Federal Grants Management Systems Landscape, 4/30/09

8/14/2019 Federal Grants Management Systems Landscape, 4/30/09

1/12

306 Florida Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20001

www.tcg.com | 202-986-5533

Perspectives on Federal GrantsManagement SystemsDavid G. Cassidy, TCG | 202-742-8471 |[email protected]

April 2009 | PRISM Education Conference


2/12

05/04/09TCG - Yes, it can be done! 2

Agenda

Grants Management Line of Business Grants.gov Back-end Systems

o Custom Builto Commercial Off-the-Shelf

o Components

Questions?


3/12

Agencies must accommodate a broadportfolio of grant programs intoconsolidated solutions

Improve transparency to public andmanagement

Consolidate grants business processesoMinimize functional overlap and redundant

datao Consolidate on one grant application

instrument

Migrate from legacy systems;consolidate disparate systems

Major Business Drivers

3


4/12

Use enterprise class technologies Use structured development

methodologies (e.g. Rational UnifiedProcess)

Promote sharing of functionalcomponentsoGrants management is an enterprise

activityo Leverage functionality for other enterprise

activities, e.g. financial management

Service-oriented architecture

Align with the Federal Enterprise

Major Technical Drivers

4


5/12

Recommended segmentation of grants lineof business into cross-agency servicecenters (Centers of Excellence)

No silver bullet for an end-to-end businessand/or technical solution for Grantsmanagement emerged

Suggested Operating Model evolvesmodularity and commonalityo Feasible, valuable, affords quick wins, and

accommodates decentralized and evolvingtechnological support

10 year timeframe for the common solution Completely focused on back office grants

processing

Grants Management Line ofBusiness

5


6/12

Three GMLOB COEs were identified:o National Science Foundation: Research.gov

Partners: DOD, NASA, USDA CSREES

o HHS / Administration for Children & Families: GATESPartners: CNCS, DOT, EPA, IMLS, State, Treasury, VA

o Education: G5Partners: Interior, DOJ/COPS

Additional COEs were expected but none announced Additional GMLOB groups were defined:

o Strategic Partnership Group: NEH, NARA, NEAo Alternative Solutions Group: HHS/NIH, DOE, SBA, USAID

All except NIH using Compusearch PRISM-Grantso Agencies Yet to Align: DHS, DOC, DOJ/OJP & OVW, DOL,

HUD, SSA, USDA Future of GMLOB in doubt

o Bush Administration initiative; has not demonstratedsignificant cost savings; facing significant antipathy and

skepticism among agencies

Grants Management Line ofBusiness

6


7/12

A single portal for grant applicationso Find and Apply functionality are well-established

o Functionality for grant review, award, reporting, andcloseout was once planned but now seems unlikely inthe short-to-medium term

Round-robin funding modelo Economically advantageous for agencies take advantage

of Grants.govs available functionality

o No distinct funding leaves system in financial limbo

o

Desire to move to transaction fees / fee for service Most agencies are now integrated with

Grants.gov

Grants.gov

7


8/12

Issued RFI for cloud computingo Actual objective: Outsource the system

Improve cost accounting and obtain per-transaction pricingfor agenciesEnable government staff to focus on requirements and noton technology management

System has suffered poor performance, especiallylatelyo Consequence of current system architecture / business

strategyo OMB directed agencies to use alternatives to Grants.gov

for Recovery Act funding, if possible

Short-term measure to support system stabilityAgencies expected to routinely use Grants.gov for non-Recovery Act funding

o Agencies instructed to provide $12m in immediatefunding to shore up Grants.gov and stabilize for thefuture

o

Additional pilot projects planned to establish alternativearchitectures for Grants.gov 2.0

Grants.gov

05/04/09TCG - Yes, it can be done! 8


9/12

Pros:o Create your own world, in your own climateo Translate your business process into electronic

environmento Opportunity to re-engineer processes with

implementationo

Buyer owns the requirements definition/implementationprocess

Cons:

o Reliance on your domain expertso

Business process may be fundamentally flawedRe-engineering costs could be higher than expectedo Higher cost of acquisitiono Increased buyer responsibility for project failureo Ability for change can translate into tendency for

compulsive, repetitive, or self-defeating changeo Difficult to justify in light of OMBs GMLOB strategy

Back-end Systems: Custombuild

9


10/12

Pros:

o Many COTS and GOTS solutions available

o Theoretically lower maintenance costs

o Theoretically lower implementation costs

o Offloads requirements definition to vendor / buying agency

o

Benefit from best practices

Cons:

o Packages have historically been either process definitive oragnostic

o Proprietary platforms create ties to one vendor for lifetime ofproduct

o Low acquisition costs offset by high re-engineering costs

All grants systems need customization

o Satisfying requirements becomes vendor or buying agencys

option, not yourso Others best practices may not be your own

Back-end Systems: CompleteSolutions

10


11/12

Pros:

o Addresses OMBs GMLOB strategy recommendation createcommonality

o Acquire the best tool for a specific tasko Deployable across the enterpriseo Integrated to your own specifications for each line of businesso Lower acquisition costs; economies of scale over long-termo Theoretically lower maintenance and implementation costs per

functional areao Benefit from vendors intellectual property for every functional

area

Cons:

o Packages are process-agnostico No immediate solution for any one line of businesso Tied to one vendor for lifetime of producto Low acquisition costs may be offset by re-engineering costso Requires significant due diligence to ensure good fito

Potentially tied to a vendor or buying agency

Back-end Systems:Components

11


12/12

Questions & Answers

12

Federal Grants Management Systems Landscape, 4/30/09

Documents

Transcript of Federal Grants Management Systems Landscape, 4/30/09