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:   

 

 

 

49

 

 

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

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

Geographic Information System 0084

 

 

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

 

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

 

 

005-49-01-51-01-0084-00

 

 

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?   

 

 

 

FY2001 or earlier

 

 

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 investment provides a technological solution for geo-spatial data management and a data and imagery acquisition solution that enables more efficient collection and manipulation of information. The program eliminates data redundancy by collaborating with partner agencies in the data management processes of collection, verification, distribution and use by federal, state and local entities. Program capabilities include the assembly, storage, transfer, manipulation, and display of geo-spatial data. The GIS program promotes efficiency and cost-savings in government operations and also in agricultural benefits administration. The GIS program consists of the four main elements: data development and acquisition, hardware and software acquisition, custom software development, and training. FSA depends heavily on the GIS program element of data development and acquisition to administer its agricultural programs. This element not only includes actual data, but it also consists of the development of a large number of computerized maps such as soil survey, NAIP imagery, common land unit (CLU), and others that are used both internal to USDA and are available to the wide range of customers via data centers and data warehouses. Data development and acquisition is the greatest cost to the GIS program. The hardware and software acquisition element of the GIS program is part of the USDA Common Computing Environment (CCE). Hardware acquisition includes items such as workstations, servers, printers, plotters and GPS devices. Along with other USDA agencies, FSA utilizes ESRI software purchased through the SmartBuy program. These tools must be customized to meet FSA business needs. The FSA develops software for business processes involved in Farm Records maintenance, Land Use reporting, Compliance, Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and other business activities. Software is also being customized to interface with FSA program databases, and to integrate map work with reengineered business applications. FSA plans to incorporate those portions of the Modernize and Innovate the Delivery of Agricultural Systems (MIDAS) investment, relating to GIS activities, which will transform FSA’s delivery of farm program benefits, on behalf of the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), into a 21st century business model. This project will provide the capability to meet the increasing demand for customer self service and eliminate FSA’s reliance on aging technology.

 

 

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)

 

 

James Heald

 

 

Phone Number   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

202-720-0787

 

 

E-mail   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

jim.heald@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:   

 

 

 

Expanded E-Government

 

 

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)

 

 

GIS directly supports the PMA goal of Expanded Electronic Government by involvement with two G-2-G Initiatives: 1) Geospatial One-Stop and 2) Disaster Management. These initiatives aim to leverage geographical information for increased efficiency.

 

 

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)?   

 

 

 

no

 

 

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

 

 

 

no

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

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)

 

 

 

 

 

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   

 

 

 

22

 

 

I. A. 20. b. Software   

 

 

 

4

 

 

I. A. 20. c. Services   

 

 

 

74

 

 

I. A. 20. d. Other   

 

 

 

0

 

 

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?   

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

 

I. A. 22. a. Name   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

Norma Ferguson

 

 

I. A. 22. b. Phone Number   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

202-720-5534

 

 

I. A. 22. c. Title   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

FSA Privacy Act Officer

 

 

I. A. 22. d. E-mail   

 

(short text - 250 characters)

 

 

norma.ferguson@wdc.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

5.748

0

2.179

1.859

 

 

 

 

 

Subtotal Planning & Acquisition

5.748

0

2.179

1.859

 

 

 

 

 

Operations & Maintenance

77.763

34.899

12.996

28.450

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL

83.511

34.899

15.175

30.309

 

 

 

 

 

Government FTE Costs

3.574

0.733

0.750

0.877

 

 

 

 

 

Number of FTE represented by cost

21

7

7

8

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

no

 

 

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

 

(medium text - 500 characters)

 

 

 

 

 

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)

 

 

The additional $12m from the MIDAS program will not result in any material scope changes. However, it will continue to support ongoing GIS efforts, current target measures, and planned milestones. $12m from the MIDAS program changes the percentage breakout for the total FY2009 funding request. As it stands, Hardware accounts for 22%, Software for 4%, and Services account for 74%.

 

 

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

2006

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mission and Business Results

Agricultural Innovation and Services

% of CRP signup bids processed using GIS

50%

20%

65%

2006

Strategic Goal 2: Enhance the Competitiveness and Sutainability of rural and Farm Economies_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Customer Results

New Customers and Market Penetration

% of offices where GIS acreage reports are collected and GIS compliance is conducted

5%

25%

10% of offices. Program Management limited the extent of the pilot.

2006

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Processes and Activities

Compliance

% of projects conforming to Agency System Development Lifecycle Processes

25%

25%

75%

2006

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Technology

User Satisfaction

% of end-users of the application or system who report they are satisfied with the application or system. User surveys and focus groups will be used to determine satisfaction levels.

50%

20%

Results not achieved. User satisfaction will be baselined in 2007.

2007

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mission and Business Results

Agricultural Innovation and Services

% of CRP signup bids processed using GIS

70%

15%

Program sponsor changed policy. No longer integrated with GIS.

2007

Strategic Goal 2: Enhance the Competitiveness and Sutainability of rural and Farm Economies______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Customer Results

New Customers and Market Penetration

% of offices where GIS acreage reports are collected and GIS compliance is conducted

30%

30%

No change

2007

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Processes and Activities

Compliance

% of projects conforming to Agency System Development Lifecycle Processes

75%

15%

100%

2007

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Technology

User Satisfaction

% of end-users of the application or system who report they are satisfied with the application or system. User surveys and focus groups will be used to determine satisfaction levels

70%

15%

Rebaselined based on enhancements from Customer Satisfaction Survey. Actual Results = 74%

2008

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mission and Business Results

Agricultural Innovation and Services

% of CRP signup bids processed using GIS

85%

5%

Program sponsor changed policy. No longer integrated with GIS.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2008

Strategic Goal 2: Enhance the Competitiveness and Sutainability of rural and Farm Economies_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Customer Results

New Customers and Market Penetration

% of offices where GIS acreage reports are collected and GIS compliance is conducted

60%

30%

To be reported in 2008

2008

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Processes and Activities

Compliance

% of projects conforming to Agency System Development Lifecycle Processes

90%

5%

To be reported in 2008

2008

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Technology

User Satisfaction

% of end-users of the application or system who report they are satisfied with the application or system. User surveys and focus groups will be used to determine satisfaction levels.

74%

3%

To be reported in 2008

2009

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mission and Business Results

Agricultural Innovation and Services

% of CRP signup bids processed using GIS

90%

5%

Program sponsor changed policy. No longer integrated with GIS.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2009

Strategic Goal 2: Enhance the Competitiveness and Sutainability of rural and Farm Economies_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Customer Results

New Customers and Market Penetration

% of offices where GIS acreage reports are collected and GIS compliance is conducted

90%

5%

To be reported in 2009

2009

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Processes and Activities

Compliance

% of projects conforming to Agency System Development Lifecycle Processes

95%

5%

To be reported in 2009

2009

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Technology

User Satisfaction

% of end-users of the application or system who report they are satisfied with the application or system. User surveys and focus groups will be used to determine satisfaction levels.

77%

3%

To be reported in 2009

2010

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mission and Business Results

Agricultural Innovation and Services

% of CRP signup bids processed using GIS

95%

5%

Program sponsor changed policy. No longer integrated with GIS.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2010

Strategic Goal 2: Enhance the Competitiveness and Sutainability of rural and Farm Economies_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Customer Results

New Customers and Market Penetration

% of offices where GIS acreage reports are collected and GIS compliance is conducted

95%

5%

To be reported in 2010

2010

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Processes and Activities

Compliance

% of projects conforming to Agency System Development Lifecycle Processes

98%

3%

To be reported in 2010

2010

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Technology

User Satisfaction

% of end-users of the application or system who report they are satisfied with the application or system. User surveys and focus groups will be used to determine satisfaction levels.

80%

5%

To be reported in 2010

2011

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mission and Business Results

Agricultural Innovation and Services

% of CRP signup bids processed using GIS

98%

3%

Program sponsor changed policy. No longer integrated with GIS.____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2011

Strategic Goal 2: Enhance the Competitiveness and Sutainability of rural and Farm Economies_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Customer Results

New Customers and Market Penetration

% of offices where GIS acreage reports are collected and GIS compliance is conducted

98%

3%

To be reported in 2011

2011

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Processes and Activities

Compliance

% of projects conforming to Agency System Development Lifecycle Processes

99%

1%

To be reported in 2011

2011

Strategic Goal 3: Support Increased Economic Opportunities and Improved Quality of Life in Rural America__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Technology

User Satisfaction

% of end-users of the application or system who report they are satisfied with the application or system. User surveys and focus groups will be used to determine satisfaction levels.

85%

5%

To be reported in 2011

 

 

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?   

 

 

 

 

 

 

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?   

 

 

 

no

 

 

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)

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

A segment architecture had not begun when this exhibit 300 was being drafted. However, it is expected that it will be part of the agency's EA Transition Strategy for FY 2010.

 

 

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)

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Geospatial Applications

Knowledge Management

Information Sharing

 

 

No Reuse

9

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Reporting components of Geospatial Applications such as the Land Use Report

Reporting

Ad Hoc

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Disaster Analysis, Program Eligibility and other Program Performance Analysis

Business Intelligence

Decision Support and Planning

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Disaster Analysis, Program Performance Analysis to respond to Congressional inquiries

Business Intelligence

Decision Support and Planning

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Customer Access Applications

Development and Integration

Data Integration

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Service Center Certification of CLU data

Development and Integration

Data Integration

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Assignment of FSA Program Codes to Geospatial Data

Knowledge Management

Information Mapping / Taxonomy

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Integration of GIS Applications with Existing System 36 legacy applications

Development and Integration

Legacy Integration

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Integration of Geospatial and Tabular Business records

Development and Integration

Data Integration

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Development of Custom GIS Applications to Support FSA Business Functions

Development and Integration

Data Integration

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

FSA's Modernization Effort

Management of Processes

Business Rule Management

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Generic Query capability supports all GIS business applications

Reporting

Standardized / Canned

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Eligibility Determinations based on land classification

Business Intelligence

Demand Forecasting / Mgmt

 

 

No Reuse

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Geospatial Data Warehouse

Data Management

Data Warehouse

Data Warehouse

005-49-01-51-01-0084-00

Internal

7

USDA Data and Digital Asset Services

Geospatial One Stop

Data Management

Data Warehouse

Data Warehouse

005-49-01-51-01-0084-00

External

7

 

 

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)

Information Sharing

Service Interface and Integration

Interface

Service Discovery

ESRI - ArcGIS

Ad Hoc

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

ESRI - ArcGIS

Decision Support and Planning

Service Interface and Integration

Interface

Service Description / Interface

ESRI - Disaster Tool

Decision Support and Planning

Service Access and Delivery

Service Requirements

Legislative / Compliance

ESRI - Disaster Tool

Data Integration

Service Access and Delivery

Service Requirements

Hosting

System 36

Data Integration

Service Access and Delivery

Service Transport

Supporting Network Services

ESRI - ArcGIS Maintenance Tool

Information Mapping / Taxonomy

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

ESRI - ArcGIS

Legacy Integration

Service Platform and Infrastructure

Support Platforms

Platform Dependent

ESRI - ArcGIS Land Use Tool

Data Integration

Service Interface and Integration

Integration

Enterprise Application Integration

ESRI - ArcGIS

Data Integration

Service Interface and Integration

Interoperability

Data Transformation

ArcObjects

Business Rule Management

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

No tools being used at this time

Standardized / Canned

Service Interface and Integration

Interoperability

Data Types / Validation

ESRI - ArcGIS

Demand Forecasting / Mgmt

Component Framework

Data Management

Reporting and Analysis

ESRI - ArcGIS

Data Warehouse

Service Platform and Infrastructure

Database / Storage

Storage

Internet Explorer

Data Warehouse

Service Access and Delivery

Delivery Channels

Internet

Internet Explorer

 

 

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)

 

 

This application intends to make use of e-Authentication services being developed by USDA.

 

 

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?   

 

 

 

2007-09-28

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

Alternative 1: Centralized/Integrated Environment (Aerial Photography)

This alternative consists of a technology architecture that is supported by centralized/integrated environment that is web technology intensive. Imagery would be acquired through the use of aerial photography.

$401,113,343.000

$47,070,415.000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

Alternative 1: Centralized/Integrated Environment(Aerial Photography) because 1) It provides labor cost aviodance related to GIS activities; 2) the imagery acquisition process is the most cost effective and has the lowest risk by using NAIP, meeting FSA requirements; 3) the financial metrics are favorable - the ROI is 0.64:1 and offers an average net benefit of $4,707,041 per fiscal year over a ten year lifecycle.

 

 

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

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

The results from the analysis indicate that by implementing Alternative 1 for the GIS program, a centralized/integrated environment will greatly reduce the redundancy, labor, and cost related with accessing information, integrating multiple data sources, performing complex analyses, and presenting information in map form. Producers will benefit from a centralized environment by reducing the time it takes to locate certain data, and by trusting its accuracy. A centralized environment will also eliminate duplicative reporting, by sharing the data that is being uploaded into the system. Another benefit to Alternative 1 is the use of aerial photography which is proven to meet FSA requirements, for timing, resolution, and cost effectiveness. Aerial imagery is not licensed, and therefore FSA can share the images as it desires, which is an important mission for the agency. This imagery acquisition process also enables delivery of images to APFO in a timely manner, between 2-3 months from the date of acquisition.

 

 

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:   

 

 

 

 

UPI if available

Date of the System Retirement

Geographic Information Systems Inv. #84

005-49-01-51-01-0084-00

2011-09-30

 

 

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?   

 

 

 

2007-09-28

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

(long text - 2500 characters)

 

 

The GIS program improved on the risk assessment conducted in 2004. The current Risk Management Plan shows a score of 16.33 or "LOW" based on the principles from the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

 

 

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

 

 

 

yes

 

 

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

 

 

 

2007-09-30

 

 

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)

 

 

To appropriately compute risk-adjusted lifecycle cost and benefit estimates for the GIS solution, risks were analyzed in the following manner. Information technology and overall program risks were assessed and categorized into five areas: financial risk, technical risk, operational risk, legal and contractual risk, and organizational risk. (For example, technical risks related to satellite imagery acquisition were considered. Primarily because it is not clear that the existing satellite industry solutions could provide 100% coverage for the country within the required time limits.) Following the risk assessment, a risk factor was applied to account for probability and impact of the identified risks and was applied to each of the alternatives. This resulted in the application of the following risk factors to the baseline and alternatives: Baseline - 15.1% cost increase; Alternative 1- 6.7% cost increase; Alternative 2 - 11.9% cost increase; Alternative 3 - 8.3% cost increase. A detailed description of the lifecycle costs for the alternatives can be found in section 4.8 of the "GIS Cost Benefit Analysis: September 2007" document attached.

 

 

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