Attachment_20_-_PPMSA_Blueprint.pdf

Pension Plan Management Segment

Blueprint

June 2014

Version 1.1

Office of Information Technology

Pension Plan Management Segment Architecture (PPMSA) Blueprint i

Pension Plan Management Segment Architecture (PPMSA) Approval Form

In accordance with PBGC Business Needs Analysis (BNA) standard, the Enterprise Architecture Team and the Core Team have met the following objectives with the PPMSA:

1. Review the current state of business and technology components for the Pension Plan Management (PPM) Segment;

2. Determine if existing in-scope solutions meet the business needs of ONR and BAPD;

3. Identify PPM data needs across the corporation;

4. Study forward-looking business and data needs as well as potential technology solutions to support the future ONR & BAPD mission area;

5. Identify and recommend the target state and modernization roadmap for PPM;

6. Utilize the PBGC BNA; and

7. Document the results of analysis & recommendations in BNA artifacts and obtain acceptance.

These objectives were achieved as a result of the support provided by the Executive Sponsors & Stakeholders, PPMSA Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), Chief Enterprise Architect, and the EAD Project Support Team.

ii iii iv

Revision History

Version Author Section Changed Summary of Changes Date

0.1 EAD Draft May 2014

1.0 EAD None Core Team Approval June 2014

1.1 EAD None Executive Approval June 2014

v

Table of Contents

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 KEY ISSUES & BASELINE ARCHITECTURE

1.2 TARGET ARCHITECTURE & RECOMMENDATIONS

1.3 MODERNIZATION ROADMAP

2 INTRODUCTION

2.1 BACKGROUND

2.2 SCOPE

2.3 APPROACH

3 PPMSA KEY ISSUES

4 BASELINE ARCHITECTURE

4.1 BASELINE ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM

4.2 BASELINE CONCEPTUAL DATA MODEL

4.3 NODE CONNECTIVITY DIAGRAM

5 PPM VISION, GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

5.1 PPM VISION

5.2 PPM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

6 TARGET ARCHITECTURE

6.1 TARGET CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

6.2 TARGET ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM

6.3 TARGET DATA

7 ROADMAP

8 RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUB-RECOMMENDATIONS

8.1 RECOMMENDATION 1

8.2 RECOMMENDATION 2

8.3 RECOMMENDATION 3

8.4 RECOMMENDATION 4

8.5 RECOMMENDATION 5

8.6 RECOMMENDATION 6

8.7 RECOMMENDATION 7

8.8 RECOMMENDATION 8

9 APPENDICES

9.1 APPENDIX A: TIMELINE

9.2 APPENDIX B: BASELINE APPROACH

9.3 APPENDIX C: BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASURES

9.4 APPENDIX D: BASELINE SWOT ANALYSIS RESULTS

9.5 APPENDIX E: PPMSA SME INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

9.6 APPENDIX F: PPMSA EXECUTIVE INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE

9.7 APPENDIX G: BASELINE ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM LINE LEGEND

9.8 APPENDIX H: BASELINE PROCESS MODELS

9.9 APPENDIX I: NODE CONNECTIVITY DIAGRAM WITH PPM TECHNICAL ISSUES

APPENDIX J: THE BASELINE DATA DICTIONARY .................................................................................................... 165 1.1 APPENDIX K: BASELINE INFORMATION SHARING MATRIX ...................................................................................... 176 1.2 APPENDIX L: BASELINE KEY INFORMATION SOURCES AND QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT ................................................. 179 1.3

9.10 APPENDIX M: PPM KEY ISSUES ALIGNMENT TO BASELINE ARCHITECTURE

9.11 APPENDIX N: TARGET PROCESS MODELS

9.12 APPENDIX O: TARGET ARCHITECTURE LINE LEGEND

9.13 APPENDIX P: MAPPING OF KEY PROCESSES TO DATA

9.14 APPENDIX Q: PROPOSED DATA STEWARDS

9.15 APPENDIX R: INFORMATION SHARING MATRIX – TARGET STATE

9.16 APPENDIX S: DATA REUSE

9.17 APPENDIX T: BUSINESS REFERENCE MODEL AND ALIGNMENT

vi

9.18 APPENDIX U: PERFORMANCE REFERENCE MODEL AND ALIGNMENT

9.19 APPENDIX V: DATA REFERENCE MODEL AND ALIGNMENT

9.20 APPENDIX W: APPLICATIONS REFERENCE MODEL AND ALIGNMENT

9.21 APPENDIX X: INFRASTRUCTURE REFERENCE MODEL AND ALIGNMENT

9.22 APPENDIX Y: SECURITY REFERENCE MODEL AND ALIGNMENT

9.23 APPENDIX Z: ALTERNATIVES FOR THE PPM MANAGEMENT APPROACH

9.24 APPENDIX AA: ACRONYM LIST

Table of Figures

FIGURE 1: BASELINE ARCHITECTURE

FIGURE 2: TARGET ARCHITECTURE DESIGN APPROACH

FIGURE 3: PPMSA TARGET CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

FIGURE 4: TARGET ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM

FIGURE 5: PPMSA MODERNIZATION ROADMAP

FIGURE 6: PPMSA SPONSORS AND CORE TEAM

FIGURE 7: PENSION PLAN MANAGEMENT (PPM) LIFECYCLE

FIGURE 8: BASELINE ANALYSIS APPROACH

FIGURE 9: PPM BUSINESS ARCHITECTURE

FIGURE 10: PPMSA BASELINE ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM

FIGURE 11: BASELINE CONCEPTUAL DATA MODEL

FIGURE 12: NODE CONNECTIVITY DIAGRAM

FIGURE 13: PPM SEGMENT VISION

FIGURE 14: GOALS & OBJECTIVES

FIGURE 15: TARGET CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS – PHASE 1

FIGURE 16: TARGET CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS – PHASE 2

FIGURE 17: TARGET ARCHITECTURE DIAGRAM

FIGURE 18: TARGET BUSINESS FUNCTION DIAGRAM

FIGURE 19: TARGET CONCEPTUAL DATA MODEL (CDM)

FIGURE 20: PPMSA MODERNIZATION ROADMAP

FIGURE 21: RECOMMENDATION 1 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 22: HIGH-LEVEL MANAGEMENT APPROACH STRUCTURE

FIGURE 23: MANAGEMENT APPROACH STRUCTURE DEFINITIONS

FIGURE 24: MANAGEMENT APPROACH STRUCTURE DEFINITIONS

FIGURE 25: MANAGEMENT APPROACH “MENU OF CHOICES”

FIGURE 26: EXAMPLES OF TRANSITIONS BETWEEN CASE TYPES FOR TERMINATIONS

FIGURE 27: RECOMMENDATION 2 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 28: RECOMMENDATION 3 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 29: RECOMMENDATION 4 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 30: RECOMMENDATION 5 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 31: RECOMMENDATION 6 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 32: RECOMMENDATION 7 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 33: RECOMMENDATION 8 OVERVIEW

FIGURE 34: ARCHITECTURAL ANALYSIS TIMELINE

FIGURE 35: BASELINE ANALYSIS APPROACH

FIGURE 36: SWOT OVERVIEW

FIGURE 37: INTERVIEWEES

FIGURE 38: INITIAL SWOT AND INTERVIEW RESPONSES

FIGURE 39: NUMBER OF RESPONSES BY TOPIC

FIGURE 40: STRENGTHS ANALYSIS

FIGURE 41: WEAKNESSES ANALYSIS

FIGURE 42: OPPORTUNITIES ANALYSIS

file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089672 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089674 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089676 vii

FIGURE 43: THREATS ANALYSIS

FIGURE 44: MANAGEMENT COORDINATION SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 45: ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE/STAFF SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 46: PROCESS STANDARDIZATION SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 47: DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 48: WORKLOAD MANAGEMENT SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 49: USE/FUNCTIONALITY SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 50: SYSTEMS INTEGRATION SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 51: SYSTEM DUPLICATION SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 52: SYSTEM ACCESS/ACCESS CONTROL SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 53: SYSTEM OWNERSHIP/MANAGEMENT SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 54: DATA STANDARDIZATION SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 55: DATA MANAGEMENT SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 56: BI/DATA ANALYTICS SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 57: INFORMATION AVAILABILITY SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 58: DATA SECURITY SWOT BREAKDOWN

FIGURE 59: NODE CONNECTIVITY DIAGRAM WITH PPM TECHNICAL ISSUES

FIGURE 60: RISK (PLAN) MONITORING FUNCTION WITH KEY ISSUES

FIGURE 61: PLAN PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS WITH KEY ISSUES

FIGURE 62: PLAN TERMINATION WITH KEY ISSUES1

FIGURE 63: PLAN TERMINATION WITH KEY ISSUES (II)

FIGURE 64: POST-TERMINATION SUPPORT WITH KEY ISSUES

FIGURE 65: FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE WITH KEY ISSUES

FIGURE 66: PPMSA TARGET BUSINESS FUNCTION DIAGRAM

FIGURE 67: TARGET MAPPING OF KEY PROCESSES TO DATA

FIGURE 68: PPMSA ALIGNMENT TO SECURITY TARGET ARCHITECTURE

FIGURE 69: MANAGEMENT APPROACH COMPONENTS

FIGURE 70: MANAGEMENT APPROACH "MENU OF CHOICES"

FIGURE 71: MANAGEMENT APPROACH ALTERNATIVE #1 (STATUS QUO)

FIGURE 72: MANAGEMENT APPROACH ALTERNATIVE #2

FIGURE 73: MANAGEMENT APPROACH ALTERNATIVE #3

FIGURE 74: MANAGEMENT APPROACH ALTERNATIVE #4

Table of Tables

TABLE 1: PPMSA TARGET RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUB-RECOMMENDATIONS

TABLE 2: ETA GUIDING PRINCIPLES

TABLE 3: PPMSA RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUB-RECOMMENDATIONS

TABLE 4: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 5: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 6: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 7: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.4 OVERVIEW

TABLE 8: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.5 OVERVIEW

TABLE 9: PROPOSED DEFINITIONS OF KEY PPM TERMS

TABLE 10: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.6 OVERVIEW

TABLE 11: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 1.7 OVERVIEW

TABLE 12: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 2.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 13: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 2.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 14: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 2.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 15: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 2.4 OVERVIEW

TABLE 16: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 3.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 17: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 3.2 OVERVIEW

file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089680 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089681 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089682 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089683 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089684 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089685 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089686 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089687 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089688 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089689 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089690 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089691 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089692 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089693 file://prod/fs/Home/home06/ksgue17/MyDocuments/Plan%20Mgmt/Blueprint_20140609.docx%23_Toc390089694 viii

TABLE 18: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 3.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 19: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 3.4 OVERVIEW

TABLE 20: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 4.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 21: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 4.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 22: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 4.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 23: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 4.4 OVERVIEW

TABLE 24: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 4.5 OVERVIEW

TABLE 25: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 4.6 OVERVIEW

TABLE 26: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 5.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 27: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 5.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 28: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 5.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 29: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 5.4 OVERVIEW

TABLE 30: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 6.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 31: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 6.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 32: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 6.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 33: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 7.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 34: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 7.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 35: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 7.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 36: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 8.1 OVERVIEW

TABLE 37: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 8.2 OVERVIEW

TABLE 38: SUB-RECOMMENDATION 8.3 OVERVIEW

TABLE 39: PPM-RELEVANT PERFORMANCE MEASURES

TABLE 40: FINAL SWOT THEMES

TABLE 41: BASELINE DATA DICTIONARY

TABLE 42: BASELINE INFORMATION SHARING MATRIX

TABLE 43: KEY INFORMATION SOURCES AND QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT (E4010)

TABLE 44: KEY INFORMATION SOURCES AND QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT (RMEW)

TABLE 45: KEY INFORMATION SOURCES AND QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT (CAS)

TABLE 46: PPMSA CONCEPTUAL DATA MODEL TO ENTERPRISE DATA MODEL MAPPING

TABLE 47: PPM-ARM ALIGNMENT

TABLE 48: ARM-TRM ALIGNMENT

TABLE 49: PPM-IRM ALIGNMENT

TABLE 50: PPMSA SYSTEM SECURITY CONTROLS

1. Executive Summary

This Pension Plan Management Segment Architecture (PPMSA) effort was sponsored by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) Barry West, the Chief of Negotiations and Restructuring (CNR) Sandy Rich, and the Director of Benefits Administration and Payment Department (BAPD) Philip Langham.

The PPMSA sponsors established a cross-functional Core Team of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) to conduct a segment architecture analysis and to produce a blueprint of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) Pension Plan Management (PPM) segment. This effort focused on the business needs of the Office of Negotiations & Restructuring (ONR) and the Benefits Administration and Payment Department (BAPD) using the PBGC Business Needs Analysis (BNA).

The Core Team consisted of the key personnel from the Office of Negotiations and Restructuring (ONR), BAPD and Office of Information Technology (OIT) and was facilitated by the Enterprise Architecture Division (EAD). The team conducted multiple workshops and working sessions with the Core Team members, SME interviews and thorough review of all available documentation. The analysis represented the discussions and input from the Core Team and key stakeholders across PBGC. The results of the analysis are reflected in the Baseline Architecture (section 4), Target Architecture (section 6), Modernization Roadmap (section 7) and Recommendations (section 8).

1.1 Key Issues & Baseline Architecture

The current state of the PPM segment was captured in the Baseline Architecture diagram (Figure 1). This diagram is further described and supported by the diagrams and models depicting the segment-wide process, data, and technology architectures in the Baseline Architecture and Appendices sections.

The Core Team and EAD support team conducted the Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis, interviewed over 60 SMEs across PBGC departments, and analyzed volumes of available documentation and data to conduct the baseline analysis of the systems, data, and processes.

Figure 1: Baseline Architecture

2. Plan Processing and Analysis

START

3. Plan Termination

1. Risk (Plan) Monitoring

4. Post Termination

5. Financial Assistance

Reportable Events

2.C

Form 500 (Standard Termination)

Form 600/601

ME Applications

NOI / Financial Assistance

Request

5.A

SE Contingency List

ME Contingency List

& DOI

ME Financial Analyst

ME Plan DB (MS Access)

1.A

SE Financial Statement Coordinator/Chief Actuary

1.D

OCC Triage

CFRD

Actuary

2.A

0.A

IPVFB BFIPRODCDMS

PBGC.gov Plan Data

2.C

1.A

2.J

1.D

Annual Report

ASD

Actuary

1.A

1.B

0.E

1.B

1.B

1.A

0.H

CWG

1.D

ME Board of Trustees

OCC Attorney

1.D

RVG

4.A

Post Standard Termination

4.C

4.C

ME Site Review

Site Review Report5.C

4.D

5.B 5.B

CFRD Financial Analyst

4.A

OCC Attorney

2.H

5.C

3.D

0.I

0.H

Work Papers

5.D

CFRD

Financial Analyst2.B

2.H

2.E

2.G

4.A

4.C

CFRD Financial Analyst

RMEW

DMS

Actuarial Work

Request

Matter

Corporate Parent

Plan

Case

Recovery Valuation

Advice and Counsel

2.O

3.A

TeamConnect

2.E

2.A

2.B

CMS

PN and SA

3.H

4.C,D

CAS

(CMS Database)

Case

2.K

5.B

TDR Package

ME Notices

ME Financial Analyst

2.F 2.F

2.L

ME Supervisory Auditor

2.G

2.M

Settlement Agreement

4.B

4.B

2.I

2.N

File Server

SAS

PAS/PPS

eFAST-2 (5500 Data from DOL) e4010

Leapfile / Secure Server

TAS

IPVFB

Participant Records

Audit Files

0.B PRAD Analyst 1.A

IRS

2.DMFW

5.C 4.D

1.B

BAPD P6

3.F

FBA

3.D

TWG

Case Team 3.C

Trust Acct.

3.D

3.F

CMSIPS

3.E

2.H

0.FCongress

Company info, credit ratings, etc.

1.C

0.C ME or SE Plan Sponsor/Plan

Administrator

FOD

Court 4.BCourt

2.P

3.A

2.F

EBLS

2.H

2.G

3.G

CFRD Admin

3.B

3.B

3.B

4.A

1.D

3.A

3.D

Coverage Determination

0.J (Premium Referral)

0.K

0.D

0.B

FRC

4.E

Info requests, congressional inquiries, etc.

0.G

Mgmt ReportsOGC

0.B

CPO

CPAD

TPD

Handoff Coordinator

I drive

CAB Auditor

2.D

5.A

MWG

ONR

File room

MEPD

Auditor

5.A

5.C

4.B

2.H

Calculations 5.E 5.E

ME Notices

CFRD

Financial Analyst

1.C

Pre.Cont List

0.K

Pre-Term Settlement / Claim

4.A

OCC Attorney

· CFRD Coordination Report

· OCC Pending Trusteeship Report

· BAPD Inventory List

3.C

3.G

ME/SE

Plan Assets

0.L

0.M

2.P

3.G

ONR Fin. Assist. Approval Memo

0.D

CFRD Triage

2.L

3.B

TPD

BAPD

4.F

BAPD Manual

(SPDRR/SPARR)

4.F

5.F

Form 501 (Post Distribution for ST)

2.P

2.Q

2.Q

Insurance company 0.N

The baseline analysis resulted in the identification of the eight key issues that summarize the people, process, technology, and data gaps expressed within the PPM Segment. These eight key issues directly influenced the development of the Target Architecture.

1. There is no single executive champion of visioning and management of the end-to-end PPM lifecycle.

2. Case management systems across the PPM segment are fragmented and have overlapping functionality.

3. Plan and case data instances are spread across multiple systems that are not sufficiently integrated, impeding easy aggregation of data for analysis and reporting.

4. There is a disconnect between the vision and execution of the case handoff from ONR to BAPD.

It is not as seamless or effective as it could be.

5. Fragmented and duplicate document management solutions require manual synchronization.

6. Some PPM processes have not capitalized on workflow automation or document and records management enhancements by not digitizing documents as early as possible.

7. There are duplicate communications and interactions with plan sponsors/plan administrators by

ONR, BAPD, and FOD prior to benefits calculation and administration.

8. PPM lacks data management mechanisms to ensure data quality, standardization, use of authoritative data sources, and proper handling of sensitive data.

1.2 Target Architecture & Recommendations

The purpose of the Target Architecture is to provide a comprehensive description of the PPMSA recommendations and how PBGC should modify and improve the current processes, data, and technology in scope of the PPMSA effort.

The Core Team used the goals and objectives and products & services to design the PPM vision. The PPM vision led to the development of target recommendations, which drove the Target Architecture, as shown below.

Figure 2: Target Architecture Design Approach

Goals & Objectives (Sets direction for Target State)

Products & Services (Supports Goals & Objectives)

Validate G&O and P&S

Life cycle Management

Access and Reporting

Case Processing

Document Management

Develop Segment Vision Develop Target

Recommendations

1. Management Approach

2. Short-term improvements

4. Centralized data repository

3. Shared PPM Life cycle Solution

8. Improved performance management

6. Improved data management

5. Centralized document mgmt repository

7. Improved communications

Develop Target Architecture

The PPM vision consists of four shared services across the Pension Plan Management lifecycle:

· Pension Plan Lifecycle Management: The Core Team initially started designing the management approach vision that comprised of several functional groups that were led by a team of executives and an executive chairperson that would be responsible for the visioning, feasibility analysis, and management of the pension plan lifecycle improvements in an inter-departmental, collaborative environment. However, upon further analysis, the Core Team decided to instead take a step back and first define the fundamental components of a management approach and the various choices that each component may possess. This will ensure the executives and Core Team understand the full spectrum of choices and combinations of the management approach components, and will set the stage for the executive and Core Team to properly design and ultimately establish the PPM management approach. The executive team can also consider several draft management approach alternatives designed by the Core Team.

· Pension Plan Access and Reporting: Availability and accessibility of pension plan information from a centralized repository as the established gold source.

· Pension Plan Case Processing: Availability of either a single case management system or a suite of tightly integrated case management systems built upon the centralized repository of plan data and providing necessary workflow oversight and availability functions.

· Pension Plan Document Management: Consolidation of systems that result in streamlined access, search, and storage of documents, and elimination of document duplication or manual synchronization.

Based upon the PPM vision, the Core Team developed recommendations and sub-recommendations to help PBGC achieve the Target Architecture. The Core Team took into consideration not only the SWOT analysis and key issues identified by this effort, but also the previously completed segment architectures and priorities of the impacted departments to avoid recommending new efforts that either have been partially done by the completed BNA efforts or can be done through a refresh of the existing segments.

The details of these recommendations, along with their sequencing can be found in sections 7 and 8.

# Recommendation # Sub-recommendation

Develop a unified PPM Management Approach and supporting management artifacts to implement the PPM Target State

1.1 Design and establish a management approach to serve as a mechanism for Pension Plan Management (PPM) governance, planning, and implementation to fulfill the target state of the PPM segment

1.2 Establish the PPM priorities

1.3 Develop and execute an Integrated Master PPM Plan which will enable and implement the formally-established PPM target state

1.4 Perform data, technology, and process dependency analysis when implementing improvements crossing segment boundaries

1.5 Develop definitions of PPM terms to ensure a shared understanding across all PPM users

1.6 Develop and implement a change management strategy for the PPM segment's modernization to ensure people, process, technology, and data-related changes are properly implemented

1.7 Develop new and enhance existing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) and controls for implemented processes

Continue implementing planned or funded, and short-term system and process improvements that yield immediate benefits and address immediate pain points

2.1 Expand the existing automated workflow functionality across PPM processes where possible

2.2 Increase the use of electronic approvals for PPM documents, where legally permissible

2.3 Implement greater transparency during the case handoff process to ensure both CFRD and BAPD obtain the required information at the time needed

2.4 Update and socialize the impacted PPM roles and responsibilities to synchronize with the evolution of BAPD's structure, systems, and processes as they evolve

Employ a shared Pension Plan Lifecycle

Management Solution for managing plans and cases throughout end-to-end Pension Plan lifecycle

3.1 Conduct collaborative and synchronized requirements development for an end-to-end Pension Plan Lifecycle Management Solution

3.2 Select an alternative for a single Pension Plan Lifecycle Management Solution

3.3 Implement the selected alternative of a single Pension Plan Lifecycle Management Solution

3.4 Develop and implement training for increased compliance with PPM processes including proper systems use

Improve Pension Plan data management with normalized data and a centralized data repository

4.1 Create and implement a data management strategy for the consolidation and management of Pension Plan data

4.2 Utilize a Unique Identifier (UID) for pension plans across all PPM systems throughout the entire pension plan lifecycle

4.3 Normalize data structures across PPM systems for pension plan data, and formalize reference data definitions

4.4 Establish a centralized data repository for pension plan data

4.5 Service-enable the PPM data stores and applications

4.6 Enable automatic extraction and processing of data from incoming forms, notices, and applications

Table 1: PPMSA Target Recommendations and Sub-recommendations

# Recommendation # Sub-recommendation

Centralize a document management repository for use by the departments throughout the Pension Plan lifecycle

5.1 Digitize forms and enable electronic submission of applications, forms and notices by Plan Administrators where possible

5.2 Perform analysis and create common, normalized document metadata

5.3 Consolidate fragmented document management repositories

5.4 Establish compliant records management procedures

Secure and enable better availability and accessibility of plan and case data which meet the needs of PPM roles

6.1 Define PPM roles and their respective data and system access needs

6.2 Provide or restrict system access to, or licenses for, existing systems to users in the short term based on role needs and least privilege principle

6.3 Implement flexible, role-based access controls based on the enterprise identity, credentialing, and access management (ICAM) framework and related systems

Improve communications between PBGC and external stakeholders to streamline information delivery

7.1 Provide an online portal for plan practitioners

7.2 Create streamlined and secure communication channels for Plan Practitioners

7.3 Establish a mechanism for managing and logging plan practitioner interactions across the pension plan lifecycle

Improve the performance management framework and reporting capabilities of the PPM lifecycle

8.1 Reassess, define, and implement the capture and reporting of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

8.2 Utilize business intelligence and reporting tool and ensure appropriate access to PPM data

8.3 Establish guidelines and criteria for publicly reported information on pension plans (e.g., Open Government Initiative)

During the development of recommendations the Core Team utilized the Target Concept of Operations diagrams, which visually portray the implementation of technical and data-related recommendations over two phases, as shown below in Figure 3.

Figure 3: PPMSA Target Concept of Operations

Implementation of the recommendations listed above and Target Concept of Operations will result in the PPMSA Target Architecture, illustrated below in the Target Architecture Diagram. Detailed descriptions of the arrows on this diagram are provided in Appendix O: Target Architecture Line Legend.

Figure 4: Target Architecture Diagram

Legend

ONR Actor

BAPD Actor

External/Other Actor

Working Group

System or Application

Electronic Forms/ Documents

Electronic Document Store

Database

Normal path

Conditional path

Hard Copy Document eFAST (5500 Data from DOL)

2. Plan Processing and Analysis

START

3. Plan Termination

1. Pension Plan Risk Monitoring

4. Post Termination

5. Financial Assistance

5.A

SE Contingency Liabilities

ME Contingency Liabilities & DOI

ME Financial Analyst

SE Financial Statement Coordinator/Chief Actuary

1.C

OCC Triage

CFRD Actuary

0.A, 3.A

1.B

2.D

Annual Report

ASD Actuary

1.B

1.B

0.L

CWG

ME Board of Trustees

OCC Attorney

1.C

RVG

Site Review Report

5.B

4.D

5.D 5.D

CFRD RV Analyst

OCC Attorney

Site Review Documents 5.C

CFRD

Financial Analyst

4.A

CFRD Financial Analyst

Pension Plan Lifecycle Management System

Case

3.B

PPLMS

Promissory Note and Security Agreement

4.C,D

CPPDS

(Centralized Pension Plan

Data Store)

5.D

TDR Package

ME Financial Analyst

2.A

ME Supervisory Auditor

2.E, 2.H

Settlement Agreement

4.B

4.G

2.C

2.I

Audit Files

0.C

PRAD

Analyst

0.F

IRS

2.B

5.B

FBA

3.C

TWG

Case Team Trust Acct.

3.C

Congress

Company info, credit ratings, etc.

1.A

0.D ME or SE Plan Sponsor/Plan Administrator

Court

4.B

Court

2.J

3.B

2.E

EBLS

2.G

2.F

3.B

4.A

1.C

3.B

3.C

0.G

FRC

4.E

Mgmt Reports

OGC CPO

CAB Auditor

5.E

MWG

ONR

File room

MEPD

Auditor

5.E

4.B

0.D

CFRD

Financial Analyst

1.A

Pre-Term Settlement

/ Claim

4.A

OCC Attorney

2.J

ONR Financial Assistance Approval Memo

0.G

BAPD

4.F

BAPD Manual

(SPDRR/SPARR)

4.F

CDR

(Centralized Document Repository) .

0.C

1.B, 1.C

PBGC.gov Plan Data

0.H

1.C

1.B

MFW Triage / Workflow

0.J

CDR

4.G

5.B-E

CMD

3.C

BAPD Divisions

3.C

4.C

4.C

2.J

4.D

Enterprise RBAC

0.E

0.B

Digital Signature Support

Dashboard / Reporting

0.K

0.K

5.E

1.D

5.C

CPPDS

Electronic Forms, Notices, Applications, and other Information

4.E

Info requests, congressional inquiries, etc.

0.I

0.G

0.B

0.B

0.I

1.B, 1.C 0.M, 1.B, 1.C, 4.H

CNR

5.D

ME/SE

Plan Assets

0.N

0.O

0.Q

Insurance company

0.P

0.Q

Customer Portal

3.D

3.D Pipeline Report3.D

IPVFBCDMS

0.R

FMS

FMS

FMS 5.B-E

4.A

FMS

0.S

1.3 Modernization Roadmap

The PPMSA Modernization Roadmap will assist PBGC in planning how the target recommendations can be deployed to implement the PPMSA Target Architecture. The PPMSA Modernization Roadmap is not time-bound, and should be used to help guide priorities and implementation.

The essential components which comprise the PPMSA Modernization Roadmap are the target recommendations and sub-recommendations. The recommendations were sequenced based on their interdependencies, their projected state of maturation, and align to either/both Phases of the Concept of Operations diagram. The PPMSA Modernization Roadmap is provided below.

Figure 5: PPMSA Modernization Roadmap

2 Introduction

This effort was facilitated by Enterprise Architecture Division (EAD) and focused on the business needs of the Office of Negotiations & Restructuring (ONR) and the Benefits Administration and Payment Department (BAPD) using the PBGC Business Needs Analysis (BNA). The Core Team and EAD project support team reviewed the current state of people, process, technology, and data components for PPM segment in order to develop the Baseline Architecture. They also conducted a series of workshops, interviews and small group discussions to analyze the current state, identify the key issues, develop target recommendations and ultimately designed the target architecture. The project timeline can be found in Appendix A: Timeline.

In accordance with the PBGC Segment Architecture Methodology (PSAM), the Pension Plan Management Segment Architecture (PPMSA) sponsors established a Core Team of the key personnel from the ONR, BAPD and OIT to spearhead this segment architecture effort.

The Core Team’s responsibilities were to identify stakeholders and Subject Matter Experts (SMEs), represent business interests while providing input, concerns and feedback, make decisions on recommendations, communicate progress to peers and upper management within their organizations, and attend all workshops as well as the Executive Briefing. The Sponsors and Core Team for the PPMSA effort and their responsibilities are cited in the figure below.

Figure 6: PPMSA Sponsors and Core Team

The EAD project support team was responsible for facilitating the architecture analysis process and communications, performing SME interviews and discovery activities, conducting comprehensive analysis, developing key deliverables and supporting documentation, and providing guidance based on best practices and their knowledge of the organization. In addition to these collaborative activities conducted with the Core Team, the EAD project support team supplemented their understanding and analysis by reviewing legal mandates, audit findings, and PBGC’s strategic priorities related to PPM. They determined if existing solutions meet the business needs of ONR and BAPD, and identified new needs and opportunities for improvement.

This PPMSA Blueprint is intended to provide the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) with a consolidated view of recently conducted research, interview activities, analysis, and observations contributing to the Baseline Architecture and the subsequent Target Architecture and Modernization Roadmap.

2.1 Background

PBGC, as part of fulfilling its mission, oversees the lifecycle of pension plans. To do so, PBGC proactively monitors the financial state of active pension plans to protect participants and terminate failing pension plans when necessary. PPM is a PBGC mission business function representing a unique service area defining the mission or purpose of the agency. PPM is also the largest and most complex segment that PBGC has analyzed so far, because its data is used across many parts the enterprise and touches all major business functions. Previous segment architecture efforts have already covered Premium Operations, Core Financial Management, Benefit Determination, and Benefit Administration portions of the PPM business function. The establishment of these segments helped to provide context and scope boundaries for PPM.

ONR’s mission is to administer PBGC's defined benefit insurance programs. ONR manages PBGC's single-employer and multiemployer plan insurance programs; provides financial and actuarial analyses regarding, and negotiates with, underfunded plans to properly address PBGC's and the insurance programs' risk exposure; makes recommendations on initiating ERISA/bankruptcy legal actions and represents PBGC on those matters before courts and administrative tribunals; reviews and acts on reportable events; recommends involuntary or voluntary plan terminations under the single-employer program; and provides financial assistance under the multi-employer program.

BAPD’s mission is to manage the benefits determination and administration process for single-employer defined benefit plans, provide participant services (including application for and payment of benefits) for PBGC-trusteed plans, provide actuarial support for PBGC, and carry out PBGC's responsibilities under settlement agreements. When a defined benefit pension plan is terminated, BAPD collects plan and participant information, performs participant and plan document audits, values plan assets and liabilities, adjusts participants’ benefits, and notifies beneficiaries about updates in their benefits.

The purpose and activities of this PPMSA effort included:

Review the current state of business and technology components for PPM Segment.

Determine if existing in-scope solutions meet the business needs of ONR and BAPD.

Identify PPM data needs across the corporation.

Study forward-looking business and data needs as well as potential technology solutions to support the future ONR & BAPD mission area.

Identify and recommend the target state and modernization roadmap for PPM Utilize the PBGC Business Needs Analysis (BNA) Document the results of analysis & recommendations in BNA artifacts and obtain acceptance

2.2 Scope

Prior to the kickoff of this effort, the EA Project Lead and the Executive Sponsors gained consensus on the people, process and technology components that were in-scope, and out of scope, which are listed below.

In-Scope:

· Pension Plan Management (PPM) segment functions, key processes and systems (CMS, RMEW, e4010)

· PPM functional and technological touch points with other segments and architectures, such as:

o FOD: PPS, CFS, TAS, and MyPAA (As-Is ONLY) o BAPD: IPVFB, IPS, P6

· Propose ONR’s & BAPD’s future state for PPM areas that have not been included in prior analyses (integration with other PBGC functions)

The Pension Plan Management (PPM) segment includes the following functions: Pension Plan Risk Monitoring, Plan Processing and Analysis, Single-Employer Plan Termination, Single-Employer Post- Termination Support, and Multi-employer Financial Assistance. The figure below represents a high level depiction of the PPM lifecycle and the functions (both in-scope and out of scope) of which it is comprised.

Figure 7: Pension Plan Management (PPM) lifecycle

PPM Segment

Premium Payment & Processing

Pension Plan Risk Monitoring

Plan Processing & Analysis

Single Employer (SE) Plan

Termination

SE Post Termination

Support

Benefits Calculation

Benefits Administration

Financial Assistance

ME Plan

SE Plan

ONR and BAPD ONR and BAPDFOD ONR ONR & FOD

ONR &FOD

In Scope Already Analyzed

Out of Scope:

· Business areas and technologies addressed in previous segment analyses (e.g., Premium Operations, Benefit Determination, Core Financial Management, and Economic Modeling)

· All Financial Management Segment (FMS) systems (i.e., CFS, TAS, PPS and MyPAA), are out of scope for the target PPMSA.

o No new interfaces between PPMSA and FMS are considered or included.

· CDMS, UPT, Genesis, EFAST-2

2.3 Approach

The Core Team used a five-step baseline analysis approach, as shown in Figure 8 below, to collect, and synthesize baseline data related to PPM. This approach directly aligns to the phases established in the overall segment architecture process, which can be found in Appendix A: Timeline.

Figure 8: Baseline Analysis Approach

The data collected, combined with the analysis activities completed at each step in the process, resulted in the identification of key issues that will directly influence the development of the Target Architecture.

Throughout the baseline analysis approach, the Core Team used a diverse set of analytical methods that included:

· Participation in a facilitated Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis session

· Completion of 60 interviews with individuals across every major department of PBGC

· Business process modeling and analysis

· Conceptual data entity-relationship modeling and analysis

· Technology composition and analysis

A number of SMEs participated in the analysis—predominantly during the interviews. SMEs represented all major departments within PBGC, providing subject matter expertise for their particular area of focus.

To see a complete listing of SMEs that were interviewed as part of this effort, see section 9.2.3.

3 PPMSA Key Issues

As a result of the baseline analysis that was completed, the Core Team and EAD project support team were able to synthesize the information acquired, and crystallize this information into eight key PPM key issues, which are listed and described below.

1. There is no single executive champion of visioning and management of the end-to-end PPM lifecycle.

The end-to-end pension plan lifecycle process has not been established or analyzed.

Moreover, there is not a single role or entity responsible for driving end-to-end process improvements to attain the PPM vision.

Intra and inter-department management coordination, planning, and communications are limited or fragmented across the end-to-end PPM lifecycle.

There is no universal understanding or use of key PPM terminology and the associated data structures (e.g., plan, case, pension plan, etc.).

The siloed management of systems, budget, and resources perpetuates slow and inefficient resolution of challenges with disjointed solutions. Therefore, an arduous amount of planning and coordination is required in order to adjudicate and prioritize any and all people, process or technology improvements.

There is limited CIO-CxO oversight of IT activities in the most affected PPM areas.

2. Case management systems across the PPM segment are fragmented and have overlapping functionality.

Most of ONR uses TeamConnect for plan and case management; However, STCD and

CAB use CMS.

All of BAPD uses CMS. However, CMS lacks functionality related to workload management and workflow tracking. As a result, users supplement their use of CMS with Oracle P6 since Oracle P6 has more granular milestones and the ability to show who specifically is working on the case at a certain point in time. Both ONR and BAPD users are known to also use work-arounds, such as spreadsheets, to track their cases due to the inability of CMS to support their tracking requirements.

3. Plan and case data instances are spread across multiple systems that are not sufficiently integrated, impeding easy aggregation of data for analysis and reporting.

There is no single location to obtain reliable information on pension plans and cases.

Thus, PPM personnel are often required to manually collect information from multiple sources in order to perform their duties. Plan data and case data are spread across multiple systems (such as PPS, CDMS, IPVFB, P6) in addition to TeamConnect and CMS, but there is no mechanism in place to ensure that each instance of data is refreshed once modified by another party. This jeopardizes the data integrity, and makes it difficult to know which system has the “gold source” of data.

Limitations in system and tool access, coupled with data segmentation, impede PPM personnel from generating valuable reports.

4. There is a disconnect between the vision and execution of the case handoff from ONR to BAPD. It is not as seamless or effective as it could be.

The structure, roles, and responsibilities have been defined in the past, but will need to be revisited and confirmed when the BAPD Strategic Review is complete.1

The manual and insufficiently automated steps of the process limit the potential benefits of a transparent or expeditious process

Information pertaining to the forecast of potential plans nearing termination is held very closely; however there are some authorized personnel in BAPD that would benefit from that knowledge in order to improve their planning and resource allocation activities.

A common issue expressed during interviews was that the handoff process is not well defined and the necessary information is not available when needed. However, this issue was not confirmed by SMEs during follow-up interviews. After further investigation, it was discovered that the process was in fact documented, but not always enforced, and the necessary information is available but not in a usable format or on an as-needed basis.

Both CFRD and BAPD need documentation from Plan Practitioners prior to their termination. CFRD’s document needs do not always coincide with BAPD’s, so CFRD is not incentivized to ensure those documents are acquired upstream. This contributes to a lag in the receipt of critical information for BAPD. Although CFRD requests all plan documents in the beginning of the PPM process, they only closely monitor the receipt of those documents that directly serve CFRD’s purposes of terminating a plan.

5. Fragmented and duplicate document management solutions require manual synchronization.

PPM documents are spread across three different locations: ONR’s Document

Management System (DMS), BAPD’s Image Processing System (IPS), and the I drive.

Although DMS and IPS were built on the same platform (FileNet), they are not integrated and require:

Manual document import/export activities by BAPD.

Duplication of the documents in multiple document stores.

The fragmented document stores are especially troublesome at the point of plan termination—currently, BAPD personnel are required to export files from DMS, save them to the I drive, and then upload those I drive files into IPS for BAPD processing, which is a cumbersome and lengthy process.

6. Some PPM processes have not capitalized on workflow automation or document and records management enhancements by not digitizing documents as early as possible.

Many forms from plan administrators and documents used throughout the end-to-end pension plan processes are either in hard copy or not designed to enable automatic extraction of data. This requires the fileroom and mailrooms to manually open, scan, and triage each document received. Moreover, this requires the recipient of the document to manually enter data into TeamConnect and/or CMS.

Upon completion of many PPM processes, the outputs are stored in hard copy or on the I drive rather than digitized and saved in a system. Many of the hard copy files are stored in boxes around various places of 1200K.

The “DISC/BAPD Coordination Process: Roles and Responsibilities” effort took place in April 2011, which defined many roles and accountabilities of the handoff process.

There are many processes within the pension plan lifecycle that can be automated using a workflow engine. Automated workflow can be capitalized on throughout the many PPM processes requiring a series of reviews and approvals of documents, such as the ME Financial Assistance Requests processing, and the ME/SE Contingency List generations.

Many processes do not leverage electronic approvals and signatures. This renders the recipient to keep the document in hard copy and manually carry it to the next approver in line, which slows down the process, and increases the risk of the document being lost or forgotten about.

7. There are duplicate communications and interactions with plan sponsors/plan administrators by ONR, BAPD, and FOD prior to benefits calculation and administration.

There lacks a centralized, accessible repository of logged interactions and communications detailing the various exchanges that the departments have had with Plan Practitioners.

During the premium referrals processing, a Plan Sponsor can be contacted multiple times about the same issue. Moreover, there are instances where a Plan Sponsor has provided a document to ONR, and BAPD contacts the Plan Sponsor weeks later for the same document. This is due to the fact that the receipt of documents and correspondences with Plan Sponsors are not centrally located anywhere for PPM personnel to review prior to attempting a contact.

8. PPM lacks data management mechanisms to ensure data quality, standardization, use of authoritative data sources, and proper handling of sensitive data.

Management of PPM data (e.g., collection, entry, processing, sharing, and storage) is de-centralized, and inconsistent. As a result, data analytics, e-discovery and reporting capabilities are stunted and are not equipping leaders to make sound management decisions

There is no unique identifier for pension plans used across the different systems to unify and reconcile data updates and attributes.

The inventory of PPM data, data sources, formats, and taxonomy are not clearly defined, leading to quality issues, inconsistencies, and duplication of effort (e.g., 5500 filing data).

There is an incomplete understanding of where sensitive data is and how it is secured.

For PPM data, it’s critical to protect corporate sensitive information in addition to PII

4 Baseline Architecture

The Kickoff, Discovery, Interview, and Analyze steps culminated with the Identify (Baseline) step in the approach shown in Appendix A: Timeline. The activities involved with the Identify step involve the formulation of useful diagrams and models depicting the segment-wide process, data and technology architectures. The library of artifacts developed covered the scope contained within the PPM business architecture, which contains the listing and hierarchy of the major PPM functions, sub-functions and key processes within the segment. The PPM business architecture is depicted below:

Figure 9: PPM Business Architecture

SE Post Termination

Support

Risk (Plan) Monitoring

Plan Processing and Analysis

SE Plan Termination

ME Financial Assistance

E

TC/

DMS

TC/

DMS

CMS CMSTC/

DMS

TC/

DMS

TC

IPSIPS

Multi Employer Risk (Plan) Monitoring:

• ME preliminary contingency list generation

• MWG recommendations generation

• Determination of liabilities

• ME contingency list approval and finalization

• Pre insolvency outreach Single Employer Risk (Plan) Monitoring:

• SE contingency list generation, Contingency Working Group (CWG) adjudication, and determination of Unfunded Benefit Liabilities (UBLs)

• Early warning/ proactive monitoring and analysis

• Pre-termination settlements

Multi Employer Plan Processing and Analysis:

• File room receipt and triaging of ME notices and/or applications

• Analysis of ME notices and/or applications Single Employer Plan Processing and Analysis:

• Premium referrals resolution

• Mailroom receipt and triaging of SE tasks/notices

• Reportable event analysis, actuarial analysis, liens, and estimation of assets and liabilities Internal Legal Affairs

• E-Discovery

• Negotiations and settlements External Legal Affairs:

• Adversarial Proceedings

• Bankruptcy Monitoring and participation Plan Customer Service

• Legal Assistance

• Standard Termination Analysis

• ME Plan Assistance

Single Employer Plan Termination:

• Processing a standard termination

• Processing a distress/PBGC-initiated termination CFRD to BAPD Handoff:

• Early case assignment

• Finalization of plan termination

• Fiduciary Breach

SE Post Termination Support:

• Post termination settlements

• Recovery Valuation SE Plan Audit:

• Plan audit and letter generation

• Reconsideration/ appeals

• Defensive Litigation

• Benefits legal advice and consultation

Bold: Sub-function

• Black: Modeled key process Grey: Was Not Modeled

ME Financial Assistance Processing:

• Receipt of financial assistance request and initial analysis

• Creation and approval of financial assistance package and conditions ME Site Review

• Site review and recommendations

• Creation of site review report

Additional diagrams were developed which elaborate the scope of business functions, sub-functions and key processes with an overlay of data and technology. These diagrams included (but are not limited to) the Baseline Architecture Diagram, Conceptual Data Model (CDM), Node Connectivity Model and others.

Development of the baseline artifacts enables the Core Team to pinpoint the expression of the segment’s key issues, communicate these key issues to executives, and ultimately drive the design of the target architecture.

4.1 Baseline Architecture Diagram

In order to build the Baseline Architecture Diagram, the Core Team identified major components of the PPM segment to establish the Baseline Architecture Diagram, which are described and illustrated below:

· External Sources include people, units, or systems that are external to the PPM segment. They either provide an input or consume an output of plan management segment (i.e., not ONR or BAPD).

· Enabling Technologies consist of the major systems, applications, or data stores that are utilized throughout the PPM segment.

· Suppliers and Consumers are actors or business units which consume the outputs or provide the inputs.

· Inputs and Outputs are the major units of work and the resulting outputs that the processes utilize or yield.

· Functions and Sub-functions are the core of the segment; it comprises the key business processes that are executed in the PPM segment.

The relationships, processes, and information flows between and across the components were illustrated in the Baseline Architecture Diagram. The Baseline Architecture Diagram Line Legend may be found in Appendix G: Baseline Architecture Diagram Line Legend.

The PPM Baseline Architecture Diagram is shown below. The diagram represents all major PPM processes and interactions in scope. Key issues are identified in red.

Figure 10: PPMSA Baseline Architecture Diagram

2. Plan Processing and Analysis

START

3. Plan Termination

1. Risk (Plan) Monitoring

4. Post Termination

5. Financial Assistance

Reportable Events

2.C

Form 500 (Standard Termination)

Form 600/601

ME Applications

NOI / Financial Assistance

Request

5.A

SE Contingency List

ME Contingency List

& DOI

ME Financial Analyst

ME Plan DB (MS Access)

1.A

SE Financial Statement Coordinator/Chief Actuary

1.D

OCC Triage

CFRD Actuary

2.A

0.A

IPVFB BFIPRODCDMS PBGC.gov Plan Data

2.C

1.A

2.J

1.D

Annual Report

ASD

Actuary

1.A

1.B

0.E

1.B

1.B

1.A

0.H

CWG

1.D

ME Board of Trustees

OCC Attorney

1.D

RVG

4.A

Post Standard Termination

4.C

4.C

ME Site Review

Site Review Report5.C

4.D

5.B 5.B

CFRD Financial Analyst

4.A

OCC Attorney

2.H

5.C

3.D

0.I

0.H

Work Papers

5.D

CFRD

Financial Analyst2.B

2.H

2.E

2.G

4.A

4.C

CFRD Financial Analyst

RMEW

DMS

Actuarial Work

Request

Matter

Corporate Parent

Plan

Case

Recovery Valuation

Advice and Counsel

2.O

3.A

TeamConnect

2.E

2.A

2.B

CMS

PN and SA

3.H

4.C,D

CAS

(CMS Database)

Case

2.K

5.B

TDR Package

ME Notices

ME Financial Analyst

2.F 2.F

2.L

ME Supervisory Auditor

2.G

2.M

Settlement Agreement

4.B

4.B

2.I

2.N

File Server

SAS

PAS/PPS

e4010

Leapfile / Secure Server

TAS

IPVFB

Participant Records

Audit Files

0.B

PRAD Analyst 1.A

IRS

2.DMFW

5.C 4.D

1.B

BAPD P6

3.F

FBA

3.D

TWG

Case Team 3.C

Trust Acct.

3.D

3.F

CMSIPS

3.E

2.H

0.FCongress

Company info, credit ratings, etc.

1.C

0.C

ME or SE Plan Sponsor/ Plan Administrator

FOD

Court 4.BCourt

2.P

3.A

2.F

EBLS

2.H

2.G

3.G

CFRD Admin

3.B

3.B

3.B

4.A

1.D

3.A

3.D

Coverage Determination

0.J (Premium Referral)

0.K

0.D

0.B

FRC

4.E

Info requests,…