Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Updated Status of Department of Education's
Information Systems (Testimony, 10/08/98, GAO/T-AIMD-99-8).
GAO discussed the progress made by the Department of Education to ensure
that its computer systems supporting critical student financial aid
activities and other processes will be able to operate reliably in light
of the year 200 computing problem.
GAO noted that: (1) as Education has reported to the Office of
Management and Budget, it has 14 mission-critical systems, of which 11
pertain directly to student financial aid; (2) three of the
mission-critical student financial aid systems are already in operation;
five had September 1998 milestone dates for either renovation or
validation; and three have future deadlines for validation; (3) at the
September 17, 1998, hearing, Education reported that two systems were
expected to complete renovation by September 30, 1998--the Federal
Family Education Loan System and the Multiple Data Entry System; (4)
Education is now reporting that both have completed renovation work; GAO
noted, however, a few outstanding issues that will still need to be
addressed by the department; (5) two outstanding issues yet to be
resolved by the department are the sample size of renovated source code
that has been unit tested to date, and official departmental acceptance
of contractor certification that renovation was completed; (6) Education
is now reporting that both the Direct Loan Central Database and the
Direct Loan Servicing system have completed validation but that the
National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) still requires work to be
considered completely validated; (7) one outstanding issue is the formal
acceptance of the test analysis report, which was submitted to Education
for approval on October 2, 1998, but will not be considered final until
Education approves the document; (8) according to both Education and
contractor officials, NSLDS missed the September 30, 1998, date for
completion of validation; (9) officials pointed out that the missed
deadline was due primarily to underestimation of the adverse impact of a
noncompliant operating system that was recently upgraded to a year 2000
compliant version; (10) Education reported to GAO on October 1 that 6 of
the 162 systems did not make the September 30 deadline; (11) Education
has made clear progress; though it did not achieve its goal completely,
Education has documentation supporting that most systems met their
September 30 deadlines; (12) nevertheless, Education continues to face
an immense challenge; and (13) specifically, the department must address
the need for adequate testing, the renovation and testing of data
exchanges, and the development of business continuity and contingency
plans.
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: T-AIMD-99-8
TITLE: Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Updated Status of Department of
Education's Information Systems
DATE: 10/08/98
SUBJECT: Strategic information systems planning
Systems conversions
Information resources management
Computer software
Student financial aid
Student loans
Data integrity
Computer software verification and validation
Systems compatibility
IDENTIFIER: Y2K
Federal Family Education Loan Program Information System
Dept. of Education National Student Loan Data System
Dept. of Education Multiple Data Entry System
Dept. of Education Direct Loan Central Database
Dept. of Education Direct Loan Servicing System
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved. Major **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters, **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and **
** single lines. The numbers on the right end of these lines **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the **
** document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the **
** page numbers of the printed product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO **
** Document Distribution Center. For further details, please **
** send an e-mail message to: **
** **
** **
** **
** with the message 'info' in the body. **
******************************************************************
Cover
================================================================ COVER
Before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on
Education and the Workforce, House of Representatives
For Release on Delivery
Expected at
10 a.m.
Thursday,
October 8, 1998
YEAR 2000 COMPUTING CRISIS -
UPDATED STATUS OF DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION'S INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Statement of Joel C. Willemssen
Director, Civil Agencies Information Systems
Accounting and Information Management Division
GAO/T-AIMD-99-8
GAO/AIMD-99-8
(511264)
Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV
DLCD - x
DLSS - x
FFELS - x
MDES - x
NSLDS - x
OMB - x
============================================================ Chapter 0
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
We are pleased to appear before you again today to update the
Subcommittee on the progress made by the Department of Education to
ensure that its computer systems supporting critical student
financial aid activities and other processes will be able to operate
reliably in light of the Year 2000 computing problem. As you know,
we testified on September 17, 1998,\1 that the department continues
to face significant risks in making its 14 mission-critical systems
Year 2000 compliant. Key issues included testing of systems,
addressing data exchanges with external partners, and developing
business continuity and contingency plans.
At last month's hearing, the Acting Deputy Secretary said that
Education's mission-critical systems with September 30, 1998,
milestones for renovation or validation would meet those deadlines
and that, further, all but five of its mission-important\2 and
mission-supportive\3 computer systems would be Year 2000 compliant by
September 30, 1998. At your request, after providing some brief
background information, my statement will describe
(1) the renovation status of two mission-critical systems--the
Federal Family Education Loan System and the Multiple Data Entry
System--and the validation status of three other mission-critical
systems--the Direct Loan Central Database, Direct Loan Servicing
System, and National Student Loan Data System--and
(2) the Year 2000 compliance status of the 167 mission-important and
mission-supportive systems operated by the department.
--------------------
\1 Year 2000 Computing Crisis: Significant Risks Remain to
Department of Education's Student Financial Aid Systems
(GAO/T-AIMD-98-302, September 17, 1998).
\2 Education defines mission important as those systems whose failure
would not preclude the department from accomplishing core business
processes in the short term, but would cause failure in the
mid-to-long term. A system would be mission important if it (1) was
a backup source of data that are mission critical, (2) would cause
business failure in the mid to long range term, and (3) produces
information that crosses operating lines.
\3 Education defines mission supportive as those systems whose
failure would not preclude the department from accomplishing core
business operations in the short to long term, but would impact the
effectiveness and/or efficiency of day-to-day operations. A system
will be considered mission supportive only if it (1) does not
interface with any other system, (2) tracks or calculates data for
organizational convenience, (3) would only cause loss of business
efficiency and effectiveness for the particular owner, and (4) has no
internal or external trading partners.
BACKGROUND
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:1
Year 2000 failures in the department's mission-critical systems could
severely disrupt the student financial aid delivery process;
disbursements and the processing of applications could be delayed.
Further, the student financial aid community is a network comprising
students, institutions of higher education, financial organizations,
and other government agencies; the various systems interdependencies
that exist mean that repercussions from Year 2000 problems could
reverberate throughout this community.
As discussed more fully in our September 17, 1998, statement, the
department's slow pace in implementing a comprehensive Year 2000
program to address these risks has placed Education in a position of
having to make up for lost time. Its program has been accelerating,
but the major challenges ahead and limited time remaining may hinder
the ability of the department to deliver financial aid to students.
Specifically, the department must address the need for adequate
testing, renovation and testing of data exchanges, and development of
business continuity and contingency plans.
The time available for key testing activities within the renovation,
validation, and implementation phases for individual mission-critical
systems is limited, raising concerns about Education's ability to
complete essential testing in time. As we explain more fully in
guidance issued this past summer,\4 complete and thorough Year 2000
testing is essential to providing reasonable assurance that new or
modified systems process dates correctly and will not jeopardize an
organization's ability to perform core business operations. We
present a model with five levels of test activities: (1) testing
infrastructure, (2) software unit testing, (3) software integration
testing, (4) system acceptance testing, and (5) end-to-end testing.
Management oversight and control must be exercised throughout the
process.
The schedule constraints placed on the department's testing
activities for individual systems have already been shown to be
unrealistic in several cases. Beyond the testing of individual
mission-critical systems, Education will also have to devote a
significant amount of time to end-to-end testing of its
mission-critical business processes and supporting systems, such as
those associated with student financial aid delivery.
Education's student financial aid data exchange environment is
massive and complex. It includes about 7,500 schools, 6,500 lenders,
and 36 guaranty agencies as well as other federal agencies. Further
complicating data exchange compliance is that Education will need to
ensure that the data being received from its partners are not just
formatted correctly but are accurate. Given the challenges Education
faces in making sure that all of its systems are adequately tested
and in addressing the complexities of the massive number of data
exchanges, it will be difficult for the department to enter the new
century free of problems. Therefore, it is critical that Education
initiate the development of realistic contingency plans to ensure
continuity of core business processes in the event of Year
2000-induced failures.
--------------------
\4 Year 2000 Computing Crisis: A Testing Guide (GAO/AIMD-10.1.21,
Exposure Draft, June 1998).
EDUCATION REPORTS THAT MOST
SEPTEMBER 30 RENOVATION AND
VALIDATION DEADLINES FOR
MISSION-CRITICAL SYSTEMS WERE
MET
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2
As the department has reported to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), it has 14 mission-critical systems, of which 11 pertain
directly to student financial aid. Student financial aid programs
are administered by Education under title IV of the Higher Education
Act of 1965, as amended. The department is responsible for the
collection of more than $150 billion in outstanding loans, and its
data systems track approximately 93 million student loans and 15
million grants. Together, the major types of student aid will make
available about $51 billion to about 9 million students during the
1999-2000 academic year. Student financial aid systems are critical
to Education's ability to process student loans and grants. Three of
the mission-critical student financial aid systems are already in
operation, five had September 1998 milestone dates for either
renovation or validation, and three have future deadlines for
validation.
STATUS OF RENOVATED SYSTEMS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2.1
The renovation phase involves making actual changes, whether
eliminating, converting, or replacing hardware and software, and
documenting those changes.\5 In all cases it is important to consider
the complex interdependencies among applications, hardware platforms,
databases, and interfaces.
At the September 17, 1998, hearing, Education reported that two
systems were expected to complete renovation by September 30,
1998--the Federal Family Education Loan System and the Multiple Data
Entry System. Education is now reporting that both have completed
renovation work as described below; we noted, however, a few
outstanding issues that will still need to be addressed by the
department.
--------------------
\5 Year 2000 Computing Crisis: An Assessment Guide
(GAO/AIMD-10.1.14, September 1997).
FEDERAL FAMILY EDUCATION
LOAN SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:2.1.1
The Federal Family Education Loan System (FFELS) consists of three
main components: (1) Debt Management and Collections--the largest
component--which maintains data on debtor information such as
payments on defaulted loans and correspondence to debtors from the
department, (2) Guaranty Agency Services, which processes monthly
claims and collections information, provides periodic reporting of
their activity, and produces an annual summary of defaulted accounts,
and (3) Lender and School Services, which calculates and processes
interest payments, federal claims, and loan assignments.
According to Education officials, FFELS completed the renovation
milestone by the deadline. Contractor officials provided us with a
signed transmittal letter dated September 30, 1998; an inventory of
renovated programs; a sample review package of renovated FFELS
programs; a list of programs and database records that required
renovation; and a sample of test results.
Two outstanding issues yet to be resolved by the department are the
sample size of renovated source code that has been unit tested to
date, and official departmental acceptance of contractor
certification that renovation was completed. Based on a
recommendation from the independent validation and verification
contractor, the department plans to test a larger portion of the
changes before proceeding with software integration and systems
acceptance testing. Another outstanding issue is the formal
acceptance by the Department of Education that the renovation phase
was completed on September 30, 1998. The renovation phase documents
cannot be considered final until Education approves them. The
department plans to complete its review of the documents by
mid-October.
MULTIPLE DATA ENTRY
SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:2.1.2
The Multiple Data Entry System (MDES) either scans or enters data
from paper-based applications for federal student aid and submits the
data electronically to the Central Processing System. The system
primarily uses commercial off-the-shelf products.
According to Education, MDES completed renovation by September 30,
1998. The department provided us with a copy of the MDES Year 2000
project schedule and contractor documentation. This documentation
included a sample of unit results and vendor certifications of
commercial off-the-shelf software. An outstanding issue yet to be
addressed by the department is official departmental acceptance of
the renovation documents. We noted the lack of a contractor
signature confirming completion of MDES Year 2000 renovation
activities.
STATUS OF VALIDATED SYSTEMS
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:2.2
All converted or replaced system components must be thoroughly
validated and tested to (1) uncover errors introduced during the
renovation phase, (2) validate Year 2000 compliance, and (3) verify
operational readiness. The testing should account for applications,
database interdependencies, and interfaces. Agencies should also
assess their testing procedures and tools to ensure that all
converted system components meet quality standards and are Year 2000
compliant.
At the September 17 hearing, Education reported that three systems
were expected to complete validation by September 30, 1998--the
Direct Loan Central Database, Direct Loan Servicing System, and
National Student Loan Data System. Education is now reporting that
both direct loan systems have completed validation as described
below, but that the National Student Loan Data System still requires
additional work to be considered completely validated. We note below
a few outstanding issues that need to be addressed by the department.
DIRECT LOAN CENTRAL
DATABASE
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:2.2.1
The Direct Loan Central Database (DLCD) is a central repository for
summary-level data on Federal Direct Loan Program loans, including
aggregated financial data reported from the loan servicer. DLCD
receives loan records from the loan origination system when loans are
recorded.
According to the department, DLCD was validated by the September 30,
1998, deadline. Contractor officials provided a signed transmittal
letter for the test results, a test execution schedule for Year 2000
regression testing, a Year 2000 test analysis report, and all four
volumes of the test plan. According to the documentation supplied,
all system tests were completed prior to September 30, 1998. One
outstanding issue is the formal acceptance of the test analysis
report, which was submitted to the Department of Education for
approval on October 2, 1998, but will not be considered final until
Education approves the document.
DIRECT LOAN SERVICING
SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:2.2.2
The Direct Loan Servicing System (DLSS) maintains Federal Direct Loan
Program loan records while the borrower is in school or in deferment
or repayment status. According to Education, DLSS was validated by
the September 30, 1998, deadline. While the department reports on
DLCD and DLSS separately, both systems are maintained under the same
contract, and therefore the same documents were used to support
completion of validation for both. As noted above, formal acceptance
of the test analysis report was submitted to the department for
approval on October 2, 1998.
NATIONAL STUDENT LOAN
DATA SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------ Chapter 0:2.2.3
The National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) is a database of loan
and grant-level data on title IV programs. NSLDS performs several
functions, including (1) prescreening title IV aid applicants for
eligibility, (2) collecting student enrollment data from schools for
distribution to the guaranty agencies and direct loan servicer, (3)
calculating cohort default rates for schools, guaranty agencies, and
lenders, and (4) supporting policy and budget research.
According to both Education and contractor officials, NSLDS missed
the September 30, 1998, date for completion of validation. Officials
pointed out that the missed deadline was due primarily to
underestimation of the adverse impact of a noncompliant operating
system that was recently upgraded to a Year 2000 compliant version.
COMPLIANCE OF MOST
MISSION-IMPORTANT AND
MISSION-SUPPORTIVE SYSTEMS
DOCUMENTED
---------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3
At the September 17 hearing, the Department of Education reported
that Year 2000 compliance for the department's 167
nonmission-critical systems (24 mission-important and 143
mission-supportive systems) was to have been achieved for all but 5
systems (4 mission-important and 1 mission-supportive) by September
30, 1998. Excluding these 5 systems, the department reported to us
on October 1 that 6 of the 162 systems (1 mission-important and 5
mission-supportive) did not make the September 30 deadline.
DOCUMENTATION FOR MOST OF
EDUCATION'S
MISSION-IMPORTANT SYSTEMS
INDICATES COMPLIANCE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.1
Table 1 shows Education's October 1 reported status of the 20
mission-important systems that were expected to be compliant by
September 30, and the results of our review of the department's
documentation supporting the reported status.
Table 1
Status of Education's Mission-Important
Systems as of October 1, 1998
Report Report
ed Reported ed
compli noncomplia retire
GAO results ant nt d Total
-------------------- ------ ---------- ------ ====================
Documented 16 0 2 18
Partially documented 1 0 0 1
Not documented 0 0 0 0
Documentation 0 1 0 1
pending
======================================================================
Total 17 1 2 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in the table, Education reported to us on October 1 that one
of the systems (Educational Resources Information Center) did not
make the deadline. We were provided with documentation supporting
the department's compliance determination for two retired systems and
16 of the remaining 17 systems. In accordance with the department's
Year 2000 guidance, this documentation included a testing and
validation checklist on the types of tests run on the systems, and
required a principal program official's signature certifying that the
system was compliant. For the one system we found partially
documented, there was a letter from a contractor stating that
products supporting the system were compliant. However, the testing
and validation checklist was not included in the documentation
provided by the department. Attachment I provides a listing of all
of the department's mission-important systems and their compliance
status.
DOCUMENTATION FOR MANY OF
EDUCATION'S
MISSION-SUPPORTIVE SYSTEMS
INDICATES COMPLIANCE
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.2
Table 2 shows Education's October 1 reported status of the 142
mission-supportive systems that were expected to be compliant by
September 30, and the results of our review of the department's
documentation supporting the reported status.
Table 2
Status of Education's Mission-
Supportive Systems as of October 1, 1998
Report Report
ed Reported ed
compli noncomplia retire
GAO results ant nt d Total
-------------------- ------ ---------- ------ ====================
Documented 102 0 9 111
Partially documented 3 0 2 5
Not documented 12 0 9 21
Documentation 0 5 0 5
pending
======================================================================
Total 117 5 20 142
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in the table, Education reported to us on October 1 that 5
systems did not make the deadline, and that 20 systems had been
retired. Of the remaining 117 systems, we were provided with
documentation supporting the department's compliance determination
for 102 (87 percent). Again, in accordance with the department's
Year 2000 guidance, this documentation included a testing and
validation checklist on the types of tests run on the systems, and
required a principal office official's signature certifying that the
system was compliant. We were not provided with documentation to
support the department's determination for 12 of the systems, and
were provided with only partial documentation for 3 of them.
Attachment II provides a listing of all of the department's
mission-supportive systems and their compliance status.
-------------------------------------------------------- Chapter 0:3.3
In closing, the department has made clear progress; though it did not
achieve its goal completely, Education has documentation supporting
that most systems met their September 30 deadlines. Nevertheless,
the department continues to face an immense challenge. Specifically,
the department must address the need for adequate testing, the
renovation and testing of data exchanges, and the development of
business continuity and contingency plans.
This concludes my statement. I would be pleased to respond to any
questions that you or other Members of the Subcommittee may have at
this time.
STATUS OF EDUCATION'S
MISSION-IMPORTANT SYSTEMS AS OF
OCTOBER 1, 1998
=========================================================== Appendix I
(Estimated
Education's )
reported completion Status
System name status date documented?
--------------------------------------- ------------- ---------- ------------
Annual Program Cost Report Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Common Audit Resolution System Compliant 9/18/98 Yes
Correspondence Control Manager Noncompliant\ (12/31/ Pending
a 98)
Cost Estimation and Analysis Division Compliant 1/29/98 Yes
Loan Model
ED Occupied Buildings/Infrastructure Noncompliant\ (11/15/ Pending
a 98)
ED Pubs Compliant 9/2/98 Partially
Educational Resources Information Noncompliant\ (12/31/ Pending
Center b 98)
Elementary & Secondary School Civil Compliant 7/16/98 Yes
Rights Compliance
Financial Status Reporting System Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Formula Grant Awards System Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
FPPS Noncompliant\ (3/31/99) Pending
a
FTS2000 Infrastructure Noncompliant\ (1/1/99) Pending
a
General Performance Appraisal System Compliant 7/15/98 Yes
Goals 2000 Database Retired 9/30/98 Yes
Institutional Communications Network Compliant 9/29/98 Yes
Payment Account Query System Retired 6/1/98 Yes
Pell Grant Cost Estimation Model Compliant 5/12/98 Yes
Publication Tracking System Compliant 5/1/98 Yes
Search & Appeal Professional Compliant 5/20/98 Yes
Teloquent Distributed Call Center Compliant 9/26/98 Yes
Teloquent Phone System Compliant 7/1/98 Yes
Voice (Analog/ISDN) Telephone Equipment Compliant 2/25/98 Yes
Voice Mail Compliant 7/24/98 Yes
Waivers Tracking System Compliant 3/1/98 Yes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a As indicated in Education's September 10, 1998, report to OMB,
these four systems did not have September milestone deadlines.
\b The department acknowledges that this system did not meet its
September 30, 1998, deadline.
Source: Department of Education.
STATUS OF EDUCATION'S
MISSION-SUPPORTIVE SYSTEMS AS OF
OCTOBER 1, 1998
========================================================== Appendix II
(Estimated
Education's )
reported completion Compliance
System name status date documented?
--------------------------------------- ------------- ---------- ------------
AAAD Tracking System Compliant 7/23/98 Yes
ACD-Automatic Call Distribution Compliant 9/27/98 Yes
Application Ordering System Compliant 6/10/98 Yes
Application/Project Data System Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Archives/Retrieval System Compliant 1/20/98 Yes
ArcView Geographic Information System Compliant 7/3/98 Yes
Assignment Control Tracking System Compliant 10/3/97 Yes
Assistant Secretary's Long Range Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Calendar
Assistant Secretary's Mid-Short Range Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Calendar
Audit Tracking System Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
Automated Case Information Management Compliant 10/20/97 Yes
System
Automated Retirement Forms Software Compliant 9/18/98 Yes
Awards Obligation Analysis Compliant 7/7/98 Yes
Budget Support System Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Cardkey System Compliant 7/20/98 No
Case Information System Compliant 12/19/97 Yes
Case Management Information System 97 Compliant 7/27/98 Yes
Case Service Reporting System RSA-911 Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
CATV Compliant 2/21/98 Yes
Central Registry System Retired 5/15/98 Yes
Client Assistance Program Report Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Client/Server Correspondence and Issues Compliant 5/31/98 Yes
Management
Cohort Default Rate System Retired 4/1/98 No
Comparison of OSERS Program Budget Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Compensatory Education Program Compliant 8/28/98 No
Contractor and Panel Tracker Compliant 5/29/98 Yes
Correspondence & Institutional Ratio Compliant 7/22/98 Yes
Analysis Operation
Correspondence Tracking System Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
Customer Service Tracking System Compliant 7/31/98 Yes
Debt Collection Service Door Security Compliant 9/22/98 Partially
Direct Loan Client Manager Tracking Compliant 9/23/98 Yes
System
DLC Legislative Tracking System Compliant 9/17/98 Yes
DNP Grants and Contracts Database Compliant 7/24/98 Yes
Document Management System Retired 5/15/98 Partially
Document Scanning System Compliant 4/3/98 Partially
Education Department Automated Parking Compliant 5/21/98 Yes
Permit System
Education Payment Management System Retired 5/15/98 Yes
EEO Monitoring and Analysis System Retired 9/18/98 No
Electronic Certification System Noncompliant\ 9/30/98 Pending
b
Electronic Documents: Grants Compliant 2/1/98 Yes
Information System
Electronic Library Compliant 9/18/98 Yes
Employee Locator Compliant 9/28/98 Yes
ESI Expense Tracker Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Ethics Training & Tracking System Compliant 9/17/98 Yes
Executive Officer Support Systems Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Expenditure Tracking System Compliant 4/21/98 No
Federal Annual Statistical Reporter Compliant 2/9/98 Yes
Federal Retirement Calculations-CALC Compliant 7/15/98 Yes
Fedline Noncompliant\ 5/15/98 Pending
b
Fellowship Recipient Database Compliant 7/23/98 Yes
Field Reader's Database Compliant 7/23/98 Yes
Financial Payments Group Paradox User Retired 9/30/98 Yes
Based Application
FIPSE Mailing Preparation System Compliant 8/3/98 Yes
FOIA Tracking System Compliant 9/30/98 No
FoxPro FPCO Tracking System Compliant 7/23/98 Yes
Freebalance Compliant 7/28/98 Yes
Freedom of Information Act Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
FRPA Inventory Compliant 7/7/98 Yes
FRPA Military Base Closings Compliant 7/7/98 Yes
FTS2000 Database Compliant 8/1/98 No
Government On-Line Accounting System Noncompliant\ 5/15/98 Pending
b
Grants and Contracting Management Retired 5/15/98 Yes
System
Grants Management Database Compliant 2/23/98 Yes
Group 1 Software Retired 12/31/97 Partially
HEP Legacy System Noncompliant\ (12/31/ Pending
a 98)
Hotline Tracking System Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
HRT Planner Retired 7/28/98 No
Human Resource System Compliant 6/16/97 Yes
Human Resources Compliant 7/21/98 Yes
Human Resources Management Information Compliant 7/17/98 Yes
System
Information for Financial Aid Compliant 3/5/98 Yes
Professionals
Institutional Default Prevention System Retired 3/25/98 No
Integrated Administrative System Compliant 7/2/98 Yes
Inventory Compliant 1/27/98 Yes
Investigative Case Tracking System Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
IPEDS Higher Education Survey Data Compliant 7/1/98 Yes
IPOS Risk Management System Compliant 7/21/98 Yes
Jacob K. Javits Fellows Data Base Compliant 9/24/98 Partially
Labor Relations Case Tracking System Compliant 8/20/98 Yes
Ledger 97 Compliant 7/21/98 Yes
M204 Database Retired 2/28/98 Yes
Mailroom Management System Compliant 9/30/98 Yes
Major Data Collections Noncompliant\ (12/31/ Pending
b 98)
Management of Asset, Rent and Space Compliant 7/15/98 Yes
System
Map Info Professional Compliant 1/28/98 Yes
Maxcess Online Public Catalog Compliant 9/30/98 No
MSIP Charts Compliant 7/21/98 Yes
Nextalk 2.10 Compliant 7/24/98 No
Obligation Documents Retired 9/30/98 Yes
OCIO Customer Survey Applications Compliant 7/24/98 No
OCR Local Area Network Retired 9/24/98 No
OERI Teloquent System Compliant 9/17/98 Yes
OESE Personnel System Compliant 6/3/98 No
Official Time Tracking System Compliant 8/20/98 Yes
OIG LAN Compliant 9/29/98 Yes
OPE ADP Security Clearance Data Base Compliant 9/14/98 Yes
OPE OA Inventory Compliant 7/15/98 Yes
OPE Personnel System Compliant 7/30/98 Yes
OPM Federal Jobs On-Line (Employee Compliant 7/9/98 Yes
Express)
OSEP Budget Tracking System Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
OSERS Clearinghouse Information Compliant 5/26/98 Yes
Distribution System
OWCP Case Management System Compliant 8/20/98 Yes
Partnership for Family Involvement Compliant 7/16/98 Yes
PC Inventory System Compliant 2/9/98 Yes
PC Travel Noncompliant\ (12/31/ Pending
b 98)
Peer Review System Compliant 2/3/98 Yes
Perkins Act Retrieval Information Compliant 1/27/98 Yes
System
Personnel Tracking System Compliant 1/20/98 Yes
PES Control Tracking System Compliant 7/24/98 No
Post Employment Services and Annual Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Review
Primary Accounting System Retired 5/15/98 Yes
PROBES/MC Retired 5/26/98 No
Procurement Document System Retired 1/31/98 Yes
Projects with Industries Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Promising Practices Compliant 7/13/98 Yes
Quality Assurance Information Compliant 7/21/98 Yes
Management System
Quarterly Cumulative Caseload Report Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Quicken Compliant 4/9/98 Yes
Randolph Sheppard Vending Standard Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Reporting System RSA-15
Regulatory Assignment Tracking System Compliant 9/17/98 Yes
Requesters Database Compliant 1/5/98 Yes
Resolution of Applicant/Client Appeals Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Response Tracking System Compliant 8/18/97 Yes
Security Tracking System Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
Special Education Programs MIS Compliant 9/30/98 Yes
SPECTRAFAX Compliant 9/24/98 Yes
SRR Briefing Database Compliant 9/24/98 Yes
Staffing System Retired 9/30/98 Yes
State Independent Living & Centers for Compliant 8/12/98 Yes
Independent Living
State Student Incentive Grant Retired 8/11/98 No
Student Financial Assistance Retired 7/10/98 No
Information System
Tasker System Compliant 7/30/98 Yes
TDC Budget Management System Compliant 9/18/98 No
Telecomm Data Tracking Compliant 7/31/97 No
Time and Travel Reporting System Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
Title VII Grantee Database Compliant 7/23/98 Yes
Training Compliant 2/28/98 Yes
Training Registration Retired 7/31/98 No
Training Registration and Information Compliant 8/20/98 Yes
System
Travel (1994-1998) Compliant 7/30/98 Yes
Travel 97 Compliant 7/21/98 Yes
Union Dues Database Compliant 8/20/98 Yes
Vocational-Technical Education Program Compliant 1/23/98 Yes
Database System
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a As indicated in Education's September 10, 1998, report to OMB,
this system did not have a September milestone deadline.
\b The department acknowledges that this system did not meet its
September 30, 1998, deadline.
Source: Department of Education.
*** End of document. ***