AUTOMATED COMMUNICATIONS TERMINAL (ACT) PROGRAM EVALUATION

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 37
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 24, 2000
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: March 18, 1976
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An evaluation of the Automated Communications Terminal (ACT)
located in the Headquarters Signal Center has been completed using
the generalized program evaluation criteria given in the Appendix.
The ACT system is a computer-based system developed to auto-
mate manual message processing activities. It has been recog-
nized that the existing manual methods would require continual
increases in personnel and hardware to ensure adequate communi-
cations service. The basic objective was to achieve greater
message processing speed and accuracy using fewer personnel than
would be required if'the manual methods were continued.
The ACT system was declared operational in March 1913 and
has satisfied all technical objectives. The number of per-
sonnel assigned to message processing functions was reduced from
150 to 127, while message volumes increased by 19% and message
lengths by 20%. Message processing times were reduced by at
least 65%, which resulted in the reduction of queues from 400-500
messages at peak periods before ACT to essentially none after
its implementation. Additionally, it was shown that ACT-reduced
the annual operating costs of the Headquarters Signal Center by
$275,000.
A substantial number of problems did develop during the
program and are attributed to several factors:
a. The contractor's inexperience in communications-
oriented systems;
b. The contractor's decision during the program to
discontinue further efforts in computer-based systems
development;
c. The lack of adequate definition in the specification
of all functional requirements.
While the net result of the ACT program was considered to be
beneficial, a number of recommendations were made that might
enhance similar efforts in the future. These include more careful
scrutiny of prospective contractors and the establishment of
standardized, legally-based proposal evaluation criteria that
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
would more critically evaluate contractors' capabilities;
consideration of incentive award type of contracts for programs
of this magnitude; inclusion of penalties to cover additional
costs to the Government if specified contractor support is not
provided; and minimizing hardware specifications to those
absolutely essential to maximize bidder latitude in system design.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
s
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
AUTOMATED COMMUNICATIONS TERMINAL (ACT)
PROGRAM EVALUATION
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
1. Introduction
The Automated Communications Terminal (ACT) is part
of a program to use technology to replace manual methods
employed at the Headquarters Signal Center to handle
narrative message traffic. The overall plan includes the
automation of the relaying, processing, disseminating, repro-
ducing, and distributing of narrative record traffic.
The relaying functions have been modernized with the
installation of the Message Automation Exchange, MAX-II, the
message originating and terminating processing functions have
been automated with the installation of ACT, and the
disseminating function will be automated with the Cable
Dissemination System scheduled for acceptance in 1976. A
review of available systems has shown that replacing the
present reproduction and distribution facilities cannot yet
be done cost effectively.
The ACT system was declared operational in March 1973,
almost three years after the contract was signed and
eighteen months behind schedule. Since then, a number of
modifications have been. made to the system to enhance overall
performance. The following pages describe and examine the
evolution of ACT, from the initial planning back in the
early 1960's through the present.
2. Background
The original thinking about automating many of the
manual procedures employed in the Signal Center for
processing narrative messages started in the early 1960's,
with. active planning beginning in the 1964 time period.
It had been recognized that the increasing traffic volumes
would continue to place greater demands on the Signal
Center to ensure adequate service. The present methods
would require perpetual expansion in terms of the number
of personnel and equipment. It was decided. that plans
shoul.d be formulated to automate what was then called the
Washington. Terminal Facility (WTF), which consisted of the
originating and terminating message processing functions
for Headquarters' Staff traffic.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Since most originating and terminating messages
funnel. through the Cable Secretariat (CS) for dissemination,
reproduction, and distribution, traffic flow is some-
what distributed between it and the Signal Center. With
the plans to automate most of the manual procedures in
the Signal Center, the Cable Secretariat, which was then
a staff function of the DCI, became concerned that their
message processing queues would significantly increase.
They requested that the Office of Joint Computer Services
examine the feasibility and practicability of automating
their activities. It was concluded and recommended in
April 1966 that the only cost-effective approach would
be to amalgamate the systems required for the WTF and CS.
A joint task group, consisting of representatives
of the Cable Secretariat, Intelligence Watch, Office of
Joint Computer Services and Office of Communications was
established to fully examine the problems and define an
operational specification. This effort continued. until
January 1969 when it was determined that the complexity
of the combined system was such that budgetary limitations
would preclude implementation. It was agreed, therefore,
that a three-phase sequential program would be initiated.
Phase I was to include the automation of the Washington
Terminal Facility, Phase II would basically automate the
analyst's portion of the Cable Secretariat (CS) and Phase III
would automate the CS printing and reproduction facility.
Much of the work accomplished before this separation
of activities was used in preparing the specifications
for both the Automated Communications Terminal and the
Cable Dissemination System. The remainder of this evaluation
only considers the ACT program as conceived in Phase I.
3. ACT Functional Description
The ACT system is a multi-programmed computer
system configured to automate the message processing
operations of the Headquarters Signal Center. The ACT,
consisting of an Originating and a Terminating Section within
the system, basically handles incoming and outgoing cable
traffic. Compared to the old manual systems, ACT provides
much greater message processing speed and accuracy, greater
message storage and retrieval capabilities, and greater
operational flexibility.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03: ?CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
The originating message processing segment of the
system performs several primary functions. These are mes-
sage input, validation, routing, accountability, assembly,
logging, and output to the Message Automatic Exchange (MAX-II).
Other functions, including the output of messages to local
printers/paper tape punches, message retransmission and
readdressal, logging, message retrieval, and other general
system control operations, are performed as required in con-
junction with the primary functions.
Outgoing messages are processed by an Optical Charac-
ter Reader (OCR) which scans and converts the typed letter
to electrical signals. The electrical signals are sent to
the outgoing computer which will assign numbers, build the
message in the correct format, and check various parameters
for validation. If corrections need to be made, the message
will be displayed on an originating Visual Display Unit (VDU)
for operator processing. After processing has been completed,
the rr,~ssage is sent to MAX, then on to the addressed stations.
Terminating messages are received by ACT from MAX-II.
The system ensures that there are no format errors in the
message and, once accepted, automatically validates, accounts
for, and logs the incoming message. Processed messages
are generally sent to one of the two high-speed printers
located within the Cable Secretariat Branch for dissemination,
reproduction and distribution. When operator intervention
is necessary, messages are displayed on a VDU for operator
processing.
4. ACT System Evaluation
4.1 Original Objectives
The procurement specification that was the culmination
of the many man-years of planning that went into the ACT
system stated the following as the general objective:
"ACT shall achieve greater message processing
speed and accuracy than is presently attainable.
ACT shall process present and projected traffic
loads with fewer personnel than would be required
if the existing manual system were to be continued."
Specific objectives included in the planning documents
for the Phase I automation of the WTF included the following:
a. To fully automate those functions that were
done manually, thereby eliminating heavy backlogs of
message traffic.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : IA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
-8-
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
b. To eliminate the use of overtime needed to
reduce backlogged message traffic.
c. To be able to handle increased volumes with-
out an increase in personnel.
d. To speed the in-house handling times in the
processing of messages.
e. To effect other personnel savings wherever
possible.
4.2 Did Objectives Change?
The ACT performance requirements given in the procure-
ment specification were based on satisfying the origii.al
system objectives and remained valid throughout the contract.
While numerous changes and amendments did occur during the
contract cycle, these were basically to ensure compliance
with stated performance specifications.
4.3 Were Objectives Attained?
The ACT system was designed to satisfy the objectives
cited in Section 4.1 above. The following paragraphs describe
the extent to which each of the stated objectives was ful-
filled.
a. The primary purpose of the ACT system was to
fully automate those functions in the WTF that prior to ACT
were done manually and, in so doing, to eliminate the heavy
backlogs of message traffic. This basic goal was certainly
fulfilled. The Optical Character Reader replaced the M-28
teletype equipments used to manually prepare message tapes
for transmission (poking). Disc files and magnetic tapes
were used to replace the monitor reperforators for storing
traffic and they also were used to replace all the card files
required for manual logging of message traffic. Two high-
speed printers installed in the Cable Secretariat area re-
placed the multitude of M-28 teletype printers used to
receive the traffic from each circuit for logging and. for-
warding to CS. Visual display units are utilized to correct
format errors vice the manual methods previously employed.
Finally, the entire message processing functions that required,
among other things, preparing the transmission header was
replaced with a computer program that automatically prepares
the transmission format and inserts routing indicators, message
accountability numbers, etc.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 r-gLA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
The Optical Character Reader has eliminated 92.50
of the poking workload, that is, only 7.5% of the outgoing
messages received in the Signal Center cannot be read by
the OCR and require manual tape preparation. Of those that are
read, 66% are error free and do not require any further
manual processing; however, the remaining 340 do require
operation intervention because of handwritten changes,
preparation format errors, or just imperfections in or smudges
on the paper. The 7.5% that have to be manually poked con-
sist of 6.7% that are done by pre-arrangement (i.e., not
prepared in OCR format, such as Intel cables), and only .8%
that are OCR rejects.
Some Signal Center activities still require some
form of manual processing. For example, certain categories
of traffic are routed by MAX-II and ACT to M-28 teletype
receive reperforators for either distribution on dedicated
"room" circuits to selected offices or insertion of additional
routing indicators for expanded distribution.
The effect of the above on traffic processing
was significant. The average length of time it took to
process a message and forward it for onward transmission
was reduced by at least 65%, as shown in Table III in
paragraph d. below. For example, the average elapsed time
for priority messages was reduced from approximately three
hours to one hour, and for routine messages, twelve hours
to three hours. While no specific queue figures are avail
able, it was general opinion that before ACT was implemented
400-500 messages would be in outbound queue on a Friday
afternoon, and it would sometimes take a substantial portion
of the weekend before the queue was eliminated. Today,
Friday afternoon message backlogs are considered insignificant.
Terminating message queues were usually not as
evident as originating. Traffic, received on M-28 teletype
printers, was processed and forwarded to the Cable Secretariat
in an average three to four minutes per message, which is just
a fraction of that required for originated traffic. Another
basic reason for minimal queues is that traffic was received
at the terminal facility on multiple low-speed lines from disc
file storage at the relay (MZA.X-II) and sent to the Cable Secre-
tariat via a pneumatic tube system. Today, most messages are
sent directly to high-speed printers in the Cable Secretariat
and the only queues in the Signal Center are contained in the
MAX-II and ACT system disc files.
-5-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
b. The elimination of the use of overtime needed
to process backlogged message traffic also was accomplished.
As noted in paragraph a. above, the messages in queue for
processing have been reduced to insignificant levels. The
specific overtime figures obligated for just this purpose
were not identifiable, however, overall overtime
expenditures were reduced from $39,745 be ore ACT (1972) to
$25,294 after the implementation of ACT (1975), a decrease
of approximately 36%.
STATINTL
STATINTL
The above figur d be qualified, however.
First, although they do include expenditures, over-
time at that facility remained relatively constant over that
period at approximately 800 hours per year. The 1972 figure
has been adjusted for the approximate 5.5% annual increase
in the Federal pay scale. Even with the indicated decrease
in overtime, traffic volumes handled by the Signal Center
increased by 17 percent during this period.
In summary, then, the decrease in overtime STATINTL
noted above is a conservative estimation and, while
it is based on overall usage, the implementation of ACT STATINTL
was the only significant c ange in _ operations over that
period.
c. The ability to handle increased volumes of
traffic without an increase in personnel has been clearly
achieved. Table I compares traffic volumes for 1972 and
1975 with the number of personnel assigned to the message
processing functions within the Signal Center. As shown
in the table, even with an increase in traffic volume of
approximately 17 percent, and message length by 20 percent,
a 15 percent reduction in personnel was attained. A slight off-
setting factor, however, is the overall average grade increase
from 8.7 to 9.0 refl increases in required job skills. STATINTL
A study completed by in 1975 showed that if the manual
methods used to proc ffic before ACT were still being
utilized in 1974, 21 additional personnel would have been
required.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CPA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
TABLE I
Signal Center Volumes and Personnel
Pre-ACT
Messages processed in the Signal
Center (WTF, SAF, PTF)
Average Message Length (words)
Operations personnel required
for message processing
Maintenance personnel required
to support message processing
equipments
Automation Specialists (program-
mers) required to support message
processing
Total Signal Center personnel
associated with message
processing
Overall average GS grade level
personnel supporting message
processing
Post-ACT STATINTL
d. The fourth objective, to speed the in-house
handling times for the processing of messages, was also
successfully attained. Two levels of criteria were employed
to show the improvements resulting from the ACT system.
The first method compares average processing times for several
categories of traffic to show that significant savings re-
sulted. The second method of comparison shows the average
elapsed times in the Signal Center for each priority of
message; that is, the length of time it took a message to be
sent to MAX-II at Headquarters for relay after being received
in the Signal Center.
-7-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
The first comparison is based on measuring
the actual time required in each of the message processing
functions. For example, the average time required to process
an originating Agency staff message when using ACT is 4.2
minutes. This is based upon time and motion studies measured
from receipt in the Signal Center through filing of the
message after being read by the optical character reader.
Included is an allowance for editing messages that are
rejected by the ACT system and employee overhead (lunch,
coffee breaks, supervision, etc.). The pre-ACT figures are
based on the manual procedures required to process a message
(validating, logging, poking, etc..), and also include
employee overhead. Table II below compares pre- and post-ACT
originating processing times for each of the indicated
message categories:
Originating Processing Times (Minutes)
Category
Agency Staff
Special Designee
Special Channel
Telepouch
Restricted Handling
Intel
11.7 4.2
16.9 4.7
27.0 4.7
6.5 4.2
25.2 4.7
11.7 4.2
Post-ACT
The second method used to evaluate the improvement in
the originating process was to compare the average elapsed times
in the Signal Center for each priority of message. Table III
below shows the average time from when a message was received in
the Signal Center for processing to when it was actually trans-
mitted to the Message Automatic Exchange (MAX-II) for relay.
These figures then include the queue times before processing,
processing times, and queue times awaiting transmission to
the relay (MAX-II).
-8-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Priority
Critic, Flash
Immediate
Priority
Routine
Telepouch
Table III
Average Elapsed Time - Outgoing
Pre-ACT
14
minutes
1
hour, 35 minutes
2
hours, 52 minutes
11
hours, 50 minutes
72
hours
Post-ACT
5 minutes
15 minutes
1 hour
3 hours
9 hours
Terminating traffic comparison figures are difficult
to obtain, primarily because in the ACT system most categories
of received traffic are sent directly to two high-speed printers
in the Cable Secretariat unless format errors occurred or special.
handling was required. Even in the manual system, terminating
traffic processing was not a significant problem with average mess-
age processing time being just a fraction of what was required in
the originating process. For example, an incoming Agency staff
message required 3 minutes to process compared with 11.7 minutes
in the originating process. Special Channel messages required
4.2 minutes on the receive side compared to 27 minutes on
the send side. As a partial confirmation of the gains achieved
by automating, a study done by showed that if. the
manual system used prior to AC was used to handle 1975
receive traffic volumes, six additional personnel would
be required to process the terminating traffic.
The ACT system's ability to process and
forward messages more rapidly also is an indication of the
Signal Center's ability to handle crisis workloads without
increases in personnel and without impacting other activities.
e. The last objective was to effect further
personnel savings whenever possible by automating other
manual activities in the Signal Center. After the manual
functions of the Washington Terminal Facility were replaced
with ACT, the system was modified to include the major
portion of the message processing functions in both the
Special Activities Facility and the Project Terminal Facility.
The personnel figures shown in Table I above include these
reductions.
STATINTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
4.4 What Was the Impact of ACT on Annual Operating Costs?
The comparison of specific operating costs for Signal
Center message processing functions can only be accomplished
at a very gross level because many of the pre-ACT expenditures
were combined with costs for other activities. Table IV
below compares the expenditures for each of the indicated
categories.
TABLE IV
Comparison of Signal Center
Annual Message Processing Costs
Category Pre-ACT Post-ACT
Personnel services (excluding O/T)
Overtime 39,746 25,294
Maintenance and service contracts 92,812 91,467
Supplies and materials 52,840 26,503
Technician and programmer training 0 18 4.61
Total
ANNUAL SAVINGS $274,059
STATINTL
STATINTL
The costs shown for personnel services only include the
salaries for the personnel, including supervisors, directly
associated with the message processing functions in the Signal
Center (ACT or WTF, SAF, and PTF). Personnel (operators,
technicians and programmers) assigned to MAX - I not in-
cluded, nor are logistical personnel or other Staff STATINTL
pro-rated. It was necessary to include both S
Activities and the Project Terminal because ACT did absorb
significant portions of these facility workloads. The
pre- and post-ACT dollar amounts are based on the number STATINTL
of personnel shown in Table I (obtained from the Position
Control Register and Staff input) and the 1975
salaries for the ave ade level calculated from the
manning tables.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : C11A_RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
The overtime figures were derived as noted in Section
4.3, paragraph a. Annual costs for maintenance and service
contracts include the PRI teletype maintenance contract,
as well as the service contracts covering ACT.hardware and
peripherals. Costs before ACT were increased by an annual
5.5% to represent cost increases resulting from inflation.
Supplies and material costs were derived from the 1972
budget. and were also increased by an annual 5.5% to more
closely resemble 1975 dollars. Figures for after ACT
were determined from actual current usage. Training
before ACT was primarily accomplished internally; however,
after the implementation of ACT, both technicians and
programmers required external training.
Comparing the overall expenditures for Signal Center
message processing before and after the implementation of
ACT, the above table shows an approximate annual savings of
$275K, the bulk of which can be attributed to reduced person-
nel costs.
4.5 Overall ACT System Cost
The total fiscal obligations associated with the ACT
system include a number of ancillary expenditures in addition
to the contract cost. These include both personnel and hard-
ware costs not part of the original contract and all upgrades
after the system was implemented. The following paragraphs
describe these additional expenditures, with paragraph 4.5.5
summarizing total obligations.
4.5.1 ACT Contract Cost STATINTL
The original contract was amended eight
times resulting primarily from c ari ications`^n the specifi-
cation or enhancements to the proposed . syst,em,, The following
summarizes the ACT contractual obligations: STATINTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : Cj RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
c. Amendment #2 - Provide instruction not
included in original contract (for training in
Washin ton, D.C., area vice contractor facility)
. . . $3,400
d. Amendment #3 - Clarification of contract
. . . N/C
e. Amendment #4 - Provide maintenance training
not included in original contract - $16,820; provide
operator training - $8,550; provide mounting tables
for use with VDU's - $2,340; provide additional
spares - $10,600; Total . . . $38,310
f. Amendment #5 - Card reader to facilitate
program changes . . . $4,670
g. Amendment #6 - To allow CPU #1 or #2 to
have background operation when failover has occurred
or one CPU is in standby. Will provide better
maintenance support and allow use of on-line
peripherals . . . $34,500
h. Amendment #7 - To provide a modification
for five-level paper tape units to provide a means
for software detection of a "low-tape" or
"out-of-tape" condition . . . $3,800
i. Amendment #8 - Increases to contract resulting
from scope clarification for originating and termina-
ting software . . . $25,028
Total Contract Cost . . . $1,736,176
4.5.2 Ancillary Hardware Costs
A number of additional hardware expenditures were
required as a result of the ACT installation. The biggest
single line item was the shielded enclosure costing $78,580.
Two air handlers were procured for the enclosure to
rovide the proper temperature and humidity at a cost of
$12,500. Optical isolators had to be installed to interface
with remote printers at a cost of $2,400. Finally, modifi-
cations to th shielded enclosure were required at a cost of
$3,913.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIS-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Additional spare parts not covered in the original
ACT contract were procured at a cost of $48,034 to facilitiate
maintenance. These. included a separate disc assembly and a
visual display unit, as well as a multitude of smaller
components. Special time stamp machines were procured at a
cost of $5,000 for inserting the Message Reference Number
and the Date Time Group on outgoing messages in an OCR
compatible type font.
The compatibility of typewriters in the Headquarters
area with the ACT Optical Character Reader was also necessary.
Fortunately, it has already been recognized by an OL task group
that the non-standardization of typewriters was becoming increas-
ingly inefficient and changes were necessary. The numerous type
styles in use in the Agency caused delays and frustrations
when minor corrections or additions had to be made to corres-
pondence when originated in a different location with a
different type style. Furthermore, the Office of Joint Computer
Services had already implemented an optical scanner for pro-
cessing documents that required a unique type font. The
decision was made, therefore, to standardize to the extent
possible on the IBM Selectric II typewriters. Since there
were a number of other parameters involved in this decision
than just the implementation of ACT, direct cost apportion-
ments are impossible to determine. For exam le, while the
cost of the IBM Selectric was approximately M. more per unit
than others being considered, the interchangeability of type
fonts (each font costing $18) resulted in substantial savings
at the numerous locations requiring multiple-tyne styles.
In total, the additional hardware cost associated
with the implementation of ACT not covered in the actual con-
tract price is $140,427.
4.5.3 Ancillary Manpower Costs
While every program requires a certain amount of
manpower for system definition, specification writing,
proposal evaluation, and contract monitoring, these costs
are generally considered to be overhead, unless external
assistance is used. Additional manpower costs included were
those resulting from training the various maintenance,
operational, and programming personnel who will be responsible
for the system once it is declared operational, and
staff personnel assigned to the contractor to assist in the
development of the system.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CTA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
The basic contract included the training of personnel
in the operation, programming, and maintenance of the ACT system.
As the development progressed, the contract was amended as noted
in Section 4.5.1 to include increased operational and technical
trvining. It was subsequently decided to again expand training
in all areas at a total cost of $46,000, including travel and
per diem.
It was also necessary to train Agency secretaries
in the proper procedures for preparing cables and telepouches
for electrical transmission with the new optical character
reader. A special handbook and supplemental training were
provided for this purpose using in-house resources.
Three computer programmers were assigned to the
contractor to assist in the development of the softwai-a of the
ACT system. After the first year, one programmer was reassigned
and the other two remained on-site for an additional ten months.
Salaries for these programmers are estimated at $56K and per
diem amounted to an additional $28K, bringing total programmer
costs to approximately $84K.
In total, the additional manpower cost associated with
the implementation of ACT not covered in the actual contract
price is $130,000.
4.5.4 ACT Upgrade Costs
The ACT system configuration has been modified as necessary
to absorb additional activities and increase system flexibility.
The first modification was the integration of Project traffic
into the ACT system. This was accomplished with in-house soft-
ware changes and the procurement of a line printer at a cost
of $42,000 for remote printing application. This action resulted
in the dismantling of the old teletype equipment dedicated to
the Project Terminal Facility.
An additional disc file assembly was procured at a cost
of $35,000 for on-line application. The standby processor had
previously been of limited utility for performance of diag-
nostics, assemblies, etc.; however, the provision of a dedicated
disc file to this processor allowed these functions to be
performed with less system disruption.
Although it was initially decided to lease the Lundy-
Farrington Optical Character Reader at a cost of $55,000 per year
(including maintenance) because of anticipated changes in the OCR
market and uncertainty regarding its overall performance, it was
eventually concluded that the system was adequate and that substan-
tial savings could be made if it was procured. An agreement was
Approved For Release 2001/03/03: C4A-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
reached with the company to purchase the OCR for $67,000.
The OCR portion of the ACT system provided no redundancy
and it does require extensive maintenance. the designed
interface between the OCR and the computer portions of the,
fi
AC.T,..system 3could not be readily accommodated within the planned
Cable'blssemination System. Therefore., plans were initiated.
in.Fl-74 to procure a new OCR subsystem that was easier tomain-
.~v.,o..
#n, could be used with the existing ACT system, and would be
interfaced with CDS. This system is presently being tested
on=?gtte. A second identical system is planned for procurement
the latter part of FY-76. Total cost of the upgrade is approxi-
mately $130,000.
A two-year contract has been established at a cost of
$23,5^0 to upgrade the ACT visual display units in an effort to
enhance overall system maintenance capabilities.
Total cost associated with upgrading the ACT system
since its implementation is $297,500.
4.5.5 ACT System Overall Cost
The previous paragraphs highlighted the main expen-
ditures incurred for the ACT system since the solicitation of
bids. As noted previously, these costs only include the
initial implementation costs and system upgrade costs, and
l
do not include annual o orating expenditures. The overal
STATINTL
ACT system cost is based upon the following:
STATINTL
a. Final ACT contract cost -
b. Ancillary hardware cost
c. Ancillary manpower cost
d. System upgrade cost
TOTAL
4.5.6 Comparison of Estimated Cost with Actual
The ACT s stem as specified was estimated to cost
approximately which compares ver favorably with
both the origina contract cost of and the final
amended contract cost of Also to be included,
however, are the ancillary manpower and hardware costs
STATINTL
STATINTL
STATINTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 :.gl54-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
described above. Incorporating these fi raises the
total cost of the ACT implementation to The $.3M
ted with ACT system upgrade costs consists of items
a
STATINTL
assocz
required to both expand system capabilities and rectify defi-
ciencies in the delivered system. Examining the items enumerated
in Section 4.5.4, approximately $.12M can be attributed to
basic system costs, bringing the total costs associated with STATINTL
implementing the originally specified CAT system to
approximately 43% above the estimated STATINTL
4.6 What Ancillary Impact Did ACT Have?
While the Automated Communications Terminal certainly
provided significant message processing enhancement, its
implementation did impact other activities within the Signal
Center as well as every office within the Agency involved in
the electrical transmission of traffic. Also affected
were the personnel involved in processing traffic and the
environment in which they worked. The following paragraphs
describe these effects:
a. Impact On Other Activities
The primary interface affected by the ACT
system was that with the Cable Secretariat (CS). While the
originating message procedures were basically unchanged,
terminating traffic was now received electrically by CS on
two high-speed printers. Since messages were no longer being
manually processed in the Signal Center, CS had to cope with
a potential increased backlog resulting from their manual
operation. After ACT was placed on-line, CS initiated a
number of procedural changes that minimized their queues.
Some changes were also made to ACT to make the CS operation
more efficient, including having the messages paginated
and classified as received on the high-speed printers. A
substantial benefit derived is the ability for CS to receive
priority messages more rapidly than was possible with the
manual methods previously employed in the Signal Center.
The overall workload impact on the Cable Secretariat
was minimal, with positive gains being made in terms of
disseminating higher-priority messages.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CTA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
b. Personnel Impact
The implementation of ACT followed the auto-
mation of the relay functions at the Signal Center (MAX-II)
by a number of years and, therefore, the im act of a STATINTL
computer-based environment was familiar to iW personnel.
Supervisors were briefed on the difficulties encountered as a
result of the MAX-II installation and were thus able to avoid
many of the problem areas experienced during the earlier
automation effort. It was general opinion that employee morale
has been enhanced by the automation of the manual message
processing procedures.
The basic problem encountered was that of
motivating personnel not selected to initially operate the
ACT system and were, thus, still engaged in the tedious,
manual procedures utilized in other areas of the Signal Center.
The positions assigned to ACT were considered to be more
prestigious, primarily because of the association with a new
computer system that still provided substantial interaction with
the traffic but at a much more sophisticated level. This
exacerbation of employee morale has virtually been eliminated
since the implementation of ACT because personnel are being
rotated between the various sections, and because advancing
technology has resulted in the installation of more
sophisticated equipment in most other operational areas.
The boredom factor that sometimes occurs from
the automation of procedures that had previously been accomplished
manually did not result when ACT was implemented. A significant
amount of operator interaction is still required by the system,
especially on the originating side. Also, the differing
procedures for each category of traffic require continual
review and update. Any spare time is generally spent in
self-training, either in ACT system operation or related areas
of interest.
Another area of significant impact is the operating
environment in which personnel must function. A new computer
installation generally provides a more conducive atmosphere
in which to work (better lighting, fancier decor, etc.); however,
inadequate human engineering can seriously reduce performance.
Areas of concern include the interaction with equipment, climate,
and noise.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : 6A-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
The designed human interaction with the ACT
system has resulted in relatively few problems. The main
areas of interface occur at the optical character reader and
the visual display units. The basic problem area in the OCR
is the designed editing capability which requires excessive
human movement to adequately correct messages. The new OCR's
being implemented will rectify this shortcoming. The VDU's
were specially designed for the ACT application and have been
well received by all personnel.
Both the temperature and humidity are controlled
s-Q,mputer e3rViT~5i`iment and it is only the former that
presents _a problem. _"Tl e equipment in the ACT shie1d-ed enclosure
is cooled entirely by room air temperature rather than by direct
chilled water piping to the major sub-assemblies. As a result,
the temperature is kept considerably cooler than would other-
wise be necessary. The situation is..__aggrava,tedby the manner
in which thE: air is distributed, namely, forced air flow under
the computer floor. Being uncarpeted,,.the communicators ax.e,
directly exposed to the steel flooring for most of the eight-hour
shift, which has resulted in claims of medical problems by some
of,_th,e, personnel.
Another problem area is the noise level resulting
from the multitude of equipment operating in the closed environ-
ment of the shielded enclosure. While soundproofing is used
on the walls, the combined effect of the air handlers, high-speed
printers, and multiple blowers, results in a relatively high
noise level which has also resulted in some medical problems.
c. Environment Impact
In this era of declining natural resources, new
programs should also be examined in terms of their environmental
impact. The factors considered include space, power, and waste
The equipments required in the Signal Center for
the narrative message processing functions before ACT was
implemented consisted of rows of teletype machines used to
prepare paper tapes for transmission, print copies for
dissemination and reproduction, and produce paper tapes for
storage of messages. These functions were replaced with an
optical character reader, computers, disc files, magnetic
tapes, visual display units and high-speed printers. The
resultant space required for the ACT system and the teletype
machines still retained for backup in the event of an ACT
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : LIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
failure is approximately 2,000 square feet, as compared with
approximately 1,000 square feet for the manual equipments.
It should be noted, however, that the traffic volumes increased
by 17% and, therefore, additional equipment would have been
installed. Also, the square footage saved by absorbing the
manual processing functions of the Project Terminal Facility
and Special Activity Facility must also be considered. In
total, it is estimated that the implementation of ACT resulted
in 25% more space being utilized.
The electrical power consumed processing staff
traffic before the implementation of ACT was approximately 11 KW.
This compares with 25 kW required by the ACT system. The pre
ACT figure must also be modified to include the equipments
required to handle the increased traffic volumes and the
absorption of additional activities. It is estimated that there
was at least a 50% increase in. electrical power consumption.
Another power consideration is the air conditioning requirement.
The heat load associated with the manual system was 30,J00 BTU/
hour compared with 109,000 BTU/hour today; however the
pre-ACT figure should be increased by the factors mentioned above.
It should be noted that the teletype equipments and personnel
were previously cooled by the Headquarters building central air
conditioning plant, whereas the cooling for the ACT hardware
and personnel is obtained from a separate A/C system dedicated
to MAX-II and ACT. In total, it is estimated that the air
conditioning load increased by approximately 100%.
The waste associated with Signal Center operations
consists of the various forms of paper used by the equipments.
As mentioned previously, the system before ACT required a
paper tape for the transmission of each message, and a separate
paper tape for storage. On the receive side, multiple copy
paper was used for filing and dissemination. purposes; also
required were numerous files and logs for message accountability.
The ACT system. optically converts the message to electrical
form and stores it on magnetic tape. On the receive side,
message storage is accomplished using the MAX-Il disc files,
and single copy paper is used for dissemination purposes. The
files for accountability are now kept on higher capacity mag-
netic storage, however, the printing of logs, system status
reports, etc., is necessary to ensure system integrity and
recovery after a failure. While amounts given in Section 4.4
for supplies and materials show a 50% reduction expenditures
and should be a fairly accurate indication of the reduced waste.
Approved For Release 2001/03/031tIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
4.6.2 What Was the Impact on the Customer?
The implementation of ACT has affected the customer
in a number of ways. The enhancements to message processing
have enabled traffic to be delivered to the field recipient
on a much more timely basis. On the receive side, the automated
interface with the Cable Secretariat has allowed the more
rapid dissemination and distribution of higher priority
messages. While these are both intangible benefits, the
improvements realized with ACT have significantly reduced the
overall communication transmission time, especially during
crisis situations.
As a result of ACT, certain changes were necessary
in the cable originating procedure. Not only were unique type
fonts required to interface with the ACT optical character
reader, but special message forms requiring careful. preparation
were also necessary. The successful adaptation required writing
a special message preparation handbook and providing supplemental
training for each secretary. Today, over 900 of outgoing cable
traffic is interfaced directly with the ACT OCR.
4.7 What Limitations Exist in the ACT System?
While the implementation of the ACT system certainly
has had a positive effect on Signal Center operations, the
system., as implemented, did have certain limitations that still
exist today. A number of modifications were necessary both
during the contract and after to ensure adequate system perfor-
mance.
The primary changes to the system centered around
the procurement of a third processor for backup, performance
monitoring, and facilitating of program changes. The basic
problems encountered were: lack of flexibility regarding use
of on-line peripherals; inability to use the primary computers
for the same functions as the standby unit in the event they
failed and the standby unit was on-line; and inability to
automatically switch over to the backup system in the event
of an on-line failure. All problems, except the automatic
switchover, have been resolved either through contract
amendments or changes after the system was implemented. At
present, a failure in either of the on-line processors results
in an interruption of traffic flow and the initiation of manual
recovery procedures. Adequate procedures have been established
to minimize the disruption to traffic processing.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03-:20IA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Another basic limitation in the system resulted
from restrictions imposed in the procurement specification
on the core size. This design constraint requires processing
routines to be paged into and out of main core for functional
execution. Almost all of the applications programs and system
reference data reside on disc storage which results in
relatively slow processing times for each message. More
importantly, the limited core size basically precludes further
system expansion. This has impacted on the CDS program by
requiring certain functions to be absorbed by this new system.
Another basic problem area is the designed interface
of ACT components. The entire system is wired in such a manner
(daisy-chain) that the adding of components and the reconfiguring
of the system is an extremely difficult task. Also, maintenace
and replacement of many components requires scheduling system
downtime since most major components cannot be worked nn while
the system is on-line.
In summary, a number of software and hardware changes
have been made to the system to satisfy expanded functional
requirements and to overcome those limitations that resulted
from both the lack of finite detail in certain portions of the
procurement specification and the lack of understanding on
the part of the contractor. At present, there does not appear
to be any major improvement necessary aside from the inherent
limitations described above.
4.8 What is the System Life Expectancy?
The life expectancy of the ACT system is limited
more by circumstance than by equipment obsolescence. The
Cable Dissemination System, to be implemented in 1976, will
require an interface with the ACT system. The previously
mentioned hardware/software limitations made this interface
difficult to design and, as a result, the CDS contractor
elected to absorb the terminating function of the ACT system
into CDS at no increase in cost. Therefore, upon successful
implementation of the CDS, the ACT terminating subsystem will
become spare equipment.
The replacement of the ACT originating subsystem
is programmed for FY-77, also dependent upon the successful
implementation of CDS. This will provide a consolidated system
for handling most terminal functions associated with the
Signal Center, allowing common data storage, hardware, and
programming, resulting in savings in personnel, space and
maintenance.
-21-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
a ti
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
As an interesting point to note, the initial study
completed by the Office of Computer Services in 1966 showed
that the most effective way in which to automate the Cable
Secretariat was to consolidate it with the automation of the
Washington Terminal Facility. Limitations in the budget, as
well as the complexity of the system for that time frame,
precluded consolidating the two operations. In retrospect,
the experience gained with the procurement and implementation
of ACT by itself certainly justified that decision and should
enable the consolidation with CDS to be accomplished in a
much more effective manner.
5. Procurement Evaluation
5.1 What Resources/Expertise Were Used to Prepare the RFP?
The procurement specification for the Automated
Communications Terminal evolved after many man-years were
expended examining the functions of the Signal Center and the
Cable Secretariat. Included in these analyses were repre-
sentatives from the Cable Secretariat, Intelligence Watch, and
Office of Joint Computer Services, as well as personnel from
all areas of responsibility within the Office of Communications.
A number of discussions were also held with other U.S.
Government organizations, however, these were primarily with
Department of State personnel involved in their Automated STATINTL
Terminal System program (ATS).
A contract was established
to review the proposed procurement specs ication and provide a
cost and size estimate for the joint CS/OC automation effort.
This study effort resulted in a series of recommendations for
defining the ACT system more ex licitly; it also estimated
total system cost at As a result of budgetary STATINTL
estimates and concern for system complexity, plans were
formulated to separate the Cable Secretariat requirement from
those of OC. In January of 1969, it was agreed that OC would
start preparing specifications for the automation of just
the Staff traffic message processing center (Washington
Terminal Facility). These specifications were prepared
in-house; however, they were the product of the many man-years
of effort ex ended in the joint CS/OC effort, including the STATINTL
external study.
-22-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
1
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
5.2 What Type of Contract Was Selected?
In discussions with the Office of Logistics, it
was agreed that the contract for the ACT system would. be a
purchase/lease arrangement. All of the ACT system, except
the OCR, was procured under a firm fixed price contract because
it was determined. to be the most advantageous to the U.S.
Government since the specifications were felt to be adequately
efin_c~ It was concluded, however, that the optical character
reader would be leased because it was uncertain how effective
it would be and because such equipment rapidly reaches
obsolescence. Leasing would allow equipment changes in the
future to be more readily accommodated.
5.3 How Was the Contract Awarded?
On 27 February 1970, representatives of 17 qualified
companies were briefed on the requirements for the ACT and
presented copies of the specifications. The companies were
selected in concert with the Office of Logistics and Office
of Security. Separate conferences were held with each of
the interested companies and by the deadline, 6 April 1970,
eight proposals were received. Two of the proposals received
were submitted by combinations of companies, those being STATINTL
Evaluation criteria used to compare prospective
contractors were developed by Office of Communications personnel.
First, a group of OC personnel evaluated the technical pro-
posals on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis using the format shown
in Figure A. Once this was accomplished, the contractors
were ranked on the basis of their numerical rating. The cost
proposals were then revealed to the evaluation team and the
following comparison table was formulated.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
ACT Preliminary Proposal Comparison
STATINTL
based on reduced hardware in their proposed system. It was
determined that this change did not affect their performance
rating. It was then concluded that the five highest-ranked
proposals, of the eight shown in Table V, would be examined
further. Of the three not considered, two were eliminated
because of price and the third for being non-compliant.
OC personnel visited the plants of each of the
remaining five proposers to view first-hand the available
hardware and discuss details of the proposals with knowledge-
able personnel. Upon completion of these visits, a second
set of proposal evaluation criteria was developed to compare
the proposal performance specifications with ancillary
factors related to contractor understanding and experience.
The results of this review, given in Figure B, were incor-
porated into the performance/cost comparison chart shown in
Figure C. Based. on. these evaluations, it was determined
that the three proposers who should be considered for final
During the course of these final technical evaluations,
each of the above-named companies voluntarily submitted
reduced cost proposals based on further refinements of their
proposals, reduced price quotations from vendors, and/or
corporate decisions to absorb part of the development costs.
After further discussions to clarify technical points in each
of the proposals, the three companies were given a common
deadline to submit a final price proposal. After receipt
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 4 t1A-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
STATINTL
 Approved Foe Release 200.1/03103 : C1 -RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Olt Outnt >>:.11rti Reo1,orr.c
OR - 3 point
R - 1tnc;,E~r~:~iro
R .. 2 poi_r,tn
PR -- 1. point
IF(
1T.
}'#c'.ti111.1;; Krr.por:li?,*D
2~on Jtoc pan~ivr
lR 0 poi.i;'ta
R
PR
1T.
2..1.1.
-
2.1.1,, .2
2.1.5.1
2.1.5.2.2
2.1.5.2.3
2.1.6
2.2.1.1.
2.2.1.2.2
2.2.1.2.3
2.2.1.3
2.2_.1.1:
2.2.2.1
2.2.2.3.1
2.2.2.4.1
2.2.2.4.6
.
2.2.2.5
2,2.2.5.3
2.2.2.6
2.2.2.7
2.2.2.8
2.2.2.8.3
r
2.2.2.9
2.2.2.9.9
2.2.2.10
Figure A
Brackotn 1 r,araf--aj hI
group of r, -;.,_.:;.aa cY, c~.y:n
catagca;,'.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03: CIA-RD 9-00498A000200040005-0
 STATINTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
5.5 What Problems Occurred During the Contract?
The contract, which was awarded on 15 June STATINTL
1970, progressed reasonably smoothly for approximately the
first 15 months until pre-acceptance testing was initiated.
Up until that time, a number of problem areas were surfaced
by both the COTR and the contractor, however, these were
resolved and resulted in the first seven amendments to the
contract itemized in para ra h 5.4.1. Pre-acceptance testing STATINTL
for the ACT System began on 22 September 1971 and
was scheduled to be conducted over a six-week period. After
approximately one-third of the testing was performed, certain STATINTL
undesirable operating characteristics were Eleven
specific problem areas were identified and claimed that
five of the eleven were beyond the scope of the contract, while
the COTR claimed that only two of the eleven were. Many of these
problems resulted from a lack of contractor understanding of
the field of communications. This resulted in many misunder-
standings and misinterpretations of specific terms used in the
specification. Also a factor, however, was the lack of adequate
definition for many of the functional requirements. After a
series of meetings were held to resolve these differences, a
number of concessions were made by both parties and these
resulted in Amendment #8 to the contract. The agreement
reached covered most of the technical deficiencies, however,
the following considerations were made: the contract completion
date was extended to 17 May 1972 vice 10.October 1971; the
parts warranty and OCR leased maintenance were reduced to
a five month period after acceptance vice twelve months;
and the liquidated damages penalty was reduced to $250 per
day and a maximum of $15,000 from $500 per day and a $30,000
maximum. It was also agreed to restart pre-acceptance testing
on 27 January 1972.
Further problems arose as the agreed-upon technical
changes were incorporated and pre-acceptance testing, which
finally began on 4 April 1972, did not conclude until 2 May
1972. Arrangements were made to ship the system to Headquarters,
with final acceptance testing planned to begin on 19 June 1972.
A number of additional delays were incurred due to further
technical problems, including some mandatory Engineering Change
Orders issued by the computer manufacturer. Final acceptance
testing was concluded on 15 October 1972 with five major
problem areas still outstanding.
-27-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
a result Agency personnel, primarily programmers, na
assume the responsibility for debugging the ACT system.
In further negotiations a reement was
reached regarding all outstanding pro Mems.. would
resolve two software problems and would provide the services
of their head programmer to verify that software changes
made by the OC programmers were valid, if the contract
warranty period would be effective 15 October 1972, and all
liquidated damages would be waived.
The ACT system was finally activated on 12 March 1973
for incoming non-Agency traffic. Processing of outgoing
Agency traffic began on 9 April and, on 26 April, outgoing
SI and Restricted Handling traffic were accommodated. Within
two months, approximately 80% of Agency non-project traffic
was being processed in the ACT system. As of this date, 92.5%
of all Headquarters Signal Center mes?ages are processed
through the ACT system OCR.
6. Summary and Conclusion
The ACT system as implemented and modified fulfilled
the basic objectives associated with its performance specifi-
cations. The specific objectives cited in Section-4.1 and
evaluated in subsequent sections were and continue to be
valid. The overall improvement in message processing speed
and accuracy has enabled increased traffic volumes to be
handled with fewer personnel and less overtime. Comparing
major operating costs before and after the implementation
of ACT showed an approximate annual savings of $275K. The
significant gains shown in message processing capabilitie$
at reduced annual operating costs certainly makes the
implementation of ACT a worthwhile accomplishment. While
rall ACT system costs were shown to be approximately
no attempt was made to apportion this figure over
7e expected useful life due to the impact of the CDS imple-
mentation and because no dollar figure could be attributed
to improved customer service.
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
STATINTL
STATINTL
STATINTL
STATINTL
 STATINTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Exempt
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
STATINTL
The basic reason for the many difficulties encountered
was that - was primarily experienced in computer-based STATINTL
information systems and not communications. Of secondary
significance, but also a contributing factor, was the
specification itself which, in retrospect, did not adequately
define all of the functional requirements. The specification
also placed limitations on some of the hardware in an. apparent
effort to reduce overall system cost, however, this resulted
in reduced system performance capability and flexibility.
Lastly, the contractor's decision to discontinue further
efforts in the field of computer-based communications systems
resulted in the acceptance of a system that required sub-
stantial in-house technical, operational and programmer support
before it could be declared operational.
In conclusion, the ACT system has significantly
improved. Signal Center operational capabilities and although
many difficulties were encountered, it is felt that the
benefits certainly outweigh the trials and tribulations
experienced during the implementation period.
7. Recommendations
The many problems discussed in this program review
were a result of a multitude of independent contributing
factors. While difficulties are to be expected in any
program of this magnitude, there are areas where changes could
be made that might enhance future efforts. These include:
a. More careful scrutiny of prospective contractors,.
Such factors as long range corporate objectives, prior
-31-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
experience in related ?fields, and overall capabilities? sheuId
be evaluate efox,e a company is allowed to bid
b. Establishing standardized, legally based pro-
posal evaluation criteria that would more critically evaluate
contractor capabilities and proposed performance specifications,
thereby precluding necessary acceptance of low bidder based
solely on meeting minimal performance standards.
c. Ensuring that functional specifications and
generic communications terms are adequately defined for all
prospective contractors.
d. Considering incentive award type of contracts.,
for programs of this magnitude to emphasize desirability of
meeting specifications, schedules, etc.
e. Incorporating penalties into the contract for
added costs to the Government if the contractor does not pro
vide specified on-going support (e.g., warranty,_maintenance,
future hardware expansion capability).
f. Minimizing hardware specifications to those
necessary for interfacing with existing systems or providing
standardization; other specifications should only be given
if budget limitations require it and, then, only if performance
implications are established.
g. Establishing common contractor proposal
submission, deadlines to ensure that all bidders are given
equal opportunity to modify their proposals or bids.
h. Ensuring, to the extent possible, that
Government personnel remain assigned to these large programs
throughout the procurement cycle to maintain contract
continuity.
i. Ensuring that the latest human engineering factors
are incorporated into the system design to enhance the physiological
and psychological operating environment.
-32-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
Program Evaluation Criteria:
1. System Evaluation:
a. What were the original objectives?
b. Did the final system configuration satisfy the objectives?
c. Are the original objectives still valid?
d. What was the impact on annual operating costs?
e. How did final system costs differ from estimated?
f. What ancillary impact did the implementation have?
1) For the Office:
a) On other activities?
b) Personnel?
c) Environmental?
2) For the Customer?
g. What limitations exist in the final system?
h. What is the system life expectancy?
2. Contract Evaluation:
a. What resources/expertise were used to prepare the RFP?
b. What type of contract was selected?
C. How was the contract awarded?
1) What were vendor responses?
2) What contractor evaluation criteria were employed?
-33-
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
 Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
d. What problems occurred during the contract:
1) Legal?
2) Technical?
3) Functional?
e. How did contractor performance affect the program?
f. Did any Agency action impact on satisfactory completion?
3. Program Summary
a. What were the overall accomplishments of the new system?
b. Was the system worthwhile?
c. What were the basic problems, if any?
d. What conclusions can be drawn?
e. What recommendations can be made for future programs?
Approved For Release 2001/03/03 : CIA-RDP79-00498A000200040005-0
? k M