NIH Electronic Research NIH Electronic Research Administration:Administration:

Steering Committee MeetingSteering Committee MeetingFebruary 15, 2001 February 15, 2001

04/19/232

TodayToday Announcements New Plans for the Commons Identifying the Level You Want to Monitor the

Project Where are we:

Money Space Contractors IV&V Implementing Business Plans

Other Issues

04/19/233

Example Timeline Example Timeline (you can add (you can add features into Microsoft Project)features into Microsoft Project)

January Kick-off Commons Advisory Group

Decisions on Current Interface Formation of Two Subgroups

February – April Work with communities to:

Define enhancements to current screens for the administrative portions of the commons

Identify potential BPR for the application processes March

Decide on the new architecture for the commons May

Decide on primary changes to the screens for administrative modules

Discuss and prioritize BPR initiatives identified and determine next steps

04/19/234

Commons Functional GroupCommons Functional Group

Tolliver McKinney (St. Jude’s), Lynette Arias (OHSU), Jill Keezer (Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center), Jeff Cheek (U. California), David Wright (UT Galveston), Bob Oster (OHSU), Ellen Beck (UCLA), Mareda Weiss (U. Wisconsin, Madison), Pamela Webb (Northwestern), Jim Randolph (U. Michigan), Tom Wilson (Baylor), Denise Clark (Cornell), Stephen Dowdy (MIT), Nancy Wray (Dartmouth), Kenneth Forstmeier (Penn. St.), John McGowan (NIH), George Stone (NIH)

04/19/235

CFG RecommendationsCFG Recommendations Current Commons Interface:Current Commons Interface:

Maintain production systems I-edison - ~290 organizations

Life-cycle redesign of the commons CRISP - ~30,000 queries a week

Improve data quality Keep other existing interfaces

No enhancements or modificationsStop the e-snap pilot Focus on refining the requirements and redesign

with new technology

04/19/236

Rebuild TechnologyRebuild Technology

Choice - Experienced or Choice - Experienced or NewNew

Registration Accounts Administration Status – Application or Award Profiles

Institutional Individual

X-Train

E-SNAP Noncompeteing

applications Competing Application

R01 Fellowships Career Complex Mechanisms

Federal Commons

04/19/237

CFG Recommends Two:CFG Recommends Two: Functional Implementation Functional Implementation TeamsTeams

Improve upon the functionality in the existing NIH Commons interface so that it can be added in to the new underlying technology. 

E-grants subgroup will re-engineer the business process for non-competing and competing grant applications in FY 2001-2002 and explore related application technology options and interfaces.

04/19/238

increasing complexity and convergence requirements

Level of

imp

ort

an

ce

SNAPNon-competing

X-Train

ArchitectureInfrastructure

Wireless

AdminModules

Competing Applications:R01, SBIR, F32, R13

increasing complexity and convergence requirements

Level of

imp

ort

an

ce ComplexCompetingApplications:T32-P01-U19

Relative Position of the NIH COMMONS Requirements

International

I-edison

04/19/239

A Viable Technical Solution Must A Viable Technical Solution Must Be:Be:

Open standards-based with wide support in industry Vendor neutral Adaptable to rapid changes in policy and business

processes Interact with different access media Portable across multiple hardware and operating

systems Low in maintenance/operational cost Have a wide deployment base in industry (maturity) Able to enable large scale reuse thus shortening “time to

market”

04/19/2310

Web FormsWeb Forms

Current 2 Tier StructureCurrent 2 Tier Structure

Relational Database

WebBrowser

J-Initiator Forms Cartridge

Application Server

Forms execute here!PL/SQL

Transaction manager

Stored Procedures API’s

04/19/2311

Middle Tier

ObjectsObjects

New 3 Tier StructureNew 3 Tier Structure

Transaction manager Presentation Manager Session Manager Server Administration Messaging Server Java Server Engine Object oriented business objects

Ap

pli

cati

on T

ier

Relational Database

WebBrowser

Web

Ser

ver

04/19/2312

NIH ERA Deployment: 2001-2002NIH ERA Deployment: 2001-2002CY2001 CY2002 CY2003

CFG Recommendations

Money Comes to the Project

Decide Architecture for the Web

Deploy X-Train – V1.5

Deploy Commons – V2

Commons Registration

Accounts Administration

Application/Award Status

Institutional & Professional Profiles

Deploy X-Train V2

Re-engineer E-SNAP

Non-competing complex

R01, F32, SBIR

Pilot Competing Applications

04/19/2314

TodayToday Announcements New Plans for the Commons Identifying the Level You Want to Monitor the

Project Examples of what was provided last year Quick review of the level of detail that will be

made available to you Your input as to what level to put on the

WebSpecialized reports for you

04/19/2315

What was Provided Last What was Provided Last YearYear

Budget Project according to the cost model Organizational

CIT, OER FTE’s

Which system they are supporting Plans for change management to migrate to

IMPAC II or the Commons Contractor

TYC, Mitre Tek, Logicon/ROW Project Status Reports

04/19/2316

Cost Model Adapted Last Cost Model Adapted Last YearYear

Applications & Business Applications & Business AreaArea

Applications, Software Applications, Software InfrastructureInfrastructure

& Database Design& Database Design

Operations & MiscOperations & Misc

COTS, HW, & CITCOTS, HW, & CIT

Project ManagementProject Management

Details of Details of the Cost the Cost ModelModel

04/19/2318

What is Application What is Application Development ?Development ?

SIT

S

CM

S B

rid

ges

Con

vers

ion

Mgt

. Sys

tem

GM

/ G

PM

Com

mit

tee

Mgt

.

ICO

/ IC

Op

erat

ion

s

Pee

r R

evie

w

Tra

inee

Ap

pt.

CR

ISP

+

Rec

eip

t &

Ref

erra

l

Info

rmat

ion

Mgm

t.

Qu

ick

Vie

w

Pow

erV

iew

Tec

hV

iew

RAEReport./

Analysis/Eval.

GU

M

Peo

ple

Mis

c.

CommonApplications

Ext

ern

al I

nte

rfac

es

Requirements

Design

Development

Documentation and Training

Testing

Maintenance and Fixes

Independent Validation & Verification (IV&V)

04/19/2319 Dollars in millionsDollars in millions

IMPAC II IMPAC II CostsCosts

Commons Commons CostCost

OER OER CostsCosts

CIT CIT CostsCosts

Contract Contract CostsCosts IC TapsIC Taps

Management Management FundFund

In FY 2000:In FY 2000:How Was the $13.826 Million How Was the $13.826 Million SpentSpent

04/19/2320

2/12/01

25

OER Cost = 53 FTEsOER Cost = 53 FTEs

IMPAC I IMPAC I (Legacy)(Legacy)43.7%43.7%23.2 FTEs23.2 FTEs

IMPAC 11 IMPAC 11 39.2%39.2%20,75 FTEs20,75 FTEs

Legacy

Le

gacy

43.7

%43.7

%23.2

FTEs

23.2

FTEs

IMPAC 1

1

IMPAC 1

1

39.2

%39.2

%20,7

5 F

TEs

20,7

5 F

TEs

Com

mons

Com

mons

17.0

%17.0

%9.0

5 F

TEs

9.0

5 F

TEs

CommonsCommons17.0%17.0%9.05 FTEs9.05 FTEs

$3.131

$6.700

$3.278

$7.337

$3.995

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Operational maintenanceDatabase AdministrationUser SupportDocumentation trainingSoftware maintenanceCOTS upgradesSoftware modifications

OER OER CostsCosts

$6.700

$3.995

$3.131

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

$6.700

$3.995

$3.131

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Dollars in millionsDollars in millions

IMPAC II IMPAC II CostsCosts

Commons CostCommons Cost

04/19/2321

2/12/01

26

NIH will Benefit by Retiring the Legacy SystemNIH will Benefit by Retiring the Legacy System

IMPAC I Function FTE Gain ERA Still to Migrate to ERA Function

FSR 2.5 FTE CommonsAccounting Transaction 2.5 FTE& Release SystemPopulation Tracking 2.5 FTE CommonsDFM/IMPAC Error Report 1.0 FTE& HEDOUT (Higher Education Database Output System)

IMPAC I - Update Error Listing 1.0 FTECUPID 2.5 FTE Query & ReportsSNAPSHOT QuickviewReview Module 1.7 FTE Review ModuleType-5 Shells 2.0 FTE GUM/BridgePercent ling 2.0 FTE GUM/Bridge/ReviewContracts-entry 2.0 FTE NBS-Data WarehouseCouncil Books 2.5 FTE ECB - Summary StatementsScore & Assignment Mailers 1.0 FTE Review Module

04/19/2322

CIT Costs = Hardware / CIT Costs = Hardware / Service / SupportService / Support

$ 1.942 for IMPAC I Wylbur charges

$ 0.139 for IMPAC II Floor space for servers Connectivity to NIH Backbone

$ 1.050 for Commons Maintenance and operations of the 1

machine server needed for three commons modules

Dollars in millionsDollars in millions

IMPAC II IMPAC II CostsCosts

Commons Commons CostCost

CIT CIT CostsCosts

Turn to Your Turn to Your NotebooksNotebooksTurn to Your Turn to Your NotebooksNotebooks

04/19/2324

TodayToday Announcements New Plans for the Commons Identifying the Level You Want to Monitor the

Project Examples of what was provided last year Quick review of the level of detail that will be

made available to you Your input as to what level to put on the

WebSpecialized reports for you

04/19/2325

To help start the To help start the discussion:discussion:

Community Satisfaction with input-process-design-user friendliness, functionality

NIH staff responding to the implementation teams Project Team

Monitoring Cost, Project, Scope Creep Are recruitment-staffing-training goals being achieved Group Advocates

Ability to maintain commitment Delegations to Team Leaders Formation of Functional Implementation Teams Teams ability to define requirements

OER/Contractor Ability to adhere to timelines within 20% of schedule and

10% of cost once the requirements defined (CDR sign off by Group Advocate)

04/19/2326

TodayToday Announcements New Plans for the Commons Identifying the Level You Want to Monitor the

Project Where are we:

Money Space Contractors IV&V Implementing Business Plans

Other Issues