Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Business Case

Print

Table of Contents

  • Investment Summary Information
  • Investment Detail
  • Investment and Contracts
  • Historic CIO Rating
  • Investment Spending
  • Projects and Activities Detail
Section A: Investment Summary Information
Investment Name
DHS - Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART)
Unique Investment Identifier
024-000005253

Investment Description

The Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) is the lead entity within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that is responsible for biometric identity management services. OBIM is in the acquisition and development stage of Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART) as a replacement for the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT). The purpose of HART is to provide core biometric identity services to support the DHS missions of Counter Terrorism and Prevent Threats, Secure and Manage Our Borders, Administer the Nation?s Immigration System, Secure Cyberspace and Critical Infrastructure, Build a Resilient Nation and Respond to Incidents, and Enable Mission Success by Strengthening the Enterprise.
Agency Department of Homeland Security
Point of Contact Eric Hysen - CIO email Not Provided
Investment Type Major IT Investments
Bureau Departmental Management and Operations
Mission Support Not Applicable
Shared Service Category Not Applicable
Shared Service Identifier Not Applicable
TMF Initiatives
  • Not Applicable
FY 2024 IT Spending $39.67 M
Current CIO Rating 2
Data As Of: 07/30/2024

Total Projects

7

Cost Variance

  • 6Low
  • 0Medium
  • 1High

Schedule Variance

  • 6Low
  • 1Medium
  • 0High

Cost Variance

  • Low: Projects that have <10% Cost Variance
  • Medium: Projects that have ≥10% and <30% Cost Variance
  • High: Projects that have ≥30% Cost Variance
Cost Variance: ((Planned Total Costs - Projected or Actual Total Costs) / Planned Total Cost) x 100

Schedule Variance

  • Low: Projects that have <10% Schedule Variance
  • Medium: Projects that have ≥10% and <30% Schedule Variance
  • High: Projects that have ≥30% Schedule Variance
Schedule Variance: ((Planned Completion Date - Projected or Actual Completion Date) / Project Duration) x 100

Cost and Schedule Variance color coding is based on absolute values. For example, a +40% variance and a -40% variance are both High/Red.
Couldn't load image

Download: Project and Variance Source Data (CSV)
Date Investment First Submitted
09/28/2021
Date of Last Investment Detail Update
07/30/2024
Section B: Investment Detail
  1. Briefly describe the investment's return on investment, including benefits internal and external to the government and outcomes achieved or planned.
    Alternative 4 is used for the ROI. The AOA states that the upfront investment of $310.2M will result in a savings of $1.373B versus the baseline, or a 343 percent return. Alternative 4 has a 11.4 percent improvement in availability and a 13.7 percent increase in timeliness. Benefits assessed to Alternative 4 were primarily attributable to architecture improvements in modularity, flexibility and degree of reuse and automation. The benefits of HART also include: addressing the mission failure risk of the legacy IDENT system; achieving operations and maintenance cost efficiencies; improving detection and derogatory information matching; and providing multimodal biometric services. HART will support DHS QHSR findings and strategy for an integrated Homeland Security Enterprise for DHS and its Components; other Federal departments; State, local and tribal law enforcements; the intelligence community; and international partners. It is an integrated component of a networked Homeland Security Enterprise that addresses multi-threat, all-hazard security considerations. HART data and analysis will secure and protect the United States against terrorism, enable data integration and analysis, support and strengthen responsive immigration processing system and law enforcement, minimize disruptions to the trade and travel system, and support a smarter, stronger border by enhancing our security infrastructure through support of new technologies.?HART aligns with the QHSR Homeland Security missions of Counter Terrorism and Prevent Threats, Secure and Manage Our Borders, Administer the Nation?s Immigration System, Secure Cyberspace and Critical Infrastructure, Build a Resilient Nation and Respond to Incidents, and Enable Mission Success by Strengthening the Enterprise as outlined in the most recent QHSR update. OBIM has a crosscutting mission in the DHS 2020-2024 Strategic Plan that enables the Department Unity of Effort. HART will provide DHS with a flexible, scalable, and more efficient biometric system to support core DHS missions and operations for the future.
Section C: Investment and Contracts

Public URLs

Contracts

Section D: Historic CIO Rating
CIO Rating Date Comments
2 May 15, 2024 During Q4 FY23, the Acquisition Decision Authority approved HART?s re-baselined schedule and officially removed HART from a cost and schedule breach. If Procurement, Construction & Improvement funding and Operations & Support funding is not received, HART cannot achieve IOC while continuing to sustain the IDENT investment. HART development has slowed down while DHS leadership pursues additional funding. Achieving IOC is contingent upon addressing budget shortfalls in FY25 and FY26.
2 Jan 15, 2024 In Q4 FY23, the Acquisition Decision Authority approved the re-baselined schedule and removed HART from breach. If Procurement, Construction & Improvement funding and Operations & Maintenance funding is not received, HART cannot achieve IOC while sustaining IDENT. Funding in Q2 FY24 is dependent upon the current Continuing Resolution ending and the enactment of a FY24 budget. There is limited time for testing. If issues are found and not resolved there could be additional delays to IOC.
2 Oct 16, 2023 HART received a re-baseline approval in Q4 FY23 and exited breach; however, cost and schedule variance have exceeded thresholds during this assessment cycle. Funding continues to be a risk while performing IDENT operations, the program and leadership are actively pursuing additional funding. The program is actively addressing vulnerabilities which include EOL components which keep the overall security of the system low. HART security and privacy score is red for this assessment period.
2 Jul 17, 2023 HART received a red rating in the final FISMA scorecard. HART provided a schedule breach notification during this period; the memorandum conclusion stated OBIM will develop a breach remediation plan after required funding is secured with stakeholders. O&S funding is also needed to conduct refreshes and maintenance of critical IDENT components through early FY26, a plan for funding has been submitted. Once HART reaches IOC, costs and risks with using IDENT will reduce.
2 Apr 14, 2023 Multiple systems received yellow scores in the final FISMA scorecard. HART Initial Operational Capability (IOC) continues to be delayed. Continued development and IOC achievement is contingent on receipt of additional funding; plans for needs have been submitted. Not all risks are identified in the risk register. FY23 funding reduction is insufficient to enable continued development posing risks to cost and schedule. Staffing is currently adequate. O&M activities are being transitioned.
2 Jan 16, 2023 HART systems were rated yellow in the final FISMA scorecard. The program has a number of gaps that need to be addressed including defects, message commonality, critical and high vulnerabilities, red team findings, service level agreements, database platform performance, and pre-requisites for an operational analysis. The program is conducting performance, accuracy, and message comparison testing between systems to validate that KPPs and MOPs are being met.
2 Oct 17, 2022 Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART) system was rated red in hardware-managed assets and configuration management on the FISMA Scorecard. HART continues to experience database issues, defects, and vulnerabilities. Acquisition Review Board members approved the revised Acquisition Program Baseline, the program was re-baselined. The Increment 1 Privacy Impact Assessment indicates major privacy concerns. Security controls have been established to limit the scope of data collection.
2 Jul 21, 2022 Over the past year, the program has faced continual delays in achieving Increment 1 ADE-2C and HART IOC. These delays have been due to data and customer migration delays. The program has made progress on each of the migrations and is projecting to achieve IOC in Q1’23. Increment 1 PIA indicates major privacy concerns with the system collecting more information than required. Security controls limit the scope of data collection; however, this only partially mitigates this high risk.
2 May 06, 2022 HART now projects parallel operations will begin in Q3 2022 and IOC will be achieved in Q4 2022. HART received a partial increase of PC&I funding. Data migration continues to experience delays. Customer migration has experienced delays related to Phase 3 testing activities. Fingerprint matching subsystem is not meeting throughput and accuracy requirements is a high risk. Test results show that all matching modalities meet objective accuracy requirements, except for Fingerprint.
2 Jan 21, 2022 The start of parallel operations, which entails dual operations between the IDENT and HART systems, has shifted to the right due to migration delays. As a result, HART’s projected schedule to reach IOC has also been delayed. The data migration remains to be behind schedule. The fingerprint matching subsystem not meeting throughput and accuracy requirements is a high risk.
2 Nov 30, 2021 Sep’21 the start of parallel operations, which entails dual operations between the IDENT and HART systems, has shifted to the right due to migration delays. As a result, HART’s projected schedule to reach IOC has also been delayed. The data migration remains to be behind schedule. The fingerprint matching subsystem not meeting throughput and accuracy requirements is a high risk.
2 Jul 30, 2021 Jun’21 the HART IOC has shifted right from Q4’21 to Q2’22. Customer migration and data migration delays impacted the start date for parallel operations. This resulted in the HART IOC delay. The HART program is working to close out Increment 1. There is one remaining feature. If additional Increment 1 development is required, HART IOC will be further impacted. The fingerprint matching subsystem not meeting throughput and accuracy requirements is a high risk.
Data Last Updated On: 09/29/2021
Section E: Investment Spending

Table 1: Distribution by Spending Type

Spending Type PY 2023 CY 2024 BY 2025
DME Costs 20.952 20.952 15
O&M Costs 18.715 18.715 125.857
Total 39.667 39.667 140.857

Table 2: Distribution by Cost Pools

Cost Pools PY 2023 CY 2024 BY 2025
External Labor 15.192 16.898 36.345
Facilities & Power 0 0 0
Hardware 0 0 0
Internal Labor 0 0 38.765
Internal Services 0 0 0
Other 5.474 4.998 11.741
Outside Services 15.589 14.597 37.57
Software 3.411 3.173 16.437
Telecom 0 0 0
Total 39.666 39.666 140.858
Cost PoolsCost in millions (M)

Table 3: Distribution by IT Towers

IT Tower PY 2023 CY 2024 BY 2025
Application 9.67 10.02 34.17
Compute 10.69 10.21 30.77
Data 0 0 0
Data Center 0 0 0
Delivery 11.627 13.417 47.207
End User 4.25 3.76 10.32
IT Management 0 0 0
Network 0.21 0.19 0.49
Output 0 0 0
Platform 0.8 0 12.47
Security & Compliance 0.47 0.3 0.94
Storage 1.95 1.77 4.49
Total 39.667 39.667 140.857
IT TowersCost in millions (M)
Data Last Updated On: 07/30/2024
Section F: Project Detail

Table 1: Project Details

Project Name Project UID Status Planned Total Cost ($M) Cost Variance (%) Planned Start Date Planned End Date Schedule Variance (%) Schedule Variance (Days) TMF Initiative
HART Increment 2 3 In Progress 0 70 27 27 Not Applicable
HART - Increment 1 1 Completed 64.52 3.2 2018-04-10 2021-06-03 0 0 Not Applicable
ECP3-6 4 Completed 73.02 2.5 2021-09-29 2023-09-30 0 0 Not Applicable
MSLS Development Period 1 5 Completed 2.27 0 2022-11-01 2023-04-30 0 0 Not Applicable
MSLS Development Period 2 6 Completed 0.3 0 2023-05-01 2023-10-31 0 0 Not Applicable
MSLS Development Period 3 8 In Progress 0.45 0 2023-11-01 2024-04-30 0 0 Not Applicable
FY2024 HART Increment 1 Agile Development and O&M Support Period 2 9 In Progress 31.83 0 2024-05-01 2024-09-30 0 0 Not Applicable
LowMediumHigh

Table 2: Project Related Details

HART Increment 2
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Months
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    program increments are being developed using safe agile practices, but production releases are being done using waterfall.
HART - Increment 1
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Years
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    program increments are being developed using safe agile practices, but production releases are being done using waterfall.
ECP3-6
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Months
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    program increments are being developed using safe agile practices, but production releases are being done using waterfall.
MSLS Development Period 1
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
    Yes
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Weeks
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    kanban.
MSLS Development Period 2
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
    Yes
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Days
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    kanban.
MSLS Development Period 3
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
    Yes
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Days
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    kanban.
FY2024 HART Increment 1 Agile Development and O&M Support Period 2
  1. Are information technology investments adequately implementing incremental development methodology? (Y/N)
    Yes
  2. What is the frequency of incremental development iterations? (ex. 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months or greater)
    Days
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    kanban.