August 23, 2004
of E-Government and Information Technology
Electronic Government (E-Gov) President’s Management Agenda
(PMA) Scorecard Cost, Schedule and Performance Standard for Success
provides additional information on the President’s Management Agenda
(PMA) Expanded Electronic Government (E-Gov) initiative and the standard
for success concerning cost, schedule, and performance goals. As you know,
to achieve a “green” level of performance for this initiative,
your agency’s actual performance cannot vary from its cost, schedule
and performance goals by more than 10 percent. To achieve a “yellow”
level of performance, your agency’s cost, schedule and performance
overruns and shortfalls for all major information technology (IT) projects
must average less than 30 percent.1 The following
provides additional evidence that OMB looks for in evaluating whether
your agency meets these performance levels.
forward to hearing from your agency before the end of the applicable Scorecard
evaluation period with any additional evidence you may wish to provide.
Questions about this e-Gov Scorecard element should be directed to Lauren
Uher at firstname.lastname@example.org.
whether an agency meets the “green” standard for cost/schedule/performance
adherence, OMB looks for affirmative answers to the following questions:
the agency using earned value management to plan and manage development
activities for major IT investments (including development effort under
a mixed-lifecycle investment), and operational analyses for steady state
performance? Evidence should include:
-- a documented agency policy for using EVM and performing operational
analyses (e.g., agency’s system development lifecycle management
methodology, capital planning and investment control process, and/or
acquisition management directives);
-- established cost, schedule and performance baselines for affected
-- examples of how the agency uses data and analysis to make project
management and IT portfolio management decisions (i.e., how and when
is performance data received by the agency; who reviews it; is further
analysis done; does the agency use a tool to manage the data reported;
how is performance information reported to senior management, and what
do they do with the information).
the earned value data and analysis used to measure and report work progress
on these investments produced by EVM systems (either departmental and/or
contractor, as appropriate, depending on where the work is performed)
that meet the EVMS guidelines in ANSI/EIA-STD-748? Evidence
should include contract language and/or project charter (for in-house
projects) requiring the use of EVMS that meets the ANSI/EIA-STD (and
specifying what data and analysis the contractor(s) or in-house team
must report and when) or independent validation that the EVMS system
is ANSI/EIA-STD compliant.
earned value or operational analyses, as appropriate, how does actual
cumulative performance measure up against the approved cost and schedule
baselines, i.e., are variances equal to or less than 10 percent? Is
the project generally on-track to deliver capabilities as originally
intended, or have technical requirements been reduced or otherwise modified?
Evidence should include current cumulative EVM data and variance analyses,
and corrective action plans (if necessary).
As a reminder,
for operational investments, agencies are expected to use operational
analyses to determine how close the investment is to meeting its operational
cost, schedule and performance goals.
of Management and Budget Resource Management Offices
standard is based on the policy in OMB Circular A-11, Part 7, requiring
agencies use earned value management (EVM) to plan and manage major IT
development efforts to achieve, on average, 90 percent of approved cost,
schedule, and performance goals. (OMB Circular A-11, Part 7, found at: