Post on 01-Jan-2016
description
transcript
11
04/19/23
2
Evolution of ERAIssues and Good NewsCurrent progress-statusResources for the Project
FTE’s and Contract DollarsModel for tracking expenditures
How to manage the beastEstablishing PrioritiesCommunicating Priorities and ProgressActions/Issues/Decisions for the SC
Discuss your issues
Topics for DiscussionTopics for DiscussionTopics for DiscussionTopics for Discussion22
04/19/23
3
In the beginning…………………..IMPAC I In the beginning…………………..IMPAC I In the beginning…………………..IMPAC I In the beginning…………………..IMPAC I
GM
CM
RRA
REV
Snap Shot
33
04/19/23
4
IC IC referralreferral
Evolution of Evolution of IMPAC I IMPAC IEvolution of Evolution of IMPAC I IMPAC I
BudgetBudgetReportsReports
CodingCoding
PaylinePayline
ProjectionsProjections
GM
CM
RRA
REV
Snap Shot
CouncilCouncil
operationsoperations
44
04/19/23
5
Evolution of Evolution of
IMPACIMPAC
Evolution of Evolution of
IMPACIMPAC
CouncilCouncil
operationsoperations
BudgetBudgetReportsReports
CodingCoding
IC IC referralreferral
PaylinePayline
ProjectionsProjections
5 5
04/19/23
6
Extension Extension Systems ? Systems ? Extension Extension Systems ? Systems ?
CouncilCouncil
operationsoperations
BudgetBudgetReportsReports
CodingCoding
IC IC referralreferral
PaylinePayline
ProjectionsProjections
66
04/19/23
7
IMPAC II : IMPAC II : IMPAC II : IMPAC II :
New technology/more power/more complexExpectations high Built on existing business process and designLow resources impacted on:
Critical path decision making to develop the modules Sometimes collapsing functionality within a moduleMinimal resources to outreach, communication, help desk, and training.Lack of understanding decision making and priority setting
Enterprise not prepared for the migration of extension systems
Staff or time and knowledge to link and plan for the changes.
77
04/19/23
8
IMPAC II IMPAC II (cont )(cont ): : IMPAC II IMPAC II (cont )(cont ): :
Integration of Commons Data into IMPAC 2Stability of the databaseBudget reports needed
IMPAC 15-6 Standard formats in excelBuild query tools for budget in:
IMPAC 2Data Warehouse
Communications and Outreach
88
04/19/23
9
Most Modules in Production Most Modules in Production
QV (QuickView)
PV (PowerView)
CP (CRISP Plus F&U)
Infrastructure & Shared Modules
Interface Module
GM(Grants Management)
ICO (IC Operations)
CM(Committee Management)
RRA(Receipt, Referral, Assignment)
REV(Review)
TA / Payback(Training Activities)
GUM
People
API
UA
RAE
Query tools
Gaps in modulesGaps in modules
Production Date
April 98
April 98
June 99
May 00
June 99/May 00
June 99
June 99
Nov 96
Nov 96
99
04/19/23
10
IMPAC 2 IMPAC 2
Good News-Current ProgressGood News-Current Progress
Others in final stages of deploymentReview – summary statements in JuneReceipt\Referral for CSR – MayPercentiles in the Fall
Release redesign for CM for GSA reports
1010
04/19/23
11
Logons the First Two Weeks of Logons the First Two Weeks of AprilApril
1111
04/19/23
12
Evolution of ERA SystemsEvolution of ERA Systems
19651965 19901990 19951995 20002000
Edison
NIH Commons
Support NIH Grantee
Requirements
Interagency Edison
Federal Commons
Support Gov’t-wide Grantee
Requirements
IMPAC II
IMPACSupport NIH IC Staff
Requirements
1212
04/19/23
13
Applicant/GranteeApplicant/Grantee
NIHNIH
Grants PolicyStatement
Priority Score
Notice of Grant Award
Post-AwardCorrespondence
Other Support
Project Specific Assurances
ApplicationSpecification
ApplicationMaterialsAssurances Periodic Reports
- progress - financial - inventions - women/minorities
Final Reports - progress - financial - inventions
Certifications
Assignment SummaryStatement
Commons an Interface to Integrate Data Commons an Interface to Integrate Data from Extramural Community to the NIH from Extramural Community to the NIH
1313
04/19/23
14
Common FileCommon File
Assurances
ScientificProposals
Certifications
Other SupportProject Specific Assurances
Periodic Reports - progress - financial - inventions - women/minorities
Final Reports - progress - financial - inventions
Applicant/GranteeApplicant/Grantee
NIH IMPAC 2 NIH IMPAC 2 (and other granting agencies)(and other granting agencies)
Grants PolicyStatement
ApplicationSpecification
Assignment
Priority Score
SummaryStatement
Notice of Grant Award
Post-AwardCorrespondence
Institutes and CentersInstitutes and Centers
A Process OverviewA Process Overview1414
04/19/23
15
pilotpilot
pilotpilot
pilotpilot
worksworks
Commons a Parallel Commons a Parallel DevelopmentDevelopment
pilotpilot
worksworks
pilotpilot
pilotpilot
pilotpilot
1515
04/19/23
16
Help Needed To Assess Help Needed To Assess Priorities Priorities
Report of th
e Peer Review of th
e NIH Commons
Report of th
e Peer Review of th
e NIH Commons
April 10, 2000
April 10, 2000
Report of th
e Peer Review of th
e NIH Commons
Report of th
e Peer Review of th
e NIH Commons
April 10, 2000
April 10, 2000
1616
04/19/23
17
Involved Constituencies Involved Constituencies 1717
04/19/23
18
Recommendations Recommendations (draft)(draft)1818
04/19/23
19
Highlights of The Commons Highlights of The Commons Review Review
Urge NIH to consolidate all IC-based ERA activities into the Commons, they want a single siteBusiness practices of E-SNAP need to be redefined:
Changes in policy and in designUser group with NIH and the Extramural community needs to be established.
Focus efforts on:Integration with IMPAC 2E-SNAP, X-Train, 194 data set transmission
Link the grantee community into priority setting.
1919
04/19/23
20
Highlights of The Commons Highlights of The Commons Review Review (continued)(continued)
Not financed sufficiently to meet objectivesConstituencies need to be better involved:
NIH IC’s, Grantee Community, other federal agencies, small business etc.
NIH needs to be aware and benefit from the commons
Pilots need to integrated with IMPAC 2 into the NIH community so direct benefits seen in IMPAC 2.
2020
NIH Commons Deployment Plan: 1998-2000 NIH Commons Deployment Plan: 1998-2000 (pre-(pre-review)review)
CY1998 CY1999 CY2000
CRISP on the Web
Commons Registration
Accounts Administration
Application/Award Status
Institutional & Professional Profiles
e-SNAP
Trainee Appointments (X-Train)
Competitive Application
Fellowships
Full Prod. - Open Deployment
FDP Pilot - 65 Grantee OrganizationsPre-Prod. - ~ 120-150 Organizations
2121
NIH Commons Deployment as a Result of NIH Commons Deployment as a Result of ReviewReview
CY1998 CY1999 CY2000
CRISP on the Web
I-Edison
Commons Registration
Accounts Administration
Application/Award Status
Inst. & Prof. Profiles
e-SNAP
Trainee Appointments (X-Train)
Competitive Application
Fellowships
None transact with IMPAC 2Pilot of commons interface with 65 institutions
Expand pilot of interfaceProduction
priorit
y
hold
holdhold
hold
2222
04/19/23
23
Good News/Current ProgressGood News/Current Progress(Commons)(Commons)
CRISP on the WebPublic access - 35,000 queries a week
Interagency Edison (97)230 organizations registered ~8,500 inventions & 3,800 patents on file (95)11 agencies now utilize it
Registration/Profiles/Status in Pre-Production
142 Grantee Organizations Registered3,356 User Accounts created ~40 logons/day
E-SNAP 15 Grantee Organizations ~160 grant applications
2323
04/19/23
24
The Matrix Must Be BuiltThe Matrix Must Be BuiltThe Matrix Must Be BuiltThe Matrix Must Be Built
IMPAC IIIMPAC IIIMPAC IIIMPAC II
NBSNBS
FederalFederalCommonCommon
ss
GranteeGranteeCommunityCommunity
IC IC ExtensionsExtensions
2424
04/19/23
25
As Project Manager As Project Manager
What resources are available?FTE’s
2525
04/19/23
26
52 FTEs Committed to the Project*52 FTEs Committed to the Project*
L = Legacy, IMPAC I I2 = IMPAC II NC=NIH CommonsE=Edison FC=Fed. Commons
FTEs Effort System
30 63% L30 63% L
12 26% I212 26% I2
5 11% NC5 11% NC
FTEs Effort System
3.4 68% E3.4 68% E
0.6 12% NC0.6 12% NC
1.0 20% FC1.0 20% FC
Jim Cain, Jim Cain, DEISDEIS47 Total FTEs47 Total FTEs
George Stone, George Stone, CEITRBCEITRB,, DGPDGP
5 Total FTEs5 Total FTEs
•21 FTE’s under Dorrette Finch in the Office of Reports and 21 FTE’s under Dorrette Finch in the Office of Reports and Analysis Analysis utilize the systems but are not part of development and utilize the systems but are not part of development and supportsupport
2626
04/19/23
27
Division of Extramural Information Division of Extramural Information SystemsSystems
James CainDirector, DEIS
25% L, 75% I2Legacy Migration CoordinationDolly Sparkman (Matrix Team)
50% L, 50% I2
User Support BranchChief, T. Twoney
100% I2
Ass’t to Chief, James Tucker25% L, 75% I2
Enterprise Central Reporting, Sup., Virginia Moxley75% L, 25% I2
4 FTEs56%L, 19%I2, 25%NC
Software Quality Assurance, Sup.,
Lawrence Fanning25% L, 75% I2
3 FTEs67% L, 33% I2
Software Development and Programming Branch
Chief, Carla Flora
50% L, 50% I2
System and Database Management Branch
Chief, Kelly Landre, 90%
25% L, 75% I2
System Quality Control and Interfaces BranchChief, Emily Mitchell
50% L, 50% I2
Software Engineering and Architecture Branch
Chief, Vacant
100% I2
2 FTEs50% I2, 50% NC
Data Quality Assurance, Sup., Carolyn Stelle
100% L
4 FTEs100% L
Team Green,Supervisor,
Vacant50%L, 50% I2
5 FTEs70% L, 30% I2
4 FTEs50% I2, 50% NC
2 FTEs50% I2, 50% NC
Team Blue,Supervisor,
Vickie Fadeley100%L
5 FTEs85% L, 15% I2
Team Orange, Deputy Chief, Sup.,
Mark Siegert50%L, 50% I2
4 FTEs56% L, 44% I2
L = Legacy, IMPAC I I2 = IMPAC II NC = NIH CommonsLegend
:
2727
04/19/23
28
Division of Grants PolicyDivision of Grants Policy
NC = NIH Commons FC = Fed. CommonsLegend
:E = Edison
Commons, Extramural Inventionsand Technology Resources Branch
Chief, George Stone50% NC, 10% FC, 40% E
Carol Tippery,Director, DGP
5 FTE’s reassigned to DEIS5 FTE’s reassigned to DEIS
2828
04/19/23
29
As Project Manager As Project Manager
What resources are available?52 - FTE’s Contract dollars for FY 2000
IMPAC 2 - 5.0 million Commons - 1.0 million (needs endorsement for release)
Mitertek - 0.7 million
IC extension systems ? Internet review, council, and reporting tools ECB
Other Agencies ?Outside community ?
Academic Private sector
CollationsCollations Note o
f appre
ciatio
n to:
Note o
f appre
ciatio
n to:
Mart
ha Pin
e, NIG
MS
Mart
ha Pin
e, NIG
MS
2929
04/19/23
30
Future and Retro Cost Model Future and Retro Cost Model (draft)(draft)
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
$2.9 $16.2
$0.0 $ 1.1
$0.2 $ 1.3
$1.2 $ 6.3
$1.2 $ 8.5
IMPAC 2 Costs IMPAC 2 Costs
Cur. Yr* TotalCur. Yr* Total
* Dollars in millions -costs from June to February and include include DEIS FTE’s* Dollars in millions -costs from June to February and include include DEIS FTE’s
3030
Detail Tracking of CostsDetail Tracking of Costs 3131
$1M
$800K
$600K
$400K
$200K
$0
$200K
$150K
$100K
$50K
$0
$200K
$150K
$100K
$50K
$0
Commons Development, Deployment, & CostsCommons Development, Deployment, & Costs
Admin Interface &
Profiles
$192K - Dev. $154K - Oper.
Projections for ‘00 as of Feb. 2000Projections for ‘00 as of Feb. 2000
Commons Platform & Database
$1.97M - TYC $1.13M - CIT
CRISP
$150K - Dev.$342K - Oper.
CIT ChargesDbase Admin
‘‘9696 ‘97 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00
OperationsDevelopment
Operations
Development
3232
$50K
$40K
$30K
$20K
$10K
$0
$400K
$300K
$200K
$100K
$0
$300K
$200K
$100K
$0
X-Train
$66K - Dev. $41K - Oper.
Projections for ‘00 as of Feb. 2000Projections for ‘00 as of Feb. 2000
Status
$456K - Dev. $146K - Oper.
e-SNAP
$831K - Dev.$479K - Oper.
‘‘9696 ‘97 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00
NIH Commons Development, Deployment, NIH Commons Development, Deployment, and Costs…cont.and Costs…cont.
Development
Operations
DevelopmentOperations
Operations
Development
3333
$200K
$150K
$100K
$50K
$0
$200K
$150K
$100K
$50K
$0
$200K
$150K
$100K
$50K
$0
Fellowships
$233K - Dev.
Projections for ‘00 as of Feb. 2000Projections for ‘00 as of Feb. 2000
CompetitiveApplication
$356K - Dev.
‘‘9696 ‘97 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00
NIH Commons Development, Deployment, NIH Commons Development, Deployment, and Costs…cont.and Costs…cont.
ComplexNoncompeting
Application
$188K - Dev.
Development
Development
Development
3434
04/19/23
35
How to Manage the Beast ?How to Manage the Beast ?3535
04/19/23
36
NIH Commons User GroupAcademic Institutions
Private SectorNIH CommunityFederal Agencies
Federal Commons
IT Shared Design Group
Management Management TeamTeamIC Representatives
Project Management StructureProject Management Structure
IT Board of Governors
ERA Steering CommitteeIC Director-Chair
DDER, CIO, Project Manager, IC Rep, DDER
Project Manager
Daily Operations ManagerJim Cain
CIT Tech LiasonDonna Frahm
CIO
Multiple Functional GroupsCM
GMACRPC
EPMC
3636
04/19/23
37
How to Set Competing How to Set Competing Priorities ?Priorities ?
3737
04/19/23
38
Modules-Functional & User Groups Modules-Functional & User Groups
QV (QuickView)
PV (PowerView)
CP (CRISP Plus F&U)
Infrastructure & Shared Modules
Functional Group Interface Module
GM(Grants Management)
ICO (IC Operations)
CM(Committee Management)
RRA(Receipt, Referral, Assignment)
REV(Review)
TA(Training Activities)
GMAC(Grants Mgmt. Adv. Comm.)
CMO(Committee Management Org.)
RPC(Review Program Committee)
TPC(Training Policy Committee)
GUM
People
API
UA
RAE
CSR(Review Program Committee)
Query tools
CP (CRISP on the web)
User Group
Edison
Gaps in modulesGaps in modules
E-SNAP
X-Train
CGAP
Public/Press/Scientists
Type 5’s / VP research
T32’s – F32’s
Applicants/VP Research
Institution / NIH
EPMC
NIH Commons User GroupAcademic Institutions
Private SectorNIH CommunityFederal Agencies
3838
04/19/23
39
Priority Setting at the User LevelPriority Setting at the User Level
ERA Modul
e
Functional Group Establish priorities and relative costs with input from the user group
User GroupRecommends fixes and enhancements works with POC from OER responsible for the module
Project Team Determines priorities to fund within the framework of competing prioritiesUnfunded priorities used to build future budget requests
Recommendations and priorities from the user and functional group, and project team posted on the web and community formed through newsletter.
3939
04/19/23
40
Give Authority to a Person(s) to Develop Give Authority to a Person(s) to Develop Trans NIH Need into Core FunctionalityTrans NIH Need into Core Functionality
GM
Modules
CM
RRA
REV
TA
SITSNBS New Module
ICO
4040
04/19/23
41
Provide a Process for Anyone Group or Organization Provide a Process for Anyone Group or Organization to Obtain Input or Decide Whether to Incorporate a to Obtain Input or Decide Whether to Incorporate a Function into a Trans-NIH FunctionFunction into a Trans-NIH Function
EPMCRecommend via rating system whether a system should be incorporated into the IMPAC 2
CSR Check writing
Internet Assisted Review
Electronic Council Book
IT Shared Design Group
IC Enhancement Leveraged Leveraged
ResourcesResources
Project Team Seeks input from functional group when needed.Determines priorities to provide resources within the framework of competing prioritiesUnfunded priorities used to build future budget requests
4141
04/19/23
42
Structure forStructure for
Priority Setting for ERA ProjectsPriority Setting for ERA Projects
Functional groups User groups – consist of
Users of the system within IC’s to do their jobs, Nominated by members of the functional groups
OER liaison and support contractor. Develops cost estimates for priorities with support contractor Helps the group advocate develop a business plan Assures that issues raised by User and Functional Groups are being addressed and has ability to make minor fixes and enhancementsProvide feedback as needed to either group.
Group advocate – selected by the Project Manager Is the person responsible for this subproject or moduleEstablishes priorities for fixes, enhancements or a total redesign with broad input and a process established with both groups .Communicates the priorities of the groups to the project team and serves as a member of the project team.
ERA Project Management Team – leads the overall effort.
4242
04/19/23
43
Criteria to Rank Projects for:Criteria to Rank Projects for:
Phasing and FundingPhasing and Funding
CriteriaCriteria Maximum Point Maximum Point ValueValueManagement Support 15Business Risk of Not Doing It 10Culture Change 10Technical Risk 10Scope of Change 20Business Process Redesign 15Business Model 10Quality of Work Life 10TOTAL TOTAL 100 100
4343
04/19/23
44
Sample of Criteria Sample of Criteria 4444
04/19/23
45
Priority SettingPriority Setting Establish Budgets and Phase Establish Budgets and Phase ProjectsProjects
TimeTime
Priority Set
Review & Establish Business Practice
Business Plan
Production
Pilot & Review
Design & Review
Budget
Build Budget Next FY
4545
04/19/23
46
Priorities Will Turn Into Project Priorities Will Turn Into Project PlanPlan
FY 2001 Project Plan submitted for the BOG Review last night
Next the Project Plan developed through the priority setting process Current list is not prioritized but follows the cost model
4646
04/19/23
47
Life of a Module Expected to Be 4-6 Life of a Module Expected to Be 4-6 Years Years
Policy Technology
UsersProcess
Committee ManagementModule
4747
04/19/23
48
Communications & Outreach Communications & Outreach NeededNeeded
Redesign website Establish a newsletter to keep all informed Target e:mails Standardizing formats for updates and changesStaff and run focus groups with constituenciesIdentify resources for this function
4848
04/19/23
49
Ensure All Are Informed as to Ensure All Are Informed as to Priorities/DecisionsPriorities/Decisions
Tracking of Specific Changes / CMO User GroupTracking of Specific Changes / CMO User Group
4949
04/19/23
50
Key Concerns At This PointKey Concerns At This Point
Resources this and next fiscal year.$2 million dollar drop in FY 2001 for contracts
The effect of shutting down the commons increases the risk for NIH to loose:
creditability with the grantee communityleadership in implementing the Federal Commonsthe ability to meet the deadlines established in legislation
5050
04/19/23
51
IDEA’s for ResourcesIDEA’s for Resources
NCRR Idea ProgramOther NCRR infrastructure mechanismsBISTISBIR ProgramOMB Separate line item Open for suggestions
5151
04/19/23
52
Actions/Issues/Decisions for the Actions/Issues/Decisions for the SCSC
Is the Steering Committee, BOG, NIH is committed to the Commons?Endorsement and help towards:
Establishing the funding for the project using the existing process and using alternative grant mechanismsImplementing the structure and process outlined in the presentation to establish priorities and to manage the project
5252
04/19/23
53
Actions/Issues/Decisions for the Actions/Issues/Decisions for the SCSC
Is the model for priority setting acceptable to the Steering Committee? To recap in the model:
Priorities are decided within a module by the Group Advocate with input from the user group, functional group and the community. Across modules by the Project Leader with input from the group advocates, project team members, and the community. The project leader will seek advice from the Steering Committee for more complex issues and those that impact significantly in a shift of resources between the grantee community and internal NIH operations.
5353
04/19/23
54
Evolution of ERAIssues and Good NewsCurrent progress-statusResources for the Project
FTE’s and Contract DollarsModel for tracking expenditures
How to manage the beastEstablishing PrioritiesCommunicating Priorities and ProgressActions/Issues/Decisions for the SC
Discuss your issues
Topics for DiscussionTopics for DiscussionTopics for DiscussionTopics for Discussion5454
04/19/23
55
It’s a work in progress!!It’s a work in progress!!
Please provide feedback
5555