caAERS PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN by xscape

VIEWS: 10 PAGES: 23

									v. 1.1                                                                                     caAERS Project Management Plan


                       caAERS PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN



                                     Document Change History


           Version Number             Date                          Description

                 .5         March 13, 2008       As part of kickoff meeting
                1.0         March 30, 2008
                1.1         April 28, 2008       Updated to include new project manager, team
                                                 members
                1.2         May 09, 2008         Updated to reflect issue changes and new team
                                                 members




4/4/2009                                                                                                           Page 1
v. 1.1                                                                                                        caAERS Project Management Plan


                                                             1. Project Summary

Project Name:              CTMS Developer –caAERS Module                               Start Date:      March 7, 2008


Cancer Center:                                                                         Date Awarded:    March 2008

Current Stage of           Iteration 1 – Elaboration Phase
Project:


Points of Contact:

           1. Development Team
           The key members of the caAERS Development team are listed in the table below:
           Project Management
                            Edmond Mulaire, Ph.D.,
           Project Director                                  SemanticBits   edmond.mulaire@semanticbits.com
                            PMP
           Project Manager  Paul Baumgartner                 SemanticBits   paul.baumgartner@semanticbits.com

           Functional
           Analyst             Jennifer Reed                 SemanticBits   jennifer.reed@semanticbits.com
           SME                 Sharon Elcombe                MCCC           elcombe@mayo.edu
           SME                 Sonja Hamilton                MCCC           hamilton@mayo.edu
           SME                 Jennifer Frank                MCCC           Frank.jennifer@mayo.edu
           SME                 Jean Hanson                   MCCC           hansonj@mayo.edu
           SME                 Bob Morrell                   WFU            bmorrell@wfubmc.edu
           SME                 Kim Livengood                 WFU            klivengo@wfubmc.edu
           SME                 Cissy Yates                   WFU
           SME                 Rhonda Kimball                WFU
           SME                 Kimberly Johnson              CALGB          johns001@mc.duke.edu



4/4/2009                                                                                                                              Page 2
v. 1.1                                                                                                              caAERS Project Management Plan

           SME                  Debbie Sawyer                 CALGB             debbie.sawyer@duke.edu
           SME                  Susan Sutherland              CALGB             suthe003@mc.duke.edu
           SME                  Robin Heinze                  CALGB             robin.heinze@duke.edu
           SME                  Robert Dale                   CALGB             robert.dale@duke.edu
           SME                  Nimesh Patel                  CALGB             nimesh.patel@duke.edu
           SME                  John Postiglione              CALGB             posti001@notes.duke.edu
           SME                  Allison Booth                 CALGB

           Technical
           Lead Architect       Vinay Kumar                   SemanticBits      vinay.kumar@semanticbits.com
           Lead Architect       Ram Chilukuri                 SemanticBits      ram.chilukuri@semanticbits.com
           Lead Developer       Biju Joseph                   SemanticBits      biju.joseph@semanticbits.com
                                Srini Akkala                  SemanticBits      srini.akkala@semanticbits.com
           Developer            Monish Dombla                 SemanticBits      monish.dombla@semanticbits.com
                                Sameer Sawant                 SemanticBits      sameer.sawant@semanticbits.com
                                Arun Kumar                    SemanticBits      arun.kumar@semanticbits.com
           QA Engineer          Karthik Iyer                  SemanticBits      Karthik.iyer@semanticbits.com
           UI Designer          Steven Park                   SemanticBits      Steven.park@semantibits.com
           Technical Writer                                   SemanticBits


           2. Funded Adopters
           The Development team will work closely with the following Funded Adopters:

           Mayo (MCCC)
           Mayo is a funded adopter of caAERS and will be involved in elaboration, testing, and adoption. The following are the key Points of
           Contact (POCs) for this team:
              Sharon Elcombe: Lead Elaborator
              Sonja Hamilton: Elaborator
              Jennifer Frank, Jean Hanson: Domain Experts
              Michael Carston, Bradley Andersen: Technical Expert



4/4/2009                                                                                                                                        Page 3
v. 1.1                                                                                                             caAERS Project Management Plan


           Wake Forest (WFU)
           Wake Forest is a funded adopter of caAERS and will be involved in elaboration, testing, and adoption. The following are the key POCs
           for this team:
              Bob Morrell: Lead Elaborator, Lead Adopter
              Kimberly Hill Livengood: Domain Expert
              Xhiquiang (Steven) Cheng: Technical Expert
              Cissy Yates: Domain Expert
              Rhonda Kimball: Domain Expert

           CALGB
           CALGB is a funded adopter of caAERS and will be involved in elaboration, testing, and adoption. The following are the key POCs for
           this team:
              Kimberly Johnson: Institutional Lead
              Amish Shah: Technical Lead
              Josh Yoder: Technical Lead
              Robert Dale: Domain Expert
              Nimesh Patel: Domain Expert
              Debbie Sawyer: Domain Expert
              Susan Sutherland: Domain Expert
              Robin Heinze: Domain Expert
              John Postiglione: Domain Expert
              Allison Booth: Domain Expert



    3. WS Mentors:
    The VCDE and Architecture Workspaces will play an important role in the elaboration and testing phases of the project. Representatives from
    these workspaces will assist with requirements and project artifact reviews.



4/4/2009                                                                                                                                    Page 4
v. 1.1                                                                                                            caAERS Project Management Plan



    VCDE WS Mentors and POCs
       Brian Davis
       Lynne Wilkens

    Architecture WS Mentor and POC
        Michael Keller
        Pankaj Agarwal



    4. Reporting & Sharing Special Interest Group
    The Reporting & Sharing SIG has a special interest in the caAERS application and will be an integral collaborator on this project. The primary
    POC for the Reporting & Sharing SIG are:
              Christo Andonyadis
              Derek Walker




4/4/2009                                                                                                                                    Page 5
v. 1.1                                                                                                    caAERS Project Management Plan




Statement of Work

The main deliverable is continued development and adoption of caAERS. caAERS is a nationally scalable application with a robust
architecture to meet the needs of the caBIG Community. It is caBIG silver-level compliant, and works as an integrated part of CCTS
as well as a stand-alone application.

Before development starts, we’ll review caAERS as-is and develop an application function profile. We’ll then work with other
developers of CCTS applications to identify the redundancies, develop a set of common service specifications, and determine which
developer will be responsible for which services.

The main focus of the development will be restructuring based on the developed common service specification. This will result in the
creation of services and the ability to integrate services from other applications. Modifications will be done in such a way that will
allow caAERS to continue to work as a stand-alone application while further integrating with CCTS. In addition, increased
functionality will be added to caAERS based on adopter and elaborator needs. As alwa ys, the development team will follow agile
development methods while working in the standard elaboration, construction, and transition phases.

SemanticBits will work closely with three adopters during this cycle of development: Wake Forest, Mayo Clinic, and the Cancer
Leukemia Group B (CALGB). The adopters will help identify additional functionality changes needed in caAERS to make it a more
robust and usable application. They will actively participate in the use case development and requirement gathering a nd perform end-
user testing. They will also provide Data Sharing Plans that document the data records and fields they will share and when they will
make the data available (identifying any restrictions on the data). As they formally adopt caAERS, they will provide information about
they type of support needed and will help with the development of end user documentation.

SemanticBits also will develop and document the caAERS support process, to include supporting the current version of caAERS a s
well as the version that will be available at the end of this development cycle. SemanticBits will work with the Adopters to determine
the type of support that will likely be required. This could include self-service support on the web (FAQs, common troubleshooting,
etc), email and phone support, onsite support for installation and use, and tutorials and training.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                          Page 6
v. 1.1                                                                                                    caAERS Project Management Plan

Working with NCI-designated subject matter experts, SemanticBits will also conduct an intensive review and analysis of caAERS to
perform a gap analysis between AdEERS and the current version of caAERS. As part of this effort, we will also identify NCI’s needs
when considering caAERS as the potential new central SAE Reporting system within NCI.

SemanticBits is well-positioned to complete this project. Our past experience with caAERS and other CCTS applications (including
C3PR and PSC) has provided us with the right knowledge and foundation for the tasks in this project. Moreover, we have a strong
working relationship with Wake Forest and Mayo Clinic, and adding CALGB as an adopter will permit us to further enhance caAERS
and position it for use by a larger audience.



Project Objectives:

The main deliverable is continued development and adoption of caAERS. caAERS is a nationally scalable application with a robu st
architecture to meet the needs of the caBIG Community. It is caBIG silver-level compliant, and works as an integrated part of CCTS
as well as a stand-alone application.

Before development starts, we’ll review caAERS as-is and develop an application function profile. We’ll then work with other
developers of CCTS applications to identify the redundancies, develop a set of common service specifications, and determine which
developer will be responsible for which services.

The main focus of the development will be restructuring based on the developed common service specification. This will result in the
creation of services and the ability to integrate services from other applications. Modifications will be done in such a way that will
allow caAERS to continue to work as a stand-alone application while further integrating with CCTS. In addition, increased
functionality will be added to caAERS based on adopter and elaborator needs. As always, the development team will follow agil e
development methods while working in the standard elaboration, construction, and transition phases.

SemanticBits will work closely with three adopters during this cycle of development: Wake Forest, Mayo Clinic, and the Cancer
Leukemia Group B (CALGB). The adopters will help identify additional functionality changes needed in caAERS to make it a more
robust and usable application. They will actively participate in the use case development and requirement gathering and perform end-
user testing. They will also provide Data Sharing Plans that document the data records and fields they will share and when they will



4/4/2009                                                                                                                          Page 7
v. 1.1                                                                                                    caAERS Project Management Plan

make the data available (identifying any restrictions on the data). As they formally adopt caAERS, they will provide information about
they type of support needed and will help with the development of end user documentation.

SemanticBits also will develop and document the caAERS support process, to include supporting the current version of caAERS a s
well as the version that will be available at the end of this development cycle. SemanticBits will work with the Adopters to determine
the type of support that will likely be required. This could include self-service support on the web (FAQs, common troubleshooting,
etc), email and phone support, onsite support for installation and use, and tutorials and training.

Working with NCI-designated subject matter experts, SemanticBits will also conduct an intensive review and analysis of caAERS to
perform a gap analysis between AdEERS and the current version of caAERS. As part of this effort, we will also identify NCI’s needs
when considering caAERS as the potential new central SAE Reporting system within NCI.

SemanticBits is well-positioned to complete this project. Our past experience with caAERS and other CCTS applications (including
C3PR and PSC) has provided us with the right knowledge and foundation for the tasks in this project. Moreover, we have a strong
working relationship with Wake Forest and Mayo Clinic, and adding CALGB as an adopter will permit us to further enhance caAER S
and position it for use by a larger audience



Success Factors:

  1. Successful use of the software by funded adopters for AE data capture and expedited AE reporting.
  2. Low defect rate
  3. Continued development of new modules, features, and enhancements
  4. Completion of comprehensive gap analysis report for NCI Enterprise AER system




4/4/2009                                                                                                                          Page 8
v. 1.1                                                                                                         caAERS Project Management Plan

Project Dependencies/Constraints:

 The caAERS system has dependencies on the CTEP AdEERS system. The integration of these two systems is critical to the
 successful adoption of caAERS. We worked closely and successfully with the AdEERS team in development of caAERS version
 1.0. This joint development will need to continue during the development of caAERS version 2.0, which will included expanded
 integration between the two systems.

 The caAERS system is also dependent on the continued development of the caGrid infrastructure. To fully exploit the data
 sharing features and services in caAERS, adopters will need to deploy and administer elements of caGrid.



                                                            2. Activity List

Please refer to the MS Project Plan (caAERS-Version1.5-ProjectSchedule-baseline1.mpp) in the SVN repository on GForge for an
up-to-date list of activities for the caAERS project. The following table lists the main activities and deliverables planned for this
project.

     caAERS Deliverables Table – Period 1
     Reference      Deliverable                                                                Initial/Draft         Period 1 Final
     Task 1.1       Project Management Plan                                                          3/17/08                 4/15/08
     Task 1.2       Monthly Status and Financial Report                                                            4/10/08, 5/10/08,
                                                                                                                   6/10/08, 7/10/08,
                                                                                                                   8/10/08, 9/10/08,
                                                                                                                           10/10/08
     Task 1.3       caAERS Scope and Vision Document                                                                         3/28/08
     Task 1.4       Project Summary Report                                                                        End of PERIOD 2
     Task 2.1       Use Case Document and Requirements and Specification Document                                            8/15/09




     Task 2.2       Initial or Updated UML Model and Master Design Document                                                 4/30/08



4/4/2009                                                                                                                               Page 9
v. 1.1                                                                                         caAERS Project Management Plan

     Task 2.3     Initial or Updated Master Test Plan                                                        3/28/08
     Task 2.4     API Documents, API Code                                                                    9/15/08
     Task 2.5     Source Code and Test Activity Logs and bug reports                                         9/15/08
     Task 2.6     Updated User Manual and Administration Guide                                                9/1/08
     Task 2.7     Installation Guide and Release Notes                                                        9/1/08
     Task 3.1.1   Semantically Annotated XMIs                                                                9/15/08
     Task 3.1.2   CDE Use Report, and Annotated XML Files                                                    9/15/08
     Task 3.2     Compatibility Review Submission Package (for caBIG silver-level)                End of PERIOD 2
     Task 5.1     Adoption Plan (an extension of PMP Task 1.1)                       4/30/08                 5/30/08
     Task 5.5     Adoption Report                                                                 End of PERIOD 2
     Task 5.2.1   Integrated Use Case (an extension of use case Task 2.1)                                    8/15/09
     Task 6       Monthly Production caAERS Support Status Report                                  4/10/08, 5/10/08,
                                                                                                   6/10/08, 7/10/08,
                                                                                                   8/10/08, 9/10/08,
                                                                                                          10/10/08,
     Task 7       Enterprise SAE Requirements and Gap Analysis Report                                        9/15/08




4/4/2009                                                                                                               Page 10
v. 1.1                                                                                                       caAERS Project Management Plan

                                                             3. Work Product Identification
           See Activity List for breakdown by release.


         Deliverable Name              Start Date                  End Date                   Point of Contact
         Elaboration - Iteration 1                  3/7/08         3/31/08                    Edmond Mulaire
         Elaboration - Iteration 2                  4/1/08         4/30/08                    Edmond Mulaire
         Construction - Iteration 3                 5/1/08         5/31/08                    Edmond Mulaire
         Construction - Iteration 4                 6/1/08         6/30/08                    Edmond Mulaire
         Construction - Iteration 5                 7/1/08         7/31/08                    Edmond Mulaire
         Construction - Iteration 6                 8/1/08         8/31/08                    Edmond Mulaire
         Transition - Iteration 7                   9/1/07         9/25/08                    Edmond Mulaire




4/4/2009                                                                                                                            Page 11
v. 1.1                                                                                                  caAERS Project Management Plan


                                                           4. Schedule
Please refer to the MS Project Plan for details regarding the schedule and working days for the caAERS project.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                       Page 12
v. 1.1                                              caAERS Project Management Plan


                              5. Payment Schedule

See the project task order.




4/4/2009                                                                   Page 13
v. 1.1                                                                                                          caAERS Project Management Plan


                                                      6. Resource Profiles – Staffing


Below we list the commitment of each person involved in the project, in terms of average hours per week.

 Labor Category                  Name                                            Affiliation   % Effort     Approx      Total
                                                                                                            Hrs Per     Hours
                                                                                                             Week
 Development
 Project Director                Edmond Mulaire                                 SemanticBits     25%          10         280
 Project Manager                 Paul Baumgartner                               SemanticBits     75%          30         840
 Architect                       Vinay Kumar/Ram Chilukuri                      SemanticBits     50%          20         560
 Senior Software Engineer        Srini Akkala                                   SemanticBits    100%          40        1120
 Senior Software Engineer        Biju Joseph                                    SemanticBits    100%          40        1120
 Software Engineer               Monish Dombla                                  SemanticBits    100%          40        1120
 Software Engineer               Sameer Sawant                                  SemanticBits    100%          40        1120
 Software Engineer               Arun Kumar                                     SemanticBits    100%          40        1120
 Senior Business Analyst         Jennifer Reed                                  SemanticBits    100%          40        1120
 UI Designer                     Steven Park                                    SemanticBits     25%          10         280
 Senior Technical Writer                                                        SemanticBits     25%          10         280
 Project Control/Admin                                                          SemanticBits     25%          10         280
 Senior QA Engineer              Karthik Iyer                                   SemanticBits     50%          20         560
 Usability Engineer                                                             SemanticBits     25%          10         280
                                                                                                           Developers   10080
 Adopters
 Mayo - Institutional Leads,     Sharon Elcombe, Sonja Hamilton, Jennifer          Mayo         100%          40        1120
 Subject Matter Experts, and     Frank, Jean Hanson, Michael Carston, Bradley
 Technical Resources             Andersen
 WFU - Institutional Leads,      Robert Morrell, Kim Livengood, Steven             WFU          100%          40        1120
 Subject Matter Experts, and     Cheng, Cissy Yates, Rhonda Kimball
 Technical Resources




4/4/2009                                                                                                                               Page 14
v. 1.1                                                                                                              caAERS Project Management Plan

 CALGB - Institutional Leads,     Kimberly Johnson, Amish Shah, Josh               CALGB           100%           40         1120
 Subject Matter Experts, and      Yoder, Debbie Sawyer, Susan Sutherland,
 Technical Resources              Robert Dale, Nimesh Patel, Robin Heinze,
                                  John Postiglione, Allison Booth
                                                                                                              Adopters      3360
                                                                                 Total FTEs         12        Total Hrs     13440



Each organization’s contributions will be tracked per iteration. Variance may occur, but each organization will honor their total funded hour
commitment.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                                    Page 15
v. 1.1                                                                  caAERS Project Management Plan


7. Risk Identification
           Available in the caAERS structured risk management matrix.




4/4/2009                                                                                       Page 16
v. 1.1                                                                                                       caAERS Project Management Plan


8. Configuration Management Plan


  CM Responsibility
  Manager: Vinay Kumar (SemanticBits)



Software version control
Software will be maintained in a subversion repository, hosted at NCICB. The URL for this repository is
http://gforge.nci.nih.gov/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/?root=caaersappdev

The top level of the repository will be organized per the standard outlined in the subversion manual; i.e., tags, branches, and trunk
directories. The source code for the project as it is developed will be stored src (for java source), web (for the web application root),
and test (for unit tests, UAT scripts and reports) directories within trunk. Other directories within trunk may be added as required.

Each time the software is released, the trunk directory will be copied to a tag of this form:

https://gforge.nci.nih.gov/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/?root=caaersappdev /tags/releases/{NAME}

where {NAME} is the name of the release.

Documentation version control
Documents that are primarily authored by one individual will be maintained in Word format in the subversion repository. The URL
for the documentation directory is http://gforge.nci.nih.gov/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/?root=caaersappdev/trunk/docs.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                             Page 17
v. 1.1                                                                                                        caAERS Project Management Plan

Issue tracking
The development team will use the JIRA tool for issue tracking. Issues will be communicated to the development team via several
avenues including direct access into JIRA, via the Tracker tool hosted at NCICB and accessed through the GForge site, via the
caAERS wiki accessible via the internet, email, phone discussions, meetings, and face-to-face interactions. Although the use of a
single input point for issues is ideal, it has not been found to reflect reality. The development team (especially the Business Analyst
and Project Manager) will shoulder the majority of the responsibility of appropriately documenting any issues into the JIRA system.
We are actively investigating the feasibility of expanding access to JIRA to allow an increased number of issues to be directly entered
into this tool.

Change management
When the QA manager discovers a problem with the software, he will create a ticket for it in the issue tracking system. Perio dically,
the QA manager, the project manager, and the lead developer will meet to triage new tickets. In particular they will decide whether
each ticket describes a software defect (i.e., a bug) or a requirements defect (i.e., a new or changed feature) and its criticality (i.e.,
when it must be addressed). If necessary, the project manager will bring it to the attention of the users' representative or other team
members and incorporate their input into determining if, how, and when the issue should be addressed.

Development environment
We will develop a java web application using Java 5, targeting the Tomcat application server. Ant build scripts will be created for all
build tasks and for use by the automated build system. We will ensure compatibility with PostgreSQL and Oracle, with a general eye
towards database independence.

The specific libraries and frameworks to use will be decided as development proceeds.

Test environment
We will use JUnit for unit testing of all code, along with tools such as EasyMock and the Spring Framework's mock library to ensure
that the tests actually test units alone. Unit test reports will be stored in the subversion repository.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                             Page 18
v. 1.1                                                                                                   caAERS Project Management Plan

The development environment will be configured such that we can execute database-dependent unit tests against HSQLDB (for
speed), Oracle, and PostgreSQL. Schemamule and DBUnit will assist in this.

User Acceptance Testing will be conducted using Selenium UAT scripts written in Java. UAT reports will be generated for each test
performed and stored in the subversion repository.

Automated builds
We will use Hudson for automated builds. There will be a main automated build running all the unit tests, using HSQLDB for the
database-backed tests. There will also be two supplemental builds, running only the database-backed tests. One of these builds will be
against Oracle and the other against PostgresSQL.

The main build will provide rapid feedback that new commits do not break any of the tests. The supplemental builds will be slower,
but will verify that all functionality works against all databases.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                        Page 19
v. 1.1                                                                                                                  caAERS Project Management Plan


                                                            9. Quality Assurance Plan
           Reference the quality assurance plan and identify the person(s) responsible for project quality assurance.

  QA Responsibility
  Manager: Karthik Iyer (QA Engineer, SemanticBits)




Quality Assurance Approach
The quality assurance approach consists of three primary efforts, unit testing, integration testing, and user acceptance testing. Unit
testing is used during code development to verify correct function of source code modules, and to perform regression tests wh en code
is refactored. Integration tests will be used to verify that the modules function together when combined into a production system. User
acceptance testing will be used to verify software requirements and business value.

Unit Testing
Developers will be responsible for creating unit tests for all modules developed. JUnit will be used as the testing framework, and will
be augmented by HTTPUnit, Schemamule, and DBUnit. EasyMock. The Spring Framework’s mock library and EasyMock will be
used to create mock objects to assist in separating unit tests.

CruiseControl will ensure that unit tests are run at appropriate intervals during development and that the test reports are archived.
Developers will be able to run unit tests as needed to verify correct function of their code, the results of these ad-hoc unit tests will not
be saved. Unit test code coverage will be measured using Emma and those reports will be archived by CruiseControl.

Integration Testing
The Test Plan will contain integration tests used to verify functional requirements and to produce an integrated system suitable for
User Acceptance Testing. These tests will be written in Java as Selenium scripts, stored in subversion, and executed for each
iteration’s release candidate. The Test Plan will contain suspension and resumption criteria for the integration tests, and r eports will be
generated by Cobertura and archived by Hudson. Integration testing will be performed near the end of code development for each


4/4/2009                                                                                                                                       Page 20
v. 1.1                                                                                                     caAERS Project Management Plan

iteration, allowing sufficient development time to address integration issues. Integration tests will be peer-reviewed by developers.
Test results will be monitored by the QA Manager who will be responsible for issuing trouble tickets.


User Acceptance Testing (UAT)
The Test Plan will contain acceptance criteria, which will be tested using the same mechanisms as the integration tests: scripts written
in Java, which are run through Selenium to produce test results, which will be archived. The UATs will focus on verifying software
requirements and business value, and will be derived from the use cases. UATs will be developed iteratively, and peer-reviewed by a
developers and adopters. UAT results will be monitored by the QA Manager who will be responsible for issuing trouble tickets.




4/4/2009                                                                                                                          Page 21
v. 1.1                                                                                                             caAERS Project Management Plan


                                                                 10. Top Issues
           Provide a list of known issues associated with the project, with proposed or recommended solutions.


                Issue Description                            Recommended Solution                       Responsible         Status
                                                                                                        Individual
 1. Data Sharing requirements still             NCI and SAIC should fast-track the                   NCI-CBIIT and       Open
 open                                           resolution of this issue.                            SAIC
 2. Dependency on CAT team for                  Although this is not particularly likely, it is a    CAT and             Open
 assignment of services. The caAERS             potential risk. The caAERS team has                  caAERS teams
 team is dependent on the CAT team’s            submitted its functional decomposition to the
 timely assignment of services. If there        CAT and will monitor this risk. If
 is a significant delay here, the               assignments are not available by mid-May
 caAERS team may not have sufficient            timeframe, the caAERS team may be
 time to complete the migration of all          impacted. Monitoring of this issue will
 assigned services to SOA for CCTS              continue.
 v1.5, which is planned for release in
 September.
 3. CCTS vs caAERS Development.                 We have shared with the Adopters that we are         caAERS team         Open
 There is a risk of conflict between            under direction to work on refactoring as part
 CCTS service refactoring and the need          of the move to an SOA-based CCTS suite to
 to develop new functionality required          ensure their expectations are in line with our
 by Mayo, Wake, and CALGB for                   SOW. In addition, in our plan, we have
 adoption of caAERS at their sites.             allocated resources for work on CCTS and on
                                                caAERS new development. We will monitor
                                                the actual work on these efforts against our
                                                plan and raise this as an issue to SAIC and
                                                NCI management as needed.
 4. Integration with Local CTMS                 Regular meetings with Adopter’s technical            caAERS team         Open
 systems at Adopter Sites. The scope            teams have been established to facilitate



4/4/2009                                                                                                                                  Page 22
v. 1.1                                                                                        caAERS Project Management Plan

 and nature of the Integration into local   sharing of technical details. We have moved
 CTMS systems cannot be fully known         work on this integration effort to the
 until the teams undertake further          beginning of the construction phase since it is
 investigation and discussions              a high risk technical effort.
 regarding the different environments,
 systems, procedures, and
 requirements. There is a risk that the
 integration effort will be too complex
 to complete in the v1.5 or v2.0
 timeframe.




4/4/2009                                                                                                             Page 23

								
To top