yes," what is the name of the PARTed Program?   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. A. 14. c. If "yes," what PART rating did it receive?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. A. 15. Is this investment for information technology?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

Level 1 - Projects with low-to-moderate complexity and risk. Example: Bureau-level project such as a stand-alone information system that has low- to-moderate complexity and risk.
Level 2 - Projects with high complexity and/or risk which are critical to the mission of the organization. Examples: Projects that are part of a portfolio of projects/systems that impact each other and/or impact mission activities. Department-wide projects that impact cross-organizational missions, such as an agency-wide system integration that includes large scale Enterprise Resource Planning (e.g., the DoD Business Mgmt Modernization Program).
Level 3 - Projects that have high complexity, and/or risk, and have government-wide impact. Examples: Government-wide initiative (E-GOV, President's Management Agenda). High interest projects with Congress, GAO, OMB, or the general public. Cross-cutting initiative (Homeland Security).

 

 

Level 3

 

 

I. A. 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;(2) Project manager qualification is under review for this investment;(3) Project manager assigned to investment, but does not meet requirements;(4) Project manager assigned but qualification status review has not yet started;(5) No Project manager has yet been assigned to this investment

 

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. A. 19. Is this a financial management system?   

 

 

 

no

 

 

I. A. 19. a. If "yes," does this investment address a FFMIA compliance area?   

 

 

 

no

 

 

I. A. 19. a. 1. If "yes," which compliance area   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

This investment represents an integrated human resources and payroll system.

 

 

I. A. 19. b. If "yes," please identify the system name(s) and system acronym(s) as reported in the most recent financial systems inventory update required by Circular A-11 section 52   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

I. A. 20. a. Hardware   

 

 

 

7

 

 

I. A. 20. b. Software   

 

 

 

38

 

 

I. A. 20. c. Services   

 

 

 

47

 

 

I. A. 20. d. Other   

 

 

 

8

 

 

I. A. 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?   

 

 

 

n/a

 

 

I. A. 22. Contact information of individual responsible for privacy related questions:  

 

 

I. A. 22. a. Name   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

Gary Millett

 

 

I. A. 22. b. Phone Number   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

504-426-0168

 

 

I. A. 22. c. Title   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

NFC Privacy Advocate

 

 

I. A. 22. d. E-mail   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

gary.millett@usda.gov

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

Question 24 must be answered by all Investments:

 

 

no

 

 

Section B: Summary of Spending (All Capital Assets)  

 

 

I. B. 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.   

 

Note: For the cross-agency investments, this table should include all funding (both managing and partner agencies).
Government FTE Costs should not be included as part of the TOTAL represented.

 

 

 

PY-1 Spending Prior to 2007

PY 2007

CY 2008

BY 2009

BY+1 2010

BY+2 2011

BY+3 2012

BY+4 2013 and Beyond

Total

Planning

0

0

0

0

 

 

 

 

 

Acquisition

9.941

2.722

4.800

40.550

 

 

 

 

 

Subtotal Planning & Acquisition

9.941

2.722

4.800

40.550

 

 

 

 

 

Operations & Maintenance

1.800

9.044

10.308

9.996

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

11.741

11.766

15.108

50.546

 

 

 

 

 

Government FTE Costs

3.853

3.692

3.799

3.305

 

 

 

 

 

Number of FTE represented by cost

21

30

33

34

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. B. 2. a. If "yes," How many and in what year?   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

NFC estimates hiring 5 to 10 FTE's from FY07 through FY15, depending on the number of new HRLOB customer agencies and the types of operational services requested.

 

 

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

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

We were selected by OPM as an HRLOB Shared Service Center in September 2005, and we are now one year further in the planning process of a large and complex multi-year project. We have refined our estimates, but expect to further refine them in the next few years. We were transitioning a production HR system to NFC in our FY2007 Exhibit 300 and did not identify it as a mixed lifecycle investment. NFC incorporated steady state costs in the FY2008 plan, but included operational costs, which were removed this year to focus on IT-related costs, thereby reducing the overall lifecycle costs. In addition, we planned to implement a major upgrade of EmpowHR from version 8.8 of PeopleSoft to version 8.9 in FY2007, but that upgrade was delayed. We now plan to upgrade to version 9.0 of PeopleSoft, starting in FY2007 and completing in FY2008. These business case modifications required a substantial baseline budget change.

 

 

Section C: Acquisition/Contract Strategy (All Capital Assets)  

 

 

I. C. 1. Complete the table for all (including all non-Federal) contracts and/or task orders currently in place or planned for this investment. Total Value should include all option years for each contract. Contracts and/or task orders completed do not need to be included.   

 

SIS - Share in Services contract; ESPC - Energy savings performance contract ; UESC - Utility energy efficiency service contract; EUL - Enhanced use lease contract; N/A - no alternative financing used.
(Character Limitations: Contract or Task Order Number - 250 Characters; Type of Contract/Task Order - 250 Characters; Name of CO - 250 Characters; CO Contact Information - 250 Characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 2. If earned value is not required or will not be a contract requirement for any of the contracts or task orders above, explain why:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 3. Do the contracts ensure Section 508 compliance?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 3. a. Explain Why:   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 4. Is there an acquisition plan which has been approved in accordance with agency requirements?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 4. a. If "yes," what is the date?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 4. b. If "no," will an acquisition plan be developed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. C. 4. b. 1. If "no," briefly explain why:   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

Section D: Performance Information (All Capital Assets)  

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.

 

 

 

I. D. 1. Table 1. Performance Information Table   

 

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.

 

 

 

Strategic Goal(s) Supported

Measurement Area

Measurement Grouping

Measurement Indicator

Baseline

Target

Actual Results

2005

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

100%

2005

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

PPS and EmpowHR available to customers 99% of established business hours.

99%

2005

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of major issues resolved in 24 hours

95%

Resolve 95% of major technical issues in 24 hours.

95%

2005

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

55,000

62,000

62,000

2005

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

84,500

85,000

86,000

2005

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

85%

86%

98%

2006

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

100%

2006

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

PPS and EmpowHR available to customers 99% of established business hours.

99%

2006

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of technical issues resolved in 24 hours

95%

Resolve 95% of major technical issues in 24 hours.

95%

2006

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

62,000

100,000

65,000 (Forest Service migration delayed)

2006

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

86,000

90,000

273,000 PARs processed

2006

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

86%

87%

88%

2007

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

100%

2007

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

PPS and EmpowHR available to customers 99% of established business hours.

99%

2007

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of technical issues resolved in 24 hours

95%

Resolve 96% of major technical issues in 24 hours.

96%

2007

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

65,000

140,000

175,000

2007

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

273,000

300,000

310,000

2007

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

87%

88%

88%

2008

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

TBD

2008

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

PPS and EmpowHR available to customers 99% of established business hours.

TBD

2008

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of technical issues resolved in 24 hours

96%

96.5%

TBD

2008

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

175,000

200,000

TBD

2008

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

310,000

340,000

TBD

2008

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

88%

88.5%

TBD

2009

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

TBD

2009

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

PPS and EmpowHR available to customers 99% of established business hours.

TBD

2009

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of technical issues resolved in 24 hours

96.5%

97%

TBD

2009

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

200,000

250,000

TBD

2009

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

340,000

375,000

TBD

2009

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

88.5%

89%

TBD

2010

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

TBD

2010

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

PPS and EmpowHR available to customers 99% of established business hours.

TBD

2010

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of technical issues resolved in 24 hours

97%

97.5%

TBD

2010

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

250,000

300,000

TBD

2010

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

375,000

450,000

TBD

2010

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

89.0%

89.5%

TBD

2011

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Mission and Business Results

Compensation Management

% of paid accounts based on customer-submitted information

100%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

TBD

2011

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Availability

% of system availability during established hours

99%

100% of payroll payments paid based on data provided.

TBD

2011

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Timeliness

% of technical issues resolved in 24 hours

97.5%

98%

TBD

2011

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Customer Results

Accessibility

Number of employees with access to EmpowHR

300,000

350,000

TBD

2011

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Processes and Activities

Productivity

Number of HR actions completed using EmpowHR

450,000

500,000

TBD

2011

Provide superior cross servicing for financial and admin services to USDA and other Federal agencies: Provide timely, reliable, and cost effective payroll and HR/personnel services to Federal agencies.

Technology

Functionality

% of HR actions successfully processed by EmpowHR on the first attempt

89.5%

90%

TBD

 

 

Section E: Security and Privacy (IT Capital Assets only)  

In order to successfully address this area of the business case, each question below must be answered at the system/application level, not at a program or agency level. Systems supporting this investment on the planning and operational systems security tables should match the systems on the privacy table below. Systems on the Operational Security Table must be included on your agency FISMA system inventory and should be easily referenced in the inventory (i.e., should use the same name or identifier).

For existing Mixed-Life Cycle investments where enhancement, development, and/or modernization is planned, include the investment in both the “Systems in Planning” table (Table 3) and the “Operational Systems” table (Table 4). Systems which are already operational, but have enhancement, development, and/or modernization activity, should be included in both Table 3 and Table 4. Table 3 should reflect the planned date for the system changes to be complete and operational, and the planned date for the associated C&A update. Table 4 should reflect the current status of the requirements listed. In this context, information contained within Table 3 should characterize what updates to testing and documentation will occur before implementing the enhancements; and Table 4 should characterize the current state of the materials associated with the existing system.

All systems listed in the two security tables should be identified in the privacy table. The list of systems in the “Name of System” column of the privacy table (Table 8) should match the systems listed in columns titled “Name of System” in the security tables (Tables 3 and 4). For the Privacy table, it is possible that there may not be a one-to-one ratio between the list of systems and the related privacy documents. For example, one PIA could cover multiple systems. If this is the case, a working link to the PIA may be listed in column (d) of the privacy table more than once (for each system covered by the PIA).

 

 

 

I. E. 1. Have the IT security costs for the system(s) been identified and integrated into the overall costs of the investment?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 1. a. If "yes," provide the "Percentage IT Security" for the budget year:   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 2. Is identifying and assessing security and privacy risks a part of the overall risk management effort for each system supporting or part of this investment?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. E. 3. Systems in Planning and Undergoing Enhancement(s) – Security Table:   

 

The questions asking whether there is a PIA which covers the system and whether a SORN is required for the system are discrete from the narrative fields. The narrative column provides an opportunity for free text explanation why a working link is not provided. For example, a SORN may be required for the system, but the system is not yet operational. In this circumstance, answer “yes” for column (e) and in the narrative in column (f), explain that because the system is not operational the SORN is not yet required to be published.

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 4. Operational Systems - Security:   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 5. Have any weaknesses related to any of the systems part of or supporting this investment been identified by the agency or IG?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 5. a. If "yes," have those weaknesses been incorporated into the agency's plan of action and milestone process?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 6. Indicate whether an increase in IT security funding is requested to remediate IT security weaknesses?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 6. a. If "yes," specify the amount, provide a general description of the weakness, and explain how the funding request will remediate the weakness.   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 7. How are contractor security procedures monitored, verified, and validated by the agency for the contractor systems above?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. E. 8. Planning & Operational Systems - Privacy Table:   

 

Details for Text Options:
Column (d): If yes to (c), provide the link(s) to the publicly posted PIA(s) with which this system is associated. If no to (c), provide an explanation why the PIA has not been publicly posted or why the PIA has not been conducted.

Column (f): If yes to (e), provide the link(s) to where the current and up to date SORN(s) is published in the federal register. If no to (e), provide an explanation why the SORN has not been published or why there isn’t a current and up to date SORN.

Note: Links must be provided to specific documents not general privacy websites.

 

 

 

 

 

Section F: Enterprise Architecture (EA) (IT Capital Assets only)  

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 Invesment 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.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. F. 1. a. If "no," please explain why?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

Human Resources Line of Business: Service Center

 

 

I. F. 2. b. If "no," please explain why?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

no

 

 

I. F. 3. a. If "yes," provide the name of the segment architecture.   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

I. F. 4. Service Component Reference Model (SRM) Table :   

 

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.egov.gov.

a. Use existing SRM Components or identify as “NEW”. A “NEW” component is one not already identified as a service component in the FEA SRM.
b. 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.
c. ‘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.
d. Please provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount used for each service component listed in the table. If external, provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount transferred to another agency to pay for the service. The percentages in this column can, but are not required to, add up to 100%.

 

 

 

Agency Component Description

FEA SRM Service Type

FEA SRM Component (a)

Service Component Reused - Component Name (b)

Service Component Reused - UPI (b)

Internal or External Reuse? (c)

BY Funding Percentage (d)

EmpowHR and PPS

EmpowHR and PPS contain HR, personnel, and payroll-related tracking and workflow tools.

Tracking and Workflow

Process Tracking

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

NFC maintains EmpowHR and PPS records and archives for disaster recovery/business continuity.

Systems Management

Data Recovery

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

PPS integrates with EmpowHR and agencies' internal HR systems

Human Resources

Personnel Administration

 

 

No Reuse

1

PPS

PPS integrates with agencies' financial management systems.

Financial Management

Payroll

Payroll

005-03-01-01-01-1102-00

Internal

1

EmpowHR and PPS

NFC security personnel administer security access for system users.

Security Management

Access Control

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

NFC maintains EmpowHR and PPS and performs system resource monitoring on both systems.

Systems Management

System Resource Monitoring

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

NFC has PPS and EmpowHR user groups with regularly scheduled meetings for end user feedback

Customer Relationship Management

Customer Feedback

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

NFC has PPS and EmpowHR help desks to resolve system and processing issues.

Customer Relationship Management

Customer Feedback

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

EmpowHR and PPS provide multiple reports for the user community to track workload and transaction status.

Tracking and Workflow

Process Tracking

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

EmpowHR and PPS support ad hoc reports for dynamic HR/personnel management reporting.

Reporting

Ad Hoc

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

EmpowHR and PPS have libraries of standardized reports that users can run.

Reporting

Standardized / Canned

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

The EmpowHR and PPS databases can be queried for data extraction and analysis.

Data Management

Extraction and Transformation

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

EmpowHR and PPS architectures enable data recovery within specified timeframes.

Data Management

Data Recovery

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

EmpowHR integrates with PPS, while PPS integrates with USDA and non-USDA customer financial systems.

Development and Integration

Enterprise Application Integration

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

Users cannot access EmpowHR or PPS without valid user ID's and passwords.

Security Management

Identification and Authentication

Identification and Authentication

005-03-02-01-02-8003-04

Internal

1

EmpowHR and PPS

Based on access rights, EmpowHR and PPS users can only log into authorized systems/modules.

Security Management

Access Control

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

The activities of EmpowHR and PPS users in creating and modifying records is tracked for auditing purposes.

Security Management

Audit Trail Capture and Analysis

 

 

No Reuse

1

EmpowHR and PPS

USDA is working closely with OPM to ensure that NFC systems are effectively interfaced with RSM.

Development and Integration

Data Integration

Data Integration

027-00-01-02-01-1010-00

External

1

EmpowHR and PPS

USDA is working closely with OPM to ensure that NFC systems are effectively interfaced with EHRI.

Development and Integration

Enterprise Application Integration

Enterprise Application Integration

027-00-01-99-01-1219-24

External

1

 

 

I. F. 5. Table 1. Technical Reference Model (TRM) Table:   

 

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.

a. 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
b. 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.

 

 

 

FEA TRM Service Area

FEA TRM Service Category

FEA TRM Service Standard

Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name)

Process Tracking

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

EmpowHR and PPS have integrated workflow and reporting tools. EmpowHR is based on PeopleSoft version 8.8.

Data Recovery

Service Platform and Infrastructure

Database / Storage

Storage

EmpowHR and PPS database/storage mediums include DB2, Oracle, SQL, and IDMS.

Personnel Administration

Service Access and Delivery

Delivery Channels

Internet

EmpowHR is web-based and available for customers to use with various browsers. PPS has several web-based components.

Payroll

Service Interface and Integration

Integration

Enterprise Application Integration

PPS interfaces with EmpowHR and customer financial systems.

Access Control

Component Framework

Security

Certificates / Digital Signatures

EmpowHR and PPS use SSL security. PPS web access will be integrated with e-Authorization security by 9/30/06.

System Resource Monitoring

Service Access and Delivery

Service Requirements

Hosting

NFC hosts PPS and will be hosting EmpowHR in December 2006.

Customer Feedback

Service Access and Delivery

Access Channels

Collaboration / Communications

NFC customer service representatives can be contacted by e-mail, phone, fax, etc. The Network Control Center has an automated e-mail customer service questionnaire that is sent to follow-up on calls.

Process Tracking

Service Platform and Infrastructure

Database / Storage

Database

EmpowHR and PPS database/storage mediums include DB2, Oracle, SQL, and IDMS.

Ad Hoc

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

Web-based reports, FOCUS reporting tool, etc.

Standardized / Canned

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

Web-based reports, FOCUS reporting tool, etc.

Extraction and Transformation

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

EmpowHR and PPS database/storage mediums include DB2, Oracle, SQL, and IDMS.

Data Recovery

Service Platform and Infrastructure

Database / Storage

Database

EmpowHR and PPS database/storage mediums include DB2, Oracle, SQL, and IDMS.

Enterprise Application Integration

Service Interface and Integration

Integration

Enterprise Application Integration

EmpowHR integrates with PPS. PPS integrates with USDA and non-USDA financial systems.

Identification and Authentication

Component Framework

Security

Certificates / Digital Signatures

PPS integrated with e-Authentication, EmpowHR e-Authentication scheduled for FY07.

Access Control

Component Framework

Security

Supporting Security Services

EmpowHR and PPS require valid User ID and Password.

Audit Trail Capture and Analysis

Service Platform and Infrastructure

Database / Storage

Database

EmpowHR and PPS database/storage mediums include DB2, Oracle, SQL, and IDMS.

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

I. F. 6. a. If "yes," please describe.   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

NFC is working closely with OPM in support of e-Payroll, e-HRI, e-Training, e-Recruitment One-stop, e-Clearance, and Retirement System Modernization (RSM). NFC is partnering with the Department of Interior's National Business Center (NBC) to provide electronic Official Personnel File (e-OPF) services.

 

 

PART II: PLANNING, ACQUISITION AND PERFORMANCE INFORMATION  

Part II should be completed only for investments identified as “Planning” or “Full-Acquisition,” or “Mixed Life-Cycle” investments in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above

 

 

 

Section A: Alternatives Analysis (All Capital Assets)  

In selecting the best capital asset, you should identify and consider at least three viable alternatives, in addition to the current baseline, i.e., the status quo. Use OMB Circular A-94 for all investments and the Clinger Cohen Act of 1996 for IT investments to determine the criteria you should use in your Benefit/Cost Analysis.

 

 

 

II. A. 1. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this project?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

II. A. 1. a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed?   

 

 

 

2004-07-01

 

 

II. A. 1. b. If "no," what is the anticipated date this analysis will be completed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. A. 1. c. If no analysis is planned, please briefly explain why:   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

II. A. 2. Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:   

 

(Character Limitations: Alternative Analyzed - 250 characters; Description of Alternative - 500 Characters)

 

 

 

Description of Alternative

Risk Lifecycle Cost Estimate

Risk Lifecycle Benefits Estimate

 

 

 

 

1

Establish Government-wide Service Centers to support multiple agencies in HR management and back office activities

1605000.000

2149000.000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. A. 3. Which alternative was selected by the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee and why was it chosen?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

OPM (managing agency) selected Option 1 - Shared Service Model. NFC was selected as an HRLOB Shared Service Center in September 2005.

 

 

II. A. 4. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

The results of the cost benefit analysis indicated the following benefits: results in a NPV of $160 million; provides a cost saving to the government by limiting the number of HR systems existing across government agencies; provides a platform for improved E-business capabilities; positions the government to move in the direction of open architecture defined by the FEA; reduces the number of legacy and redundant HR systems government-wide; fewer licensing costs; reduced operations and maintenance costs through combined services; reduced integration costs; increased focus on analytics and management instead of transaction times; better/faster decision making; reuse of hardware, software and infrastructure; and economies of scale.

 

 

II. A. 5. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

II. A. 5. a. If “yes,” are the migration costs associated with the migration to the selected alternative included in this investment, the legacy investment, or in a separate migration investment?   

 

 

 

This Investment

 

 

II. A. 5. b. Table 1. If "yes," please provide the following information:   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Section B: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)  

You should have performed a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of this investment's life-cycle, developed 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.

 

 

 

II. B. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

 

 

2007-06-30

 

 

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

 

 

 

no

 

 

II. B. 1. c. If "yes," describe any significant changes:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

Reassessed risks and updated risk management plan for FY08 investment cycle.

 

 

II. B. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. B. 2. a. If "yes," what is the planned completion date?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. B. 2. b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

II. B. 3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

NFC adjusted timeframes and costs for EmpowHR migrations to allow for risk of requirements/scope change.

 

 

Section C: Cost and Schedule Performance (All Capital Assets)  

EVM is required only on DME portions of investments. For mixed lifecycle investments, O&M milestones should still be included in the table (Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline). This table should accurately reflect the milestones in the initial baseline, as well as milestones in the current baseline.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. C. 2. a. If "yes," was it the CV or SV or both ?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. C. 2. b. If "yes," explain the causes of the variance:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

II. C. 2. c. If "yes," describe the corrective actions:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. C. 3. a. If "yes," when was it approved by the agency head?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

II. C. 4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline   

 

Complete the following table to compare actual performance against the current performance baseline and to the initial performance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, for all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline and actual completion dates (e.g., “03/23/2003”/ “04/28/2004”) and the baseline and actual total costs (in $ Millions). In the event that a milestone is not found in both the initial and current baseline, leave the associated cells blank. Note that the ‘Description of Milestone’ and ‘Percent Complete’ fields are required. Indicate ‘0’ for any milestone no longer active. (Character Limitations: Description of Milestone - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

PART III: FOR "OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE" INVESTMENTS ONLY (STEADY-STATE)  

Part III should be completed only for investments identified as "Operation and Maintenance" (Steady State) in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above.

 

 

 

Section A: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)  

You should have performed a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of this investment’s life-cycle, developed 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.

 

 

 

III. A. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

III. A. 1. c. If "yes," describe any significant changes:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

III. A. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

III. A. 2. a. If "yes," what is the planned completion date?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

III. A. 2. b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

Section B: Cost and Schedule Performance (All Capital Assets)  

 

 

III. B. 1. Was operational analysis conducted?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

III. B. 1. a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

III. B. 1. b. If "yes," what were the results?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

III. B. 1. c. If "no," please explain why it was not conducted and if there are any plans to conduct operational analysis in the future:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

III. B. 2. Complete the following table to compare actual cost performance against the planned cost performance baseline. Milestones reported may include specific individual scheduled preventative and predictable corrective maintenance activities, or may be the total of planned annual operation and maintenance efforts).  

(Character Limitations: Description of Milestone - 250 Characters)

 

 

 

III. B. 2. a. What costs are included in the reported Cost/Schedule Performance information (Government Only/Contractor Only/Both)?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

III. B. 2. b. Comparison of Planned and Actual Cost   

 

 

 

 

 

 

PART IV: Planning For "Multi-Agency Collaboration" ONLY  

Part IV should be completed only for investments identified as an E-Gov initiative, an Line of Business (LOB) Initiative, or a Multi-Agency Collaboration effort., selected the “Multi-Agency Collaboration” choice in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above. Investments identified as “Multi-Agency Collaboration” will complete only Parts I and IV of the exhibit 300.

 

 

 

Section A: Multi-Agency Collaboration Oversight (All Capital Assets)  

Multi-agency Collaborations, such as E-Gov and LOB initiatives, should develop a joint exhibit 300.

 

 

 

IV. A. 1. Stakeholder Table   

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 2. Partner Capital Assets within this Investment   

 

Provide the partnering strategies you are implementing with the participating agencies and organizations. Identify all partner agency capital assets supporting the common solution (section 300.7); Managing Partner capital assets should also be included in this joint exhibit 300. These capital assets should be included in the Summary of Spending table of Part I, Section B. All partner agency migration investments (section 53.4) should also be included in this table. Funding contributions/fee-for-service transfers should not be included in this table. (Partner Agency Asset UPIs should also appear on the Partner Agency's exhibit 53)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 3. Partner Funding Strategies ($millions)   

 

For jointly funded initiative activities, provide in the “Partner Funding Strategies Table”: the name(s) of partner agencies; the UPI of the partner agency investments; and the partner agency contributions for CY and BY. Please indicate partner contribution amounts (in-kind contributions should also be included in this amount) and fee-for-service amounts. (Partner Agency Asset UPIs should also appear on the Partner Agency's exhibit 53. For non-IT fee-for-service amounts the Partner exhibit 53 UPI can be left blank) (IT migration investments should not be included in this table)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 4. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this project?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 4. a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 4. b. If "no," what is the anticipated date this analysis will be completed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 4. c. If no analysis is planned, please briefly explain why:   

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 5. Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 6. Which alternative was selected by the Initiative Governance process and why was it chosen?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 7. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 8. Table 1. Federal Quantitative Benefits ($millions):   

 

What specific quantitative benefits will be realized (using current dollars)
Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 9. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 9. a. If "yes," are the migration costs associated with the migration to the selected alternative included in this investment, the legacy investment, or in a separate migration investment?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. A. 9. b. Table 1. If "yes," please provide the following information:   

 

 

 

 

 

 

Section B: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)  

You should have performed a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of this investment’s life-cycle, developed 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.

 

 

 

IV. B. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. B. 1. c. If "yes," describe any significant changes:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. B. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. B. 2. a. If "yes," what is the planned completion date?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. B. 2. b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

Section C: Cost and Schedule Performance (All Capital Assets)  

You should also periodically be measuring the performance of operational assets against the baseline established during the planning or full acquisition phase (i.e., operational analysis), and be properly operating and maintaining the asset to maximize its useful life. Operational analysis may identify the need to redesign or modify an asset by identifying previously undetected faults in design, construction, or installation/integration, highlighting whether actual operation and maintenance costs vary significantly from budgeted costs, or documenting that the asset is failing to meet program requirements.

EVM is required only on DME portions of investments. For mixed lifecycle investments, O&M milestones should still be included in the table (Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline). This table should accurately reflect the milestones in the initial baseline, as well as milestones in the current baseline.

Answer the following questions about the status of this investment. Include information on all appropriate capital assets supporting this investment except for assets in which the performance information is reported in a separate exhibit 300.

 

 

 

IV. C. 1. Are you using EVM to manage this investment?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 1. a. If "yes," does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard - 748?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 1. b. If "no," explain plans to implement EVM:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%? (CV% = CV/EV x 100; SV% = SV/PV x 100)   

 

NOT applicable for capital assets with ONLY O&M.

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 2. a. If "yes," was it the CV or SV or both ?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 2. b. If "yes," explain the causes of the variance:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 2. c. If "yes," describe the corrective actions:   

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

Applicable to ALL capital assets

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 3. a. If "yes," when was it approved by the agency head?   

 

Applicable to ALL capital assets

 

 

 

 

 

IV. C. 4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline   

 

Complete the following table to compare actual performance against the current performance baseline and to the initial performance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, for all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline and actual completion dates (e.g., “03/23/2003”/ “04/28/2004”) and the baseline and actual total costs (in $ Millions). In the event that a milestone is not found in both the initial and current baseline, leave the associated cells blank. Note that the ‘Description of Milestone’ and ‘Percent Complete’ fields are required. Indicate ‘0’ for any milestone no longer active.

 

 

 

 

Métier | work forward
Powered by WorkLenz
© Copyright. Métier, Ltd. 1999-2007. All rights reserved.
Patent Pending Application Numbers: 09/334,256;09/536,378;09/536,383;7,062,449;60/642,983;11/090,038
Version 5.0