Information Investment Subcommittee Meeting June 21, 2007

1. Information Investment Subcommittee MeetingJune 21, 2007 Note: Presentation Contains Pre-decisional BY 2009 Dollars. Internal Use Only.

2. Agenda • Current Events • Highlights of May IIS Meeting • BY 2009 CPIC Major Portfolio (see attachments 1 & 2) Project Overviews – Quarterly Analyses • Earned Value Management (EVM) and Operational Analysis (see attachment 3) • High-Risk (see attachment 4) • Enterprise Architecture (see attachment 5) • Timeline Expected Outcomes: 1) Concurrence on updated BY 2009 Portfolio, 2) Concurrence on selecting Architecture segments, 3) Concurrence on corrective action plan for investments outside of acceptable variance, and 4) Concurrence on corrective action plan for high-risk investments, as needed

3. IIS GoalsHighlights from May Discussion June 21, 2007 Anne Mangiafico CPIC Program Lead OEI/OTOP/MISD

4. Potential New IIS Activities for FY 2008 Q1 • Organizational IT Profiles: How can READ be helpful to improve the IIS understanding of IT systems and potential cross-organizational data requirements? • Enterprise Tools: What are the enterprise tools, what investments are using them, when will other investments use them, what is the governance structure for them? • Case Study: At what stage does an IT system get identified for IIS oversight and what is the IIS role for interoperability, especially if it is a non-major investment?

5. BY 2009 Major IT Investment Portfolio June 21, 2007 Jim Maas CPIC Major Lead OEI/OTOP/MISD

6. OMB Exhibit 300 Changes Highlights • Merged Performance Information Tables into a new Performance Information Table. • Minor changes to the security and privacy status reporting tables. • Simplified Cost and Schedule Performance section. • Adds new questions about legacy system replacements. • Adds new questions about segment architectures. • Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture? • If “yes,” provide the name of the segment architecture as provided in the agency’s most recent annual EA Assessment • Adds new question about relation to the GAO High Risk Areas. • Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas? • 25 high-risk areas to focus on the need for broad-based transformations to address major economy, efficiency, or effectiveness challenges.“ http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d07310.pdf • Adds new requirement to identify certification levels via the Federal Acquisition Certification for Program and Project Managers (FAC-P/PM). • What is the current FAC-P/PM certification level of the project/program manager? (Entry/Apprentice-level, Mid/Journeyman-level, Senior/Expert-level, DAWIA-Level-1, DAWIALevel-2, DAWIA-Level-3,TBD)

7. Status of EPA CPIC Major Process Preliminary Activities Status as of 6/21/2007 Training and 1st Evaluation 2nd Evaluation 07/18 05/09 Training 06/05 Bus. Case Due 06/17 Score Available Bus. Case Development 1st Evaluation ofBus. Case Bus. Case Development for 2nd Evaluation Group One ALL Bus. Cases Due for 2nd Evaluation 05/23 Training 06/20 Bus. Case Due 07/06 Score Available Bus. Case Development 1st Evaluation ofBus. Case Bus. Case Development for 2nd Evaluation Group Two 3rd and Additional Evaluations to IIS September 10, 2007 Submission to OMB

8. Earned Value Management June 21, 2007 Angel Delgado CPIC Team OEI/OTOP/MISD/ITSPB

9. EVM and Portfolio Variance FY 2007 Q2 - Cumulative Cumulative Variance Report: • 10 investments reporting Earned Value. 7 investments are within 10% cost and schedule variance • eRulemaking: -16.0% schedule variance • FinRS: -14.7% schedule variance • PRISM: -36.5% schedule variance • Portfolio performance within acceptable variance: Cost Variance (CV) =-0.2% Schedule Variance (SV) =-8.5%

10. EVM Metrics – Q2 FY 2007Cumulative Notes: 1 – $ in Millions. 2 – All data based on OMB approved baselines.

11. Portfolio Performance – FY 2007 Q2 Cumulative

12. EVM Cumulative Variance Trend Analysis – Previous Four Quarters

13. Investments Out of Variance • Contact person to provide justification on: • eRulemaking: -16.2% schedule variance • Funding deficit due to CR and multi-Agency funding • FinRS: -14.7% schedule variance • Schedule change due to contract award delay and protest • PRISM: -36.5% schedule variance • Data provided initially was not in accordance with their • projected planned cost • RECOMMENDATION: • (1) Concurrence on proposed corrective actions • (2) Concurrence to continue investments outside of acceptable level of variance

14. Rebaseline Status • Status of Investments’ Rebaseline Requests: • At OMB awaiting approval • FinRS – Modify schedule due to pending protest resolution • CAMDBS - Combine milestones currently reported separately • PRISM – Modify schedule due to significant budget cuts • IGMS – Increase cost to support migration from IGMS to a Grants Management Line of Business • Pending action to forward to OMB • eRulemaking – Modify schedule and costs due to CR • TIM – Modify milestones • EPASS – Reduction of funding – Removal of Logical Security milestones (OEI) • SDMS – Scope changes; adding ITCS • Pending receipt from Investment Managers • ICIS – Due to OEI June 29, 2007

15. Operational Analysis June 21, 2007 Angel Delgado CPIC Team OEI/OTOP

16. Operational Analysis Review

17. Operational Analysis Outside of Variance • TIM -19.5% of Cost Variance (Cost Overrun) RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) Concurrence on proposed corrective action (2) Concurrence to continue investment outside of acceptable level of variance (3) OEI and OCFO work together in the tracking of validated budget data (4) SIO of each portion to receive quarterly reports for his/her office (HQ & Regions)

18. High Risk Report June 21, 2007 Anne Mangiafico CPIC Program Lead OEI/OTOP

19. Summary • OMB Definition: • OMB Circular A-11: investments requiring special attention from oversight authorities and the highest levels of agency management • All E-Gov and Line of Business (LoB) initiatives managed by EPA and investments associated with migrating to an E-Gov or LoB initiative • OMB has reduced the High Risk listfrom 18 to a total of 14 investments • High Risk Projects: • FM LoB Legacy System (part of the LFS investment) • FM LoB Migration (part of the FinRS investment) • E-Travel Migration (part of the FinRS investment) • People Plus HR (major, alignment with EHRI and the HR LoB) • HR LoB Migration (part of the People Plus HR investment) • EHRI-eOPF (non-major, Enterprise Human Resources Integration-electronic Official Personnel Folder) • EZ Hire (non-major, vacancy announcement and application system) • E-Training (non-major) • eRulemaking (major) • ICMS (major, Integrated Contracts Management System, alignment with IAE) • IGMS (major, Integrated Grants Management System, alignment with Grants.GOV and the GM LoB) • E-Authentication (non-major) • E-Authentication Shared Service Provider (non-major) • E-Clearance Migration (non-major)

20. FY 2007 Q3 Status • Four projects have been removed from the High Risk List • E-Payroll Legacy System (non-major): investment is complete, EPA has migrated to DFAS. • FAS-Legacy System (non-major): system does not exist, incorrectly added to the High Risk list. • FAS-Migration (non-major): system does not exist, incorrectly added to the High Risk list. • FinRS (major): separated into component investments FM LoB, E-Payroll and E-Travel • Of the current fourteen projects, three do not meet a high risk principal criteria (cost and schedule are not within 10% variance) • FM LoB Migration (component of the FinRS investment) • E-Travel Migration (component of the FinRS investment) • eRulemaking See Attachment 4

21. FY 2007 Q3 Status (cont.) • Cause and Corrective Action: • FM LoB Migration: Exceeds 10% of Schedule Variance. A component of the FinRS investment. EPA submitted an interim rebaselining request to OMB and is awaiting approval. • E-Travel Migration: Exceeds 10% of Schedule Variance. A component of the FinRS investment. EPA is working with GSA and the contractor to resolve the implementation issues and to adjust the rollout schedule. • eRulemaking: Exceeds 10% of Schedule Variance. The FY2007 Continuing Resolution delayed the receipt of funding from contributing partner agencies. Re-structure of the FY2006 budget and lower monthly expenditures to cover FY2007 costs until sufficient funding is received. The eRulemaking PMO will be submitting a rebaseline request in June 2007. • Reporting: • Sent to OMB June 15, 2007 • Report to be sent to GAO and EPA IG See Attachment 4

22. High Risk IT Investments – FY 2007 Q3

23. High Risk IT Investments – FY 2007 Q3

24. Enterprise Architecture:Advancing Segment Prioritization June 21, 2007 Kevin J. Kirby EPA Data Architect OEI/OTOP/MISD

25. Agenda (1) Setting the Stage: OMB Requirements and EPA’s EA (2) Aligning FY09 CPIC Investments to EA Segment Plans (3) Segment Architecture Development Prioritization, Selection, and Sequencing Expected Outcomes: Concurrence and Executive sponsorship of selected EPA EA priority segment architectures for FY 07 and FY 08

26. Setting the EA Stage Agencies should use Enterprise Architecture Planning to ensure IT portfolios support Agency strategic missions (President’s Management Agenda, e-Government goals) Agencies must: • Architect Invest Implement IT Solutions (in that order) • Mature Enterprise Architecture Programs by closely aligning the IT Investment Portfolio with the Enterprise Architecture • Demonstrate architecture: a) Completion, b) Use, and c) Results in “Segments” of the Agency’s business

27. Segment Architecture Focus in New CPIC Guidance 2006 OMB requirement: demonstrate at least one business area (Segment) with complete architecture, and use of it, leading to demonstrable programmatic performance improvement Changes for 2007: • New guidance further ties FY09 investments to segment architectures Exhibit 300: Q F3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture? Yes /No a. If “yes,” provide the name of the segment architecture. Exhibit 53: Segment Architecture represents the status of the investment's alignment to the agencies segment architecture process. The following options are available: (1) - This investment is identified as supporting an approved, complete segment architecture (2) - This investment is part of an incomplete or in-process segment architecture (3) - This investment is part of a planned, but yet to be initiated, segment architecture

28. Current “Segment” Architecture Development at EPA • 17 – initial EPA Segments identified based on mission business lines, functions, and support services • 13 – Segments formalized in architecture activities to date • 11 – Segments with some baseline architecture information collected • 9 – Segments that have demonstrated progress towards Target Architecture • 1 – Records Management identified as EPA’s Priority “Segment” for the Feb 07 EA Maturity Assessment (needs completion) • 1 – Land Quality Management Segment architecture completed and approved by Program Official (shared with OMB)

29. Segment Maturation

30. Proposed Segment Ranking

31. Advancing EA Segments • All Segments – Re-define Baseline Information - Validate Inventory of existing Tools and Services • Use Architectural Planning to: - Support Programmatic Business Planning - Complete Segment Architecture- Define core services/tools- Underpin Strategic Planning- Align IT Resources & Investment Planning- Track Strategic Performance Improvement • Role of IIS:- Advance EA Segment Development - Develop Queuing Strategy for Segments- Identify which Segment to Advance –Next to go Public

32. Proposed Segment Priorities • Tier 1: Priority Selected Segments- Land Quality Management (submitted)- Records Management (in process) • Tier 2: Advanced Segments in process- Water Quality Management - Substances Management - Air Quality Management • Tier 3: Well defined Segments in process- Geospatial Services - Financial Services (component of Admin. Services) - Emergency Management - IT/IM Management • ACTION RECOMMENDATIONS: • Identify internally which segment(s) are most important and/or ready to become Priority Segments • Schedule completion of these segments: identify and schedule the remaining segments

33. ITIM Timeline June 21, 2007 Anne Mangiafico CPIC Program Lead OEI/OTOP/MISD

34. ACCOMPLISHMENTS May 2 OMB Draft E-300 Guidance Available May 3 CPIC Kick-Off Meeting with SMEs May 9 E-300 Training for Project Managers (Group One) May 20 OMB Releases Draft A-11 (Sections 53 and 300) May 23 EPA’s E-300 Draft Guidance Available to CPIC Community May 23 E-300 Training for Project Managers (Group Two) June 5 E-300 Business Cases for Group One Due to OEI’s CPIC Team June 15 High Risk Report to OMB June 15 E-Gov Non-Duplication Report to OMB June 17 Scores and Feedback Available to Investments in Group One June 20 E-300 Business Cases for Group Two Due to OEI’s CPIC Team COMING SOON Early July OMB Releases Final A-11, Sections 53 and 300 July 6 OMB Final E-300 Format and Guidance to Program Offices July 6 Scores and Feedback Available to Investments in Group Two July 9 FY2009 Draft E-53 to OMB (Agency IT Budget) July 18 All E-300 Business Cases due to OEI for Second Evaluation August 2 Scores and Feedback Available for All Investments August 7 E-300 Business Cases due to OEI for Third Evaluation August 15 Scores and feedback on all Investments provided to SIOs, IIS Members, PMs, IMOs, and ODs August 22 SIOs Sign Cover Sheets for their E-300s Late August IIS Meeting to Review Final BY2009 Portfolio for OMB Submission August 31 E-300 Final Submissions due in eCPIC Sept 10 OMB Submissions: 53, 300, CPIC Documents, and applicable PIAs BY 2009 CPIC Milestones

35. ITIM Schedule

36. ITIM Schedule

37. Closing Remarks