The document describes NASA's Strategic Workforce Management Model (SWMM), which was created to forecast NASA's long-term workforce needs. SWMM aggregates workforce demand estimates for individual projects generated using budget, schedule and program manager input. It then allows visualization of total workforce needs by competency, center or agency-wide over time. SWMM also enables "what if" scenario analysis to estimate the workforce effects of changes to project budgets or schedules. Overall, SWMM aims to provide NASA leadership with a tool for strategic workforce planning and minimizing job losses across centers.

1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
How SWMM was built
Two ways it could be done:
Index Name Code P
2.4.1 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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

21. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
A simple scenario re Human Space Flight
• Extend ISS to 2020
www.nasa.gov 21

22. 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

23. 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

24. 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

25. 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

26. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Five projects individually
FTE by Competency Domain FTE by Domain
1800 900
1600
Science 800 Science
1400 700
1200
1000 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
2015
1200 1200
1000
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

27. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Five projects together
FTE by Competency Domain
4500
4000
3500
Science
3000
F 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

28. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
5 Projects:
SSP extended 2 years — staffing peak is higher
FTE by Competency Domain
4500
4000
3500
Science
3000
F 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

29. 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
3000
F 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

30. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SSP 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
3000
F 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

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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
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

35. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Five Projects, Center Split, Continued
ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain
80 80
70 70
60 60 Science Science
50 50 Mgt. Mgt.
40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.
30 30 Engineer. Engineer.
20 20 Business Business
10 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 Domain
400 300
350
250
Science
300
250 Mgt.
200 Science
200 Msn. Ops. Mgt.
150
150 Engineer. Msn. Ops.
100
Business
100 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

36. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Shuttle Extended, Center Split Continued
ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain
80 80
70 70
60 60 Science Science
50 50 Mgt. Mgt.
40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.
30 30 Engineer. Engineer.
20 20 Business Business
10 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 Domain
400 300
350
250
Science
300
250 Mgt.
200 Science
200 Msn. Ops. Mgt.
150
150 Engineer. Msn. Ops.
100
Business
100 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

37. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
SSP extended, Orion & Ares stretched, by center Cont.
ARC - FTE by Domain DFRC - FTE by Domain
80 80
70 70
60 60 Science Science
50 50 Mgt. Mgt.
40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.
30 30 Engineer. Engineer.
20 20 Business Business
10 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 Domain
400 300
350
250
Science
300
250 Mgt.
200 Science
200 Msn. Ops. Mgt.
150
150 Engineer. Msn. Ops.
100
Business
100 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

38. 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 Domain
80 80
70 70
60 60 Science
Science
50 50 Mgt.
Mgt.
40 40 Msn. Ops. Msn. Ops.
30 30 Engineer. Engineer.
20 20 Business Business
10 10
0 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 Domain
400 300
350
250
Science
300
250 Mgt.
200 Science
200 Msn. Ops. Mgt.
150
150 Engineer. Msn. Ops.
100
Business
100 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

39. 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

40. 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

41. 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

42. 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

43. 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

44. 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
Spitzer
Development 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

45. 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

46. 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

47. 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 0.5
FTE + 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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

51. 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

52. 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

53. 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