19th Annual International

Integrated Program Management Conference

 

Practice Symposia

 

Symposium Coordinator:        Ray Stratton, EVP, PMP

                                                                

        

PS 01 Earned Value Management:  Evaluating and Managing Subcontractors

              Sandy McElroy, Northrop Grumman Space Technology

             

PS 02 Introduction to the NDIA EVM Standard and Guides

             Walter Berkey, Lockheed Martin Corp.

             David Treacy, MCR, LLC

PS 03 Recognizing EVM Gaming

            Walt Majerowicz, Computer Sciences Corp.

            Dorothy Tiffany, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

PS 04 A Success-Oriented and Collaborative Approach

                 to EVM System Validation

              Ivan Bembers, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

              Howard Morse – BAE Systems Corporation

PS 05 Interfacing Earned Value Management and

                Risk Management Process

              Val Jonas, CEO Risk Decisions Group

              Lauren Bone, Bone Consulting Limited

PS 06 Efforts to Improve Air Force Cost Analysis

              Ranae P. Woods

PS 07 A Case Study of Earned Schedule to do Predictions

              Lewis Hecht

             

PS 08 NDIA Earned Value Management Systems Application Guide

              David Muzio, MCR

PS 09 Statistical Methods Applied to Project Management

              Walt Lipke, Tinker Air Force Base (retired)

             

PS 10 Department of Defense Earned Value Management Policy and Initiatives

              Deborah Tomsic, Office of the Secretary of Defense

             

PS 11 Lessons Learned in Implementing and Certifying an EVMS in Europe

                on the Presidential Helicopters Program

              Richard Brodkorb, Performance Management Associates, Inc.

              Massimo Biggi, AgustaWestland-Italy

 

PS 12 What’s New with EVM at NASA?

              Dorothy Tiffany, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

PS 13 Relationship Diagramming Method

              Fredric Plotnik, EnProMaC

                           

PS 14 NDIA EVMS Intent Guide

              Neil Albert, MCR, LLC

              Peter Wynne

             

PS 15 Adoption – the Real Challenge in Implementing EVMS

              Mike Young, Pinnacle Management Systems

PS 16 Lessons Learned in Implementing EVM in the Federal Civilian Market

              Brian Evans, MCR, LLC

              Sean Osborne, MCR, LLC

                           

PS 17 Exploration of Cultural Change

              Rick Albertson, Wyle Laboratories

PS18 Electronic Facilitation of NASA Integrated Cost Risk for

                Improved Cost Management

              David Graham, NASA Headquarters IPAO

              Dan Walkovitz, Mainstay Software Corporation

             

PS 19 Implementing EVMS in a Dynamic Project Environment

              Basil A. Soutos, Performance Management Associates

             

PS 20 Program Managers Guide to the IBR

              Buddy Everage, SM&A Cororation

             

PS 21 FAA Portfolio/Program Performance Metrics

              Daniel Milano, FAA

              Nicole Waddell, KM Systems Group

PS 22 The Risk Based Estimate at Completion (EAC)

              John K. Pakiz, Performance Management Systems

PS 23 Earned Schedule in Action

              Kym Henderson, Past Education Director-PMI Sydney Australia Chapter

PS 24 GAO’s Cost Assessment Guide & How It Defines

                EVM Best Practices

              Karen Richey

              Jennifer Echard

              Carol Cha

PS 25 Applying Earned Value Management to Project Formulation?

              Samuel Padgett, NASA, Johnson Space Center

             

PS 26 NDIA EVMS System Acceptance Guide

              Buddy Everage, SM&A,

PS 27 Achieving ANSI/ESI Standard 748 Compliance at

                VA

              Russ Jones, Department of Veterans Affairs

              Willie J. Wilson, Department of Veterans Affairs

PS 28 Integrating EVM into Project Assessments

              Ted Williams, ProjectRx, Inc.

             

PS 29 Building a Professional Project Planning and Control Community

              Peter Mill, BAE Systems

PS 30 Linked Control Account Analysis™ and the Use of Risk Indexes™

              John D. Driessnack, MCR, LLC

              Patrick K. Barker, MCR, LLC

             

PS 31 Estimating EVMS Implementation & Execution Requirements

              Rudolph F. Simpson, II, IBM Global Business Services

PS 32 NDIA Surveillance Guide   

              Robert Loop

 

PS 33 The Project Cost Variance Model: a Project Management Tool

              Thomas Wilke, IBM Global Business Service

PS 34 Program Office Execution of an Integrated Baseline Review

              Mark Andersen, Tecolote Research, Inc,.

              David Nelson, Tecolote Research, Inc.

PS 35 Earned Value in an Agile Environment

              Frederick Manzer, Strategy Bridge International, Inc.

             

PS 36  Using EVM Reporting to Develop Cost Estimating Models:

                The Value and Pit Falls

                Alexander Ante, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

                Heather Chelson, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

                Carly Ballintine, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

ABSTRACTS & BIOS

 

PS 01 - Earned Value Management:  Evaluating and Managing Subcontractors

 

 

The acquisition environment is constantly changing and the percentage of subcontracted effort on major contracts is on the rise.  That increased percentage of subcontracted effort brings with it an increase in the need for Prime Contractors to flow down Earned Value Reporting requirements.

A Prime Contractor wants to have early visibility into the performance of the suppliers to ensure delivery on schedule and within cost.  Earned value reporting facilitates that visibility and the Prime Contractor must effectively manage a process which will ensure the integrity of the reported information. Clear communication between the Contractor Team and the Supplier Team, Earned Value capability assessment, training, and effective oversight are all essential to the successful implementation and reporting of Earned Value.

This session will provide insight into approaches for effective proactive EVMS/Schedule Management capability assessment and supplier performance management.  It is designed for individuals intending to flow down earned value on new subcontracts, and for those working on existing contracts with significant subcontracted content who may have encountered challenges in obtaining meaningful Earned Value data.   The session will also include discussion on performance of EMVS Process Capability Assessments, Interventions at subcontractors, Joint Surveillance/Schedule Audits, IBR and JSR Preparation, Analysis/Support to Programs utilizing predictive metrics, and recommended internal and external subcontract EVMS and Schedule training.

 

Sandy McElroy, Northrop Grumman Space Technology

 

Voice: (310) 813-6732                            Fax: (310) 813-6792                       E-mail:   sandy.mcelroy@ngc.com

 

Sandy McElroy has over 26 years of program and functional business management experience at Northrop Grumman Corporation. As Business Management Director for Strategic Sourcing and Supply Chain Management reporting directly to the Sector’s Chief Financial Officer, Sandy is responsible for providing an integrated business management capability to the Supply Chain organization, striving for best value possible from NGST’s subcontractors, including EVMS/Schedule Management, cost/price analysis, resources management, financial forecasting, reporting, strategic planning and make-buy execution.  She partners with the Supply Chain Vice President in evaluating subcontractor operational program performance and strives to enhance NGST contractual position across the subcontract base.   Her organization supports EVMS process capability assessments and provides on site Cost and Scheduling subject matter experts to proactively analyze and resolve areas of risk and offers corrective action and predictive metrics for future improved subcontract execution.

Prior to her present assignment, Sandy served as Director, Enterprise Planning, Scheduling, and Systems Integration for Northrop Grumman, Integrated Systems, where she was responsible for implementing integrated multi-functional planning and scheduling processes, systems, tools, and deploying skilled resources across all Integrated Product Teams and functional organizations.  Additionally, she was Director, Business Management for Production and Quality and she held key Project Control leadership positions on major programs among which included the F-35, F/A-18, and ATF Programs.

Sandy holds a bachelor’s degree in Business Economics from U.C. Santa Barbara and M.B.A. from Pepperdine University.

 

PS 02 - Introduction to the NDIA EVM Standard and Guides

OMB Circular A-11 Part 7, Supplement, The Capital Programming Guide, requires that agencies EVM processes should be consistent with the guidelines and processes in the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) EVMS Guides.  For many, these guides have been routinely employed in developing, implementing and managing the EVM processes.  For others, the existence of the guides is new information.   This session will provide an introduction to  these guides as well as insight into recent changes for ANSI/EIA 748, Earned Value Management Systems standard.  The introduction will address their organization, relationships, purpose, key elements, and information on obtaining the guides.  The session is for those who are just beginning to work in the area of EVM as well as those who have been involved in EVM for many years, especially in industries supporting the U.S. Federal Government.

Walter H. Berkey

Senior Manager, Earned Value Management, Lockheed Martin Corporation

Walt Berkey is the Manager responsible for Earned Value Management on the Program Assessment and Evaluation staff at Lockheed Martin Corporate Headquarters in Bethesda, MD.   He is primarily responsible for the Corporation’s EVM Policy (CPS-026) and the DCE Advance Agreement recognizing the Corporate Program Performance Management (EVM) Process compliance with ANSI/EIA 748.  He also provides EVM leadership as the corporate representative to the Program Performance Management Council comprised of Planners, Program Finance, and EVM representatives from all business units.

Walt has been responsible for a wide range of Finance Management, Business Management, and EVM positions at IBM Federal Systems Manassas and IBM Group Headquarters that became part of Loral and subsequently Lockheed Martin.  These responsibilities have included Contract Performance Measurement responsibility on both development and production contracts and Business Management responsibilities at the business unit level; Cost Accounting Standards compliance and Earned Value Management Process including performance and proposal tool capability at the IBM/Loral Group Headquarters; and a member of the Headquarters Management team responsible for Program Control Reviews and Performance Assessment Reviews conducted internally.

He is active in NDIA Program Management Systems Committee and the industry lead on the joint Government/Industry ANSI/EIA 748 Revision work team, industry lead in the development of the joint IBR Guide, the Application Guide, and served as the past committee chair. He is also the NDIA representative on the GEIA Systems, Standards, and Technology Committee that includes being the earned value management system subject matter person for ANSI/EIA 748.    

David M. Treacy, PMP Principal, MCR LLC

 

Phone: (703)-623-4534                  Fax: (703)-830-1279                       E-Mail:  dtreacy@mcri.com

 

Mr. David Treacy has had extensive program management experience in complex, research, development and acquisition projects for the DoD, DOE, NASA, and other Federal Agencies.  Previously he was a program manager within the Department of Energy for high energy particle research facilities at Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.  Mr. Treacy was also responsible for developing the policies and regulations for program and project management as well as developing and leading the Earned Value Management System program for the Department of Energy.  Prior to DOE, David was with the Air Force Space Systems Division in various acquisition capacities including, Systems Engineering, Planning, Programming and Budgeting, Test and Evaluation, Program Control and Program Management.  Between assignments in the Air Force, he worked for the NASA Space Shuttle Program and the National Reconnaissance Office as a project manager.  He was certified in program management within the DoD Acquisition Corps and is a member of the Project Management Institute and the College of Performance Management, as well as a Project Management Professional.   Currently, Mr. Treacy is a principal with MCR Federal, LLC of McLean, Virginia, where he supports FAA, DISA, Air Force, USMC, other Federal Agencies.  Mr. Treacy is active in the National Defense Industrial Association developing and maintaining the  NDIA EVM Guides. 

 

PS 03 - Recognizing EVM Gaming

Why would a contractor or project manager intentionally reduce an Estimate-To-Complete or activity duration? What are the implications of your contractor keeping two sets of Earned Value Management “books,” and how would you even know about it? Under what circumstances would a contractor manipulate schedule logic? What is a “rubber baseline?” These questions and others like it raise serious concerns that all project teams using Earned Value Management should recognize. This presentation examines some common and not-so-common gaming, abuse, and data manipulation techniques that some projects or contracts may employ. At best, these techniques are errors or misunderstandings on the part of the contractor, at worst they are outright fraud and could place the entire project outcome in jeopardy.

 

Walter Majerowicz, PMP, MBA, Computer Sciences Corporation

 

Voice:  (301) 286-5622         Fax:  (419) 844-4129   E-Mail:  Walt.Majerowicz@nasa.gov

Mr. Majerowicz is the Deputy Program Manager for the Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) Program Analysis and Control (PAAC) II contract at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.  He is responsible for the planning & scheduling discipline on PAAC and also supports Goddard’s Advanced Concepts and Formulation Office.  Mr. Majerowicz is co-chair of the annual NASA Project Management Challenge conference and is an instructor with the NASA Academy of Program, Project & Engineering Leadership (APPEL) in the areas of earned value management and project scheduling. Previously, he was the Planning & Schedule Manager on numerous NASA programs and projects.  Prior to joining CSC, Mr. Majerowicz held positions in program planning and control at The Boeing Company and the Martin Marietta Corporation. Mr. Majerowicz holds an M.B.A. from the University of Baltimore and a Certificate in Technology Management from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).  Recent award honors include the NASA Goddard Outstanding Mentor Award, the CSC Science and Information Services Business Area Excellence Award in Program/Project Management, and the NASA Public Service Medal.

 

Dorothy Tiffany, MSPM, CPA, PMP  NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

 

Voice:  (301) 286-5917         Fax:  (301)-286-1736    E-Mail:  Dorothy.J.Tiffany@nasa.gov

Dorothy Tiffany is the NASA EVM Program Executive and the PM Challenge Conference Project Manager in NASA’s Office of Chief Engineer.  She also holds the position of Deputy Chief of the Advanced Concepts and Formulation Office for Business Management at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.  Ms. Tiffany is responsible for leading the Agency’s implementation of Earned Value Management and for developing stronger project teams.  She is a faculty member for the NASA Academy of Program/Project & Engineering Leadership in the fields of project management, earned value management, budgeting and effective communications. She previously managed the business operations of numerous satellite development projects at NASA and directed Goddard’s Financial Management Division and Accounting Branch. Ms. Tiffany was awarded two NASA Exceptional Achievement Medals and the NASA Exceptional Service Medal for her work in finance and project management and has been recognized for her efforts in mentoring and diversity.  Ms. Tiffany holds an M.S. in Project Management from Boston University, a B.S. in Accounting from the University of Maryland and a Certificate in Technology Management from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).

 

PS 04 - A Success-Oriented and Collaborative Approach

to EVM System Validation

Industry mergers and the transition from C/SCSC to EVMS have both affected the relevancy of legacy EVM systems to current-day operations.  BAE Systems, National Security Solutions (NSS) found itself in this position on a number of contracts with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA).  NSS Senior Management recognized there was a gap between the informal EVMS practices and the company’s EVM System description which was last reviewed and approved in 1993.  This legacy EVM System was no longer relevant with how the organization was currently implementing its Earned Value Management System.  As a result, NGA and NSS both recognized that there was a compelling need for NSS to identify, standardize and document the current NSS EVMS practices in a new EVMS process description.  NSS formally committed to seek NGA’s EVM System acceptance and obtain an Intelligence Community EVMS Advance Agreement.

This presentation will provide an overview of the approach to EVM System acceptance and identify best practices and lessons learned from both the Government and Contractor perspectives.  The engagement strategy between NGA and NSS was collaborative and success-oriented.  At the same time, NGA maintained a structured review approach and an independent perspective. As a result, the timeline to system acceptance was accelerated while continuing to achieve all stated review objectives.  NGA completed the EVMS Validation Review in February, 2007 and signed an EVMS Advance Agreement in April, 2007.

Ivan Bembers – National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Ivan Bembers works for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, Acquisition Business Office and leads a group responsible for Earned Value Management System (EVMS) acceptance, surveillance reviews, gap analysis, facilitating Contract Implementation Reviews and Integrated Baseline Reviews, training, policy, and management consulting.  As a representative on the Intelligence Community (IC) Earned Value Management Council (IC-EVMC), Ivan collaborates with other IC member agencies in the joint review of new as well as proposed updates to previously accepted Industry Partners’ EVM System descriptions.  As a result of the EVM System Validation Review with BAE Systems, National Security Solutions, Ivan coordinated the review results with the members of the council culminating in an IC EVM Council EVMS Advance Agreement with BAE Systems, National Security Solutions.  Prior to working at NGA, Ivan has provided a full range of EVM support activities on other Intelligence Community and Ballistic Missile Defense Organization programs, worked in corporate finance and contracts/procurement positions, and served in the US Army.  He has both a Masters and BS degree in Business Administration, a Masters Certificate in Project Management, and is a member of PMI.

Howard Morse – BAE Systems Corporation Howard Morse has twenty seven years of experience as a leader and key contributor in the aerospace / defense industry.  His focus has been on program management, system integration, system engineering, program planning and financial analysis on large complex programs dealing with command, control, communications, data networks, aircraft and space and launch systems.  Howard’s primary experience related to Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS) includes leading the EVM System implementation and compliance project for BAE Systems, National Security Solutions.  This led to an Advance Agreement with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) and other members of the Intelligence Community.  Howard also deployed an EVM system at the company level on Big Safari, as well as on Electronic Warfare Programs for the Lockheed Martin Corporation, and implemented EVMS (C/SCSC) on the Peacekeeper missile and Space Shuttle Main Engine Programs for Rocketdyne/Rockwell International Corporation.

 

PS 05 -  Interfacing Earned Value Management and

Risk Management Processes

 

Sound risk management process and robust earned value management application each offer the opportunity to improve project control and provide the project manager with reliable information on which to base proactive management decisions. All too often the disciplines are practiced in isolation and compete with each other for resource and project management attention. Recognising the advantages each has to offer and how best they can compliment each other as part of a return to holistic project management. Is the subject of this session which deals with how to combine the two disciplines of Risk Management and Earned Value Management.

Val Jonas, CEO Risk Decisions Group

Tel: (+44) (0)1865 718666  Fax: (+44) (0) 1865 718600  E-Mail: val.jonas@riskdecisions.com

 

Val Jonas, CEO of Risk Decisions since 1998, is a well-known and respected risk management specialist. She is a member of the Best Practice Review Group for the UK Office of Government Commerce’s M_o_R guidance on risk management, a member of the PMI College of Performance Management Global Advisory Committee a participant on the Risk–EV working group, sponsored by the Association for Project Management (APM) EV Sig.

Val has played a major part in the design and development of the Predict! risk management toolset, working closely with key customers in the defense, aerospace, IT and energy sectors in the UK and overseas. Recently, she developed the Company's Risk Management Masterclass; delivering these at senior management levels within large defense organizations, in industry and government. Risk Decisions has successfully helped customers achieve senior management buy-in to the ‘whole’ risk management ethos.

Val has a joint honors BA in Mathematics and Computing from Oxford Uni

versity. She is also a non-executive director of SOLL Leisure Ltd, a fast growing leisure company in Oxfordshire UK.

Lauren Bone, Director, Bone Consulting Limited

Tel: (+44) (0)7766 974063                                                       E-Mail:lb@boneconsultingltd.com

Lauren Bone, B Eng (Mech), as an independent consultant,has focused for the last 15 years on the introduction and maturation of Earned Value Management in a variety of project environments and organisations. Her experience includes work in Australia, the Middle East & Europe, on government and commercial projects. Engagements have included Integrated EVMS System Design, Implementation Support, Training & Coaching and participation in EV project Reviews to various of the applicable world standards.  

, Lauren is a foundation member and interim chair of the recently convened Global Advisory Committee of the PMI-College of Performance Management, is a member of UK MOD DEVMIG (Defence EV Management Interest Group) and the UK APM EV-Specific Interest Group. Her most recent efforts through these organisations has involved defining and promoting the integration of Risk and Earned Value and her current focus is on development, maintenance and promulgation of internationally accepted standards in the application of Earned Value.

PS 06 - Efforts to Improve Air Force Cost Analysis

 

This workshop will discuss the efforts the Air Force is taking to reduce cost overruns and restore credibility with OSD and Congress. Specifically, Ms. Woods will discuss revisions to Air Force Policy Directive 65-5 with specific emphasis on annual estimates updates which include EVM analysis; the establishment of Air Force Cost Analysis Agency Operating Locations; increased cost estimating decision support to Air Force senior leadership; and personnel issues including more stringent qualification and certification standards.  Ms. Woods will conclude with time for questions and answers.

 

Ranae P. Woods

Voice: 703-697-5313 FAX: 703-693-6642        Email: Ranae.Woods@pentagon.af.mil

Ranae P. Woods, a member of the Senior Executive Service, is Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Cost and Economics, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Financial Management and Comptroller, Washington, D.C. Mrs. Woods is responsible for assisting the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Cost and Economics in directing and supervising Air Force cost, economic and business case analysis. She also assists in managing the activities of the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency and is Deputy Chair of the Air Force Cost Analysis Improvement Group.

Mrs. Woods began her career as a cost analyst and industrial engineer in the Navy Cost Analysis Intern Program for the Naval Center for Cost Analysis where she supported the development of cost estimates for a wide variety of Navy weapon systems. Since 1993, she has held a wide variety of cost analysis positions within the Air Force. Prior to her current position, Mrs. Woods was detailed from the Air Force Cost Analysis Agency to a career broadening position. She served as Deputy Chief of the Programming and Integration Division, Total Force Integration Directorate, Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Plans and Programs.

EDUCATION
1988 Bachelor of Science degree in industrial engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park
1995 Master of Business Administration degree, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Falls Church
2005 Master's degree in national resource strategy, Industrial College of the Armed Services, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C.


AWARDS AND HONORS
1990 Best Article of the Year in the Journal of Parametrics
1995 Runner-up Acquisition Costing Civilian of the Year
1995 Analysis and Evaluation Award, American Society of Military Comptrollers - Washington Chapter

PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS
Acquisition Professional, Level III

PS 07 -  A Case Study of Earned Schedule to do Predictions

 

The new concept of earned schedule has been presented previously at this conference. A short summary review of various technical papers on earned schedule will be presented to bring the audience up to current levels.

Our case study involves a US Navy trainer contract. The contract from the Government included a very substantial schedule incentive to finish early.  The contractor experienced technical, cost and schedule problems from the beginning.  As part of the author’s job responsibilities for the Defense Contract Management Agency, we attempted to provide the contractor with gentle guidance on how to deal with the various problems.  In discussions between the author and the Navy, the Navy expressed strong desire for predictions from DCMA on how successful the contractor would be in making delivery on or before schedule.

In addition to that concern, DCMA analysis showed that the contractor’s CSSRs were not accurate.  The earned schedule technique was used extensively on this contract to track the contractor’s performance and to make long-term predictions to the US Navy customer.

Analysis techniques will be explained in detail including the logic involved. Results will be compared to the contractor’s monthly reports.  Results will show that earned schedule is a very good predictor of problems and how effectively the contractor solved them.

 

Lewis Hecht, Consultant

Phone: 607-765-2731; Cell: 607-765-2731                                 E-mail: LCHECHT@AOL.COM

Lewis Hecht’s background includes 6 ½ years with the Defense Contract Management Agency as an electronics engineer with expertise in earned value management systems. He received training from the Defense Acquisition University in EVMS and achieved level 2 DAWIA certification. DAWIA stands for the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act, passed by Congress in the 1990s. As an EVMS expert, he performed engineering surveillance over several contractors on radar, acoustics, build of two maintenance trainers, airborne mine clearing systems, full rate production of US Navy helicopters, and a major sub tier supplier for the Presidential helicopter contract. He also performed routine surveillance on two contractors’ cost reporting systems to verify their compliance. He retired from DCMA in February this year.

Prior to his Federal employment, Lewis’ work background included 26 years with IBM Microelectronics. With IBM, he worked in program management, quality control, yield management, clean room technology, semiconductor manufacturing, printed circuit board manufacturing, and hybrid device manufacturing. Technical accomplishments included 11 published scientific papers, 4 patents and 8 public domain inventions.

His education includes a BS in physics from Ohio State University, and a MS in solid-state physics from Rensselaer Poly Tech, Troy NY. Consulting work has involved clients such as Integrated Flex Technology, Endicott NY and Proctor & Gamble, Cincinnati, Ohio.

EVMS interests include the use of mathematical analysis methods for predictive models and earned schedule calculations.

PS 08 - NDIA EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS APPLICATION GUIDE

 

The NDIA Application Guide is the Program Management Systems Committee’s newest of five EVMS guides.  It was published in March of 2007, as a working release for use and comment.  OMB asked NDIA to prepare an introductory guide covering the entire process required to implement and manage EVM during all phases of the acquisition life cycle.  The goal was to help government agencies, private firms, and individuals new to EVM gain an overview of the EVM process before implementing the requirements in the  other EVM guides.  .

The Guide has four major sections: Acquisition Process and Earned Value Management; EVM Application Planning; Performance Management and Measurement; and EVM Application Guidance. The major subsections are: Acquisition Life-Cycle; Earned Value Management; Integrating Risk Management with EVM; Organizing for EVM; Developing Program Budgets; Contracting for EVM: Measuring Performance Progress; Management Analysis; Program Progress Communication; and Change Management. The last section summarized each of the NDIA EVM Guides.

The presentation will discuss the contents of each section to introduce the Guide to the audience. The audience will be asked to provide comments on the Guides’ completeness and ease of understanding.  Some comments will be taken at the session and others may be emailed to the working group.  As a working draft changes are expected and will be made before the Guide is published as a final document. 

David Muzio / MCRI

 

Phone: 727-441-4614

Fax: 727-443-3242

E-Mail: dlm773@verizon.net

 

David Muzio is currently a part-time employee of MCR, LLC, specializing in Business Case Development and implementation of Earned Value Management, with expertise in all aspects of Acquisition Management.  Dave retired from the Federal Government in 2006 after 39 years of contracting and program management experience. His experience includes: (1) performance-based service contract concept development and implementation across the Federal Government; (2) program management and policy development of the government's outsourcing program defined in OMB Circular A-76; (3) major capital acquisition policy development defined in OMB Circular A-11, Part 7, and the Capital Programming Guide, including the requirements for the use of EVM on all major acquisition programs for both contractor and government development work; and (4) the Federal Acquisition Regulation policy on including EV in Contracts.

Dave has a B.S. in Business Administration from the University of California at Berkeley, and a MBA from Auburn University. He is a member and Fellow of the National Contract Management Association (NCMA), a member of the Project Management Institute, including CPM and the Risk SIG. He was presented with the CPM's Driessnack Award in 2006.

 

PS 09 - Statistical Methods Applied to Project Management

An objective of project management is to provide a reliable means for predicting the cost and schedule outcomes. Inherently, the outcome is largely determined in the planning, and of course completion forecasting commonly occurs with analysis of project performance. Having the project plan, management would like to be able to quantify its risk - What is the likelihood for having a successful project with this plan? How much should be allocated to reserves to achieve a high probability of success? If reserves are constrained to maintain the bid price in the competitive range, what is the probability of having a successful outcome?  During project execution management desires to answer this question - Can we state with confidence when the project can be expected to complete and simultaneously describe its projected final cost? Earned Value Management (EVM) has long provided basic techniques for predicting final project cost, while recently developed Earned Schedule (ES) offers the same facility for predicting project duration. The application of statistical methods to the cost and schedule indicators from EVM and ES provides a well-founded means for answering the project management questions posed. This presentation describes the fundamental elements necessary for performing statistical analysis.

Walt Lipke, Software Division – Tinker Air Force Base (retired)

 

Voice: (405) 364-1594          Fax:                                  E-Mail: waltlipke@cox.net

 

Walt Lipke retired in 2005 as deputy chief of the Software Division at the Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center. He has over 35 years of experience in the development, maintenance, and management of software for automated testing of avionics. During his tenure, the division achieved several software process improvement milestones:

• 1993 - first Air Force activity to achieve Level 2 of the Software Engineering Institute’s Capability Maturity Model® (CMM®)
• 1996 - first software activity in federal service to achieve CMM Level 4 distinction
• 1998 – division achieved ISO 9001/TickIT registration
• 1999 - division received the SEI/IEEE Award for Software Process Achievement

Mr. Lipke has published several articles and presented at conferences, internationally, on the benefits of software process improvement and the application of earned value management and statistical methods to software projects. He is the creator of the technique Earned Schedule (Copyright © 2003 Lipke), which extracts schedule information from earned value data. Mr. Lipke is a graduate of the USA DoD course for Program Managers. He is a professional engineer with a master’s degree in physics, and is a member of the physics honor society, Sigma Pi Sigma (SPS). Lipke achieved distinguished academic honors with the selection to Phi Kappa Phi (FKF). In March 2007 he received the PMI Metrics Specific Interest Group Scholar Award.   

PS 10 - Department of Defense Earned Value Management Policy and Initiatives

The Department of Defense (DoD) has undertaken several initiatives to improve the use of Earned Value Management (EVM) to more successfully manage and oversee defense acquisition programs.  In March 2005, DoD released changes to its EVM policy to provide consistency in EVM implementation across the Department and to better manage its programs through improvements in DoD and industry EVM practices.  In February 2007, DoD formally recognized the EVM System Intent Guide as an important reference for interpreting the intent of the guidelines in ANSI/EIA-748.  In July 2007, DoD released three noteworthy documents—a memorandum disseminating the DoD EVM roles and responsibilities, a letter communicating DoD’s continued recognition of the EVM system guidelines in the revised version of ANSI/EIA-748, and a memorandum directing full implementation of the central repository system on all EVM reports for major programs.  In addition, OSD leadership has directed another review of the EVM policy and practices, to include the state of compliance and enforcement.  This session will provide details on the status of these initiatives and solicit feedback on potential future improvement activities.  In addition, the session will provide an opportunity for participants to dialogue on other program management-related topics.

Deborah A. Tomsic, Office of the Secretary of Defense  (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics)

       Voice: (703) 695-0707                    Fax: (703) 693-7043                       E-Mail:  deborah.tomsic@osd.mil

 

Deborah (Debbie) Tomsic is a senior program analyst in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology and Logistics), Acquisition Resources and Analysis, Acquisition Management.  She is responsible for oversight of several major defense acquisition programs and is the Office of the Secretary of Defense focal point for earned value management.

In her previous position, Ms. Tomsic was the senior strategic planner for the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA).  In this capacity, she was responsible for all aspects of strategic planning and performance measurement for the Agency.  Prior to joining DCMA in 1993, Ms. Tomsic served in several assignments with the Department of the Army in the United States and overseas, where she was responsible for a variety of human capital and financial management processes and projects.

Ms. Tomsic holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Business and Management from the University of Maryland and a Master of Science degree in National Resource Strategy from the Industrial College of the Armed Forces.  She is also a graduate of the National Defense University’s Senior Acquisition Course.  Ms. Tomsic is a certified acquisition professional in the program management career field.

 

PS 11 - Lessons Learned in Implementing and Certifying an EVMS in Europe

on the Presidential Helicopters Program

Many challenges face the Team executing the new Presidential Helicopters Program in order to meet DoD’s EVMS requirements, especially in the very demanding environment due to the nature of the Program and the International make-up of the Team. This presentation will explore the Lessons Learned in applying a full blown EVMS requirement at AgustaWestland-Italy (AW-I) for the period from 2004 through the summer of 2007.  During this period, AW-I developed and implemented an EVMS, designed to be fully compliant with ANSI/EIA 748-A.  The effort is expected to culminate with a Certified EVM System under 748-A in the summer 2007.

Lessons learned in this implementation are from every quarter of corporate and system environments, and deal with several major issues, including cultural challenges due to multi-national participants, a volatile Program scope and schedule, and the lack of experience in EVMS at AW-I.

The presentation will take the viewer through a brief chronology of events leading up to the summer of 2007, followed by an exploration of the issues, solutions, and lessons learned in developing and using EVMS as an effective management approach for the Program.  The presenters are two key leaders with first-hand experience in implementing and supporting the DoD EVMS Validation Review  , looking for experiences of others to guide them in their own system development and implementation, and for those interested in learning the real-world obstacles and successes in aggressively implementing EVMS on a challenging, high profile program by an International Team.

Richard Brodkorb, Performance Management Associates, Inc. and

Voice: (714)  235-1485                   Fax: (714) 693-1017                       E-mail: rebmanage@aol.com

Richard Brodkorb has over 30 years experience in EVMS and related project management disciplines, having started his career in the USAF as a CSCSC System Demonstration Review Team Chief.  As a pioneer in EVMS, he was instrumental in forging policies and practices in both the government and industry arenas.  He has consulted with dozens of clients in Project Management and EVMS on 5 continents at all levels of management.

His positions have included USAF Officer, Founder and CEO of two consulting organizations specializing in EVMS, Instructor in Project Management at University of California, and guest lecturing as many other universities and professional societies.  His clientele have included major corporations in engineering, construction, aerospace, electronics, automotive, and utilities industries, as well as US Federal agencies and foreign governments.

Massimo Biggi, AgustaWestland-Italy

Massimo Biggi is the Program Manager at AW-I for the Presidential Helicopters Program, a major participant of the International Team.  He has taken full ownership and responsibility for the development and implementation of EVMS at AW-I, including guiding the entire corporate Program Team throughout the phases leading to Certification under ANSI/EIA Standard 748-A.  Mr. Biggi is a mechanical engineer, with experiences with multiple projects. His credentials include design and development and project/program management assignments in the automotive and aerospace industries over the past 14 years.

PS 12 - What’s New with EVM at NASA?

 

NASA manages some of the most complex projects in the world.  As federal budgets get tighter, integrating cost, schedule and technical aspects of projects becomes more important.  EVM will play an increasingly important role in mission success.   What’s new with EVM at NASA?  Find out at this session. 

Dorothy Tiffany, MSPM, CPA, PMP  NASA Goddard Space Flight Center

 

Voice:  (301) 286-5917         Fax:  (301)-286-1736    E-Mail:  Dorothy.J.Tiffany@nasa.gov

Dorothy Tiffany is the NASA EVM Program Executive and the PM Challenge Conference Project Manager in NASA’s Office of Chief Engineer.  She also holds the position of Deputy Chief of the Advanced Concepts and Formulation Office for Business Management at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center.  Ms. Tiffany is responsible for leading the Agency’s implementation of Earned Value Management and for developing stronger project teams.  She is a faculty member for the NASA Academy of Program/Project & Engineering Leadership in the fields of project management, earned value management, budgeting and effective communications. 

She previously managed the business operations of numerous large satellite development projects, including Calipso, POES, TRMM, and TDRS.  She also directed GSFC’s Financial Management Division and Accounting Branch, instituting major information system reforms with the voucher examination and payment process.

Ms. Tiffany was awarded two NASA Exceptional Achievement Medals and the NASA Exceptional Service Medal for her work in finance and project management and has been recognized for her efforts in mentoring and diversity.  Ms. Tiffany holds an M.S. in Project Management from Boston University, a B.S. in Accounting from the University of Maryland and a Certificate in Technology Management from the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).  She is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP) with the Project Management Institute (PMI) and a Certified Public Accountant (CPA). Ms. Tiffany is a member of PMI, the College of Performance Management, the Maryland Association of Certified Public Accountants and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.

 

PS 13 – Relationship Diagramming Method 2007

The ADM Arrow Diagramming Method of CPM was introduced in 1957 – 50 years ago.  The PDM Precedence Diagramming Method of CPM was introduced in 1964.  The RDM Relationship Diagramming Method was introduced in 2005 by Fredric L. Plotnick in the 6th edition of CPM in Construction Management, O’Brien and Plotnick, McGraw-Hill.  Presented and refined by member feedback at PMI College of Scheduling, PMI College of Performance Management, Association for Advancement of Cost Engineers International and the American Society of Engineering Management, Mr. Plotnick will discuss the current status of the methodology, efforts to set a certification standard for uniform usage, and discussions with Primavera Software Systems for implementation. 

The guiding principles of RDM are to gather, record and incorporate into the CPM computer algorithm, information relating to the restraints and events at the beginning and end of each restraint, as well as better defining information relating the activities of a logic network plan and calculated schedule.  RDM permits the project team to distinguish between physical restraints and resource restraints.  RDM software automatically highlights restraints where “the ball is passed” between crews, subcontractors, jobsite locations and other situations requiring greater management supervision.  RDM distinguishes between starting a second activity three days after a ten day activity has started, and after three days or 30% of the first activity has been performed. 

RDM provides many other benefits for the small additional effort of recording information typically discussed but discarded due to the lack of support by computer software designed in the 1960’s.

 

Fredric L. Plotnick, Esq., P.E. – EnProMaC – Jenkintown, PA

Voice: (215) 885-3733                  Fax: (215) 885-3732      E-Mail:  fplotnick@fplotnick.com

Fredric L. Plotnick, Esq., PE, is CEO and principal consultant of Engineering & Property Management Consultants, Inc. He has bachelors and masters degrees in civil engineering and is a registered Professional Engineer in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Florida.  He is also an attorney and a member of the Bars of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Florida.  Mr. Plotnick is an adjunct professor of the departments of Civil Engineering, Engineering Management and Construction Management at Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He is a past president of the Philadelphia Chapter of the Pennsylvania Society of Professional Engineers, and a past Construction Group chair of the Philadelphia Section of the American Society of Civil Engineers.  Mr. Plotnick is co-author, along with James J. O’Brien, of the industry bible, CPM in Construction Management, currently in its 6th edition, McGraw-Hill.  He is also director of Academic Liaison and chair of the Technical Track of the annual conference of the PMI Project Management Institute’s College of Scheduling, as well as a regular speaker for the PMI College of Performance Management. 

 

PS 14 – NDIA EVMS Intent Guide

As a result of industry ownership responsibility for EV, NDIA developed what we have today: The ANSI/EIA-748, which defines the 32 criteria guidelines.  Establishing an Industry Standards for EVMS was superior step forward.  However, the criteria lack of direction on the documentation and process for compliance and with many new organizations using or being required to use EVMS and getting validated, the need for a clear interpretation of the guidelines grew.

The Federal Agencies, including the DOD teamed with NDIA to develop an approach to help all parties involved in the resolution of guidelines interpretation problems.  The objective is to produce guidance to clarify and communicate the intent of the EVMS guideline.

Peter A. Wynne

 

                                  Voice: 817 935-5107                                                                E-Mail: peter.a.wynne@lmco.com

 

Mailing Address: PO Box 748, Mail Zone 8601, Fort Worth, TX 76101-0748

 

Mr. Wynne is currently the Director of Cost Management Integration for the Business Management area of Lockheed Martin Corporation’s Aeronautics Company located in Fort Worth, Texas. Mr. Wynne joined the General Dynamics Fort Worth Division in 1979 and in 1981 became the Business Manager of the Electronics Manufacturing Center overseeing the estimating, negotiating, and performance management of the F-16 electronics manufacturing. He has performed jobs of increasing scope and responsibility in Military Electronics, Program Management, Estimating, and Business Management. During his tenure as the Business Director for the F-16 Program, Mr. Wynne led the successful implementation of the Manufacturing Resource Planning business model. In his current role Mr. Wynne led the consolidation of three sites earned value systems which included 12 primary Program areas into one Program Performance Management System and related system documentation. Mr. Wynne holds a   B.A. in Finance: University of South Florida, M.B.A. (Business Management): University of Dallas.

 

PS 15  - Adoption – the Real Challenge in Implementing EVMS

With the Federal Government increasing the applicability of earned value management (EVM) on more programs and contracts (OMB Circular A-11) many organizations are being introduced to Earned Value for the first time. Some of these organizations are not heavily invested in traditional project management techniques and have little awareness of earned value.

Implementing EVM in an organization typically involves at least business process development, systems deployment and integration, and training of the workforce. However, EVMS requires more than just producing the Contract Performance Reports.

The ANSI 748 criteria require that the organization adopt EVM as a management approach for the program. The most critical and challenging part of an EVMS implementation is getting the organization to adopt the new management approach and tools.

This paper focuses on the challenges of getting an organization to use earned value methods – EVMS Adoption. Similar to building in quality, user adoption needs to be considered from the earliest stages of an implementation. This paper describes important steps in framing the implementation of EVM and techniques for gaining and measuring adoption of earned value management techniques.

 

Mike Young, Pinnacle Management Systems – Northern Virginia

Voice: 678 984 4335        E-Mail: Mike.Young@pinnaclemgmt.com

Mike Young has more than has more over 20 years of experience in the field of Enterprise Project Management and Earned Value Management.  Early in his career he worked for a group providing consulting to NASA and the DOE implementing EVM and Schedule Risk management systems.   He then moved to a major software vendor where he led the development of their EPM and EVM products.

Mr. Young has extensive experience in establishing Enterprise Project Management systems for IT and High Tech organizations.  He focuses on ensuring solid Adoption of EPM and EVM solutions and alignment to business drivers.

He has worked in a variety of industries including Commercial Software, Aerospace and Defense, Computer Hardware, Financial Services and Pharmaceuticals.  He built several consulting practices for vertical markets including IT and High Tech New Product Introduction.

 

PS 16 - Lessons Learned in Implementing EVM within the Federal Enterprise

By Brian M. Evans, PMP

Contributing Authors: John Driessnack, PMP, CCEA; David Treacy, PMP; and Sean Osborne

Earned Value Management (EVM) is considered a best practice within the project management community. It provides an integrated disciplined approach to managing programs and projects which provides an objective performance assessment from which informed decisions may be made. Senior leadership is looking for better tools to track between capital planning and project execution. Implementing EVM provides an opportunity for senior leadership to implement an integrated management system, build a central repository for projects, and feedback information into future project planning.

Implementing EVM within Federal Agencies offers unique challenges that are not seen in the private sector. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Capital Programming Guide has mandated the use and reporting of EVM metrics through the exhibit 300 (e300) process. As a result, civilian agencies have chosen a variety of methods to implement and report EVM. This presentation offers lessons learned to the unique challenges of meeting the 32 ANSI/EIA EVM guidelines within Federal civilian agencies.

This session is for individuals who are implementing EVM within Federal civilian agencies or those who desire knowledge of some lessons learned while implementing EVM within Federal civilian agencies. The lessons learned are from projects that are in the process of or are implementing EVM within a Federal civilian agency and how some of the barriers to implementation have been overcome.

Brian M. Evans, PMP, Principal - Executive Consulting Group, MCR, LLC.

 

Voice: (703) 217-6304                    Fax: (703) 416-9750                       E-Mail: bevans@mcri.com

 

Brian Evans is a Principal in MCR’s Executive Consulting Group. The group is responsible for Integrated Program Management support across MCR.  Brian’s is responsible for scheduling competency throughout the organization.   Brian has over 20 years of Program and Project Management experience on a variety of Federal programs. During that time he has been involved in the planning, budgeting, and execution of a variety of DOD Weapons System, Civilian IT, and Civilian construction programs.  During his career, he has served a variety of roles including deputy program manager, project manager, program control chief, business analyst, scheduler, risk manager, and contract manager. He has worked on IT projects rated CMM Level 3 and CMMI Level 5.

His other experience includes being the lead for the implementation of EVM within and FAA organization, the deputy program manager for a NIH grants management system, the program control chief for an IRS data warehouse, the program control chief for a CMS financial accounting system, and a program management consultant for a major DOD weapons system program.

He has also spent time working for IBM Business Consulting Services; PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP Management Consulting Services; Litton Industries; PRC, Inc. and Advanced Technology, Inc.

PS 17 - Exploration of Cultural Change

This lecture will take participants on a journey of change exploration and address the important drivers of the symposium theme of improving the culture of cost estimating at NASA. What is organizational ecology and why does the prevailing wisdom that organizations change easily and often contradict reality? How can organization change theory influence cultural improvements? What are the evolutionary stages of change that an organization must follow to achieve true adaptation? We will answer these questions and extend our journey into the neurological origins of behavior. What’s really going on inside our head? How do neurotransmitters influence how we behave? Are there really limited time-windows in which we are open to new ideas? Why “just the facts” are never enough to change people’s minds. Does the cumulative weight of experience make it harder for people to change? Rounding out our journey will be an examination of politics and power on culture including the nature of bureaucratic organizations, the self-interest of management, and the fragmented structure of government agencies.

Rick Albertson, Wyle Laboratories – Chantilly, VA

Voice: (207) 221-5878      Fax: (703) 818-4118  E-Mail: rick_albertson@verizon.net

 Rick Albertson is an executive management consultant with Wyle Laboratories of Chantilly, Virginia and is both a Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and Certified Management Accountant (CMA). Mr. Albertson has worked on projects for NASA, FBI, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, OUSD (AT&L), Congressional Member Offices, and various intelligence community agencies. Mr. Albertson’s specialty is organization design, development, and improvement using Systems Theory as espoused by the eminent Peter Senge and Theory of Constraints by Eliyahu Goldratt. Mr. Albertson uses these methodologies combined with his study of genetics, neurobiology, and cultural biology to decompose organization structures to their molecular level and rebuild them based on their principal success drivers. Mr. Albertson’s expertise also includes organization change management, process engineering, business ethics, enterprise architecture design, knowledge management, program management, and records management.

PS 18 - ELECTRONIC FACILITATION OF NASA INTEGRATED COST RISK FOR IMPROVED COST MANAGEMENT

(NASA PA&E/Cost Analysis Division Cost Research Project)

Explain and demo the use of an illustrative Electronic Network Environment (ENE) application for facilitating NASA’s integrated cost-risk process utilizing electronic transmission and interfacing of EVM Contract Performance Report (CPR) and Cost Analysis Data Requirement (CADRe) information for improving cost estimates for enhanced project management.  This ENE is planned as a facilitation tool for projects to streamline the production and use of the new NASA CADRe and CPR requirements.  NASA PA&E/Cost Analysis Division (CAD) is working to finalize and implement the Cost Analysis Data Requirement (CADRe) document containing a project description, project technical and programmatic characteristics and a project life cycle cost estimate (LCCE).  This document is planned to be updated at each Key Decision Point (KDP) in the NASA acquisition project lifecycle in order to document descriptive, technical, programmatic and cost estimate changes that occur to NASA major flight projects during their lifecycle.  At CADRe updates subsequent to the first CADRe, actual costs from the EVM system Contract Performance Reports (CPR) are electronically recorded in CADRe for its LCCE updates.  As LCCE’s evolve, regularly produced EVMS data from these projects will be integrated with NASA’s CADRe’s that capture historical cost, programmatic and technical data.  This integrated body of data will be used during and at each transition between NASA Phases A through E: Concept Development – SDR; Preliminary Design - PDR; Detailed Design – CDR; Fabrication, Assembly, and Test – Launch; Operations and Sustainment - Disposal to generate an estimate-to-complete (ETC) for an updated LCCE.  The notional case study  presented will demonstrate that the proof-of-concept ENE electronically updates the CADRe with real-time contractor-produced EVMS data that can improve the quality of ETC’s for ongoing projects while, at the same time, providing more current data to improve estimates on other projects.

 

 

David Graham, NASA Headquarters IPAO, Washington, D.C.

                    Voice     (202) 358-1002 Fax:  (202) 358-3602    E-Mail:David.Graham-1@NASA.Gov

Before coming to NASA in April 03, David R. Graham worked at the Aerospace Corporation for two years supporting the Intelligence Community Cost Analysis Improvement Group (IC CAIG).  He began at the Space & Missile Systems Center (SMC), Los Angeles AFB, CA in Jan, 1979.  He has held a variety of budget, cost performance, cost estimator, cost-risk and program analyst positions up to the present.  His career has taken him from Los Angeles to Washington DC and back two times, finally settling at NASA Headquarters and living in the Northern Virginia area.  His work includes earned value analysis, cost estimating, cost-risk analysis, cost as an independent variable (CAIV), Activity Based Costing, aircraft modification financial analysis and space launch range pricing. Most recently, he is focusing on cost-risk management through an integration of cost estimating and Earned Value Management for improving cost management at NASA.  He is a SCEA Certified Cost Estimator and a present SCEA Board Member.

 

Dan Walkovitz, Mainstay Software Corporation, Centennial, CO

 Voice (303) 220-8780 x. 223        Fax: (303) 220-5620         E0Mail:DWalkovi@Mainstay.com

Dan has been involved with the aerospace/defense industry for twenty years.  As CEO of Mainstay Software Corporation during that time, he has focused Mainstay Software Corporation’s unique analytical software tools in various areas within aerospace and defense.  Dan has overseen application of the transformational First AIDE technology to aerospace/defense estimating, pricing, source selection, program management and related acquisition analysis areas.  Dan has been the primary Mainstay representative to Boeing Phantom Works and NASA IPAO regarding use of First AIDE to create tools that integrate EVMS and cost analysis in the case of NASA, and design, performance, cost and risk for systems of systems at Boeing Phantom Works.

PS 19 - Implementing EVMS in a Dynamic Project Environment

“Developing the Plan for the Plan”

On March 7, 2005, the Under Secretary of Defense revised the DoD EVM (Earned Value Management) Policy by lowering the cost thresholds for contracts that require compliance with the ANSI/EIA-748-A Standard for Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS).  The many challenges facing contractors implementing an effective Earned Value Management System (EVMS) include fully understanding the contractual EVMS requirements and level-setting implementation time-lines.   

Toward this endeavor, contractors and DoD agencies should bypass setting an arbitrary date for EVMS implementation.  Instead, they should work together to develop a realistic and achievable EVMS implementation plan based on contract complexity and type, project risk, and dollar size. 

This presentation shows the required EVMS implementation areas (Organization, Planning and Budgeting, Accounting, and EVMS Tools Setup) and specific design activities toward developing a successful EVMS Implementation Plan from contract award through conduct of the Integrated Baseline Review (IBR). 

 

Basil A. Soutos, Performance Management Associates

 

Phone: (703) 409-5941            Fax : (571) 223-1491                E-Mail: bsoutos@pmassoc.com

Mr. Soutos is Director, Earned Value Management (EVM) Washington Area Operations for Performance Management Associates (PMA).  He is responsible for client engagements, business development, and conduct of public seminars.  Mr. Soutos has 21 years experience in providing Project Management and Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS) implementation, training and consulting services for Government agencies (NRO, NGA, and NSA) and Mission Partners (Computer Sciences Corporation, Welkin Associates Ltd., Lockheed Martin Corporation, Raytheon, BAE, and General Dynamics).   Since 2000, Mr. Soutos has facilitated over 50 Integrated Baseline Reviews and trained over 4,000 acquisition professionals in EVM basics and advanced principles.   Mr. Soutos specializes in preparing clients for successfully implementing contractor’s Performance Measurement Baselines (PMB) and facilitating Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBR). 

 

PS 20 - Program Managers Guide to the IBR

 

In 1994 the Department of Defense (DoD) instituted a policy requiring its Program Managers to conduct Integrated Baseline Reviews (IBRs) on contracts requiring compliance with the DoD Earned Value Management System criteria (the term used at the time).  To comply with the DoD directive the military components developed their individual IBR guides and processes for conducting the IBR. The IBR process had merit and proved to be valuable in assisting Program Manager’s to better understand the contract’s scope of work and the risks associated with meeting cost, schedule and technical objectives of the contract.  However, the numerous and often inconsistent review procedures that existed at that time resulted in concerns by Industry with regard to the effectiveness of the IBR and were these reviews meeting the desire outcomes.  NDIA brought these issues to the attention of OSD in September 1999.  As a result, an IBR Integrated Product Team (IPT), consisting of both government and industry representatives, was established in 1999.  The charter of the IPT was 1) to assess how IBRs were being performed as compared to DoD policy; 2) identify impediments to effective IBRs; and 3) recommend changes to improve the IBR process.  The result of the IBR IPT efforts was the NDIA IBR Guide. This purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the development of the NDIA Program Manager’s Guide to the Integrated Baseline Review Process, a discussion of its contents and how OSD, OMB and Industry expects this Guide to be used in preparing and conducting IBRs.

Henry B. (Buddy) Everage, SM&A, Newport Beach, CA

Voice: (703) 822-1201                                  E-Mail:  buddy.everage@smawins.com

Buddy Everage is the Principal EVM Specialist for SM&A Corporation where he is the lead for the company’s EVMS consulting practice. In that capacity Mr. Everage provides support to aerospace and defense contractors in all areas related to EVM systems development, implementation, maintenance and training.

Mr. Everage represents SM&A as a member of the Executive Committee of the National Defense Industrial Association’s (NDIA) Program Management Systems Committee (PMSC).  He was the primary author and lead for the joint industry/government PMSC working group that developed the recently published NDIA EVM System Acceptance Guide.  He is also active in the PMI College of Performance Management and has served as the VP of Finance.  In addition, Mr. Everage was the co-chairperson for the 18 th Annual International Integrated Program Management Conference in 2006.

 

PS 21 - FAA Portfolio / Program Performance Metrics

 

This paper will present the FAA Portfolio / Program Performance Metrics implemented by the FAA.  The FAA is restructuring many of it’s business processes to operate like a commercial business.  Many businesses utilize portfolio program performance metrics to monitor program performance and compare performance across their portfolio of programs and this paper will provide an understanding of the approach used by the FAA to identify the metrics that will reflect a broad measure of program performance.  The FAA performance metrics use a Green / Yellow/ Red stop light technique and the paper will review the process the FAA used to identify criteria that provided objective program performance metrics for management.

The paper will also provide the process FAA followed to integrate the program metrics with other FAA business metrics. 

The paper will describe the automation of the FAA Portfolio / Program Performance Metrics and how management has the ability obtain early visibility into program performance issues.  The attendees will understand how management can use on-line tools and reports to drill down to understand the underlying factors driving the metrics.  The presentation will include existing program metrics currently being presented to management. 

                

Dan Milano, FAA

 

Phone: 202-267-8450

E-Mail: Daniel.Milano@faa.com

 

Daniel is a Senior Advisor to the FAA Assistant Administrator for Information Services and Chief Information Officer.  He is responsible for all aspects of information technology (IT) capital planning; overseeing the development of the agency's IT business cases and IT portfolio; implementing Earned Value Management and other program management best practices and processes; and representing the agency at the Department of Transportation in all areas of IT capital planning and investment control.

In addition to his career at the FAA, Daniel Milano was a Senior Financial Advisor to Air Force Assistant Secretary for Financial Management (SAF/FM).  He advises SAF/FM on family housing and utilities privatization initiatives; aircraft and facilities leasing and conducts financial research in key areas such as aerospace company financial health. 

Prior to working for the US Air Force, Daniel Milano was an operations research analyst with Naval Center for Cost Analysis (NCCA). He was the IT program manager for the Visibility and Management of Operating and Support Cost (VAMOSC) system.  He has also worked on various special studies for the Under Secretary of the Navy, the Vice Chief of Naval Operations (VCNO), the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Financial Management & Comptroller (ASN FM&C) and the Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Research, Development & Acquisition (ASN RDA). 

Mr. Milano previously worked as a mechanical engineer for the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR).  He was responsible for the development of acquisition plans, including affordability assessments and long-range investment planning analyses, in support of Joint Strike Fighter and Aerial Target programs.

 

Nicole Waddell, KM Systems Group

 

Voice: (443) 540-1257                                                              Email: nwaddell@kmsystemsgroup.com

Ms. Waddell has over sixteen years of professional Information Technology industry experience and twelve years of project/program management experience within the government and commercial business arena.  She is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP). Ms. Waddell’s professional roles have included Director, Project Manager, Senior Consultant, Senior Engineer, Business Analyst, and Trainer.  She has extensive experience planning and managing full life-cycle system development projects, joint application development, business process reengineering, change management and total quality management initiatives.  Ms. Waddell has managed schedule, cost, and technical performance for several complex multi-million dollar enterprise-wide projects.

Ms. Waddell is currently working with the KMSG team to implement the Portfolio/Program Performance Management initiative at the FAA.   In addition, she is working closely with several major FAA programs in reviewing their EVM readiness in accordance with the OMB Exhibit-300 review process, the FAA Acquisition

PS 22 - The Risk Based Estimate at Completion (EAC)

 

The Risk Based EAC is one of Ten Targets of Opportunity brought forward in The EVMS Light Book I, authored by John J Pakiz.  It is perhaps the most important, since the EAC is sometimes called the bottom line of EVMS.  This presentation highlights the principal attributes and benefits of the Risk Based EAC process which the author believes is evolving into a Best Practice.

An EAC is driven by “Risk and Opportunities” which change as work proceeds.  The EAC cycle needs to be dynamic and target “Risk and Opportunities.” The latest EAC needs to be compared with the prior EAC to have accountability and meaningful results.  An EAC cycle driven by “Risk and Opportunities” gives the Engineer/Manager the best tools and methods for containing costs.  The prime contractor and major subcontractors need to do Quarterly Risk Based EAC cycle in an integrated fashion to achieve best results.  Experience has shown that a Quarterly Risk Based EAC cycle provides a balance that is practical and works well with the Monthly Control Account EAC updates from variance analysis.  By introducing “Risk and Opportunities” at a higher level, it enables establishing a realistic Most Likely EAC at the earliest practical time.

 

John J Pakiz Performance Management Systems

Voice: 202.290.1170           Email: johnjpakiz@comcast.net

 

John J Pakiz’s 50 years of experience includes 45 years with Douglas/McDonnell Douglas/ Boeing (Ret.).  Most of it directly related to DOD, NASA, DOE, Commercial and European Programs involving both Program Control Systems and Performance Measurement Systems.

His aerospace experience since 1958 includes:

- Thor Ground Launched Ballistic Missile Program in the United Kingdom 1958-1961.

- Skybolt Air Launched Ballistic Missile Program in the United Kingdom 1962-1963.

- Advanced Technology Marketing 1963-1965.

- Apollo Space Program 1965-1972.

- Skylab Space Station Program 1969-1973.

- Space Shuttle Program 1972-1980.

- European Spacelab Program in Germany 1973-1976.

- Edison Company Solar Power I Station Program 1980-1984.

- International Space Station Program 1986-2002.

- C-17 Cargo/Troop Transport Program 1984-2002.

- Delta Launch Vehicle Program 1984-2002.

- A Principal Member of NDIA Team that developed the EVMS Standard 1994-1997.

- Received DOD Highest Acquisition David Packard Award 1998.

- Vice Chairman/Chairman NDIA Program Management Systems Committee 1998-2002.

- Senior Advisor/Author on Earned Value Management Systems 1983 - Independent since 2003.

- Special Activities, Other Programs, NDIA Participant 1984-2008 and beyond.

Prior to joining Douglas Aircraft, John attended UCLA on a Navy NROTC scholarship, was a three year Varsity Letterman in Track and Field, and received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Engineering in 1955.  He then served three years on active duty as an Officer in the United States Navy on the Heavy Cruiser USS St. Paul, CA-73.  John now resides in Washington D.C.

 

PS 23 - Earned Schedule in Action

Earned schedule analysis is a breakthrough analytical technique that derives schedule performance measures in units of time, rather than cost. The same basic Earned Value Management (EVM) data points are used. Indicators, similar to those for cost, are derivable from the earned schedule measure. These indicators provide a status and predictive ability for schedule, analogous to cost. Because these metrics use time based measures, they augment traditional EVM and integrated schedule analysis.

This presentation describes the application of Earned Schedule on a small scale but time critical Information Technology (IT) software development project. The Earned Schedule indicators were actively used in conjunction with the traditional EVM and network schedule based measures to manage the project.

The critical path calculated completion dates after weekly status updates to the “logic driven” network schedule were tabulated and compared with the weekly Earned Schedule predicted completion dates. Analysis of the differences occurred as part of the weekly schedule update and review process.

While care should be taken in generalizing the results and specific experiences of this small scale project, the active use of Earned Schedule has provided additional important insights into the behavior and benefits of the Earned Schedule metrics which could only come from “actual use”. Earned Schedule is shown to provide an important analytical “bridge” between EVM data and metrics and the “real” network schedule.

Note:  This presentation is at the advanced level and will not cover the basic theory of Earned Schedule in any detail.  Persons interested in attending who are not familiar with Earned Schedule basics are directed to the Earned Schedule papers available on the Earned Schedule website at www.earnedschedule.com.

 

Kym Henderson, Past Education Director – PMI Sydney Australia Chapter

 

         Voice: 61 414 428 537            Fax: 61 (2) 8394 9295        E-Mail: kym.henderson@froggy.com.au

 

Kym Henderson is a practicing information technology project manager with significant experience in project recoveries utilizing simplified Earned Value Management techniques. His first degree is a Bachelor of Business and a Master of Science (Computing) from the University of Technology, Sydney. Kym has presented at many conferences internationally and published papers in various publications including the Measurable News, Crosstalk - The Journal of Defense Software Engineering and as part of the proceedings of PMI Global Congresses. Kym also published the first validation of the Earned Schedule method in the Measurable News in 2003.

He teaches “Applying Earned Value Concepts to Commercial [IT] Projects” for the PMI SeminarsWorld ® program (2005 2007). Kym is the Immediate Past Education Director (2003–2007) of the PMI Sydney Chapter where I implemented a highly regarded Chapter education program. His primary professional interest is advancing project management practice by transitioning worthwhile advanced project management concepts to practical application.

PS 24 - GAO’s Cost Assessment Guide (Exposure draft, version 1.0)

and how it Defines Earned Value Management Best Practices

 

The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is responsible for, among other things, assisting Congress in its oversight of the federal government, including agencies’ stewardship of public funds. Legislators, government officials, and the public want to know whether government programs are achieving their goals and what their costs are. The capability to generate reliable program cost estimates is a critical function necessary to effectively use public funds and to support the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) capital programming process. Without it, agencies are at risk of experiencing cost overruns, missed deadlines, and performance shortfalls—all of which are recurring problems that our program assessments too often reveal. 

Our Cost Assessment Guide was developed in order to establish a consistent methodology based on best practices to be used across the federal government for the development and management of its program cost estimates. In particular, it provides a detailed link between cost estimating and earned value management (EVM)—which is especially critical for setting realistic program baselines and managing risk. By design, managers and auditors alike should find this Guide to be a useful manual as they assess (1) the credibility of a program’s cost estimate for budget and decision-making purposes, and (2) the program’s status using EVM.

In this presentation, we will discuss the content of the Guide related to Earned Value Management and highlight case studies from previous audits which illustrate the best practices being discussed. In addition, we will provide examples of recent GAO audits where the Guide was piloted as an audit tool.

Karen Richey

Karen Richey is a senior cost analyst in GAO’s Center for Technology and Engineering, where she is involved in performing cost analyses and technology audits on a wide range of systems. In the past few years, Karen has been responsible for championing the use of earned value management as an auditing tool at GAO. Certified by the National Defense University as a Chief Information Officer (CIO), Karen is also Level-III certified in the field of cost estimating and financial management. She has 17 years experience in the fields of cost estimating and technology auditing.

 Before joining the GAO, Karen was a cost analyst for the Department of the Navy where she performed earned value management and developed independent cost estimates for major weapon and automated information systems. Karen holds a degree in Statistics and Mathematics from the University of South Carolina. In the last year, she has developed and delivered a one day training class for auditors on EVM as well as co-authoring articles in The INTOSAI IT Journal and the Navy Comptroller Magazine.

Jennifer Echard

Jennifer Echard has been a senior cost analyst in GAO’s Center for Technology and Engineering since 2002. At GAO she is involved in performing cost analyses and technology audits on a variety of programs spanning many different agencies. Before joining the GAO, Jennifer was a cost analyst for the Department of the Navy where she developed independent cost estimates for major weapon and automated information systems. Jennifer holds a degree in Mathematics from the University of Maryland. She has co-authored articles in The INTOSAI IT Journal and the Navy Comptroller Magazine. Jennifer is also Level-III certified in the field of cost estimating and financial management. She has 18 years experience in the fields of cost estimating and technology auditing.

Carol Cha

Carol Cha is a Senior Information Technology Specialist at the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). During her tenure, she has led reviews in EVM and acquisition management at the Departments of Commerce, Defense, Homeland Security, and Treasury, among others.  She also teaches beginning and advanced EVM training courses within GAO. Currently, she is working on the development of GAO’s Cost Assessment Guide—which is intended to be an auditor’s guide to program and system life-cycle cost estimation. She holds a B.S. in Business Information Technology from Virginia Tech.

PS 25 - Is Earned Value Management Worth Doing In Project Formulation?

We know it works in the implementation phase, which includes DDT&E and production.  For many years federal agency acquisition policies were written around the concept of using EVM starting at PDR when DDT&E contracts were issued until production was finished.  Those were the phases in which baselined system requirements were analyzed and allocated to system components and the system architecture really gelled – serious money.  In the implementation phase, early visibility into problems paid off handsomely and EVM was a no-brainer.

But what about the formulation phase, that period before the preliminary design comes together, now sometimes called “pre-acquisition”?  Normally, this phase is performed without the insight provided by an EVMS.  It’s usually judged to be just not worth it; the period of performance and the spending for pre-acquisition or formulation are frequently judged to be too small to make EVM practicable. 

At the other end of the spectrum, though are the mega-projects that have a formulation phase that may go on for years, consuming heroic sums of funding.  EVM usually helps in such an environment.  Is the difference just size or time?  This presentation will analyze some of the other project or system attributes or variables that might help us to decide whether to use EVM for formulation.

 

Samuel C. Padgett, NASA, Johnson Space Center

 

Voice: (281) 483-8984       Fax: (281) 483-6431   E-Mail: mailto:samuel.c.padgett@nasa.gov

Sam Padgett is an engineer who works as an analyst at NASA’s Johnson Space Center.  For the last decade he has worked as JSC’s internal consultant, advising the Center, projects, programs, missions and the agency regarding policy and practice for EVM.  He’s earned masters degrees in engineering and business and he received NASA’s Exceptional Service Medal in 2006.

PS 26 – NDIA EVMS System Acceptance Guide

 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-11, the Karen Evans’ OMB memo of August 2005, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) EVMS clause all require the use of validated EVM processes by all federal government agencies.  Historically, EVM system validations have only been available through the defense community with Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) conducting these validations as the EVM Executive Agent.  Recognizing the fact that an equivalent organization does not exist to perform this function for non-Department of Defense (DoD) agencies, OMB requested that NDIA, as the recognized EVM subject matter expert body, address this issue for applicability at the FAR level with the key issue being EVM system acceptance across multiple agencies.  The NDIA EVM System Acceptance Guide was developed as a response to the OMB request.  This guide establishes the standard methodology to provide a robust and acceptable review of an EVM System.  This presentation, “The Process of System Acceptance” will provide an overview of the acceptance frame work as documented in the NDIA EVM System Acceptance Guide. 

  Henry B. (Buddy) Everage, SM&A, Newport Beach, CA

Voice: (703) 822-1201                                  E-Mail:  buddy.everage@smawins.com

Buddy Everage is the Principal EVM Specialist for SM&A Corporation where he is the lead for the company’s EVMS consulting practice. In that capacity Mr. Everage provides support to aerospace and defense contractors in all areas related to EVM systems development, implementation, maintenance and training.

Mr. Everage represents SM&A as a member of the Executive Committee of the National Defense Industrial Association’s (NDIA) Program Management Systems Committee (PMSC).  He was the primary author and lead for the joint industry/government PMSC working group that developed the recently published NDIA EVM System Acceptance Guide.  He is also active in the PMI College of Performance Management and has served as the VP of Finance.  In addition, Mr. Everage was the co-chairperson for the 18 th Annual International Integrated Program Management Conference in 2006.

PS 27 - Achieving ANSI/ESI Standard 748 Compliance at

VA using Primavera

As mandated in the President’s Management Agenda E-Government initiative and the Office of Management and Budget Circular A-11, an Earned Value Management System (EVMS) is required to comply with American National Standards Institute/Electronics Industries Alliance (ANSI/EIA) Standard 748.  This requirement applies to all major IT projects and ongoing major IT developmental projects.  Specifically, Dept. of Veterans Affairs (VA) was required to establish and validate performance measurement baselines with clear cost, schedule and performance goals.  The Office of Information and Technology (OI&T) in VA was charged with implementation and management of the EVMS program.  

VA has been able to achieve compliance with the ANSI/EIA Standard and is in the process of reviewing all major IT development programs for agency-wide compliance.   This session will discuss how VA was successful in completing its self-evaluation to achieve compliance.    

Russ Jones, Department of Veterans Affairs

Voice:  202-536-3024                                   E-Mail:  russ.jones2@va.gov

 

Mr. Jones has served in VA since 1995 in various project management positions.  Since 2001, he has been involved with the implementation of Primavera Software in VA serving as a Project Manager, the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Primavera PMO Deputy Director, and a VA-certified Primavera trainer.   During that time, he served on the VA Earned Value Working Group; helping write the VA EV Standard Operating Procedures, develop EV training materials and presenting EV techniques to upper management and project managers. 

In 2006, he transferred to VA OI&T where he is a Primavera Subject Matter Expert (SME) and the VA team lead for Primavera Training, EVM, and Performance Measurement Baseline reviews.     Mr. Jones received has a Masters Degree in Public and Health Service Administration, a Masters Certificate in Project Management from George Washington University and is a Project Management Professional (PMP). 

                                                                       

Willie J. Wilson, Department of Veterans Affairs

 

Voice: (202) 577-3288                                  Email:    Willie.Wilson@va.gov

Mr. Wilson has been an employee of the US Government for 23 years; 8 years in the US Air Force as a Maintenance Systems Data Analysis and most recently with VA.  His employment with the Department of Veterans Affairs began in 1992 as an IT Specialist in West Haven CT, and he has since held numerous positions within VHA that included Project Coordinator, Project/Program Manager over a national IT software initiative.  He was also assigned to the VHA Primavera PMO as a certified Primavera instructor, Chairman of the Primavera Methodology group and SME.

In April of 2007 he transferred to VA OI&T where he is a Primavera SME, member of the liaison team supporting Project Managers with EVM, IBRs and BCRs. Mr. Wilson received a Masters Certificate in Project Management from George Washington University and is also a PMP.

PS 28 – Integrating EVM into Project Assessments

 

Project assessments, health checks, and audits can provide significant benefits in helping to monitor delivery results and manage project risk. Why then are they still not a standard practice?

Three common reasons are: 1) Awareness – Project Stakeholders do not possess a basic understanding of the purpose, mechanics, outcomes, or benefits of project assessments. 2) Fear – Project Assessments, sometimes referred to as Project Audits, they can put fear into the heart of even an experienced Project Manager or Sponsor. 3) Framework – An appropriate assessment structure or framework for providing project oversight does not exist.

During this presentation, you will review key elements of an effective project assessment framework, see how EVM can be integrated into the assessment framework, and discuss project assessment lessons learned and best practices.

The presentation will establish a solid foundation for individuals interested in understanding how to develop and deploy an effective project oversight framework.

 

 

Ted Williams, ProjectRx, Inc.

 

Phone: (908) 520-2283                Fax: (908) 292-1060                E-Mail: ted@projectrx.com

 

Ted is the President and Founder of ProjectRx, Inc., a New Jersey based consulting company specializing in the development and deployment of effective project assessment frameworks. Ted has over 30 years of IT experience, more than 20 years with hands-on management and oversight of large business critical programs and projects, and 10 years conducting project audits and assessments. ProjectRx provides clients with project oversight solutions that integrate proven processes and a world-class product with the appropriate education, training, and mentoring.

Prior to ProjectRx, Ted was employed by Pennsylvania Power & Light, CSX Transportation, PHH, and Cendant Corporation, where he served as Group Vice President for the Corporate Project Audit Group. He was instrumental in the development of processes, tools, and standards for project management audits which were successfully deployed and thrived in a constantly changing and decentralized environment.

Ted holds a BS in Commerce and Engineering Sciences from Drexel University, MS in Business – Information Technology from Johns Hopkins University, and PMP Certification from the Project Management Institute (PMI) where he is a member of the College of Performance Management and Troubled Projects Special Interest Groups. In addition to PMI, Ted is a member of the Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA).

 

Kerri Wszolek, ProjectRx, Inc.

 

Phone: (908) 520-2283                Fax: (908) 292-1060                E-Mail: kerri@projectrx.com

Kerri has more than 5 years of experience with project assessment applications, databases, and providing project audit support. Kerri was previously employed by Fidelis Care New York and Cendant Corporation. She holds a BS in Health Services Management from SUNY Utica/Rome, and CAPM Certification from the Project Management Institute.

 

PS 29 -  Building a Professional Project Planning and

Control Community

A common problem raised by senior programme and project managers is the shortage of skilled, professional Project Planning and Control staff; these include project schedulers, project control staff, and those skilled in the use of earned value management. For many reasons, companies are struggling to recruit people with the right balance of skills and experience. They are in short supply, both within BAE Systems and nationally. One of the reasons this position has arisen is that historically, this particular skill discipline has not been well recognised and there is often no clear mechanism for professional and career development.

In response, BAE Systems have launched a significant change programme to build a Professional Project Planning and Control community; it covers a number of strands including career structure, professional training/development, process development, and cross company benchmarking.

This presentation will provide an update to the progress of the change program, focussing on the development of a career path, and associated competence frameworks. Lessons pertaining to developing and delivering training in this discipline will be shared. Finally the session will describe a scheme aimed at introducing young people into the discipline and developing their competence and knowledge through structured development.

This session is for individuals who are part of the Project Planning & Control community, or for individuals who need to develop such a community within their organisation.

 

 

Peter Mill, BAE SYSTEMS – Warton, UK

 

Voice: +44 (0) 1772 854380                                            E-Mail: pete.mill@baesystems.com

 

Pete Mill is the Project Control Manager for the Military Air Solutions Operating Group (OG). In this capacity, Pete has the responsibility for the deployment and governance of EVM within Air Systems. This requires the generation of enablers to EVM deployment including policy and strategy documentation, training materials, guidelines and best practice. Pete has been involved in EVM since the mid 90’s and has had experience in overseeing the implementation of EVM systems over that time on a number of major programs, which currently includes working towards an Advance Agreement for the Air Systems OG based on the implementation on JSF F-35.

He is currently the Project Manager for the BAE SYSTEMS Corporate Planning, Monitoring & Control Group, which is working to improve professionalism and core capability in this area across BAE SYSTEMS.

Pete is the BAE SYSTEMS representative for Earned Value on the joint industry/UK MoD working group (DEVMIG), involved in the development of the UK Guide for Integrated Baseline Reviews.

Pete is also an active member of the APM Specific Interest Group on Earned Value, and was instrumental in the development of the APM UK Guideline for Earned Value Management.

PS 30 - Linked Control Account Analysis™ and the Use of Risk Indexes™

The growing size and complexity of Defense programs and an increased awareness of uncertainty places a growing emphasis on the integration of risk, earned value, cost, and schedule and creates the need for new communication tools. Federal agencies have updated guidance documents and policies (e.gl, Draft GAO Cost Estimating Guide) to encourage this integration.

Since 2005, MCR has conducted internal research on a set of indices, called MCR’s “Risk IndexesTM,” quantified in terms of exposure and susceptibility, that address this new communication paradigm.  MCR uses a process called Linked Control Account AnalysisTM (LCAA), linking risk, schedule, cost and EVM information at the control account level, to derive Risk Indexes..  Currently MCR is on contract with OUSD (AT&L)/ARA to use LCAA™ and Risk Indexes™ to explore improvements in acquisition situation awareness.  MCR’s efforts use LCAA program to better analyze performance and identify trends and characteristics of the Risk Indexes based on detailed earned value, Integrated Master Schedule and risk register data.  MCR assists ARA in assessing performance and developing findings and recommendations that will provide the basis for follow-on business rules to enable possible DoD-wide implementation.

              The study assesses trends in major DoD acquisition programs.    MCR’s research explores to what extent the LCAA methodology was able to successfully anticipate actual program execution. 

John D. Driessnack, Senior Director, Integrated Program Management,

Executive Consulting Group, MCR, LLC—Arlington, VA

Voice:  703-472-5357                     E-mail:  jdriessnack@mcri.com

John Driessnack is the Senior Director of the Executive Consulting Group which is responsible for Integrated Program Management support across MCR.   John leads consultant efforts and workshops for Industry, Federal Agencies, including DoD, FAA, and Intel programs, concentrating on improving customers’ integrated program management processes.   He lectures at Defense Acquisition University (DAU) on Risk Management and at American University on Program Management and writes and facilitates cases.  An editor of DAU Risk Management Community of Practice, he edited the Acquisition Review Quarterly special editions on Risk Management, Spring 2003.  He is co-chairperson of the PMSC’s joint Industry/Government Risk Management Working Group and lead for the process team.

              Before joining MCR, John had over 20 years experience in DoD leadership positions on various joint programs, including GBS, V-22 Osprey, Air Borne Self-Protection Jammer.  He retired as a professor at DAU and lectured at various conferences as well as at Lockheed and Raytheon.  . 

 

Education:  John holds a BS in Industrial Engineering from Penn State, a MS in Economics from Wright State University, and has completed course work for a PhD in Economics from George Mason University.  

Professional Memberships: John belongs to SCEA, obtaining his certificate in Cost Estimating in 1997, and is a member of PMI, awarded his PMP certificate in 1998.

Patrick K. Barker, Principal,

Executive Consulting Group, MCR LLC—Arlington, VA

Voice:  703-898-6354                     E-mail: pbarker@mcri.com

              Pat Barker is a Principal in MCR’s Executive Consulting Group which provides Integrated Program Management (IPM) support across MCR.  Pat leads a variety of teams and provides consultant efforts and workshops for Industry and Federal Agencies, including DoD programs, concentrating on interdisciplinary tasks, particularly those linking EVM, Risk, System Engineering, Cost and Schedule.  He provides IPM and strategic planning consulting to the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense ITS and is manager for MCR’s LCAA research and training task supporting the Resources Division in the OUSD (AT&L)/ARA.

              Prior to joining MCR, Pat had significant leadership and analysis experience in modeling and simulation development and policy guidance in various DoD and civilian capacities. Pat spent 4-years as an Assistant Professor of History at the USAF Academy and has extensive background in training and course development.  During his  20-year USAF career, Mr. Barker was also a B-52 electronic warfare officer and a functional manager in technology warning for the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

Education: Pat holds a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering and a Master of Arts in History, both from Lehigh University.  He has begun PhD coursework in Business Leadership.

Professional Memberships: Pat is a member of PMI, and a past member of the Association of Old Crows.

 

PS 31 - Estimating EVMS Implementation & Execution Requirements

Earned Value Management Systems are becoming more and more prevalent in Government procurement requirements as driven by The President’s Management Agenda, the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-11 and most recently, the Under Secretary of Defense’s July 3, 2007 “Use of Earned Value Management (EVM) in the Department of Defense.” Contractors and Government Agencies alike are pressed to spin up and mature EVMS’s rapidly. But what are the costs of implementing and sustaining earned value? And how are they estimated in a manner worthy of justification in these days of intense budget scrutiny?

At IBM Public Sector, these questions were addressed by the EVMS Program Management Office in the creation of a relatively simple Excel-based tool that calculates Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) staffing and travel requirements based upon certain project criteria for start-up and steady-state conditions. The tool also provides an estimate of the number of Control Account Managers by type (Discrete, Level of Effort and Material). This ROM estimate is helpful in quick-turn-around sizing estimates and is a data point used in the final estimating of EVMS resources for proposals. Actual project staffing requirements for implementation of an EVMS are being collected to validate the underlying functions.

This session is for EVM practitioners who are interested in the functions and arguments underlying an EVMS resource estimating tool. Deeper discussion of how much discrete work a Control Account Manager can handle in a year, what labor grade of EVM Analysts should be used and how much of a Master Scheduler’s time is needed to instantiate an EVMS will prove interesting

.

Rudolph F. Simpson, II, PMP, IBM Global Business Services—Mechanicsburg, PA

      Voice: (877) 250-4290                  Fax: (877) 250-4290                     E-Mail: randy.simpson@us.ibm.com

Mr. Simpson accepted his first program management assignment in 1973 and has been engaged in some aspect of the field ever since. His experience includes estimating, pricing, manpower planning, cost control, schedule control, earned value management, management consulting, firm fixed price project management, cost reimbursable program management, program management excellence, proposal management, college instructor and industry program management trainer. He is an aerospace engineer and has worked primarily within the aerospace industry (Martin Marietta Aerospace, McDonnell Aircraft Company, Fairchild Space Company, and Honeywell Aerospace Electronic Systems) and consulted with over 30 different high technology firms in the Washington, DC greater metropolitan area during his 10 years as an independent consultant.

Mr. Simpson’s most recent role is within IBM Public Sector’s EVMS PMO assisting in the instantiation of an ANSI/EIA-748A-compliant EVMS. He is responsible for EVMS responses to Government Request for Proposals with the ANSI/EIA-748A requirement. He chaired the Organizational Process Group for two successful EVMS self-certification efforts and is engaged in the preparation for a 3rd EVMS CFA Validation activity. He is a certified PMI Program Management Professional (PMP).

PS 32 - EVMS Surveillance

Earned Value Surveillance is an essential component of a company’s implementation of EVMS.  The goal of surveillance is to demonstrate continued compliance with the ANSI/EIA 748 EVMS guidelines.  It is a requirement for all contracts with requirements to comply with the EVMS guidelines.

Effective surveillance also benefits any company implementing EVMS internally.  Decisions may be based on EVM results, and the validity of the information reported is essential.

The industry published in 2004 a guide to the surveillance process incorporating successful practices and warnings compiled to have successful surveillance.  This course will train the participant in these best practices and lessons learned.

The material will include the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Program Management Systems Committee (PMSC) Surveillance Guide.

Learning Outcomes

The student have an intermediate level understanding of how to design, implement and practice a successful EVMS surveillance program within the intent of the ANSI EIA-748 guidelines.  This includes:

• Understanding the purpose and scope of surveillance

Understand the organizational aspects for independent surveillance

Examine the methods and choices available for annual surveillance planning

Understand how to execute program surveillance effectively

Understand system surveillance

Review potential metrics to summarize surveillance results

Understand systemic corrective actions necessary to maintain continued conformance with ANSI/EIA guidelines

Robert Loop  

Instructor Biography

Robert Loop is the Lockheed Martin Integrated Systems & Solutions (IS&S) Manager of Central Program Controls.  He has 20 years experience in program management and performance measurement.

He is responsible for program and system EVMS surveillance activities, EVMS tools, and EVMS program support.  He lead the Lockheed Martin Corporate EVMS team developing a corporate EVMS surveillance plan and common approach.  He has expertise in Critical Chain integration with EVMS.  Bob is currently the Vice Chairman of the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) Program Management Systems Committee (PMSC).  He also led the team that wrote the NDIA PMSC Surveillance Guide.    

Previously Bob worked in Raytheon.  He participated in developing the Raytheon Corporate EVMS Process Description and in standardizing computer-based training.  Bob has experience as a business manager on a variety of EVMS implementations. 

Bob holds a Bachelor of Business Administration Degree from Baylor University.   He received his Masters of Science degree in Accounting from the University of Colorado.

PS 33 - The Project Cost Variance Analysis Model:

a Project Management Tool

Cost variance analysis in the project management environment as practiced today is an inexact science and is often limited to a narrative, subjective or qualitative analysis.  The lack of clarity and consistency in cost variance analysis often leads to credibility issues with customers and senior leadership and does not provide a closed loop estimating process to facilitate continuous improvement. The Standard Cost Variance Model appears in many cost accounting texts and is widely used as a method to attribute total variance to cost input factors in the standard costing accounting environment.  However, there has been very little useful translation of these concepts into the project management environment.  This paper provides a methodology to apply a derivation of this variance model to the complex project management scenarios that are found in today’s corporate (and government) cost accumulation environments. With many different stakeholders responsible for portions of a given cost baseline and associated variance, it is important to have a credible method to calculate the components of a cost variance that is simple and mathematically sound.  When cost variances are significant, customers and senior management demand to know what is driving the variance.  This paper provides an organization or project team with a tool to quantitatively calculate the components of cost variances in any cost accumulation environment, no matter how sophisticated.  It will also provide a project team the quantitative data to assess initial project costing assumptions and make strategic and tactical course corrections.

Thomas Wilke, PMP, CMA, CPA   EVMS PMO Leader

IBM Global Business Service, Public Sector

Phone:   (410) 349-6000                                 e-mail: tom.wilke@us.ibm.com

Mr. Wilke has 25 years of experience in project management, contract management, performance improvement, risk management, organizational change management, financial management, business modeling and economic analysis. He has managed and controlled numerous projects with U.S. Federal Agencies, prime contractors, and commercial business enterprises. The majority of these projects and businesses were focused on systems implementations of significant size, complexity and duration. Mr. Wilke is a subject matter expert in earned value management system implementations and brings a broad range of management capabilities to bear on assignments and issues.

 

PS 34 - Program Office Execution of an Integrated Baseline Review

The basis of this presentation focuses on the responsibilities of a DoD Program Office in regard to preparing for and executing an effective Integrated Baseline Review (IBR). DoD requirements are generally very broad and leave much of the detailed direction / planning up to the Program Office and respective contractor(s). This presentation will cover best practices and lessons learned on planning requirements, conducting an IBR, scoring, and post-IBR documentation.

 

• Pre-IBR Planning & Checklists

Selecting a Program Office team to conduct an effective IBR - Discusses when to start building and training a program team and what the makeup of the team should be (i.e. technical, cost, earned value, etc).

IBR Entrance/Exit Criteria, IBR Award Fee Criteria 

Program Office IBR Facilitation Guidelines - Provides an overview of the IBR event including leadership, roles, responsibilities, CAM interview schedules, etc.

Control Account Manager (CAM) Interview Facilitation Guidelines

IBR Data Requirements – Guidance on what is needed electronically before and during the IBR.
(2) Conducting the IBR

IBR Scoring Matrix – Details the scoring process and expectations of the contractor.

Scoring Database – Comprehensive Microsoft Excel based tool that captures and depicts IBR results as the event is occurring.

Recording IBR Action Items, Conducting a CAM Interview

• Post IBR Requirements

Action Item Follow-up, Formal Documentation, Briefing to Management, Subsequent Reviews

Mark Andersen, PMP 

Tecolote Research, Inc.    80 M St SE, Suite 422, Washington, DC  20003 

(202) 204-0380 ext 13    Fax (202) 204-0386   mandersen@tecolote.com

Mr. Andersen has over 20 years of program management and project controls experience, specializing in Earned Value Management and CPM Scheduling.   His current responsibilities include providing EVM and schedule support for multiple Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) programs.   Assigned as an EVM Lead, he has helped to establish earned value and scheduling processes, policies, and guidelines while directing the work of assigned analysts.   Also functioning as the point-of-contact (POC) for the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), he has interfaced with the contractors to ensure they are maintaining an accurate IMS and effective IMS processes. Mr. Andersen is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP) through Project Management Institute (PMI), holds a BS in Engineering from Polytechnic University of New York, and is the owner of several US patents.

David Nelson

Tecolote Research, Inc.  80 M St  SE,  Suite 422, Washington, DC  20003                                           (

202) 204-0380 ext 18    Fax (202) 204-0386   dnelson@tecolote.com

Mr. Nelson has over ten years of program management experience, including Earned Value Management (EVM), financial accounting, personnel management, project controls, IT management, databases and reporting, networks, system selection and implementation, and requirements analysis. His current responsibilities include providing EVM and schedule support for multiple Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) programs.  He provides insight into cost and schedule variances, data trends, program impacts, and proposed cost recovery plans. Mr. Nelson also functions as the point-of-contact (POC) for Estimate at Complete (EAC) analysis, interfacing with the Program Office, the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), and the contractor to ensure EAC integrity. Mr. Nelson holds an Accounting Degree from George Mason University and a Masters Degree in Information Science from George Washington.

PS 35 - Earned Value in an Agile Environment

Earned value measures progress in achieving specifically defined performance objectives through the integration of technical accomplishment with the consumption of time and resources. In traditional sequential development this has worked well and provided clear and predictable insight to the status of projects. The current environment, however includes: spiral development, iterative development, incremental development, agile development, and “who knows what we are developing” situations where there are no clear, up front, technical objectives. Without these objectives earned value can lose one leg of the stool and not accurately reflect progress. This session examines alternative approaches to technical performance measurement that, although very non-traditional, provide valid means of assessing technical progress in non-traditional development cycles. Individuals struggling in these environments are encouraged to attend and share their successes and frustrations.  Perhaps together we can agree on a rational approach.

PS 35 - Earned Value in an Agile Environment

Earned value measures progress in achieving specifically defined performance objectives through the integration of technical accomplishment with the consumption of time and resources. In traditional sequential development this has worked well and provided clear and predictable insight to the status of projects. The current environment, however includes: spiral development, iterative development, incremental development, agile development, and “who knows what we are developing” situations where there are no clear, up front, technical objectives. Without these objectives earned value can lose one leg of the stool and not accurately reflect progress. This session examines alternative approaches to technical performance measurement that, although very non-traditional, provide valid means of assessing technical progress in non-traditional development cycles. Individuals struggling in these environments are encouraged to attend and share their successes and frustrations.  Perhaps together we can agree on a rational approach.

Frederick Manzer, Strategy Bridge International, Inc.

      Voice: (540) 845-0309      Fax: (703) 832-0292         E-Mail: fmanzer@strategybridgeintl.com

 

A dynamic and skilled trainer requested by customers for their training events.  Mr. Fred Manzer combines practical experience with his extensive knowledge of theory to address customer learning needs in their environment and using their terminology.  As a government employee and commercial consultant he provided training and project management support for major US defense contractors and US Government agencies acquiring major systems. As a nationally recognized expert in project planning and earned value Mr. Manzer frequently speaks on these subjects at conferences and professional symposia.  His systems engineering approach to project management facilitates acceptance by the engineering community and promotes successful implementation of recommended practices.  As Director of Project Management at Strategy Bridge International, Inc. he develops and presents training and provides consulting support to commercial companies and government organizations.  Mr. Manzer has fifteen years as a professional trainer in commercial and government organizations.  Prior to joining the government Mr. Manzer was a project manager in the defense industry and a manager of program control responsible for the implementation of earned value systems in defense contractors.

 

PS 36 - Using EVM Reporting to Develop Cost Estimating Models:

The Value and Pit Falls

 Cost and technical data are the two essential inputs for developing cost models.  One input cannot be analyzed exclusive of the other.   However, we have found that many program offices assume that cost estimators can just take Earned Value data from the wInsight and Cost Performance Report use them for cost modeling efforts.   As a result, much of the data collection process is repairing the relationship of the technical and cost actuals in an extensive effort to normalize the data.

This presentation will address pitfalls and recommend approaches during the data collection and normalization process to ensure that the data you receive is complete, auditable, usable, and relevant.  We have made some achievements but have also stumbled through using EVM data from wInsight results and CPRs.

 

Alexander Ante,

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

 

Voice: (703) 755-5424          E-Mail: alexander.j.ante@nga.mil

Alexander Ante has over twenty five years experience as Financial Management, both in Acquisition and Base Operations. In his career as and United States Air Force Officer, contractor, and government civilian, he has extensive experience cost estimating, budgeting, & earned value management in support of procurement of  addition, aircraft, space, and information systems. He is currently a government civilian at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) where he provides technical expertise in cost estimating and decision analysis support for the procurement of intelligence related information systems.

Heather Chelson,

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency

Voice: (703) 755-5108          E-Mail: heather.f.chelson@nga.mil

Heather Chelson’s background in cost estimating and financial management has been primarily in support of the intelligence community through programs at TRW and TASC (both now Northrop Grumman) and as a civilian at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.  She has been key to developing the cost capabilities at NGA and is author of several papers including topics such as implementation of cost estimating risk, schedule achievability for software development, CAIV and target costing, and predicting CPI.

She has been a member of several intelligence community awarded teams and has received the NIMA Meritorious Unit Citation Award (twice), Director of Central Intelligence Meritorious Unit Citation Award, and NRO Director's Team Award for her work in the field of cost estimating and financial management.