Thursday, March 18, :36 PM Page 1 of 16

Transcription

1 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Exhibit 300: Capital Asset Plan Business Case Summary Part I: Summary Inmation And Justification (All Capital Assets) Section A: Overview (All Capital Assets) 1. Date of Submission: 9/4/ Agency: Department of Justice 3. Bureau: Office Of Justice Programs 4. Name of this Investment: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh 5. Unique Project (Investment) Identifier: (For IT investment only, see section For all other, use agency ID system.) 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY 2011? (Please Operations Maintenance NOTE: Investments moving to O&M in FY 2011, with Planning/Acquisition activities prior to FY 2011 should not select O&M. These investments should indicate their current status.) 7. What was the first budget year this investment was FY2001 or earlier to OMB? 8. Provide a brief summary justification this investment, including a brief description of how this closes in part or in whole an identified agency permance gap; this description may include links to relevant inmation which should include relevant GAO reports, links to relevant findings of in audits. is a web-based, data-driven application that provides end-to-end the application, approval management of. currently s the core missions processes of DOJ's Office of Justice Programs (OJP) Office on Violence Against Women (OVW). capabilities include the interface with the portal's Find Apply capabilities. is used as a system of record data source USDOJ input to USASPENDING.GOV in compliance with OMB guidance regarding FFATA. In the FY09 Exhibit 300, was classified as a Mixed Lifecycle project (DME O&M). During FY 08, was effectively changed to an O&M Lifecycle project based on two aspects of guidance from OMB in FY08. Guidance #1 - In the FY08 budget passback, OMB did not approve the allocation of DME funding to. Guidance #2 - In FY2008 OMB rejected USDOJ/OJP's waiver request to retain as a stalone Grants Management System directed USDOJ/OJP to develop a migration plan to move to a GMLOB Consortia Provider product. On 06/24/08 OMB accepted the milestone plan containing USDOJ/OJP's migration timeline Adaptive Maintenance plan FY15. For FY06, FY07, FY08 received 34,808 grant from which 10,634 were made totaling $5.3 Billion. currently s 15,013 active totaling $19.2 Billion. The FY10 O&M request $ million will OJP efts to maintain with sufficient capacity, reliability permance to meet the administration needs of USDOJ. has been approved by the OMB E-Gov Portfolio Manager pending migration to a GMLOB Consortia Provider. To fully realize the existing capabilities of from one GMLOB Providers will require modernization enhancement GMLOB products. The OMB approved milestone plan anticipates migration in FY15 when has reached the end of application system life the GMLOB has sufficiently enhanced their products to meet the needs of USDOJ's administration mission. A limited refresh of will improve system reliability, provide services users to meet changing legislative regulatory requirements, will simplify system maintenance operations. OJP will add SOA, XML, UML into. This investment will be coordinated with OJP's EA/Operational Improvements initiative the conversion to the DOJ UFMS financial system. a. Provide here the date of any approved rebaselining within the past year, the date the most recent (or planned) alternatives analysis this investment, whether this investment has a risk management plan risk register. 9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve Yes this request? a. If "yes," what was the date of this approval? 6/24/ Contact inmation of Program/Project Manager? Name Phone Number 11. What project management qualifications does the Project Page 1 of 16

2 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Manager have? (per FAC-P/PM)? 12. If this investment is a financial management system, then please fill out the following as reported in the most recent financial systems inventory (FMSI): Financial management system name(s) System Acronym Unique Project Identifier (UPI) number 120 Community Partnership Grants Management System a) If this investment is a financial management system Not a core financial system; does not need to comply with AND the investment is part core financial system then FFMIA select the primary FFMIA compliance area that this investment addresses (choose only one): Section B: Summary of Funding (Budget Authority Capital Assets) 1. Provide the total estimated life-cycle cost this investment by completing the following table. All amounts represent budget authority in millions, are rounded to three decimal places. personnel costs should be included only in the row designated "Government FTE Cost," should be excluded from the amounts shown "Planning," "Full Acquisition," "Operation/Maintenance." The "TOTAL" estimated annual cost investment is the sum of costs "Planning," "Full Acquisition," "Operation/Maintenance." For buildings facilities, life-cycle costs should include long term energy, environmental, decommissioning, /or restoration costs. Funding all costs associated with the entire life-cycle investment should be included in this report. Funding levels should be shown budget authority by year consistent with funding levels in Exhibit 53. The Summary of Funding table shall include the amounts allocated to the investment from, should be directly tied to, the Fiscal Year Budget. This includes direct appropriations ( or matory accounts), user fees, approved self-funding activities will provide the actual annual "budget" the investment. This "budget" will be a subset congressionally approved budget each fiscal year. This will provide Departments/Agencies OMB useful inmation on the actual Fiscal Year dollars being asked spent on an investment. SUMMARY OF FUNDING FOR PROJECT PHASES (REPORTED IN MILLIONS) (Estimates BY+1 beyond are planning purposes only do not represent budget decisions) PY-1 BY+4 PY 2009 CY 2010 BY 2011 BY BY BY Total earlier beyond Planning: Acquisition: Subtotal Planning & Acquisition: Operations & Maintenance: Disposition Costs (optional): SUBTOTAL: Government FTE Costs FTE represented by Costs: TOTAL (incl. FTE costs) Government FTE Costs should not be included in the amounts provided above. Note: For the multi-agency investments, this table should include all funding (both managing partner partner agencies). Government FTE Costs should not be included as part TOTAL represented. Note 2: The two sub-total rows total row will be calculated not data entry. 2. If the summary of funding has changed from the FY2010 President's Budget request, briefly explain those changes: This summary of spending reflects the ending of this version of in FY2012. The spending reflects what is needed to maintain the system until then a renovated version of will be put in place (See Exhibit 300 Software Renovation). The spending profile has been modified from the President's FY10 budget to reflect the following investments that are reaction to business need changes prior to the implementation renovation program: Additional features resulting from system impact by the Recovery Reinvestment Act of 2009, migration of financial tracking basis to the use of DUNs numbers from agency-specific vendor numbers, additional features to exp a decision management module, expansion of GIS technology enhanced tracking of grantee permance measures collections analysis. Section C: Acquisition/Contract Strategy (All Capital Assets) 1. Complete the table all (including all non-) contracts /or task orders currently in place or planned this investment. Total Value should include all option years each contract. Contracts /or task orders completed do not need Page 2 of 16

3 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) to be included. Page 3 of 16

4 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Contract/Task Orders Table * Costs in millions What, if any, Type of If so what is alternative Contract/Task the date Is this an Contract or Has the Start date of End date of Total Value of Is it Competitively financing Is EVM in the Order (In award? If not, Interagency Task Order contract been Contract/ Task Contract/ Task Contract/ Task permance a? option is being contract? accordance what is the Acquisition? Number a (Y/N) Order Order Order ($M) based? (Y/N) (Y/N) used? (ESPC, (Y/N) with FAR Part planned award (Y/N) UESC, EUL, 16) date? N/A) Contract: Labor Hour Yes 9/8/2006 9/8/2006 9/25/ No Yes Yes NA Yes GS06F0291Z; Task Order: DJ2006TO097 Contract: DJJ05C1118 Time Materials Yes 5/9/2005 5/9/2005 5/8/ No Yes Yes NA Yes Contract: Labor Hour Yes 7/21/2008 7/21/2008 7/20/ No Yes Yes NA Yes GS35F0042N; Task Order: DJO2008F08102 Page 4 of 16

5 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) 2. If earned value is not required or will not be a contract requirement any contracts or task orders above, explain why: In July 2007, after reviewing 20 artifacts meeting with OJP staff contractors, JMD OCIO certified that is fully ANSI/EIA STD -748 compliant. In Jun 2008 JMD permed an annual compliance review determine remains ANSI compliant. 3. Is there an acquisition plan which reflects the requirements of Yes FAR Subpart 7.1 has been approved in accordance with agency requirements? a. If "yes," what is the date? 2/18/2004 NOTE: Data structure to be used to identify contract numbers in FPDS. To assist in the linkage of Contract/Task Order Numbers from the Acquisition Strategy table to FPDS, agencies should provide the following inmation "Contract/Task Order Numbers" based on the FPDS-NG data requirements (as specified in the FPDS-NG Data Element Dictionary- Part of Indefinite Delivery Vehicle (IDV)? Procurement Instrument Identifier Example Yes Data Element 1A (NTE 50 characters) " DNBCHC020042" No Data Element 1A, the Referenced PIID, Data Element 1C (NTE 100 characters) "GS09Q08DN0165-IDV-GS10F0216N" Section D: Permance Inmation (All Capital Assets) In order to successfully address this area exhibit 300, permance goals must be provided the agency be linked to the annual permance plan the relevant Agency Segment Architecture. The investment must discuss its permance measures in agency s mission strategic goals as outlined in the corresponding Segment Architecture. Permance measures (indicators) must be provided. They are the internal external permance 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, if applicable, investment outputs. They do not include the completion date 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 permance goals measures the major investment use the Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Permance Reference Model (PRM). Map all Measurement Indicators to the corresponding "Measurement Area" "Measurement Grouping" identified in the PRM. There should be at least one Measurement Indicator each four different Measurement Areas ( each fiscal year). The PRM is available at The table can be extended to include permance measures years beyond the next President's Budget. Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Prevent Prevent Customer Prevent Measureme Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target Rating OMB nt Area nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results Customer Access Web posting Post all FY 173 Results Accessibility of all 2004 solicitations solicitations/ solicitations notices solicitations in the Web in posted in required customer FY 2004 beginning in on customer FY 2003 the Web Web Mission Business Results Efficiency ment Protection on ) Thursday, March 18, Page 5 of 16 Web/electron All FY 2004 ic submission of all required beginning in FY 2003 number of on multiple 4:36 PM 14,430 in FY 2004 Process/awar 4,684 FY d all FY a to Tribal governments

6 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results ment Protection Prevent Processes Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Results Prevent Customer Results Prevent Mission Results Total dollar amount of amount of ) Complaints Extent to which established Help FY 2004 Desk can be Access Accessibility Efficiency ment Protection of established solicitations/ notices posted in customer Web on ) Web posting of all solicitations required beginning in FY 2003 Page 6 of 16 Process/awar d all FY 2004 established FY 2004 established Post all FY 2005 solicitations in customer on the Web Web/electron All FY 2005 ic submission of all required beginning in FY 2003 number of on multiple orgs. ) $6,305,229, 000 in FY 2004 a to Tribal governments orgs. ) 96.2 percent of resolved by initial Tier 1 action 543 per month (average) 225 solicitations the Web in FY ,066 in FY 2005 Process/awar 6063 FY d all FY a to Tribal governments orgs. ) Rating OMB Prevent Mission Total dollar Process/awar $6,136,983,

7 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results ment Protection Prevent Processes Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Prevent Mission Business Results amount of amount of ) Complaints Extent to which Help Desk can be Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection ment Protection of customer on ) Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e 543 per month in 2004 (average) established posting Baseline electronic submission of connector not established number of on multiple Total dollar amount of amount of Page 7 of 16 d all FY 2005 Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate Maintain staffing/profi ciency levels of timely effective response Post 75% of 96 FY 2006 customer 75% of FY in FY 2005 a to Tribal governments orgs. ) 99 percent of Help Desk resolved by initial Tier 1 actions 1149 per month (average) in FY 2006 (100%) received 5,765 electronic the connector in FY 2006 (100%) Process/awar 4569 FY d all FY 2006 Process/awar d all FY a to Tribal governments orgs. ) $4,478,904, 558 in FY 2006 a to Tribal governments Rating OMB

8 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Processes Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results ) Complaints Extent to which Help Desk can be Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection ment Protection of customer on ) Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e Page 8 of 16 Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate 1149 Maintain per month in 2005 (average) Posting of all required beginning in FY 2005 Electronic submission of all required beginning in FY 2005 number of on multiple Total dollar amount of amount of ) staffing/profi ciency levels of timely effective response Maintain % posting of customer All FY 2007 orgs. ) 92.4 percent of resolved by initial Tier 1 actions 1427 per month (average) June 2007 (100%) received 8,331 electronic the connector Sep 2007 Process/awar 1,145 FY d all FY 2007 Process/awar d all FY a to Tribal governments orgs. June 2007 ) $1,048,940, 731 in FY 2007 a to Tribal government orgs June 2007 Rating OMB

9 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Processes Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results Complaints Extent to which Help Desk can be. Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection ment Protection of customer on ) Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e factoers. Page 9 of 16 Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate Maintain per month in 2006 (average) Posting of all required beginning in FY 2005 Electronic submission of all number of on multiple Total dollar amount of amount of ) staffing/profi ciency levels of timely effective response Maintain 100% posting of customer All FY 2008 ) percent of resolved by initial Tier 1 actions 1882 per month June 2007 (average) In February 2009 DOJ was granted a waiver on the use of as a cooperative eft by agencies to reduce the impact on sys load to resulting from the ARRA Act of This metric is not applicable in FY2009. received 11,379 electronic the connector. Process/awar 4,875 FY d all FY 2008 Process/awar d all FY a to Tribal governments organizations. $5,435,498, 734 in a to Tribal government Rating OMB

10 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Processes Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results Complaints Extent to which Help Desk can be Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e Not yet of available customer. on Posting of all required beginning in FY 2005 Electronic submission of all Total dollar amount of amount of ) Page 10 of 16 Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate organizations. Processed 24,203 Help Desk resolved by initial Tier 1 actions Maintain Processed staffing/profi 24,203 Help ciency levels Desk of timely effective response Maintain 100% posting of grant sysnopses on customer. All FY 2009 In February 2009 DOJ was granted a waiver on the use of as a cooperative eft by agencies to reduce the impact on sys load to resulting from the ARRA Act of This metric is not applicable in FY2009. In February 2009 DOJ was granted a waiver on the use of as a cooperative eft by agencies to reduce the impact on sys load to resulting from the ARRA Act of This metric is not applicable in FY2009. Process/awar d all FY 2009 processed in FY processed in FY2009. Rating OMB

11 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results ment Protection Prevent Processes Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Prevent Mission Results numberards ) Complaints Extent to which Help Desk can be Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection ment Protection Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e Not yet of available customer on Posting of all required beginning in FY 2005 Electronic submission of all Total dollar amount of amount of ) numberards ) Page 11 of 16 Process/awar d all FY Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate Total grant funding a in FY2009 is $9,206,373, 869 The Helpdesk processed 46,416 in FY % were successfully closed on the first call. Maintain The staffing/profi Helpdesk ciency levels processed of 46,416 in FY % were timely successfully effective closed on the response first call. Maintain TBD 100% posting of customer All FY 2010 TBD Process/awar TBD d all FY 2010 Process/awar TBD d all FY Rating OMB

12 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Processes Productivity Efficiency Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection ment Protection Prevent Processes Productivity Efficiency Activities Extent to which Help Desk can be Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e Not yet of available customer on Posting of all required beginning in FY 2005 Electronic submission of all Total dollar amount of amount of ) numberards ) Extent to which Help Desk can be Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e Page 12 of 16 Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate TBD Maintain TBD staffing/profi ciency levels of timely effective response Maintain TBD 100% posting of customer All FY 2011 TBD Process/awar TBD d all FY 2011 Process/awar TBD d all FY Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate TBD Rating OMB

13 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Permance Inmation Table Fiscal Year Goal(s) Measureme nt Area Prevent Technology Reliability Prevent Customer Prevent Customer Prevent Mission Results Prevent Mission Results Measureme Measureme Measureme Baseline Target nt Category nt Grouping nt Indicator Results Access Accessibility Frequency Depth ment Protection ment Protection Prevent Processes Productivity Efficiency Activities Prevent Technology Reliability Not yet of available customer on Posting of all required beginning in FY 2005 Electronic submission of all Total dollar amount of amount of ) numberards ) Extent to which Help Desk can be Ability of Tier 1 to close upon multiple unpredictabl e Not yet of available Page 13 of 16 Maintain TBD staffing/profi ciency levels of timely effective response Maintain TBD 100% posting of customer All FY 2012 TBD Process/awar TBD d all FY 2012 Process/awar TBD d all FY Resolve all at Tier 1 -- refer to Tier 2 only when complexity or other necessitate TBD Maintain TBD staffing/profi ciency levels of timely effective response Rating OMB

14 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Section E: Security (IT Capital Assets only) For IT investments, agencies should maintain up-to-date tracking of which systems in the FISMA inventory any IT investment. Linking major IT investments to FISMA systems will be addressed outside the context A-11 budget submission Exhibit 300. Section F: Enterprise Architecture (EA) (IT Capital Assets only) In order to successfully address this area capital asset plan business case, the investment must be included in the agency's EA Capital Planning Investment Control (CPIC) process mapped to ing the FEA. The business case must demonstrate the relationship between the investment the business, permance, data, services, application, technology layers agency's EA. Have the requisite investment-level architecture documentation Yes requirements (e.g., reference model mappings, FTF mappings, etc.) this investment been documented in the corresponding Segment Architecture? For detailed guidance regarding segment architecture requirements, please refer to See this guidance also regarding the reporting of six digit codes corresponding to agency segment architectures in Exhibit 53,, limited cases determined by the Chief Architect, reporting an investment alignment with multiple segments. Page 14 of 16

15 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) Exhibit 300: Part III: For "Operation Maintenance" investments ONLY (Steady State) Part III should be completed only investments identified as "Operation Maintenance" (Steady State) in response to Question 6 in Part I, Section A above. Section A: Cost Schedule Permance (All Capital Assets) For investments classified as Operations Maintenance investments, complete the following table on milestones used to measure cost schedule permance, representing only one level investment s Work Breakdown Structure. This should generally show Level 3 Work Breakdown Structure. Page 15 of 16

16 Exhibit 300: OJP Community Partnership Grants Management System () Architecture Technology Refresh (Revision 11) 2. Comparison of Work Completed Costs to Current Approved Baseline: Complete the following table to compare actual permance against the current permance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline actual completion dates (e.g., "03/23/2003"/ "04/28/2004"), baseline actual start dates, the baseline actual total costs (in $ Millions). Note that the 'Description of Milestone' 'Percent Completed'-both Planned -fields are required. Total Cost Baseline (mm/dd/yyyy) Percentages Complete Description of Milestone Planned Cost Start Date Completion Date Planned Cost ($M) ($M) Planned Planned Stard Budget Form 4/1/2008 9/4/2008 1/1/2009 0% 95% O&M FY2001- FY /1/ /1/2000 9/30/ % 95% Peer Review II 4/1/2007 5/1/ /31/2007 0% 70% Project Totals 10/1/ /1/2000 9/30/2011 0% 92.75% Page 16 of 16