Feasibility Evidence Description (FED) Version 3.0
Feasibility Evidence Description (FED)
e-LockBox
<Team 10
<Team members and roles>
Cheng Zhang / Prototyper / Chief DeveloperGuancheng Li / Project Manager/ Prototyper/ Developer
Yutong Guo / Operational Concept Engineer/ Developer/ Tester
Qing Wei / Life Cycle Planner/ Feasibility Analyst/ Developer
Si Zhao / Software Architect/ Tester
02/12/2017
Version History
Date / Author / Version / Changes made / Rationale /08/20/16 / Rui Ma / 1.0 / · Tailored from ICSM OCD
· Template to specify risks of the
current system / · Initial draft for use with e-LockBox v1.0
08/30/16 / Rui Ma / 1.1 / · Add template table
· Cost Analysis and feasibility / · Consistent format
· Identify Personnel costs, Service feasibility
09/06/16 / Rui Ma / 1.2 / · Removed Section 1.1 / · Section 1.1 was duplicated with section 1.7 due to Format error
09/14/16 / Rui Ma / 1.3 / · Updated Section 2 / · Consistent with e-LockBox v1.9
09/25/16 / Rui Ma / 2.0 / · Moved Section 1.1 to 1.2
· Add Section 1.2
· Updated Section 3 and add 3.1-3.3 / · Consistent with IICM-Sw
10/30/16 / Rui Ma / 2.1 / · Embedded description in each table
· Removed Section 6.1.1 Definition / · To be consistent with ICM EPG
· template set standard V2.1
· To leanify the artifact
11/17/16 / Rui Ma / 2.2 / · Updated Section 2, 3, and 6 / · Draft vision for TRR
12/02/16 / Rui Ma / 2.3 / · Fix some parts based on the suggestion / · Final deliverable for DCR
02/12/17 / Qing Wei / 3.0 / · Update Risk Assessment / · Update for RDCR package
Table of Contents
Feasibility Evidence Description (FED) i
Version History ii
Table of Contents iii
Table of Tables iv
Table of Figures v
1. Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose of the FED Document 1
1.2 Status of the FED Document 1
2. Business Case Analysis 2
2.1 Cost Analysis 3
2.2 Benefit Analysis 4
2.3 ROI Analysis 4
3. Architecture Feasibility 8
3.1 Level of Service Feasibility 8
3.2 Capability Feasibility 9
3.3 Evolutionary Feasibility 11
4. Process Feasibility 12
5. Risk Assessment 14
6. NDI/NCS Interoperability Analysis 15
6.1 Introduction 15
6.2 Evaluation Summary 15
Table of Tables
Table 1: Personnel Costs 3
Table 2: Hardware and Software Costs 4
Table 3: Benefits of e-LockBox System 4
Table 4: ROI Analysis (Money) 5
Table 5: ROI Analysis (Time) 6
Table 6: Level of Service Feasibility 8
Table 7: Capability Requirements and Their Feasibility Evidence 9
Table 8: Evolutionary Requirements and Their Feasibility Evidence 11
Table 9: Rationales for Selecting Architected Agile Model 12
Table 10: Risk Assessment 14
Table 11: NDI Products Listing 15
Table 12: NDI Evaluation 15
FED_RDCP_S17b_T10_V3.0 13 02/12/17
Feasibility Evidence Description (FED) Version 3.0
Table of Figures
Figure 1: ROI Analysis Graph (Money) 6
Figure 2: ROI Analysis Graph (Time) 7
FED_RDCP_S17b_T10_V3.0 13 02/12/17
Feasibility Evidence Description (FED) Version 3.0
1831. Introduction
1831.1 Purpose of the FED Document
The Feasibility Evidence Description contains the feasibility study of the project, identifying possible risks, costs, benefits and NDI/NCS components in building the e-LockBox system.
Our client is Living Advantage Inc., a public agency that helps foster youth, manage their vital records and provide them with services and advice.
1831.2 Status of the FED Document
The status of the FED is currently at the Rebaselined Development Commitment Package version number 3.0. The major changes from Development Commitment Package version 2.3 are:
· Update Capability Feasibility
· Update Risk Assessment
1832. Business Case Analysis
Our vision, in this project, is to realize a website that makes youths keep and download vital life documents conveniently and securely.
Assumptions· People will use this system with satisfaction in security and efficiency.
· People will trust their case managers and this system in security of protecting their personal information.
Stakeholders / Initiatives / Value Propositions / Beneficiaries
· Living Advantage staff
· Youth user
· Developer
· Maintainer / · Develop login verification code
· Maintain the system
· Manage cases
· Train staff and youth users to use this system
· Take surveys / · Improve system security
· Improve information management process
· Better keep track of youth users
· Enable identification of youth users / · Living Advantage staff
· Youth user
Cost
· Web services costs and website costs
· Developers’ time
· Clients’ time / Benefits
· Provides an easy system tailored towards foster youth management
· Centralized, secure repository for foster youth vital documents
· Potential source of income through licensing to public agencies.
Cost (All costs drivers):
- Development Cost
· $36/year Domain name – This is for mylaspace.com, mylaspace.net and mylaspace.org.
· $20/month Digital Ocean – This will host the system to ensure security.
· $6/year Amazon S3 – This can store offsite secure file.
· $149/year SSL certificate – This account is for secure login and transport encryption.
- Maintenance Cost
· $35-$40/hours Hire an IT engineer
- Advertising
· TBD
- COTS
· $0 for MySQL and iOS SDK
Benefits:
- Make it easier for users
- Increase security of the e-LockBox
· Use verification code to identify the identity of users.
· Use inactive function to protect user’s files and profile.
· Use invisible function to ensure the youth users cannot see some special files.
1832.1 Cost Analysis
This part identifies all possible costs, either in monetary terms or non-monetary terms such as hours spent, qualitative benefits for the project.
2.1.1 Personnel Costs
Table 1: Personnel Costs
Activities / Time Spent (Hours)Development Period(24 weeks)
Valuation and Foundations Phases: Time invested (CS577A, 12 weeks)
Client: meeting via email, phone or other channels
[2 hours/week*12 weeks *2 people] / 48
Client Representatives: Meeting via email, phone, and other channels
[1 hours/week*12 weeks *2people] / 24
Architecture Review Boards
[1.5 hours*4 times* 2 people] / 12
Re-Baseline, Development and Operation Phases: Time invested (CS577B, 12 weeks)
Client: meeting via email, phone or other channels
[2 hours/week*12 weeks *2 people] / 48
Client Representatives: Meeting via email, phone, and other channels
[2 hours/week*12 weeks *2 people] / 48
Architecture Review Boards and Core Capability Drive-through session
[1.5 hours*3 times* 2 people] / 9
Deployment of system in operation phase and training
[3 hours*3 times*2 people] / 18
Total (5 weeks*2 persons) / 207
Maintenance Period(1 year)
Maintenance
[3 hours/week*52 weeks] / 156
Total / 156
2.1.2 Hardware and Software Costs
Table 2: Hardware and Software Costs
Type / Cost / RationaleDomain name / $36/year / Including mylaspace.com
mylaspace.net mylaspace.org
Hardware VPS hosting / $20/month Digital Ocean / Isolated hosting for the system to ensure security
Software- SSL certificate / $149/year* / Secure login and transport encryption
Software- Amazon S3 / Free for up to 25000 documents at ~200kb each (4.7gb) for the first year.
$6/year thereafter for 10gb of storage / Offsite secure file storage and/or backup
Total $431/year
Maintenance / $35-$40/hour and 10hour/month / Hire an IT engineer to maintain the system.
Total: $4200-$4800/year
1832.2 Benefit Analysis
Table 3: Benefits of e-LockBox System
Current activities & resources used / % Reduce / Time Saved (Hours/Year)Case Management
Case creation and tracking
(2471 cases *0.5 hours = 1235.5 hours) / 25 / 309
User Management
Manage users (5 hours *52 weeks) / 50 / 130
Activity Management
Manage activities (6 hours *52 weeks) / 25 / 78
System Foundations
Authentication, send email, log and secure questions (10hrs* 52 weeks) / 12.5 / 65
Total / 582
Worth($30/hour) / 17460
1832.3 ROI Analysis
Live Advantage Inc. has one administrator and five case managers (60$/hour for the administrator and 35$/hour for a case manager). We assume 10% annually increase, one administrator and one case manager met us for the project for 56 hours (Table 1), so the personal cost is (60+35) *56=$5320 (half year of the 2017 will be increased to $2926). And the Hardware and Software Costs is $431 (Table 2) (2017 will be increased to $474). In this case, the total cost for year 2016 is $5751 and for year 2017 is $5650 ($2250 (maintenance for half year)+$474+$2926).
After we deliver the system by the summer of 2017, the cost will be only the Hardware and Software Costs and the payment for the maintainer, which is $4200-$4800, we take a median to calculate and assume a 10% annually increase. Then we get the cost for the following years. After we deliver the system, it starts to save both administrator and case managers time.
Because the saved time per year for each staff is 582 hours (half is 291 hours) (Table 3), so the website can reduce the cost of employment about 1 person. Thus, the money saved for 2017 is 35* 8*20*12*1.1=73920 (half year 36960$), the ROI Analysis (time analysis and money analysis) is shown below:
Table 4: ROI Analysis (Money)
Year / Cost / Benefit(Effort Saved) / Cumulative Cost / Cumulative Benefit / ROI
2016 / 5751 / 0 / 5751 / 0 / -1
2017 / 5650 / 36960 / 11401 / 36960 / 2.24
2018 / 4950 / 73920 / 16351 / 110880 / 5.78
2019 / 5445 / 73920 / 21796 / 184800 / 7.48
2020 / 5990 / 73920 / 27786 / 258720 / 8.31
Figure 1: ROI Analysis Graph (Money)
The down arrow points to the breakeven point of the ROI Analysis Graph.
Table 5: ROI Analysis (Time)
Year / Cost / Benefit(Effort Saved) / Cumulative Cost / Cumulative Benefit / ROI
2016 / 207 / 0 / 207 / 0 / -1
2017 / 182 / 291 / 389 / 291 / -0.25
2018 / 172 / 582 / 561 / 873 / 0.56
2019 / 189 / 582 / 750 / 1455 / 0.94
2020 / 208 / 582 / 958 / 2037 / 1.13
Figure 2: ROI Analysis Graph (Time)
The down arrow points to the breakeven point of the ROI Analysis Graph.
1833. Architecture Feasibility
In this section, we provide evidence or rationale of why we think the following LOS, capability, and evolutionary requirements are satisfied.
1833.1 Level of Service Feasibility
Table 6: Level of Service Feasibility
Level of Service Requirement / Product SatisfactionLOS-1 Security: All the documents must be stored securely.
The security specification should include login-control (Verification Code), system-access-control, documents-storage and so on. / Product Strategies: Domain Architecture-driven.
Process Strategies: Prototyping, Performance Analysis, Simulation, Test Plans & Tools.
Analysis: Identify all possible attacks and vulnerability using information of similar system. Then we are able to select appropriate security strategies in the architecture.
LOS-2 Upgrade & Migration: All the existing functions should be migrated from Laravel 4.1 to Laravel 5.3. / Product Strategies: Interface Specification, UI Flexibility.
Process Strategies: Prototyping, Analysis, Test Plans & Tools.
Analysis: Self-learning on the website and migrate all the useful functions to the new version.
LOS-3 Performance: UI should be concise and smart. Management process should be efficient. / Product Strategies: Interface Specification, UI Flexibility.
Process Strategies: Prototyping, Performance Analysis, Test Plans & Tools.
Analysis: Design UI part, make it simple and easy to use by youth users. Test the management process, make it concise and simple to use.
LOS-4 Usability: The system shall be easy to use for youth users and case managers. The usability can be tested by questionnaire and actual operation. / Product Strategies: Interface Specification, UI Flexibility.
Process Strategies: Prototyping, Usage Monitoring & Analysis.
Analysis: Build a friendly interface for users offering high usability. Using prototyping, usage monitoring & analysis to guide the design process.
LOS-5 Data Size: This system should support large data. Currently, the Living Advantage has 353 kids, each kid has at most 7 documents stored on e-Lockbox system, and each document is about 1MB, thus the total storage is around 2.5GB.
Since Living Advantage predicts to have more foster youth in the future, they prefer to limit the storage capability for each case to be no more 15 documents. Suppose each document can be no more than 3MB, and there are 1000 kids, the total expected storage for documents will be no more than 44GB. / Product Strategies: Domain Architecture-driven
Process Strategies: Performance Analysis, Simulation, Test Plans & Tools.
Analysis: Define database in the Architecture and using test strategies to test the system.
1833.2 Capability Feasibility
Table 7: Capability Requirements and Their Feasibility Evidence
Capability Requirement / Product SatisfactionCR-1: User Login and Generating Verification Code / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: User Login and Generating Verification Code has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-1
CR-2: Create a New Case / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Creating a new case has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-2
CR-3: View Case / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: View Case has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-3
CR-4: Edit Case / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Edit case has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-4
CR-5: Delete Case / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Delete Case has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-5
CR-6: Create Account for Youth / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Create Account for Youth has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-6
CR-7: Inactivate Case / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Inactivate Case has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-7
CR-8: Activate Case / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Activate Case has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-8
CR-9: Create High-Level User / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Create High-Level User has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-9
CR-10: View User / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: View User has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-10
CR-11: Edit Own Profile / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Edit Own Profile has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-11
CR-12: Inactivate User / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Inactivate User has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-12
CR-13: Activate User / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Activate User has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-13
CR-14: Create a New Activity / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Create a New Activity has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-14
CR-15: View Activity / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: View Activity has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-15
CR-16: Edit Activity / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Edit Activity has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-16
CR-17: Delete Activity / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Delete Activity has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-17
CR-18: Upload Vital Document / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Upload Vital Document has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-18
CR-19: Download Document / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Download Document has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-19
CR-20: Set Doc Invisible / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Set Doc Invisible has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-20
CR-21: Set Doc Visible / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Set Doc Visible has been prototyped, tested with database, and shown to client.
Referred use case diagram: UC-21
CR-22: Send Email / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Send Email has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-22
CR-23: Settings / Software/Technology used: MySQL, Laravel
Feasibility Evidence: Settings has been prototyped.
Referred use case diagram: UC-23
1833.3 Evolutionary Feasibility
Table 8: Evolutionary Requirements and Their Feasibility Evidence