Exhibit 300 (BY2009) for HRSA - BHPr National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB)/Healthcare Integrity and Protection Data Bank (HIPDB)

1. Date of Submission:

2008-02-04

2. Agency:

009

3. Bureau:

15

4. Name of this Capital Asset:

HRSA - BHPr National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB)/Healthcare Integrity and Protection Data Bank (HIPDB)

5. Unique Project Identifier:

009-15-01-02-01-1010-00

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

Mixed Life Cycle

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

FY2004

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 NPDB was designed to protect public health by providing vital information that restricts the ability of incompetent health care practitioners from moving State to State without discovery of previous substandard performance or unprofessional conduct. The NPDB discloses to eligible entities information on medical malpractice payments, adverse clinical privileges and licensure and other adverse actions taken against physicians and dentists by State licensing authorities, hospitals and professional societies. The HIPDB was designed to reduce healthcare fraud & abuse by collecting and disclosing to authorized entities information on health care related civil judgments and criminal convictions, adverse licensure and certification actions, exclusions from health care programs, and other adjudicated actions taken against health care providers, suppliers and practitioners. Both Data Banks must recover all costs through the collection of user fees. Under the current Firm-Fixed Price and Time and Material (T&M) contract, the NPDB-HIPDB system is continuously enhanced to meet legislative and Government initiatives that reasonably fit the architecture; including expanding the database to include additional data elements and/or add new reports and client categories and functional enhancements. As a result of the small percentage of enhancements, and the vast amount of operations & maintenance that are integrated throughout the current NPDB-HIPDB, this program is considered a mixed life-cycle. Therefore, the NPDB-HIPDB IT investment consists of a combination of Development-Modernization-Enhancement (DME) and steady-state (SS) processes. Agency performance gaps don't exist within the NPDB-HIPDB investment because of applied managed processes and periodic reviews ensure that the NPDB-HIPDB operates on track and within budget. Established performance metrics also help ensure that the contractor is motivated to stay within budget and deliver top results. As a result, system users receive higher performance, greater quality and responsiveness.

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.

yes

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

yes

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

yes

If yes, select the initiatives that apply:

Initiative Name
Expanded E-Government

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?)

This investment directly supports the PMA through the expansion/improvemen t of E-Government. It is considered a HRSA critical applications initiative that meets statutory requirements, & is needed to provide for the health & safety of workers & the public. The primary objective of the information is to improve the quality of health care by promoting patient safety & improving patient protection and promote access to, & appropriate use of, health care information on individuals & organizations.

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

yes

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

yes

14.b. If yes, what is the name of the PARTed program?

2006: HRSA - National Practitioner/Health Integrity Data Banks

14.c. If yes, what rating did the PART receive?

Moderately Effective

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?

no

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

no

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

N/A.

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

N/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 A11 section 52.

N/A.

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

Area	Percentage
Hardware	4
Software	0
Services	71
Other	25

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

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

Name	Caroline Lewis
Phone Number	(301) 443-3312
Title	Director, Division of Policy Review and Coordination
Email	clewis@hrsa.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?

yes

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	18.250	4.565	2.732	2.830
Acquisition Budgetary Resources	0.000	0.000	0.000	0.000
Maintenance Budgetary Resources	54.750	14.018	12.240	11.600
Government FTE Cost	11.472	3.880	3.880	3.700
# of FTEs	62	31	31	31

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

no

2.a. If "yes," how many and in what year?

N/A

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

No change.

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	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Collections and Receivables	Dollar amount of unreconciled query fee deposits	$31,728	Reduce unreconciled deposits to zero	$0.00
2	2006	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Complaints	Ratio of number of complaints by queriers and reporters to Customer Service Center to number of reports and queries processed.	0.5%	Reduce complaint ratio to 0.25%	0 .00001%
3	2006	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Cycle Time	Time between query and response	4 hours	Less than 2 hours	average time is 55 minutes
4	2006	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Number of hours of non-planned down-time	52 for the year	0	2.1 hours (127 minutes)
5	2007	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	20,457,339	Increase by 3%	18,947,985
6	2007	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	.4 hours
7	2007	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	.0004%
8	2007	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	99.9%
9	2008	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	21,071,059	Increase by 3%	TBD
10	2008	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	TBD
11	2008	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	TBD
12	2008	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	TBD
13	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	21,703,190	Increase by 3%	TBD
14	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	TBD
15	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	TBD
16	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	TBD
17	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	22,354,285	Increase by 3%	TBD
18	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	TBD
19	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	TBD
20	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	TBD
21	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	23,024,913	Increase by 3%	TBD
22	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	TBD
23	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	TBD
24	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	TBD
25	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	23,715,660	Increase by 3%	TBD
26	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	TBD
27	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	TBD
28	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	TBD
29	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	User Fee Collection	Amount of user fees collected	24,427,129	Increase by 3%	TBD
30	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Response Time	Average time for electronic report processing with notification back to user	3.5 hours	2.5 hours	TBD
31	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Errors	Percentage of erroneous disclosure information about individuals	between .015% and .01%	less than .005%	TBD
32	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Availability	Percentage of available time of accessible and functioning web site	between 94% and 98%	more than 99%	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.

HRSA National Practitioner Data Bank/Healthcare Integrity Protection DB

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	Query	Defines the set of capabilities that support retrieval of records that satisfy specific query selection criteria.	Search	Query			No Reuse	35
2	Library / Storage	Defines the set of capabilities that support document and data warehousing and archiving.	Document Management	Library / Storage			No Reuse	1
3	Knowledge Capture	Defines the set of capabilities that facilitate collection of data and information.	Knowledge Management	Knowledge Capture			No Reuse	5
4	Knowledge Distribution and Delivery	Defines the set of capabilities that support the transfer of knowledge to the end customer.	Knowledge Management	Knowledge Distribution and Delivery			No Reuse	10
5	Information Retrieval	Defines the set of capabilities that allow access to data and information for use by an organization and its stakeholders.	Knowledge Management	Information Retrieval			No Reuse	2
6	Standardized / Canned	Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of pre-conceived or pre-written reports.	Reporting	Standardized / Canned			No Reuse	5
7	Ad Hoc	Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of dynamic reports on an as needed basis.	Reporting	Ad Hoc			No Reuse	5
8	Data Mart	Defines the set of capabilities that support a subset of a data warehouse for a single department or function within an organization.	Data Management	Data Mart			No Reuse	10
9	Program / Project Management	Defines the set of capabilities that manage and control a particular effort of an organization.	Management of Processes	Program / Project Management			No Reuse	2
10	Reservations / Registration	Defines the set of capabilities that allow electronic enrollment and confirmations for services.	Customer Initiated Assistance	Reservations / Registration			No Reuse	10

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	Query	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
2	Library / Storage	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Database	Vendor: Oracle, Product: Oracle v10g
3	Knowledge Capture	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
4	Knowledge Distribution and Delivery	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
5	Information Retrieval	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
6	Standardized / Canned	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
7	Ad Hoc	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
8	Data Mart	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Support Platforms	Platform Dependent	Vendor: SRA, Product: Sun / Unix
9	Program / Project Management	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
10	Reservations / Registration	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
11	Self-Service	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
12	Knowledge Capture	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
13	Knowledge Distribution and Delivery	Service Access and Delivery	Access Channels	Web Browser	Vendor: Netscape & Microsoft, Product: Netscape v 7.02, 7.1, or 7.2 and IE v6.0, 6.0 SP1, or 6.0 SP2
14	Self-Service	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
15	Reservations / Registration	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
16	Program / Project Management	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
17	Information Retrieval	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
18	Knowledge Capture	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
19	Ad Hoc	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
20	Standardized / Canned	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
21	Query	Service Access and Delivery	Delivery Channels	Internet	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
22	Self-Service	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
23	Reservations / Registration	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
24	Program / Project Management	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
25	Information Retrieval	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
26	Knowledge Distribution and Delivery	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
27	Ad Hoc	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
28	Standardized / Canned	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
29	Query	Service Access and Delivery	Service Requirements	Legislative / Compliance	Vendor: SRA, Product: NPDB/HIPDB
30	Data Mart	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Delivery Servers	Web Servers	Vendor: SRA, Product: Apache / Unix based web server

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

no

1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

yes

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

2007-06-30

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

no

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

The NPDB-HIPDB investment receives no appropriations from Congress. The user fees collected are primarily used to operate, maintain, and enhance the NPDB-HIPDB. Previsions in the law allow the Data Banks to upgrade and incorporate new technologies as they occur, or as legislative mandates are imposed on the Data Banks. Therefore, risk, as a result of Life-cycle costs, can indeed increase due to external mandates outside of HHS/HRSA's control during scheduling/enhancement phase. However, the firm-fixed price contract vehicle that is currently in-place strictly controls the costs associated with the system. Contract modifications are reviewed in detail for budgetary purposes and will not be put into place unless the value of the contract modification meets a new system need. Unexpected costs that come from risks associated with the system are discussed and mitigated in the NPDB HIPDB Risk Assessment, NPDB-HIPDB system security plan, and NPDB-HIPDB COOP. During the scheduling phase, release contents are determined. New functionality and System Change Requests (SCRs) for a specific release are selected before release planning begins. At the Configuration Control Board (CCB), the Government and the Contractor assign specific SCRs to the planned release. This phase establishes the overall goals of the release. It is also during this phase that the release schedule is outlined. After this phase, changes may be introduced; however, the overall release goals will remain the same.

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

yes

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

no

2.b. If yes, explain the variance.

Not applicable

2.c. If yes, what corrective actions are being taken?

Not applicable

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

no