Performance-Based Earned Value ®

PBEV = EVM + Quality
Home     New     Basic EVM     Advanced EV: PBEV     Dept of Defense     EV = Ponzi Scheme?     PBEV the Book     Consulting     PBEV Live Training     About us     Contact Us      
DOD Guide Matrix
Technical Performance
Technical Baseline
DoD EVM Implementation

< See also sublinks to left.

 

NEW:  DOD Proposes to withhold payment to contractors for non-compliance with EVMS: 

DoD  is proposing to withhold payment of 10% to contractors that are noncompliant with the contractual EVMS requirements. On January 15, DoD issued a proposed amendment to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) to improve the effectiveness of DoD oversight of contractor Business Systems, including EVMS. Per the amendment, contractor business systems and internal controls, including EVMS, are the first line of defense against waste, fraud, and abuse. Weak control systems increase the risk of unallowable and unreasonable costs on Government contracts.  

The proposed DFARS amendment was published Jan. 15 in the Federal Register  Proposed EVMS withhold amendment  .  Interested parties should submit comments in writing to DoD on or before March 16, 2010.                                                                         .

NEW:  DOD EVM Report to Congress: 

DOD submitted its Congressionally-required report on Earned Value Management, DoD EVM: Performance, Oversight, and Governance (Report).

Report concluded that "The utility of EVM has declined to a level where it does not serve its intended purpose." It includes findings and recommendations regarding:

1. Changes in culture necessary

2. Accuracy of EVM data

3. Technical Performance Measures (TPM).

4. Systems Engineering (SE)

 

The following information is available at the DoD EVM Implementation tab.

  • Link to Report
  • Abstract of the Report regarding the above issues
  • Assessment of the Report's merits and deficiencies
  • Recommendations to improve the effectiveness of EVM sent to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees and to the Office of Management and Budget
  • Assessment of Industry's input to DoD for the Report   

The complete Report to Congress may be downloaded at link: DAU web site: DoD Report to Congress  

 

For guidance on how to link EV to TPMs and how to augment EVM processes with a rigorous SE process, see my articles and presentations on the Advanced EV: PBEV tab, especially "Integrating SE with EVM" published in the PMI Measurable News (May 2008) or the original version, published in May 2004 in Defense AT&L.

  

June 15, 2009: New, Interim Defense Acquisition Guide (DAG) includes expanded guidance to integrate Technical Performance Measures (TPM) with EVM and enhanced Systems Engineering (SE) responsibilities for integrated planning.

DAG includes new guidance for integrating TPMs with EVM and the IMS, including contractual TPM reporting. A contractor must now have a TPM plan, defined in terms of expected performance at specific points in the program as defined in the WBS and IMS, the methods of measurement at those points, and the variation limits for corrective action.

DAG also includes expanded responsibility for SE to integrate the:

  • Technical scope of effort in the WBS
  • Corresponding event driven program implementation in the IMS and EVM
  • Technical baselines, TPMs, and EV.

 The pertinent sections of the DAG are 4.5.1, 4.5.4.1, 4.5.4.2, and 4.5.6.1. 

The DOD Guide Matrix and the Technical Performance tabs (top left corner) have been updated to include the DAG. 

More specific guidance and examples for integrating technical performance, or Quality, with EVM are provided in my article, Integrating SE with EVM, in the “PMI Measurable News” and in the presentation to the DCMA.

  • A link to the PMI article is provided at the  Advanced EV: PBEV tab.
  • The presentation made to the DCMA EVM Center Conference, that covered the DAG's new guidance for EVM, is available at the  PBEV Live EV Training  tab.   
  • Detailed guidance, practical examples, and templates are in my book, Performance-Based Earned Value®.
  • A link to DAG is provided below.

 

May 22, 2009: Pres. Obama signed Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (WSARA), S. 454. Includes EVM improvement and Systems Engineering (SE) best practices.

Section 302, Earned Value Management, directs DoD to provide recommendations for improving EVM and its implementation within DoD including:

·         A discussion of the merits of possible alternatives

·         A plan for implementing any improvements the Secretary determines to be appropriate

The Act also requires that DoD develop policies and guidance for the

·         Use of SE principles and best practices

·         Development of SE master plans

 

The Act can be downloaded at http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-454

 

Web Editor’s note: Performance-Based Earned Value® meets the intent of the Act. PBEV augments the EVMS Standard by overcoming the Standard’s failure to incorporate Quality into the measurement of EV. PBEV provides guidance for integrating SE with EVM. It is based on SE principles and best practices from SE and Project Management standards and CMMI®. It ensures that EV is based on objective technical performance measures and on meeting the technical baseline requirements. Acquisition managers and contractors are invited to consider PBEV as a framework for process improvement.

 

DAPS:

Recent DOD guidance has finally acknowledged that the EVMS Standard has a “quality gap.” The “DOD Systems and Software Engineering Defense Acquisition Program Support Methodology”(DAPS) states that EVMS has no provision to measure quality.” To overcome the EVMS quality gap, DAPS provides excellent guidance to be used during Program Support Reviews. DAPS discusses the importance of using Technical Performance Measures (TPM), Critical Technical Parameters (CTP), and other metrics to cover other performance-related requirements/capabilities such as Developmental Test success criteria and  Operational Test entrance criteria. DAPS also provides useful focus questions that should be answered to ensure that earned value is linked to technical performance (Section 3.3.4.3). Links to DAPS and other DOD Guides for more effective program management are available below.

 

May 6, 2009: Dep.  Sec. Of Defense Lynn provided testimony on Acquisition Reform to the House Armed Services Committee.

Recommendations for Acquisition Reform include:

  1.  Improve contractor data reporting of earned value
  2. Tie incentive fees to contractor performance
  3. Maintain disciplined systems engineering integrated with testing

 The full testimony can be downloaded at http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/FC050609A/Lynn_Testimony050609.pdf 

 

DODI 5000.02 Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, date Dec. 2, 2008:

This revision requires a Systems Engineering Plan (SEP). The SEP shall describe the program’s overall technical approach, including key technical risks, processes, resources, metrics, and applicable performance incentives. It shall also detail the timing, conduct, and success criteria of technical reviews.

https://akss.dau.mil/Documents/Policy/DoDI%205000-02%20(Official%20Signed%20Version)%202%20Dec%202008.pdf

      Note: See DOD guides below, including guidance to

  • Integrate the entry and success criteria of technical reviews (such as PDR and CDR) in the IMP and IMS
  • Integrate SEP with Technical Performance Measures (TPM) and EVM

Dept. of the Navy memorandum:

DoD (POL) policy memoranda: 

 

 

 
Various DoD guides summarize policy and guidelines for integrating systems engineering with EVM and for basing award fee and incentives on achieving integrated plans and meeting contractual performance requirements. The guides cover the following topics:
  • Technical reviews
  • Integrated plans
  • Technical Performance Measures (TPM)
  • Technical Baselines
  • Integrated Baseline Review (IBR)
  • Award Fee and Incentives

 

The key guides are:

  • Interim Defense Acquisition Guide (DAG)
  • Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) Preparation Guide
  • Work Breakdown Structure Handbook, MIL-HDBK-881A (WBS)
  • Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) Preparation and Use Guide (IMP/IMS)
  • Guide for Integrating SE into DOD Acquisition Contracts (Integ SE)
  • Systems and Software Engineering Defense Acquisition Program Support Methodology (DAPS)
  • PDF file from DOD (AT&L), How to Prepare a SEP that Works, includes the following useful slides:

        19: Key Performance Parameters (KPP) should include

    •  Actual KPPs from draft or approved Initial Capabilities Document (ICD), Capabilities Development Document (CDD), or Capabilities Production Document  ( CPD)
    • Progress made towards KPPs

        23: Requirements Traceability

    •  Chart illustrates requirements traceability
    • Capabilities (CDD/CPD)
    • Technical Baseline
      • Functional Baseline
      • Allocated Baseline
      • Product Baseline

          35: Technical Reviews

        ·         Shows schedule of all SE technical reviews and relationships to the technical baseline

           All Guides and the PDF file, How to Prepare a SEP that Works, except WBS, may be downloaded at  http://www.acq.osd.mil/sse/pg/guidance.html within "Systems Engineering."

      WBS may be downloaded at http://www.acq.osd.mil/pm/currentpolicy/wbs/MIL_HDBK-881A/MILHDBK881A/WebHelp3/MILHDBK881A.htm

       

      Common Content of DOD Guides: (See detailed table by clicking top left corner, "DOD Guide Matrix")
             Technical Reviews:

      • Event-driven timing of technical reviews
      • Success criteria of technical reviews
      • Include entry and exit criteria for technical reviews in IMP and IMS
      • Assess technical maturity in technical reviews
        Integrated Plans:
         1. Integrate SEP with
            • IMP/IMS
            • TPMs
            • EVM
         2. Integrate WBS with
            • Requirements specification
            • Statement of work
            • IMP/IMS/EVMS
         3. Link risk management (including risk mitigation plans), technical reviews, TPMs, EVMS, IMS
         4. Include technical baselines in IMP/IMS and assess progress at event-driven technical reviews:
            • Functional Baseline: System Functional Review (SFR)
            • Allocated Baseline: Preliminary Design Review (PDR)
            • Product Baseline: Critical Design Review (CDR) and System Verification Review (SVR) 
        Integrated Baseline Review:
        During IBR, review
            • Plans for event-based technical reviews including entry and exit criteria
            • Correlation of TPMs, IMP, IMS, EVMS