• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Ross.howard
 

Ross.howard

on

  • 9,113 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
9,113
Views on SlideShare
9,113
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Ross.howard Ross.howard Presentation Transcript

    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Strategic Workforce Management Model February, 2009 PAE/Howard Ross and PAE/Jason Derleth Aerospace Corporation/Marcus Lobbia and John Goble OHCM/Stephen Chesley PAE/Nancy Searby and Andrew Demo www.nasa.gov 1
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Order of Presentation • Why do we need something like SWMM? • How SWMM was built? • So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade? • How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs using budget and schedule data? • How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or cutting its budget? www.nasa.gov 2
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Why do we need something like SWMM? • No large organization, with a multitude of projects and numerous physical locations, has perfect insight into long-term workforce demand – Without a carefully constructed set of data and a model, • It is difficult to predict workforce needs except over the very near term • It is even more difficult to do vital ‘what if’ analyses – This is the real focus of this presentation: to demonstrate we are trying to develop a relatively rapid ‘what if’ forecasting capability www.nasa.gov 3
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Why do we need something like SWMM? • Understanding future workforce Civil Service Opportunities Over Time needs allows: 20000 15000 Wedge of Opportunity - as new CS FTP - as CS temp/term – Strategic budget decisions 10000 - as contract-able work 5000 – Better-placed work assignments 0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 Fiscal Year – Targeted hiring Agency Competency Distribution Mission Operations Quality/Safety/Performance Technician • Know your workforce (types and Structures, Materials & Mechanics Electrical &Electronic numbers) Demand Engineering of Systems Sensor Systems Computer Science & Information Technology 8% 6% 4% 4% 5% Human & Biological • Know your workforce Supply Thermal/Fluid Power & Propulsion 4% 5% Systems Analysis & Mission Planning 19% • Identify gaps and surpluses Aeronautics Multi-disciplinary R&D Chemical Earth Sciences 12% Space Sciences Biological Sciences 5% 4% 3% • Present results and forecasts to Physical Sciences Professional Development Management 3% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 1% 1% 1% 6% Business Operations decision-makers Workforce Operations & Support Financial Operations 3% 2% Institutional Operations & Support SWMM is trying to forecast DEMAND far into the future. www.nasa.gov 4
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Why do we need something like SWMM? • From HR 2764 Appropriation Language: – …”Finally, NASA is encouraged to engage in long-term agency-wide workforce planning.” – “The Administrator shall prepare a strategy for: • minimizing job losses… • equitably distribute tasks and workload between the Centers…. • [provide] overall projections of future civil service .. workforce levels” SWMM is trying to forecast DEMAND far into the future. www.nasa.gov 5
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Order of Presentation • Why do we need something like SWMM? • How SWMM was built? • So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade? • How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs using budget and schedule data? • How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or cutting its budget? www.nasa.gov 6
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration How SWMM was built Two ways it could be done:Index Name Code P2.4.1 Space Obse rv atories 1.4.1.6 T errest rial Planet F inder 269,590 1.4.3.2 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Development 530,007 1.4.3.5 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Operat ions 315,404 1.4.2.2 James W ebb Spac e T elesc ope 411,672 1.4.7.1 1.4.10.1 1.4.10.3 1.2.6.1 W ide- Field Infrared Survey Explorer LISA(Laser Int erferomet er Spac e Ant enna) Const ellat ion- X Magnet ospheric Mult isc ale (MMS) 340,396 430,647 390,492 943,396 Bottom up: project-by-project Phase C/D Workforce and Development Cost (FY08$M) 1.2.7.2 Int erst ellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) 576,706 $2,000 1.4.5.1 Gamma- ray Large Spac e T elesc ope (GLAST 378,710 (>1000 discrete items in our budget $ Dev FY08$M 1.4.6.1 Kepler 354,171 $1,800 Linear ($ Dev FY08$M) Cassini 1.4.7.5 AST RO- E II 344,833 1.4.8.5 FUSE 378,154 y = 0.4392x 1.4.8.9 GALEX 657,620 $1,600 1.4.8.10 W MAP 610,577 R2 = 0.9241 1.4.8.11 SIRT F/Spit zer 420,579 & workforce systems) Development Cost FY08$M $1,400 1.4.8.12 Chandra 397,424 1.4.8.15 Int egral 412,595 1.4.8.16 XMM 411,021 $1,200 1.2.1.2 Geospac e Sc ienc e 274,542 1.2.7.9 IBEX (10) 316,764 $1,000 1.2.7.10 NuSt ar (11) 328,689 1.4.1.1 Spac e Int erferomet er (SIM) - Planet Quest 453,341 Spitzer 1.4.1.7 Large Binoc ular T elesc ope Int erferomet er 481,847 $800 1.4.3.3 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Servic ing Mission 217,774 MER 1.4.7.3 EUSO 919,203 MRO $600 1.4.7.4 SW IFT 789,737 1.4.7.6 1.4.8.6 1.4.8.7 1.4.8.8 Nuc lear Spec t rosc opic T elesc ope Array CHIPS RXT E SW AS 222,501 392,139 372,059 367,832 Top Down: parametric estimates $400 DawnNew Horizons STEREO Kepler Phoenix Deep Impact $200 1.4.8.13 HET E- II 425,082 (derived from cost estimates) Stardust MESSENGER 1.4.8.14 GP- B 415,113 Genesis 1.4.8.17 IPAC 556,464 $- 1.4.9.3 Hersc hel 550,059 - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 1.4.9.4 Planc k 429,559 Total Workforce 1.4.10.6 Fut ure Missions 381,269 2.5.2.2 Hubble Spac e T elesc ope Servic ing Projec t 329,678 SWMM is “bottom up” for most of the portfolio (allowing both numbers and types of people, but “top down” for science projects whose planned start is sometime after 2015 www.nasa.gov 7
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration How SWMM was built: we have estimates of DEMAND for many projects JWST Workforce Workflow Projections by Domain JWST Workforce Workflow: Engineering Competency Suites 225 160.0 Phase DEV 150.0 TNAR PDR CDR 200 140.0 2.12 Multi-disciplinary R&D 2.11 Thermal/Fluid 130.0 2.10 Structures, Materials & Mechanics 175 2.9 Sensor Systems 2.8 Power & Propulsion 120.0 2.7 Electrical & Electronic 2.6 Computer Science & Information Technology 150 Science 110.0 2.5 Chemical Mission Operations 2.3 Aeronautics 100.0 2.2 Systems Analysis & Mission Planning Leadership and Management 2.1 Engineering of Systems 125 90.0 Engineering FTE FTE Business Management 80.0 100 70.0 60.0 75 50.0 50 40.0 Assumed 30.0 25 20.0 10.0 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 0.0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 FY FY WIMS Data Mar 07 Engineers roll off throughout development; Distribution of specific engineering science support stays constant; estimated competencies changes throughout what happens after launch and modified our development. estimates after discussions with SMD. Example: JWST Workforce Plan (2007) – drawn from N2 and WIMS and discussions with Program Manager www.nasa.gov 8
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration How SWMM was built… • Then aggregate all projects at a center or across the agency to get total workforce DEMAND. Generate workforce demand for all 1 1 projects (like Orion and JWST), using N2, 2 2 Extract all needs for a 3 3 Create a “people” sand WIMS, and assumptions from program competency for the managers for outyears Agency or at a center chart that can be displayed by Center, by M ulti-d isc iplina ry R & D Th e rm al/Flu id competency, etc. S tru cture s, M a teria ls & M ec ha n ic s S e n so r S ystem s P o w e r & P ro p uls io n E le ctrica l & E lec tro n ic C om p u te r S cie nc e & [D] Info rm ation Te ch n olo gy [S] C he m ica l H um a n a n d B io lo g ica l A e ro na utics S ys te m s A na lys is & M is sio n P la n nin g E n g in e erin g o f S ys te m s 05 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 J W S T W o rk fo rc e W o rk flo w : E n g in e e rin g C o m p e te n c y S u ite s 1 6 0 .0 Phase DEV 1 5 0 .0 TN A R PDR CDR 1 4 0 .0 2 . 1 2 M u lt i-d is c ip lin a ry R & D 2 . 1 1 T h e rm a l/ F lu id 1 3 0 .0 2 . 1 0 S t ru c t u re s , M a t e ria ls & M e c h a n ic s 2.9 S e ns o r S y s te m s 2 . 8 P o w e r & P ro p u ls io n 1 2 0 .0 2 . 7 E le c t ric a l & E le c t ro n ic 2 . 6 C o m p u t e r S c i e n c e & In fo r m a t i o n T e c h n o l o g y 1 1 0 .0 2 . 5 C h e m ic a l 2 . 3 A e ro n a u t ic s 1 0 0 .0 2 . 2 S y s t e m s A n a ly s is & M is s io n P la n n in g 2 . 1 E n g in e e rin g o f S y s t e m s 9 0 .0 FTE 8 0 .0 7 0 .0 6 0 .0 5 0 .0 4 0 .0 3 0 .0 2 0 .0 1 0 .0 0 .0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 FY W IM S D a ta M a r 0 7 www.nasa.gov 9
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Order of Presentation • Why do we need something like SWMM? • How SWMM was built? • So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade? • How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs using budget and schedule data? • How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or cutting its budget? www.nasa.gov 10
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration How many employees do we need? FTE by Center ARC 25000 DFRC GRC 20000 GSFC JPL 15000 JSC KSC 10000 LaRC MSFC 5000 SSC HQ 0 ShrdSvcs 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Unassgnd FTE by Domain 25000 20000 Science 15000 Mgt. Msn. Ops. 10000 Engineer. Business 5000 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Obvious question: why does the DEMAND drop? Is this real [no]? Answers will become obvious shortly… www.nasa.gov 11
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SOMD FTE by Center ARC 4000 DFRC 3500 GRC 3000 GSFC 2500 JPL JSC 2000 KSC 1500 LaRC ASSUME: 1000 MSFC 500 SSC •Shuttle 0 HQ ShrdSvcs retirement in 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Unassgnd 2010 FTE by Domain 4000 •ISS in 2016 3500 3000 •SCAN, LSP, 2500 Science Mgt. RPT continue 2000 Msn. Ops. 1500 Engineer. 1000 Business 500 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 www.nasa.gov 12
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration ARMD FTE by Center ARC 1600 DFRC 1400 GRC 1200 GSFC 1000 JPL JSC ASSUME: 800 KSC 600 LaRC 400 MSFC SSC •ARMD FTE 200 HQ 0 are ShrdSvcs 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Unassgnd constant beyond 1600 FTE by Domain 2014 1400 1200 Science 1000 Mgt. 800 Msn. Ops. 600 Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 www.nasa.gov 13
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration OTHER FTE and Budget ($M) by Center ARC 12000 DFRC 10000 GRC GSFC 8000 JPL JSC 6000 ASSUME: KSC 4000 LaRC MSFC • Education FTE are 2000 SSC constant at the 2014 HQ level 0 ShrdSvcs 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Unassgnd • Reimbursable Business FTE are constant at the 12000 FTE and Budget ($M) by Domain 2008 level 10000 Science • CASP FTE are 8000 Mgt. constant at the 2014 6000 Msn. Ops. level Engineer. 4000 Business 2000 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 www.nasa.gov 14
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration ESMD – a year ago FTE by Domain (Generated March 08) 6000 5000 4000 Science Management FTE 3000 Mission Ops Engineering Business 2000 1000 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Increase in engineering as more of the Ares and Lunar hardware DDTE kicks in. www.nasa.gov 15
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration ESMD -- today FTE by Domain (Generated March 08) 6000 5000 Far fewer total FTE As with most 4000 Science in the outyears now big, long-term Management FTE 3000 Mission Ops Engineering (with the biggest projects, one Business reduction in 2000 forecasts more 1000 engineering). FTE the closer 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 one comes to FTE by Domain an execution 6000 Why: This is an year. 5000 Science artifact of WAG data received from Cx: 4000 Mgt. •Little Ares V DDTE 3000 Msn. Ops. •Very little lunar Engineer. surface sys. 2000 Business •No center- 1000 assignments re Altair 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Nonetheless, the trend of the data through 2014 is good, and can / was used for “what if” analysis www.nasa.gov 16
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Order of Presentation • Why do we need something like SWMM? • How SWMM was built? • So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade? • How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs using budget and schedule data? • How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or cutting its budget? www.nasa.gov 17
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • Strategic Workforce Management Model is also to enable: – Analysis of “what-if?” scenarios • What if this project started earlier or if it stretched out? • What if this project was done inhouse? • What if we this project was done by international partners? www.nasa.gov 18
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SWMM Scenario Builder Types of Scenarios (for now) • Add and delete projects • Shift projects in time (delay start) • Stretch projects (remain longer in formulation; remain longer in development; etc) • Extend projects (e.g., keep operations going at existing level) • Change project make/buy • Besides FTE data, show effects on budget • Assign projects or project elements to different centers www.nasa.gov 19
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration How SWMM is run by a user to do these scenarios Include (1) or Spend more time Exclude (0) a than originally project planned in a phase Delay or advance Extend a project the start of the longer than project originally planned www.nasa.gov 20
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration A simple scenario re Human Space Flight • Extend ISS to 2020 www.nasa.gov 21
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SOMD Current and with ISS Extended to 2020 Total FTE by Competency Domain Total FTE by Competency Domain 4000 4000 3500 3500 3000 3000 2500 2500 2000 Science 2000 Science Mgt. Mgt. 1500 Msn. Ops. 1500 Msn. Ops. Engineer. Engineer. Business Business 1000 1000 500 500 0 0 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 2011 2014 2017 2020 2011 2014 2017 2020 Current Plan ISS extended www.nasa.gov 22
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration All of SOMD and ESMD – JSC, KSC, and MSFC ISS Extended to 2020 JSC - FTE by Domain JSC - FTE by Domain 3000 3000 2500 2500 Science Science 2000 Mgt. 2000 Mgt. 1500 Msn. Ops. 1500 Msn. Ops. Engineer. Engineer. 1000 1000 Business Business 500 500 0 0 2011 2012 2013 2019 2020 2009 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2011 2012 2013 2019 2020 KSC - FTE by Domain 2009 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 KSC - FTE by Domain 1600 1600 1400 1400 1200 Science 1200 Science 1000 Mgt. 1000 Mgt. 800 Msn. Ops. 800 Msn. Ops. 600 Engineer. Engineer. 600 400 Business 400 Business 200 200 0 0 MSFC FTE by Domain 2010 2013 2017 2020 2009 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016 2018 2019 MSFC FTE by Domain 2010 2013 2017 2020 2009 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016 2018 2019 2000 2000 1800 1800 1600 Science 1600 1400 Science Mgt. 1400 1200 Mgt. 1200 1000 Msn. Ops. 1000 Msn. Ops. 800 Engineer. 800 Engineer. 600 Business 600 400 Business 200 400 200 0 0 2011 2014 2017 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 2011 2014 2017 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 Base Case ISS Extended www.nasa.gov 23
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Results of Some Other Human Space Flight Scenarios • We ran these 3 scenarios: – Baseline – Stretch 3 projects • Shuttle flies to 2012 Scenario 1 • Orion stretched / grown by a year Scenario 2 • Ares 1 stretched / grown by a year – Shift 2 projects 2 years to the right • Delay start of Altair Scenario 3 • Delay start of Ares 5 www.nasa.gov 24
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Human Spaceflight Scenarios • How to implement the scenarios: – Extend Shuttle 2 years • Assume 2009 staffing is duplicated in 2010 and 2011 – Stretch Orion and Ares I for 1 year • Will show algorithm used for any project (not specific to these projects) later in presentation – Delay Ares V and Altair staffing up by 2 years • Slide future years’ staffing 2 years to the right www.nasa.gov 25
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Five projects individually FTE by Competency Domain FTE by Domain1800 9001600 Science 800 Science1400 70012001000 Space Shuttle Mgt. 600 500 Orion Mgt. 800 Msn. Ops. 400 Msn. Ops. 600 300 Engineer. Engineer. 400 200 200 100 Business Business 0 0 FTE by Domain FTE by Domain 2009 2011 2012 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010 2013 2011 20151200 12001000 Science 1000 Ares V Science 800 Ares I Mgt. 800 Mgt. 600 Msn. Ops. 600 Msn. Ops. 400 400 Engineer. Engineer. 200 200 Business Business 0 0 2009 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2009 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010 2011 2012 2010 2011 2012 FTE by Domain b/c of lack of 700 good data for Science 600 Ares V, ignore 500 Altair Mgt. beyond 2015 400 300 Msn. Ops. 200 Engineer. 100 Business 0 2009 2010 2012 2013 2014 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2011 2015 www.nasa.gov 26
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Five projects together FTE by Competency Domain 4500 4000 3500 Science 3000F 2500 Mgt.T 2000 Msn. Ops.E 1500 Engineer. 1000 Business 500 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2014 www.nasa.gov 27
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration 5 Projects: SSP extended 2 years — staffing peak is higher FTE by Competency Domain 4500 4000 3500 Science 3000F 2500 Mgt.T 2000 Msn. Ops.E 1500 Engineer. 1000 Business 500 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2014 www.nasa.gov 28
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration 5 Projects: SSP extended, Orion & Ares stretched 1 yr; FTE in 2010-11 less than before FTE by Competency Domain 4500 4000 3500 Science 3000F 2500 Mgt.T 2000 Msn. Ops.E 1500 Engineer. 1000 Business 500 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2014 www.nasa.gov 29
    • National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSSP Ext. 2 yrs, Orion & Ares I Stretched 1 yr, Ares V & Altair delayed 2 yrs; 2012 peak still over baseline, staffing has very different profile FTE by Competency Domain 4500 4000 3500 Science 3000F 2500 Mgt.T 2000 Msn. Ops.E 1500 Engineer. 1000 Business 500 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2014 www.nasa.gov 30
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration 5 Projects, Center Split JSC - FTE by Domain 1200 1000 Science 800 Mgt. 600 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2011 2012 2013 2019 2020 2009 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 KSC - FTE by Domain 600 500 Science 400 Mgt. 300 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 200 Business 100 0 2010 2013 2015 2018 2020 2009 2011 2012 2014 2016 2017 2019 MSFC FTE by Domain 1800 1600 1400 Science 1200 Mgt. 1000 Msn. Ops. 800 600 Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2011 2014 2017 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 31
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Shuttle Extended, Center Split JSC - FTE by Domain 1200 1000 Science 800 Mgt. 600 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 400 Business 200 Large 0 changes 2011 2012 2013 2019 2020 2009 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 KSC - FTE by Domain 600 for all 3 500 Science 400 Mgt. ctrs 300 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 200 Business 100 0 2010 2013 2015 2018 2020 2009 2011 2012 2014 2016 2017 2019 MSFC FTE by Domain 1800 1600 1400 Science 1200 Mgt. 1000 Msn. Ops. 800 600 Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2011 2014 2017 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 32
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SSP extended, Orion & Ares stretched, by center JSC - FTE by Domain 1200 1000 Science 800 Mgt. 600 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2011 2012 2013 2019 2020 2009 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 KSC - FTE by Domain 600 500 Science 400 Mgt. 300 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 200 Business 100 0 2010 2013 2015 2018 2020 2009 2011 2012 2014 2016 2017 2019 MSFC FTE by Domain 1800 1600 1400 Science 1200 Mgt. 1000 Msn. Ops. 800 600 Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2011 2014 2017 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 33
    • National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSSP Ext. 2 yrs, Orion & Ares I Stretched 1 yr, Ares V and Altair Start delayed 2 yrs – by center JSC - FTE by Domain 1200 1000 Science 800 Mgt. 600 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 400 Business 200 0 2011 2012 2013 2019 2020 2009 2010 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 KSC - FTE by Domain 600 500 Science 400 Mgt. 300 Msn. Ops. Engineer. 200 MSFC 100 Business staffing 0 2010 2013 2015 2018 2020 2009 2011 2012 2014 2016 2017 2019 MSFC FTE by Domain 1800 drops a 1600 1400 Science lot, 1200 1000 Mgt. compared 800 600 Msn. Ops. Engineer. to base 400 200 Business case 0 2011 2014 2017 2020 2009 2010 2012 2013 2015 2016 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 34
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Five Projects, Center Split, Continued ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain80 8070 7060 60 Science Science50 50 Mgt. Mgt.40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.30 30 Engineer. Engineer.20 20 Business Business10 10 0 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2010 2011 2016 2017 2009 2012 2013 2014 2015 2018 2019 2020 GRC - FTE by Domain LaRC FTE by Domain400 300350 250 Science300250 Mgt. 200 Science200 Msn. Ops. Mgt. 150150 Engineer. Msn. Ops. 100 Business100 Engineer. 50 50 Business 0 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2009 2010 2011 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010 2011 2012 2013 2020 2009 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 35
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Shuttle Extended, Center Split Continued ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain80 8070 7060 60 Science Science50 50 Mgt. Mgt.40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.30 30 Engineer. Engineer.20 20 Business Business10 100 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2010 2011 2016 2017 2009 2012 2013 2014 2015 2018 2019 2020 GRC - FTE by Domain LaRC FTE by Domain400 300350 250 Science300250 Mgt. 200 Science200 Msn. Ops. Mgt. 150150 Engineer. Msn. Ops. 100 Business100 Engineer. 50 50 Business 0 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2009 2010 2011 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010 2011 2012 2013 2020 2009 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 36
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SSP extended, Orion & Ares stretched, by center Cont. ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain80 8070 7060 60 Science Science50 50 Mgt. Mgt.40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.30 30 Engineer. Engineer.20 20 Business Business10 100 0 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2010 2011 2016 2017 2009 2012 2013 2014 2015 2018 2019 2020 GRC - FTE by Domain LaRC FTE by Domain400 300350 250 Science300250 Mgt. 200 Science200 Msn. Ops. Mgt. 150150 Engineer. Msn. Ops. 100 Business100 Engineer. 50 50 Business 0 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2009 2010 2011 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010 2011 2012 2013 2020 2009 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 www.nasa.gov 37
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SSP Ext. 2 yrs, Orion & Ares I Stretched 1 yr, Ares V and Altair Start delayed 2 yrs – by center, cont ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain80 8070 7060 60 Science Science50 50 Mgt. Mgt.40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.30 30 Engineer. Engineer.20 20 Business Business10 100 0 2010 2011 2016 2017 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2009 2012 2013 2014 2015 2018 2019 2020 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 -10 GRC - FTE by Domain LaRC FTE by Domain400 300350 250 Science300250 Mgt. 200 Science200 Msn. Ops. Mgt. 150150 Engineer. Msn. Ops. 100 Business100 Engineer. 50 50 Business 0 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 2009 2010 2011 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2010 2011 2012 2013 2020 2009 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Peak staffing has moved to the right, owed to Ares V delay www.nasa.gov 38
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Order of Presentation • Why do we need something like SWMM? • How SWMM was built? • So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade? • How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs using budget and schedule data? • How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or cutting its budget? www.nasa.gov 39
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Switching now to SMD • By far the most complex owed to – the number of projects, – the diversity in acquisition strategies, – the dynamic portfolio of new missions, and – updates on extended operations. • Synched up – Agency Mission Planning Manifest (the agreed set of >90 SMD missions with Launch Readiness Dates as late as 2025), – Sand Chart (a PA&E tool for coarse cost estimation), and – Created a new parametric WF estimating tool for new missions • Given a known annual budget for each project, how many FTE will be employed each year to work on that project www.nasa.gov 40
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SMD Key Points: FTE by Center ARC DFRC Staffing drops in GRC outyears owed to our GSFC JPL assumption of a 0.2 JSC inhouse/total labor ratio KSC LaRC for each new mission MSFC that begins outside the SSC HQ budget horizon ShrdSvcs 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Unassgnd Staffing can be made FTE by Domain constant by a different assumption, as we will Science show in a scenario Mgt. Msn. Ops. SWMM allows us to Engineer. Business anticipate the effects of such in-sourcing…. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 www.nasa.gov 41
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Parametric Model for Workforce Estimates Agency Mission Planning Manifest (AMPM) Apply Sand Chart Cost Estimate 009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 20 2 Project Milestones (CDR, LRD), Start / End Dates Each Project’s Annual Cost Adjust Make/Buy to best match N2/WIMS $100 $90 Annual Workforce and Operations Cost (FY08$M) Cost FY08$M Linear (Cost FY08$M) Cassini-Orbit Apply Aerospace Corp. Correlations y = 0.4177x $80 2 Cassini-Cruise R = 0.9663 Annual Operations Cost FY08$M Spitzer $70 Global Precipitation Measurem ent (GPM) (378289) $60 MRO $50 140 $40 MER $30 STEREO Annual FTE and Cost (FY08$M) N2 Data 350 $100 $20 Phoenix Dawn Encounter Messenger 120 Kepler $10 Genesis New Horizons-Cruise Dawn Cruise Parametric Estimate FTE Stardust $- - 50 100 150 200 250 Cost (FY08$M) $90 Annual Workforce 300 100 Annual Full Time Equivalent (FTE) FTE + JPL WYE $80 M/B 250 $70 Annual Cost (FY08$M) 80 $60 200 60 GPM 0.32 $50 150 $40 40 100 $30 $20 20 50 $10 0 PDR = 3/2002 - $- CDR = 2/2003 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 PER = 9/2005 Launch = 7/2006 Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Each Project’s Annual FTE Each Project’s Annual Workforce TOTAL Workforce www.nasa.gov 42
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Data Example: Actual Development Cost & WF Chart* * From Aerospace Corporation study sponsored by Discovery New Frontiers Program Office at MSFC STEREO Annual FTE and Cost (FY08$M) STEREO Annual Workforce and Cost (FY08$M) 350 $100 FTE Workforce Annual Full Time Equivalent Contractor) Cost (FY08$M) $90 300 Annual Workforce (Civil Servant +(FTE) $80 250 $70 Annual Cost (FY08$M) $60 200 $50 150 $40 100 $30 $20 50 $10 - $- PDR = 3/2002 CDR = 2/2003 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 PER = 9/2005 Fiscal Year Launch = 7/2006 www.nasa.gov 43
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Comparison of TOTAL Workforce vs. Cost* * From Aerospace Corporation study sponsored by Discovery New Frontiers Program Office at MSFC Phase C/D Workforce and Development Cost (FY08$M) Annual Workforce and Operations Cost (FY08$M) $2,000 $100 $ Dev FY08$M Cost FY08$M $1,800 Linear ($ Dev FY08$M) Cassini $90 Linear (Cost FY08$M) Cassini-Orbit y = 0.4392x y = 0.4177x $1,600 $80 Cassini-Cruise R2 = 0.9241 R2 = 0.9663 Annual Operations Cost FY08$M SpitzerDevelopment Cost FY08$M $1,400 $70 $1,200 $60 MRO $1,000 $50 Spitzer $800 $40 MER MRO MER $600 $30 DawnNew Horizons Phoenix $400 STEREO $20 Kepler Phoenix Messenger Dawn Encounter Deep Impact Kepler $200 $10 Stardust MESSENGER Genesis New Horizons-Cruise Genesis Dawn Cruise Stardust $- $- - 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 - 50 100 150 200 250 Total Workforce Annual Workforce Data fit provides parametric relationship between project’s TOTAL workforce (Civil Servant + Contractor) and cost www.nasa.gov 44
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SMD Workforce Results Planetary Science 1800 Astrophysics 1600 1000 1400 1200 FTE + JPL WYE 900 1000 800 600 800 400 200 700 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Fiscal Year FTE + JPL WYE 600 Earth Science 1400 1200 500 1000 400 FTE + JPL WYE 800 600 300 400 200 200 0 100 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Heliophysics Fiscal Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 500 450 0 400 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 350 Fiscal Year FTE + JPL WYE 300 250 Dotted line is N2 workforce data through 200 150 2014, then assumed staffing was flatlined 100 50 for outyears as basis of comparison 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Fiscal Year www.nasa.gov 45
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SWMM Scenario Capability Applied to SMD • See if / how to prevent the reduction in workforce (FTE+JPL WYE) in outyears – SWMM’s parametric model allows adjusting Make/Buy (M/B) and Launch Readiness Dates to fill in gaps in projected workforce demand www.nasa.gov 46
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration SMD Scenario – Adjusting Demand Predictions • Astrophysics example: 1200 1000 800 1000 FTE + JPL WYE 600 900 Change M/B 400 800 for one 700 mission from 200 0.2 to 0.5FTE + JPL WYE 600 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 1200 500 400 1000 300 800 FTE + JPL WYE 200 - Shift LRD for 600 that mission left 100 one year 400 0 - Change M/B for 200 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 a second Fiscal Year mission from 0.2 0 to 0.4 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 www.nasa.gov 47
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Order of Presentation • Why do we need something like SWMM? • How SWMM was built? • So, how many people does NASA need over the next decade? • How SWMM can be used to do “what if” scenarios? • In the absence of other data, can we estimate workforce needs using budget and schedule data? • How should we forecast the effects of stretching a project or cutting its budget? www.nasa.gov 48
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration ‘Stretching’ an Individual Project Project Phase Stretch Planned Duration New Duration Notes Shifts start date for a project to the right (only Shift 0 yrs 0 yrs 0 yrs works with projects that have not yet started) A: Formulation 0 yrs 1 yrs 0 yrs Stretches formulation phase of project B: Prelmiinary Design 0 yrs 1 yrs 0 yrs Stretches preliminary design phase of project C/D: Development 0 yrs 6 yrs 0 yrs Stretches development phase of project Stretches time between development and operations and maintains enough workforce for Build & Shelf 0 yrs 0 yrs 0 yrs launch Proportionately extend operations phase at E: Operations 0 yrs 3 yrs 0 yrs increased cost Total Stretch 0 yrs 11 yrs Planned 0 yrs New Total Project Duration Calculate New Stretch Results W o r k fo r c e S tr e tc h T o ta l P r o j e c t F T E 140 P la nne d (F T E yrs = 8 1 5 ) S tre tc hM A X (F T E yrs = 8 1 5 ) 120 S tre tc hM IN (F T E yrs = 8 1 5 ) S tre tc hA V G (F T E yrs = 8 1 5 ) 100 80 FTE 60 40 20 0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 F is c a l Y e a r www.nasa.gov 49
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Stretch an Individual Project – Stretch Formulation by 3 years Project Phase Stretch Planned Duration New Duration Notes Shifts start date for a project to the right (only Shift 0 yrs 0 yrs 0 yrs works with projects that have not yet started) A: Formulation 3 yrs 1 yrs 0 yrs Stretches formulation phase of project B: Prelmiinary Design 0 yrs 1 yrs 0 yrs Stretches preliminary design phase of project C/D: Development 0 yrs 6 yrs 0 yrs Stretches development phase of project Stretches time between development and operations and maintains enough workforce for Build & Shelf 0 yrs 0 yrs 0 yrs launch Proportionately extend operations phase at E: Operations 0 yrs 3 yrs 0 yrs increased cost Total Stretch 3 yrs 11 yrs Planned 0 yrs New Total Project Duration Calculate New Stretch Results W o r k fo r c e S tr e tc h T o ta l P r o j e c t F T E 140 P la nne d (F T E yrs = 8 1 5 ) S tre tc hM A X (F T E yrs = 8 7 5 ) 120 S tre tc hM IN (F T E yrs = 8 1 5 ) S tre tc hA V G (F T E yrs = 8 4 5 ) 100 Two limiting cases: 80 1. Don’t increase FTE 60 FTE-years 2 40 2. Enter next phase 3 with same number 20 1 of FTE as 0 originally planned 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 F is c a l Y e a r www.nasa.gov 50
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Examples of Some Other Possible Stretch Algorithms IF THEN budget is cut prior to SDR and LRD date allowed to slip minimally increased cost, with inhouse staffing level (FTE) assumed to enter next phase at the originally planned level budget is cut prior to SDR and content is adjusted cost is minimal to zero, with FTE staffing probably as before, unless a whole instrument was dropped budget cut prior to PDR with no change in LRD or content expect a $1 for $1 payback later on, with no change in FTE budget cut prior to CDR with no change in LRD or content expect a $2 for $1 payback later on; staffing: assume the cut occurs between PDR and CDR. Assume staffing prior to CDR is cut by the % cut in the budget. Then determine the number of FTE-years that were cut. Then add back in twice this number throughout the rest of Phase C/D. budget cut prior to CDR and LRD or content is allowed to change probably only $1 to $1 payback. Assume the cut occurs between PDR and CDR, and assume the content but not the LRD has changed. Assume staffing prior to CDR is cut by the % cut in the budget. Then determine the number of FTE-years that were cut. Then add back in same number throughout the rest of Phase C/D. budget cut after CDR with no change in content expect a $2 for $1 payback with likely day for day delay to the LRD that will also add cost. If LRD is held constant then about a $3 to $1 payback; For staffing: assume the schedule is slipped as little as possible. Calculate time left to LRD, increase the schedule by the % of the budget cut, but double the FTE-years in the remaining time in Phase C/D. OR: assume the schedule can’t be slipped, so there is cost growth as well as staffing growth. Don’t know when the budget is cut and for how long, so don’t know when staffing is cut and for how long. Assume the cut takes place and remains for 1/3rd of the remaining time in Phase C/D, then for the 2/3ths left, increase cost and staffing by 3x the percentage of the cut for the rest of Phase C/D. For the 3:1 payback, the risk is way up, multiple paths are taken for the high risk items.. www.nasa.gov 51
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Next Steps for SWMM • Validate with all MDs • Run a scenario where we estimate WF for Cx using previous ESMD assumptions and apply the Center roles announced in Sept 07 • Refine parametric model – Find and include more historical mission data (beyond the 13 missions we have) • Program the Stretch Algorithms www.nasa.gov 52
    • National Aeronautics and Space Administration Concluding Remarks • The model results are only as good as the input data • SWMM rapidly provides insight into strategic issues by showing first-order effects of various scenarios • A new parametric workforce estimating tool has been created, but it is not yet validated • SWMM will continue to be developed by PAE as part of a suite of tools to help the budget-workforce planning process www.nasa.gov 53