1 NCHELP Collaborations Tim Cameron NCHELP Adele Marsh American Education Services

2 Topics to be Discussed The Focus of NCHELP The High Performance Channel Meteor Common Account Maintenance (CAM) CommonLine

3 The Focus of NCHELP  Information  Involvement  Advocacy  Education

4 NCHELP Committees  The foundation of NCHELP’s public policy development activities  Debt Management  Program Operations  Program Regulations  Legal Affairs  Membership Education and Training  Electronic Standards

5 NCHELP and Standards  The Electronic Standards Committee  Combined Efforts  CommonLine  Common Account Maintenance (CAM)  Common Claim Initiative (CCI)  School Advisory Group  Electronic Standards Steering Committee

6 The Electronic Standards Committee Advisory Teams – Communications and Training – CommonLine Origination and Disbursement – Change Transactions – General Account Maintenance – Default Aversion and Claims – Testing and Certification – Electronic Exchange

7 Electronic Exchange Standards CompuServe SMTP/POP3 FTP HTTPS with SOAP

8 The High Performance Channel Collection of Software Components Provides – Secure – Efficient – Open Methodology Supports Real-Time Processing

9 The High Performance Channel Transmits Data over HTTPS – Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) – Server-side and Client-side Software Components Real-Time Internet Based Processing Available Under the GPL

10 The High Performance Channel & Meteor Meteor Utilizes the HPC Software for B2B Messaging – Meteor – Data Aggregation – HPC – Data Exchange

11 Data Exchange Model Fast and Secure Connection Designed to be Automated

12 Transmission Cycle Example Two Distinct Exchanges – Business Request – Business Response

13 Transmission Cycle Example

14 Transmission Cycle Example

15 Summary Based on Open Technical Standards Compliant with ED Technical Standards Deployable on Many Hardware Platforms

16 METEOR

17 Meteor is... A collaborative effort by Meteor sponsors to provide a standard for the aggregation of financial aid data to both financial aid professionals and student/borrowers.

18 Meteor is, cont... The software and service to obtain a student or borrower’s financial aid information from various sources. The Meteor software can be installed on almost any web site -- a school, lender, guaranty agency, secondary market, or servicer. The software is Open Source, meaning: – developed free of charge by the Meteor sponsors – a “gift” from the Meteor sponsors to the financial aid community – the code can be extended by many to meet specific needs

19 How does Meteor Work? Meteor uses the concepts of Access Providers and Data Providers. A Meteor Access Provider allows inquirers to obtain information through its web site by hosting a copy of the Meteor software, which generates the request to the Data Providers for the borrower’s information. Access providers can be Schools, Guarantors, Lenders, Servicers, or Secondary Markets. A Meteor Data Provider hosts a copy of the Meteor software that enables them to respond to the Access Provider’s request for information, supplying data from their system. Data Providers are typically Lenders, Servicers, Guarantors, and Secondary Markets. In the future, the Dept. of ED, State Grant authorities, Schools, and others could become Data Providers.

20 Simplified Meteor Illustration School Guarantor Servicer Student (next phase) Access Providers Data Providers Financial Aid Professional Lender Index

21 Authentication Users authenticated by Access Providers Data providers may request additional data if higher level of authentication is required from user

22 Meteor Implementation Phases Current Phase – Has Loan Detail information – Financial aid professional (school) access only to loan summary data and loan detail data – Multiple data providers – Multiple access providers

23 Meteor Implementation Phases Next phase – Financial aid professional and student/borrower access to both loan summary and loan detail data – Multiple data providers – Multiple access providers

24 Meteor Standards Business messaging using XML – Collaboration with the PESC XML Forum – Based on IFX Standards – Consistent with the Department of Education’s Common Record

25 Meteor Standards Software components using Java Systems design using UML and object-oriented development methodologies

26 Meteor Standards Authentication – Based on SAML – Collaborative effort with Shibboleth – Industry standard doesn’t currently exist, but will converge with “standard” when it is available

27 Meteor Standards Transport – Collaboration with the Electronic Exchange Advisory Team of the NCHELP Electronic Standards Committee – High Performance Channel A collection of software components that provide a secure, efficient, open methodology for moving data among FFELP participants. Transmits data over HTTPS using the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP), and XML-based messaging protocol.

28 The Current State of Meteor Affairs The initial Meteor reference implementation and technology has proven very successful in accomplishing its objectives Estimated current phase final code delivery (for project team testing) set for May 19, 2002 Estimated current phase public code release set for August 1, 2002 Early adopter implementation begins at public release through the end of 2002

29 Early Adopters AES Connecticut Student Loan Foundation - GA Connecticut Student Loan Foundation - Lender Georgia Higher Education Assistance Corporation Great Lakes Higher Education Corporation Illinois Student Assistance Commission NELA National Student Loan Program Sallie Mae Student Loan Guarantee Foundation of Arkansas Texas Guaranteed USAFunds

30 Meteor Ongoing Status For current status and updates: Meteor Project Info: Meteor Implementers Page: Meteor Tech Info:

31 Meteor Sponsors (as of 3/22/2002) American Education Services American Student Assistance Bank One Chase Manhattan College Foundation, Inc. [NC] College Board/College Credit Education Loan Program Connecticut Student Loan Foundation Educational Credit Management Corporation Education Assistance Corporation Education Funding Association Florida Department of Education, OSFA

32 Meteor Sponsors Georgia Higher Education Assistance Corporation Great Lakes Higher Education Guaranty Corporation GuaranTec, LLP Higher Education Student Assistance Authority Illinois Student Assistance Commission Iowa Student Loan Liquidity Corporation Kentucky Higher Education Assistance Authority Key Education Resources LoanStar Systems, Inc. Michigan Higher Education Assistance Authority Montana Guaranteed Student Loan Program

33 Meteor Sponsors National Student Loan Program, Inc. New Hampshire Higher Education Assistance Foundation New Mexico Educational Assistance Foundation New York State Higher Education Services Corporation NCS Pearson North Carolina State Education Assistance Authority Northwest Education Loan Association (NELA) Oklahoma Guaranteed Student Loan Program Oregon Student Assistance Commission Panhandle-Plains Student Loan Center Rhode Island Higher Education Assistance Authority

34 Meteor Sponsors Sallie Mae, Inc. Southwest Student Services Corporation Student Loan Finance Association Student Loan Guarantee Foundation of Arkansas Student Loans of North Dakota Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation United Student Aid Funds Vermont Student Assistance Corporation

35 Common Account Maintenance (CAM)

36 NCHELP and Standards: Common Account Maintenance  Development began with AMF  Published in 1999  Implementation – NOW!

37 NCHELP and Standards: The Common Claim Initiative  Finalized standards in 2001  Implementation – NOW!

38 CommonLine

39 NCHELP and Standards: CommonLine  Initial Implementation in 1995  Release 5 Implemented in April 2002  XML Version was the basis for the Common Record

40 NCHELP and Standards: CommonLine  CommonLine, the Common Record and XML  Business System Design—April 24, 2002  Submitted to PESC and ESC May 10,  Recommend Process to ESC—May 17, 2002  Begin Implementation Guide—June 15, 2002  Begin Technical Reference—June 15, 2002  Formatting/Tech writing—June 15, 2002  Schema Produced—July 15, 2002  Review of draft documentation—July 31, August 21, 2002  Draft Publication - September 1, 2002  Final Publication—January 1, 2003  Implementation—April 1, 2003

41 Questions & Feedback