Exhibit 300 (BY2010) for HHS Unified Financial Management System

1. Date of Submission:

2009-04-10

2. Agency:

009

3. Bureau:

00

4. Name of this Capital Asset:

HHS Unified Financial Management System

5. Unique Project Identifier:

009-00-01-01-01-0001-00

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?

FY2003

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 Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Unified Financial Management System (UFMS) solution was built-in early 2004. UFMS was implemented in April 2005 at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administrationi (FDA) (Release 2.0). A UFMS major functionality Release 2.2 occurred in October 2005 followed by a DHHS Program Support Center (PSC) (Release 3.0) in October 2006 and Indian Health Services (IHS) (Release 4.0) in 2007. UFMS is a Joint Financial Management Improvement Program certified web-based commercial, off-the-shelf product that serves as the foundation for integrated financial management across the department. The system provides a unified approach for enhancing financial management perfomance by eliminating duplication, streamlining processes, and establishing a common information technology infrastructure across the enterprise. Additionally, the system produces consistently relevant, reliable, and timely financial information to support unified decision-making, cost-effective business operations, and standard and custom reporting across the Department. These UFMS financial management features are in concert with the mandates set forth in the President's Management Agenda (PMA) 3 Improved Financial Performance. UFMS is interfaced with other feeder systems such as payroll and travel. It in essence communicates with these systems systematically. During its development UFMS automated its internal processes to reduce costs internally and thereby reducting government operating costs. These are all cornerstones of PMA 4 Expanded Electronic Government. UFMS has been a lynch pin in facilitating the Department to maintain its "clean" unqualified financial statement audit opinion.

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?

Waiver Issued

11.b. When was the Program/Project Manager Assigned?

2008-06-01

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)?

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
Expanded E-Government
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?)

UFMS automates internal processes, minimizes redundancy, standardizes business processes and maximizes interoperability to increase timely and accurate financial management reporting across HHS. It provides automated funds control so managers can assess available program funds daily. UFMS uses a browser-based user interface to deliver robust query and reporting capabilities. UFMS reduces workload burden on vendors by leveraging one vendor database and eliminating errors caused by re-keying data.

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:

Financial Systems and Processes

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.

Unified Financial Management System (UFMS)

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

Area	Percentage
Hardware	5
Software	14
Services	81
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	Suzi Connor
Phone Number	(202) 260-5528
Title	OS Senior Privacy Official
Email	Suzi.Connor@hhs.gov

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

no

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 -2007	PY 2008	CY 2009	BY 2010
Planning Budgetary Resources	33.816	0.300	0.000	0.000
Acquisition Budgetary Resources	201.002	6.650	0.000	0.000
Maintenance Budgetary Resources	60.193	29.050	26.090	25.867
Government FTE Cost	37.573	2.123	0.650	0.660
# of FTEs	198	10	4	4

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

no

In order to successfully address this area of the exhibit 300, performance goals must be provided for the agency and be linked to the annual performance plan. The investment must discuss the agency's mission and strategic goals, and performance measures (indicators) must be provided. These goals need to map to the gap in the agency's strategic goals and objectives this investment is designed to fill. They are the internal and external performance benefits this investment is expected to deliver to the agency (e.g., improve efficiency by 60 percent, increase citizen participation by 300 percent a year to achieve an overall citizen participation rate of 75 percent by FY 2xxx, etc.). The goals must be clearly measurable investment outcomes, and if applicable, investment outputs. They do not include the completion date of the module, milestones, or investment, or general goals, such as, significant, better, improved that do not have a quantitative measure.

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

Row	Fiscal Year	Strategic Goal Supported	Measurement Area	Measurement Grouping	Measurement Indicator	Baseline	Planned Improvement to the Baseline	Actual Results
1	2007	S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2006 audit opinion.	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	Received a clean audit opinion.
2	2007	S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) such as number of internal HHS users, and stakeholders satisfied with UFMS.	2006 customer satisfaction rate.	Maintain and/or improve customer satisfaction rate.	Strategic Planning Interviews conducted. General satisfaction equated to a 4 or better with noted areas for improvement.
3	2007	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	Maintain or improve monthly and annual reconcilation and reporting costs	$72/hr
4	2007	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Reliability	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2004 uptime for HHS FMS.	99%	99.42%
5	2008	S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2007 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
6	2008	S.O. 1.2 - Increase health care service availability and accessibility	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) such as number of internal HHS users, and stakeholders satisfied with UFMS.	90% score of 4 or better	92% score of 4 or better	TBD
7	2008	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	Maintain or improve monthly and annual reconcilation and reporting costs	TBD
8	2008	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Overall Costs	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 99% uptime for HHS FMS.	99.42%	TBD
9	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2008 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
10	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) with retrieval and accessibility of financial management information, including ease of online use.	2008 customer satisfaction (with retrieval and accessibility) rate.	TBD	TBD
11	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Overall Costs	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2008 uptime for HHS FMS.	TBD	TBD
12	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2009 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
13	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) with retrieval and accessibility of financial management information, including ease of online use.	2009 customer satisfaction (with retrieval and accessibility) rate.	TBD	TBD
14	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Reliability	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2009 uptime for HHS FMS.	TBD	TBD
15	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2010 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
16	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) with retrieval and accessibility of financial management information, including ease of online use.	2010 customer satisfaction (with retrieval and accessibility) rate.	TBD	TBD
17	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Reliability	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2010 uptime for HHS FMS.	TBD	TBD
18	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2011 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
19	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) with retrieval and accessibility of financial management information, including ease of online use.	2011 customer satisfaction (with retrieval and accessibility) rate.	TBD	TBD
20	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Reliability	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2011 uptime for HHS FMS.	TBD	TBD
21	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2012 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
22	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) with retrieval and accessibility of financial management information, including ease of online use.	2012 customer satisfaction (with retrieval and accessibility) rate.	TBD	TBD
23	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Reliability	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2012 uptime for HHS FMS.	TBD	TBD
24	2009	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	TBD	TBD
25	2010	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	TBD	TBD
26	2011	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	TBD	TBD
27	2012	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	TBD	TBD
28	2013	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	TBD	TBD
29	2014	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Mission and Business Results	Program Monitoring	Achievement of clean audit opinion.	2013 audit opinion	Maintain a clean audit opinion.	TBD
30	2014	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Customer Results	Customer Satisfaction	% of customers satisfied (defined as achieving a 4 or higher) with retrieval and accessibility of financial management information, including ease of online use.	2013 customer satisfaction (with retrieval and accessibility) rate.	TBD	TBD
31	2014	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Technology	Reliability	UFMS uptime.	Average scheduled 2013 uptime for HHS FMS.	TBD	TBD
32	2014	S.O. 1.3 - Improve health care quality, safety, cost and value	Processes and Activities	Financial Management	Total average cost per hour of producing monthly and annual reports.	$72/hour (excludes CMS)	TBD	TBD

In order to successfully address this area of the business case and capital asset plan you must ensure the investment is included in the agency's EA and Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process, and is mapped to and supports the FEA. You must also ensure the business case demonstrates the relationship between the investment and the business, performance, data, services, application, and technology layers of the agency's EA.

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.

HHS Unified Financial Management System

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

yes

3.a. If yes, provide the name of the segment architecture as provided in the agency’s most recent annual EA Assessment.

032-000

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	OS ASRT Unified Financial Management System	The Unified Financial Management System is a business transformation effort, using a Web-based commercial off the shelf product, to replace five legacy financial systems with one modern accounting system comprising 2 components: HIGLAS, & Global.	Reporting	Standardized / Canned			No Reuse	5
2	OS ASRT Unified Financial Management System	The Unified Financial Management System is a business transformation effort, using a Web-based commercial off the shelf product, to replace five legacy financial systems with one modern accounting system comprising 2 components: HIGLAS, & Global.	Data Management	Data Exchange			No Reuse	20
3	Revenue Accrual		Financial Management	Revenue Management			No Reuse	10
4	OS ASRT Unified Financial Management System	The Unified Financial Management System is a business transformation effort, using a Web-based commercial off the shelf product, to replace five legacy financial systems with one modern accounting system comprising 2 components: HIGLAS, & Global.	Reporting	Ad Hoc			No Reuse	5
5	OS ASRT Unified Financial Management System	The Unified Financial Management System is a business transformation effort, using a Web-based commercial off the shelf product, to replace five legacy financial systems with one modern accounting system comprising 2 components: HIGLAS, & Global.	Management of Processes	Configuration Management			No Reuse	0
6	Expense Accrual		Financial Management	Expense Management			No Reuse	3
7	OS ASRT Unified Financial Management System	The Unified Financial Management System is a business transformation effort, using a Web-based commercial off the shelf product, to replace five legacy financial systems with one modern accounting system comprising 2 components: HIGLAS, & Global.	Supply Chain Management	Procurement			No Reuse	5
8	Obligations		Financial Management	Billing and Accounting			No Reuse	0
9	OS ASRT Unified Financial Management System	The Unified Financial Management System is a business transformation effort, using a Web-based commercial off the shelf product, to replace five legacy financial systems with one modern accounting system comprising 2 components: HIGLAS, & Global.	Management of Processes	Quality Management			No Reuse	2

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	Standardized / Canned	Component Framework	Data Management	Reporting and Analysis	Oracle Business Intelligence Discoverer by: Oracle Corporation
2	Data Exchange	Component Framework	Data Interchange	Data Exchange	SSH File Transfer Protocol by: The Internet Engineering Task Force
3	Revenue Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Storage	EMC SAN Products by: EMC Corporation
4	Revenue Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Storage	Sun Server by: TBD
5	Ad Hoc	Component Framework	Data Management	Reporting and Analysis	Oracle Business Intelligence Discoverer by: Oracle Corporation
6	Configuration Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Software Engineering	Software Configuration Management	Mercury Interactive Test Director by: Hewlett-Packard Corporation
7	Expense Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Software Engineering	Test Management	Mercury Interactive Test Director by: Hewlett-Packard Corporation
8	Expense Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Software Engineering	Test Management	LoadRunner by: Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.
9	Procurement	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Support Platforms	Dependent Platform	Sun Solaris by: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
10	Billing and Accounting	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Database / Storage	Database	Oracle by: Oracle Corporation
11	Quality Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Support Platforms	Independent Platform	PL/SQL by: Oracle Corporation
12	Quality Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Support Platforms	Independent Platform	Oracle by: Oracle Corporation
13	Quality Management	Service Platform and Infrastructure	Support Platforms	Independent Platform	Sun Java System Web Server by: Sun Microsystems, Inc.

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.

multi-OPDIVs

You should perform a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of the investment's life-cycle, develop a risk-adjusted life-cycle cost estimate and a plan to eliminate, mitigate or manage risk, and be actively managing risk throughout the investment's life-cycle.

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?

2007-07-11

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

yes

1.c. If yes, describe any significant changes:

HHS recognizes that managing investment risk is fundamentally altered during the steady state phase where the focus transitions from on-time, on-budget deployment and user acceptance to monitoring how the investment is performing. That approach is documented in the UFMS Program Management Manual dated July 11, 2007. This manual documents a series of management practices and controls the UFMS O&M program has in place to manage risk and performance for the UFMS application. The current approach distinguishes risk management as a proactive process to identify, assess, and treat risks that may prevent program service delivery. Conversely, issue management is recognized as a reactive process to respond to known issues that are already preventing service delivery. Operational risks are documented using a risk register which are reviewed on a periodic basis to understand status of day-to-day risk treatments, consider changes to the risk assessment, and the identification and assessment of new risks. In addition, program level risk assessments are conducted monthly in conjunction with the UFMS business owner. These assessments focus on identifying and mitigating risks that have the potential to jeopardize benefits realized from the investment. The plan also integrates performance management at multiple tiers. Performance is monitored at the system operations, and contractor level. The program uses system performance metrics, such as system uptime, to monitor system risk daily and relies on operational metrics, such as backlog, timeliness and customer satisfaction, to monitor operational risks to the program on a daily or weekly basis. The program routinely disseminates these metrics to UFMS customers and stakeholders. Service delivery performance is reinforced by a performance based contract for the prime UFMS O&M core service provider which incorporates financial incentives and penalties for performance that are further mapped to O&M program processes such as incident management, change management and program management. Finally the UFMS O&M program conducts daily status meetings, weekly schedule review meetings, and monthly executive status meetings to monitor costs and schedule, manage program performance and manage risk persistently. The program operates using IT Information Library(TM) methodology.

1. Was operational analysis conducted?

no

1.c. If no, please explain why it was not conducted and if there are any plans to conduct operational analysis in the future.

An operational analysis will be conducted in October 2008.