Exhibit 300 FY2009

I. A. 1. Date of Submission:
2007-08-17

I. A. 2. Agency:
018

I. A. 3. Bureau:
45

I. A. 4. Name of this Capital Asset:
(short text - 250 characters)
Student Aid Internet Gateway (SAIG)

I. A. 5. Unique Project (Investment) Identifier:
For IT investment only, see section 53. For all other, use agency ID system.
018-45-01-07-01-1070-00

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.
Operations and Maintenance

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)
The U.S. Department of Education (ED), FSA is responsible for managing and administering student financial assistance programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended. In 2001, to reduce costs of delivering student financial aid, FSA management decided to move data transmissions in support of these programs from a proprietary network to Internet transmissions. The resulting SAIG Portal provides this telecommunications support and facilitates data transmission between FSA?s customers and the various Title IV Application Systems. SAIG is a store and forward mailbox application used by FSA?s customers (post-secondary schools, lenders, guaranty agencies, state agencies, and other electronic trading partners) for sending and receiving Privacy Act data to the Title IV application systems. There are currently 7,000+ customers participating in SAIG. Customers transmit data using their local Internet Service Provider (ISP) to reduce transmission costs to FSA. The Commercial off the Shelf (COTS) products that support the customers? transmissions were developed by the commercial vendor ClickCommerce. The software products include Easy Access (client), Secure Remote (mailbox application), and Online Secure Manager (web-based online query status of transmissions). SAIG is currently hosted at FSA?s Virtual Data Center (VDC) in Meriden, CT operated by the vendor Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC).

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

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

I. A. 11. Contact information of Project Manager

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

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. 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 1

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

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. 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

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 and Spending Prior to 2007 PY 2007 CY 2008 BY 2009 BY+1 2010 BY+2 2011 BY+3 2012 BY+4 2013 and Beyond Planning 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000         Acquisition 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000         Subtotal Planning & Acquisition                 Operations & Maintenance 3.695 1.263 1.330 2.000         Total                 Government FTE Costs 0.321 0.120 0.127 0.134         Number of FTE represented by cost 1 1 1 1

I. B. 2. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's?
no

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)

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)

Type of Contract/Task Order Has the contract been awarded? If so what is the date of the award? If not, what is the planned award date? Start date of Contract/Task Order End date of Contract/Task Order Total Value of Contract/Task Order ($M) Is this an Interagency Acquisition? Is it performance based? Competitively awarded? What, if any, alternative financing option is being used? Is EVM in the contract? Does the contract include the required security & privacy clauses? Name of CO CO Contact Information (phone/email) Contracting officer certification level If N/A, has the agency determined the CO assigned has the competencies and skills necessary to support this aquistion?

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

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 2007 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Average score for survey results (range is 0 to 5) 3.0 4.0 01/2007 2007 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Processes and Activities Costs         2007 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Technology Availability Availability: SAIG mailbox daily uptime expressed as a percentage 99.7% 99.7% 06/2007 2007 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Percentage of partners using SAIG for electronic access for data exchange 100% 100% 06/2007 2008 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Percentage of partners using SAIG for electronic access for data exchange 100% 100% 06/2008 2008 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Average score for survey results (range is 0 to 5) 3.0 4.0 01/2008 2008 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Processes and Activities Costs         2008 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Technology Availability Availability: SAIG mailbox daily uptime expressed as a percentage 99.7% 99.7% 06/2008 2009 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Percentage of partners using SAIG for electronic access for data exchange 100% TBD TBD 2009 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Average score for survey results (range is 0 to 5) 3.0 TBD TBD 2009 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Processes and Activities Costs         2009 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Technology Availability Availability: SAIG mailbox daily uptime expressed as a percentage 99.7% TBD TBD 2006 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc.v Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Percentage of partners using SAIG for electronic access for data exchange 100% 100% 100% 2006 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Average score for survey results (range is 0 to 5) 3.0 4.0 4.63 2006 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Processes and Activities Costs         2006 Goal 3: Ensure the accessibility, affordability, and accountability of higher education... etc. Technology Availability Availability: SAIG mailbox daily uptime expressed as a percentage 99.7% 99.7% 99.7%

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. 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:

Agency/or Contractor Operated System Planned Operational Date Date of Planned C & A update (for existing mixed life cycle systems) or Planned Completion Date (for new systems)

I. E. 4. Operational Systems - Security:

Agency/or contractor Operated System? NIST FIPS 199 Risk Impact level (High, Moderate, Low) Has C & A been Completed, using NIST 800-37? (Y/N) Date Completed: C & A What standards were used for the Security Controls tests? (FIPS 200/NIST 800-53, Other, N/A) Date Completed: Security Control Testing Date the contingency plan tested

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

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.

(b) Is this a new system? (Y/N) (c) Is there a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) that covers this system? (Y/N) (d) Internet Link or Explanation (e) Is a System of Records Notice (SORN) required for this system? (Y/N) (f) Internet Link or Explanation

I. F. 1. Is this investment included in your agency's target enterprise architecture?
no

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

I. F. 3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture?
no

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) FSA SAIG Reporting To support Adhoc reports to end user for data analysis Reporting Ad Hoc     No Reuse 3 FSA SAIG Customer Assistance To support endusers on-line help to assist in program utilization. Customer Initiated Assistance Online Help     No Reuse 2 FSA SAIG Document Management To provide cohesive data to access program data Document Management Indexing     No Reuse 15 FSA SAIG Workflow Management To provide a standard process to rec and send data access. Tracking and Workflow Process Tracking     No Reuse 10 FSA SAIG Library / Storage To provide library storage, and respository for access data. Document Management Library / Storage     No Reuse 40 FSA SAIG Data Management To support Federal Student Aid access to rec and send data. Data Management Data Exchange     No Reuse 30

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) Library / Storage Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications Hewlett-Packard Company, Object COBOL/UX Developer Bundle for HPUX 11.0 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Storage Hewlett-Packard Company, MirrorDisk/UX Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, GlancePlus/UX Pak for s800 11.00 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, C/ANSI C Developer's Bundle for HP-UX 11.00 (S800) Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, aC++ Compiler (S800) Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, Special Edition HP-UX Unlimited-User Lic Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, OnLineJFS (Advanced VxFS) Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, MC / Service Guard Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, PerfView Analyzer for s800 11.00 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX Development Kit for Java* Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX Installation Utilities (Ignite-UX) Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, Cluster Object Manager Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, Java 2 SDK 1.3 for HP-UX (700/800), PA1.1 + PA2.0 Add On Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, Java 2 RTE 1.3 for HP-UX (700/800), PA1.1 + PA2.0 Add On Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, English HP-UX 64-bit Runtime Environment Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX Installation Utilities for Installing 11.00 Systems Library / Storage Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications Hewlett-Packard Company, PCI RS-232 MUX Software Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX 11.0 Support Tools Bundle, Jun 2001 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX General Release Patches, March 2001 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX Hardware Enablement and Critical Patches, September 2001 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Perl Programming Language Library / Storage Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware IBM Corporation, MQSeries for HP-UX Library / Storage Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware IBM Corporation, MQSeries Update (U474386) for HP-UX Library / Storage Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware IBM Corporation, MQSeries Update (U474837) for HP-UX Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Servers / Computers Hewlett-Packard Company, Proliant DL380 Process Tracking Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDNgine v2.6.8 Library / Storage Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDNgine v2.6.8 Indexing Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDNgine v2.6.8 Ad Hoc Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDNgine v2.6.8 Personalization Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDNgine v2.6.8 Online Help Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDNgine v2.6.8 Library / Storage Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDManager v5.0.0020 Library / Storage Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDConnector API v1.2 Online Help Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDCommunityManager v2.5.8 Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDClient v2.2.020 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on OS/390 MVS/ESA 2.6+ (with LE/370 1.9)) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.50 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on OS/390 MVS/ESA 2.6+ (with LE/370 1.9)) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.46 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on OS/390 MVS/ESA 2.6+ (with LE/370 1.9)) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDClient v2.2.023 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on OS/400 4.2 and above (Compiler Level 3.7)) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDClient v2.2.0263 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on OS/400 4.2 and above (Compiler Level 3.7)) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.48 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on OS/400 4.2 and above (Compiler Level 3.7)) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDClient v2.2.023.1 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on AIX 4.2 and above) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.50 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on AIX 4.2 and above) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.54 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on Digital Equipment Corporation's (DEC) Unix 4.0) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.50 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on Digital Equipment Corporation's (DEC) OpenVMS 7.1) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDClient v2.2.023 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on HP UX 10.01 and above)l Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.46 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on HP UX 10.01 and above) Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications ClickCommerce Incorporated, TDClient v2.2.023.1 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on Sun Solaris 2.6, and above, on SPARC (i.e. not Intel)) Data Exchange Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database ClickCommerce Incorporated, EAClient v1.46 (provided by this investment, supports application systems running on Sun Solaris 2.6, and above, on SPARC (i.e. not Intel))

I. F. 6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?
no

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

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 Baseline Status Quo NaN NaN

II. A. 3. Which alternative was selected by the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee and why was it chosen?
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. A. 4. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?
(long text - 2500 characters)

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

UPI if available Date of the System Retirement

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

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

II. B. 3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:
(long text - 2500 characters)

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

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)

Initial Baseline - Planned Completion Date Initial Baseline - Total Cost Current Baseline - Planned Completion Date Current Baseline - Actual Completion Date Current Baseline - Planned Total Cost Current Baseline - Actual Total Cost Current Baseline Variance - Schedule Current Baseline Variance - Cost Percent Complete

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

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

III. B. 1. Was operational analysis conducted?
no

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)

Planned Completion Date Planned Total Cost Actual Completion Date Actual Total Cost Variance - Schedule Variance - Cost FY2002 - Maintenance             FY2003- Maintenance             FY2004-Maintenance             FY2005 - Maintenance             FY2005 - Software License Fee             FY2005 - System Administration             Oracle Upgrade             FY2006 - Maintenance             FY2006 - Software License Fee             FY2006 - System Administration             FY2007 - Maintenance             FY2007 - Software License Fee             FY2007- System Administration             FY2008 - Maintenance             FY2008 - Software License Fee             FY2008- System Administration             FY2009 - Maintenance             FY2009 - Software License Fee             FY2009- System Administration

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.

Joint exhibit approval date

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)

Partner Agency Asset Title Partner Agency Exhibit 53 UPI

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)

Partner Exhibit 53 UPI CY Contribution CY Fee-for-Service BY Contribution BY Fee-for-Service     NaN NaN NaN NaN

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

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

Description of Alternative Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Costs estimate Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Benefits estimate Baseline Status Quo NaN NaN

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:

Budgeted Cost Savings Cost Avoidance Justification for Budgeted Cost Savings Justification for Cost Avoidance   NaN NaN

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

UPI if available Date of the System Retirement

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

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

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

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

Initial Baseline - Planned Completion Date Initial Baseline - Total Cost Current Baseline - Planned Completion Date Current Baseline - Actual Completion Date Current Baseline - Planned Total Cost Current Baseline - Actual Total Cost Current Baseline Variance - Schedule Current Baseline Variance - Cost Percent Complete Agency responsible for activity                   NaN