Exhibit 300 (BY2010) for ACF GrantSolutions.gov -Grants Administration Tracking Evaluation System (GATES) - Grants Center for Excellence
PART ONE
OVERVIEW
- 1. Date of Submission:
- 2009-04-10
- 2. Agency:
- 009
- 3. Bureau:
- 70
- 4. Name of this Capital Asset:
- ACF GrantSolutions.gov / Grants Administration Tracking Evaluation System (GATES) - Grants Center for Excellence
- 5. Unique Project Identifier:
- 009-70-04-00-01-1356-24
- 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2010?
- Mixed Life Cycle
- 7. What was the first budget year this investment was submitted to OMB?
- FY2002
- 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 ACF Grants Center of Excellence operates GrantSolutions.gov / Grants Administration, Tracking and Evaluation System (GCOE) is one of three Grants Management Line of Business (GMLOB) consortia providers. The GCOE provides business solutions to grants officers and specialists to manage their grant programs and process grant applications from receipt through award. Financial information is exchanged electronically with the HHS UFMS enterprise financial system, and standards are being developed to interface with any financial accounting system. Currently 16 different agencies have signed as business partners for GCOE services. The GCOE is undergoing a modernization effort by moving from client-server to web based architecture, along with redesigning its data architecture, to enable the GCOE to support the E-Gov initiatives in the President's Management Agenda. This investment positions the GCOE to support other PMA strategies e.g. Improved Financial Performance, Budget and Performance Integration, and Strategic Management of Human Capital. ACF follows the agency's capital programming process and related techniques to determine the GCOE's effectiveness in supporting the HHS and ACF mission and strategic goals, and to identify and implement needed improvements. Funding for the mixed life-cycle of this project encompasses operations and maintenance of the legacy GATES system, the migration of HHS OPDIVs to the GCOE, and other improvements in support of the GMLOB, and other PMA initiatives. The GCOE is also one of two systems comprising the Department's Enterprise-wide Grants Management System. The GCOE enables ACF to function as a full-fledged grants processing organization capable of supporting its expanded customer base of HHS service grant-making OPDIVs; while the NIH IMPAC II system supports research grants. This investment provides for system enhancements and service delivery improvements as the various grants management and reporting processes currently in use at HHS OPDIVS continue to be unified, streamlined and standardized across the Department. This initiative is pursuant to the Secretary's "One HHS" goal, and is consistent with the HHS Strategic Plan goal to achieve excellence in management practices, and enhances the use of information technology in service delivery and record keeping by improving the accessibility and functionality of the technology.
- 9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request?
- yes
- 9.a. If "yes," what was the date of this approval?
- 2008-12-11
- 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?
- Waiver Issued
- 11.b. When was the Program/Project Manager Assigned?
- 2006-12-31
- 11.c. What date did the Program/Project Manager receive the FACP/PM certification? If the certification has not been issued, what is the anticipated date for certification?
- 2009-07-31
- 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)?
- no
- 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 Expanded E-Government Faith Based and Community 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?)
- In 2006, OMB chose GCOE as a GMLOB consortia provider. USDA was the first non-HHS agency supported by the GCOE, Denali Commission was the 2nd non-HHS agency supported, and 7 other Federal agencies have signed as Partners for GCOE support thereby achieving expanded E-Gov performance across agency borders. See Question 8. Automated interfaces with agency financial systems directly supports Financial Performance. GCOE also supports grants made to Faith-Based and Community organizations.
- 14. Does this investment support a program assessed using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)?
- 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 3
- 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)?
- yes
- 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:
- GCoE addresses the following FFMIA compliance areas; federal financial management system requirements, applicable Federal accounting standards, and the Standard General Ledger (SGL) at the transaction level.
- 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.
- GrantsSolutions.gov/GATES - Grants Center of Excellence
- 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 100 Other 0
- 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 David Jenkins Phone Number 202-690-5802 Title Senior Privacy Official Email david.jenkins@acf.hhs.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
SUMMARY OF SPEND
- 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
-2007PY
2008CY
2009BY
2010Planning Budgetary Resources 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Acquisition Budgetary Resources 2.792 1.045 1.069 0.000 Maintenance Budgetary Resources 10.750 3.610 3.660 3.710 Government FTE Cost 1.003 0.347 0.355 0.363 # of FTEs 3 3 3 3
- 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.
- The summary of spending has not changed from the FY2009 President's budget request.
PERFORMANCE
- 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 2005 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of service grant system funding development contracts Four Contracts Reduce to one contract (Enterprise GATES) Reduced to one contract 2 2005 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of OPDIV-unique grants processes and policies Three OPDIV-unique systems Reduce to one system (Enterprise GATES) Reduced to one system 3 2005 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of HHS social service grants managed through GATES 54% Increase to 86% Increased to 86% 4 2005 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Number of days between submission of grant application to initiation of HHS Review 21 days Reduce to one day for electronic submission Reduced to one day 5 2005 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GATES 99.0% scheduled availability Increase to 99.5% scheduled availability Increased to 99.5% 6 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of OPDIV grants management system requirements integrated within Enterprise GATES Four OPDIVs (AoA, ACF, IHS, CMS) Increase to six OPDIVs Increased to six OPDIVS (added OPHS and HRSA) 7 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of Enterprise Architecture (EA) framework models completed One model (As-Is) partially completed Increase to two models (As-Is and To-Be) completed and integrated Two models (As-Is and To-Be) completed and integrated 8 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Level of E-Authentication E-Authentication level 1 Increase to E-Authentication level 2 Increased to E-Authentication level 2 9 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of ACF grants applications processed via Grants.gov 10% of grant applications submitted electronically Increase to 20% of grant applications submitted electronically Increased to 30% of grant applications via Grants.gov 10 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants reporting processed via OLDC 10% of grantees reporting via OLDC Increase to 50% of grantees reporting via OLDC Increased to 50% of grantees reporting via OLDC 11 2006 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Functionality Percent alignment of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES OLDC with ACF and HHS Enterprise IT Architecture 60% alignment, excluding some legacy GATES components (e.g., PowerBuilder clients) Increase to 100% alignment, excluding some legacy GATES components (e.g., PowerBuilder clients) Increased to 100% alignment, excluding some legacy GATES components (e.g.PowerBuilder clients) 12 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Processes and Activities Efficiency Number of days between submission of grant application to initiation of HHS review process one day Maintain one day Maintained one day 13 2006 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Processes and Activities Efficiency Number of days to review and approve GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES grant applications Up to 90 days to review and approve grant applications Reduce 20%, or up to 72 days, to review and approve grant applications Reduced 20%, or up to 72 days, to review and approve grant applications 14 2006 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.5% scheduled availability Increase to 99.9% scheduled availability Increased to 99.9% scheduled availability 15 2007 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES Six partners Increase to seven partners Increased to seven partners 16 2007 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 30% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 40% of grant applications processed electronically Increased to 39.6% of grant applications filed electronically 17 2007 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 50% of grant reports submitted electronically Increase to 55% of grant reports submitted electronically Increased to 55% of grant reports submitted electronically 18 2007 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry for grant applications 100% of 2006 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2006 processing time Decreased to 95% of 2006 processing time 19 2007 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability Maintained 99.9% scheduled availability 20 2008 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES Seven partners Increase to eight partners Increased to eight partners 21 2008 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 40% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 45% of grant applications submitted electronically Increased to 47% of grant applications submitted electronically 22 2008 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 55% of grant reports submitted electronically Increase to 60% of grant reports submitted electronically Increased to 60% of grant reports submitted electronically 23 2008 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry processing time for grant applications 100% of 2007 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2007 processing time Decreased to 95% of 2007 processing time 24 2008 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability TBD 25 2009 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES Eight partners Increase to nine partners TBD 26 2009 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 47% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 50% of grant applications processed electronically TBD 27 2009 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 60% of grant reports submitted electronically Increase to 65% of grant reports submitted electronically TBD 28 2009 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry processing time for grant applications 100% of 2008 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2008 processing time TBD 29 2009 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability TBD 30 2010 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES Nine partners Increase to ten partners TBD 31 2010 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 50% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 55% of grant applications processed electronically TBD 32 2010 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 65% of grant reports submitted electronically Increase to 70% of grant reports submitted electronically TBD 33 2010 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry processing time for grant applications 100% of 2009 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2009 processing time TBD 34 2010 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability TBD 35 2011 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES Ten partners Increase to 11 partners TBD 36 2011 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 55% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 60% of grant applications processed electronically TBD 37 2011 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 70% of grant reports submitted electronically Increase to 75% of grant reports submitted electronically TBD 38 2011 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry processing time for grant applications 100% of 2010 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2010 processing time TBD 39 2011 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability TBD 40 2012 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 11 partners Increase to 12 partners TBD 41 2012 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 60% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 65% of grant applications processed electronically TBD 42 2012 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 75% of grant reports submitted electronically Increase to 80% of grant reports submitted electronically TBD 43 2012 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry processing time for grant applications 100% of 2011 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2011 processing time TBD 44 2012 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability TBD 45 2013 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Mission and Business Results Information Management Number of partner grants management system requirements integrated within GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 12 partners Increase to 13 partners TBD 46 2013 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grants applications processed electronically 65% of grant applications processed electronically Increase to 70% of grant applications processed electronically TBD 47 2013 S.O. 3.1 - Promote the economic independence and social well-being of individuals and families across the lifespan Customer Results Customer Impact or Burden Percent of grant reports submitted electronically 80% of grant reports submitted electronically Maintain 80% of grant reports submitted electronically TBD 48 2013 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Processes and Activities Efficiency Percent reduction of contractor data entry processing time for grant applications 100% of 2012 processing time Decrease to 95% of 2012 processing time TBD 49 2013 Effective Management of Human Capital / Information Technology / Resources Technology Availability Percent of time for scheduled availability of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES 99.9% scheduled availability maintain 99.9% scheduled availability TBD
Enterprise Architecture
- 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.
- ACF Grants Administration Tracking Evaluation System - Grants Center for Excellence
- 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 Financial Management System Integration Development and Integration Enterprise Application Integration No Reuse 5 2 GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES Functionally, GATES is used by grants officers and specialists to manage their grant programs and process grant applications from receipt through award. Financial information is exchanged electronically with the CORE accounting system and interfaces are being established to the HHS UFMS enterprise financial system. While mostly steady-state, GATES is undergoing some modernization effort by moving from client-server to web based architecture, along with redesigning its data architecture Financial Management Activity-Based Management No Reuse 94
- 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 Enterprise Application Integration Service Interface and Integration Interoperability Data Format / Classification SOAP by: World Wide Web Consortium 2 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Apache Tomcat by: Apache Software Foundation 3 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Network Devices / Standards TCP/IP by: The Internet Engineering Task Force 4 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport File Transfer Protocol (FTP) by: The Internet Engineering Task Force 5 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Authentication / Single Sign-on Security Assertion Markup Language by: OASIS Security Services Technical Committee 6 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Oracle 9i Application Server by: Oracle Corporation 7 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Integrated Development Environment Oracle Developer Suite by: Oracle Corporation 8 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.1 by: The Internet Engineering Task Force 9 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Dependent Platform Microsoft Windows 2000 by: Microsoft Corporation 10 Activity-Based Management Component Framework Business Logic Platform Dependent Technologies Windows.Net by: Microsoft Corporation 11 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Test Management Mercury Interactive Test Director by: Hewlett-Packard Corporation 12 Activity-Based Management Component Framework Business Logic Platform Independent Technologies Java 2 Enterprise Edition by: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 13 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Web Browser Windows Internet Explorer by: Microsoft Corporation 14 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Dependent Platform Mac OS by: Apple Inc. 15 Activity-Based Management Component Framework Data Management Database Connectivity Java Database Connectivity by: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 16 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Web Browser Netscape Navigator by: Netscape Communications Corporation 17 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Web Servers Microsoft Internet Information Services 6.0 by: Microsoft Corporation 18 Activity-Based Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Content Rendering 36 CFR Part 1194 by: United States Access Board 19 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Oracle by: Oracle Corporation 20 Activity-Based Management Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware Developer Fax API by: Interfax Inc. 21 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Local Area Network (LAN) Ethernet by: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 22 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Supporting Network Services Lightweight Directory Access Protocol by: The Internet Engineering Task Force 23 Activity-Based Management Service Interface and Integration Interoperability Data Format / Classification Secure / Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions by: The Internet Engineering Task Force 24 Activity-Based Management Service Interface and Integration Interoperability Data Format / Classification SOAP by: World Wide Web Consortium 25 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport Simple Key Management Protocol by: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 26 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Dependent Platform Sun Solaris by: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 27 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport Secure Sockets Layer by: Netscape Communications Corporation 28 Activity-Based Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Java Server Pages by: Sun Microsystems, Inc. 29 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Authentication / Single Sign-on Oracle Enterprise Single Sign-On by: Oracle Corporation 30 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport Hypertext Transfer Protocol with SSL by: The Internet Engineering Task Force 31 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Microsoft SQL Server by: Microsoft Corporation 32 Activity-Based Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Web Servers Apache by: Apache Software Foundation 33 Activity-Based Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 by: The Internet Engineering Task Force
- 6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?
- no
PART TWO
RISK
Answer the following questions to describe how you are managing investment risks.
- 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?
- yes
- 1.a. If yes, what is the date of the plan?
- 2008-06-30
- 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:
- All identified risks have been managed or are in the process of being managed. Schedule risks have been considered when establishing the program schedule. It is very probably that GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES will be completed on schedule. It is unlikely that the project schedule will vary greater than 10% from the schedule baseline. The project schedule is based primarily on investment planning but also contains limited external deadlines and dependencies. There is a reasonable amount of contingency built into the project schedule. The project is mature enough that any minor schedule variances are not likely to cause major variances later in the life cycle. The project has moderate complexity as it involves multiple development efforts over the next three years. As GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES matures, there remains very little cost risk. The cost estimate is based on ample historical performance on the investment and the selected alternative is defined enough to estimate the cost. The cost estimates are well developed and will probably not need additional refinement during this life cycle. Costs are both risk adjusted and inflation adjusted. If the project received less than the total budgetary resources requested, new business partnerships could not be developed. This would put severe limitations on GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES providing ongoing services and would raise the burden of current partner agencies. This investment is funded incrementally and was approved by OMB for the previous budget cycle. The costs reported in the Cost and Schedule Performance Section and Summary of Spending Table in this exhibit include the full cost of GrantSolutions.gov/ GATES, including transition to support and O&M costs. Both the cost and schedule carefully account for risk.
COST & SCHEDULE
- 1. Does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard 748?
- no
- 2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%?
- no
- 3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?
- no





