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

Integrated Partner Management (IPM)

Exhibit 300: Capital Asset Plan and Business Case Summary
Part I: Summary Information And Justification

Section A: Overview

  1. Date of submission: Sep 10, 2007
  2. Agency: 018
  3. Bureau: 45
  4. Name of this Capital Asset: Integrated Partner Management (IPM)
  5. Unique Project (Investment) Identifier: 018-45-01-06-01-1140-00
  6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2010? Full-Acquisition
  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 IPM initiative, through process reengineering and process automation, will provide, in one solution, improved eligibility, enrollment, and oversight processes used to manage partner entities (i.e., schools, school servicers, lenders, lender servicers, guarantee agencies, private collection agencies, state agencies, federal agencies, accrediting agencies, auditors, and owners) as they administer Title IV Financial Aid for Students. Today, many Federal Student Aid applications manage these processes, which result in duplicate and conflicting data storage, complex system architecture, excessive file exchange activities, and the lack of a centralized view of partners. The IPM Solution should reduce these issues, ensuring that all customers and employees have access to the same, current, institutional eligibility and oversight data. Schools, lenders, guarantors and other partners are located throughout the world. Federal Student Aid's monitoring and oversight staff are located at Federal Student Aid headquarters and throughout the U.S. in ten regional offices. The IPM initiative will be implemented in phases, with the current high-level plan as follows: - Pre-development: September 2006 ? October 2007. This phase consists of business process reengineering (BPR), detailed requirements, detailed design, and project planning for IPM. (Budget: $6.3M from FY06 funding) - Phase I: September 2007 ? October 2008. The major components of this phase include the functions currently performed by eAPP, LAP, eZ-Audit, ERM, and PM. Also included is the RID management, integrated participation and enrollment management, integration with the enterprise services (e.g. security architecture, enterprise portal and enterprise service bus), and data mangement. (Budget: $7.9M from FY06 funding) - Independent verification and validation (IV&V) is scheduled to occur throughout the Pre-Dev and Phase 1. (Budget: $2.4M from FY06 funding) - Phase II is targeted to begin May 2008 and conclude April 2009. The major components of this phase include core oversight, case management, the functions currently performed by PEPS, and IPM hosted shared services. The PEPS legacy system will be retired during this phase. (Budget: $7M from FY08 funding) - Operations and Maintenance of Phase I. (Budget: $6.5M from FY08 funding) - Independent verification and validation (IV&V) is targeted to occur throughout Phase II. (Budget: $800K from FY08 funding).
  9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request? yes
    1. If "yes," what was the date of this approval? Aug 30, 2007
  10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit? yes
    1. What is the current FAC-P/PM (for civilian agencies) or DAWIA (for defense agencies) certification level of the program/project manager? Waiver Issued
  11. Has the agency developed and/or promoted cost effective, energy efficient and environmentally sustainable techniques or practices for this project. no
    1. Will this investment include electronic assets (including computers)? no
    2. Is this investment for new construction or major retrofit of a Federal building or facility? (answer applicable to non-IT assets only) no
      1. If "yes," is an ESPC or UESC being used to help fund this investment? [Not answered]
      2. If "yes," will this investment meet sustainable design principles? [Not answered]
      3. If "yes," is it designed to be 30% more energy efficient than relevant code? [Not answered]
  12. Does this investment directly support one of the PMA initiatives? yes
    Expanded E-Government
    1. Briefly and specifically describe for each selected how this asset directly supports the identified initiative(s)? Expanded Electronic Government - This is a primary factor driving the IPM solution's support of the PMA. The IPM Solution contributes to the fulfillment of Expanded Electronic Government by "reducing the reporting burden on businesses". IPM is not a shared service provider.
  13. 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
    1. If "yes," does this investment address a weakness found during a PART review? [Not answered]
    2. If "yes," what is the name of the PARTed program? [Not answered]
    3. If "yes," what rating did the PART receive? [Not answered]
  14. Is this investment for information technology? yes

For information technology investments only:

  1. What is the level of the IT Project? (per CIO Council PM Guidance) Level 2
  2. In addition to the answer in 11(a), what project management qualifications does the Project Manager have? (per CIO Council PM Guidance) (1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment
  3. Is this investment or any project(s) within this investment identified as "high risk" on the Q4-FY 2008 agency high risk report (per OMB Memorandum M-05-23)? yes
  4. Is this a financial management system? no
    1. If "yes," does this investment address a FFMIA compliance area? [Not answered]
      1. If "yes," which compliance area: [Not answered]
      2. If "no," what does it address? [Not answered]
    2. 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 [Not answered]
  5. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2010 funding request for the following?
Hardware 0
Software 0
Services 100
Other 0
  1. 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
  2. Are the records produced by this investment appropriately scheduled with the National Archives and Records Administration's approval? yes
  3. Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas? no

Section B: Summary of Spending

  1.  

Table 1: SUMMARY OF SPENDING FOR PROJECT PHASES
(REPORTED IN MILLIONS)
(Estimates for BY+1 and beyond are for planning purposes only and do not represent budget decisions)

  PY-1 and earlier PY 2008 CY 2009 BY 2010 BY+1 2011 BY+2 2012 BY+3 2013 BY+4 and beyond Total
Planning: 1.03 0 0 0          
Acquisition: 15.08 10.4 0 0          
Subtotal Planning amp; Acquisition: 16.11 10.4 0 0          
Operations & Maintenance: 0 0 10.78 12          
TOTAL: 16.11 10.4 10.78 12          

Government FTE Costs should not be included in the amounts provided above.

Government FTE Costs 0.446 0.803 2.79 4.244          
Number of FTE represented by Costs: 4 7 18 37          
  1. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's? yes
    1. If "yes", How many and in what year? In 2009, IPM will require 1 additional FTE in a COR position, 1 additional FTE in an SSO position and 2 additional FTEs in IT Specialists positions.
  2. If the summary of spending has changed from the FY2009 President's budget request, briefly explain those changes: Difference in FY09 President's budget request was approx. $5 million and is due to additional needs of the Helpdesk development and suppot, O&M support for Audit resolution expanded requirements and enterprise integration with portal and security architecture.

Section D: Performance Information

Performance Information Table

Fiscal Year Strategic Goal(s) Supported Measurement Area Measurement Grouping Measurement Indicator Baseline Target Actual Results
2006 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Requests per Month: Reduce data retrieval issues/reporting requests by allowing users to do their own reporting. 20 20 20 - no change from baseline
2006 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Number of separate systems to see full partner view - have to manually pull data together to report:Real-time updates to database suppling the approriate information without redundancy. Single partner view. 5 5 5 - no change from baseline
2006 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Data Reliability and Quality Number of separate stove-piped systems. 6 6 6- no change from baseline
2006 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Innovation and Improvement Number of id's and Passwords: Reduced sign-on points into FSA Systems 6 6 6- no change from baseline
2008 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Number of requests per month: Reduce data retrieval issues/reporting requests by allowing users to do their own reporting. 2008: 30% reduction 20 15 Available 09, 2008
2008 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Number of separate systems to see full partner view - have to manually pull data together to report: Real-time updates to database suppling the approriate information without redundancy. Single partner view. 2008: 20% improvement. 5 4 Available 09, 2008
2008 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Innovation and Improvement Number of id's and Passwords: Reduced sign-on points into FSA Systems. (2008: 25% reduction). 6 2 Available 10, 2008
2008 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Data Reliability and Quality Number of separate stove-piped systems. 6 2 Available 12, 2008
2007 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Number of Requests per month: Reduce data retrieval issues/reporting requests by allowing users to do their own reporting. 20 20 20 - no change from baseline
2007 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Number of separate systems to see full partner view - have to manually pull data together to report:Real-time updates to database suppling the approriate information without redundancy. Single partner view. 5 5 5 - no chang from baseline
2007 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Innovation and Improvement Number of id's and Passwords: Reduced sign-on points into FSA Systems 12 12 12 - no change from baseline.
2007 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Data Reliability and Quality Number of separate stove-piped systems. 6 6 6 - no change from baseline
2009 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Number requests per month: Reduce data retrieval issues/reporting requests by allowing users to do their own reporting. (2009: 65% reduction) 20 8 Available 05, 2009
2009 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Number of separate systems to see full partner view - have to manually pull data together to report: Real-time updates to database suppling the approriate information without redundancy. Single partner view.(2009: 60% improvement). 5 2 Available 04, 2009
2009 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Innovation and Improvement Number of id's and Passwords: Reduced sign-on points into FSA Systems.(2009: 58% reduction). 6 1 Available 06, 2009
2009 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Data Reliability and Quality Number of separate stove-piped systems. 6 1 Available 06, 2009
2010 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Technology Data Reliability and Quality Number of separate stove-piped systems. 6 0 Available 12, 2010
2010 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Processes and Activities Innovation and Improvement Number of id's and Passwords: Reduced sign-on points into FSA Systems.(2010: 60% reduction). 6 1 Available 12, 2010
2010 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Number of separate systems to see full partner view - have to manually pull data together to report: Real-time updates to database suppling the approriate information without redundancy. Single partner view.(2010: 75% improvement). 5 2 Available 12, 2010
2010 Goal 3:Objective 2: Deliver Federal Student Aid to students and parents effectively and efficiently. Mission and Business Results Higher Education Number requests per month: Reduce data retrieval issues/reporting requests by allowing users to do their own reporting. (2010: 85% reduction) 20 8 Available 12, 2010

Section F: Enterprise Architecture (EA)

  1. Is this investment included in your agency's target enterprise architecture? yes
    1. If "no," please explain why? [Not answered]
  2. Is this investment included in the agency's EA Transition Strategy? yes
    1. If "yes," provide the investment name as identified in the Transition Strategy provided in the agency's most recent annual EA Assessment. Integrated Partner Management
    2. If "no," please explain why? [Not answered]
  3. Is this investment identified in a completed and approved segment architecture? yes
    1. If "yes," provide the six digit code corresponding to the agency segment architecture. The segment architecture codes are maintained by the agency Chief Architect. For detailed guidance regarding segment architecture codes, please refer to http://www.egov.gov/. 206-000

4. Service Component Reference Model (SRM) Table :

Agency Component Name Agency Component Description FEA SRM Service Type FEA SRM Component Service Component Reused Internal or External Reuse? BY Funding Percentage
Component Name UPI
IPM Partner Oversight Provides risk and issue identification, assessment, mitigation and resolution capabilities to support the partner oversight lifecycle Customer Relationship Management Customer Analytics [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 7
IPM Partner Eligibility and Enrollment Establishes and maintains up-to-date partner records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Customer Relationship Management Customer / Account Management [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 5
IPM Partner Eligibility and Enrollment Establishes and maintains up-to-date partner records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Customer Relationship Management Contact and Profile Management [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Partner Eligibility and Enrollment Establishes and maintains up-to-date partner records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Customer Relationship Management Partner Relationship Management [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 3
IPM Partner Eligibility and Enrollment Establishes and maintains up-to-date partner records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Customer Relationship Management Customer Feedback [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 5
IPM Partner Eligibility and Enrollment Provides partners with interface capabilities to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Customer Initiated Assistance Self-Service [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Partner Eligibility and Enrollment Provides partners with interface capabilities to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Customer Initiated Assistance Assistance Request [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 5
IPM Workflow Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Tracking and Workflow Process Tracking [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Workflow Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Tracking and Workflow Case Management [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Workflow Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Routing and Scheduling Inbound Correspondence Management [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Workflow Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Routing and Scheduling Outbound Correspondence Management [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Partner Oversight Provides risk and issue identification, assessment, mitigation and resolution capabilities to support the partner oversight lifecycle Knowledge Discovery Modeling [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 7
IPM Partner Oversight Provides risk and issue identification, assessment, mitigation and resolution capabilities to support the partner oversight lifecycle Business Intelligence Demand Forecasting / Mgmt [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 7
IPM Program Management Provides continued support of IPM business outcomes, operational metrics and quality management for the IPM Target State Business Intelligence Balanced Scorecard [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 5
IPM Partner Oversight Provides risk and issue identification, assessment, mitigation and resolution capabilities to support the partner oversight lifecycle Knowledge Discovery Data Mining [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 7
IPM Partner Oversight Provides risk and issue identification, assessment, mitigation and resolution capabilities to support the partner oversight lifecycle Business Intelligence Decision Support and Planning [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 7
IPM Reporting Provides real-time query based reporting (Ad-Hoc Query) to authorized users needed to assess performance related to performance, eligibility and oversight business functions Reporting Ad Hoc [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 3
IPM Reporting Provides pre-defined reporting (Custom Reporting) for authorized users needed to assess performance related to performance, eligibility and oversight business functions Reporting Standardized / Canned [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 3
Security Architecture Provides management capabilities which conform to all Federal Security requirements and FSA security guidelines Security Management Access Control Access Control 018-45-03-00-02-2050-00 Internal 4
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Document Imaging and OCR [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 2
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Classification [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Knowledge Management Information Retrieval [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Records Management Record Linking / Association [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Document Conversion [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Document Referencing [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Document Review and Approval [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Document Revisions [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Indexing [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Document Management Library / Storage [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Knowledge Management Information Mapping / Taxonomy [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Knowledge Management Information Sharing [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Knowledge Management Knowledge Distribution and Delivery [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Records Management Document Classification [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Records Management Document Retirement [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Document Management Provides a suite of tools dedicated to receipt, storage, conversion and distribution of records to support the Enroll Partner, Individual Enrollment and the Maintain Partner Eligibility business functions Knowledge Management Knowledge Capture [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 1
IPM Reporting Provides IPM data extraction, organization and formatting capabilities (Managed Reports) needed to assess performance related to performance, eligibility and oversight business functions Reporting Standardized / Canned [Not answered] [Not answered] No Reuse 3

 

5. Technical Reference Model (TRM) Table:

FEA SRM Component FEA TRM Service Area FEA TRM Service Category FEA TRM Service Standard Service Specification
Customer Analytics Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Siebel Analytic Server
Customer / Account Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Contact and Profile Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Partner Relationship Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Customer Feedback Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Self-Service Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Assistance Request Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Process Tracking Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Case Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Inbound Correspondence Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Outbound Correspondence Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Modeling Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Demand Forecasting / Mgmt Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Balanced Scorecard Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Data Mining Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Siebel Analytic Server
Decision Support and Planning Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Ad Hoc Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Siebel Analytic Server
Standardized / Canned Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Siebel Analytic Server
Access Control Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Authentication / Single Sign-on IBM Tivoli Identity and Access Manager
Document Imaging and OCR Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Classification Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Information Retrieval Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Record Linking / Association Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Document Conversion Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Document Referencing Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Document Review and Approval Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Document Revisions Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Indexing Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Library / Storage Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Information Mapping / Taxonomy Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Oracle 10g
Information Sharing Service Interface and Integration Interface Service Discovery IBM Websphere ESB UDDI
Knowledge Distribution and Delivery Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM Websphere
Document Classification Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Document Retirement Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM FileNet P8
Knowledge Capture Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Standardized / Canned Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Siebel Analytic Server
Knowledge Capture Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Adobe Lifecycle Forms
Knowledge Capture Service Platform and Infrastructure Data Management Database Oracle 10g
Process Tracking Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM Websphere
Case Management Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM Websphere
Knowledge Capture Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display IBM Websphere
Knowledge Capture Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Portal Servers IBM Websphere
Knowledge Capture Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Servers / Computers Hewlett Packard (HP UX)
Knowledge Capture Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Knowledge Distribution and Delivery Component Framework User Presentation / Interface Dynamic Server-Side Display Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Knowledge Distribution and Delivery Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Portal Servers IBM Websphere
Knowledge Distribution and Delivery Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Siebel Partner Relationship Management
Knowledge Distribution and Delivery Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Oracle 10g
  1. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., USA.Gov, Pay.Gov, etc)? no
    1. If "yes," please describe. [Not answered]

Part II: Planning, Acquisition And Performance Information

Section A: Alternatives Analysis

  1. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this investment? yes
    1. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was completed? Apr 14, 2006
    2. If "no," what is the anticipated date this analysis will be completed? [Not answered]
    3. If no analysis is planned, please briefly explain why: [Not answered]

2. Alternatives Analysis Results:

Alternative Analyzed Description of Alternative Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Costs estimate Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Benefits estimate
Legacy Systems with Enhancements Enhancements to the Legacy systems (PEPs, eZ-Audit, eAPP and ERM). Enhancements would include an implementation of RID (Routing ID) in addition to the legacy identifiers, and enhancements necessary to support minimal business operations for audits, and imaging. 22 1
IPM Integrated Partner Management Solution. This solution differs from the others by improving controls through a single point of enrollment and access for partners to our systems, and assists FSA's systems modernization goals in solving entity relationship identification problems, facilitates reusable data, and strengthens internal controls. Automation and reduction of paper-based processes allows for productivity increases and security risk reductions. 81 25
ADvance implementation of RID ADvance implementation of RID and a separate case management system. Believed to increase the cost of ADVance by about 35%. 160 15
Status Quo Legacy systems, not integrated, with minimal changes to keep steady state. Does not satisfy business need. 13 0
  1. Which alternative was selected by the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee and why was it chosen? The IPM (Integrated Partner Management) solutions was chosen because it meets Federal Student Aid's system modernization goals such as solving entity relationship identification problems, facilitates reusable data, and strengthens internal controls. Through the selection of this alternative, we expect to achieve tighter integration of partner-level data and enhance its utility for monitoring, service, technical assistance, and risk management purposes. In addition, we will improve controls through a single point of enrollment and access for partners to our systems.The reason why the Legacy Systems with Enhancements alternative was not chosen was because it does not solve entity relationship identification problems, facilitate reusable data or implement single sign-on that reduces burden on partners, nor does it strengthen security and internal controls to an extent that supports Federal Student Aid's removal from GAO's High Risk List (technical advantages outweigh the cost savings). Further, it does not allow for the presentation of integrated institutional views that are needed for the enhancement of monitoring activities. Such views are increasingly important because of the increasing structural complexity in the postsecondary sector, which is fueled by business consolidation in mature markets, growth in distance learning solutions, state budget shortages, and so on. The reason why the ADvance-based implementation is not the chosen alternative, is that the implementation of the RID infrastructure in ADvance is feasible as an initial phase, but ADvance is not the first system in the processing life cycle, nor the system of record for partner (particularly school partner) eligibility. ADvance does not contain initiation of certain business relationships among entities that trigger eligibility review by Federal Student Aid case management. ADvance processing of Pell Grant and Direct Loan records presupposes school eligibility, utilizing a feed from PEPS (the eligibility system of record that the IPM Solution will replace). Further, ADvance does not maintain records for guaranty agency or lender servicer partners. For these reasons, along with the exorbitant cost of ADvance, cannot provide the ultimate vehicle for tracking entity relationships although it could help provide a workable interim solution (since all Federal Student Aid systems will eventually be modified to handle the RID).
    1. What year will the investment breakeven? (Specifically, when the budgeted costs savings execced the cumulative costs.) 2015
  2. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized? The IPM project was initiated to address some of the deficiencies in Federal Student Aid's current stove-piped system architecture, characterized by multiple partner entry points to Federal Student Aid's services, redundant data edits, redundant data storage, excessive file exchange activities, and the inability to view data about a partner's activities and needs. These deficiencies result in barriers to performing adequate monitoring and oversight, limit Federal Student Aid's ability to provide customer service to partners, and create frustration among Federal Student Aid's customers who must deal with multiple Federal Student Aid systems to perform a single business function.IPM will significantly improve Federal Student Aid's business operations, including the critical monitoring and oversight functions, by creating the ability to track customer activities through the full life-cycle of a partner's functions within Federal Student Aid's systems. IPM will also increase customer satisfaction by leveraging single (reduced) sign-on for partners.IPM supports Federal Student Aid's modernization efforts to integrate and streamline core systems. The primary systems to be consolidated are: Application for Approval to Participate in Federal Student Financial Aid Programs (eAPP), eZ-Audit, Electronic Records Management (ERM) and the Postsecondary Education Participants System (PEPS). Additionally, the Participation Management (PM) functionality of the Student Aid Internet Gateway (SAIG) will be incorporated into this effort. Federal Student Aid intends to use a combination of commercial off the shelf (COTS) and custom software for this solution. Functionality: Integrated data view services; Enrollment management; School on-going oversight; Financial partner on-going oversight; Enterprise RID services; Profile and demographics management; Access management; Analytical reporting; Risk analysis; Workflow and document management Some of the benefits IPM will achieve are: Improved decision-making; Increased data availability to school and financial partner oversight staff; A single identifier (RID) at the enterprise level to manage partner activities; Improved customer service; Reduced Case Management business process cycle times through the implementation of work-flow technology; Reduced manual data entry; Automated risk triggers.

5. Federal Quantitative Benefits ($millions):

  Budgeted Cost Savings Cost Avoidance Justification for Budgeted Cost Savings Justification for Budgeted Cost Avoidance
PY-1 and Prior  
PY  
CY  
BY  
BY+1  
BY+2  
BY+3  
BY+4 and Beyond 0 0 TBD TBD
Total LCC Benefit 0 0 LCC = Life-cycle cost
  1. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole? yes
    1. 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? This Investment
    2. If "yes," please provide the following information:

List of Legacy Investment or Systems

Name of the Legacy Investment or Systems UPI if available Date of the System Retirement
eAPP (electronic App;lication) 018-45-01-06-02-2260-00 Feb 27, 2009
ERM (electronic records management) [Not answered] Feb 27, 2009
eZ-Audit 018-45-01-06-02-2110-00 Feb 27, 2009
PEPs 018-45-01-06-02-2260-00 Jun 30, 2009
LAP (Lender Application) [Not answered] Feb 27, 2009
PM (Participation Management ) [Not answered] Feb 27, 2009

Section B: Risk Management (All Capital Assets)

  1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan? yes
    1. If "yes," what is the date of the plan? Oct 31, 2006
    2. Has the Risk Management Plan been significantly changed since last year's submission to OMB? no
    3. If "yes," describe any significant changes: [Not answered]
  2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed? [Not answered]
    1. If "yes," what is the planned completion date? [Not answered]
    2. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks? [Not answered]
  3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule: As part of the IBR (Integrated Baseline Review) process for pre-development, a thorough risk inventory of the whole project was completed. The probability, impact and mitigation strategy for each risk occurrence was documented in the IPM Risk Repository, reviewed by the Joint Risk Management Board (JRMB) and incorporated into the IPM baseline. This JRMB meets monthly to review new risks and to monitor all risks until they are resolved, mitigated or retired and the risk no longer presents a challenge to the IPM project. The risk repository will then be used in the future IBRs for Phase I and Phase II to be incorporated into the cost and schedule and to be used as lessons learned.

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

  1. Does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard - 748? yes
  2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%? (CV%= CV/EV x 100; SV%= SV/PV x 100) yes
    1. If "yes," was it the? Both
    2. If "yes," explain the causes of the variance: The tasks in pre-development were measured based on 0 - 100% value. Time frames extended, in almost all incidences, beyond the earned value timing estimation there by preventing milestones to be completed on time. More up-front time was necessary to gather and analyze requirements before requirement writing could begin. The volume of requirements to be documented was also more than originally anticipated. Additional JAD (joint application development) time was required to elicit requirements from the SMEs (subject matter experts). JADs involving multiple SMEs were also needed to effectively get the right and complete requirements. It was unknown that interface legacy contracts would need to be established to gather data requirements, which took extended time to execute. It is not believed, at this time, that the variances will ever reduce to an acceptable level for pre-development. A new IBR (integrated baseline review) is being conducted for Phase 1 to align the dates and costs going forward based on the completed requirements and design, a more accurate needs assessment can be developed to inform the schedule and cost.
    3. If "yes," describe the corrective actions Perot changed their approach to accommodate a more iterative requirements development and delivery process. Perot also proposed combining the originally scheduled Release 1 with Release 2 in Phase 1, combining the releases of eligibility, enrollment with financial statements and compliance audits. This will save time and resources that would have been required on some duplicate efforts for 2 releases, such as training, testing, outreach and synchronization processes that will no longer be required between ez-audit and IPM. This will inform and support Phase 1, but will not correct pre-development that was already baselined. See II.C.2 for a further description of the IBR process.
  3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year? no
    1. If "yes," when was it approved by the agency head? [Not answered]

4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline:

Description of Milestone Initial Baseline Current Baseline Current Baseline Variance  
Planned Completion Date Total Cost ($M) Estimated Completion Date
Planned:Actual
Total Cost ($M)
Planned:Actual
Schedule:Cost
(# days:$M)
Percent Complete
FY 03 Complete requirements Apr 30, 2004 1.601 Apr 30, 2004 Apr 30, 2004 1.601 1.601 0 0 100
FY 04 Develop and Award SOO for High Level Conceptual Design and Sequencing Plan Jul 23, 2004 0 Jul 23, 2004 Jul 23, 2004 0 0 0 0 100
FY 04 High Level Conceptual Design and Sequencing Plan Jan 13, 2005 0.28 Jan 13, 2005 Jan 13, 2005 0.28 0.28 0 0 100
FY 05 Complete the acquisition/procurement process. Jun 15, 2006 0.416 Jun 15, 2006 Jun 15, 2006 0.416 0.364 0 0 100
FY 05 Gather business requirements and develop procedure standards with the Eligiblity and Oversight area. Sep 30, 2006 0.543 Sep 30, 2006 Dec 29, 2006 0.543 0.413 0 0 100
FY06 Pre-Development Sep 9, 2007 5.011 Sep 9, 2007 Nov 15, 2007 5.011 9.347 25 3.253 100
FY06 Phase I Oct 30, 2008 7.908 Oct 30, 2008 [Not answered] 7.908 4.012 99 1.674 56
FY08 O&M Phase I Apr 30, 2009 3 Apr 30, 2009 [Not answered] 3 [Not answered] [Not answered] [Not answered] 0
FY08 Phase II Mar 31, 2009 3.236 Mar 31, 2009 [Not answered] 3.236 [Not answered] [Not answered] [Not answered] 0
FY09 O&M Phase I & II Nov 30, 2009 5.498 Nov 30, 2009 [Not answered] 5.498 [Not answered] [Not answered] [Not answered] 0

Return to OMB Exhibit 300 page