Exhibit 300 (BY2009) for National Institute of Health (NIH) CIT Central Accounting System (CAS)

1. Date of Submission:

2008-02-04

2. Agency:

009

3. Bureau:

25

4. Name of this Capital Asset:

NIH CIT Central Accounting System (CAS)

5. Unique Project Identifier:

009-25-01-01-01-3101-00

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

Operations and Maintenance

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

FY2001 or earlier

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.

The CAS, which was developed in 1978, was reviewed by the NIH and a decision was made to migrate its functionality to the NIH Business System (NBS), a component of the HHS Uniform Financial Management System (UFMS). The CAS is a critical component in the operations of the NBS since it continues to process transactions from the Administrative Data Base (ADB), Central Payroll, Payment Management System (PMS), and Information for Management, Planning, Analysis and Coordination (IMPAC)/eRA. The NBS is a component of the HHS UFMS project which will consolidate many administrative legacy systems within HHS, and improve the financial management of HHS. Please refer to NBS project # 009-25-01-01-01-4601. The CAS project resides in the Division of Enterprise and Custom Applications, Center for Information Technology, NIH. The CAS is a legacy system project that almost thirty years old, and processes accounting and financial transactions for the NIH. It processes data from the ADB, Central Payroll, PMS, IMPAC/eRA. The CAS provides data exchange to the ADB, PMS and IMPAC. Data is extracted from the CAS nightly and made available to the NIH through the NIH Data Warehouse. In the past, the CAS produced a wide range of reports that detail spending within the Agency. These reports are now being generated by the NBS since NBS is now the financial system of record. In addition, financial reports previously generated for the Department of Health and Human Services, the Treasury Department, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Public Health Service are also now being generated by the NBS. The NIH Business System (NBS) will eventually totally replace the CAS. The number of financial transactions being processed by the CAS continues to diminish as modules within the NBS are being deployed. The CAS project has been extended to allow for completion of the NIH NBS. If the CAS is not funded, the NIH will not have an automated means of processing the accounting and financial transactions still originating from the ADB, Payroll, PMS, and IMPAC/eRA systems.

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

yes

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

2007-06-26

10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit?

yes

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

Senior/Expert-level

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

no

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

yes

12.b. Is this investment for new construction or major retrofit of a Federal building or facility? (answer applicable to non-IT assets only)

no

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

yes

If yes, select the initiatives that apply:

Initiative Name
Financial Performance

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

The CAS is a key element in implementing the initiative of improving financial performance because it efficiently integrates data from the legacy ADB system, PMS, Payroll, and eRA with the NBS and continued operation of this system is essential to the ongoing operations of the NBS which is a component of the HHS UFMS project which will consolidate many administrative legacy systems within HHS, and improve the financial management of HHS.

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

no

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

no

15. Is this investment for information technology?

yes

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

Level 2

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

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

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

no

19. Is this a financial management system?

yes

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

yes

19.a.1. If yes, which compliance area:

Supports Federal Accounting Standards

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 A11 section 52.

The NIH Central Accounting System (CAS)

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

Area	Percentage
Hardware	0
Software	0
Services	73
Other	27

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

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

Name	Karen Pla
Phone Number	301-402-6201
Title	NIH Privacy Act Officer
Email	plak@mail.nih.gov

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

yes

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

no

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

All amounts represent Budget Authority

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

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

Cost Type	Py-1 & Earlier -2006	PY 2007	CY 2008	BY 2009
Planning Budgetary Resources	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
Acquisition Budgetary Resources	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
Maintenance Budgetary Resources	7.290	0.530	0.281	0.281
Government FTE Cost	0.790	0.220	0.229	0.229
# of FTEs	4	2	2	2

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

no

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

Changed to reflect budget submission for 2008 and 2009 and reflect change in FTEs

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

Row	Fiscal Year	Strategic Goal Supported	Measurement Area	Measurement Grouping	Measurement Indicator	Baseline	Planned Improvement to the Baseline	Actual Results
1	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	99.99%
3	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Reliability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	99.99%	99.5%	99.99%
4	2006	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	.002	.005	.002
5	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	0.0
6	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	99.99
7	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Reliability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	99.99%	99.5%	99.99
8	2007	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	.002	.005	.002
9	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	TBD
10	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
11	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Reliability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
12	2008	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	.002	.005	TBD
13	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	TBD
14	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
15	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Reliability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
16	2009	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	.002	.005	TBD
17	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	TBD
18	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
19	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Availability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	.002	.005	TBD
20	2010	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
21	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	TBD
22	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
23	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Availability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	.002	.005	TBD
24	2011	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
25	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Mission and Business Results	System Maintenance	Variance of cost from Plan	0.00	0.00	TBD
26	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Customer Results	Availability	Percentage of time that System is available to users during the 12 hour daily schedule	99.99%	99.5%	TBD
27	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Technology	Availability	Percentage of time that processing occurs smoothly	.002	.005	TBD
28	2012	Effective Management of Human Capital/Information Technology/Resources	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of errors reported	99.99%	99.5%	TBD

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

yes

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

yes

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

NIH CIT Central Accounting System (CAS)

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

no

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

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

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

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

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

Row	Agency Component Name	Agency Component Description	Service Type	Component	Reused Component Name	Reused UPI	Internal or External Reuse?	Funding %
1	Access Control	Access Control - Support the management of permissions for logging onto a computer, application, service, or network; includes user management and role/privilege management.	Systems Management	Access Control			No Reuse	2
2	Activity-Based Management	Defines the set of capabilities that support a defined, specific set of finance-related tasks for a given objective.	Financial Management	Activity-Based Management			No Reuse	3
3	Ad Hoc	Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of dynamic reports on an as needed basis.	Reporting	Ad Hoc			No Reuse	3
4	Auditing	Defines the set of capabilities that support the examination and verification of records for accuracy.	Financial Management	Auditing			No Reuse	10
5	Billing and Accounting	Defines the set of capabilities that support the charging, collection and reporting of an organization's accounts.	Financial Management	Billing and Accounting			No Reuse	50
6	Decision Support and Planning	Defines the set of capabilities that support the analyze information and predict the impact of decisions before they are made.	Business Intelligence	Decision Support and Planning			No Reuse	10
7	Payment / Settlement	Defines the set of capabilities that support the process of accounts payable.	Financial Management	Payment / Settlement			No Reuse	21
8	Standardized / Canned	Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of pre-conceived or pre-written reports.	Reporting	Standardized / Canned			No Reuse	1

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

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

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

Row	SRM Component	>Service Area	Service Category	Service Standard	Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name)
1	Access Control	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Authentication / Single Sign-on	RACF
2	Activity-Based Management	Component Framework	Presentation / Interface	Static Display	QWS3270 - IBM
3	Ad Hoc	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Database	IMS - IBM
4	Ad Hoc	Service Interface and Integration	Interface	Service Description / Interface	MAINFRAME - IBM
5	Auditing	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Software Engineering	Software Configuration Management	COBOL - IBM
6	Billing and Accounting	Component Framework	Business Logic	Platform Dependent	COBOL - IBM
7	Decision Support and Planning	Service Access and Delivery	Service Transport	Supporting Network Services	Cisco
8	Payment / Settlement	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Other Electronic Channels	Cisco
9	Payment / Settlement	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Intranet	IE - Microsoft
10	Standardized / Canned	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Hardware / Infrastructure	Servers / Computers	OS390 - IBM

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

yes

6.a. If yes, please describe.

This investment leverages: Budget Formulation and Execution Line of Business, Financial Management Line of Business.

1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

yes

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

2007-06-22

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

no

1. Was operational analysis conducted?

yes

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

2008-01-25

What were the results of your operational analysis?

The CAS is fully operational and operates well within the budgeted costs. The CAS is a batch system and the percentage of daily errors is within .02%. There is no customer interaction with the CAS and as a result, there were no customer satisfaction surveys conducted. Due to some audit concerns and gaps in meeting the business mission, the CAS is being replaced by the NBS.