| FY2008 Exhibit 300 | | | | | | | PART I: SUMMARY INFORMATION AND JUSTIFICATION | | In Part I, complete Sections A, B, C, and D for all capital assets (IT and non-IT). Complete Sections E and F for IT capital assets. | | | | | | | Section A: Overview (All Capital Assets) | | The following series of questions are to be completed for all investments. | | | | | | | I. A. 1. Date of Submission: | | 2006-01-06 | | | | |
| I. A. 4. Name of this Capital Asset: | | (short text - 250 characters) | | | Executive Information System (EIS) and Related Feeder Systems__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | |
| I. A. 5. Unique ID: (For IT investments only, see section 53. For all other, use agency ID system.) | | 184-15-02-01-01-1061-00 | | | | |
| I. A. 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2008? | | (Please NOTE: Investments moving to O&M ONLY in FY2008, with Planning/Acquisition activities prior to FY2008 should not select O&M. These investments should indicate their current status.) | | | Planning | | | | |
| I. A. 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: | | (long text - 2500 characters) | | | The Executive Information System (EIS) directly implements the Presidents Management Agenda by establishing a system that supports Budget and Performance Integration for USAID on a global, enterprise-wide basis. It enables Agency leadership, Congress, and oversight agencies to track program money from budget to program plans, to procurement, to action. It also eliminates duplicative, non-standard, error-prone user systems and manual processes that cause delays in reporting and sap personnel productivity.
The EIS centralizes and protects data essential to the Three Ds, the three pillars of Homeland Security: Defense, Diplomacy, and Development. The full acquisition phase that begins in FY08 will pay for COTS, configuration, data management, business process improvement, and operations for internal users who work at headquarters and throughout the world, including missions in more than 70 countries and programs in more than 150 countries. The EIS integrates data from multiple feeder systems, eliminates unreliable and duplicative information systems, improves productivity of field personnel, and speeds the delivery of answers for urgent decisions about international affairs.
In planning during FY06 it was decided that the EIS would take the lead in addressing the lack of agency wide data standards for reporting data, some of which is the result of the lack of standard definitions for terms used by the Executive and Legislative Branches. Data standards are necessary for accurate reporting of the results achieved in performing USAIDs mission and in compliance in meeting earmarks, legislation, and Presidential directives. This role places EIS as the primary coordination effort for data exchange across the agency, and resulted in incorporating EIS into the Enterprise Architecture and Data Reference Model. Without a clearly defined effort to address data standards and information exchange USAID will not be able to resolve the problems created by the development of applications to address specific and unique business requirements. This lack of coordination and standards has resulted in the development of at least 200 and possibly as many as 1,700 programs addressing specific and unique reporting mandates. It is estimated that USAID is spending as much as 20% of staff hours addressing reporting mandates at a cost of $20 million a year. | | | | |
| I. A. 9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request? | | yes | | | | | | | | I. A. 9. a. If "yes", what was the date of this approval? | | 2005-10-01 | | | | |
|
| I. A. 10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit? | | yes | | | | |
| I. A. 12. Has the agency developed and/or promoted cost effective, energy-efficient and environmentally sustainable techniques or practices for this project. | | yes | | | | | | | | I. A. 12. a. Will this investment include electronic assets (including computers)? | | yes | | | | |
| I. A. 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 | | | | | | | | I. A. 12. b. 1. If "yes", is an ESPC or UESC being used to help fund this investment? | | | |
| I. A. 12. b. 2. If "yes", will this investment meet sustainable design principles? | | | |
| I. A. 12. b. 3. If "yes", is it designed to be 30% more energy efficient than relevant code? | | | |
|
|
| I. A. 13. Does this investment support one of the PMA initiatives? | | yes | | | | | | | | I. A. 13. a. If "yes", check all that apply: | | | |
| I. A. 13. b. Briefly describe how this asset directly supports the identified initiative(s). | | (medium text - 500 characters) | | | The system would provide a solution to bridge multiple USAID systems to report lifecycle of USAID foreign assistance program. | | | | |
|
| I. A. 14. Does this investment support a program assessed using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)? | | (For more information about the PART, visit www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part.) | | | no | | | | | | | | I. A. 14. a. If "yes", does this investment address a weakness found during the PART review? | | | |
| I. A. 14. b. If "yes", what is the name of the PARTed Program? | | (short text - 250 characters) | | | | |
| I. A. 14. c. If "yes", what PART rating did it receive? | | | |
|
| I. A. 15. Is this investment for information technology? (see section 53 for definition) | | yes | | | | |
| I. A. 16. What is the level of the IT Project (per CIO Council's PM Guidance)? | | Level 1 - Projects with low-to-moderate complexity and risk. Example: Bureau-level project such as a stand-alone information system that has low- to-moderate complexity and risk. Level 2 - Projects with high complexity and/or risk which are critical to the mission of the organization. Examples: Projects that are part of a portfolio of projects/systems that impact each other and/or impact mission activities. Department-wide projects that impact cross-organizational missions, such as an agency-wide system integration that includes large scale Enterprise Resource Planning (e.g., the DoD Business Mgmt Modernization Program). Level 3 - Projects that have high complexity, and/or risk, and have government-wide impact. Examples: Government-wide initiative (E-GOV, President's Management Agenda). High interest projects with Congress, GAO, OMB, or the general public. Cross-cutting initiative (Homeland Security). | | | Level 2 | | | | |
| I. A. 17. What project management qualifications does the Project Manager have? (per OMB's PM Guidance): | | (1) - The project manager assigned for this investment has been validated as qualified in accordance with OMB PM Guidance.; (2) - The project manager assigned for this investment is in the process of being validated as qualified in accordance with OMB PM Guidance.; (3) - The project manager assigned for this investment is not validated as qualified in accordance with OMB PM Guidance.; (4) - The qualifications for the project manager named have not been evaluated.; (5) - No project manager is currently assigned for this investment.; (6) - N/A -- This is not an IT investment. | | | (3) Project manager assigned to investment, but does not meet requirements | | | | |
| I. A. 18. Is this investment identified as "high risk" on the Q4 - FY 2006 agency high risk report (per OMB's "high risk" memo)? | | no | | | | |
| I. A. 19. Is this a financial management system? | | yes | | | | | | | | I. A. 19. a. If "yes", does this investment address a FFMIA compliance area? | | no | | | | | | | | I. A. 19. a. 1. If "yes" which compliance area? | | (short text - 250 characters) | | | | |
| I. A. 19. a. 2. If "no", what does it address? | | (medium text - 500 characters) | | | EIS is a mixed system as defined in OMB Circular A-127 that includes features that collect and report data about financial events that in part support financial planning and budgeting activities. | | | | |
|
| I. 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 A-11 section 52 | | (long text - 2500 characters) | | | Executive Information System (EIS) | | | | |
|
| I. A. 20. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2008 funding request for the following? (This should total 100%) | | | | | | |
| I. A. 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 | | | | |
|
| Section B: Summary of Funding | | | | | | | I. B. 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.
Note: For the cross-agency investments, this table should include all funding (both managing and partner agencies). Government FTE Costs should not be included as part of the TOTAL represented. | | | PY-1 and Spending Prior to 2006 | PY 2006 | CY 2007 | BY 2008 | | Planning | $0.44 | $1.40 | $0.50 | $1.00 | | Acquisition | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.00 | | Subtotal Planning & Acquisition | $0.44 | $1.40 | $0.00 | $0.00 | | Operations & Maintenance | $0.00 | $0.00 | $0.50 | $0.26 | | TOTAL | $0.44 | $1.40 | $1.00 | $0.26 | | Government FTE Costs | $0.03 | $0.10 | $0.10 | $0.10 | | Number of FTE represented by cost | $0.40 | $0.80 | $0.80 | $0.80 |
| | | | |
| I. B. 2. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's? | | no | | | | | | | | I. B. 2. a. If "yes", How many and in what year? | | (medium text - 500 characters) | | | | |
|
| I. B. 3. If the summary of spending has changed from the FY2007 President's budget request, briefly explain those changes. | | (long text - 2500 characters) | | | In FY06, USAID verified the functional requirements, conducted a high-level review of existing systems currently used to support reporting, positioned EIS within the USAID Enterprise Architecture (EA) and Data Resource Model (DRM), and determined that the scope of work required for a successful project exceeded original estimates. Working closely with the most senior of USAIDs management the EIS Strategy was revised to include responsibility for improving coordination across existing and new applications that process data required to meet agency wide reporting requirements. The revised strategy includes addressing data standards and data quality, resolving territorial interests and independent processes, and developing a system that can be used worldwide with access from both USAID and the Department of State (DOS). | | | | |
|
| Section D: Performance Information | 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 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 or qualitative measure.
Agencies must use Table 1 below for reporting performance goals and measures for all non-IT investments and for existing IT investments that were initiated prior to FY 2005. The table can be extended to include measures for years beyond FY 2006. | | | | | | | I. D. 1. Table 1 | | (Character Limitations: Strategic Goal(s) Supported - 250 Characters; Performance Measure - 250 Characters; Actual/baseline (from Previous Year) - 250 Characters; Planned Performance Metric (Target) - 250 Characters; Performance Metric Results (Actual) - 250 Characters; Measurement Indicator - 250 Characters; Baseline - 250 Characters; Planned Improvement to the Baseline - 250 Characters; Actual Results - 250 Characters) | | | Fiscal Year | Strategic Goal(s) Supported | Performance Measure | Actual/baseline (from Previous Year) | Planned Performance Metric (Target) | Performance Metric Results (Actual) | | 2004 | Management and Organizational Excellence: A high-performing workforce | Users have inadequate tools for aligning budget and program performance data, and their needs are not clearly defined. | Identify user needs | Needs identified through JAD process | High level needs identified | | 2005 | Management and Organizational Excellence: Integrated budgeting and financial accountability | Requirements for integrating budget and performance data are not consistently documented | Define requirements for EIS | Conduct requirements analysis | Produced high-level requirements document | | 2005 | Management and Organizational Excellence: Customer-oriented delivery of administrative services | Best practices for field methods not clearly defined | Identify methods, tools, and feeder systems that might be generalized to worldwide use, in support of the EIS | Conduct field survey | Produced report summarizing findings | | 2006 | Management and Organizational Excellence: Customer-oriented delivery of administrative services | Validate requirements with senior managers and align EIS with Joint USAID-State Enterprise Architecture | EIS Strategy Document | Revise EIS Strategy Document and develop Architecture Document | Updated EIS Strategy reviewed by Business Transformation Executive Committee and architecture document produced | | 2007 | Customer Results | Timeliness and Responsiveness | Update Agency data standard and reduce paper processing | To be established by FY07 survey | >60% of pilot users report elimination of need for some paper records or informal cuff systems | | 2007 | Management and Organizational Excellence; Customer oriented delivery of administrative services | Revalidate deliverables with senior management | EIS Stragetgy Document | Revise EIS strategy document and Architecutre document | Updated EIS Strategy reviewed by Business Transformation Executive Committee | | 2008 | Technology | Information and Data | Data standardization or Tagging Establish benchmark % of program management coding schemes that match standard Agency Codes | Agency standards to be developed in FY07 | | | 2008 | Mission and Business Results | Planning and resource allocation | Workforce planning amount time required to gather information on program planning, resource allocation, or results to be able to responde to a query. | | | | 2009 | Customer Results | Service Acessibility | | | | | 2009 | Process and Activities | Productivity and Efficiency | | | |
| | | | |
| I. D. 2. Table 2 | | Fiscal Year | Measurement Area | Measurement Grouping | Measurement Indicator | Baseline | Planned Improvement to the Baseline | Actual Results | | 2008 | Mission and Business Results | Improvement | Type of data available | Financial data only | Add procurement and/or results data | TBD |
| | | | |
|
| Section F: Enterprise Architecture (EA) | | 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 Invesment 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. | | | | | | | I. F. 1. Is this investment included in your agency's target enterprise architecture? | | yes | | | | | | | | I. F. 1. a. If "no", please explain why? | | (long text - 2500 characters) | | | | |
|
| I. F. 2. Is this investment included in the agency's EA Transition Strategy? | | no | | | | | | | | I. F. 2. a. If "yes", provide the investment name as identified in the Transition Strategy provided in the agency's most recent annual EA Assessment. | | (medium text - 500 characters) | | | | |
| I. F. 2. b. If "no" please explain why? | | (long text - 2500 characters) | | | The EIS will be included in the USAID EA Transition Strategy in FY07. Currently draft versions of the USAID Data Architecture and Data Resource Model (DRM) identify EIS as the future central resource for information on USAID activity worldwide. The DRM is the standardized data architecture that will be used by EIS. The "As-Is" components of selected legacy EIS feeder applications are contained in USAID's existing Technical Reference Model (TRM). | | | | |
|
| I. F. 3. 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/. | | FEA SRM 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. FEA Service Component Reused - 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 Porject 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 comonent 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. (Character Limitations: Agency Component Name - 250 Characters; Agency Component Description - 500 Characters) | | | | |
| I. F. 4. 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. (Character Limitations: Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name) - 250 characters) | | | FEA SRM Component | FEA TRM Service Area | FEA TRM Service Category | FEA TRM Service Standard | Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name) | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Presentation / Interface | Static Display | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Presentation / Interface | Dynamic Server-Side Display | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Business Logic | Platform Independent | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Data Interchange | Data Exchange | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Data Management | Database Connectivity | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Data Management | Reporting and Analysis | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Interface and Integration | Integration | Middleware | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Interface and Integration | Integration | Enterprise Application Integration | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Interface and Integration | Interoperability | Data Format / Classification | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Interface and Integration | Interoperability | Data Types / Validation | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Interface and Integration | Interface | Service Description / Interface | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Access and Delivery | Access Channels | Web Browser | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Access and Delivery | Access Channels | Other Electronic Channels | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Access and Delivery | Service Requirements | Legislative / Compliance | Various legislation and directives | | Process Tracking | Service Access and Delivery | Service Requirements | Authentication / Single Sign-on | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Access and Delivery | Service Transport | Service Transport | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Support Platforms | Platform Dependent | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Delivery Servers | Media Servers | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Delivery Servers | Portal Servers | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Delivery Servers | Web Servers | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Delivery Servers | Application Servers | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Database / Storage | Database | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Hardware / Infrastructure | Local Area Network (LAN) | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Hardware / Infrastructure | Servers / Computers | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Service Platform and Infrastructure | Hardware / Infrastructure | Wide Area Network (WAN) | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Security | Certificates / Digital Signatures | USAID's AIDNET General Support System | | Process Tracking | Component Framework | Security | Supporting Security Services | USAID's AIDNET General Support System |
| | | | |
| I. F. 5. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)? | | no | | | | | | | | I. F. 5. a. If "yes", please describe. | | (long text - 2500 characters) | | | | |
|
| I. F. 6. Does this investment provide the public with access to a government automated information system? | | no | | | | | | | | I. F. 6. a. If "yes", does customer access require specific software (e.g., a specific web browser version)? | | | | | | | I. F. 6. a. 1. If "yes", provide the specific product name(s) and version number(s) of the required software and the date when the public will be able to access this investment by any software (i.e. to ensure equitable and timely access of government information and services). | | (medium text - 500 characters) | | | | |
|
|
|
|
| PART IV: FOR "E-GOV AND LINES OF BUSINESS OVERSIGHT" ONLY | | Part IV should be completed only for investments which in FY08 are considered an E-Gov initiative or a Line of Business (LOB), i.e., selected the "E-Gov and LOB Oversight" choice in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above. Investments currently identified as "E-Gov and LOB Oversight" will complete only Part I and IV of the exhibit 300. | | | | | | | Section A: E-Gov and Lines of Business Oversight (All Capital Assets) | | Multi-agency initiatives, such as E-Gov and LOB initiatives, should develop a joint exhibit 300. | | | | | | | IV. A. 1. Stakeholder Table | | As a joint exhibit 300, please identify the agency stakeholders. Provide the partner agency and partner agency approval date for this joint exhibit 300. | | | | |
| IV. A. 2. Partner Capital Assets within this Investment | | Provide the partnering strategies you are implementing with the participating agencies and organizations. Identify all partner agency capital assets supporting the common solution; Managing Partner capital assets should also be included in this joint exhibit 300. These capital assets should be included in the Summary of Spending table of Part I, Section B. (Character Limitations: Partner Agency Asset Title - 250 Characters) | | | | |
| IV. A. 3. Partner Funding Strategies ($millions) | | For jointly funded initiative activities, provide in the "Partner Funding Strategies Table": the name(s) of partner agencies; the UPI of the partner agency investments; and the partner agency contributions for CY and BY. Please indicate partner contribution amounts (in-kind contributions should also be included in this amount) and fee-for-service amounts. (Partner Agency Asset UPIs should also appear on the Partner Agency's exhibit 53. For non-IT fee-for-service amounts the Partner exhibit 53 UPI can be left blank.) | | | | |
|
|
|
|