Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)

Exhibit 300: Part I: Summary Information and Justification (All

Capital Assets)

Overview

Date of Submission: 8/3/2006

Agency: Department of Education
Bureau: Institute of Education Sciences
Name of this Capital Asset: Education Resources
Information Center (ERIC)
Unique Project (Investment) 018-50-01-05-01-1030-00
Identifier: (For IT investment
only, see section 53. For all other,
use agency ID system.)
What kind of investment will this Mixed Life Cycle
be in FY2008? (Please NOTE:
Investments moving to O&M ONLY
in FY2008, with
Planning/Acquisition activities
prior to FY2008 should not select
O&M. These investments should
indicate their current status.)
What was the first budget year FY2004
this investment was submitted to
OMB?
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 mission of ERIC is to provide a comprehensive, easy-to-use,
searchable, Internet-based bibliographic and full-text database of
education research and information for educators, researchers, and the
general public. It is the only system within the Federal Governent that
provides this service. Prior to the initiation of the ERIC database, there
was no existing Internet based system with this functionality. This
initiative achieves the following high-level results for the Department of
Education and its customers: expansion of electronic government. This
project uses the Internet to enable citizens to access information and
transact business. The project supports agency objectives by providng
access to more education information that is more comprehensively
described and either provides the corresponding full-text articles or
links to publishers so that individuals can purchase those materials if
they choose. ERIC provides access to education materials and thus
complies with legislation authorizing the Institute of Education Sciences
within the U.S. Department of Education.
Did the Agency's Yes
Executive/Investment Committee
approve this request?
a. If "yes," what was the date of
this approval?
Did the Project Manager review Yes
this Exhibit?
Has the agency developed and/or No
promoted cost effective, energy
efficient and environmentally
sustainable techniques or
practices for this project.
a. Will this investment include No
electronic assets (including
computers)?
b. Is this investment for new No
construction or major retrofit of a
Federal building or facility?
(answer applicable to non-IT
assets only)
1. If "yes," is an ESPC or UESC
being used to help fund this
investment?
2. If "yes," will this
investment meet sustainable
design principles?
3. If "yes," is it designed to be
30% more energy efficient than
relevant code?
Does this investment support one Yes
of the PMA initiatives?
If "yes," check all that apply: Expanded E-Government
a. Briefly describe how this Use the Internet to enable
asset directly supports the citizens to penetrate the Federal
identified initiative(s)? bureaucracy to access
information and transact
business. Expanded Electronic
 Government is a primary factor
driving ERIC's support of the
PMA. To enable the e-
Government vision, the
President's e-Government
Taskforce identified initiatives in
four categories of electronic
service delivery: Service to
Individuals; Service to
Businesses; Intergovernmental
Affairs; and Internal Efficiency
and Effectiveness.
Does this investment support a No
program assessed using the
Program Assessment Rating Tool
(PART)? (For more information
about the PART, visit
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part.)
a. If "yes," does this investment No
address a weakness found during
the PART review?
b. If "yes," what is the name of
the PART program assessed by
OMB's Program Assessment
Rating Tool?
c. If "yes," what PART rating did
it receive?
Is this investment for information Yes
technology?
If the answer to Question: "Is this investment for information
technology?" was "Yes," complete this sub-section. If the
answer is "No," do not answer this sub-section.
For information technology investments only:
What is the level of the IT Level 3
Project? (per CIO Council PM
Guidance)
What project management (1) Project manager has been
qualifications does the Project validated as qualified for this
Manager have? (per CIO Council investment
PM Guidance):
Is this investment identified as No
"high risk" on the Q4 - FY 2006
agency high risk report (per
OMB's "high risk" memo)?
Is this a financial management No
system?
a. If "yes," does this investment No
address a FFMIA compliance area?
1. If "yes," which compliance N/A
area:
2. If "no," what does it
address?
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

What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2008 funding

request for the following? (This should total 100%)
Hardware 0
Software 0
Services 100.000000
Other
If this project produces Yes
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?
Are the records produced by this No
investment appropriately
scheduled with the National
Archives and Records
Administration's approval?

Summary of Funding

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.
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 BY + BY + BY + BY + 4
and PY 2006 CY 2007 BY 2008 1 2 3 and Total
Earlier 2009 2010 2011 Beyond
Planning
Budgetary 0 0 0 0
Resources
Acquisition
Budgetary 10.55358 6.926667 7.415923 1.586725
Resources
Subtotal Planning & Acquisition
Budgetary 10.55358 6.926667 7.415923 1.586725
Resources
Operations & Maintenance
Budgetary 1.55615 0.8958 0.85001 7.177
Resources
TOTAL
Budgetary 12.10973 7.822467 8.265933 8.763725
Resources
Government FTE Costs
Budgetary 0 0.1339 0.1376 0.1443
Resources
Number of 0 1.2 1.2 1.2
FTE
represented
by Costs:
Note: For the cross-agency investments, this table should
include all funding (both managing partner and partner
agencies). Government FTE Costs should not be included as part
 of the TOTAL represented.

Will this project require the No

agency to hire additional FTE's?
a. If "yes," How many and in
what year?
If the summary of spending has changed from the FY2007
President's budget request, briefly explain those changes:
Changes in the contract budget for each year reflect changes in labor
rates for the contractor's staff.

Performance Information

In order to successfully address this area of the exhibit 300,

performance goals must be provided for the agency and be
linked to the annual performance plan. The investment must
discuss the agency's mission and strategic goals, and
performance measures must be provided. These goals need to
map to the gap in the agency's strategic goals and objectives
this investment is designed to fill. They are the internal and
external performance benefits this investment is expected to
deliver to the agency (e.g., improve efficiency by 60 percent,
increase citizen participation by 300 percent a year to achieve
an overall citizen participation rate of 75 percent by FY 2xxx,
etc.). The goals must be clearly measurable investment
outcomes, and if applicable, investment outputs. They do not
include the completion date of the module, milestones, or
investment, or general goals, such as, significant, better,
improved that do not have a quantitative or qualitative
measure.
Agencies must use Table 1 below for reporting performance
goals and measures for all non-IT investments and for existing
IT investments that were initiated prior to FY 2005. The table
can be extended to include measures for years beyond FY 2006.

Performance Information Table 1:

Fiscal Strategic Performance Actual/baseline Planned Performance
Year Goal(s) Measure (from Previous Performance Metric
Supported Year) Metric Results
(Target) (Actual)
 2003 As per N/A N/A
discussion
with OMB,
this data is
contained
in Table 2.

All new IT investments initiated for FY 2005 and beyond must

use Table 2 and are required to use the Federal Enterprise
Architecture (FEA) Performance Reference Model (PRM). Please
use Table 2 and the PRM to identify the performance
information pertaining to this major IT investment. 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 at least four
different Measurement Areas (for each fiscal year). The PRM is
available at www.egov.gov.
Performance Information Table 2:
easurement Measurement Measurement Measurement Baseline Planned Actual R
Area Category Grouping Indicator Improvement
to the
Baseline
stomer Customer Customer Customer A customer In FY 2005, In FY 2005,
sults Benefit Satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction ERIC will implement
with website survey was implement a survey to a
not completed formal survey customer
prior to FY to assess satisfaction
2005, so it is customer receive cus
not possible to satisfaction and feedback.In
identify a receive 2005, ERIC
customer customer implement
satisfaction feedback. The survey to a
baseline at goal is to customer
this time. The achieve a 70% satisfaction
survey will be customer receive cus
conducted in satisfaction feedback.
FY 2005. survey in FY
2005.
ssion and Education Higher # of existing In October By September The new ER
siness Education websites 2003, there 1 2004, website we
sults distributing were 35 implement a September
ERIC websites that single web site
 information to disseminated to disseminate
the public. (IES ERIC ERIC
legislation information. information.
requires This number
information was reduced
dissemination to 3 websites
in a cost by January
effective and 2004.
non-duplicative
manner.)
ocesses and Cycle Time and Cycle Time Average 6 – 9 Implement a The ERIC w
tivities Resource Time amount of time months website that went live on
to enter a will reduce the September
journal into the amount of time Information
database after to enter a continues to
publication journal into the added to th
database after website.
publication to 1
month. This
level of
improvement is
not scheduled
to occur until
FY 2005.
chnology Reliability and Availability % of time the The ERICWeb Implement a ERICWeb si
Availability online system site only new ERIC web opened on
(website, became site by September
database, and operational on September 1, as schedule
search September 1, 2004. access to o
engines) is 2004. bibliographi
available to the accessioned
public. 1966- July
stomer Customer Customer Customer A customer Maintain at ASCI surve
sults Benefit Satisfaction satisfaction satisfaction least a 70% random pop
with website survey was customer survey of 2
not completed satisfaction questions, w
prior to FY rating (this implemente
2005, so it is performance ERIC Web s
not possible to goal is based September
identify a on industry First score
customer best practices above the a
satisfaction as identified by for governm
baseline at the American site using th
 this time. The Customer
survey will be Satisfaction
conducted in Index for
FY 2005. websites).
ssion and Education Higher % of full text Approximately 100% of full 100 percen
siness Education material in 1% of full text text material content acq
sults areas of material was will be from ERIC a
information available to available to the sources und
mandated by the public at public by end agreement
legislation the end of FY of FY 2005 processed a
available to the 2004. September
public
ocesses and Cycle Time and Cycle Time Average 6 – 9 1 month Daily proce
tivities Resource Time amount of time months was September
to enter a the average amounted t
journal into the amount of records. Of
database after time to enter 13,590 wer
publication a journal into released in
the database completed s
after 13,098 wer
publication released as
during FY progress" o
2004 records.
chnology Reliability and Availability % of time the 98% This 99% 99.5% as o
Availability online system baseline is September
(website, only based on
database, and one month of
search data –
engines) is September
available to the 2004.
public.
stomer Customer Customer Customer A customer Maintain at For the peri
sults Benefit Complaints satisfaction satisfaction least a 70% 07/01/06 -
rate with survey was customer 09/30/06, t
website not completed satisfaction overall satis
prior to FY rating (this score was 6
2005. The first performance decline of t
overall rating goal is based points from
score of 70 on industry previous qu
(FY2006) will best practices based on a
serve as the as identified by of 1,550 re
baseline for the American
the project. Customer
 Satisfaction
Index for
websites)
ssion and Education Cultural and % of new Only a limited 93% of full text For Q4 200
siness Historic content in all degree of full material will be workflow sy
sults Exhibition areas of text material available to the documents
information was available public in FY 6,572 recor
mandated by to the public 2006 5,787 EJs a
legislation at the end of EDs) were p
available to the FY 2004. to ERIC. Ov
public there were
records pub
compared t
previous qu
There were
more EJs; 4
fewer EDs.
ocesses and Cycle Time and Cycle Time Average 6 – 9 1 month For Q4 200
tivities Resource Time amount of time months was the EJs wer
to enter a the average processed w
journal into the amount of days; 30.6%
database after time to enter 60 days; 99
publication a journal into published w
the database days. For E
after 75.8% were
publication processed w
during FY days; 96.8%
2004 60 days, an
within 105
chnology Reliability and Availability % of time the 98% This 99.5% Sampled "u
Availability online system baseline is was down 0
(website, only based on 99.16% for
database, and one month of sample set
search data – 2006.
engines) is September
available to the 2004.
public.
stomer Customer Customer Customer A customer Maintain at For Decemb
sults Benefit Complaints satisfaction satisfaction least a 70% the custom
rate with Web survey was customer satisfaction
site. not competed satifaction was 68 bas
prior to FY arting ( this 601 respon
2005, so it is performance the survey.
 not possible to goals is based
identify a on industry
customer best practices
satisfaction as identified by
baseline at the american
this time. The Customer
survey will be Satisfaction
conducted in Index for Web
Fy 2005 and sites).
will serve as
the baseline
for the
project.
ssion and Education Cultural and % of new Only a limited 95% of full text A project in
siness Historic content in all degree of full material will be digitize the
sults Exhibition areas of text material available to the of about 33
information was available public in FY text docum
mandated by to the public 2006. Once copyr
legislation at the end of permission
available to the FY 2004. obtained fro
public. authors, the
web site wi
additional
documents
permission
disseminate
been grantd
ocesses and Cycle Time and Cycle Time Average 6 to 9 months 1 month For Q42006
tivities Resource Time amount of time was the cycle time f
to enter a average of acquisitio
journal into the amount of promotion t
database after time to enter was as follo
publication. a journal into journals, 62
the database days; for no
after journal reco
publication average wa
during FY days.
2004.
chnology Reliability and Availability % of time the 98% This 99% For Q42006
Availability online system baseline is website and
(website, only based on database w
database, and one month of 99.83% of
search engine) data -
 is available to September
the public. 2004.
stomer Customer Customer Customer A customer Maintain at 12/2008
sults Benefit Complaints satisfaction satisfaction least a 70.05%
rate with Web survey was customer
site. not competed satifaction
prior to FY rating ( this
2005, so it is performance
not possible to goals is based
identify a on industry
customer best practices
satisfaction as identified by
baseline at the american
this time. The Customer
survey will be Satisfaction
conducted in Index for Web
Fy 2005 and sites).
will serve as
the baseline
for the
project.
ssion and Education Cultural and % of new Only a limited 100% of full 12/2008
siness Historic content in all degree of full text material
sults Exhibition areas of text material will be
information was available available to the
mandated by to the public public in FY
legislation at the end of 2006.
available to the FY 2004.
public.
ocesses and Cycle Time and Cycle Time Average 6 to 9 months 3 weeks 12/2008
tivities Resource Time amount of time was the
to enter a average
journal into the amount of
database after time to enter
publication. a journal into
the database
after
publication
during FY
2004.
chnology Reliability and Availability % of time the 98% This 99.5% 12/2008
Availability online system baseline is
(website, only based on
 database, and one month of
search engine) data -
is available to September
the public. 2004.

Enterprise Architecture (EA)

In order to successfully address this area of the business case

and capital asset plan you must ensure the investment is
included in the agency's EA and Capital Planning and
Investment Control (CPIC) process, and is mapped to and
supports the FEA. You must also ensure the business case
demonstrates the relationship between the investment and the
business, performance, data, services, application, and
technology layers of the agency's EA.
1. Is this investment included in your agency's Yes
target enterprise architecture?
a. If "no," please explain why?

2. Is this investment included in the agency's EA Yes

Transition Strategy?
a. If "yes," provide the investment name as Education
identified in the Transition Strategy provided in the Resources
agency's most recent annual EA Assessment. Information
Center
(ERIC)
b. If "no," please explain why?

3. Service 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.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/.
y Agency Service FEA SRM FEA SRM FEA Service FEA Service Internal B
ent Component Domain Service Component Component Component or P
Description Type Reused Reused UPI External
Name Reuse?
Curators use
Web harvesters
to cull grey
literature and
enhance the
and
ERIC database Back Office Data Loading and
No Reuse 4
with Services Management Archiving
nts
acquisitions for
which
copyright
permission has
been obtained.
Information
Specialists and
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
Back Office Data Meta Data
nd software to No Reuse 8
Services Management Management
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
ting Usability test Back Office Development Instrumentation No Reuse 6
plans are Services and and Testing
implemented Integration
approximately
three times
annually and
results are
documented to
improve user
interfaces and
augment
 search
performance.
Experts in
education
research and
methodology
and major
technical
Business Governance /
& aspects of an Management
Management Policy No Reuse 2
ert online of Processes
Services Management
database
advise the
contractor on
reseach and
development
issues.
This
component
includes
scheduling and
Business Program /
t defining work Management
Management Project No Reuse 1
activities, level of Processes
Services Management
of effort, and
reporting to
meet contract
deliverables.
Curators use
Web harvesters
to cull grey
literature and
enhance the
and
ERIC database Customer Customer
Subscriptions No Reuse 3
with Services Preferences
nts
acquisitions for
which
copyright
permission has
been obtained.
ions Information Digital Asset Content Content No Reuse 1
e Specialists Services Management Authoring
prepare and
edit text for
the Web site,
 make
conference
presentations
and
communicate
with users
groups, while
graphic
designers
construct
interface
design
revisions.
Information
Specialists
prepare and
edit text for
the Web site,
make
conference
presentations
ions Content
and Digital Asset Content
e Publishing and No Reuse 1
communicate Services Management
Delivery
with users
groups, while
graphic
designers
construct
interface
design
revisions.
ions Information Digital Asset Content Content Review No Reuse 1
e Specialists Services Management and Approval
prepare and
edit text for
the Web site,
make
conference
presentations
and
communicate
with users
groups, while
 graphic
designers
construct
interface
design
revisions.
Information
Specialists and
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
Digital Asset Document
nd software to Classification No Reuse 4
Services Management
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
Curators use
Web harvesters
to cull grey
literature and
enhance the
and
ERIC database Digital Asset Document Document
No Reuse 4
with Services Management Conversion
nts
acquisitions for
which
copyright
permission has
been obtained.
Information Digital Asset Document Document No Reuse 4
nd Specialists and Services Management Referencing
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
 software to
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
Information
Specialists and
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
Digital Asset Document
nd software to Indexing No Reuse 1
Services Management
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
Technicians the
software for
the server, the
ERIC database,
the database
search engine
as well as the
platforms and Digital Asset Document Library /
No Reuse 8
operating Services Management Storage
system to
maintain the
ERIC system's
availability to
the public 24
hours a day, 7
days a week.
Information Digital Asset Knowledge Categorization No Reuse 8
 Specialists and
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
nd software to
Services Management
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
Information
Specialists and
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC Information
Digital Asset Knowledge
And software to Mapping / No Reuse 8
Services Management
create stub Taxonomy
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
and Curators use Digital Asset Knowledge Information No Reuse 4
Web harvesters Services Management Retrieval
nts to cull grey
literature and
enhance the
ERIC database
with
acquisitions for
which
copyright
 permission has
been obtained.
Information
Specialists
prepare and
edit text for
the Web site,
make
conference
presentations
ions
and Digital Asset Knowledge Information
e No Reuse 2
communicate Services Management Sharing
with users
groups, while
graphic
designers
construct
interface
design
revisions.
Structured
abstracts for
research
documents can
be created by
contributors
online, and an
Digital Asset Knowledge Knowledge
instructional No Reuse 2
nts Services Management Capture
video assists
contributors in
defining
metadata
elements
describing the
document.
ions Information Digital Asset Knowledge Knowledge No Reuse 2
e Specialists Services Management Distribution and
prepare and Delivery
edit text for
the Web site,
make
conference
presentations
 and
communicate
with users
groups, while
graphic
designers
construct
interface
design
revisions.
Information
Specialists and
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
Digital Asset Records Document
nd software to No Reuse 4
Services Management Classification
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
ERIC records.
Information Digital Asset Records Record Linking / No Reuse 8
And Specialists and Services Management Association
Lexicographers
use publishers'
journal data
that is
transformed
for the ERIC
software to
create stub
records,
suggest
metadata
elements, and
perform quality
control for
 ERIC records.
Technicians
shall revisit
relevance
ranking and
search
Support Pattern
performance to Search No Reuse 2
nts Services Matching
ensure that
system
features
optimize user
efficiency.
Technicians
shall revisit
relevance
ranking and
search
Support Precision /
performance to Search No Reuse 3
nts Services Recall Ranking
ensure that
system
features
optimize user
efficiency.

Use existing SRM Components or identify as "NEW". A "NEW"

component is one not already identified as a service component
in the FEA SRM.
A reused component is one being funded by another
investment, but being used by this investment. Rather than
answer yes or no, identify the reused service component funded
by the other investment and identify the other investment using
the Unique Project Identifier (UPI) code from the OMB Ex 300
or Ex 53 submission.
'Internal' 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.
Please provide the percentage of the BY requested funding
amount used for each service component listed in the table. If
 external, provide the funding level transferred to another
agency to pay for the service.

4. 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.
FEA SRM FEA TRM FEA TRM FEA TRM Service
Component Service Area Service Service Specification
Category Standard (i.e. vendor or
product
name)
Knowledge Javascript; Java
Component Platform
Distribution Business Logic Servlet; Java
Framework Independent
and Delivery Portal
Knowledge
Component Data Database
Distribution JDBC;OLE/DB
Framework Management Connectivity
and Delivery
Knowledge
Component Presentation / Content Cascading Style
Distribution
Framework Interface Rendering Sheets (CSS)
and Delivery
Knowledge Dynamic
Component Presentation / Java Server
Distribution Server-Side
Framework Interface Pages (JSP)
and Delivery Display
Hyper Text
Knowledge
Component Presentation / Markup
Distribution Static Display
Framework Interface Language
and Delivery
(HTML)
BEA
Knowledge Service Authentication
Service LDAP;Windows
Distribution Access and / Single Sign-
Requirements 2003 Active
and Delivery Delivery on
Directory
Knowledge Service
Service
Distribution Access and Hosting Dedicated
Requirements
and Delivery Delivery
Sec. 172 of
Knowledge Service Public Law 107-
Service Legislative /
Distribution Access and 279, Education
Requirements Compliance
and Delivery Delivery Sciences
Reform Act
 Nokia
Loadbalancer
(Nokia IP530);
Microsoft
Knowledge Service
Service Service Internet
Distribution Access and
Transport Transport Information
and Delivery Delivery
Server;
Microsoft
Internet FTP
Server
Knowledge Service
Data Format / XML;Dialog
Distribution Interface and Interoperability
Classification B;PDF
and Delivery Integration
eXtensible
Knowledge Service Stylesheet
Data
Distribution Interface and Interoperability Language
Transformation
and Delivery Integration Transform
(XSLT)
Knowledge Service
Data Types /
Distribution Interface and Interoperability XML Schema
Validation
and Delivery Integration
Knowledge Service
Database /
Distribution Platform and Database Oracle
Storage
and Delivery Infrastructure
HP MSA1000;
Knowledge Service
Database / HP NAS HEAD
Distribution Platform and Storage
Storage (HP ProLiant
and Delivery Infrastructure
DL580 G2)
Knowledge Service
Delivery Application
Distribution Platform and Apache Tomcat
Servers Servers
and Delivery Infrastructure
Knowledge Service
Delivery BEA WebLogic
Distribution Platform and Portal Servers
Servers Portal
and Delivery Infrastructure
Knowledge Service Internet
Delivery
Distribution Platform and Web Servers Information
Servers
and Delivery Infrastructure Server
Knowledge Service
Hardware / Local Area
Distribution Platform and Gigabit network
Infrastructure Network (LAN)
and Delivery Infrastructure
Knowledge Service Hardware / Network Switches (Cisco
Distribution Platform and Infrastructure Devices / 6513) ,
 firewalls (Nokia
and Delivery Infrastructure Standards IP530) from
data network
HP ProLiant
Knowledge Service
Hardware / Servers / DL380 G3 ;
Distribution Platform and
Infrastructure Computers DELL (6450,
and Delivery Infrastructure
2650, 2550)
BEA WebLogic
Knowledge Service Integrated
Software Workshop;
Distribution Platform and Development
Engineering Netbeans;
and Delivery Infrastructure Environment
Eclipse
Knowledge Service Documentum
Software
Distribution Platform and Modeling Workflow; Argo
Engineering
and Delivery Infrastructure UML
Knowledge Service Software
Software Atlassian JIRA;
Distribution Platform and Configuration
Engineering Subversion
and Delivery Infrastructure Management
WebQA by
Watchfire;
Knowledge Service
Software Test Apache J Unit;
Distribution Platform and
Engineering Management Apache J
and Delivery Infrastructure
Meter; Apache
J Test; Badboy
Knowledge Service
Support Platform Microsoft
Distribution Platform and
Platforms Dependent Windows 2003
and Delivery Infrastructure
Knowledge Service Java 2 Platform
Support Platform
Distribution Platform and Enterprise
Platforms Independent
and Delivery Infrastructure Edition (J2EE)
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
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.

5. Will the application leverage No

existing components and/or
applications across the
Government (i.e., FirstGov,
Pay.Gov, etc)?
a. If "yes," please describe.

6. Does this investment provide Yes

the public with access to a
government automated
information system?
a. If "yes," does customer No
access require specific software
(e.g., a specific web browser
version)?
1. If "yes," provide the
specific product name(s) and
version number(s) of the
required software and the date
when the public will be able to
access this investment by any
software (i.e. to ensure
equitable and timely access of
government information and
services).

Exhibit 300: Part II: Planning, Acquisition and Performance

Information

Alternatives Analysis

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.
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.
1. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this Yes
project?
 a. If "yes," provide the date the analysis was 1/10/2003
completed?
b. If "no," what is the anticipated date this analysis
will be completed?
c. If no analysis is planned, please briefly explain why:

2. Alternative Analysis Results:

Use the results of your alternatives analysis to

complete the following table:
Send Alternative Description of Risk Risk
to Analyzed Alternative Adjusted Adjusted
OMB Lifecycle Lifecycle
Costs Benefits
estimate estimate
Status Quo: Market
research comprised of
program assessment and
staff analysis revealed
the following problems
with the existing system:
(1) Lack of design
uniformity, (2) Focus on
the gray literature, (3)
Development
Long delays in bringing
True of new system
information online, (4)
by contractor
Reliance on abstracts and
absence of full-text
access, (5) Inefficient
use of resources, (6) Use
of resources for low
priority functions, (7)
Spotty coverage, and (8)
Misleading synthesis of
information.
True Development Market research
of new system comprised of program
by government assessment and staff
FTE analysis revealed the
following problems with
the existing system: (1)
 Lack of design
uniformity, (2) Focus on
the gray literature, (3)
Long delays in bringing
information online, (4)
Reliance on abstracts and
absence of full-text
access, (5) Inefficient
use of resource. It was
concluded by program
management that the
weakne
Data for this alternative,
which has been in
existence for over 35
years, is reported from
previous RFPs, quarterly
and annual reports
provided by the
contractors, and other
historical data. This
Development
alternative proposes the
of new system
True use of a combination of
with multiple
contractors, one focusing
contractors.
on the intellectual
content and another
delivering IT. Existing
requirements could be
developed and
documented through a
separate procurement
and implemented by the
existing system.
True Enhance Data for this alternative,
existing system which has been in
existence for over 35
years, is reported from
previous RFPs, quarterly
and annual reports
provided by the
contractors, and other
historical data. This
alternative proposes the
 use of a combination of
contractors and
government FTE. Existing
requirements could be
developed and
documented through a
separate procurement
and implemented by the
existing system, thereby
achieving the outcomes
implied by the program
assessment.

3. Which alternative was selected by the Agency's

Executive/Investment Committee and why was it chosen?
The alternative selected was the development of a new system by
contractor. The Department of Education does not have staff with
expertise in engineering, programming, and the information technology
specialization required to operate such a system. Moreover, the most
economical alternative was to competitively award the project to
contractors with staff experienced in architecture and systems
maintenance.
4. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?
The public can now access the ERIC system 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week. Through put time for record publishing has decreased from
approximatley nine months to less than sixty days.

Risk Management

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.
1. Does the investment have a Yes
Risk Management Plan?
a. If "yes," what is the date of 10/30/2006
the plan?
b. Has the Risk Management No
Plan been significantly changed
since last year's submission to
 OMB?
c. If "yes," describe any significant changes:

2. If there currently is no plan,

will a plan be developed?
a. If "yes," what is the
planned completion date?
b. If "no," what is the strategy for managing the risks?

3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life

cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:
Annual periodic usability tests assess the need for refining graphic
design of the web pages to ensure fast results of search; programmers
review results rankings and search options so that users can find the
information they need quickly and efficiently.

Cost and Schedule Performance

1. Does the earned value Yes

management system meet the
criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard-748?

2. Answer the following questions about current cumulative cost and

schedule performance. The numbers reported below should reflect
current actual information. (Per OMB requirements Cost/Schedule
Performance information should include both Government and
Contractor Costs):
a. What is the Planned Value 9064.890000
(PV)?
b. What is the Earned Value (EV)? 8233.894000
c. What is the actual cost of work 12382.210000
performed (AC)?
d. What costs are included in the Contractor Only
reported Cost/Schedule
Performance information
(Government Only/Contractor
Only/Both)?
e. "As of" date: 12/30/2006
3. What is the calculated Schedule 1.010000
Performance Index (SPI= EV/PV)?
4. What is the schedule variance 125.467000
(SV = EV-PV)?
5. What is the calculated Cost 1.009000
Performance Index (CPI = EV/AC)?
6. What is the cost variance 117.088000
(CV=EV-AC)?
7. Is the CV% or SV% greater than No
+/- 10%? (CV%= CV/EV x 100;
SV%= SV/PV x 100)
a. If "yes," was it the?
b. If "yes," explain the variance:

c. If "yes," what corrective actions are being taken?

8. Have any significant changes No

been made to the baseline during
the past fiscal year?
8. If "yes," when was it approved No
by OMB?