This status assessment reviews the current status of the project with respect to resources, budget, schedule, risk, technical issues, and management issues. Any actions arising from this assessment will be summarized in this document.

1.2 Scope

This status assessment reviews all aspects of the C-Registration System as of the end of the C2 Iteration.

1.3 Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations

Refer to the Glossary [3].

1.4 References

Applicable references are:

Course Registration System Vision Document, WyIT387, V1.0, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Stakeholder Requests Document, WyIT389, V1.0, 1998, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Glossary, WyIT406, V1.0, 1998, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Master Schedule, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Construction Phase Schedule, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Software Development Plan, WyIT418, V2.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Iteration Plan, Preliminary Iteration (Inception), WyIT414, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Iteration Plan, Elaboration Iteration #E1, WyIT420, V1.0 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System C2 Iteration Plan, WyIT500, V1.0. 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System C2 Integration Build Plan, WyIT502, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Test Plan for the Architectural Prototype, WyIT432, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Test Plan, WyIT501, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Test Evaluation Summary for the Architectural Prototype, WyIT433, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System C2 Test Evaluation Summary, WyIT503, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System C2 Iteration Assessment, WyIT504, V1.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.
Course Registration System Risk List, WyIT419, V3.0, 1999, Wylie College IT.

2. Resources

2.1 Personnel/Staffing

The project is fully staffed with the exception of 1 Developer position and 1 Tester position. These positions were identified during the last iteration to help move the schedule up by several weeks. Rick Bell is currently interviewing candidates.

The systems engineers were released from the project and assigned to other projects at the start of the C2 Iteration. System performance problems have resulted in 2 of the engineers returning to the project on a part-time basis.

2.2 Financial Data

The original budget of $116,600 for the C2 Iteration was overrun by $10,000 due to additional effort being deployed to address the performance issues.

With respect to the overall project budget of $638,000 (see Project Plan V2.0 [6]), an overrun of $104,000 is projected.

The table below summarizes the overall project financial status as well as the last iteration's financial status.

BUDGET
	Budget	Actual To Date	Estimate to Complete	Estimate at Completion	Variance	Percent Variance
	B	ATC	ETC	EAC=ATC+ETC	V=B-EAC	PV=V/B

Overall Project	$638,000	$402,000	$340,000	$742,000	-$104,000	-16.3%
C2 Iteration	$116,600	$126,600	$-	$126,600	-$10,000	-8.6%

3. Top 10-Risks

The top risks and their mitigation plans are documented in the Risk List [16]. The current status and any actions assigned to mitigate the risks have been updated in Version 3 of the Risk List.

4. Technical Progress

The C2 Iteration to develop the R1.0 software baseline has just completed. All work products as defined in the iteration plans [7],[8],[9] have been generated and reviewed.

40 defects in the R1.0 baseline remain open. 12 of these are classified as High or Critical severity. (See the C2 Test Evaluation Report [13] for more details on the C2 defects.)

Add additional iteration, C2b, has been introduced to redesign the interface to the Course Catalog System.

Meeting the performance and loading requirements is currently the only major Design Issue outstanding.

5. Major Milestone Results

The following table summarizes the results of the major milestones

Milestone	Planned Date	Actual Date	Results
Business Case Review	19/01/1999	30/01/1999	Business Case Review was well received by Senior Management Team and Wylie College representatives. No scope changes. Release 2.0 committed to June 24^th, 1999.
Architectural Prototype	02/03/1999	15/03/1999	Major performance problems discovered in accessing the Course Catalog System.
Beta Release	02/04/1999	12/04/1999	User Feedback favorable. Users requested design changes to all screens and menus.
Initial Operational Capability (Release 1.0)	10/05/1999	-	Release 1.0 System Test completed. Performance requirements accessing the Course Catalog System not met. Senior Management Team has decided to add an iteration to redesign the interface software to correct the performance problems.
Product Release 1.0	19/05/1999	-
2^nd Operational Capability	24/06/1999	-
Product Release 2.0	24/06/1999	-

6. Total Project/Product Scope

The overall scope of the project as defined in the Vision Document [1] has not changed. User feedback on the Beta release resulted in a redesign of all screens and menus. This change was "in scope" and no change orders will be issued to the customer.

7. Action Items and Follow-through

The following list of open action items has been compiled from the Risk List [16], C2 Test Evaluation Report [14], and the weekly Project Meetings:

Id.	Action Item Description	Assignee	Due Date	Status
1.	Devote systems engineering resources to the response time issue involving the Course Catalog System.	Rick Bell	04/04/1999	Open.
2.	Review the master schedule to see if a fourth iteration can be added to the Construction Phase.	Senior Mgmt Team	31/03/1999	Open. Meeting scheduled.
3.	Ensure all high risk components are code inspected prior to build integration.	Rick Bell	31/03/1999	Open. Rick to discuss at weekly meeting.
4.	Plan additional design reviews for the R2.0 Release.	Rick Bell	15/04/1999	Open. To be added to C3 and C2b schedules.
5.	Fix the problems with the Load Simulator Software and re-run the associated test cases.	Kerry Stone	02/04/1999	Open Test Engineer assigned to problem.
6.	Investigate defect aging. Why are a number of defects taking more than 30 days to close?	Kerry Stone	02/04/1999	Open
7.	Monitor progress on the performance issues weekly.	Rick Bell	Ongoing	Open
8.	Hire one additional developer.	Rick Bell	15/04/1999	Open Recruiting Agencies contacted.
9.	Continue to monitor Y2K status on the legacy systems.	Rick Bell	Ongoing	Open