1 Program Health Metrics/Templates. 2 Program Requirements Program Parameter Status Program Scope...
-
Upload
liliana-ray -
Category
Documents
-
view
226 -
download
0
Transcript of 1 Program Health Metrics/Templates. 2 Program Requirements Program Parameter Status Program Scope...
1
Program Health Metrics/Templates
2
Program Requirements
Program ParameterStatus
Program ScopeEvolution
Program Resources
Budget
Manning
Contractor Health
LEGENDSColors: G: On Track, No/Minor IssuesY: On Track, Significant IssuesR: Off Track, Major IssuesGray: Not Related/Not Applicable
Trends:Up Arrow: Situation Improving(number): Risk Score (based on 100 possible)Down Arrow: Situation Deteriorating
Program Execution
Contract EarnedValue Metric
ContractorPerformance
Testing Status
Technical Maturity
Sustainability RiskAssessment
Program RiskAssessment
Fixed PricePerformance
ACME Aerospace
Probability of Program SuccessSummary
Date of Review: 2 May 06
PEOPEO’s Name
Program Name
ACAT ID
Program Life Cycle Phase:
Program “Fit”Capability Vision
DoD Vision
Program Success
Naval Vision
Program Advocacy
Warfighter
Congress
Industry
International
Naval
Joint Staff
OSD
Rebaselines: (0)Last Rebaseline: Date
Software
3
I. Program Requirements Factor
4
Combat Capability
Threshold Objective
C4I Interoperability(Strategic, Theater, Force
Coord.,Force Control, Fire Control)
Endurance
Position diamond along bar to best show where each item is in terms of its threshold - objective range.
Cost
Manning (Non-KPP)
Sustained Speed
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XXDate of Review: dd mmm yy PM
PEOPEOXXXXXX
(EXAMPLES)
-Status as of Last Brief(mm/yy – e.g. “01/03”)
Comments:
REQUIREMENTS - PROGRAM PARAMETER STATUS
YHistorical
YPredictive
5
REQUIREMENTS - PROGRAM SCOPE EVOLUTION
Requirement Funded Pgm Schedule
(Budgeted/Obl) (Used / Planned)
• Original CDD (date) $#.#B / NA NA / 120 Months
• Current CDD (date) $#.#B / $#.#B 170/210 Months
Stable
Increased
Descoped
COL, PM Date of Review: dd mmm yy
PEOPEOXXXXXX
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
Comments:
YPredictive
Y Historical
6
II. Program Resources Factor
7
Program Funding Requirement($ in Millions / Then Year) Prior FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY08-15 To Comp Total
RDT&ECurrent $ (PB 08) 1257.5 68.5 55.4 48.1 58.3 41.6 50.0 47.5 47.9 417.3 200.0 1874.8Required $ 1257.5 70.0 57.0 48.1 58.3 41.6 50.0 47.5 47.9 420.4 200.0 1877.9 Delta $ (Current - Required) 0.0 (1.5) (1.6) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (3.1) 0.0 (3.1)
PROCUREMENTCurrent $ (PB 08) 569.0 351.5 521.7 499.2 497.6 507.8 512.5 500.5 495.4 3886.2 2000.0 6455.1Required $ 569.0 351.5 521.7 499.2 497.6 507.8 512.5 500.5 495.4 3886.2 2000.0 6455.1 Delta $ (Current - Required) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
O&MCurrent $ (PB 08) 0.0 0.6 2.7 6.9 10.6 30.8 44.5 46.0 46.5 188.6 1000.0 1188.6Required $ 0.0 0.6 2.7 6.9 10.6 30.8 44.5 46.0 46.5 188.6 1000.0 1188.6 Delta $ (Current - Required) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
TOTALCurrent $ (PB 08) 1826.5 420.6 579.8 554.2 566.5 580.2 607.0 594.0 589.8 4492.1 3200.0 9518.5Required $ 1826.5 422.1 581.4 554.2 566.5 580.2 607.0 594.0 589.8 4495.2 3200.0 9521.6 Delta $ (Current - Required) 0.0 (1.5) (1.6) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 (3.1) 0.0 (3.1)
QUANTITIESCurrent (PB 08) 16 10 18 19 23 23 23 23 23 116 102 280.0Required Qty 16 7 11 17 22 22 22 23 23 101 141 304.0 Delta Qty (Current - Required) 0 (3) (7) (2) (1) (1) (1) 0 0 (15) (39) (54)
YPredictive
Y Historical
8
RESOURCES - BUDGETProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
PEOPEOXXXXXX
PM Date of Review: dd mmm yy
Navy Goals (Obl/Exp): First Year Second Year Third Year
RDT&E,N 95%/58% 100%/91% ------- OP,N 70%/--- 85%/--- 100%/--- OM,N -------
Comments:
SUFF
R/Y/G
FY01 OBL/EXP
FY02 OBL/EXP
FY03 OBL/ EXP
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09
RDT&E,N
Xx%/yy%
Xx%/yy%
Xx%/yy%
OPN N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A N/A N/A
SCN N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
WPN N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A N/A N/A N/A
O&M,N N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
Xx%/yy%
MPN N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
MILCON N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A Xx%/yy%
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/AGPredictive
G Historical
9
Staffing Adequacy Staffing Level Skill Level
Previous Current Future Previous Current Future
OVERALL G G G G G G
Program Mgmt G G G G G G
Engineering G Y Y G G G
Logistics G G G G G G
Test & Evaluation G G Y G G Y
Contracting Mgmt G R G G Y G
Budget & Financial Mgmt G G G G G G
Cost Analysis Y R G G G G
Depots G G G G G G
Resource Sponsors GG G G G G
GPredictive
G Historical
10
RESOURCES – CONTRACTOR HEALTH
• Corporate Indicators – Company/Group Metrics
• Current Stock P/E Ratio• Last Stock Dividends Declared/Passed • Industrial Base Status (Only Player? One of __ Viable
Competitors?)– Market Share in Program Area, and Trend (over last Five Years)
• Significant Events (Mergers/Acquisitions/ “Distractors”)
• Program Indicators – Program-Specific Metrics
• “Program Fit” in Company/Group• Program ROI (if available)• Key Players, Phone Numbers, and their Experience• Program Manning/Issues• Contractor Facilities/Issues• Key Skills Certification Status (e.g. ISO 9000/CMM Level)
• PM Evaluation of Contractor Commitment to Program – High, Med, or Low
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
PEOPEOXXXXXX Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
YPredictive
YHistorical
11
Contractor Staffing
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Fu
ll T
ime
Eq
uiv
ale
nt
Plan 1266 1399 1357 1434 1518 1604 1681 1745 1798 1814 1814 1814 1820 1825 1802 1811
Status 1272 1314 1342 1395 1447 1578 1605 1627
38626
38657
38687
38718
38749
38777
38808
38838
38869
38899
38930
38961
38991
39022
39052
39083
YPredictive
YHistorical
12
III. Program Execution Factor
13
Platform Quantities 1 1 1
System Quantities 1 1 1
Subsystem Quantities 1 1 1
Milestones/Reviews
Squadron Acquisition Schedule:Lead ShipFollow ShipFollow Ship
System 1
System 2
System 3
Subsystem 1
Subsystem 2
Subsystem 3
FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY09 FY 08 FY11 FY10 FY12 FY14FY13 FY15
AS Approval
MS B
FY17 FY16 FY18 FY20FY19 FY21 FY22 FY23
First Ship Design & Mat’l Procurement
First Ship Design & Mat’l Procurement w/ AP Funds
Follow Ship Mat’l ProcurementConstruction
Contract Award and Reviews
Builders Trial (BT)
Acceptance Trial (AT)
Integrated Trial (IT)
Delivery (Del)
OPEVAL
Inc One CDD
Approval
Total Program 1 3 1 2 1 2 1 1
Seabasing CBAJIC
ApprovedSeabasing
CBA IOC FOC ----------------
BT DEL AT
(10/09/07)
Squadron
DABPR
Notional Program Schedule
DABPR
IT DEL
BT AT DEL
OPEVAL 4 mo after DELPreliminary(8 mo)
And Contract Design(12 mo)
PreliminaryAnd Contract
Design
AP 1 AP 1 1
We are here
Inc Two CDD
Approval
Inc Three CDD
Approval
14
$100111%
56% $50
100% $90
122% $110
00%
04/02 04/04 08/0404/00
EXECUTION – CONTRACT EARNED VALUE METRICS [give short contract title]
YYMMDD
Axxxxx-YY-Cxxxx Contractor Name [Prime or Significant Sub]
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
Date of Last Rebaselining: JAN02Number of Rebaselinings: 1Date of Next Rebaselining: MMM YY
KTR’s EAC: 104M
Date of Last Award Fee: MMM YYDate of Next Award Fee: MMM YY
1.18
PM’s EAC
To
tal
Sp
ent
Total Calendar Schedule $M
0 %
TAB
BAC
ACWP
EAC
EV
% S
pe
nt
50%
[TCPIEAC = 0.76]
CV = $2.0 M
SV = $2.9 M
100% 108%
01/02
SPI
1.18
1.18
Ahead of Schedule and UnderspentBehind Schedule and Underspent
Ahead of Schedule and OverspentBehind Schedule and Overspent
0.940
0.960
0.82
0.86
0.90
0.94
0.98
1.02
1.06
1.10
1.14
0.82 0.86 0.90 0.94 0.98 1.02 1.06 1.10 1.14
CPI
01/00
10/9907/99
04/99
05/0204/02
03/02
02/02
10/01
07/01
04/011/01
10/0007/00
04/00
01/02
42%
PM’s Projected Performance at Completionfor CPI and Duration.
PEOPEOXXXXXX
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
(1.1,1.1)
(1.1, -0.95)(-0.95, -0.95)
(-0.95, 1.1)
YPredictive
YCurrent
15
Cost Risk and Mitigation• This slide will use NAVSEA/NAVAIR S- curve for
cost risk showing current info and if possible where the PM expects to be in 1 year and why (mitigation plan).– Include where cost risk was last year– Include PM and all independent cost estimates
PM
Probability Distribution Curve
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
$2,100 $2,150 $2,200 $2,250 $2,300 $2,350 $2,400
EAC ($M)
% P
rob
abil
ity
Probability Cost5% 2,138$
10% 2,155$ 15% 2,167$ 20% 2,177$ 25% 2,187$ 30% 2,194$ 35% 2,203$ 40% 2,211$ 45% 2,219$ 50% 2,228$ 55% 2,235$ 60% 2,244$ 65% 2,254$ 70% 2,264$ 75% 2,276$ 80% 2,290$ 85% 2,304$ 90% 2,325$ 95% 2,358$
AIR-4.2’s Most Likely Estimate $XXXM
AIR-4.2’s Point Estimate $XXX
YPredictiveY
Current
16
APB Schedule PerformanceMilestone Objective Threshold Current Est.
Milestone A,B,C Sep 1996 Mar 1997 Oct 1996
Preliminary Design Review Complete Jul 1997 Jan 1998 Jun 1997
Critical Design Review Complete Jul 1998 Jan 1999 Sep 1998
Integrated Testing Complete Jul 2005 Jan 2006 Jan 2006
OPEVAL Testing Complete (AH-1Z) Jan 2006 Jul 2006 Oct 2006
Milestone III Aug 2006 Feb 2007 TBD
IOC (AH-1Z) Mar 2011 Sep 2011 Sep 2011
Navy Support Date (AH-1Z) Mar 2012 Sep 2012 Mar 2012
DAB LRIP Review Aug 2003 Feb 2004 Oct 2003
CAE LRIP #2 Review Feb 2005 Aug 2005 Mar 2005
OPEVAL Testing Complete (UH-1Y) Jan 2006 Jul 2006 Oct 2006
IOC (UH-1Y) Mar 2008 Sep 2008 Mar 2008
Navy Support Date (UH-1Y) Mar 2012 Sep 2012 Mar 2012
CAE LRIP #3 Review Sep 2005 Mar 2006 Mar 2006
COLOR DEFINITIONS:≥ 30 days prior to threshold< 30 days prior to threshold
BREACH: Date follows threshold
Prior to objective
Only applies when you have a APB
Discuss Breaches and mitigation plans
YPredictive
YCurrent
17
APB Cost PerformanceObjective Threshold Current Est.
Base Year Costs
Development (RDT&E): 1221.0 1343.1 1214.8
Procurement (PROC): 5165.8 5682.4 5003.1
MILCON: - - -
Acquisition O&M: - - -
Total Acquisition Costs: 6386.8 - 6217.9
O&S: 6548.0 7202.8 6548.0
Total BY Life Cycle Costs: 12934.8 N/A 12765.9
Then Year Costs
Development (RDT&E): 1324.8 N/A 1322.0
Procurement (PROC): 6676.1 N/A 6693.3
MILCON: - N/A -
Acquisition O&M: - N/A -
Total Acquisition Costs: 8000.9 N/A 8015.3
O&S: - N/A -
Total TY Life Cycle Costs: N/A N/A N/A
Quantities
Development (RDT&E): 4 4 4
Procurement (PROC): 280 280 280
Unit Cost
Avg Proc Unit Cost (BY $M): 18.4 20.3 17.9
Avg Proc Unit Cost (TY $M): 23.8 N/A 23.9
Prog Acq Unit Cost (BY $M): 22.5 24.7 21.9
Prog Acq Unit Cost (TY $M): 28.2 N/A 28.2
COLOR DEFINITIONS:≤ 9% above Objective> 9% above Objective
BREACH: Exceeds threshold
Below Objective
Only applies when you have a APB
Discuss Breaches and mitigation plans
YPredictive
YCurrent
18
Contractor:
Program:
Contract Number:
Item: (CPAR, IPAR or AF) AF CPAR AF AF IPAR CPAR IPAR AF IPAR IPAR AF IPAR CPAR IPAR
Period Ending: (Mmm YY) Jan 99 Apr 99 Jul 99 Jan 00 Mar 00 Apr 00 Jun 00 Jul 00 Sep 00 Dec 00 Jan 01 Mar 01 Apr 01 Jun 01
Months Covered: (NR) 6 12 6 6 3 12 3 6 3 3 6 3 12 3
Areas to Evaluate
a. Technical (Quality of Product) EXC EXC EXC EXC
(1) Product Performance VG VG VG VG
(2) Systems Engineering SAT SAT SAT SAT
(3) Software Engineering MARG MARG MARG MARG
(4) Logistics Support/Sustainment UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT
(5) Product Assurance EXC EXC EXC EXC
(6) Other Technical Performance VG VG VG VG
b. Schedule SAT SAT SAT SAT
c. Cost Control MARG MARG MARG MARG
d. Management UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT
(1) Management Responsiveness EXC EXC EXC EXC
(2) SubContract Management VG VG VG VG
(3) Program Mgmt and Other Mgmt SAT SAT SAT SAT
e. Other Areas MARG MARG MARG MARG
(1) Communications UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT
(2) Support to Government Tests UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT
Award Fee Percentage: 85% 70% 90% 84%
N00000-00-C-0000
Contract Start Date:
Estimated Completion Date:
MMM YY
MMM YY
((Contractor Name))
((Program Name))
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
EXECUTION – CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCEPEOPEOXXXXXX
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
YPredictive
YCurrent
19
EXECUTION – FIXED PRICE PERFORMANCE
• DCMA Plant Rep Evaluation– Major Issues
• Delivery Profile Graphic (Plan vs Actual)– Major Issues
• Progress Payment Status– Major Issues
• Other Metrics are Available – Example – Status/Explanation for Production Backlog
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
PEOPEOXXXXXX
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
GPredictive
G(3)
Current
20
(4)
(2)
5
(3)
EXECUTION - PROGRAM RISK ASSESSMENT
Lik
eli
ho
od
5
4
3
2
1
Consequence4321
High
Medium
Low
• A brief description of Issue # 5 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 5 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation• A brief description of Issue # 1 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 1 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 3 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 3 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 2 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 2 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 6 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
• A brief description of Issue # 6 and rationale for its rating.
• Approach to remedy/mitigation
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
PEOPEOXXXXXX
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
Trends: Up Arrow: Situation Improving (#): Situation Stable
(for # Reporting Periods) Down Arrow: Situation Deteriorating
( )
( )
YPredictive
YCurrent
Cost, schedule, technical and external risks
21
1: Training2: Support Equipment3: Publications4: Facilities5: Maintenance Concept6: Supply Support7: MTBF/Ao/Reliability
Sustainability Areas Sustainability Areas (examples)
Consequence
Lik
eli
ho
od
5
4
3
2
1
54321
41
2
6
5
3
7
Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronymACAT XXACAT XXDate of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
PEOPEOXXXXXX
RISK # 4 Brief description of Issue and rationale for its rating.
Approach to remedy/mitigation.
RISK #5Brief description of Issue and rationale for its rating.
Approach to remedy/mitigation.
RISK # 6
Brief description of Issue and rationale for its rating.
Approach to remedy/mitigation.
EXECUTION – SUSTAINABILITY RISK ASSESSMENT
YCurrent
YPredictive
22
Risk and Mitigation Plan for each RED- Yellow in B/U
PM
Risk Owner: Program office, Contractor
Description:• Two PB 08 Congressional marks ($30M/$4.9M). If passed will significantly increase risk of executing the POR. Impacts risk reduction, shipyard PD/CD,
Government review of shipyard products and source selection.
Mitigation Steps:
1. Brief Resource Sponsor on funding requirements for POM 10 09/05//07
2. De-scope and re-prioritize POR execution plan 10/07 – 12/07
3. Develop and staff POM 10 issue 11/07 – 05/08
4. Requirement included in Navy POM 10 Submit 05/08
5. Requirement included in PB10 01/09
6. Brief Congressional Staffer’s on funding requirement 03/09
7. Track Congressional actions and ensure funding is included in final DoD appropriations bill
8. De-scope and reprioritize Program, if necessary, based on final Congressional action
Date of Review: 11/2007
1 2 3 5 6
7
Category: High 5-5
Sept 10 Sept 07 Oct 07 Nov 07 Mar 09
4
Pre MDAPTechnology
Development Phase
Pre MDAPTechnology
Development Phase
May 08 Jan 09
3
8
23
ILS StatusPrevious Current Future Issues
Maintenance Planning G G G
Supply Support G G G
Technical Data G G Y
Computer Resources Support Y G G
PHS&T G G G
Manpower And Personnel G G G
Support Equipment G G RCritical support equipment will be obsolete; replacement unfunded.
Training and Training Support G G G
Facilities G G G
Design Interface G G G
24
EXECUTION – TESTING STATUS
• TES/TEMP Status • Contractor Testing - Status (R/Y/G)
– Major Points/Issues• Developmental Testing – Status (R/Y/G)
– Major Points/Issues• Operational Testing – Status (R/Y/G)
– Major Points/Issues• Follow-On Operational Testing – Status (R/Y/G)
– Major Points/Issues• Special Testing – Status (R/Y/G) (Could Include LFT&E,
Interoperability Testing (JITC), Etc.) – Major Points/Issues
• Other (DOT&E Annual Report to Congress, etc – As Necessary)
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
PEOPEOXXXXXX Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
GPredictive
GCurrent
25
Maturity of Key Technologies
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Mar-01 Jun-01 Sep-01 Dec-01 Mar-02 Jun-02 Sep-02 Dec-02 Mar-03 Jun-03 Sep-03 Dec-03
Tech 1
Tech 2
Tech 3
Tech 4
Tech 5
EXECUTION – TECHNICAL MATURITYPEOPEOXXXXXX
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Mar-04 Jun-04 Sep-04 Dec-04 Mar-05 Jun-05 Sep-05 Dec-05
Percentage of Engineering Drawings Approved/Released
CDR
Program Initiation
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Sep-05 Dec-05 Mar-06 Jun-06 Sep-06
Percentage of Production Processes Under SPC
MilestoneC
YPredictive
YCurrent
26
Program XXX Summary
Technology Readiness Assessment
Critical Technologies Today MS B
Tech 1 TRL 5 TRL 7
Tech 2 TRL 5 TRL 7
Tech 3 TRL 7 TRL 7
Tech 4 TRL 4 TRL 7
Tech 5 TRL 7 TRL 7
Top Cost Drivers
Cost FY08$ B
- APUC
- PAUC
Notional Acquisition Program Baseline (APB)
Note: Program is Pre-Milestone “B” and does not yet have an APB
Schedule
COSTS ARE BASED ON PROGRAM OF RECORDAND ARE INTERDEPENDANT, NOT SEPARABLE
IOC 03/16 06/16
MS B 07/10 01/11
1. Transport, Carry, Offload and Deliver 1/3 of a Surface BLT (w/o manning) (Surface Battalion Landing Team Employment KPP) 25%
2. Propulsion & Control System (Surface Battalion Landing Team Employment and At-Sea Vehicle/Equipment and Personnel Transfer KPPs) 19%
3. Accommodations (Mission Payload and Surface Battalion Landing Team Employment KPPs) 15%
4. At sea vehicle transfer capability (At-Sea Vehicle/Equipment and Personnel Transfer KPP) 7.5%
27
Interrelationships, Dependencies and Synchronization with Complementary Systems
C4:
GCCS-M JTRS Cluster 1
JTRS Cluster 5 JTRS WNW
DCGS-N JPALS
Army:
LCU 2000
LSV
CH47 variants
AH64D
OH58D
LMSR
FSS
1
3
3
C S PI
C S PI
2
Combat Logistics Force:T-AKE
T-AOE2
2
PM DAES Rating: I C S P Not Rated Fielded
I = Integration. Color denotes Synchronization of effort with this program Number denotes degree of dependency:
1 – Critical , 2 – Significant , 3 - Enabler
1Solid denotes current systemDash denotes future system
Arrow to MPF(F) denotes supports MPF(F)Arrow from MPF(F) denotes MPF(F) supports
3
1
1
2
3
2
1
1
C S PI
3
2
Program X
Air Force: HH60G
MH53J or MC5/C17/KC_
3
3
1
3
3
1
1
MPF(F) LMSRMPF(F) LHA(R)/ LHD
Aviation:
CH-53
MH-60S
MH-60R
UH-1/AH-1
MV-22
Sea Shield:
DDG1000
CG(X)
LCS
SSGN
DDG-51
SSN-774
CSG / ESG:
CVN 21
LHA(R)
CVN-68
LHD
LPD-17
C S PI
C S PI
2
2
2
2
2
1
3
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
Connectors:
EFV
LCAC
JHSV
2
2
DEC. 07
28
IV. Capability Fit Factor
29
PROGRAM “FIT” IN CAPABILITY VISION
AREA(Examples) STATUS TRENDDoD Vision G (2)• Transformation G (2)• Interoperability Y (3)• Joint G (3)Naval Vision Y (4)• Current Force Y (4)• Future Force (N/A) (N/A)• Other (N/A) (N/A)
• Overall Y Y (2)
• TRANSFORMATION: THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROGRAM POSSESSES THE TRANSFORMATIONAL ATTRIBUTES (E.G. PRECISION, LETHALITY, STREAMLINED/COMMON LOGISTICS, ETC) SPECIFIED BY OSD LEADERSHIP
• INTEROPERABILITY: THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROGRAM COMPLIES WITH/HAS EMBEDDED WITHIN IT THE ARCHITECTURAL /ENGINEERING CHARACTERISTICS (E.G. COMPLIANCE WITH THE GLOBAL INFORMATION GRID (GIG)/INFORMATION DISSEMINATION MANAGEMENT (IDM) CRDS, DII, OPEN ARCHITECTURE PROTOCOLS) WHICH WOULD ALLOW IT TO INTEROPERATE ACROSS SERVICES (JOINT FORCES)/WITHIN COALITIONS
• JOINTNESS: THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE PROGRAM IS USABLE BY OTHER SERVICES, JOINT OPERATIONS, AND COALITIONS WITHOUT UNIQUE SUPPORT ARRANGEMENTS BEING MADE BY THOSE USERS
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
PEOPEOXXXXXX
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
YPredictive
Y(2)
Current
30
V. Advocacy Fit Factor
31
PROGRAM ADVOCACY
AREA(Examples) STATUS TREND• OSD Y (2)
– (Major point)• Joint Staff Y (2)
– (Major point)• War Fighter Y (4)
– (Major point)• Naval Secretariat G
– (Major point)• Congressional Y
– (Major point)• Industry G (3)
– (Major Point)• International G (3)
– (Major Point)• Overall Y
Date of Review: dd mmm yyCOL, PM
ProgramProgramAcronymAcronym
ACAT XXACAT XX
PEOPEOXXXXXX
Y Current
YPredictive
32
Congressional Adds/Issues
TitleAmount
($M)Committee/
MemberStatus
Action (last 12 months) Due Date Status
Action completed and on timeAction completed but not on timeAction not completed and due within 2 weeksAction not completed and due overdue