Harvey elliott

14,986 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
14,986
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
20
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Harvey elliott

  1. 1. Architecture for Cost Analytics Process Environment Tony Harvey Daren Elliott NASA 2012 PM Challenge February 22, 2012  Los Angeles  Washington, D.C.  Boston  Chantilly  Huntsville  Dayton  Santa Barbara  Albuquerque  Colorado Springs  Goddard Space Flight Center  Johnson Space Center  Ogden  Patuxent River  Washington Navy Yard  Ft. Meade  Ft. Monmouth  Dahlgren  Quantico  Cleveland  Montgomery  Silver Spring  San Diego  Tampa  Tacoma  Aberdeen  Oklahoma City  Eglin AFB  San Antonio  New Orleans  Denver  Vandenberg AFBPRT 114 03 January 2012 1 of 42
  2. 2. Outline/Agenda Project Lifecycle Process Context Cost Analytics Framework Overview Fundamental Cost Data Data Iteration Cost Analytics Tools for Cost Analytics Cost Analytics in the Project Lifecycle PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 2 of 42
  3. 3. Project Lifecycle Process Overview High-level Project Lifecycle  Definition Phase (Pre-Phase A)  Simple Definition of Functionality with Value Proposition (High Level Cost and Schedule )  Acquisition Phase (Phase A)  Detailed Definition with Cost and Schedule through End-of-Life  Development Phase (Phases B to D)  Cost and Schedule updates  Operation Phase (Phase E)  Cost and Schedule Updates Use Cost Analytics in Each Phase PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 3 of 42
  4. 4. Project Life Cycle Conceptual View Definition Phase Acquisition Phase Development Phase Operations Phase Concept Definition Feasibility Measurement Analysis Criteria Project Definition Cost / Schedule Management Calibration Decisions Project Implementation Analysis Tools Performance Management Analysis Decisions Project Analytics Data Store Project Modification/ Sustaining Project Project Management Database Reporting Performance Database Tools AnalysisPRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 4 of 42
  5. 5. Infrastructure Goals Functionality  Provide Cost and Schedule Data Management  Provide Cost and Schedule Analysis Tools  Provide Project Engineering support for Performance analyses  Provide Program Management support for Schedule and Budget excursion analyses Maintainability  Support Easy Database Changes  Support Easy Tool Additions  Support Data Load/Unload PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 5 of 42
  6. 6. Infrastructure Options Infrastructure Options for Technology Solution  Use a Web UI and MS/SQLServer  Hosted on Network Servers  Accessible to Authorized Users in NDC domain  Use Desktop Application and Apache Derby Database  Installed and Executed on a PC/Laptop  Restricted to PC Users  Uses Network Drives for inter-User communications PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 6 of 42
  7. 7. Web Infrastructure Network Servers MOP Cost Analysis Data Authenticated Database IP Network / JSC VPNUsers (2) Log into (3) File (4) Create Infrastructure to Uploaded into (1) Prepare Cost Reports upload DB Data XLS File(s) PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 7 of 42
  8. 8. Desktop Infrastructure Network Drive Transfer/Reporting Medium Embedded Database User Cost Analysis Data (2) File (3) Export Cost Uploaded into Data and (1) Prepare Cost DB Reports Data XLS File(s)PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 8 of 42
  9. 9. Fundamental Cost Data QUESTION: What do you get when you… ?  Identify EVERY Cost Driver and capture them in an Excel Spreadsheet  Identify the Schedule Tasks associated with each Cost Item  Separate different Cost Data Types into separate Tabs  E.g. Material, Travel, Level of Effort, Software Development scope ANSWER: Something like… CxP MOP Cost Analysis Data Requirements (CADRe) CADRe data is a NASA HQ requirement to demonstrate “credible cost estimates” MOP delivered CADRe data to HQ up to MOP PDR A Normalized data format was used for the MOP CADRe data suitable for storage in a relational database Tecolote developed a CADRe database on an MOD network server PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 9 of 42
  10. 10. Changing to Schedule Oriented Cost data MOP CADRe data was Cost Data allocated to Fiscal Years When the Schedule changed the Cost data needed to be changed to re-spread it across Fiscal Years to reflect the Schedule changes Recently the CADRe data has been redesigned to become Schedule Oriented  Cost Items are associated with Schedule Tasks  Changes to the Project Schedule automatically re-spread the cost PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 10 of 42
  11. 11. CADRe data What data is supported?  Schedule Data  MS/Project files can be used to supply schedule data  All costs are associated with a Schedule Task  Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Data  CADRe data can use ANY Project defined WBS  All costs are associated with a WBS Item  Travel Cost Data  Material Cost Data  Level of Effort Cost Data  Software Development Cost Data PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 11 of 42
  12. 12. Schedule Data Low Likeliest High Schedule Task Name Start End Duration Predecessors % Complete Status Date Multiplier Multiplier MultiplierMSProj11 10/3/2011 9/30/2020 2347 10% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2Kickoff 10/3/2011 10/3/2011 0 100% 15Jun2012 1 1 1APA Development 10/3/2011 4/26/2013 410 62% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2APA Design 10/3/2011 10/21/2011 15 1 100% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2APA PBR 10/21/2011 10/21/2011 0 3 100% 15Jun2012 1 1 1APA Implementation 10/24/2011 3/29/2013 375 63% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2APA User Interface 10/24/2011 3/29/2013 375 4 50% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2APA Constraints Checker 10/24/2011 11/2/2012 270 4 70% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2APA Database Manager 10/24/2011 11/9/2012 275 4 60% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2APA Schedule Manager 10/24/2011 8/24/2012 220 4 80% 15Jun2012 0.9 1 1.2 Subject Matter Expert PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 12 of 42
  13. 13. WBS Data WBS # WBS Name 1. Another Planning Application 1.1 APA Management 1.2 APA Development 1.2.1 APA Systems Engineering 1.2.2 APA Implementation 1.2.2.1 APA User Interface 1.2.2.2 APA Constraints Checker 1.2.2.3 APA Database Manager 1.2.2.4 APA Schedule Manager 1.2.3 APA Deployment 1.3 APA Sustaining 1.4 APA ModificationsPRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 13 of 42
  14. 14. Material Cost Data Activity Material Purchase Unit Price FY ofWBS # WBS Name Type Type Material Description BOE Type $ price1. Another Planning Application Dev COTS HW Development Server BOM #3 Buy $5,000 10 Single Unit Config Num Spares Cost Low Likeliest High Qty Configs Qty Assoc. Task Distribution Multiplier Multiplier Multiplier FY11 FY12 1 1 - APA Development Start 0.90 1 1.2 $0 $5,253 Schedule Task Name Start End Duration MSProj11 10/3/2011 9/30/2020 2347 Kickoff 10/3/2011 10/3/2011 0 APA Development 10/3/2011 4/26/2013 410 PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 14 of 42
  15. 15. Travel Cost Data Num Daily Trip Activity Num Num Days Per Lodging Travel BY of Total CostWBS # WBS Name Type People Trips /Trip Diem Cost Cost price (BY)1. Another Planning Application Dev 2 4 3 $75 $150 $1,000 10 $13,400 BY of Cost Low Likeliest High price Assoc. Task Distribution Multiplier Multiplier Multiplier FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 10 APA Development Level 1 1.1 1.2 $0 $9,855 $5,783 $0 Schedule Task Name Start End Duration MSProj11 10/3/2011 9/30/2020 2347 Kickoff 10/3/2011 10/3/2011 0 APA Development 10/3/2011 4/26/2013 410 PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 15 of 42
  16. 16. Level of Effort (LOE) Data Activity Level of WBS # WBS Name Cost Type Type Assoc. Task Effort FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY151.1 APA Management FTE Dev APA Development 0.5 - 0.50 0.29 - -1.2.1 APA Systems Engineering EP Dev APA Design 4.0 - 0.20 - - -1.2.3 APA Deployment EP Dev APA Deployment 4.0 - - 0.28 - -1.3 APA Sustaining EP Sus APA Sustaining 2.0 - - 1.02 2.00 2.001.4 APA Modifications EP Mod APA Modification - - - - - - Schedule Task Name Start End Duration APA Development 10/3/2011 4/26/2013 410 APA Design 10/3/2011 10/21/2011 15 APA Deployment 4/1/2013 4/26/2013 20 APA Sustaining 3/29/2013 9/30/2020 1957 PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 16 of 42
  17. 17. (SEER) Software Data Cost Activity Size Newly Size Pre- % change to WBS # WBS Name Type Type Units Developed exists Pre-exist1.2.2.1 APA User Interface EP Dev KSLOC 70 - 0%1.2.2.2 APA Constraints Checker EP Dev KSLOC - 81 10%1.2.2.3 APA Database Manager EP Dev KSLOC - 50 10%1.2.2.4 APA Schedule Manager EP Dev KSLOC - 90 10% Software Size % change COTS Type - # Separate Phase At Reuse to Reuse Size Programs Estimate Language Application Type - 0% None 2 Proposal Java Graphical User Interface - 0% None 2 Proposal Java Expert System - 0% None 2 Proposal Java Data Warehousing - 0% None 2 Proposal Java Data Warehousing Development Development ROM Size / Staff Assoc. Task for Method Standard Staff Year Years Phase1 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 Incremental DO-178B Level C 4.0 8.75 APA User Interface - 5.74 3.01 - RUP Full DO-178B Level C 4.0 3.43 APA Constraints Checker - 3.12 0.30 - Spiral DO-178B Level C 4.0 1.83 APA Database Manager - 1.64 0.19 - Spiral DO-178B Level C 4.0 3.70 APA Schedule Manager - 3.70 - - Schedule Task Name Start End Duration APA User Interface 10/24/2011 3/29/2013 375 APA Constraints Checker 10/24/2011 11/2/2012 270 APA Database Manager 10/24/2011 11/9/2012 275 APA Schedule Manager 10/24/2011 8/24/2012 220 PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 17 of 42
  18. 18. Data Iteration Cost Estimation Events are used to record Multiple Data Snapshots in the Database  MCR, SDR, PDR, CDR, etc.  Quarterly Baseline Reviews  Monthly Status Reports  Weekly Project Reviews Multiple data snapshots provide more opportunities for Cost Analysis  Performance analyses from comparing two snapshots  Schedule Performance Analyses  Cost Performance Analyses  Trending analyses  Changes in scope over time  Changes in Cost Estimate over time  Changes in Schedule over time PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 18 of 42
  19. 19. Basic Cost AnalyticsRequirements+ Design Effort Cost Loaded Work to be done Schedule (i.e. estimated labor + A plan to do the work material cost)Technology Productivity MetricsResources Cost Profiles Cost analytics Budget06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 19 of 42
  20. 20. Extended Cost AnalyticsRequirements+ Design Total Project Cost (w/ LOE) Effort Cost Loaded p Work to be done Schedule (i.e. estimated labor + A plan to do the work material cost)Technology $ Productivity Project Risks MetricsResources Emperical Heuristics Cost Profiles Project External Cost analytics Completion Date Events Budget Utilization Capacity to do work06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 = Source of Uncertainty PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 20 of 42
  21. 21. Tools for Cost Analytics SEER-SEM for Software Estimation ACEIT for Cost Estimation ACEIT for Cost and Schedule Confidence Level Analyses Schedule Comparison for Schedule Performance Analyses Cost Profile Comparison for Cost Performance Analysis PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 21 of 42
  22. 22. Cost Analytics in the Project Lifecycle Definition Phase (Pre-Phase A)  Project Business Case Justification Acquisition Phase (Phase A)  Detailed Budget Analyses Development Phase (Phases B to D)  Development Cost and Schedule Performance Analyses Operation Phase (Phase E)  Operations Cost and Schedule Performance Analyses PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 22 of 42
  23. 23. Process/ Data Flow Architecture Data Mined from Project Business Development Project Case Process Dashboard Project Scorecard Updated Cost / Project + Detailed Cost / Heuristic Data / Schedule Data Analytics Schedule Data Metrics Database Planning Data Multi- Budget Data Updates Project DashboardPre-Phase A Phases A to EPRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 23 of 42
  24. 24. Data Collection - Project Definition Primary Focus is the “Business Case”  Use Business Case Surveys  Use Business Case Scorecard  Use CADRe Detailed Cost Data  Collect Risk (Threat) Data  Collect “Replaceable” Costs  Costs that will occur if Project is NOT performed  Costs that will be replaced if Project IS performed  Create Business Case Summary from input data  Summarize detailed cost/schedule data  Derive ROI data PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 24 of 42
  25. 25. Business Case Data Quantitative Cost Savings ROI/NRI after 10 years $381,000 Balanced Project Scorecard Category Rating Score Status items created include Reuse Extensibility >80% Med 27 9 Multiple Future Software Cost Avoidance  Project Scorecard Reusability Flexibility Groups Significant 9 15 Standards Compliant 27 Ops Need Mandatory 45  Cost Profile Qualitative Ops Scope Multiple Groups 9 Customer Satisfaction $ Avoidance Med 15  Savings (ROI) profile Accessibility Some 12 Security Low 18 Integration Complexity  Project Schedule/ Milestone Chart TouchPoints Med 6 192 Qual Score Context 56% PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 25 of 42
  26. 26. Data Collection - Project Development Cost and Schedule Data is collected and stored throughout the Project Lifecycle – Capture the pre-kickoff baseline data – Establish reporting cycles for capturing data iterations – Process Data for status and performance analyses PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 26 of 42
  27. 27. Project Schedule Status Schedule data captured in database Summary Status charts created for Project Dashboard PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 27 of 42
  28. 28. Project Cost Performance Shows Planned vs. Actual Cost Performance Burn-down Chart shows Baseline Cost-to-complete over time and Actual Costs PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 28 of 42
  29. 29. Project Schedule Performance Metrics Percent Start Finish Old ProjectedName Start Finish Duration Complete Slip Slip PDWS PDWP ADWP SV SPI SCPI Duration DurationTask 1 1-Jan-00 12-Jan-00 12 100% 0 2 10 10 12 0 1 0.834 12 12Task 2 5-Jan-00 14-Jan-00 10 80% 0 0 10 8 10 -2 0.8 0.8 10 10.5Task 3 8-Jan-00 17-Jan-00 10 70% 0 0 8 7 8 -1 0.875 0.875 10 10.43Task 4 14-Jan-00 18-Jan-00 5 0% 0 0 2 0 2 -2 0 0.715 5 7  Provides Performance Indices for Schedule Tasks much like EVM indices  Compares two iterations of the Project’s schedule  Measures actual progress against planned progress during interval between schedules  Identifies Schedule items that need attention  Provides Projected Task Duration based on measured performance EXAMPLE PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 29 of 42
  30. 30. Project Excursions (What-Ifs) Program Management must handle many pressures to control projects due to  Budget Cuts  Project Overruns  Multiple Projects Competing for limited Funds Cost Analytics must support  Schedule Excursions  Budget Constraint Excursions PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 30 of 42
  31. 31. Web Framework Status There is a CxP MOP CADRe Database on an MOD Network Server The Web UI to the MOP CADRe DB can be used to Import and Export data CxP MOP users can request access to the Web UI CxP MOP users can be authorized to access to the Web UI The SEER-SEM tool runs on user request to create Software Development Estimates The new Database Schema for Schedule Based Cost Data has been defined PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 31 of 42
  32. 32. Desktop Framework Status Developed Primarily as an Analytics Tool Development Platform The UI supports multiple database instances Tools exist to  Import Schedule Based Cost Data  Export Cost Data Spreadsheets  Update CADRe data from Project Schedules  Create Schedule Performance Status  Create a Milestone Excursion ACEIT model data  Perform Budget Constraint Analyses PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 32 of 42
  33. 33. Thank You Tony Harvey (aharvey@tecolote.com)PRT 114 PRT 114 03 2012 03 January January 2012 Approved For Public Release 33 of 42
  34. 34. Backup CADRe Submission to HQ Detailed Process Flow Charts Multi-Layered Management Concept Detailed Business Case Results PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 34 of 42
  35. 35. When is CADRe Data Required? NASA HQ requires CADRe submissions 5 times in a project’s life Program Phases Formulation Implementation Flight Projects Pre-Phase A: Phase A: Phase B: Phase C: Phase D: Phase E: Phase F: Life Cycle Concept Concept Fabrication, Operations & Disposal Phases Studies Development Preliminary Design Detailed Design Assembly & Test Sustainment SDR PDR CDR Launc Traditional h Waterfall Development or Directed 1 1a 2 2a 3 4 5 Missions Down AO-Driven Select CR Select Step 2 Projects Step 1 1 2 2a 3 4 5Legend GPMC Mission Decision Review/ICR All parts of CADRe due 30 days 2 4 CADRe, All Parts after site review 1 All parts of CADRe due 30 days 90 days after launch, after site review as built or as deployed 2a CADRe update, if necessary configuration 1a CADRe update, if necessary 5 CADRe, Part C only 3 Update as necessary during CADRe delivered; based on 30 days after CDR 11 last year of planned Concept Study Report (CSR) project life and winning proposal PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 35 of 42
  36. 36. Project Process DetailsPRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 36 of 42
  37. 37. Program Management DetailPRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 37 of 42
  38. 38. Multi-Layered Management ConceptPRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 38 of 42
  39. 39. Project Cost Profile Provides statement of Resource Requirements over time  Total Cost per BCC  By Tasks using WBS  Shows Cost Breakdown over time  Collect CADRe Data at Detailed Level  Identify Summary WBS Items in Detailed Data  By Activity Type  Shows cost separated by Development, Modification, and Sustaining $2,000 Source Activity Data Type Type Cost Type FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 $1,800SW Dev FTE - - - - - - $1,600SW Mod FTE - - - - - -SW Sus FTE - - - - - - $1,400SW Dev EP 17.49 8.72 - - - - $1,200SW Mod EP - 3.87 7.74 7.71 3.85 -SW Sus EP - 0.51 1.03 1.03 0.51 - $1,000 RY$, MLOE Dev FTE 1.00 0.50 - - - -LOE Mod FTE - - - - - - $800LOE Sus FTE - 1.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 - $600LOE Dev EP - - - - - -LOE Mod EP - - - - - - $400LOE Sus EP - 5.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 - $200Trav Dev Travel $319.91 $165.10 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Trav Mod Travel $0.00 $1,807.01 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0Trav Sus Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $1,736.13 $0.00 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20Mat Dev Material $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Task I Task II Task III Task IV Task VMat Mod Material $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00Mat Sus Material $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 39 of 42
  40. 40. ROI Chart Shows Costs vs. Savings  Per BCC Calculate Savings From  CADRe Detailed Cost Data  “Replaceable” Costs  Costs that will occur if Project is NOT performed  Costs that will be replaced if Project IS performed As Costs change ROI can be Re-Calculated PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 40 of 42
  41. 41. Project Scorecard Quantitative Cost Savings ROI/NRI after 10 years $381,000 Provides Qualitative Balanced Project Scorecard Category Rating Score Rating Reuse >80% 27 Extensibility Med 9 Final Score can be Future Software Cost Avoidance Multiple Reusability Groups 9 used for Option Flexibility Significant 15 Standards Compliant 27 comparison Qualitative Ops Need Mandatory 45 Multiple Identical to current Customer Satisfaction Ops Scope $ Avoidance Groups Med 9 15 BCC scorecard Accessibility Some 12 Security Low 18  With textual rating Integration Complexity TouchPoints Med 6 192 drop-down lists Qual Score Quantitative Cost Savings 10 yr ROI $381,000 $381,000 Context $381,000 56% Data provided by Qualitative Criteria Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Project team and Qualitative Scores Future Reuse Software Cost Extensibility >80% Med < 10% High 30-40% Low stored in DB Avoidance Reusability Flexibility Multiple Groups Significant Limited Use Complete Throughout MOD Little Standards Compliant Non-standard Little Customer Ops Need Mandatory Nice to have Big benefits Satisfaction Ops Scope Multiple Groups Limited Use Throughout MOD $ Avoidance Med None Low Accessibility Some Restricted Not restricted Integration Security Low High Low Complexity TouchPoints Med Med Med Numerical Score 192 57 141 Qual Score Context 56% 17% 41% PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 41 of 42
  42. 42. Project Schedule/ Milestone Chart Provides Summary Schedule Data Schedule Data is collected in CADRe data CADRe data can be updated from Project Schedule CADRe data identifies Summary Schedule items Milestone Chart created from Project Schedule data held in the CADRe data PRT 114 03 January 2012 Approved For Public Release 42 of 42

×