SRB Handbook and Process
   Michelle Calloway and Tahani Amer
Independent Program Assessment Office



            Seventh Annual NASA
      Program Management Challenge 2010
              February 10, 2010
                                          Used with permission
                                                        Page 1
Outline


SRB Handbook Overview
SRB Handbook Purpose
Section 1: Context for Independent Lifecycle Review (ILCR) Process
Section 2: High level principles that govern the SRBs
Section 3: Scope and expectations of ILCR
Section 4: SRB Initiation process
Section 5: SRB Products
Section 6: Notional review timeline
Appendices: Agency Independence Policy, PIR guidance
Summary




                                                                 Page 2
SRB Handbook Overview



• NASA established Standing Review Boards (SRBs) for independent life-
  cycle reviews (ILCR) to ensure that high priority Agency Programs and
  projects (P/p) are reviewed by groups of uniquely qualified experts.
• The SRB Handbook (HB) is a tool to assist the NASA community and
  SRBs in defining working interfaces with Mission Directorates,
  Programs, projects, Centers, review organizations, and Management
  Councils based on best practices.
• The SRB HB is a Special Publication release from the NASA Office of
  Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E) which expands on the concept
  of the SRB introduced in the NPR 7120.5, Space Flight Program and
  Project Management Requirements.
• The SRB Handbook was published by Program Analysis &
  Evaluation/IPAO with concurrence from Office of the Chief Engineer.




                                                                          Page 3
SRB Handbook Purpose


• The SRB Handbook provides the philosophy and guidelines
  for the setup, processes, and products of SRBs in support of
  the Agency‘s implementation of its independent lifecycle
  review process.

• The SRB Handbook is written to provide guidance to the
  NASA program and project communities and the SRBs
  regarding the expectations, processes, products, timelines,
  and working interfaces with NASA Mission Directorates
  (MDs), Centers, review organizations, and Management
  Councils.

• The SRB Handbook can be supplemented and tailored to
  meet the needs of the Agency and P/p being reviewed.


                                                                 Page 4
The SRB Handbook Section 1



•   The SRB process integrates the NPR 7120.5 requirements and the NPR
    7123.1 requirements, into a single ILCR set.
•   NPR 7120.5’s governance of the SRB is consistent with NASA Policy
    Directive (NPD) 1000.0, Governance and Strategic Management
    Handbook.
•   SRBs lower the burden of multiple ILCRs on P/p and enhance
    efficiency through the development of common review definitions and
    processes.
•   The SRB implementation also ensures that P/p, Decision Authorities
    (DAs), and Technical Authorities (TAs) benefit from consistent,
    efficient, and value-added ILCRs and products.
•   Needs and objectives of convening authorities and decision
    authorities are intended to be met through the SRB.




                                                                          Page 5
The SRB Handbook Section 2


•   The HB provides guidelines for SRB processes and products.
•   Identifies the major principles and assumptions that govern the
    execution of SRBs.
•   Provides guidance for SRB member independence:
     –   Civil servants (CSs) must have a complete Office of Government Ethics (OGE) 450 or
         Standard Form (SF) 278 form on file. CS will be screened for personal Conflict of
         Interest (PCI) and position screening.
     –   Office Chief Council (where contract is located) screens consultant for Organizational
         Conflict of Interest (OCI) and PCI with assistance from contracting officer.
     –   In the event of PCI, procedures have been established by the Agency to determine if
         the impairment is considered acceptable. If the impairment is acceptable, it will be
         documented and approved by the applicable NASA legal officials and the CAs.
     –   In the event of OCI for any prospective SRB member, “firewalls” within the company,
         the “non-disclosure agreement” and “evidence” that personal bias has been
         sufficiently mitigated shall be provided in an OCI mitigation plan by the contractor.
     –   CS and consultants will be vetted on an annual basis.




                                                                                                  Page 6
The SRB Handbook Section 3
                   SRB Engagements

•   SRBs independently assess P/p throughout their life-cycles at Key
    Decision Pointe (KDPs) in accordance with NPR 7120.5.
•   The SRB remains inactive between life-cycle reviews except as
    requested by the CAs or DAs.
•   The SRB is intended to support the reviews in the P/p life cycle with a
    consistent core membership.
•   Category 1 project SRBs report to the Agency PMC, all other project
    SRBs complete their reporting at the MD PMC level.
•   The actual reporting requirements for each review with SRB
    participation are determined with the preparation of the Addendum
    ToRs for that review.




                                                                              Page 7
The SRB Handbook Section 3
                   P/P Categorizations

•   Projects are broken down by robotic or human flight projects.
•   Robotic mission projects and human mission projects have different
    life-cycle reviews, assessment requirements, and reporting venues.
•   Programs are broken down by Uncoupled or Loosely Coupled Projects
    and Single or Tightly Coupled Programs.
•   Programs consisting of multiple projects that are not directly
    connected to one another (either by schedule, cost, technical
    interfaces, or management structures) are characterized as uncoupled
    or loosely coupled programs.
•   Programs consisting of one large project or multiple projects that are
    directly connected to one another (e.g., Space Shuttle Program) are
    characterized as single-project or tightly coupled programs.




                                                                             Page 8
SRB Engagement Life-Cycle Roadmap
    for Robotic Mission Projects




                                    Page 9
The SRB Handbook Section 4
             SRB Composition and COI

•   The Agency has established the following options for conducting
    independent reviews by SRBs.




•   Appendix C and D contain the COI Policy, COI Disclosure and Non-
    Disclosure Certification related to SRBs.
                                                                       Page 10
The SRB Handbook Section 4
                     SRB Membership

•   Members are selected from within the Agency, industry, academia,
    and other government agencies.
     –   Consideration should be given to other NASA Centers and cross-mission
         opportunities, e.g., robotic versus human project expertise.
     –   For project SRBs, a suggested diversity rule of thumb is that no more than half of the
         members should come from the host Center.
     –   Nominees must satisfy the independence criterion and should represent a balance of
         diverse backgrounds and professional and organizational perspectives.

•   Minimizing the SRB size has been considered best practice. Multiple
    disciplines can be covered by one member. Specialists may be added
    temporarily to review specific critical areas.
•   It is important to balance competence with current or recent
    experience in the selection of well-qualified SRB members.
•   The SRB chair will be a well recognized expert with a depth of
    technical knowledge and the breadth of experience.
•   The review manager ensures consistency in the implementation of
    Agency policy, process, and products as defined in the ILCR process.
    RM may also serve on the SRB as a discipline expert.
                                                                                                  Page 11
The SRB Handbook Section 4
                  SRB Membership/ToRs


•   The Chair has the responsibility for developing the candidate
    membership list for the SRB. However, the CAs approve the
    membership.
•   The disciplines necessary to form the team are derived from the P/p
    content, such as the work breakdown structure (WBS). Consideration
    is also given to risk areas of the P/p.
•   The ToR is the agreement between the SRB and the convening
    authorities and documents the SRB charter, scope, and agreements
    between the convening authorities and the SRB.
•   The Chair and RM work collaboratively with the CAs and the P/p to
    develop a ToR that meets the expectations for the Agency.




                                                                          Page 12
The SRB Handbook Section 5
                         SRB Products
3 primary functions of SRB Assessment:
 1. Perform complete comprehensive independent assessments of the P/p
 2. Develop findings and formulate recommendations based on these assessments
 3. Report results to the P/p and TAs and DAs




                                                                                Page 13
The SRB Handbook Section 5
                            SRB Assessment Criteria

          SRB assessments use NPR 7120.5D’s set of six assessment criteria
 Criteria                   7120.5 D Definition                                               Notes
                                                                    System Requirements Document (SRD) and Requirements
            Alignment with and contribution to Agency needs,
                                                                    Traceability Report are two key documents
  Goals     goals, and objectives and the adequacy of
            requirements flow down from those.


            Adequacy of technical approach, as defined by NPR
Technical
            7123.1 entrance and success criteria.

                                                                    Includes ICAs/ISAs/SRAs/JCLs
 Cost /     Adequacy of the integrated cost and schedule estimate
Schedule    and funding strategy in accordance with NPD 1000.5.


                                                                    Includes manpower, fabrication/assembly/test facilities and
            Adequacy and availability of resources other than       equipment, ground support equipment, launch sites,
Resources                                                           communication networks, and mission operation centers;
            budget.
                                                                    either government or privately held resources.

                                                                    Assessment of the P/p management of risk for its adequacy
            Adequacy of the risk management approach and risk       to deal with all significant threats to its success.
  Risk
            identification and mitigation per NPR 8000.4.

                                                                    Management approach, management practices, acquisition
                                                                    planning adequacy ,and methods of
  Mgmt      Adequacy of management approach.                        communication/reporting


                                                                                                                             Page 14
The SRB Handbook Section 5
                          SRB Products

•   SRB findings are defined as either Strengths or Weaknesses
     – A Strength is a finding of the SRB that describes a feature of the P/p that in the
       judgment of the SRB is better than expected at a particular stage of the life-
       cycle
     – A weakness is a finding that the SRB believes constitutes a threat to the future
       success of the P/p
         • If it is deemed critical, it should be treated as an “issue”. Each issue should
           be accompanied by observations that substantiate the criticality of the
           issue to P/p success and a recommendation(s) for correcting the weakness,
           including a timetable that is consistent with the subsequent
           implementation/operation activities planned
         • If the SRB determines a weakness is worthy of mention, but is not critical to
           the future success of the P/p, it should be treated as a “concern”. Each
           identified concern may be accompanied by a recommendation(s) for
           correcting the weakness that the P/p is encouraged to consider




                                                                                       Page 15
The SRB Handbook Section 5
                       SRB Products

SRB Findings are provided in a Management Briefing and a companion detail report




                                     Criteria   Adequacy   SRB Comments

                                      Goals        G



                                    Technical      Y



                                     Cost /
                                    Schedule
                                                   R




                                    Resources      G



                                      Risk         Y



                                      Mgmt         R




                                                                                   Page 16
The SRB Handbook Section 6
 Notational Review Timeline




                              Page 17
Appendices C thru E:
            Agency Independence Policy

•   Defines the policy and procedure guidance established to assure the
    integrity of Standing Review Board (SRB) reports.
•   SRB Membership Background Information, Confidential Conflict of
    Interest Disclosure, and Non-Disclosure Certification.
•   Outlines the SRB Options for Independent Life-Cycle Reviews.




                                                                          Page 18
Appendix F:
         Program Implementation Review (PIR) Guidance

•   For uncoupled and loosely coupled programs, the Implementation
    Phase only requires Program Status Reviews (PSRs)/Program
    Implementation Reviews (PIRs) at to assess the program’s
    performance and authorize its continuation at biennial KDPs
•   PSRs are conducted by the Program to examine the Program’s
    continuing relevance to the Agency’s Strategic Plan, the progress to
    date against the approved baseline, the implementation plans for
    current and upcoming work, budget, schedule, and all risks and their
    mitigation plans. PIRs are conducted as part of this review to provide
    Agency management with an independent assessment of the readiness
    of the Program to continue with implementation.
•   Additional purposes of these reviews are to :
     –   Identify to Agency management the Program strengths, issues and concerns
     –   Identify specific areas where improvement is needed and provide recommendations on
         means to strengthen the Program
     –   Identify broader Agency issues that have potential impact on present or future Program
         performance


                                                                                              Page 19
Appendix F:
Program Implementation Review (PIR) Guidance




                                               Page 20
Summary


•   The SRB Handbook was developed to provide the philosophy and
    guidelines for the setup, processes, and products of SRBs in support
    of the Agency’s implementation of its ILCR process.
•   The SRB Handbook is written to provide guidance to the NASA
    program and project communities and the SRBs regarding the
    expectations, processes, products, timelines, and working interfaces
    with NASA Mission Directorates (MDs), Centers, review organizations,
    and Management Councils.




                                                                           Page 21

Calloway amer v2

  • 1.
    SRB Handbook andProcess Michelle Calloway and Tahani Amer Independent Program Assessment Office Seventh Annual NASA Program Management Challenge 2010 February 10, 2010 Used with permission Page 1
  • 2.
    Outline SRB Handbook Overview SRBHandbook Purpose Section 1: Context for Independent Lifecycle Review (ILCR) Process Section 2: High level principles that govern the SRBs Section 3: Scope and expectations of ILCR Section 4: SRB Initiation process Section 5: SRB Products Section 6: Notional review timeline Appendices: Agency Independence Policy, PIR guidance Summary Page 2
  • 3.
    SRB Handbook Overview •NASA established Standing Review Boards (SRBs) for independent life- cycle reviews (ILCR) to ensure that high priority Agency Programs and projects (P/p) are reviewed by groups of uniquely qualified experts. • The SRB Handbook (HB) is a tool to assist the NASA community and SRBs in defining working interfaces with Mission Directorates, Programs, projects, Centers, review organizations, and Management Councils based on best practices. • The SRB HB is a Special Publication release from the NASA Office of Program Analysis and Evaluation (PA&E) which expands on the concept of the SRB introduced in the NPR 7120.5, Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements. • The SRB Handbook was published by Program Analysis & Evaluation/IPAO with concurrence from Office of the Chief Engineer. Page 3
  • 4.
    SRB Handbook Purpose •The SRB Handbook provides the philosophy and guidelines for the setup, processes, and products of SRBs in support of the Agency‘s implementation of its independent lifecycle review process. • The SRB Handbook is written to provide guidance to the NASA program and project communities and the SRBs regarding the expectations, processes, products, timelines, and working interfaces with NASA Mission Directorates (MDs), Centers, review organizations, and Management Councils. • The SRB Handbook can be supplemented and tailored to meet the needs of the Agency and P/p being reviewed. Page 4
  • 5.
    The SRB HandbookSection 1 • The SRB process integrates the NPR 7120.5 requirements and the NPR 7123.1 requirements, into a single ILCR set. • NPR 7120.5’s governance of the SRB is consistent with NASA Policy Directive (NPD) 1000.0, Governance and Strategic Management Handbook. • SRBs lower the burden of multiple ILCRs on P/p and enhance efficiency through the development of common review definitions and processes. • The SRB implementation also ensures that P/p, Decision Authorities (DAs), and Technical Authorities (TAs) benefit from consistent, efficient, and value-added ILCRs and products. • Needs and objectives of convening authorities and decision authorities are intended to be met through the SRB. Page 5
  • 6.
    The SRB HandbookSection 2 • The HB provides guidelines for SRB processes and products. • Identifies the major principles and assumptions that govern the execution of SRBs. • Provides guidance for SRB member independence: – Civil servants (CSs) must have a complete Office of Government Ethics (OGE) 450 or Standard Form (SF) 278 form on file. CS will be screened for personal Conflict of Interest (PCI) and position screening. – Office Chief Council (where contract is located) screens consultant for Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) and PCI with assistance from contracting officer. – In the event of PCI, procedures have been established by the Agency to determine if the impairment is considered acceptable. If the impairment is acceptable, it will be documented and approved by the applicable NASA legal officials and the CAs. – In the event of OCI for any prospective SRB member, “firewalls” within the company, the “non-disclosure agreement” and “evidence” that personal bias has been sufficiently mitigated shall be provided in an OCI mitigation plan by the contractor. – CS and consultants will be vetted on an annual basis. Page 6
  • 7.
    The SRB HandbookSection 3 SRB Engagements • SRBs independently assess P/p throughout their life-cycles at Key Decision Pointe (KDPs) in accordance with NPR 7120.5. • The SRB remains inactive between life-cycle reviews except as requested by the CAs or DAs. • The SRB is intended to support the reviews in the P/p life cycle with a consistent core membership. • Category 1 project SRBs report to the Agency PMC, all other project SRBs complete their reporting at the MD PMC level. • The actual reporting requirements for each review with SRB participation are determined with the preparation of the Addendum ToRs for that review. Page 7
  • 8.
    The SRB HandbookSection 3 P/P Categorizations • Projects are broken down by robotic or human flight projects. • Robotic mission projects and human mission projects have different life-cycle reviews, assessment requirements, and reporting venues. • Programs are broken down by Uncoupled or Loosely Coupled Projects and Single or Tightly Coupled Programs. • Programs consisting of multiple projects that are not directly connected to one another (either by schedule, cost, technical interfaces, or management structures) are characterized as uncoupled or loosely coupled programs. • Programs consisting of one large project or multiple projects that are directly connected to one another (e.g., Space Shuttle Program) are characterized as single-project or tightly coupled programs. Page 8
  • 9.
    SRB Engagement Life-CycleRoadmap for Robotic Mission Projects Page 9
  • 10.
    The SRB HandbookSection 4 SRB Composition and COI • The Agency has established the following options for conducting independent reviews by SRBs. • Appendix C and D contain the COI Policy, COI Disclosure and Non- Disclosure Certification related to SRBs. Page 10
  • 11.
    The SRB HandbookSection 4 SRB Membership • Members are selected from within the Agency, industry, academia, and other government agencies. – Consideration should be given to other NASA Centers and cross-mission opportunities, e.g., robotic versus human project expertise. – For project SRBs, a suggested diversity rule of thumb is that no more than half of the members should come from the host Center. – Nominees must satisfy the independence criterion and should represent a balance of diverse backgrounds and professional and organizational perspectives. • Minimizing the SRB size has been considered best practice. Multiple disciplines can be covered by one member. Specialists may be added temporarily to review specific critical areas. • It is important to balance competence with current or recent experience in the selection of well-qualified SRB members. • The SRB chair will be a well recognized expert with a depth of technical knowledge and the breadth of experience. • The review manager ensures consistency in the implementation of Agency policy, process, and products as defined in the ILCR process. RM may also serve on the SRB as a discipline expert. Page 11
  • 12.
    The SRB HandbookSection 4 SRB Membership/ToRs • The Chair has the responsibility for developing the candidate membership list for the SRB. However, the CAs approve the membership. • The disciplines necessary to form the team are derived from the P/p content, such as the work breakdown structure (WBS). Consideration is also given to risk areas of the P/p. • The ToR is the agreement between the SRB and the convening authorities and documents the SRB charter, scope, and agreements between the convening authorities and the SRB. • The Chair and RM work collaboratively with the CAs and the P/p to develop a ToR that meets the expectations for the Agency. Page 12
  • 13.
    The SRB HandbookSection 5 SRB Products 3 primary functions of SRB Assessment: 1. Perform complete comprehensive independent assessments of the P/p 2. Develop findings and formulate recommendations based on these assessments 3. Report results to the P/p and TAs and DAs Page 13
  • 14.
    The SRB HandbookSection 5 SRB Assessment Criteria SRB assessments use NPR 7120.5D’s set of six assessment criteria Criteria 7120.5 D Definition Notes System Requirements Document (SRD) and Requirements Alignment with and contribution to Agency needs, Traceability Report are two key documents Goals goals, and objectives and the adequacy of requirements flow down from those. Adequacy of technical approach, as defined by NPR Technical 7123.1 entrance and success criteria. Includes ICAs/ISAs/SRAs/JCLs Cost / Adequacy of the integrated cost and schedule estimate Schedule and funding strategy in accordance with NPD 1000.5. Includes manpower, fabrication/assembly/test facilities and Adequacy and availability of resources other than equipment, ground support equipment, launch sites, Resources communication networks, and mission operation centers; budget. either government or privately held resources. Assessment of the P/p management of risk for its adequacy Adequacy of the risk management approach and risk to deal with all significant threats to its success. Risk identification and mitigation per NPR 8000.4. Management approach, management practices, acquisition planning adequacy ,and methods of Mgmt Adequacy of management approach. communication/reporting Page 14
  • 15.
    The SRB HandbookSection 5 SRB Products • SRB findings are defined as either Strengths or Weaknesses – A Strength is a finding of the SRB that describes a feature of the P/p that in the judgment of the SRB is better than expected at a particular stage of the life- cycle – A weakness is a finding that the SRB believes constitutes a threat to the future success of the P/p • If it is deemed critical, it should be treated as an “issue”. Each issue should be accompanied by observations that substantiate the criticality of the issue to P/p success and a recommendation(s) for correcting the weakness, including a timetable that is consistent with the subsequent implementation/operation activities planned • If the SRB determines a weakness is worthy of mention, but is not critical to the future success of the P/p, it should be treated as a “concern”. Each identified concern may be accompanied by a recommendation(s) for correcting the weakness that the P/p is encouraged to consider Page 15
  • 16.
    The SRB HandbookSection 5 SRB Products SRB Findings are provided in a Management Briefing and a companion detail report Criteria Adequacy SRB Comments Goals G Technical Y Cost / Schedule R Resources G Risk Y Mgmt R Page 16
  • 17.
    The SRB HandbookSection 6 Notational Review Timeline Page 17
  • 18.
    Appendices C thruE: Agency Independence Policy • Defines the policy and procedure guidance established to assure the integrity of Standing Review Board (SRB) reports. • SRB Membership Background Information, Confidential Conflict of Interest Disclosure, and Non-Disclosure Certification. • Outlines the SRB Options for Independent Life-Cycle Reviews. Page 18
  • 19.
    Appendix F: Program Implementation Review (PIR) Guidance • For uncoupled and loosely coupled programs, the Implementation Phase only requires Program Status Reviews (PSRs)/Program Implementation Reviews (PIRs) at to assess the program’s performance and authorize its continuation at biennial KDPs • PSRs are conducted by the Program to examine the Program’s continuing relevance to the Agency’s Strategic Plan, the progress to date against the approved baseline, the implementation plans for current and upcoming work, budget, schedule, and all risks and their mitigation plans. PIRs are conducted as part of this review to provide Agency management with an independent assessment of the readiness of the Program to continue with implementation. • Additional purposes of these reviews are to : – Identify to Agency management the Program strengths, issues and concerns – Identify specific areas where improvement is needed and provide recommendations on means to strengthen the Program – Identify broader Agency issues that have potential impact on present or future Program performance Page 19
  • 20.
    Appendix F: Program ImplementationReview (PIR) Guidance Page 20
  • 21.
    Summary • The SRB Handbook was developed to provide the philosophy and guidelines for the setup, processes, and products of SRBs in support of the Agency’s implementation of its ILCR process. • The SRB Handbook is written to provide guidance to the NASA program and project communities and the SRBs regarding the expectations, processes, products, timelines, and working interfaces with NASA Mission Directorates (MDs), Centers, review organizations, and Management Councils. Page 21