Exhibit 300 FY2009

I. A. 1. Date of Submission:
2007-07-31

I. A. 2. Agency:
018

I. A. 3. Bureau:
14

I. A. 4. Name of this Capital Asset:
(short text - 250 characters)
Travel Management System (TMS)

I. A. 5. Unique Project (Investment) Identifier:
For IT investment only, see section 53. For all other, use agency ID system.
018-14-01-01-01-1050-00

I. A. 6. What kind of investment will this be in FY2009?
Please NOTE: Investments moving to O&M in FY2009, with Planning/Acquisition activities prior to FY2009 should not select O&M. These investments should indicate their current status.
Multi-Agency Collaboration

I. A. 7. What was the first budget year this investment was submitted to OMB?
FY2005

I. A. 8. 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:
(long text - 2500 characters)
The Department's eTS 100% supports the PMA on expanded e-government. The eTS solution supports the Department's complete Travel Management System and provides a web-based end-to-end integrated solution to ED travelers. The solution enables travel documentation to be completed and processed in a electronic format thus providing a more efficient document flow. The solution also supports EFT payments through split disbursement capability. Split disbursement capability allows a traveler to designate a portion of their reimbursement to be sent directly to the Government-contracted travel card vendor and the remainder to the employees' personal account. With the implementation of split disbursement, the Department can realize a benefit with fewer defaulted credit cards because payments are made directly to the vendor, rather than through the traveler first. The integrated solution includes interfaces between ED's financial system and the eTS system to provide more timely transmissions and accuracy of automated (secured) data. Another advantage of the eTS solution is the integrated On-Line Booking engine (OBE). The OBE is integrated into the solution to allow travelers the flexibility of logging into one system creating the authorization and clicking a button to allow them to make common carrier, hotel and rental car reservations within the same application. After the completion of the trip, the system allows travelers the ability to electronically file and route the voucher through to the integrated payment process. This will allow travelers more efficient and effective travel document processing.

I. A. 9. Did the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee approve this request?
yes

I. A. 10. Did the Project Manager review this Exhibit?
yes

I. A. 11. Contact information of Project Manager

I. A. 12. Has the agency developed and/or promoted cost effective, energy-efficient and environmentally sustainable techniques or practices for this project?
no

I. A. 13. Does this investment directly support one of the PMA initiatives?
yes

I. A. 14. Does this investment support a program assessed using the Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART)? (For more information about the PART, visit www.whitehouse.gov/omb/part.)
no

I. A. 15. Is this investment for information technology?
yes

I. A. 16. What is the level of the IT Project? (per CIO Council PM Guidance)
Level 1 - Projects with low-to-moderate complexity and risk. Example: Bureau-level project such as a stand-alone information system that has low- to-moderate complexity and risk.
Level 2 - Projects with high complexity and/or risk which are critical to the mission of the organization. Examples: Projects that are part of a portfolio of projects/systems that impact each other and/or impact mission activities. Department-wide projects that impact cross-organizational missions, such as an agency-wide system integration that includes large scale Enterprise Resource Planning (e.g., the DoD Business Mgmt Modernization Program).
Level 3 - Projects that have high complexity, and/or risk, and have government-wide impact. Examples: Government-wide initiative (E-GOV, President's Management Agenda). High interest projects with Congress, GAO, OMB, or the general public. Cross-cutting initiative (Homeland Security).
Level 2

I. A. 17. What project management qualifications does the Project Manager have? (per CIO Council's PM Guidance):
(1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment;(2) Project manager qualification is under review for this investment;(3) Project manager assigned to investment, but does not meet requirements;(4) Project manager assigned but qualification status review has not yet started;(5) No Project manager has yet been assigned to this investment
(1) Project manager has been validated as qualified for this investment

I. A. 18. Is this investment identified as "high risk" on the Q4-FY 2007 agency high risk report (per OMB Memorandum M-05-23)?
no

I. A. 19. Is this a financial management system?
yes

I. A. 20. What is the percentage breakout for the total FY2009 funding request for the following? (This should total 100%)

I. A. 21. If this project produces 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?
no

I. A. 22. Contact information of individual responsible for privacy related questions:

I. A. 23. Are the records produced by this investment appropriately scheduled with the National Archives and Records Administration's approval?
yes

I. A. 24. Does this investment directly support one of the GAO High Risk Areas?
Question 24 must be answered by all Investments:
no

I. B. 1. 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.
Note: For the cross-agency investments, this table should include all funding (both managing and partner agencies).
Government FTE Costs should not be included as part of the TOTAL represented.

PY-1 and Spending Prior to 2007 PY 2007 CY 2008 BY 2009 BY+1 2010 BY+2 2011 BY+3 2012 BY+4 2013 and Beyond Planning 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000         Acquisition 1.350 0.300 0.075 0.075         Subtotal Planning & Acquisition                 Operations & Maintenance 0.540 0.573 0.919 0.779         Total                 Government FTE Costs 0.457 0.470 0.493 0.516         Number of FTE represented by cost 4 4 4 4

I. B. 2. Will this project require the agency to hire additional FTE's?
no

I. C. 1. Complete the table for all (including all non-Federal) contracts and/or task orders currently in place or planned for this investment. Total Value should include all option years for each contract. Contracts and/or task orders completed do not need to be included.
SIS - Share in Services contract; ESPC - Energy savings performance contract ; UESC - Utility energy efficiency service contract; EUL - Enhanced use lease contract; N/A - no alternative financing used.
(Character Limitations: Contract or Task Order Number - 250 Characters; Type of Contract/Task Order - 250 Characters; Name of CO - 250 Characters; CO Contact Information - 250 Characters)

Type of Contract/Task Order Has the contract been awarded? If so what is the date of the award? If not, what is the planned award date? Start date of Contract/Task Order End date of Contract/Task Order Total Value of Contract/Task Order ($M) Is this an Interagency Acquisition? Is it performance based? Competitively awarded? What, if any, alternative financing option is being used? Is EVM in the contract? Does the contract include the required security & privacy clauses? Name of CO CO Contact Information (phone/email) Contracting officer certification level If N/A, has the agency determined the CO assigned has the competencies and skills necessary to support this aquistion?

I. C. 2. If earned value is not required or will not be a contract requirement for any of the contracts or task orders above, explain why:
(long text - 2500 characters)
Contract ED-03-PO-1082 (EDCAPS ISS) was awarded in FY03, prior to the elaboration of EV requirements. The contract is firm fixed price, minimizing government risk, for operations and maintenance activities. The contractor provides monthly financial status reports with information on work completion percentages, budget spent and ETC for task orders. The contract will be completed at the end of FY08 and we will include EV reporting requirements in follow-on contracts.

I. C. 3. Do the contracts ensure Section 508 compliance?
yes

I. C. 4. Is there an acquisition plan which has been approved in accordance with agency requirements?
yes

I. D. 1. Table 1. Performance Information Table
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 (indicators) 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 measure.

Agencies must use the following table to report performance goals and measures for the major investment and use the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Performance Reference Model (PRM). 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 each of the four different Measurement Areas (for each fiscal year). The PRM is available at www.egov.gov. The table can be extended to include performance measures for years beyond FY 2009.

Strategic Goal(s) Supported Measurement Area Measurement Grouping Measurement Indicator Baseline Target Actual Results 2005 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Accounting Interface Failures 26 interfaces failures per year. Improve the interface failures to 18 per year. As of 9/30/05, no interface failures have resulted in documents not processing in the general ledger. 2005 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Productivity Custom Reconciliation Reports 3 custom reports in the TMS application Provide one additional reconciliation report for users to easily access for reconciliation purposes As of 9/30/05, no planned enhancements to the current TMS due to anticipated migration to eTS. 2005 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Efficiency Travel Document Processing Travel Document processing takes from 7-10 days Reduce document processing in TMS to 3-4 days. As of 9/30/05, reimbursements continue to meet the 2-4 day reimbursement timeframe. 2005 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime 20 system reboots Reduce system reboots due to hung application to 14. As of 9/30/05, five re-boots have been required due to hung application. Weekly re-boots are still performed as part of EDCAPS maintenance. 2006 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Accounting Interface Failures 26 interfaces failures per year Less than 18 per year. As of 9/30/06, 0 interface failures. Data has been processing regularly in the General Ledger 2006 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Help Desk Support 50% End-User Traveler Issues Resolved within one hour 75% End-User Traveler Issues resolved within one hour As of 09/30/06, 99% of End-User issues referred by EDCAPS Help Desk were resolved successfully. 2006 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Efficiency Travel Document Processing 7-10 days Processing Time Reduce to 2-3 days. As of 9/30/06, 2-3 day processing occurs with integrated TMS system. 2006 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime 20 system reboots Reduce to 14. As of 9/30/06, 2 TMS system reboots have been reported. 2007 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Financial Management Interface Failures 26 interfaces failures preventing documents from processing in the general ledger Less than 18 per year. As of 9/30/07, 6 interface failures have resulted. Resolution of file failure were addressed and resolved within 24 hours as outlined in the SLAs. 2007 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Help Desk Support 50% End-User Traveler Issues Resolved within one hour 75% End-User Traveler Issues resolved within one hour As of 9/30/07, 99% of end-user travel issues were resolved with the EDCAPS Help Desk. Those that could not be resolved by Help Desk Staff or Functional Team were referred to the vendor's Help Desk for resolution. 2007 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Efficiency Travel document processing 3-4 days for travel document processing.. Reduce processing to 2-3 days. As of 9/30/07, travel files were processed timely and payment were made within 24 hours of successful file processing. 2007 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime 20 system reboots Reduce to 14. As of 9/30/07, no system reboots were requested by ED to the vendor. System availability is monitored by GSA. Scheduled maintenance was performed as required. 2004 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Accounting Interface Failures 26 interfaces failures per year. Improve the interface failures to 18 per year. 9 Interface failures. Process logs produced alerted system administrators and issues resolved in all cases. 2004 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Productivity Custom Reconciliation Reports 3 custom reports in the TMS application. Provide one additional reconciliation report for users to easily access for reconciliation purposes. Two custom reports were moved to production in FY 03. To assist with reconciliation issues additional users were issued ?Reports? IDs to assist offices with reconciliation of accounts. 2004 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Efficiency Travel documentation processing Travel Document processing takes from 7-10 days Improve document processing in TMS to 3-4 days Document processing reduced to 2-4 days with additional training provided on the system and the ease of use of the system. 2004 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime 20 system reboots Reduce system reboots due to hung application to 14 Scheduled weekly re-boots reduced the amount of reboots to 2 or less during this period. 2006 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Reduced Travel Ticket Transactions Fees 50% adoption rate of on-line booking engine 70% usage of on-line booking engine As of 9/30/06, ED 77% OBE usage. ED has the highest adoption rate of OBE usage across the eTS vendor CWGT. 2008 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Financial Management Interface Failures 18 interfaces failures preventing documents from processing in the general ledger Less than 15 per year. Results Expected December 2008 2008 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Help Desk Support 75% End-User Traveler Issues Resolved within one hour 80% End-User Traveler Issues resolved within one hour Results Expected December 2008 2008 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Efficiency Travel document processing 2-3 days for travel document processing.. Reduce processing to 1-2 days. Results Expected December 2008 2007 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Reduced Travel Ticket Transactions Fees 50% usage of on-line booking engine 70% usage of on-line booking engine As of 9/30/07, 70% usage of on-line booking by ED staff to secure travel reservations. 2008 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Reduced Travel Ticket Transactions Fees 70% adoption rate of on-line booking engine 75% usage of on-line booking engine Results Expected December 2008 2008 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime 14 system reboots Reduce to 10. Results Expected December 2008 2009 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Reduced Travel Ticket Transactions Fees Maintain 70% usage of on-line booking engine Maintain 75% usage of on-line booking engine Results Expected December 2009 2009 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime Maintain 14 system reboots due to hung application Maintain Reduction† to 10 Results Expected December 2009 2009 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Productivity Travel Document Processing Maintain 2-3 days for travel document processing.. Maintain Reduction of Processing to1-2 days Results Expected December 2009 2009 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Financial Management Interface Failures Maintain 18 interfaces failures preventing documents from processing in the general ledger Maintain less than 15 per year Results Expected December 2009 2009 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Service Efficiency Help Desk Support Maintain 75% End-User Traveler issues resolved within one hour Maintain 80% end-user traveler issues resolved within one hour Results Expected December 2009 2010 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Reduced Travel Ticket Transaction Fees Maintain 70% usage of on-line booking engine Maintain 75% usage of on-line booking engine Results Expected December 2010 2010 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime Maintain 14 system reboots Maintain Reduction to 10 Results Expected December 2010 2010 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Productivity Travel Document Processing Maintain 2-3 days for travel document processing.. Maintain Reduction† to 1-2 days Results Expected December 2010 2010 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Financial Management Interface Failures Maintain 18 interfaces failures preventing documents from processing in the general ledger Maintain less than 15 per year Results Expected December 2010 2010 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Service Efficiency Help Desk Support Maintain 75% End-User Traveler issues resolved within one hour Maintain 80% end-user traveler issues resolved within one hour Results Expected December 2010 2011 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Accuracy of Service or Product Delivered Reduced Travel Ticket Transaction Fees Maintain 70% usage of on-line booking engine Maintain 75% usage of on-line booking engine Results Expected December 2011 2011 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Technology Availability System Downtime Maintain 14 system reboots Maintain Reduction to 10 Results Expected December 2011 2011 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Processes and Activities Productivity Travel Document Processing Maintain 2-3 days for travel document processing.. Maintain Reduction to 1-2 Processing days Results Expected December 2011 2011 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Mission and Business Results Financial Management Interface Failures Maintain 10 interfaces failures preventing documents from processing in the general ledger Maintain less than 15 per year Results Expected December 2011 2011 Cross-Goal Strategy on Management Customer Results Service Efficiency Help Desk Support Maintain 75% End-User Traveler issues resolved within one hour Maintain 80% end-user traveler issues resolved within one hour Results Expected December 2011

I. E. 1. Have the IT security costs for the system(s) been identified and integrated into the overall costs of the investment?

I. E. 2. Is identifying and assessing security and privacy risks a part of the overall risk management effort for each system supporting or part of this investment?

I. E. 3. Systems in Planning and Undergoing Enhancement(s) – Security Table:
The questions asking whether there is a PIA which covers the system and whether a SORN is required for the system are discrete from the narrative fields. The narrative column provides an opportunity for free text explanation why a working link is not provided. For example, a SORN may be required for the system, but the system is not yet operational. In this circumstance, answer "yes" for column (e) and in the narrative in column (f), explain that because the system is not operational the SORN is not yet required to be published.

Agency/or contractor Operated System Planned Operational Date Planned or Actual C&A Completion Date

I. E. 4. Operational Systems - Security:

Agency/or contractor Operated System NIST FIPS 199 Risk Impact level (High, Moderate, Low). Has C&A been Completed, using NIST 800-37? (Y/N) Date C&A Complete. What standards were used for the Security Controls tests? Date Complete(d): Security Control Testing Date the contingency plan tested.

I. E. 5. Have any weaknesses related to any of the systems part of or supporting this investment been identified by the agency or IG?

I. E. 6. Indicate whether an increase in IT security funding is requested to remediate IT security weaknesses?

I. E. 7. How are contractor security procedures monitored, verified, and validated by the agency for the contractor systems above?
(long text - 2500 characters)

I. E. 8. Planning & Operational Systems - Privacy Table:
Details for Text Options:
Column (d): If yes to (c), provide the link(s) to the publicly posted PIA(s) with which this system is associated. If no to (c), provide an explanation why the PIA has not been publicly posted or why the PIA has not been conducted.

Column (f): If yes to (e), provide the link(s) to where the current and up to date SORN(s) is published in the federal register. If no to (e), provide an explanation why the SORN has not been published or why there isn't a current and up to date SORN.

Note: Links must be provided to specific documents not general privacy websites.

(b) Is this a new system? (Y/N) (c) Is there a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) that covers this system? (Y/N) (d) Internet Link or Explanation (e) Is a System of Records Notice (SORN) required for this system? (Y/N) (f) Internet Link or Explanation

I. F. 1. Is this investment included in your agency's target enterprise architecture?
yes

I. F. 2. Is this investment included in the agency's EA Transition Strategy?
yes

I. F. 3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture?
no

I. F. 4. Service Component 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.egov.gov.

a. Use existing SRM Components or identify as "NEW". A "NEW" component is one not already identified as a service component in the FEA SRM.
b. 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.
c. '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.
d. Please provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount used for each service component listed in the table. If external, provide the percentage of the BY requested funding amount transferred to another agency to pay for the service. The percentages in this column can, but are not required to, add up to 100%.

Agency Component Description FEA SRM Service Type FEA SRM Component (a) Service Component Reused - Component Name (b) Service Component Reused - UPI (b) Internal or External Reuse? (c) BY Funding Percentage (d) Operations/Maintenance E2 Solution provides canned reporting capabilities within application. Reporting Standardized / Canned Travel Management 023-10-01-03-01-0220-24 External 5 Operations/Maintenance E2 Solution provides on-line tutorials and on-line assistance within application for end-users use. Customer Initiated Assistance Online Tutorials Travel Management 023-10-01-03-01-0220-24 External 5 Security Software needed to support the security of the E2 system. Tracking and Workflow Case Management Travel Management   Internal 4 Voucher Processing Fees Fees for processing employee vouchers in lieu of software licensing fees Financial Management Expense Management Travel Management 023-10-01-03-01-0220-24 External 25 Incentive Fees Incentives paid to contactor for superior travel application performance Human Resources Travel Management Travel Management 023-10-01-03-01-0220-24 External 20 Training Training staff on new E2 travel system Human Resources Education / Training Travel Management   Internal 7 Legacy System Shutdown Archiving data from legacy travel system for future queries involving travel transactions. Data Management Loading and Archiving Travel Management   Internal 5 Testing Application and integration testing of E2 application Development and Integration Instrumentation and Testing Travel Management   Internal 10 Interfaces Maintenance, modification, and enhancement of the E2 interface with FMSS Development and Integration Data Integration Travel Management   Internal 20 EDNET Services Information Technology Infrastructure Services provided by the DoED EdNet Investment. Development and Integration Instrumentation and Testing Instrumentation and Testing 018-24-02-00-01-1020-00 Internal 0 EDNET Services Information Technology Infrastructure Services provided by the DoED EdNet Investment. Organizational Management Network Management Network Management 018-24-02-00-01-1020-00 Internal 0 EDNET Services Information Technology Infrastructure Services provided by the DoED EdNet Investment. Security Management Cryptography Cryptography 018-24-02-00-01-1020-00 Internal 0 EDNET Services Information Technology Infrastructure Services provided by the DoED EdNet Investment Security Management Intrusion Detection Intrusion Detection 018-24-02-00-01-1020-00 Internal 0 E-Travel Establish a common government-wide web-based end-to-end travel management service that reduces or eliminates capital investment and minimizes total cost per transaction for the gov't with policy based on best travel management practices. Human Resources Travel Management Travel Management 023-10-01-03-01-0220-24 External 0

I. F. 5. Table 1. 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.

a. 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
b. 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.

FEA TRM Service Area FEA TRM Service Category FEA TRM Service Standard Service Specification (i.e., vendor and product name) Expense Management Service Interface and Integration Integration Middleware Oracle PL SQL and Net 8 provided by ISS Travel Management Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Legislative / Compliance Federal Travel Regulations; Section 508 Travel Management Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Authentication / Single Sign-on TBD Travel Management Service Access and Delivery Service Requirements Hosting Internal provided by EDNET Travel Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Supporting Network Services Provided by EDNET Travel Management Service Access and Delivery Service Transport Service Transport Provided by EDNET Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Support Platforms Platform Dependent Microsoft Windows provided by EDNET;IBM-AIX provided by ISS Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Database Oracle provided ISS Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Database / Storage Storage IBM SAN provided by ISS Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Web Servers Progress 9.1C Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Delivery Servers Application Servers Microsoft Internet Information Services provided by EDNET Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Software Configuration Management Rational Enterprise Suite and Rational Clearcase provided by ISS Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Test Management Mercury Interactive Load Runner provided by ISS Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Software Engineering Modeling Rational Rose provided by ISS Travel Management Service Platform and Infrastructure Hardware / Infrastructure Servers / Computers Compaq ProLiant provided by ISS Travel Management Component Framework Security Certificates / Digital Signatures TBD Travel Management Component Framework Security Supporting Security Services Provided by ISS Travel Management Component Framework Presentation / Interface Static Display Microsoft Internet Information Services provided by EDNET Travel Management Component Framework Business Logic Platform Dependent Microsoft Visual Basic provided by ISS Travel Management Component Framework Data Management Database Connectivity Oracle SQL Net provided by EDNET Travel Management Component Framework Data Management Reporting and Analysis Oracle Runtime;Cognos Impromptu;Cognos Query provided by ISS

I. F. 6. Will the application leverage existing components and/or applications across the Government (i.e., FirstGov, Pay.Gov, etc)?
yes

II. A. 1. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this project?

II. A. 2. Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:
(Character Limitations: Alternative Analyzed - 250 characters; Description of Alternative - 500 Characters)

Description of Alternative Risk Lifecycle Cost Estimate Risk Lifecycle Benefits Estimate

II. A. 3. Which alternative was selected by the Agency's Executive/Investment Committee and why was it chosen?
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. A. 4. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. A. 5. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole?

UPI if available Date of the System Retirement

II. B. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

II. B. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?

II. B. 3. Briefly describe how investment risks are reflected in the life cycle cost estimate and investment schedule:
(long text - 2500 characters)

II. C. 1. Does the earned value management system meet the criteria in ANSI/EIA Standard - 748?

II. C. 2. Is the CV or SV greater than 10%?

II. C. 3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?

II. C. 4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline
Complete the following table to compare actual performance against the current performance baseline and to the initial performance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, for all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline and actual completion dates (e.g., "03/23/2003"/ "04/28/2004") and the baseline and actual total costs (in $ Millions). In the event that a milestone is not found in both the initial and current baseline, leave the associated cells blank. Note that the 'Description of Milestone' and 'Percent Complete' fields are required. Indicate '0' for any milestone no longer active. (Character Limitations: Description of Milestone - 500 characters)

Initial Baseline - Planned Completion Date Initial Baseline - Total Cost Current Baseline - Planned Completion Date Current Baseline - Actual Completion Date Current Baseline - Planned Total Cost Current Baseline - Actual Total Cost Current Baseline Variance - Schedule Current Baseline Variance - Cost Percent Complete

III. A. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?

III. A. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?

III. B. 1. Was operational analysis conducted?

III. B. 2. Complete the following table to compare actual cost performance against the planned cost performance baseline. Milestones reported may include specific individual scheduled preventative and predictable corrective maintenance activities, or may be the total of planned annual operation and maintenance efforts).

(Character Limitations: Description of Milestone - 250 Characters)

Planned Completion Date Planned Total Cost Actual Completion Date Actual Total Cost Variance - Schedule Variance - Cost     NaN

IV. A. 1. Stakeholder Table
As a joint exhibit 300, please identify the agency stakeholders. Provide the partner agency and partner agency approval date for this joint exhibit 300.

Joint exhibit approval date 023 2005-09-19

IV. A. 2. Partner Capital Assets within this Investment
Provide the partnering strategies you are implementing with the participating agencies and organizations. Identify all partner agency capital assets supporting the common solution (section 300.7); Managing Partner capital assets should also be included in this joint exhibit 300. These capital assets should be included in the Summary of Spending table of Part I, Section B. All partner agency migration investments (section 53.4) should also be included in this table. Funding contributions/fee-for-service transfers should not be included in this table. (Partner Agency Asset UPIs should also appear on the Partner Agency's exhibit 53)

Partner Agency Asset Title Partner Agency Exhibit 53 UPI 023 e-Gov Travel System - E2 Solutions 023-10-01-14-01-0220-24

IV. A. 3. Partner Funding Strategies ($millions)
For jointly funded initiative activities, provide in the "Partner Funding Strategies Table": the name(s) of partner agencies; the UPI of the partner agency investments; and the partner agency contributions for CY and BY. Please indicate partner contribution amounts (in-kind contributions should also be included in this amount) and fee-for-service amounts. (Partner Agency Asset UPIs should also appear on the Partner Agency's exhibit 53. For non-IT fee-for-service amounts the Partner exhibit 53 UPI can be left blank) (IT migration investments should not be included in this table)

Partner Exhibit 53 UPI CY Contribution CY Fee-for-Service BY Contribution BY Fee-for-Service 023

IV. A. 4. Did you conduct an alternatives analysis for this project?
yes

IV. A. 5. Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:

Description of Alternative Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Costs estimate Risk Adjusted Lifecycle Benefits estimate 1 Maintain Control support at current level. Continue contractor baseline support through eTS lifecycle. This alternative would also utilize the on-board ED expertise to successfully manage the eTS solution. This solution relies on the contractor labor and provides the highest degree of expertise for maintaining the hosted software end-to-end solution.     2 Government takes over baseline support for the complete eTS solution. Benefits would be similar to Alternative 1 but costs would be greater due to the increase in government employees needed to take over eTS maintenance tasks. In addition, this risk is greater under this alternative due to current staffing constraints and the the timeline associated with the hiring of additional qualified ED staff would severely impact the system.     3 Do not migrate to the eTS solution. This would be the greatest risk and put the Department in non-compliance with the Federal Travel Regulations and the PMA initiatives. This would prove to be the most economical solution but not in accordance with mandates associated with the eTS migration.     4 Cross Servicing with another Agency. Eliminate ED travel system and enter into a cross-servicing agreement with another agency. We would enter into an agreement with another agency to handle our travel management functionality. This may not offer the degree of functionality we currently enjoy. It also might not be as integrated with the rest of the EDCAPS systems thus requiring manual system updates. This could potentially be a security risk associated with this option.

IV. A. 6. Which alternative was selected by the Initiative Governance process and why was it chosen?
(long text - 2500 characters)
Alternative One was selected and was derived by the FTR mandate whereas each Federal civilian agency must migrate to a eTS solution no later than 9/30/2006. Although this option is the least economical, it puts ED in compliance with the regulation changes. The eTS solution also provides the integrated On-Line Booking Engine capability and split disbursement functionality which proves a benefit for the Department and travelers. ED received a waiver of the migration date to extend to October 2, 2006 due to the implementation of a new FMSS system. If a waiver would not have been granted a significant amount of funding would have been required to integrate the solution with the legacy and new FMSS systems. eTS System was 100% (enterprise-wide) fully deployed on 10/2/2006.

IV. A. 7. What specific qualitative benefits will be realized?
(long text - 2500 characters)
With the migration to the eTS solution, the Department will be in compliance with the FTR mandated provisions and the PMA. Additionally, the system offers a fully integrated On-Line Booking Engine and split disbursement capability which offers additional benefits for the Department and travelers.

IV. A. 8. Table 1. Federal Quantitative Benefits ($millions):
What specific quantitative benefits will be realized (using current dollars)
Use the results of your alternatives analysis to complete the following table:

Budgeted Cost Savings Cost Avoidance Justification for Budgeted Cost Savings Justification for Cost Avoidance BY

IV. A. 9. Will the selected alternative replace a legacy system in-part or in-whole?
yes

UPI if available Date of the System Retirement Gelco Travel Manager   2006-09-27

IV. B. 1. Does the investment have a Risk Management Plan?
yes

IV. B. 2. If there currently is no plan, will a plan be developed?

IV. C. 1. Are you using EVM to manage this investment?
yes

IV. C. 2. Is the CV% or SV% greater than ± 10%? (CV% = CV/EV x 100; SV% = SV/PV x 100)
NOT applicable for capital assets with ONLY O&M.
no

IV. C. 3. Has the investment re-baselined during the past fiscal year?
Applicable to ALL capital assets
no

IV. C. 4. Comparison of Initial Baseline and Current Approved Baseline
Complete the following table to compare actual performance against the current performance baseline and to the initial performance baseline. In the Current Baseline section, for all milestones listed, you should provide both the baseline and actual completion dates (e.g., "03/23/2003"/ "04/28/2004") and the baseline and actual total costs (in $ Millions). In the event that a milestone is not found in both the initial and current baseline, leave the associated cells blank. Note that the 'Description of Milestone' and 'Percent Complete' fields are required. Indicate '0' for any milestone no longer active.

Initial Baseline - Planned Completion Date Initial Baseline - Total Cost Current Baseline - Planned Completion Date Current Baseline - Actual Completion Date Current Baseline - Planned Total Cost Current Baseline - Actual Total Cost Current Baseline Variance - Schedule Current Baseline Variance - Cost Percent Complete Agency responsible for activity FY 07 E2 Interfaces                     TMS Testing                     eTS Migration Costs - Interfaces                     FY 08 E2 Testing                     System Configuration                     FY 2003 Maintenance Expenditures                     FY 2006 Incentive Fees                     FY 07 E2 Testing                     Interfaces                     TMS Enterprise Pilot                     FY 08 E2 Training                     eTS Migration Costs - Security                     FY 2005 Maintenance Expenditures                     FY 2002 Maintenance Expenditures                     Legacy System Shutdown                     FY 07 E2 Training                     TMS Conference Room Pilot 2                     eTS Migration Costs - Implementation/Development Costs                     FY 08 E2 Security                     FY 08 E2 Interfaces                     TMS Conference Room Pilot 1                     FY 2007 Incentive Fees                     FY 2008 Incentive Fees                     Accounting Configuration                     FY 2001 Maintenance Expenditures                     Kick off meeting                     FY 2007 Maintenance Expenditures                     FY 2008 Maintenance Expenditures                     TMS Training                     eTS Migration Costs - Contractor Costs                     FY 08 E2 Enhancements                     FY 2004 Maintenance Expenditures                     FY 2006 Maintenance Expenditures                     Conversion, Execution and Cutover                     FY 09 Maintenance                     FY 09 Incentive Fees                     FY 09 Training                     FY 09 Security                     FY 09 Testing                     FY 09 Interfaces                     FY 09 Enhancements                     FY09 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY09 C & A (Security)                     FY 07 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY 08 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY 06 Security                     FY 06 Training                     FY06 Testing                     FY10 Maintenance                     FY10 Training                     FY10 Security                     FY10 Incentive Fees                     FY10 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY10 Testing                     FY10 Enhancements                     FY10 Interfaces                     FY11 Maintenance                     FY11 Training                     FY11 Security                     FY11 Incentive Fees                     FY11 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY11 Testing                     FY11 Enhancements                     FY11 Interfaces                     FY11 C & A Security                     FY09 C & A Security                     FY10 C & A Security                     FY12 Maintenance                     FY12 Training                     FY12 Security                     FY12 Incentive Fees                     FY12 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY12 Testing                     FY12 Enhancements                     FY12 Interfaces                     FY12 C & A Security                     FY13 Maintenance                     FY13 Training                     FY13 Security                     FY13 Incentive Fees                     FY13 Voucher Processing Fees                     FY13 Testing                     FY13 Enhancements                     FY13 Interfaces                     FY13 C & A Security