U.S. Department of Education: Promoting Educational Excellence for all Americans

Exhibit 300 FY2009

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:
2007-09-10

I. A. 2. Agency:
018

I. A. 3. Bureau:
45

I. A. 4. Name of this Capital Asset:
(short text - 250 characters)
Common Services for Borrowers-Legacy (CSB-Legacy)

I. A. 5. Unique Project (Investment) Identifier:
For IT investment only, see section 53. For all other, use agency ID system.
018-45-01-01-01-1070-00

I. A. 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2009?
Please NOTE: Investments moving to O&M in FY2009, with Planning/Acquisition activities prior to FY2009 should not select O&M. These investments should indicate their current status.
Operations and Maintenance

I. A. 7. What was the first budget year this investment was submitted to OMB?
FY2004

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 original Common Services for Borrowers (CSB) contract was modified in May 2007. So the initial Common Services for Borrowers (CSB) solution, which was designed to re-engineer Borrower Services' core legacy systems and business processes under a single system, is no longer scheduled to be implemented as planned. Although it will still essentially be comprised of the core legacy systems as individual components, it has been modified to improve upon the previous operating efficiencies of totally separate systems. As a result, the current solution will now be known as Common Services for Borrowers-Legacy (CSB-Legacy). The legacy components of CSB-Legacy are the following four separate business processes/systems: Direct Loan Servicing System (DLSS), Debt Management and Collections System (DMCS), Direct Loan Consolidation System (DLCS), and Conditional Disability Discharge Tracking System (CDDTS). The current CSB-Legacy solution will focus on system operations and maintenance and will be operated in a steady state environment. Further, it will involve consolidation of multiple, diverse call centers and operations facilities into fewer, more efficient facilities; and redundant functions will be eliminated to the extent possible.

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?
2007-08-30

I. A. 10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit?
yes

I. A. 11. Contact information of Project Manager

Name
(short text - 250 characters)

Phone Number
(short text - 250 characters)

E-mail
(short text - 250 characters)

I. A. 11. a. What is the current FAC-P/PM certification level of the project/program manager?

I. A. 12. Has the agency developed and/or promoted cost effective, energy-efficient and environmentally sustainable techniques or practices for this project?
no

I. A. 12. a. Will this investment include electronic assets (including computers)?
no

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 directly support one of the PMA initiatives?
yes

I. A. 13. a. If "yes," check all that apply:
Financial Performance
Expanded E-Government

I. A. 13. b. 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?)
(medium text - 500 characters)
This investment aligns with e-Government initiative by meeting the following goals: Improved Financial Performance Objectives: Receive a clean audit of the agency's financial report. Expanded Electronic Government Objectives: This is a primary factor driving CSB's support of the PMA. CSB contributes to the fulfillment of service to individuals focused on building easy one-stop shopping creating single points of easy entry to access high quality of governmental services.

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?
no

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?
yes

I. A. 16. What is the level of the IT Project? (per CIO Council 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 CIO Council's PM Guidance):
(1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment;(2) Project manager qualification is under review for this investment;(3) Project manager assigned to investment, but does not meet requirements;(4) Project manager assigned but qualification status review has not yet started;(5) No Project manager has yet been assigned to this investment
(1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment

I. A. 18. Is this investment identified as "high risk" on the Q4-FY 2007 agency high risk report (per OMB Memorandum M-05-23)?
yes

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)
Servicing Direct student loans.

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)

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

I. A. 20. a. Hardware
0

I. A. 20. b. Software
0

I. A. 20. c. Services
100

I. A. 20. d. Other
0

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?
yes

I. A. 22. Contact information of individual responsible for privacy related questions:

I. A. 22. a. Name
(short text - 250 characters)

I. A. 22. b. Phone Number
(short text - 250 characters)

I. A. 22. c. Title
(short text - 250 characters)

I. A. 22. d. E-mail
(short text - 250 characters)

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

I. A. 24. Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas?
Question 24 must be answered by all Investments:
no

Section B: Summary of Spending (All Capital Assets)

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 2007 PY 2007 CY 2008 BY 2009 BY+1 2010 BY+2 2011 BY+3 2012 BY+4 2013 and Beyond
Planning 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000        
Acquisition 57.376 0.000 0.000 0.000        
Subtotal Planning & Acquisition                
Operations & Maintenance 51.900 188.967 203.800 202.700        
Total                
Government FTE Costs 7.731 2.750 1.140 0.714        
Number of FTE represented by cost 71 24 9 6        

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 FY2008 President's budget request, briefly explain those changes.
(long text - 2500 characters)

Section C: Acquisition/Contract Strategy (All Capital Assets)

I. C. 1. Complete the table for all (including all non-Federal) contracts and/or task orders currently in place or planned for this investment. Total Value should include all option years for each contract. Contracts and/or task orders completed do not need to be included.
SIS - Share in Services contract; ESPC - Energy savings performance contract ; UESC - Utility energy efficiency service contract; EUL - Enhanced use lease contract; N/A - no alternative financing used.
(Character Limitations: Contract or Task Order Number - 250 Characters; Type of Contract/Task Order - 250 Characters; Name of CO - 250 Characters; CO Contact Information - 250 Characters)

  Type of Contract/Task Order Has the contract been awarded? If so what is the date of the award? If not, what is the planned award date? Start date of Contract/Task Order End date of Contract/Task Order Total Value of Contract/Task Order ($M) Is this an Interagency Acquisition? Is it performance based? Competitively awarded? What, if any, alternative financing option is being used? Is EVM in the contract? Does the contract include the required security & privacy clauses? Name of CO CO Contact Information (phone/email) Contracting officer certification level If N/A, has the agency determined the CO assigned has the competencies and skills necessary to support this aquistion?
ED 04 CO 0004                                

I. C. 2. If earned value is not required or will not be a contract requirement for any of the contracts or task orders above, explain why:
(long text - 2500 characters)

I. C. 3. Do the contracts ensure Section 508 compliance?

I. C. 3. a. Explain Why:
(medium text - 500 characters)

I. C. 4. Is there an acquisition plan which has been approved in accordance with agency requirements?

I. C. 4. a. If "yes," what is the date?

I. C. 4. b. If "no," will an acquisition plan be developed?

I. C. 4. b. 1. If "no," briefly explain why:
(medium text - 500 characters)

Section D: Performance Information (All Capital Assets)

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.

I. D. 1. Table 1. Performance Information Table
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.

  Strategic Goal(s) Supported Measurement Area Measurement Grouping Measurement Indicator Baseline Target Actual Results
2005 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education:Default recovery rate (% of collections divided by the collections portfolio as it existed at the end of the prior year). The FY 2003 rate is used as the baseline. 10 11 By FY 2005 end, the recovery rate exceeded its planned improvement rate of 11%. 11.92% was achieved.
2005 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction:Borrower satisfaction. The surveys are being developed validated, and scheduled in 2005. TBD TBD Expect to submit Survey form to OMB for approval in November 2005.
2005 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Timeliness Cycle Time:Number of days to consolidate loans.The objective is to maintain a steady state. 20 20 Loans were consolidated in 15.89 days in Jul., 30.52 in Aug, and 39.46 in Sep.
2005 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels:Telecommunications facilities (voice and data) provisioned to control abandoned rates as a percent.The objective is to maintain a steady state. 2 2 The abandon rate for Jul was 1.24%, Aug was .77%, and .67% in Sep.
2006 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education:Default recovery rate (% of collections divided by the collections portfolio as it existed at the end of the prior year). The FY 2003 rate is used for the baseline. 10% 11.5% Recoveries achieved a 12.21% rate exceeding the 11.5 planned improvement.
2006 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Borrower satisfaction. Percent of Respondents rated at least a Satisfied or above for Customer Service. 65% 70% 88% of Respondents rated a Satisfied or above for Customer Service.
2006 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Timeliness Cycle Time: Number of days to consolidate loans. The objective is to maintain a steady state. 20 20 Loans were consolidated in 34.43 days in September 2006 due to a surge in volume equal to 10 times the normal volumes.
2006 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Abandoned rate percent reflects the proportion of callers who, after remaining in the route-to-CSR queue for at least 5 seconds, elects to hang-up and abandon their service attempt. Object is steady state. 2% 2% Abandoned rate was .94% in September 2006.
2007 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Default recovery rate (% of collections divided by the collections portfolio as it existed at the end of the prior year). The FY 2003 rate is used as the baseline. 10% 11.5% Recoveries achieved are 10.40% of the 11.5% improvement as of 6-30-07.Recoveries achieved are 7.0% of the 11.5% improvement as of 3-31-07. Recoveries achieved are 2.95% of the 11.5% improvement as of 12-31-06.
2007 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Borrower satisfaction. Percent of Respondents rated at least a Satisfied or above for Customer Services. 65% 70% Update: Last update: March 2007 Planning has begun for the Borrower Survey and the package is being prepared for OMB approval. Last update: Planning has not yet begun for the Borrower Survey.
2007 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Timeliness Cycle Time: Number of days to consolidate loans. The objective is to maintain a steady state. 20 20 Loans were consolidated in 13.35 days as of 6-30-07. Loans were consolidated in 15.57 days as of 3-31-07. Loans were consolidated in 15.95 days as of 12-31-06.
2007 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Abandoned rate percent reflects the proportion of callers who, after remaining in the route-to-CSR queue for at least 5 seconds, elects to hang-up and abandon their service attempt. Object is steady state. 2% 2% Abandoned rate was .39% as of 6-30-07. Abandoned rate was .47% as of 3-31-07. Abandoned rate was .56% as of 12-31-06.
2005 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Load levels Load Levels: Calls blocked at the Service Centers as a percent. The objective is to maintain a steady state. 0.5 0.5 Blockage was .99% in Jul, .01% in Aug, and .00% in Sep.
2006 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Service Center blockage occurs when calls routed from the FTS network exceed the inbound trunk capacity at the centers. The result is a caller receives a busy signal. The objective is a steady state. 0.5% 0.5% Blockage rate was .00% in September 2006.
2007 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Service Center blockage occurs when calls routed from the FTS network exceed the inbound trunk capacity at the centers. The result is a caller receives a busy signal. Objective is a steady state. 0.5% 0.5% Blockage rate was .0% as of 6-30-07. Blockage rate was .0% as of 3-31-07. Blockage rate was .0% as of 12-31-06.
2004 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Asset and Liability Management Default Aversion -Maintain a Cohort Default Rate (CDR) less than the FFEL program. Baseline is NSLDS computed CDR calculation; CSB?s Direct Loan CDR is measured against the FFEL program. Annually, CSB?s DL portfolio should have a lower default rate (CDR) than equivalent FFEL rates. The DL Program outperformed FFEL 5.0% to 5.2% in the 2002 Cohort Default Rate overall, as reported 10/2004.
2004 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Timeliness Increase the % of electronic loan consolidation applications and reduce the ?days to consolidate?. FY ?03 = 88% and 31 days, CSB Baseline is 20 days to consolidate all loans per borrower CSB has met or exceeded this measurement each month from Jan to Sep 04.
2004 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Telecommunications facilities (voice and data) provisioned to control abandoned rates and call blockage at the Service Center. Abandoned Rate is 2% and Calls Blocked is .50%. Maintain the Abandon Rate and Call Blockage baseline for CSB. FY04 CSB abandon rate was .26%. Blockage was .91%. Blockage in one of the legacy systems was high for first 3 months of CSB.
2008 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Default recovery rate (% of collections divided by the collections portfolio as it existed at the end of the prior year). The FY 2003 rate is used as the baseline. 10% TBD  
2008 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Borrower satisfaction. Percent of Respondents rated at least a Satisfied or above for Customer Services. 65% 70%  
2008 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Timeliness Cycle Time: Number of days to consolidate loans. The objective is to maintain a steady state. 20 20  
2008 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Abandoned rate percent reflects the proportion of callers who, after remaining in the route-to-CSR queue for at least 5 seconds, elects to hang-up and abandon their service attempt. Object is Steady State. 2% 2%  
2008 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Service Center blockage occurs when calls routed from the FTS network exceed the inbound trunk capacity at the centers. The result is a caller receives a busy signal. Objective is a steady state. 0.5% 0.5%  
2009 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Higher Education: Default recovery rate (% of collections divided by the collections portfolio as it existed at the end of the prior year). The FY 2003 rate is used as the baseline. 10% TBD  
2009 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Customer Satisfaction Customer Satisfaction: Borrower satisfaction. Percent of Respondents rated at least a Satisfied or above for Customer Services. 65% 70%  
2009 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Timeliness Cycle Time: Number of days to consolidate loans. The objective is to maintain a steady state. 20 20  
2009 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Abandoned rate percent reflects the proportion of callers who, after remaining in the route-to-CSR queue for at least 5 seconds, elects to hang-up and abandon their service attempt. Object is Steady State. 2% 2%  
2009 Goal 3, Objective 2: Deliver federal student aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Response Time Load Levels: Telecommunications facilities: Service Center blockage occurs when calls routed from the FTS network exceed the inbound trunk capacity at the centers. The result is a caller receives a busy signal. Objective is a steady state. 0.5% 0.5%  

Section E: Security and Privacy (IT Capital Assets only)

In order to successfully address this area of the business case, each question below must be answered at the system/application level, not at a program or agency level. Systems supporting this investment on the planning and operational systems security tables should match the systems on the privacy table below. Systems on the Operational Security Table must be included on your agency FISMA system inventory and should be easily referenced in the inventory (i.e., should use the same name or identifier).

For existing Mixed-Life Cycle investments where enhancement, development, and/or modernization is planned, include the investment in both the "Systems in Planning" table (Table 3) and the "Operational Systems" table (Table 4). Systems which are already operational, but have enhancement, development, and/or modernization activity, should be included in both Table 3 and Table 4. Table 3 should reflect the planned date for the system changes to be complete and operational, and the planned date for the associated C&A update. Table 4 should reflect the current status of the requirements listed. In this context, information contained within Table 3 should characterize what updates to testing and documentation will occur before implementing the enhancements; and Table 4 should characterize the current state of the materials associated with the existing system.

All systems listed in the two security tables should be identified in the privacy table. The list of systems in the "Name of System" column of the privacy table (Table 8) should match the systems listed in columns titled "Name of System" in the security tables (Tables 3 and 4). For the Privacy table, it is possible that there may not be a one-to-one ratio between the list of systems and the related privacy documents. For example, one PIA could cover multiple systems. If this is the case, a working link to the PIA may be listed in column (d) of the privacy table more than once (for each system covered by the PIA).

I. E. 1. Have the IT security costs for the system(s) been identified and integrated into the overall costs of the investment?

I. E. 1. a. If "yes," provide the "Percentage IT Security" for the budget year:

I. E. 2. Is identifying and assessing security and privacy risks a part of the overall risk management effort for each system supporting or part of this investment?

I. E. 3. Systems in Planning and Undergoing Enhancement(s) – Security Table:
The questions asking whether there is a PIA which covers the system and whether a SORN is required for the system are discrete from the narrative fields. The narrative column provides an opportunity for free text explanation why a working link is not provided. For example, a SORN may be required for the system, but the system is not yet operational. In this circumstance, answer "yes" for column (e) and in the narrative in column (f), explain that because the system is not operational the SORN is not yet required to be published.

  Agency/or contractor Operated System Planned Operational Date Planned or Actual C&A Completion Date
       

I. E. 4. Operational Systems - Security:

  Agency/or contractor Operated System? NIST FIPS 199 Risk Impact level (High, Moderate, Low) Has C & A been Completed, using NIST 800-37? (Y/N) Date Completed: C & A What standards were used for the Security Controls tests? (FIPS 200/NIST 800-53, Other, N/A) Date Completed: Security Control Testing Date the contingency plan tested
DLSS              
DLCS              
DCMS              
CDDTS              

I. E. 5. Have any weaknesses related to any of the systems part of or supporting this investment been identified by the agency or IG?

I. E. 5. a. If "yes," have those weaknesses been incorporated into the agency's plan of action and milestone process?

I. E. 6. Indicate whether an increase in IT security funding is requested to remediate IT security weaknesses?

I. E. 6. a. If "yes," specify the amount, provide a general description of the weakness, and explain how the funding request will remediate the weakness.
(long text - 2500 characters)

I. E. 7. How are contractor security procedures monitored, verified, and validated by the agency for the contractor systems above?
(long text - 2500 characters)

I. E. 8. Planning & Operational Systems - Privacy Table:
Details for Text Options:
Column (d): If yes to (c), provide the link(s) to the publicly posted PIA(s) with which this system is associated. If no to (c), provide an explanation why the PIA has not been publicly posted or why the PIA has not been conducted.

Column (f): If yes to (e), provide the link(s) to where the current and up to date SORN(s) is published in the federal register. If no to (e), provide an explanation why the SORN has not been published or why there isn't a current and up to date SORN.

Note: Links must be provided to specific documents not general privacy websites.

  (b) Is this a new system? (Y/N) (c) Is there a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) that covers this system? (Y/N) (d) Internet Link or Explanation (e) Is a System of Records Notice (SORN) required for this system? (Y/N) (f) Internet Link or Explanation
DLSS          
DLCS          
DCMS          
CDDTS          

Section F: Enterprise Architecture (EA) (IT Capital Assets only)

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?
yes

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)
Common Services for Borrowers (CSB)

I. F. 2. b. If "no," please explain why?
(long text - 2500 characters)

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

I. F. 3. a. If "yes," provide the name of the segment architecture.
(medium text - 500 characters)
Loan Segment Architecture

I. F. 4. Service Component Reference Model (SRM) Table :
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.egov.gov.

a. Use existing SRM Components or identify as "NEW". A "NEW" component is one not already identified as a service component in the FEA SRM.
b. 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.
c. '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.
d. Please provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount used for each service component listed in the table. If external, provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount transferred to another agency to pay for the service. The percentages in this column can, but are not required to, add up to 100%.

  Agency Component Description FEA SRM Service Type FEA SRM Component (a) Service Component Reused - Component Name (b) Service Component Reused - UPI (b) Internal or External Reuse? (c) BY Funding Percentage (d)
Security Architecture Provides management capabilities which conform to all Federal Security requirements and FSA security guidelines Security Management Identification and Authentication Identification and Authentication 018-45-03-00-02-2050-00 Internal 0
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Establishes and maintains up-to-date borrower records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Relationship Management Call Center Management     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Establishes and maintains up-to-date borrower records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Relationship Management Customer / Account Management     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Establishes and maintains up-to-date borrower records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Relationship Management Contact and Profile Management     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Establishes and maintains up-to-date borrower records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Relationship Management Partner Relationship Management     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Establishes and maintains up-to-date borrower records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Relationship Management Surveys     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Provides borrowers with interface capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Preferences Alerts and Notifications     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Provides borrowers with interface capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Initiated Assistance Self-Service     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Customer Relationship Management Provides borrowers with interface capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Customer Initiated Assistance Assistance Request     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Document Management Document Imaging and OCR     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Document Management Library / Storage     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Document Management Document Conversion     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Data Management Provides data management capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Data Management Data Exchange     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Data Management Provides data management capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Data Management Data Mart     No Reuse 10
FSA CSB Financial Management Provides loan repayment, consolidation and collections capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Financial Management Payment / Settlement     No Reuse 10
FSA CSB Financial Management Provides loan repayment, consolidation and collections capabilities to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Financial Management Debt Collection     No Reuse 10
FSA CSB Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Routing and Scheduling Inbound Correspondence Management     No Reuse 5
FSA CSB Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Service Debts, Consolidate Loans and Recovery and Resolution business functions Tracking and Workflow Process Tracking     No Reuse 5

I. F. 5. Table 1. Technical Reference Model (TRM) Table:
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.

a. 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
b. 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.

  FEA TRM Service Area FEA TRM Service Category FEA TRM Service Standard Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name)
Call Center Management Component Framework Presentation / Interface Wireless / Mobile / Voice Avaya, Write-1, 5.1.2.1
Self-Service Component Framework Presentation / Interface Wireless / Mobile / Voice Avaya, Write-1, 5.1.2.1
Customer / Account Management Component Framework Security Supporting Security Services McAfee Virusscan Enterprise 8.0i
Data Exchange Service Access and Delivery Access Channels Collaboration / Communications FileNet Corporation U.S.A., FileNet/Panagon, 3.6 ESE, SP3
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Hewlett-Packard Company, HP-UX 11.11 Patch B.11.11.0312.4
Quality Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Software Configuration Management IBM Corporation, Rational ClearQuest, 2003.06.15
Quality Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Software Configuration Management IBM Corporation, Rational ClearCase, 2003.06.15
Quality Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Software Configuration Management IBM Corporation, Rational Rose 2001a, 4.1.100.1332
Quality Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Integrated Development Environment IBM Corporation, Rational Rose 2001a, 4.1.100.1332
Quality Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Test Management IBM Corporation, Rational Test Manager, 2003.06.15
Quality Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Software Configuration Management IBM Corporation, Requisite Pro, 2003.06.15
Identification and Authentication Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Authentication / Single Sign-on IBM Corporation, Tivoli Access Manager, 5.1.0.13-proxy 5.2 - Idap
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Integrated Development Environment IBM Corporation, WebSphere Studio Application Developer 5.0, 5.1 for Windows
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Independent Microsoft Corporation, Windows NT, 4.0
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Microsoft Corporation, Windows 2000
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Microsoft Corporation, Windows XP
Ad Hoc Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Microstrategy Incorporated, Data Analysis Server, 7.5.4
Standardized / Canned Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Microstrategy Incorporated, Data Analysis Server, 7.5.4
Ad Hoc Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Microstrategy Incorporated, Publishing Server, 7.5.4
Standardized / Canned Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Microstrategy Incorporated, Publishing Server, 7.5.4
Ad Hoc Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Microstrategy Incorporated, Web Server, 7.5.4
Standardized / Canned Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Microstrategy Incorporated, Web Server, 7.5.4
Data Mart Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Oracel Corporation, Oracle RDBMS 9i, Enterprise, 9.2.0.4
Data Warehouse Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Oracle Corporation, Oracle RDBMS 9i, Enterprise, 9.2.0.4
Data Exchange Component Framework Security Supporting Security Services RSA Security Incorporated, RSA BSA Libraries, 1.0.0.1
Customer / Account Management Component Framework Business Logic Platform Independent Siebel Systems Incorporated, Java API, 1.4.2
Call Center Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Siebel Systems Incorporated, Siebel 7.5
Customer Analytics Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Siebel Systems Incorporated, Siebel 7.5
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Siebel Systesms Incorporated, Siebel 7.5
Contact and Profile Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Siebel Systems Incorporated, Siebel 7.5
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Independent Sun Microsystems Incorporated, Java 2 Enterpreise Edition, 1.4.2.03
Customer / Account Management Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware Sun Microsystems Incorporated, Java Messaging Service, 1.4.2.03
Data Exchange Component Framework Data Management Database Connectivity Sun Microsystems Incorporated, Java Database Connectivity, 1.4.2.03
Customer / Account Management Component Framework Business Logic Platform Independent Sun Microsystems Incorporated, Java Development Kit 1.3 PER eDOCS COTS
Customer / Account Management Component Framework Security Supporting Security Services Tripwire Incorporated, Intrusion Detection System, 4.5
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Storage Symantec Corporation, Veritas NetBackup, 5.1
Data Exchange Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware IBM Corporation, MQ Series, 5.3
Document Conversion Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers IBM Corporation, Application Server, 5.1
Document Conversion Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Web Servers IBM Corporation, HTTP Server (IHS) Server, 1.3.28
Document Conversion Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware Siebel Systems Incorporated, Enterprise Integration Manager 7.5
Data Exchange Component Framework Data Interchange Data Exchange Microsoft Corporation, Windows 2000 Server, FTP
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Network Devices / Standards Microsoft Corporation, Windows 2000 Server, SNMP
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Network Devices / Standards Microsoft Corporation, Windows 2000 Server, TCP/IP
Data Exchange Service Interface and Integration Interoperability Data Format / Classification Microsoft Corporation, Windows 2000 Server, XML
Customer / Account Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Network Devices / Standards Open Source June 1999, www.xmirpc.com, ASP Implementation, XML-RPC
Data Exchange Component Framework Data Interchange Data Exchange Microsoft, Simple Object Access Protocol, Toolkit 3
Customer / Account Management Component Framework Business Logic Platform Independent Hewlett-Packard, Cobol

I. F. 6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?
no

I. F. 6. a. If "yes," please describe.
(long text - 2500 characters)

PART II: PLANNING, ACQUISITION AND PERFORMANCE INFORMATION

Part II should be completed only for investments identified as "Planning" or "Full Acquisition," or "Mixed Life-Cycle" investments in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above

Section A: Alternatives Analysis (All Capital Assets)

In selecting the best capital asset, you should identify and consider at least three viable alternatives, in addition to the current baseline, i.e., the status quo. Use OMB Circular A-94 for all investments and the Clinger Cohen Act of 1996 for IT investments to determine the criteria you should use in your Benefit/Cost Analysis.

II. A. 1. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this project?

II. A. 1. a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed?

II. A. 1. b. If "no," what is the anticipated date this analysis will be completed?

II. A. 1. c. If no analysis is planned, please briefly explain why:
(medium text - 500 characters)

II. A. 2. Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:
(Character Limitations: Alternative Analyzed - 250 characters; Description of Alternative - 500 Characters)

  Description of Alternative Risk Lifecycle Cost Estimate Risk Lifecycle Benefits Estimate
       
       
       
       

II. A. 3. Which alternative was selected by the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee and why was it chosen?
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. A. 4. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. A. 5. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole?

II. A. 5. a. If "yes," are the migration costs associated with the migration to the selected alternative included in this investment, the legacy investment, or in a separate migration investment?

II. A. 5. b. Table 1. If "yes," please provide the following information:

  UPI if available Date of the System Retirement
     

Section B: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)

You should have performed a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of this investment's life-cycle, developed 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.

II. B. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

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

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

II. B. 1. c. If "yes," describe any significant changes:
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. B. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?

II. B. 2. a. If "yes," what is the planned completion date?

II. B. 2. b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. B. 3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:
(long text - 2500 characters)

Section C: Cost and Schedule Performance (All Capital Assets)

EVM is required only on DME portions of investments. For mixed lifecycle investments, O&M milestones should still be included in the table (Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline). This table should accurately reflect the milestones in the initial baseline, as well as milestones in the current baseline.

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

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

II. C. 2. a. If "yes," was it the CV or SV or both ?

II. C. 2. b. If "yes," explain the causes of the variance:
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. C. 2. c. If "yes," describe the corrective actions:
(long text - 2500 characters)

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

II. C. 3. a. If "yes," when was it approved by the agency head?

II. C. 4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline
Complete the following table to compare actual performance against the current performance baseline and to the initial performance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, for all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline and actual completion dates (e.g., "03/23/2003"/ "04/28/2004") and the baseline and actual total costs (in $ Millions). In the event that a milestone is not found in both the initial and current baseline, leave the associated cells blank. Note that the 'Description of Milestone' and 'Percent Complete' fields are required. Indicate '0' for any milestone no longer active. (Character Limitations: Description of Milestone - 500 characters)

  Initial Baseline - Planned Completion Date Initial Baseline - Total Cost Current Baseline - Planned Completion Date Current Baseline - Actual Completion Date Current Baseline - Planned Total Cost Current Baseline - Actual Total Cost Current Baseline Variance - Schedule Current Baseline Variance - Cost Percent Complete
                   
                   
                   
                   
                   

PART III: FOR "OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE" INVESTMENTS ONLY (STEADY-STATE)

Part III should be completed only for investments identified as "Operation and Maintenance" (Steady State) in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above.

Section A: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)

You should have performed a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of this investment's life-cycle, developed 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.

III. A. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?
yes

III. A. 1. a. If "yes," what is the date of the plan?
2007-03-31

III. A. 1. b. Has the Risk Management Plan been significantly changed since last year's submission to OMB?
no

III. A. 1. c. If "yes," describe any significant changes: Mbr> (long text - 2500 characters)

III. A. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?

III. A. 2. a. If "yes," what is the planned completion date?

III. A. 2. b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?
(long text - 2500 characters)

Section B: Cost and Schedule Performance (All Capital Assets)

III. B. 1. Was operational analysis conducted?
no

III. B. 1. a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed.

III. B. 1. b. If "yes," what were the results?
(long text - 2500 characters)

III. B. 1. c. If "no," please explain why it was not conducted and if there are any plans to conduct operational analysis in the future:
(long text - 2500 characters)
The U.S. Department of Education has recognized the requirement for conducting an operational analysis and is working to sufficiently respond to the requirement request as released in the OMB Memorandum M-05-023. In the meantime, cost and schedule performance are being monitored and analyzed on a monthly basis.

III. B. 2. Complete the following table to compare actual cost performance against the planned cost performance baseline. Milestones reported may include specific individual scheduled preventative and predictable corrective maintenance activities, or may be the total of planned annual operation and maintenance efforts).

(Character Limitations: Description of Milestone - 250 Characters)

III. B. 2. a. What costs are included in the reported Cost/Schedule Performance information (Government Only/Contractor Only/Both)?
Contractor Only

III. B. 2. b. Comparison of Planned and Actual Cost

  Planned Completion Date Planned Total Cost Actual Completion Date Actual Total Cost Variance - Schedule Variance - Cost
In School            
Grace or Current            
Deferment or Forbearance            
Delinquent Day 31 to 90            
Delinquent Day 91 to 150            
Delinquent Day 151 to 210            
Delinquent Day 211 to 270            
Default Status            
Conditional Discharge            
Loan Consolidation            
In School            
Grace or Current            
Deferment or Forbearance            
Delinquent Day 31 to 90            
Delinquent Day 91 to 150            
Delinquent Day 1511 to 210            
Delinquent Day 211 to 270            
Default Status            
Conditional Discharge            
Loan Consolidation            
In School            
Grace or Current            
Deferment or Forbearance            
Delinquent Day 31 to 90            
Delinquent Day 91 to 150            
Delinquent Day 151 to 210            
Delinquent Day 211 to 270            
Default Status            
Conditional Discharge            
Loan Consolidation            
Operations & Maintenance            
Operations & Maintenance            
Operations & Maintenance            
Operations & Maintenance            

PART IV: Planning For "Multi-Agency Collaboration" ONLY

Part IV should be completed only for investments identified as an E-Gov initiative, an Line of Business (LOB) Initiative, or a Multi-Agency Collaboration effort., selected the "Multi-Agency Collaboration" choice in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above. Investments identified as "Multi-Agency Collaboration" will complete only Parts I and IV of the exhibit 300.

Section A: Multi-Agency Collaboration Oversight (All Capital Assets)

Multi-agency Collaborations, 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.

  Joint exhibit approval date
   

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 (section 300.7); 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. All partner agency migration investments (section 53.4) should also be included in this table. Funding contributions/fee-for-service transfers should not be included in this table. (Partner Agency Asset UPIs should also appear on the Partner Agency's exhibit 53)

  Partner Agency Asset Title Partner Agency Exhibit 53 UPI
     

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) (IT migration investments should not be included in this table)

  Partner Exhibit 53 UPI CY Contribution CY Fee-for-Service BY Contribution BY Fee-for-Service
    NaN NaN NaN NaN

IV. A. 4. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this project?

IV. A. 4. a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed?

IV. A. 4. b. If "no," what is the anticipated date this analysis will be completed?

IV. A. 4. c. If no analysis is planned, please briefly explain why:
(medium text - 500 characters)

IV. A. 5. Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:

  Description of Alternative Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Costs estimate Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Benefits estimate
Baseline Status Quo NaN NaN

IV. A. 6. Which alternative was selected by the Initiative Governance process and why was it chosen?
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. A. 7. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. A. 8. Table 1. Federal Quantitative Benefits ($millions):
What specific quantitative benefits will be realized (using current dollars)
Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:

  Budgeted Cost Savings Cost Avoidance Justification for Budgeted Cost Savings Justification for Cost Avoidance
  NaN NaN    

IV. A. 9. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole?

IV. A. 9. a. If "yes," are the migration costs associated with the migration to the selected alternative included in this investment, the legacy investment, or in a separate migration investment?

IV. A. 9. b. Table 1. If "yes," please provide the following information:

  UPI if available Date of the System Retirement
     

Section B: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)

You should have performed a risk assessment during the early planning and initial concept phase of this investment's life-cycle, developed 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.

IV. B. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

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

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

IV. B. 1. c. If "yes," describe any significant changes:
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. B. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?

IV. B. 2. a. If "yes," what is the planned completion date?

IV. B. 2. b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?
(long text - 2500 characters)

Section C: Cost and Schedule Performance (All Capital Assets)

You should also periodically be measuring the performance of operational assets against the baseline established during the planning or full acquisition phase (i.e., operational analysis), and be properly operating and maintaining the asset to maximize its useful life. Operational analysis may identify the need to redesign or modify an asset by identifying previously undetected faults in design, construction, or installation/integration, highlighting whether actual operation and maintenance costs vary significantly from budgeted costs, or documenting that the asset is failing to meet program requirements.

EVM is required only on DME portions of investments. For mixed lifecycle investments, O&M milestones should still be included in the table (Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline). This table should accurately reflect the milestones in the initial baseline, as well as milestones in the current baseline.

Answer the following questions about the status of this investment. Include information on all appropriate capital assets supporting this investment except for assets in which the performance information is reported in a separate exhibit 300.

IV. C. 1. Are you using EVM to manage this investment?

IV. C. 1. a. If "yes," does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard - 748?

IV. C. 1. b. If "no," explain plans to implement EVM:
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. C. 1. c. If "N/A," please provide date operational analysis was conducted and a brief summary of the results?
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. C. 2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%? (CV% = CV/EV x 100; SV% = SV/PV x 100)
NOT applicable for capital assets with ONLY O&M.

IV. C. 2. a. If "yes," was it the CV or SV or both ?

IV. C. 2. b. If "yes," explain the causes of the variance:
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. C. 2. c. If "yes," describe the corrective actions:
(long text - 2500 characters)

IV. C. 3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?
Applicable to ALL capital assets

IV. C. 3. a. If "yes," when was it approved by the agency head?
Applicable to ALL capital assets

IV. C. 4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline
Complete the following table to compare actual performance against the current performance baseline and to the initial performance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, for all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline and actual completion dates (e.g., "03/23/2003"/ "04/28/2004") and the baseline and actual total costs (in $ Millions). In the event that a milestone is not found in both the initial and current baseline, leave the associated cells blank. Note that the 'Description of Milestone' and 'Percent Complete' fields are required. Indicate '0' for any milestone no longer active.

Return to OMB Exhibit 300 page