Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNASA Earned Value Management (EVM) Capability ProjectPM ChallengeJerald KerbyFebruary 9, 1
  2. 2. Content• EVM Capability Objectives• Approach• Project Life Cycle• Current State/Gaps within Agency• Current EVM Capability Project Status• Lessons Learned/Issues to date – Actual Costs – Planning• Possible Future Issue Papers• Gaps Update• Path Forward• Backups – ANSI/EIA-748 (32 guidelines) – Draft NASA EVM Processes 2
  3. 3. NASA EVM Capability ObjectivesOverall Objective is to develop an Agency EVM capability that complies with theguidelines in ANSI/EIA-748 and test through two pilots, refine and finalize EVM processbased on test results.• Provide integrated set of processes, tools, guidance, training and technical support (people) to develop and demonstrate an Agency EVM capability.• Apply lessons learned from previous pilot activities• Clarify roles at program, project and Center level• Devise a strategy for EVM software tool licensing and maintenance• Provide for the planning, managing, controlling and integration of “in-house” work at a project’s primary and support Centers• Integrate “in-house” with contractor data for comprehensive project performance assessment• Goal is to apply ANSI/EIA 748 guidelines to enhance EVM capability. – Document anomalies if needed 3
  4. 4. EVM Capability Approach• Manage as a project with formulation, implementation, and operations/maintenance phases – Approved by NASA Project Management Counclil (PMC) in Dec. 2009• Maximize use of existing COTS software• Partner with ESMD, SMD, CFO, CIO, OP, JSC, MSFC, GSFC• Pilot capability on one Constallation (CxP) project and one SMD project• Establish a steering committee with members from all Mission Directorates and Centers• Commission a peer review board to include EVM practitioners, business managers, project managers in project oversight.• Document agreements (via MOU/Project Plan) between Centers, mission directorates and support offices to define roles and responsibilities.• Present status twice annually to NASA PMC via Baseline Performance Review (BPR).• Once capability is developed and tested via pilot activities, system operations and maintenance, including licenses and technical support, will be funded by projects and by the institutions as they implement EVM 4
  5. 5. Steering Committee Steering Committee Email TelephoneOCE Mike Ryschkewitsch 202.358.1823OCFO Beth Robinson (Chair) 202.358.0978SMD Mike Luther 202.358.0260 Roy Maizel (alternate for SMD) 202.358.2630ESMDOCIO Gary Cox 202-358-0413 Michael Medsker (alternate for OCIO) 202-358-0637OP Jim Balinskas 202.358.0445PA&E Tom Coonce 202.358.4905MSFC Pam Cucarola 256.544.0092JSC Cynthia Neal 281.483.2202GSFC George Barth 301.286.5894GRC James Free 216.433.3339JPL Dale Johnson 818.354.5453ARC Carol Carroll 650.604.0267SSC Jim Bevis 228.688.3374 Keith Brock (alternate for SSC) 228.688.1311DRFCLaRC Dr. David Gilman 757.864.4428KSC Janet Petro 321.867.2355Others 5
  6. 6. Peer Review Team Peer Review Team Email TelephoneOCE Sandra Smalley 202.358.4731OCFO Kevin Buford 202.358.0405SMD Chuck Miller 202.358.0715 Claude Freaner (alternate for SMD) 202.358.2522ESMDOCIO Gerald Smith 202-358-1372 Kai Moericke (alternate for OCIO) 202-358-4733OP Carl Weber 202.358.1784PA&E John Fitch 202.358.1228MSFC Stacy Counts 256.544.6004JSC Doug Sander 281.244.7391JSC Justin Mathurin 281.483.6333GSFC William Sluder 301.286.8976GRC Bob Sefcik 216.433.8445 Vince Bilardo (alternate for GRC) 216.433.3931JPL Kevin Rice 818.354.3622ARCSSC Robert Ross 228.688.2320 Deborah Norton (alternate for SSC) 228.688.1168DRFCLaRC Dan Tenney (Chair) 757.864.6095LaRC Dr. Barry Lazos 757.864.5731KSC Franci Brice 321.867.2381KSC Richard Dobbs 321.867.7402KSC Susan Waterman 321.867.6688Others Richie Law 757-864-2184Others Roy Savage 757-864-4886 6
  7. 7. EVM Capability Life CycleFormulation Implementation Operations & Maintenance• Planning • CxP pilot (EVA) • Consultation/ technical support• Requirements • SMD pilot (ICESat2) • Mentoring• Design & development • Integration and test • Data archival• CxP/NEDI/Others Lessons • Initial operations • IBR support Learned • Capability modifications • Training• Ops Concept/Capability and enhancements Storyboard • Handbook and procedure• Capability Description (Gap updates Analysis) • Agency-wide• Procedure development communications• Training Requirements• MOU• Steering Committee• Business Rules/PPBE Integration 7
  8. 8. Current State within NASANASA utilizes EVM data on contracts but lacks the capability to: (1) readily apply EVM on in-house development effort; and (2) integrate in-house and contracted EVM data for total project performance assessment. – CxP is in the process of building EVM capability but consistent Agency processes do not exist – Centers are also in process of building capability but none are ANSI compliant except JPL – Consistent roles and responsibilities between programs, projects and Centers do not exist to streamline EVM – NASA lacks an approach to coordinate necessary business system, policy, and process changes 8
  9. 9. Current State - ANSI EIA-748 Compliance status• All ANSI/EIA-748 Guidelines Can Be Met - Some Require Workarounds or Changes to NASA policies/procedures – 21 of 32 guidelines can be met with no changes required to current NASA policies/procedures – 11 guidelines currently not met due to gaps with the Agency business systems and processes – Labor intensive workarounds identified for all but 3 of the guidelines not currently met
  10. 10. Fixing the gaps require…• OCE, CFO and CIO solve gaps associated with Agency business systems• In parallel, MDs and Centers establish consistent processes and procedures• Charter a steering committee for oversight and strategic Agency decision making (Members: All Mission Directorates and Centers given the opportunity for membership) – Decisional Direction – Approve a change or waive the requirement• Run two pilots (SMD/ESMD) proofing out capability for integrated in-house and contractor EVM that identifies business system solutions and creates efficiencies through streamlined processes and training – Provide template for all projects to follow – Validate needed business system changes – Develop workarounds for interim solution – Identify optimal solution (what’s good enough?) 10
  11. 11. Current EVM Capability Project Status• Completed Formulation Activities – Drafted EVM Capability processes, system description, and project plan – Peer Review conducted the week of April 12th, 2010 • Responded with Action plan to closeout Request for Actions • No major issues • Any disagreements will come before the Steering Committee for Resolution• Entered implementation phase – 1st Pilot kicked-off at JSC week of April 5th, 2010 and initial gap analysis complete – EVA pilot cancelled in June 2010 because of changes/uncertainty within the CxP and the project office • Documented Results/ Lessons Learned/Issues Papers (end of July) – Two Issue Papers Submitted for Consideration • Inconsistency between Plan and Performance • Business Rules and Actual Cost – 2nd Pilot has started with review of data and setup support • Started in Sept. at GSFC • Pilot delayed in Nov. for re-planning until early Jan. 2011 11
  12. 12. Issue Paper: Business Rules and Actual CostsEffects: NASA business rules and cost distribution methodologies impact NASA’s effective use of the Earned Value approach to project management. The following are three effects. 1. Artificial Variances 2. Distorts EVM data 3. Significantly impairs predictive ability of EVMPossible Solutions: The goal is for projects to obtain reliable and timely actual cost data from NASA’s accounting system for all elements of cost and provide meaningful cost and schedule data for management insight and control. There are several solutions, described below.Alternatives/Recommendation: 1. Maintain Current State 2. Modify System/Processes: Continue the Contractor Performance and Cost Tracking (C-Initiative) or similar initiative with emphasis to resolve these issues. 3. Implement Work-Around: Workaround Alternative 3.a.: Use cost/schedule integration commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) tools to capture lower level costs using estimated actuals outside of SAP. Workaround Alternative 3.b: Use Total Calculated Cost from SAP. 4. Interim Workarounds and Modify System/Processes: This is an integrated alternative that leverages Workaround alternatives 3.a. and 3.b. in the near term, while Alternative 2, Modifying system/Processes, is evaluated for implementation in the longer term. 12
  13. 13. Issue Paper: Inconsistency Plan and PerformanceEffects: NASA inconsistency between plan and performance impacts NASA’s effective use of the Earned Value approach to projectManagement. The following are two effects. 1. Artificial variances are created which dilute the value of EVM metrics in providing meaningful performance data for the responsible manager, monthly project reviews, and external senior management reviews of project performance. 2. The predictive value of EVM performance metrics that enables developing creditable Estimates at Complete (EAC) for work remaining is compromised. Possible Solutions: The goal is to realize and record cost in the period the work is planned and performed. There are severalsolutions described below.Alternatives/Recommendations:1. Maintain Current State2. Modify System/Processes: Develop a consistent methodology for accumulating and distributing non-direct costs to cover support organizations’ indirect budgets. These costs would be allocated to projects that use these services utilizing indirect cost pools similar to industry practices today.3. Implement Workarounds: Workaround Alternative 3.a Refine the planning/work authorization process that documents the agreement between the project and performing support organizations for the technical scope of work, along with the associated schedule and budget, to require time-phasing all elements of costs to be consistent with the planned timing of allocating these costs. Workaround Alternative 3.b: Develop a process using estimate actuals where indirect costs are incurred in the same manner and in the same time period in which they are planned in the EVM PMB. Workaround Alternative 3.c: Plan indirect costs in a separate work package (WP) within the control account. This would require a method to distinguish the costs so they can be associated with the correct WPs. Workaround Alternative 3.d: Plan indirect costs in a separate, higher-level control account at the project level that could be managed and reported separately. Workaround Alternative 3.e: Increase Center CM&O budgets to meet the needs of the support organizations’ indirects or ODCs.4. Interim Workarounds and Modify System/Processes: This is an integrated alternative that leverages Workaround Alternatives 3.a. and 3.d. in the near term while Alternative 2, Modifying System/Processes, is evaluated for implementation. The approach would be to refine the planning/work authorization process that documents the scope, schedule, and budget (all elements of cost) between organizations (Workaround 3.a); in conjunction with requiring the establishment of a separate, higher- level control account at the project level for indirect costs to be planned in the same manner in which costs are expected to be recognized and services rendered (Workaround 3.d). In the far term, develop a consistent methodology for accumulating and distributing non-direct costs to cover support organizations’ indirect budgets (Alternative 2).
  14. 14. Recommendations/Approval on Issues• Issue Paper #1 - Planning − Continue to access the impact of EVA pilot during ICESat-2 pilot − Test the two recommended alternatives − Document ICESat 2 results and either make a process/business change or address in training• Issue Paper #2 - Business rules and actual costs − Maintain recommendations made by project team −Test workarounds during ICESat 2 pilot and document results – OCFO develops a detail plan for the Initiative C to help address the issues • Delivery date to coincide with end of pilot or before • EVM Capability will support by providing EVM requirements • Agency makes a decision on long-term solution based on pilot results and OCFO plan.• Next Steps… • Resume the ICESat2 pilot and update Steering Committee early spring 2011. 14
  15. 15. Possible Future Issue - Implement EVM early/TransitionLesson Learned: Implement EVM as early as possible in Project Life – Setting up EVM in the planning phase is easier than trying to retrofit once the project is nearing maturity• Issue: EVM from Phase B to Phase C. Currently the Agency’s requirement is to report EVM 60 days after entering into phase C. The actuals have not caught up with the EVM data when the first month of EVM is required• Causes: The same project number is used for each phase of a project. Actuals are slow to catch up from one phase to another• Effect: The EVM data will be distorted until the actuals for the EV and cost for all phases except C are subtracted from the totals.• Possible Solutions: – Change the project code after each phase to distinguish costs/work for each phase – Make the 1st month’s reporting due 90 days after entering into phase C for actuals to catch up – Develop a recommended approach and document in EVM Capability – Develop training to illustrate the problem and solution 15
  16. 16. Phase B to C Transition Comparison Why the timing is relevant EVM PROJECT PHASE COMPARISONEARNED VALUE COMPONENTS Total with Phase B PHASE C/D Only BUDGET $ 1,137,606.00 $ 475,000.00 EARNED VALUE $ 1,088,606.00 $ 426,000.00 ACTUALS $ 845,406.00 $ 384,000.00 COST VARIANCE $ 292,200.00 $ 91,000.00 COST PERFORMANCE INDEX 1.29 1.11 SCHEDULE VARIANCE $ (49,000.00) $ (49,000.00)SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE INDEX 0.96 0.90 16
  17. 17. Gaps Impacting NASA’s Ability to be Compliant with ANSI/EIA-748 * All priorities within a group are of equal importanceGap # Priority* Gap Description Guideline(s) Status Impacted 1 1 * All priorities within a group are of equal NASA business practice requires that obligations and costs occur at the same level of the 16, 17 Workaround/ WBS in SAP, sometimes resulting in costs being posted where obligations are available and importance Change not necessarily where the work is performed (off charging). Required 2 1 Costing old money first (off charging) 16 Workaround/ Change Required 3 1 Algorithm being used to distribute 533 cost (off charging) 16 Workaround/ Change Required 4 1 Inability to collect support contractor hours and elements of cost at the appropriate WBS 16 Workaround/ element where the work is performed. Change Required 5 2 Leave (annual, sick, or comp) is charged to the project when taken not earned (off charging) 16 Change Required 6 2 Projects sometimes need to break down the WBS below level 7 to obtain a manageable 17, 22 Change piece of work Required /Workaround 7 3 The Project Manager will not be able to control the configuration of the WBS until he/she is 1 Change given approval authority of WBS elements being added to SAP. Required 8 3 NASA does not have a Work Authorization system for work across the Agency. 9 Change Required 9 4 Indirect cost policies continue to change and are not handled like normal, full cost are in an 4, 19, 24 Workaround/ EVM System. Change Required 10 4 Projects are not able to get timely and reliable grant, Internal Partner, and Reimbursable cost 6, 7, 16, 27 Workaround/ data from the system. Change Required 11 4 NASA does not have a Material Management System or policies across the Agency to 3,9,21 Workaround/ support the EVM guidelines for material. Change Required 17 Issue papers addressed solutions for the circled gaps.
  18. 18. Path Forward• Continue ICESat2 Pilot and document lessons learned, update documentation as needed• Develop transition strategy for long-term implementation• Continue to provide Steering Committee with information to make decisions for Agency• Enter into O&M upon successful Operational Readiness Review (ORR)• Project Close (EVM Capability Team will not do the implementation) 18
  19. 19. Backup 19
  20. 20. Issue Paper: Business Rules and Actual CostsIssue: NASA’s business rules and the accounting system’s recording of actual cost present challenges for generating meaningfuldata for EVM performance measurement and analysis. Useful EVM performance measurement and analysis is dependent uponcomparing actual costs, value of accomplished work, and budget values. During the Extravehicular Activity (EVA) Pilot, there werenumerous examples of unreliable EVM performance measurement indicators and analysis based on data created by following NASAbusiness rules that influence the manner in which contractor budgets are developed and actual costs reported. Additionally, themanner in which SAP records obligations and actual costs further destabilized the EVM performance measurement and analysisprocess on the EVA Project.Causes: During the EVA EVM pilot there were two causes that contributed to the misalignment of actual costs with budgeted work.The first is the methods used to establish and allocate contractor costs. The second cause is the manner in which NASA recordsobligations and actual costs in SAP. 1. Contractor Costs The manners in which contract reporting requirements are established and costs recorded contribute to a misalignment of plans and actual costs. Establishment Finalized contracts do not consistently contain Data Requirements Documents (DRD) with detailed requirements for individual Work Year Equivalents (WYE), hours, tasks, cost, etc. to support project-level EVM reporting. Allocated Cost The algorithm that is sometimes used to distribute contractor costs does not necessarily reflect the manner in which work is being performed on the project. This algorithm is often used in cases where multiple organizations fund a task agreement. While there are several methods for distributing actual cost, the primary cost distribution business rule is to cost the oldest money first, irrespective of where the work was performed. Costing old money first means that actual costs are recorded against the fund with the earliest expiration date. 2. Recording of Obligations and Actual Costs in SAP The methods used by NASA to record obligations and actual costs in SAP contribute to a misalignment of plans and actual costs. SAP business rules do not allow cost to exceed obligations for a WBS, and the SAP Cost category contains only those actual costs that do not exceed the obligation amount for that WBS element. This can cause significant understatement of a WBS element. SAP business rules require that obligations occur at the same level of the WBS where costs are collected. SAP currently allows actual costs to be collected at a maximum of seven levels. The EVA Project costs are often collected at the lowest WBS level which from a total contract perspective, some WBS codes may have excess obligations while others have obligations insufficient to accommodate the actual costs incurred. Hence, costs not getting recorded to the proper WBS element. This is further complicated by the laborious process required to move obligations to where they are required. When additional funds are obligated a spike in the cost for the month can occur. 20
  21. 21. Issue Paper: Inconsistency Plan and PerformanceIssue: In evaluating the EVA Project’s planning and performance data, there are instances where Center support organizations’budget plans were not time phased consistent with how certain elements of cost were realized. The problem is primarily withother support costs (e.g., material; equipment, ODCs) that are attributable to that organization’s support to project offices. Theresult is artificial cost variances caused by budget planning methodology that isn’t synchronized with how performance and actualcosts are incurred.Causes: The systemic cause can be isolated to the practice of Center support organizations including in their monthly, time phasedplan a factor that represents other support costs that are attributable to the support organization’s support. 1. While their direct support (labor) is performed and actual costs recorded monthly consistent with the plan, these other costs are allocated direct on a non-recurring basis. 2. Hence, the budget for these costs is spread over each month, while the actual costs are recorded in lump sums only a few months during the year. 3. The pervasive view of the support organizations’ is these (indirect) costs will all equal at the end of the year so there is no emphasis on improving the monthly time phasing.Effects: NASA inconsistency between plan and performance impacts NASA’s effective use of the Earned Value approach to projectManagement. The following are two effects. 1. Artificial variances are created which dilute the value of EVM metrics in providing meaningful performance data for the responsible manager, monthly project reviews, and external senior management reviews of project performance. 2. The predictive value of EVM performance metrics that enables developing creditable Estimates at Complete (EAC) for work remaining is compromised. Possible Solutions: The goal is to realize and record cost in the period the work is planned and performed. There are severalsolutions described below. 21
  22. 22. ANSI EIA 748 Guidelines (Level 1 Requirements)1. Define the authorized work elements for the program. A work breakdown structure (WBS), tailored for effective internal management control, is commonly used in this process.2. Identify the program organizational structure including the major subcontractors responsible for accomplishing the authorized work, and define the organizational elements in which work will be planned and controlled.3. Provide for the integration of the company’s planning, scheduling, budgeting, work authorization and cost accumulation processes with each other, and as appropriate, the program work breakdown structure and the program organizational structure.4. Identify the company organization or function responsible for controlling overhead (indirect costs).5. Provide for integration of the program work breakdown structure and the program organizational structure in a manner that permits cost and schedule performance measurement by elements of either or both structures as needed.6. Schedule the authorized work in a manner which describes the sequence of work and identifies significant task interdependencies required to meet the requirements of the program.7. Identify physical products, milestones, technical performance goals, or other indicators that will be used to measure progress. 22
  23. 23. ANSI EIA 748 Guidelines (Level 1 requirements)8. Establish and maintain a time-phased budget baseline, at the Cost Account level, against which program performance can be measured. Budget for far-term efforts may be held in higher level accounts until an appropriate time for allocation to the CA level. Initial budgets established for performance measurement will be based on either internal management goals or the external customer negotiated target cost, including estimate for authorized but undefinitized work. On Government contracts, if an over target baseline is used for performance measurement reporting purposes, prior notification must be provided to the customer.9. Establish budgets for authorized work with identification of significant cost elements (labor, material, etc.) as needed for internal management and for control of subcontractors.10. To the extent it is practical to identify the authorized work in discrete work packages, establish budgets for this work in terms of dollars, hours, or other measurable units. Where the entire control account is not subdivided into work packages, identify the far term effort in larger planning packages for budget and scheduling purposes.11. Provide that the sum of all work package budgets plus planning package budgets within a control account equals the control account budget.12. Identify and control level of effort activity by time-phased budgets established for this purpose. Only that effort which is immeasurable or for which measurement is impractical may be classified as level of effort. 23
  24. 24. ANSI EIA 748 Guidelines (Level 1 requirements)13. Establish overhead budgets for each significant organizational component of the company for expenses which will become indirect costs. Reflect in the program budgets, at the appropriate level, the amounts in overhead pools that are planned to be allocated to the program as indirect costs.14. Identify management reserves and undistributed budget.15. Provide that the program target cost goal is reconciled with the sum of all internal program budgets and management reserves.16. Record direct costs in a manner consistent with the budgets in a formal system controlled by the general books of account.17. When a work breakdown structure is used, summarize direct costs from control accounts into the work breakdown structure without allocation of a single control account to two or more work breakdown structure elements.18. Summarize direct costs from the control accounts into the contractor’s organizational elements without allocation of a single control account to two or more organizational elements.19. Record all indirect costs which will be allocated to the contract.20. Identify unit costs, equivalent units costs, or lot costs when needed. 24
  25. 25. ANSI EIA 748 Guidelines (Level 1 requirements)21. For EVMS, the material accounting system will provide for: 1) Accurate cost accumulation and assignment of costs to control accounts in a manner consistent with the budgets using recognized, acceptable, costing techniques. 2) Cost performance measurement at the point in time most suitable for the category of material involved, but no earlier than the time of progress payments or actual receipt of material. 3) Full accountability of all material purchased for the program including the residual inventory.22. At least on a monthly basis, generate the following information at the control account and other levels as necessary for management control using actual cost data from, or reconcilable with, the accounting system: 1) Comparison of the amount of planned budget and the amount of budget earned for work accomplished. This comparison provides the schedule variance. 2) Comparison of the amount of the budget earned the actual (applied where appropriate) direct costs for the same work. This comparison provides the cost variance.23. Identify, at least monthly, the significant differences between both planned and actual schedule performance and planned and actual cost performance, and provide the reasons for the variances in the detail needed by program management.24. Identify budgeted and applied (or actual) indirect costs at the level and frequency needed by management for effective control, along with the reasons for any significant variances. 25
  26. 26. ANSI EIA 748 Guidelines (Level 1 requirements)25. Summarize the data elements and associated variances through the program organization and/or work breakdown structure to support management needs and any customer reporting specified in the contract.26. Implement managerial actions taken as the result of earned value information.27. Develop revised estimates of cost at completion based on performance to date, commitment values for material, and estimates of future conditions. Compare this information with the performance measurement baseline to identify variances at completion important to company management any applicable customer reporting requirements including statements of funding requirements.28. Incorporate authorized changes in a timely manner, recording the effects of such changes in budgets and schedules. In the directed effort prior to negotiation of a change, base such revisions on the amount estimated and budgeted to the program organizations.29. Reconcile current budgets to prior budgets in terms of changes to the authorized work and internal replanning in the detail needed by management for effective control.30. Control retroactive changes to records pertaining to work performed that would change previously reported amounts for actual costs, earned value, or budgets. Adjustments should be made only for correction of errors, routine accounting adjustments, effects of customer or management directed changes, or to improve the baseline integrity and accuracy of performance measurement data.31. Prevent revisions to the program budget except for authorized changes.32. Document changes to the performance measurement baseline. 26
  27. 27. Storyboard – Pre KDP B (latest revision August 2010) 0.0 Pre KDP B No No MDAA / HQ 0.01 Acquisition 0.03 0.06 Strategy Planning Approve Program Plan & Process Program FAD 0.05 PCA approval 0.02 Develop Draft 0.08 Prepare Program Plan (PM) Project FAD Program FAD & PCA (MDAA) Approval YesProgram Mgr / Yes YesProgram Mgt 0.04 Yes Office Acquisition Strategy Meeting (Work Distribution/ Make/Buy) 0.07 Prepare Project FAD 0.10Project Office Approval for Manager / Preliminary Project Project No Plan, WBS, Budget, 1.01 No Yes Schedules, etc. for Organization 0.09 all phases as Preliminary applicable Project Plan, WBS, Budget, Schedules, etc. for all phases asElement Mgr / Subproject / applicable Team Institutional/ Functional No 27
  28. 28. Storyboard – Organization 1.0 Organization MDAA / HQ 1.01 KDP B NoProgram Mgr /Program Mgt Office 3.04 Prepare & Issue Preliminary Planning Guidance / WAD / Dollarized RAMProject Office Manager / 1.02 Project Finalize Project Plan for Phase C (EVM Approach) 2.01 Extend and Refine 1.03 Master Schedule Approve (Draft) Project PlanElement Mgr / Subproject / 1.04 1.05 1.07 Team Yes Extend & 1.06 Prepare WBS Extend & Refine Project Extend & Dictionary Refine WBS Refine Responsibility Organizational Assignment 8.01 Breakdown Matrix (RAM) & Estimate Material Structure (OBS) Identify Control Needs and Cost Accounts P-CAM Institutional/ Functional 28
  29. 29. Storyboard – Scheduling 2.0 Scheduling Developing IMS IMS Status & Update 7-1.11 Input CAPs/update IMS, WBS, RAM, WAD, etc. Update 10.08 budget logs (PBB, Project Manager / Project Office Integrate Supplier AUW, Contingency/ Cost/ Schedule MR, UB) Data into Cost & Schedule Tools and 7-2.08 Reports Input CAPs/update IMS, WBS, RAM, WAD, etc. Update 1.07 budget logs (PBB, Extend & Refine 8.21 AUW, Contingency/ 2.04 Responsibility Received Material MR, UB) Integrate Assignment detailed Item / Claim BCWP Matrix (RAM) & schedules 3.11 Identify Control Establish the Accounts PMB 2.13 2.08 Input 2.02 2.05 Generate a workaround 2.01 Extend and Health Check form to gather IMS plans. 2.14 Extend and Refine 2.03 status updates or Publish and 2.15 Refine Master 2.10 2.11 Intermediate- Extend and Verify vertical electronic file to Health Distribute Export data Schedule 2.07 Input P-CAM Calculate a new Level Refine logic- traceability collect P-CAM’s Check and final to cost tool (Draft) Baseline and updates into the critical path and Element Mgr Schedule linked 3.07 schedule updates Analysis schedules Subproject/ Publish detailed schedule new forecast detailed CAP Reconcile Verify and EVM status IMS and or cost tool dates schedule or schedule with significant Iterate source of CAP budget data project as needed. (top, schedule until fully milestones intermediate, (draft), and integrated and detail if applicable Determine 2.06 level) assign EV critical path Review and measurement 6-1.02 Approve 6-1.01 techniques Schedule Monthly IMS Schedule Risk Performance Analysis P-CAM Assessment 2.09 Analysis Provide status 2.12 including AS/AF, Review results of forecasted dates, status. Milestones, & EV Develop 3.05 workaround plans P-CAMs as needed to Develop CAPs correct Institutional/ (Budget only) Functional 9.14 forecasted Integrate schedule slips Contractor Cost/ Schedule Data into Cost & Schedule Tools and ReportsAgency EVM Capability Project / Jerald Kerby, PM / (256) 544-3243 08/02/2010 29
  30. 30. Storyboard – Work/Budget Authorization 3.0 Work/Budget Authorization MDAA / HQ 3.15 KDP C 2.05 3.01 Health Check Update/Issue WAD or Verify vertical Equivalent (e.g.,Program Mgr / traceabilityProgram Mgt PAD) Verify significant Office 1.07 project milestones Extend & Refine Responsibility Determine 3.13 Assignment Matrix critical path Perform IBR (RAM) & Identify (Verify SOW, WBS Control Accounts Schedule Risk Dictionary, PMB, Assessment IMS, Risk, etc.) Project Manager / Project Office 3.11 3.10 Determine Yes Approved Reserves Rqmnts 3.03 3.02 Prepare & Issue Establish Project Preliminary Planning Budget Log Guidance / WAD / Dollarized RAM 3.12Element Mgr / 3.07 Subproject / Establish the Reconcile PMB Team schedule with budget data until fully 2.03 3.06 integrated Extend and Refine 3.04 Extend and 3.09 5.03 3.08 Finalize & logic-linked Develop Tech, Cost, Refine Time-phase Negotiate Issue CA detailed CAP & Schedule Risk Charge 2.07 indirect budget CAPs WAD schedule or source Assessment Numbers Baseline and of CAP schedule (If needed) Publish P-CAM (draft), and 3.14 IMS if applicable assign Incorporate EV measurement Changes if (top, intermediate, techniques Required and detail level) 3.05 P-CAMs Develop CAPs Institutional/ (Budget only) Functional 2.04 Integrate detailed schedulesAgency EVM Capability Project / Jerald Kerby, PM / (256) 544-3243 08/02/2010 30
  31. 31. Storyboard – Accounting 4.0 AccountingProgram Mgr /Program Mgt Office Yes Project Manager / Project Office 6-1.02 4.07 4.08 Monthly Incorporate verified Verify Load into Performance ACWP into Cost tool Cost Tool 4.03 Analysis 4.04 Download data from Verify/Distribute Core Financial ACWP data to P- System into CAMs spreadsheets 4.09 Reconcile to general book of accountsElement Mgr / Subproject / 4.05 Team Verify labor charges and other charges as applicable 8.13 4.06 Enter acceptance Correct errors as into SAP (Actuals applicable Recorded) P-CAM Institutional/ Functional 4.01 Record Cost in 4.02 Core Financial Month end closing No SystemAgency EVM Capability Project / Jerald Kerby, PM / (256) 544-3243 08/02/2010 31
  32. 32. Storyboard – Indirect Management 5.0 Indirect Management MDAA / HQProgram Mgr /Program Mgt 3.05 Office P-CAMs Develop CAPs (Budget only)Project Office Manager / ProjectElement Mgr / Subproject / 5.05 5.08 6-2.02 Team 5.02 5.03 Analyze and Establish EAC with Develop ETC Plan Establish budgets Time-phase evaluate variances ETC rates for for the Control for indirect cost indirect budget caused by indirect indirect cost at CA/ Account and BoE costs WP level P-CAM Institutional/ Functional 5.01 5.06 5.04 5.07 IM Center CFO Analyze and Collect and record Develop EAC & provide indirect evaluate base and indirect cost ETC rates Guidance rate variances 32
  33. 33. Storyboard – Managerial Analysis 6-1.0 Managerial Analysis MDAA / HQ 9.14 10.08 Integrate Integrate Intra- 6-1.12 Contractor Agency (other Review Cost/Schedule Centers) Cost/ Performance Data Data into Cost & Schedule Data into Assess Impact onProgram Mgr /Program Mgt Schedule Tools Cost & Schedule Reserves (UFE) and Reports Tools and Reports Office 2.14 Publish andProject Office Distribute 6-1.11 Manager / final 6-1.05 Prepare and Issue Project schedules 6-1.04 6-1.08 Identify accounts Monthly 6-1.10 6-1.03 Analyze Data Review Metrics, that exceed Performance Review and Run preliminary Metrics and Variance Analysis, established Reports Approve Changes CPR and Trends Corrective Actions thresholds and incorporate Variance Analysis Report revised ETC, if forms necessaryElement Mgr / Subproject / No 6-2.01 Team 6-1.01 6-1.02 Issue Schedule Monthly Comprehensive Analysis Performance project EAC 6-1.09 Analysis planning 6-1.06 6-1.07 Review and guidelines Analysis and Routine ETC / Yes Submit revised response to VARs EAC Revision WAD, If Required Required? P-CAM Optional 7-2.01 Identify Internal Institutional/ 4.08 Change Functional Verify Load into Cost tool 33
  34. 34. Storyboard – Comprehensive EAC 6-2.0 Comprehensive Estimate-at-Completion (EAC) MDAA / HQProgram Mgr /Program Mgt Office 6-1.04 6-2.12 Analyze Data Performance Metrics and Reports Trends 6-2.05 YesProject Office Approve EAC? Manager / Project 6-2.09 6-2.10 6-2.11 Update Project Contingency/MR Update Reported 6-2.01 Lien List Analysis EAC Issue (If Necessary) 6-2.03 6-2.04 Yes Comprehensive Analyze EACs and Review Project project EAC BoEs ETC / EAC planning NoElement Mgr / guidelines Subproject / Team 6-2.06 6-2.02 Document Develop ETC Plan Disagreement (re- for the Control negotiate/iterate Account and BoE as needed) P-CAM 6-2.08 6-2.07 Revised EAC: Update EAC on Approved WAD WAD 5.08 Establish EAC with ETC rates for Institutional/ Functional indirect cost at CA/ WP level 34
  35. 35. Storyboard – Change Mgmt (External) 7-1.0 Change Management (External Changes) MDAA / HQ 7-1.06 No 7-1.01 Approved? Identify ExternalProgram Mgr /Program Mgt Changes Office Yes 7-1.04 7-1.05 Revise Program/ Revise Program/Project Office Yes Project Plan Project Manager / Plan? Project 7-1.07 Publish Guidance 7-1.11 7-1.12 No for Authorized Input CAPs/update Issue approved 7-1.10 WADs/CAPS/ Change IMS, WBS, RAM, Review & IMS/WBS/Publish Yes WAD, etc. UpdateElement Mgr / 7-1.03 Approve CAPs Subproject / 7-1.02 budget logs (PBB, Project Budget Prepare Assess change, & EACs? Logs AUW, Contingency/ Team Change develop MR, UB) Request technical, cost & Documentation schedule impacts 7-1.09 Review CAPs & EACs 7-1.08 Develop new and/ 7-1.13 P-CAM or revise existing Receive approved Control Account WAD, CAPs & Plans (CAPs) & EAC EAC Institutional/ Functional No 35