Exhibit 300 (BY2010) - CMS Common Working File (CWF)
PART ONE
OVERVIEW
- 1. Date of Submission:
- 2008-09-08
- 2. Agency:
- 009
- 3. Bureau:
- 38
- 4. Name of this Capital Asset:
- CMS Common Working File (CWF)
- 5. Unique Project Identifier:
- 009-38-01-02-01-1110-00
- 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2010?
- 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 Common Working File (CWF) is a single data source for Fiscal Intermediaries and Carriers to verify beneficiary eligibility and conduct prepayment review and approval of claims from a national perspective. It is the only place in the fee for service (FFS) claims processing system where full individual beneficiary information is housed. CWF meets CMS' core requirements for claims processing: 1) beneficiary entitlement to Part A/B, 2) accurate deductible & coinsurance, 3) appropriate services, 4) benefits on the claim are available, and 5) Medicare Secondary Payer information is correct. CWF also performs limited part A/B crossover editing to insure services are not paid twice on different types of claims. CWF has four quarterly releases that control, implement, and update software changes due to legislative mandates. Software changes for the claims processing operations are managed in quarterly releases developed through a change control process that begins with the Medicare Change Control Board review and prioritization of pending requests. The FFS Operations Board approves the quarterly releases with oversight by the FFS Governance Council and manages/integrates day-to-day operations of the FFS program across CMS. The FFS claims processing environment is distributed across 4 claims processing modules and 1 integrated testing module. This investment also funds the Single Testing Contractor (STC), the only entity responsible for: 1) independently testing the base FFS shared systems and CWF, and 2) validating that Medicare requirements are correctly implemented. Testing is performed in an integrated, production-like environment allowing CMS to monitor and control system testing, costs, standardization, communication, and flexibility across systems. This investment directly supports the PMA Improve Financial Performance, as it is an essential component ensuring that accurate payments are made for medically necessary services and are provided to eligible beneficiaries by qualified providers of care. The impact of not funding CWF & STC would be detrimental to Medicare, introducing system errors, causing harmful delays in claims processing and payment, and reducing the access, availability, and provision of health care services to Medicare beneficiaries. Error-free releases that implement legislative mandates with minimal interruption to processing ensure that beneficiaries receive the correct service and providers receive the correct payment.
- 9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request?
- yes
- 9.a. If "yes," what was the date of this approval?
- 2008-03-26
- 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?
- Waiver Issued
- 11.b. When was the Program/Project Manager Assigned?
- 2004-11-14
- 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.
- no
- 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 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 CWF directly supports the PMA "Improve Financial Performance" because it is an essential component to ensuring that accurate payments are made for only medically necessary services and are provided only to eligible Medicare beneficiaries by qualified providers. CWF also is vital to minimizing fraud and abuse in the Medicare program and ensuring quality of care is provided to Medicare beneficiaries.
- 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?
- 10001060 - Medicare
- 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 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)?
- no
- 19. Is this a financial management system?
- no
- 20. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2009 funding request for the following? (This should total 100%)
Area Percentage Hardware 0 Software 1 Services 99 Other
- 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 Maribel Franey Phone Number 410-786-0757 Title Director, Division of Privacy Compliance Email Maribel.franey@cms.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?
- yes
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 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Maintenance Budgetary Resources 40.120 22.214 29.209 30.537 Government FTE Cost 0.400 0.500 0.530 0.561 # of FTEs 4 5 5 5
- 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 current funding levels for this investment were developed through the CMS' annual CPIC process. The funding levels for CWF claims processing do not equal the President's Budget because the CMS portfolio has been adjusted to reflect re-evaluated Agency priorities.
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 2006 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release 90% 100% 91% 2 2006 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Average score of CWF Host Survey following a production release 4 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) 4.78 3 2006 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within the specified time frame 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 2006 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours 96% 98% 98% 5 2007 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release 91% 95% 95% 6 2007 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Cumulative percentage of release hours per problem 4.78 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) 5 7 2007 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4 8 2007 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours 98% 98.5% 98.5% 9 2008 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release 95% 96% 95% 10 2008 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Cumulative percentage of release hours per problem 5 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) 5 11 2008 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame 4 of 4 4 of 4 4 of 4 12 2008 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours 98.5% 98.5% 99% 13 2009 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release 95% 97% TBD 14 2009 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Cumulative percentage of release hours per problem 5 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) TBD 15 2009 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame 4 of 4 4 of 4 TBD 16 2009 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours 99% 98.5% TBD 17 2010 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release TBD 98% TBD 18 2010 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Cumulative percentage of release hours per problem TBD 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) TBD 19 2010 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame TBD 4 of 4 TBD 20 2010 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours TBD 98.5% TBD 21 2011 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release TBD 99% TBD 22 2011 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Cumulative percentage of release hours per problem TBD 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) TBD 23 2011 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame TBD 4 of 4 TBD 24 2011 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours TBD 98.5% TBD 25 2012 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release TBD 100% TBD 26 2012 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Cumulative percentage of release hours per problem TBD 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) TBD 27 2012 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame TBD 4 of 4 TBD 28 2012 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Accessibility Percentage of system availability during processing hours TBD 98.5% TBD 29 2013 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release TBD 100% TBD 30 2013 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Average score of CWF Host Survey following a production release TBD 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) TBD 31 2013 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame TBD 4 of 4 TBD 32 2013 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Availability Percentage of system availability during processing hours TBD 98.5% TBD 33 2014 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Mission and Business Results Health Care Administration Cumulative percentage of errors detected by testing contractor prior to release TBD 100% TBD 34 2014 S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Average score of CWF Host Survey following a production release TBD 5 (scale of 1 to 5, 5 = excellent, 1 = failure) TBD 35 2014 S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility Processes and Activities Timeliness Number of software releases implemented within specified time frame TBD 4 of 4 TBD 36 2014 S.O. 2.3 - Promote and encourage preventive health care, including mental health, lifelong healthy behaviors, and recovery Technology Availability Percentage of system availability during processing hours TBD 98.5% 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.
- CMS Common Working File (CWF)
- 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 CWF Information Retrieval Services 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 25 2 CWF Data Exchange Services Defines the set of capabilities that support the interchange of information between multiple systems or applications; includes verification that transmitted data was received unaltered. Data Management Data Exchange No Reuse 50 3 CWF Information Sharing Services Defines the set of capabilities that support the use of documents and data in a multi-user environment for use by an organization and its stakeholders. Knowledge Management Information Sharing No Reuse 25
- 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 Information Retrieval Component Framework Data Management Database Connectivity Connect:Direct by: Sterling Commerce 2 Data Exchange Component Framework Data Interchange Data Exchange Connect:Direct by: Sterling Commerce 3 Data Exchange Service Interface and Integration Integration Enterprise Application Integration Connect:Direct by: Sterling Commerce 4 Information Sharing Component Framework Data Management Database Connectivity Connect:Direct by: Sterling Commerce
- 6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?
- no
PART THREE
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?
- 2008-07-30
- 1.b. Has the Risk Management Plan been significantly changed since last year's submission to OMB?
- no
COST & SCHEDULE
- 1. Was operational analysis conducted?
- yes
- 1.a. If yes, provide the date the analysis was completed.
- 2008-08-06
- What were the results of your operational analysis?
- CMS has established contract performance metrics to monitor CWF's effectiveness in meeting program objectives. It has been determined that the FFS systems need a fundamental technology transformation because of the steady increase in transaction volume and the increasingly complex business processes. Renovation will be needed to meet increasing business demands and improve the accuracy of payment determinations, optimize system quality, availability, and performance, lower operational, management and maintenance costs and position CMS for future reforms.
- 1.c. If no, please explain why it was not conducted and if there are any plans to conduct operational analysis in the future.
- Not Applicable.





