Version History Date Author Version Changes made Rationale 10/10/12 MM 1.0 First Version VC Package 10/15/12 MM 1.1 Section 1 and 5 completed FC Package 10/22/12 MM 1.2 Bugs fixed Response to Evaluation of VC Package 10/30/12 MM 1.3 Section 2-4 completed Bugs fixed FCR ARB 11/05/12 MM 1.4 Section 2, 2.2, 2.3, 3 Fixed FCR ARB Comments 11/09/12 MM 1.5 Benefits in Program Model Updated with more realistic concepts (Section 2) Section 2.2, 2.3 updated in regards to the new benefits. Instructor’s Comment 11/26/12 MM 1.6 Bugs fixed New feasibility evidences added (Pulling information from PubMed module ) Bugs fixed based on TA Comments We have provided some feasibility evidences about our most risky module (Pulling information from PubMed module) 11/28/12 MM 1.7 RIO updated Instructor’s Comments 12/03/12 MM 2.0 Bugs fixed Feasibility evidences updated Complete FED for DCR ARB (Final DC Package) 12/10/12 MM 2.1 FED updates based on ARB’s comments Final DC Package 12/17/12 MM 2.2 RIO fixed Level of Service Feasibility, Capability Feasibility, Evolutionary Feasibility Updated TA’s Comment – Evaluation of Final DC Package 02/11/13 MM 3.0 Risk Assessment Updated Personal Turnover
Business Case Analysis Assumptions People are willing to use an electronic system for collaboration Increased collaboration improves research Stakeholders (Who) Initiatives (What) Value Propositions (Why) Beneficiaries (For Whom) Developers PTS marketing team PTS research team Web master Database administrator Develop System Market the project and get people to sign up. Promoting success stories. Collect statistics on injuries Perform outreach of new research Train the web master. Increase research collaborations between members of PTS. Improve education and research. Reduce number of injuries for children. Reduce the burden on hospitals and clinics. Members of PTS The medical field Children Parents Hospitals, Clinics, Society Cost Development Personnel Training (Developers, Webmaster) Maintenance Infrastructure expenses (e.g. Web Hosting/Server) Benefits Number of members’ published papers (Rationale: This project is supposed to facilitate researchers’ (members) collaboration. So if in the future we find that the number of published paper increased, it means that this project has been useful.) Hours that each member spends on research.
Require little upfront costs 2 2 The major costs are about web hosting and servers. Require low total cost of ownership 2 3 PTS do not need to spend much money to own PTS-RID. Not-so-powerful local machines 2 4 It is a web application.
Risk Assessment Table 9: Risk Assessment Risks Risk Exposure Risk Mitigations Potential Magnitude Probability Loss Risk Exposure Lack of developer skills would increase lifecycle plan. 3 6 18 Training One Team member’s turnover would affect estimations and increase lifecycle plan. 3 6 18 Eliminate Low priority Modules Current PTS log-in page cannot be compatible with the project. 6 3 18 Modify their current code Inability to connect to PubMed will fail the project. 8 2 16 Using PubMed API tools Client will not be satisfied if response time does not meet target. 8 2 16 Consider Solr, Lucene solutions, Prototyping, Optimizing Code COTS products chosen do not meet the needs of the users. 4 2 8 Get client and board feedback, COTS assessment, Prototyping Staffing unavailability (database manager, moderator) would increase system downtime. 4 1 4 Get client and board feedback, Business Case Analysis