Introduction

GTA has built the Enterprise Portal, commonly referred to as georgia.gov, to provide a rich array of features and content in support of open-standard, interoperable Web based applications that can leverage application components to be provided by GTA.   Enterprise Portal clients, primarily state and local government entities, will be able to operate applications out of the Portal - portal based applications – as well as utilize GTA content management tools to deliver rich content to the constituents of the State of Georgia.

 

The application components and features of the Enterprise Portal are referred to as the portal services service line.   This service line is made up of the following services:

 

Portal Application Management Platform (Portal AMP): all features of the Portal related to operating Web based applications.   Depending on its design, a portal based application will utilize the different features, or service items, of the Portal AMP to varying degrees.   The Portal is purposely designed to provide this flexibility to its clients when they are designing and building Web based applications.   Features of the Portal AMP include:

 

  • Identity and access management services, such as authentication and single sign on
  • Directory services
  • Presentation and personalization services, such as support of multi-device rendering of Web content and customization of such content based on user preferences
  • Integration services that enable a Web based application to tap into the functionality and data of “legacy” applications
  • Application management services: application logic management, transaction management and transaction data management. 

Portal Content Management Platform (Portal CMP): The Portal is also designed to provide its clients with flexibility and autonomy to manage Web based content in a secure environment.   This environment – the Portal CMP – operates in concert with the Portal AMP to provide users of Portal based applications with a superior, custom experience and improved access and delivery of client services.   The Portal CMP is made up of a content builder/editor and a content repository.   

Enterprise Application Components: GTA will build, or acquire and then operate, these components.   The components will be based predominantly on the Web services application design and architecture paradigm, such that multiple Web based applications can leverage their functionality.

 

Although there are three main selections, this project will deal directly with the cost modeling of Content Management Platform (CMP) since that is what my team manages.

 

Scope of Need or Issue

GTA is an authority of the State of Georgia, meaning that it is to be self sustaining and generate revenue to support its goals, staff, and overhead. Until now we have received state funding to offset the initial costs of creating the portal and supporting our customers. We have now reached the need to recover the cost of the portal, support staff and future upgrades. One of the most pressing issues is how to we bill our clients?

 

Objectives

A fair method of billing is needed to continue to support and enhance the portal. Since the portal is new and we have no historical data, we are going to have to forecast based on amount of content, frequency of content served (hits), and personalization or customization. I am proposing we build a costing model that a user can enter the variables and receive a weighted ratio of cost that is then divided against total usage of the portal and then divided by the support cost of staff, maintenance, and upgrades.

 

Variables

This model is intended to provide a dynamic cost model to bill clients based on three decision variables:

  • Web Specific Content Load
  • Access Frequency
  • Presentation/ Customization

 

The dependent variable in this case is the fixed cost of supporting the portal.

 

Models

  • The user types in a weighted content rating on a scale of 0-5 for each of the three areas:
    Web specific content load - how much content is physically stored in megabytes on the servers.
  • Access Frequency – how many hits the content is getting through bandwidth.
  • Customization – How much work on GTA’s staff will be required to implement templates and content?

 

These formulas are then calculated with predetermined pricing factors in yellow. This then gives a total weighted content rating for each agency which is then divided by the cost of the portal and given a percentage of the cost spread ratio which is then used to give the share of cost to each agency.

 

 

Model Development

 

Proposal for Spreading Portal Services Annual Costs for Content Management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cost for Fiscal year 2004 - Content Management Platform for Portal

$   1,456,544

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rating, Weighted Content   0=Lowest; 5=Highest

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Web Specific Content Load

Access Frequency

Presentation/ Customization

TOTAL

Cost Spread Ratio

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pricing Factor:

0.4

0.4

0.2

 

 

 

 

 

MAIN PORTAL

 

 

                     3.0

                 3.0

                       5.0

        3.4

4.7%

                     0

 

 

AGENCY BIZ CARDS

 

 

                     3.0

                 3.0

                       5.0

        3.4

4.7%

            68,025

 

 

COUNTY CITY BIZ

 

 

                     3.0

                 3.0

                       1.0

        2.6

3.6%

            52,019

 

 

LEGIS BIZ CARDS

 

 

                     3.0

                 3.0

                       2.0

        2.8

3.8%

            56,021

 

 

DHR

 

 

                     5.0

                 3.0

                       1.0

        4.6

6.3%

            92,034

 

 

GTA

 

 

                     3.0

                 3.0

                       2.0

        2.8

3.8%

            56,021

 

 

OIG

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

PS

 

 

                     3.0

                 3.0

                       2.0

        2.8

3.8%

            56,021

 

 

SRTA

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

OAH

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

AGENCY

 

 

                     2.0

                 2.0

                       1.0

        1.8

2.5%

            36,013

 

 

TOTAL

 

 

 

 

 

   72.8

 

 

 

 

 

Note - Total % is not equal to 100%. This is because there are still start up costs that are absorbed by GTA, i.e. only 72.2% of costs are "passed through" to portal services clients, the rest is absorbed by GTA for now. Eventually, 100% of cost will be absorbed by portal services clients.

 

Recommendations

While a good start, this model is limited because there is no actual data to use. As real data comes in, the model will change and become more accurate.

 

For the next release, I would like to build another DSS sheet for the users to automatically calculate the weighting factors based on simple inputs rather than calculating it separate and then inputting it into this DSS.