Skip to main content

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 Congressionally designated lead entity within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that is responsible for biometric and identity management services. Homeland Advanced Recognition Technology (HART) will be the replacement for the Automated Biometric Identification System (IDENT) and the purpose of HART is to provide core biometric and identity services to support the DHS missions as outlined in the DHS Third Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (2023) to 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 Combat Crimes of Exploitation and Protect Victims.
Agency Department of Homeland Security
Point of Contact Antoine McCord - 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 2025 IT Spending $136.04 M
Current CIO Rating 3
Data As Of: 03/27/2025

Total Projects

8

Cost Variance

  • 7Low
  • 0Medium
  • 1High

Schedule Variance

  • 7Low
  • 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
03/27/2025
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.
Section C: Investment and Contracts

Public URLs

Contracts

Section D: Historic CIO Rating
Data Last Updated On: 09/29/2021
Section E: Investment Spending

Table 1: Distribution by Spending Type

Spending Type PY 2024 CY 2025 BY 2026
DME Costs 10 15 0
O&M Costs 70.664 121.043 0
Total 80.664 136.043 0

Table 2: Distribution by Cost Pools

Cost Pools PY 2024 CY 2025 BY 2026
External Labor 37.025 47.374 0
Facilities & Power 0 0 0
Hardware 0 0 0
Internal Labor 0 38.765 0
Internal Services 0 0 0
Other 16.133 17.024 0
Outside Services 23.07 29.378 0
Software 4.437 3.502 0
Telecom 0 0 0
Total 80.665 136.043 0
Cost PoolsCost in millions (M)

Table 3: Distribution by IT Towers

IT Tower PY 2024 CY 2025 BY 2026
Application 16.52 29.06 0
Compute 0 0 0
Data 0 0 0
Data Center 0 0 0
Delivery 43.214 69.14 0
End User 0 0 0
IT Management 0 0 0
Network 20.67 37.543 0
Output 0 0 0
Platform 0 0 0
Security & Compliance 0.26 0.3 0
Storage 0 0 0
Total 80.664 136.043 0
IT TowersCost in millions (M)
Data Last Updated On: 03/27/2025
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
Post Deployment Support 2 Future 0 0 0 0 Not Applicable
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

Post Deployment Support
  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)
  3. Please describe the iterative development methodology being employed. (500 characters or less)
    project is for support and maintenance.
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.