eTravel Service

2.0 APPROACH TO IMPLEMENTATION (C.6.8.1, • Managers who are available and willing to
EVALUATION FACTOR 2) make timely submissions and decisions
2.0.a This section describes our approach for stan- • Data and information availability in accordance
dard implementation services for all agencies plac- with the task order and schedule
ing task orders for eTS/GovTrip. We use a stan- • Willingness of the agency to work through
dard approach that accounts for most situations problems and maintain the schedule
expected in the Federal Government, which in- • TMC/TSS already integrated into GovTrip/
cludes a powerful mix of computer-based tools DTS or prepared to support the schedule.
and instructor-led classes. 2.0.e We will meet with the agency during the task
2.0.b Our standard implementation approach ad- order process to ensure the agency is establishing a
justs for agency-unique configuration issues and realistic schedule given their circumstances. Our
ensures the operational readiness to the specifics Team has developed surveys and planning tem-
of each agency situation and timeline. Our guides plates to help assess agency readiness. We have an
for agency planning and execution are adjusted to established approach through the use of the agency
unique agency needs and time schedules, includ- implementation plan and the agency implementa-
ing the selection of reservation/fulfillment services tion checklist to monitor and provide early notice
and/or authorization and voucher services. This of potential problems. Agency-specific data con-
flexibility of our implementation approach to ad- sists of four major areas: system configuration,
just for a wide range of agency requirements business process, administrative setup, and per-
minimizes the need for special customization. sonal data. Planning documentation exists for each
area. Documentation will be specifically tailored
2.0.c A well-prepared agency could be operational to GovTrip and made available for use under the
in as few as 4 weeks from task order signing—1 eTS. The agency Account Manager and Imple-
week of planning and preparation; 1 week of coor- mentation Lead will work with the agency to en-
dinator training, configuration decision making, sure early detection and appropriate mitigation of
and integration planning; 1 week of concurrent problems.
business process review, administrator training, set
up, interface coordination, and user training; and 1 2.0.f Our Team has a proven implementation ap-
week of process verification and operational roll- proach and a training program with sufficient staff
out support. We can support a 4-week implemen- for simultaneous agency roll-outs. This enables us
tation for a well-prepared Initial Operation Capa- to offer the Government accelerated timelines un-
bility (IOC) agency. der which up to 29 agencies will be rolled out by
the second year so that the Government will real-
2.0.d A well-prepared agency is characterized by ize travel savings 1 year early. Table 2-1 describes
the following: the Government targets and our capacity to per-
• Leadership committed to implementing eTS on form faster agency deployments. The rightmost
an established timeline column shows the accelerated agency roll-out
schedule we are prepared to support.
Table 2-1. Government Targets and Possible Accelerated Schedule. Our standard implementation services accelerate im-
plementations, saving Government travel costs.
eTS Milestone Fiscal Year Time Frame Target No. of Agencies Team Capacity for
(per C.6.8) Agency
Implementations
IOC FY03–FY04 Jul 2003–Nov 2003 1 3
1 FY04 Dec 2003–Sep 2004 7 14
2 FY05 Oct 2004–Sep 2005 12 29
3 FY06 Oct 2005–Sep 2006 24 All
4 FY07 Oct 2006–Sep 2007 All All
5 FY08 out Oct 2007–beyond All All

2.1 IMPLEMENTATION TEAMS AND SUPPORT

(C.6.8.1.1(2) AND (7))

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 9 “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

2.1.a We will provide a dedicated implementation
team for each agency placing a task order for res-
ervation and fulfillment services and/or
authorization and voucher services. Training
classes are provided as specified for each service
level. The allocation of labor to the implementa-
tion tasks is shown in Table 2-2 for each of the
three service levels.

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 10a “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

Table 2-2. Dedicated Implementation Support by Activity by Person-Weeks.

SERVICE LEVEL
Number of Users
Planning
Kickoff Meeting
Mgr/Coord. Class
Integration Workshop
Business Process Review
Administration Class
Integration Test Assistance
Set up
Process Verification
Acceptance
Implementation Report
Continuing Support
Total
A B C
500 2,000 5,000
1 2 3
.6 1 1
.4 1 1
.4 1 2
1.6 3 4
- 1 1
.6 1 1
4 (2 analysts for 2 weeks) 8 (2 analysts for 4 weeks) 12 (3 analysts for 4 weeks)
1 (1 analyst for 1 week) 2 (2 analysts for 1 week) 3 (3 analysts for 1 week)
1 2 4 (1 analyst for 4 weeks)
1 1 2 (1 analyst for 2 weeks)
.4 1 2
12 person-weeks 24 person-weeks 36 person-weeks

2.1.b For large-scale agency implementations, we 2.2 STANDARD IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES IN

propose to use the proposed implementation proc- THE DEDICATED SUPPORT PERIOD
ess, specified service levels, and additional service (C.6.8.1.1(3) – C.6.8.1.1(8))
levels (as specified in Volume 4, Price Proposal.)
2.2.a Northrop Grumman proposes a standard im-
The appropriate service level would be applied to
plementation process based on experiences at over
each activity in the large-scale agency. (Generally,
25 sites, with an installed population base of
activities in the agency are identified as major or-
70,000 users. We have refined and tuned our im-
ganizations if they have separate business proc-
plementation procedures and tools at large
esses, individual Travel Management Cen-
(>15,000) and small sites using both on-site teams
ter/Travel Services Solutions (TMC/TSS)
and remote site support. The standard process, as-
contractors, or different legacy business systems.)
sociated tools, account managers, and implementa-
This approach allows the large agency to aggre-
tion team allow an agency to rapidly assemble the
gate the implementation effort into a single task
data, establish the administrative structures, and
order and then apply the volume discounts identi-
get GovTrip operational. Our implementation ap-
fied in the pricing proposal.
proach is flexible for agency-standard configura-
2.1.c We have established a very rigorous ap- tions, but will adhere to the common processes of
proach to certifying personnel readiness on im- eTS consistent with the task order. The implemen-
plementation teams. It includes the following: tation team supports the GovTrip Account Man-
ager and agency with the expertise to ensure suc-
• An individual personnel qualification and test-
cessful planning, meetings, reviews, setup, and
ing program for Implementation, Training, and
document processing. Training teams provide
Customer Support (help desk) personnel on
classes in support of the Account Manager and
topics including authorizations, voucher/local
agency. Our standard implementation process is
voucher, routing, TMC document processing,
shown in Figure 2-1, below.
and help desk operations. Standard scripts and
talking points are used for implementation, cus- 2.2.b A detailed breakdown of proposed labor for
tomer support, and training. each activity in our standard implementation proc-
• All implementation, customer support, and ess for each service level is provided in Table 2-2.
training personnel must attend a hands-on im-
plementation exercise in a controlled environ-
ment. Senior analysts/subject matter experts
conduct this 1-week, full-scale simulation of
implementing a site. This exercise, modeled
with sample data, is a repeatable training ex-
perience for implementation, training, and help
desk personnel.

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 11 “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

Figure 2-1. Activities in the Standard Implementation Process. A fully prepared agency could achieve standard implementa-
tion in 4 weeks.
2.2.c Our approach has been proven to be adapt-
able to a wide range of site situations and user
populations. Implementation teams have fielded to
current customers’ sites of up to 25,000 users.
Help desk analysts have also remotely supported
small, homogenous site implementations in a few
weeks.
2.2.1 Implementation Begins with a Task Order
2.2.1.a Our Program Manager appoints an Account
Manager for each agency and also appoints an Im-
plementation Team Lead. These two individuals
direct all implementation activities in coordination
with the eTS agency Transition Manager. The im-
plementation and roll-out process begins with the
task order and assignment of the Account Manager,
who activates the necessary resources from our im-
plementation, operations and maintenance, cus-
tomer support, training, outreach, and fulfillment
teams.
2.2.2 Planning Session and Billing Plans
(C.6.8.1.1 (5))
2.2.2.a The Account and Implementation Managers
conduct preliminary meeting(s) with the agency to
acquaint senior management with the standard
GovTrip implementation process, review the eTS
common processes and agency standard configura-
tion options, familiarize the transition team with the
agency implementation guide, identify detailed
timeline considerations, and prepare for the kickoff
meeting. The schedule is confirmed, and a joint
agenda for the kickoff meeting is prepared and pub-
lished. The Integration Agreement workshop and
Travel Manager/
Coordinator class follow this planning session.
2.2.2.b At the planning session, we establish
agency-specific billing parameters and procedures.
Our proposed billing approach allows flexibility to
NGMS/A020363PR
eTravel Service
accommodate parameters necessary for defining
organizational structures, billing addresses, rout-
ing, and configurable fees defined with the agen-
cies. Billing includes processes for use of Cen-
trally Billed Accounts (CBAs), Individually Billed
Accounts (IBAs), Government Travel Requests
(GTRs), and personal charge cards. Fees may be
configured by agency, applied to services at vari-
ous points in the work flow, and defined by task
order.
2.2.3 Manager/Coordinator Classes (C.6.8.1.1(6))
2.2.3.a This 4-day, instructor-led class for the eTS
Transition Manager, Travel Manager, and Coordi-
nators covers a system overview, details of agency
standard configuration and roles, maintenance tasks
(e.g., portal updates), and review of the administra-
tor function. This class is attended by the Imple-
mentation Team Lead and precedes the kickoff
meeting. The agency implementation process par-
ticipants need the course content to facilitate finaliz-
ing the agency standard configura-tion and as input
to the business process review.
2.2.4 Integration Agreement Workshop
2.2.4.a The agency and our integration engineers,
with implementation team assistance, conduct a
series of meetings to define data transfer interface
requirements between GovTrip and the agency’s
business systems. We will explain the business
rules used to ensure accurate processing occurs
between the real-time GovTrip interface to the
user and the typical batch processing of the legacy
financial systems. Mapping is accomplished for
the wide range of transactions—funds checking,
obligation, disbursement, payment confirmations
and rejects, archiving (optional), human resource
data exchange, etc. We use the Mercator design
client to design and implement two-way transla-
Vol. 2 - 11 “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

tions. Mercator provides robust support for XML,
EDI, and UDF formats, including complex bus-
iness rules, lookup tables, and exit procedures.
2.2.4.b The eTS Vision statement includes this
sentence: The value of the eTS approaches order
of magnitude returns when agencies invest to in-
tegrate eTS functionality with their business sys-
tems using the eTS data exchange capabilities. The
goals of the eTravel project include accelerating
reimbursement of travel expenses to the Federal
traveler and to travel charge card vendors.
2.2.4.c GovTrip and the GovTrip EAI Platform
provide those ROI benefits for our DoD customer
and travelers today. Our integration with dozens of
DoD financial systems for delivering obligation
and voucher transactions provides the additional
benefit of enabling real-time transactional travel
systems to provide services while simultaneously
“buffering” or “insulating” the batch-limited leg-
acy financial systems. Because of our unique de-
sign, the timing sequence of the travel process is
buffered via GovTrip’s Payment Module and EAI
Platform. This design promotes smooth processing
of multiple change documents and protects the
legacy financial systems from multiple documents
in-process simultaneously, bad lines of account-
ing, poor data, and insufficient funds. For exam-
ple, obligations may be sent as an ORI-GINAL,
AMENDMENT, or SUPPLEMENT. An obliga-
tion transaction derived from an original authori-
zation is always submitted as an ORI-GINAL. An
obligation transaction derived from an authoriza-
tion amendment is submitted as an ORI-GINAL
only if the obligation transactions from all prior
versions of the authorization have already been
rejected. Otherwise, the transaction is an obliga-
tion adjustment and is submitted as an
AMENDMENT.
2.2.4.d GovTrip produces transaction files for
transmittal via the EAI Platform to the financial
systems. GovTrip also processes response files
from the financial systems. GovTrip tracks the
status of current and pending transactions ensuring
that transactions are sent under the proper circum-
stances, with the proper accounting infor-mation,
at the proper times, and with proper consideration
given to responses received for prior transactions.
All these transactions are associated with a travel
document and a specific version of the document
in GovTrip. GovTrip also records information to
indicate the status of transactions for these docu-
ments. This includes information on the submittal
NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 12
eTravel Service
of transactions, as well as infor-mation on transac-
tion outcomes (e.g., information on the rejection of
obligations and the payment of invoices).
2.2.4.e Unique features of GovTrip include under-
standing of the complexity of the financial proc-
ess, the ability of the user to create several change
documents that might process in the same batch
cycle, and accommodating the necessary sequenc-
ing and timing of these financial trans-actions. Our
real world experience, developed over years of
work supporting DoD, has enabled us to provide
the ROI described in the eTS Vision. For the Fed-
eral traveler, we accelerate reimbursement of
travel expenses. This process is proven and opera-
tional today.
2.2.4.f Additionally, the GovTrip Payment Module
can be configured and tailored by organizations to
block financial transactions. This allows those or-
ganizations that are ready for GovTrip and the
TMC interface to begin using GovTrip immedi-
ately even though they may not yet have the inter-
face to the supporting financial system. This facili-
tates early adoption pending the design and
establishment of the financial interface. Further,
GovTrip can be configured by agency to support
trip types that can initiate obligations, but not dis-
bursements, or vice versa. This facilitates situa-
tions where bulk obligations are made, or where
disbursements are made manually. These features
demonstrate another facet of the power of the
GovTrip software to immediately meet the needs
of all agency users.
2.2.5 Kickoff Meeting (C.6.8.1.1(3))
2.2.5.a Account Managers and Implementation
Team Leads review the GovTrip configuration
options, assignment of user roles and permissions,
and implementation process. Unique agency needs
and business processes are discussed with travel
management personnel. Agency attendees should
include Coordinators, Administrators, Transporta-
tion/Travel Managers and TMC Representatives
(as appropriate), and other Managers involved in
the travel process. This meeting assists agency
personnel in finalizing the agency standard con-
figuration and drafting their business rules prior to
the business process review.
2.2.6 Business Process Review
2.2.6.a Account and Implementation Managers
conduct a review with the eTS Transition Manager,
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

Travel Manager, Agency Coordinators, and Admin-
istrators. Included in this review are basic agency
business rules, exception processing, integration
plans between GovTrip and existing business sys-
tems and processes, incorporation of travel services
(e.g., existing TMC, new GovTrip TMC and online
booking, or FedTrip™, as applicable), audit sam-
pling plans, access/reporting from the business data
warehouse, and the status of the integration agree-
ment effort. Key outputs from the review are a re-
vised timeline, draft agency business rules, agency
procedures, and full preparation to begin document-
ing the administrative set up. The Implementation
Team Lead is available for continuous consultation
to assist Coordinators and Administrators with fi-
nalizing business rules; establishing routing and
approval chains; establishing supplier designations,
messages, and warnings; uploading electronic per-
sonnel and accounting data; coordinating existing
TMC integration, if applicable; and supporting the
development of the integration agreement. The
agency is able to finalize their business rules for use
during the Administrator class and begin preparing
draft set-up data.
2.2.7 Administrator Class (C.6.8.1.1(6))
2.2.7.a The Administrator class includes a system
overview, document processing, and organiza-
tional activities necessary to maintain and change
administrative and personal data. The results of the
agency configuration decisions and business proc-
ess review are incorporated into this class. Section
4.2 details our training approach.
2.2.8 Setup and Data Loading (C.6.8.1.1(4))
2.2.8.a During setup, agency information is final-
ized and uploaded. This includes an interface to
the agency personnel system and/or the set-up cli-
ent tool to establish formats to validate traveler
profile information, set up administrative functions
(organization structure, routing, and approval
chains); document access structures to include
NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 12a
eTravel Service
read-only access to documents, traveler profiles
with user accounts/permission levels, and other
settings; and set up accounting information. Setup
may continue later than shown in Figure 2-1.
2.2.8.b Automated tools enhance our ability to
provide timely, responsive implementation ser-
vices while minimizing or reducing potential er-
rors. We use a set-up client tool to support imple-
mentation, and a web-based maintenance tool to
support the ongoing system administration activi-
ties of the coordinators and administrators.
2.2.8.c The set-up client tool is PC-based, using
Microsoft Access 2000. This tool prevalidates data
prior to upload (e.g., administrative setup, traveler
profile, and accounting). Source data inputs to the
tool are in Microsoft Excel format. One of the les-
sons learned from DTS is that semantic and syn-
tactic quality checks of key data fields are very
important. These quality checks are incorporated
into the GovTrip upload process and prevent many
data errors. Standardizing the content is important
if the data elements are to be used for reporting
purposes. The tool supports individual record
modification, bulk updates, and multiple ex-
ports/imports. The implementation team assists
with final setup and upload of data; for later roll-
outs, the help desk is the focal point for the upload
process.
2.2.8.d Other existing tools are used after upload
of data for changes, additions, and ongoing opera-
tions. These tools incorporate significant labor-
saving features identified from previous site im-
plementations. These features include the follow-
ing:
• Mandatory traveler data validation checks to
ensure supporting systems receive required
data, including Government credit card valida-
tion and bank routing with Federal Organiza-
tion Master File
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

• Lines of Accounting templates to minimize
data entry errors and automate fiscal year roll-
over process
• Routing list integrity rules (such as requiring
approval, but only at one step during routing
and only by primary approver or alternates)
• Automated cross-organization document access
maintenance using global rules controlled by
the administrator.
2.2.9 Establish/Test the Integration Agreement
(C.6.8.1.1(8))
2.2.9.a Our Technical Engineers provide support
to establish the interface agreement for each
agency and test the end-to-end interfaces. This is
typically completed in support of the agency In-
terim Authority to Operate (IATO).
2.2.9.b There are three basic steps to the method-
ology: Data Translation, Communication Connec-
tivity, and Testing. These steps comprise a proven
and reliable process to define and implement the
integration required to process business transac-
tions across a diverse community of systems. The
Data Translation development occurs concurrently
with the Communication Connectivity. Point-to-
point testing begins when both the map validation
and communications test are completely defined.
If translation or communications issues arise dur-
ing point-to-point testing, a mutually agreeable
solution is identified and the responsible party re-
solves the issue. When two or more systems that
transfer transactions within a community have
completed point-to-point testing, full system test-
ing (an end-to-end functional test) is performed,
which allows business transactions to flow among
the newly integrated systems.
2.2.9.c Integration Agreements are reached with
agency personnel during the site survey; this is the
initial meeting with the functional and technical
proponents of the interfacing system. This meeting
will include a description of the concept of opera-
tions and an overview of how the specific system
will participate in the travel business processes.
During the establishment of an Integration Agree-
ment, Northrop Grumman will provide technical
support and define testing activities. Some cus-
tomers that have similar Integration Agreements
and currently use our EAI platform include US
Bank, Citibank, Federal Express, many Value
Added Networks (VANs), the Defense Finance
Accounting System (DFAS), Wide Area Work
Flow (WAWF), U.S. courts, DoD’s Purchase Card
NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 13
eTravel Service
Program, and many more.
2.2.9.d As part of each system integration, a suite
of support documentation is delivered that in-
cludes a design, cost, and schedule estimate; a
Functional Description Document (FDD); a sys-
tem logical map; a system physical map; the Inter-
face Test Document (ITD); and the Interface De-
ployment Guideline (IDG).
2.2.10 User Training: Traveler/Arranger/Supervisor
(C.6.8.1.1(6))
2.2.10.a We offer 4 days of traveler, arranger, and
supervisor half-day and/or full-day financial ap-
prover sessions. The mix of classes and schedule
are coordinated with the agency. The standard
scheduling and delivery of classroom instruction is
organized so that our training team travels to the
training site on Sunday of the week in which train-
ing is to begin. Monday is used to orient the in-
structors and to stand up the training environment.
Four days of classes are provided Tuesday through
Friday. Agency requirements for alternate sched-
ules will be considered on an individual task order
basis.
2.2.11 Process Verification
2.2.11.a The implementation team assists the
agency in processing documents to ensure inter-
faces are operating and to allow key personnel
(agency administrators, financial approvers, su-
pervisors, and the TMC) to build experience prior
to live use of the system.
2.2.12 Acceptance
2.2.12.a Acceptance signifies agency use of Gov-
Trip and is defined in the task order as number of
traveler profiles uploaded and minimum number
of completed transactions by type, specific imple-
mentation and operational support activities, con-
figuration requirements, and data exchange capa-
bilities. This milestone concludes the dedicated
implementation support period.
2.3 CONTINUING IMPLEMENTATION SUPPORT
(C.6.8.1.1(9))
2.3.a Implementation support is available for two
additional months of weekly conference calls to
discuss and mitigate roll-out issues. The monthly
conference call reviews, initiated at task award,
continue through the agency’s roll-out and de-
ployment through the sixth month of the agency’s
deployment. Sustainment training
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

support is provided to the agency through two
powerful computer-based tools: the Enterprise
Web Training System (EWTS) in the agency stan-
dard configuration which allows real-time use of
GovTrip capabilities for training; and our web-
based training tool (WBT), which provides inter-
active, scenario-driven exercises for each eTS
common user role. In addition, the business intel-
ligence, data warehouse, and reporting capability
classes may be scheduled during this time period.

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 13a “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

2.4 IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENTATION
(C.6.8.1.1(10))
2.4.a Our Team has a library of documentation and
automated tools to support agency-specific im-
plementation, enhance rapid agency adoption, and
expedite implementation. Our 4-year investment in
our proposed process and documentation, along
with continual process improvement to incorporate
lessons learned, facilitates minimal customization.
2.4.b The Implementation Plan includes the fol-
lowing key parts:
• Agency Implementation Planning Guide—a
detailed and activity-based timeline that en-
compasses all the long- and mid-range planning
and preparation activities needed to ensure suc-
cess. It is used at the initial planning workshop
and is updated by the Account Manager.
• Agency Implementation Check List—an item-
ized go/no-go list of activities in the 30-day pe-
riod prior to live travel. It is used to maintain
visibility of the readiness of an agency to begin
using GovTrip. It is typically used in the final
weeks prior to live travel to guide actions and
priorities during in-process reviews.
• Implementation team Standard Operating Pro-
cedures (SOPs)—a guide to the process and
procedures at an agency site.
2.4.c The Implementation Report is initiated at the
kickoff meeting and updated weekly with lessons
learned and agency configuration items. The
agency receives the final report 30 days after the
conclusion of dedicated implementation support.
This report documents the agency standard con-
figuration, including standard processes, work
flows, business rules, and audits.
2.5 TMC IMPLEMENTATION
2.5.a While at contract award GovTrip provides
the power of a fully integrated Travel Agency, our
service includes a robust TMC capability to expe-
dite the adoption of eTS by those agencies that
choose to continue using TMCs. We recognize
that some agencies and/or specific sites have con-
tracted separately for their own TMC services
from various providers, and we can immediately
support inclusion of these providers. GovTrip’s
flexible and configurable architecture provides the
capability to interface with any TMCs awarded
contracts by GSA or individual agencies or sites.
Northrop Grumman offers the use of GovTrip to
agency-contracted TMC service providers. This
NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 14
eTravel Service
will increase the uniformity of travel policy en-
forcement and reduce the variability in the service
and user experience.
2.5.b In addition to the GovTrip Reservation and
Fulfillment online booking engine and services,
GovTrip supports the use of existing TMCs with
an electronic interface to all four global distribu-
tion services (GDS-Sabre, Apollo, Worldspan, and
Amadeus). We have an active program to incorpo-
rate existing TMCs into the interface; the individ-
ual pseudo city codes for each TMC can be regis-
tered for the agency or a subset of organizations.
Then the TMC receives trip requests directly from
the system into its GDS Passenger Name Record
(PNR) format. This interface currently supports
five active commercial travel offices, with an addi-
tional 28 certified for use.
2.5.c Our system currently interfaces with seven
major TMCs at 17 sites and has completed testing
communication with an additional 36 TMCs (Ta-
bles 2-3 and 2-4). Additionally, we have the capa-
bility to interface with and support agencies using
FedTrip™. We have a documented and proven
testing and training plan for a TMC interface. This
reduces implementation time and expedites adop-
tion, quickly bringing new TMCs and their pre-
ferred GDSs online with a PNR interface tailored
to their needs.
2.5.d For those Agencies/TMCs that prefer to con-
tinue with FedTrip™ in addition to or instead of
the GovTrip booking engine, GovTrip will incor-
porate a single sign-on as interface to FedTrip™
once the FedTrip™ site has been updated from
RESASSIST to RESXSM.
Table 2-3. Major TMCs in Production. GovTrip interfaces
with all major GDSs, is currently in use with seven large and
small business TMCs at 17 locations, and is readily configur-
able for additional sites.
TMC in GSA
Master
TMC Sites GDSs Contract
SatoTravel 6 Sabre:Apollo Yes
Carlson Wagonlit 1 Sabre Yes
Omega World Travel 4 Sabre:Apollo Yes
The Travel Company 1 Worldspan No
N&N Travel 3 Worldspan No
Kola Nut Travel 1 Sabre No
Alamo Travel 1 Sabre Yes
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

Table 2-4. TMCs by GDS Tested for Production (including those already in production). GovTrip has operating interfaces
with four GDSs (Sabre, Galileo/Apollo, Worldspan, and Amadeus) and has completed testing for implementation at 36
large and small business TMCs.
Sabre Galileo: Apollo Worldspan Amadeus
Rodgers Travel Century Travel Service Cruise Ventures Inc. dba CI Travel Bay Area Travel
CWT/Almeda Travel, Inc. Allen Johnson Travel Ravenel Travel Lawton’s Travel
Alamo Travel Group Knowledge Connections Winggate Travel Travel Fever
Sun Travel Potomac Falls Travel Kreative Travel Uniglobe Reston Travel Center
CWT/AST Connections Manassas Travel Adtrav Travel Management
Airtrack Travel System SatoTravel Travco
Stone Travel Omega World Travel Geraco Travel
Aviatours Holiday Travel Inernational
Serenity Travel Manassas Travel
Kola Nut Travel The Travel Company
CWT/El Sol Travel N&N Travel
Business Travel Advisors
CWT/Alexander Travel
Manassas Travel
Rosenbluth International
SatoTravel
Omega World Travel
Alamo Travel

2.6 BDW IMPLEMENTATION 2.6.a.2 While our BDW is capable of receiving

2.6.a Our approach to implementing the BDW is
to utilize existing data acquisition and integration
services to populate our data warehouse based on
our published data schema and to host the ware-
house on a computing platform that we have sized,
configured, and located in our data center. Thus,
our approach combines the advantages of an exist-
ing and highly successful commercial service and
system with the security of self-hosting and the
reliability and performance of dedicated hardware.
The Northrop Grumman Team has detailed the
data schema in a single HTML document (Busi-
ness Data Warehouse Description Document –
BDWDD) as we have developed our BDW for
commercial customers. This document includes all
table and field definitions and table relationships,
and will be made available to the GSA for review
after contract award. Currently the schema con-
tains TMC (air, rail, car, and hotel), credit card,
and client-specific “organizational” information.
2.6.a.1 In addition, we propose a comprehensive
set of services including data management and
integration; functional capabilities such as stan-
dard reports and ad hoc querying; user access
management via our web portal and business intel-
ligence tools, including Actuate and MicroStrat-
egy.
and sending data to or from any format or system,
supplemental hourly fees would be charged for
integration with agency systems or other sources
not specified as currently provided in Table 2-5 or
Table 2-6. Because the proposed BDW exists, and
is already in use by TRX for corporate customers,
we expect to implement the eTS BDW as a single
event. We plan to populate it initially with data
from the 19 TMCs that currently have a business
relationship with the Northrop Grumman Team
following receipt of authorization from the Gov-
ernment to access such data. As additional TMC
feeds are authorized to provide data, the data will
be added to the BDW as it becomes available
(typically monthly).
2.6.b Northrop Grumman is committed to main-
taining a “World Class,” highly functional, easy-
to-use system, inclusive of the BDW, and is also
committed to introducing technological and travel
industry-related improvements. Northrop Grum-
man’s proposal allows for continuing technology
refresh of the COTS software and hardware that
are deployed in the system. The schedule for up-
grades is aligned with component up-
grades/agreements. As part of its commercial best
practices, Northrop Grumman conducts industry
analyses and trade-off studies to ensure that a best-
value solution is provided. Major changes directed
by GSA would require an analysis of the require-

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 15 “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

ments and impact analysis. The proposed price being issued. These updates can include the addi-
does include periodic maintenance and fixes to the tion of new data
BDW that would result in new versions/releases

Table 2-5. Federally Approved TMCs. The identified suppliers already providing data feeds to the proposed commercial BDW
solution represent 39% of the total Federally-Approved TMC population.
Data Feeds
Federally-Approved TMC Currently Provided Tested for Production
1 AAA Corporate Travel Services
2 Adventure Travel Y
3 Aggieland SuperTravel
4 Air Sea Travel
5 Alamo Travel Y
6 All Seasons Travel Y
7 American Express Travel Y Y
8 Bay Area Travel – Florida
9 Bay Area Travel, Inc.
10 Belle Meade Travel, Inc. Y
11 Bentley Hedges Travel
12 Bonner Travel Services, Inc.
13 Business Travel Advisors, Inc. Y Y
14 Carlson Wagonlit Travel – Midwest Travel Y
15 CI Travel
16 Creative Travel Y
17 CW Government Travel, Inc. dba Carlson Wagonlit Travel Y
18 CWT/Century Travel Service, Inc. Y Y
19 Dallas Travel
20 Fortune International Travel, Inc.
21 Global Travel
22 Global, Inc.
23 Gwin Travel Planners
24 Hickory Beeline
25 Holiday Travel Y
26 Lorraine Travel Bureau
27 Manassas Travel Y Y
28 Mon Valley Travel
29 National Travel, Inc.
30 Omega World Travel Y Y
31 Premier Travel Y
32 Prestige Travel
33 Professional Travel Y
34 Rodgers Travel Y
35 RTS Travel
36 SatoTravel Y Y
37 Semont Travel dba Travco

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 15a “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

Table 2-5. Federally Approved TMCs (concluded). The identified suppliers already providing data feeds to the proposed com-
mercial BDW solution represent 39% of the total Federally-Approved TMC population.
Data Feeds
Federally Approved TMC Currently Provided Tested for Production
38 Springdale Travel
39 Sterling Travel
40 Sun Travel
41 Travel and Transport Y
42 Travelennium, Inc.
43 US Travel – Alaska
44 Winggate Travel Y
45 World Travel Partners Y
46 World Travel Service
47 WorldTek Y
48 WorldWide Travel Y
49 Wright Travel Y

Table 2-6. Charge Card Issuers. The following Charge Card Issuers provide data feeds to the proposed commercial BDW solu-
tion. The existence of available data feeds expedites the implementation of eTS.
Data Feeds
Charge Card Issuers Currently Provided
1 Citibank Y
2 US Bank Y
3 Bank of America Y
4 Mellon (Pcard only) Y
5 Bank One Y

elements and the modification of existing data
elements as a result of reasonable changes in exist-
ing data feeds. Should the Government desire to
add new data feeds beyond those already proposed
in our solution, we can provide engineering
change proposals at that time.
2.6.c Data quality is of primary importance in any
data warehouse. The Northrop Grumman Team
has developed a comprehensive process to collect,
normalize, validate, translate, and deliver data to
include multiple checkpoints/audits and specific
rules to determine data quality and reasonableness.
Figures 2-2 and 2-3 show details of the data con-
solidation process and associated decision points.
2.6.d We will collect data and perform tests to de-
termine data integrity and reasonableness. For
first-time feeds, we also request the TMC provide
a subset of sample reports (e.g., top suppliers,
routes, hotels, etc.) created from the data which we
compare to similar reports generated from the data
loaded into the BDW. If possible, data issues will
be resolved internally according to an agreed-upon
set of data-cleansing rules (see list below). Data
suppliers (e.g., TMCs) will be contacted when is-
sues cannot be resolved internally, and, if neces-
sary, they will be asked to fix the data and resub-
mit. These quality checks are repeated for each
new data feed, or if any new data elements are
added to an existing feed.

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 15b “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)
 eTravel Service

Figure 2-2. Data Consolidation Process. Data quality is of primary importance in any data warehouse.

Figure 2-3. High-level Logical View of Proposed Architecture. Our architecture draws on our Team’s years of experience
with collecting and cleansing data, and dealing with different sources of travel-related data.

“Reasonableness” Tests: Do the values make
sense?
• Compare spend/transaction count for month
over month
• Verify that currencies have been exchanged
correctly to reporting currency
• Verify that all city/hotel/car codes map to
look-up tables
• Check daily car rates versus total car amount
• Check cost per room night versus total hotel
amount
• Check cost per room night
• Verify that refund tags are valid refund tags
• Verify that refund tags are mapping
• Check for duplicate tickets
• Check for null plating carrier
• Verify that plating carrier and code are accu-
rate
• Check for “Unknown” segment carrier
• Verify that exchange tags are valid exchange
tags
• Verify that exchanges are mapping back to
original ticket
• Check actual class and mapping to class.

NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 15c “Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

2.6.e Users of the BDW are expected to be agency
Travel and Financial Managers and GSA PMO
Travel Managers. The BDW supports approxi-
mately 750 users. The beneficiaries of the BDW
include Government travelers, agency Travel
Managers, GSA PMO Travel Managers, and tax-
payers. The additional beneficiaries will include
agency financial and purchasing managers.
2.6.f Success in executing queries and interpreting
results depends on the users having a working
knowledge of the GovTrip, a basic understanding
of how the BDW works, and a familiarity with
using the query tools to retrieve Warehouse data.
Training will give Federal Travel Analysts the
framework needed to understand and use the
GovTrip BDW. BDW training focuses on the use
of the reporting and ad hoc tools to extract infor-
mation from the BDW. It provides insight into the
interpretation and use of the reports to analyze
travel patterns, prepare budgetary estimates, and
manage agency travel programs. The BDW train-
ing curricula generally takes one business day to
administer. As proposed, training is classroom-
based; however, it may be delivered remotely via
the Internet using WebEx or a similar product. As
mandated in the RFP, training sessions are de-
signed for up to 25 users at a time, can be held at
Government or Northrop Grumman facilities, and
will be provided 30 days prior to implementation.
Sample Training Summary
• Training associated with data mining, data
queries, and report generation covers a variety
of topics, from initial sign-on, through selec-
tion of desired data sets and report generation,
to final log-off. Classes offered are 8 hours in
length and will cover standard reports and the
basic operations associated with extracting and
viewing the desired data sets.
Sample Topics
• Introductions/Setup
• Overview of Reporting/Analysis Tools
− Signing into Reporting/Analysis Tools
− Home Page
− Adobe Acrobat Reader
− My Profile
− Changing Password
− Select Data Set
− Logging Out
• Standard Reports
− Standard Report Menu
NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 15d
eTravel Service
− Report Qualifiers by Report
− Review of Standard Reports
− Schedule Reports
− Report Versions
− Report Portfolio Menu
− Search
− Printing Reports
• Review/Questions
• Report Analysis and Interpretation
• Practical Exercise
2.6.g The standard BDW reports provide detailed
information on supplier usage for airlines, hotels,
and car rental firms. Policy compliance analysis
can be accomplished with the Required Agency
Travel Report and the CPP Report (two of the
mandatory reports called out by the proposal so-
licitation).
2.6.g.1 In addition, the Northrop Grumman Team
offers custom reporting to measure policy compli-
ance and online booking usage. An example of
this type of report would be a GovTrip Usage Re-
port that documents the number of bookings made
through the online system (as compared to those
booked over the phone with an agent). Another
custom report separately tracks those transactions
that began over the Internet, but were completed
by an agent.
2.6.h As the BDW currently exists as a commer-
cial product, product and regression testing is
regularly performed. When the GovTrip BDW is
implemented at Northrop Grumman’s data center,
a comprehensive set of system-level tests will be
performed to validate hardware and software con-
nectivity and functionality. The third component
of testing is input data quality testing, which is
discussed in detail in Section 2.6.d. Copies of any
discrepancy reports from any level of testing will
be made available to the GSA for review.
2.6.h.1 The BDW analysis engine, build on TRX’s
commercial travel management and analysis prod-
uct, is an established COTS with proven perform-
ance histories. As such, each of these products has
been through a comprehensive set of pre-release
testing regimens and is supported by regular re-
lease updates to address any known
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)

problems or user-identified issues. Because our
proposed solution is built around these COTS
products, testing can focus on data validation (i.e.,
BDW content as it is received from the data
sources) and the testing of the specific reports and
queries. The testing of the received data, as de-
scribed in our previous response, does produce
comparison and discrepancy reports that we can
provide to the Government for review.
2.6.i Except for scheduled maintenance (monthly
during non-peak hours), we propose 24/7 access to
NGMS/A020363PR Vol. 2 - 15e
eTravel Service
the BDW (via reporting and ad-hoc tools). Our
system performance goal for BDW system avail-
ability is 98%, which is consistent with the per-
formance goal for the other parts of GovTrip.
2.6.i.1 All data in the BDW is backed up and
stored off-site. In the event of a catastrophic loss
of the data center, access to the restored data
would be provided from an alternate site. The
Northrop Grumman Team estimates that recovery
would not take longer than 14 days.
“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the
restriction on the title page of this proposal or quotation.” (APR 1984)