2

BILLING MODERNIZATION – phase I

3

BILLING MODERNIZATION – phase II objectives

• Retirement of the legacy DTC and NSCC billing systems

• Standardized data integration processing

• End-to-End balancing

• Enhanced MIS capabilities for those interfaces utilizing/converting to UBF

• Retirement of the legacy DTC and NSCC billing systems

• Standardized data integration processing

• End-to-End balancing

• Enhanced MIS capabilities for those interfaces utilizing/converting to UBF

4

BILLING MODERNIZATION – phase II

Appx. 85 Interfaces

(appx. 50 million rows daily

-summarized to appx. .5 million rows monthly)

5

DATA INTEGRATION - requirements

• Source data from a wide range of sources (predominantly mainframe sources)

• Write data to a wide range of targets

• Transform data according to billing rules

• Process more than 50 million transactions per day

• Source data from a wide range of sources (predominantly mainframe sources)

• Write data to a wide range of targets

• Transform data according to billing rules

• Process more than 50 million transactions per day

6

DATA INTEGRATION – background

• Looked at Inventory

• Explored WBI

• Much too costly

• Unnecessary real-time overhead

• Similar issues with other EAI vendors

• True ETL problem set

• Validated with research vendors

• Looked at Inventory

• Explored WBI

• Much too costly

• Unnecessary real-time overhead

• Similar issues with other EAI vendors

• True ETL problem set

• Validated with research vendors

7

ETL OVERVIEW

• E - Extraction*

• T - Transformation

• L - Loading

• Other features

• Visibility

• Dependency management

• Reusability

• Versioning

• Auditing

*Also referred to by some vendors as Capture, Transform and Flow

• E - Extraction*

• T - Transformation

• L - Loading

• Other features

• Visibility

• Dependency management

• Reusability

• Versioning

• Auditing

*Also referred to by some vendors as Capture, Transform and Flow

8

ETL – tool selection process

• Formation of Tool Selection Committee

• Infrastructure, ADM, product management, Arch. Office

• CMMi Compliant Process (SAM pilot)

• RFI

• Product Selection Criteria

• Proof of Concept

• Final Selection

• ROI

• Acquisition

• Formation of Tool Selection Committee

• Infrastructure, ADM, product management, Arch. Office

• CMMi Compliant Process (SAM pilot)

• RFI

• Product Selection Criteria

• Proof of Concept

• Final Selection

• ROI

• Acquisition

9

ETL – tool selection process – stage A

• Stage A: Pre-screen the ETL products and short-list two products.• Step1: Pre-screened the vendors: The following four vendors were

selected based upon previous experience, market share and published reports.

• Ascential

• DataMirror

• Informatica

• SAS

• Step2: Requested information and product demonstration.

• Step3: ETL tool selection committee discussed and evaluated the information and two products were selected for further evaluation.

• Stage A: Pre-screen the ETL products and short-list two products.• Step1: Pre-screened the vendors: The following four vendors were

selected based upon previous experience, market share and published reports.

• Ascential

• DataMirror

• Informatica

• SAS

• Step2: Requested information and product demonstration.

• Step3: ETL tool selection committee discussed and evaluated the information and two products were selected for further evaluation.

10

ETL – tool selection process – stage B

• Stage B: Final selection of the product• Step1: Developed and documented comprehensive list of

evaluation criteria, success criteria and weight based upon consultation with various stakeholders.

• Step2: Evaluated the two vendor products through a well defined/documented “proof of concept” process.

• Step3: Made the final selection based upon evaluation-score and price.

• Stage B: Final selection of the product• Step1: Developed and documented comprehensive list of

evaluation criteria, success criteria and weight based upon consultation with various stakeholders.

• Step2: Evaluated the two vendor products through a well defined/documented “proof of concept” process.

• Step3: Made the final selection based upon evaluation-score and price.

11

ETL – tool selection criteria

• Company Profile

• Product Profile

• DTCC Specific Requirements

• Example: Ability to call external programs

• Relative Strengths and Weaknesses

• Example: Connectivity to metadata repositories

• Price

• Company Profile

• Product Profile

• DTCC Specific Requirements

• Example: Ability to call external programs

• Relative Strengths and Weaknesses

• Example: Connectivity to metadata repositories

• Price

12

ETL – sample evaluation criteria

13

ETL – sample evaluation criteria – cont’d.

14

ETL – final selection

• Ascential Software

• Functionality

• Most flexibility

• Distributed run-time engine

• Generated COBOL (mainframe)

• Price

• Favorable ROI (based solely on Billing usage)

• Ascential Software

• Functionality

• Most flexibility

• Distributed run-time engine

• Generated COBOL (mainframe)

• Price

• Favorable ROI (based solely on Billing usage)