Trademark Fee Cost Analysis TPAC Briefing June 9, 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project Cycle Management
Advertisements

SHOW ME THE MONEY BUDGETING 101.
FCMAT Response & Preparation: Process Outline October 25, 2006.
HR SERVICE REQUEST SYSTEM Department Demonstrations February 2012.
Opportunities Exist to Strengthen FHWAs Coordination Guidance and Oversight of the Tribal Transportation Program October 30, 2013.
PAGE Quick Guide to the FedRAMP Readiness Process 1 August 2014 Presented by: FedRAMP PMO
1 Commonwealth of Virginia Executive Branch Strategic Planning, Service Area Planning, and Performance-Based Budgeting Agency Strategic & Service Area.
REVISED DRAFT 5/29/2014 Strategic Financial Forecasting Project Georgia Tech Foundation Development Committee Project Update June 2014.
NC Shared Services Funding Model Evolution North Carolina Office of Information Technology Services.
Waitlist Process Review Board Meeting April 8, 2014.
ANZSIC 2006 Implementation International Workshop on Implementation of ISIC and CPC Kunming, China September 2009.
Project Cost Management Estimation Budget Cost Control
1 Ohio Department of Transportation Michael Miller, Auditor Division of Finance & Forecasting Division of Finance & Forecasting Office of Audits Rural.
1 Evaluation Results Independent Review of the USPTO Activity Based Information Program and Methodology Presented to TPAC - August 28, 2009.
Financial and Grants Management Institute - March 18-20, Federal Grants Management for Fiscal Staff.
Manager Orientation Budgeting & Forecasting. 2 UFundamentals Today’s Agenda New Budget Model Principles Overview of budgeting and forecasting Timelines.
Trademark Fee Cost Analysis Status Update for TPAC November 2009.
Office of Chief Financial Officer Report USPTO Trademark Public Advisory Committee February 19-20, 2009.
February  Intro  Budgeting Timeline  Update on NSTAR upgrade  Budgeting Changes and Guidelines  HR position budgeting  Finance budgeting 
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Physical Inventory Best Practices 1 Briefing for Joint Physical Inventory Working Group September.
© 2006 Jupitermedia Corporation Webcast TitleSuccessful Rollout Planning 1 January 19, :00pm EST, 11:00am PST George Spafford, President Spafford.
1 Business Area Report Richard Brown Business Area Director.
December 2010 Project Director’s Report OIDAP Quarterly Meeting Baltimore, MD Sylvia Karman OIDAP Member & Director, Office of Vocational Resources Development.
OECD Guidelines on Insurer Governance
PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE PRESENTATION: PROGRESS REPORT ON KEY CONTROLS (MOVING TOWARDS UNQUALIFIED REPORT) TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE RELIABILITY OF FINANCIAL.
Effective Management and Compliance 1 ANA GRANTEE MEETING  FEBRUARY 5, 2015.
Unit 8:COOP Plan and Procedures  Explain purpose of a COOP plan  Propose an outline for a COOP plan  Identify procedures that can effectively support.
© Grant Thornton | | | | | Guidance on Monitoring Internal Control Systems COSO Monitoring Project Update FEI - CFIT Meeting September 25, 2008.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Airports Division Eastern Region Grant Closeout Guidance 33 rd Annual Airports Conference Patricia.
GBA IT Project Management Final Project - Establishment of a Project Management Management Office 10 July, 2003.
Centro de Estudos e Sistemas Avançados do Recife PMBOK - Chapter 4 Project Integration Management.
November 2007 January 2008 Februar y 2008 March 2008 April 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 November 2007 December.
Your Financial Work Defense Finance and Accounting Service DFAS Transformation Update March 2003.
Monitoring Schedule David Chappell, or
1 AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE REPORT Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Energy Ms Thulisile Mashanda– Member: Audit and Risk Committee 15 October 2013.
Chief Retail Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and Business Plan Functional Lecture Mike Allen.
PROJECT 123 Business Case March 30, Page 1 Authors: Saltlane Table of Contents Executive Summary Background Scope Approach Resource Requirements.
2010 UBO/UBU Conference Health Budgets & Financial Policy Briefing: Strategic Plans for UBO Date: 24 March 2010 Time: 0800–0850.
Interim Executive Director June  Financial Management Practices Audit Results Fiscal Year Audit Results Fiscal Year Internal.
American Community Survey ACS Content Review Webinar State Data Centers and Census Information Centers James Treat, ACSO Division Chief December 4, 2013.
IT Finance Subcommittee – FY11 Q1 Wrap Up October 4, 2010 DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY.
1 HOW TO WRITE A CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (CAP) Presented by Nancy Gates Chief, Financial Policy and Compliance Division April 29, 2008.
DIR Board Meeting | July 17, 2012 Cost-Recovery Fees and Fee Setting Methodology Nick Villalpando Chief Financial Officer.
1 Commonwealth Project Management Division Bob Haugh Project Management Division November 15, 2010 Revision of.
Proposal Pricing Training February 2004 Lance I. Stadler Pricing Manager, Corporate Headquarters Stanley Headquarters 300 North Washington Street, Suite.
Projects spanning over two programming periods Department for Programme and Project Preparation Beatrix Horváth, Deputy Head of Department Budapest, 5.
Trademark Fee Cost Analysis TPAC Status Briefing #2 – Public August 28, 2009.
OCFO - Financial Status of USPTO May 7, FY 2010 Status Authorized level of $1,887.0 million Mid-year Budget Execution Review currently underway.
In the Framework of: Financed by: Developed by: MODULE 11 Management Overview Business Plan Update.
HIPAA Summit Practical Approaches to Sticky Payer Issues April 26, 2002 Bob Perlitz, AVP, HIPAA Compliance Officer.
U.S. Department of Agriculture eGovernment Program February 25, 2003 USDA Presidential Initiatives Meeting Chris Niedermayer, USDA eGovernment Executive.
Info-Tech Research Group1 Manage IT Budgets & Cost World Class Operations - Impact Workshop.
Finance Roy Preece STFC RAL Oversight Committee Meeting 27 th November 2015.
Page 1 Portfolio Committee on Water and Environmental Affairs 14 July 2009.
FDIC Perspective on Environmental Risk Presented by: Gordon Stoner Legal Division Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation May 6, 2008.
OMB Status 03/31/05 Monday, June 6, 2005 OMB Progress 03/31/05 Vicki Novak Tom Luedtke Gwen SykesPat DunningtonGwen Sykes Best in Government! Steps to.
FIMS FY16 Year-End Schedule FIMS Annual Training May 10-12, 2016 PREPARED BY: GAYLE SMITH.
UNFCCC secretariat, SDM Rocío N. Correia, Associate Programme Officer Efforts undertaken to deliver the expected work Singapore, 28. October 2010.
Writing and updating strategic and annual plans Richard Maggs Astana September 2014.
1 BRIEFING TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON THE UTILIZATION OF CONSULTANTS BY DWAF 8 June 2005.
Accounting Division Statewide Financial Systems STATE OF WASHINGTON OFFICE OF FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT Human Resources Information Systems Options Project.
IS&T Project Reviews September 9, Project Review Overview Facilitative approach that actively engages a number of key project staff and senior IS&T.
AUDIT STAFF TRAINING WORKSHOP 13 TH – 14 TH NOVEMBER 2014, HILTON HOTEL NAIROBI AUDIT PLANNING 1.
FY2017 Mid-Year Review FY2018 Budget Planning
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards
Cost of Service Analysis & Rate Design
FY 2018 Hyperion Operating Budget Timeline
Advances in Aligning Performance Data and Budget Information:
Finance & Administrative Sub-Committee & Treasurer’s Report
Timeline Overview Planned Timescales
Presentation transcript:

Trademark Fee Cost Analysis TPAC Briefing June 9, 2009

2 Trademark Fee Cost Analysis  The Trademark Fee Cost Analysis is a joint project between CFO and Trademarks to identify the actual cost of work performed for Trademark and TTAB Processing Fees  Cost is one factor that informs the fee setting process  “Unreliable cost information affects the federal government’s ability to control and reduce costs, assess performance, evaluate programs, and set fees to recover costs where required.” -FY 2008 GAO Financial Report of the United States Government

3 Reasons for Conducting a Trademark Fee Cost Analysis  OMB Circular A-25, User Charges – requires an agency to review the user charges (fees) for agency programs biennially to ensure they recover the full cost in the aggregate.  Good Business Sense – Knowing the cost to perform the work for a specific fee helps to inform better decisions for any new fee strategy.  TPAC Request – Requested by TPAC.

4 Timeframe  Executive level kick-off – January 2009  Formal cost study team kick-off – March 2009  Costing model complete – June 2009  Fee Cost Analysis complete – August 2009  Other costing requirements – September 2009

5 Fee Cost Analysis Study - Core Team  CFO  Office of Finance Activity-Based Information Division  Office of Corporate Planning – Revenue and Fee Forecasting Division  Trademarks  Office of Commissioner for Trademarks  Office of General Counsel  Trademark Trial and Appeals Board

6 Key Steps in Project Plan  Phase I: Project Initiation and Planning – January to March  Phase II: Trademark Model Revision – March to June (currently 3-4 weeks behind – plan on recovering)  Phase III: Trademark Cost Analysis – May to August  Phase IV: Consideration of other Costing Information Requirements – August to September  Phase V: Optional Fee Setting Analysis - TBD

7 Methodology  Review, update and validate the new Trademark ABI cost model  Develop the full cost of activities using the new ABI cost model  Determine the activity unit rates (full cost of activity divided by activity driver volume)  Associate activities with fee codes to develop an activity to fee code mapping  Adjust for frequency of occurrence (how many times an activity is performed for a particular fee based on a multi-year statistical data set)  Account for work in process by splitting the processes into discrete activities and by using a multiyear set of data. An analysis of the work in process will be undertaken in Phase IV. This analysis may also address such things as a check sum for the overall Fee Cost Analysis

8 Presentation of Final Results  Currently in the process of developing details for final presentation and displays  Will identify a fully burdened unit cost for all Trademark and TTAB processing fees  Plan to show cost contribution of direct and indirect costs for each processing fee unit cost

9 Accomplishments  Validation of activities and workloads for capturing Trademark process costs  Educating staff on how to better capture time spent on particular activities to help increase accuracy  Better understanding of Trademark process  Increased visibility of ABI data to managers within Trademarks and how ABI uses the information managers provide  Working to address Trademark cost information needs

10 Challenges  Defining and formalizing the methodology at the onset  Communicating amongst the team so that we understand each other’s information requirements  Coordinating schedules of team members and process owners and the necessary follow-on meetings

11 Current Status  The core project team has recently concluded Trademark Process Owner interviews to:  Confirm the team’s understanding of the process  Understand the process owners cost information needs  Review and validate the ABI activities and workloads  Map program, project and activity charges to Trademark ABI activities  Identify shared service organization and activities that directly support the Trademark process

12 Process Owner Groups & Schedule

13 Next Steps…  Review, update and obtain final validation on all process meeting response sheets and the activity dictionary based on discussions in each process owner meeting  Develop rules for distributing allocated direct and indirect costs to Trademarks  Develop system queries to extract workloads from Trademark systems such as TRAM  Finalize rules for cost allocations, workload drivers and the activity dictionary

14 Questions… Thank you!