Ce diaporama a bien été signalé.
Nous utilisons votre profil LinkedIn et vos données d’activité pour vous proposer des publicités personnalisées et pertinentes. Vous pouvez changer vos préférences de publicités à tout moment.
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
April 27, 2009
V...
2
Module 1 Contract Work Breakdown Structure
Module 2 Contract / Project Budgets
Module 3 Scheduling & Scope/Schedule/Cost...
3
Training Objectives
 Upon completion of this training, participants will:
 Know what an Variance Analysis is and how i...
4
VAR Course Outline
 Training Objectives
 Variance Analysis Purpose
 Data Flow & Functions
 Roles and Responsibilitie...
5
VAR Course Outline
 Variance Analysis Examples
 Thresholds,
 Schedule vs. Cost,
 Current Month
 Cumulative .
 At C...
6
Index of Terms
EVMS:
 PMB – Performance Measurement Baseline
 BCWP – Budgeted Cost for Work Performed
Earned Value or ...
7
DoD EVM policy
 Whether to apply EVM to a contract therefore Variance Analysis
Report Format 5?
 What is the contract ...
8
EVMIG
 ≥ $50M REQUIRED Includes: Contracts for highly classified, foreign, and in-
house programs.
 Must use ANSI/EIA-...
9
Government Requirements - DID
 DATA ITEM DESCRIPTION
 TITLE: CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT (CPR)
 NUMBER: DI-MGMT-81466...
10
MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION
 Sections covering Variance analysis in MCSD:
 7.2. Variance Analysis
 7.2.1. ...
11
VAR Goal & Purpose
 Contain cost growth
 Minimize cost and schedule impacts to the program
 Monthly narrative suppor...
12
 Variance Analysis Report Summarizes Root-Cause,
evaluates impacts and provides corrective actions
strategy
 Insight ...
13
VARs Data Flow & Functions
Responsibility of the CAM
If an EAC impact is included, it is
also reviewed and approved b...
14
Responsibility
 CONTROL ACCOUNT + MANAGER Assigned = CAM
 Responsible For ALL assigned Control Accounts and
correspon...
15
Customer
End
Gov
VARs Data Flow & Functions - Overview
VARs
Data
VARs
Data
Program Planning
Control
and Finance
Start
C...
16
Project X EVMS Chart EXAMPLE
Distributed Budget = 689
AUW = 506
CBB = 741
BAC = 732
EAC = 826
0
100
200
300
400
500
600...
17
SOW WBS
OBSRAM
Control
Accounts
WP
PP
IMS
Resources
Resources
Resources
Resources
CPR
Format 5
CPR
Format 1,2,3,4
CAP
P...
18
Steps in Variance Analysis
CPR
Format 5
CPR
Format 1,2,3,4
CAP
ETC IMS Updates
BCWS
BCWP
VAC
BAC
EAC
PMT
% Complete
LOE...
19
ACWP Cost– Rate Analysis
 ACWP Affects:
 CV Cost Variance
 VAC Variance At Completion
 EAC Estimate At Completion (...
20
Baseline
Changes Scope,
Schedule,
Budget
BCWS & BAC Analysis
 BCWS Affects:
 SV Schedule Variance
 BAC – Changes  V...
21
BCWP Performance Analysis
 Affects:
 SV Schedule Variance
 CV Cost Variance
Excel Input
Sheets
Start
End
22
 ETC Affects:
 VAC
 EAC (ACWP+ETC)
 EAC Affects VAC
 Therefore ETC affects VAC
ETC Estimate to Complete Analysis
E...
23
Review WBS Levels and Elements
Customer Reporting Level CA Control Account
 Internal Reporting& Lower level CAs Contro...
24
VARs Frequency - Sample
SDRD B-001 533M
SDRD B-003 CPR Fmt1 SDRD B-003 CPR
Preliminary Final ME:
8-Jan-09 15-Jan-09 Dec...
25
Thresholds
 Per DID Section 2.2.6.4 …“Significant variances as specified in the
contract shall be fully explained in F...
26
Thresholds & Implications
 Customer & Internal Level WBS accounts that trip the customer
defined thresholds require ex...
27
Thresholds Example
LM Variance
Tresholds: ± 10% and $100K ± 10% and $200K ± $5M
Problem Cause 3
CM Cumulative At Comple...
28
To Watch out For
 EVMS normally excludes FFP; however, if CPR required by contract:
 FFP billed price (with fees) wil...
29
Reports & Data Repositories
For Variance Analysis
30
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
Location: Scenario:
eCAM Notebook Best Case
Server Folder Most Likely
e-mail Worst Case
Locat...
31
Best Case - eCAM Notebook
32
Best Case - eCAM Notebook
 Host Root Location:
 vamaindataApgOrionA_Program Management16_Control_Account_Mg
 Also av...
33
Reports & Data Repositories
EVMS VALIDATION
Applying Artificial Intelligence
34
 eCAM notebook is being continuously improved and until final;
diverting to server locations via Explorer is possible
...
35
CAP – CONTROL ACCOUNT PLAN
Program: Description: Approval:
CEVFEB09 February 2009 Working File Program Manager
Run Date...
36
CLASSIFICATION (When Filled In)
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT FORM APPROVED
OMB No. 0704-0188
1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3...
37
CPR Format 1– BE/EOC/Resource
Review internal performance
reports to quantify variances
by cost element
Review internal...
38
CPR Format 1– Orb CA, WP & EOC
Identify WPs
Not only CAs
creating variances
isolate significant
labor rate variances
Id...
39
COST PERFORMANCE REPORT Form Approved
FORMAT 1 - WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE OMB No. 0704-0188
CONTRACTOR CONTRACT PROGRAM...
40
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT FORM APPROVED
OMB No. 0704-0188
1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3. PROGRAM 4. REPORT PERIOD
a. NA...
41
CLASSIFICATION (When Filled In)
CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT FORM APPROVED
OMB No. 0704-0188
1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3...
42
EVMS Validation Criteria
Sample Criteria:
 Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month
therefore no ...
43
EVMS Validation Criteria
 No performance taken due to no budget; however, actuals were
accumulated - was candidate for...
44
EVMS Validation Criteria
 A task is 100% complete and ahead of schedule; however, actuals
appeared in the current mont...
45
RESULT = CPR Format 5RESULT = CPR Format 5
Customer Reporting CA levelCustomer Reporting CA level
VAC
CVSV
CURRENT PERI...
46
Additional
Data Repositories
For Variance Analysis
47
Transition
CAM
CAM
FutureNow
48
Management Review
 EVMS Application - wInsight
 In Conjunction with VAR Format 5 CPR deadlines, VARs are summarized, ...
49
Management Review - Clarification for
Interpretation
w
e
4,387
4,387
4,346
BAC 7,234
EAC 7,583
4,346
Cum CPI 6,921
CPI*...
50
Management Review
Supplemental EVMS / VAR Analysis
 The thresholds represent the changes/deltas since
the previous rep...
51
http://vawinsight1/wsweb/login.asp
52
wInsight Dashboard Artificial Intelligence
53
wInsight Dashboard AI VAR Analysis
54
wInsight Dashboard AI VAR Analysis
55
wInsight Dashboard AI VAR Analysis
56
wInsight EVMS 6 Period Summary
Project X
Task 164
Task 1891
Task 1321K
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
Apply Your Knowl...
58
Time Dimension
• Incremental/Current month (Increments of time-phased data – for
each current month)
• Cumulative (ince...
59
Interpretation & Deducing
If CPI = BCWP/ACWP & CV= BCWP-ACWP 
If BCWP>ACWP  CPI>1  CV>0
Favorable Cost variance – ...
60
Key Elements of Analysis
Problem Cause AnalysisProblem Cause Analysis
 Identify the root-cause of the problem
 Give r...
ProblemProblem
CauseCause
AnalysisAnalysis
ImpactImpact
AnalysisAnalysis
CorrectiveCorrective
Action PlanAction Plan
CVCV
...
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
Root-Cause Analy...
63
Root-Cause Analysis
 A good Root-Cause analysis:
 Starts with Root-Cause analysis of What happened and Why?
 Uses ph...
64
Questions to ask for Cause/Problem Analysis
 Detail questions to ask for Cause/Problem Analysis
 Schedule
 Questions...
65
 The task is less complex and will be completed earlier than planned.
 Early effort has been confined to tasks which ...
66
Unfavorable Schedule Variance
 The task is more complex than originally planned.
 Early effort has been more complex ...
67
 If Unable to start on time
possible reasons could include:
 Predecessor task not
completed
 Lack of firm specificat...
68
SV - Reference to DID
 “Explanations of schedule variances and the impact on the contract
shall be performed in parall...
69
 Delayed billing (Subs, Contractors, IWAs)
 Efficiencies
 More technicians vs. engineers
 Rate changes (should be d...
70
 The task is more complex than originally planned.
 The more complex tasks have been completed early.
 Program prior...
71
 Underestimated
 More expensive:
Parts/Material,
Equipment,
Subcontractors,
Suppliers
 Labor in Transition
 Knowled...
72
Variance at Completion
 At Completion VAC = BAC – EAC ( totals – data projected at
the end of the project) deal with:
...
73
Causing cost and/or schedule
variance:
 ESD
 Size/weight/power
 Noise/vibration
 Test failures
 Inspection issues
...
74
Rate and Volume/Usage/Price Analysis
 For Labor, separately identify:
 amounts attributable to rate changes
 amounts...
75
Rate Impact Example Write-Up
LM AX
1.6.4.3.10 Propulsion ($865.321)
1.6.4.3.09 Structures ($60.133)
1.6.4.3.06 Mechanis...
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
Impact Analysis
...
77
 Describes specific Cost, Schedule and Technical Impacts to the Program
AND to other Functional areas or other tasks i...
78
RISKSRISKSRISKSRISKS
Covers AUWCovers AUW
If MR isIf MR is
Credited uponCredited upon
CFRCFR
Covers AUWCovers AUW
If MR...
79
MR Reference to DID
 Per DID Section 2.2.4.6 Management Reserve. “…shall not
be used to offset cumulative cost varianc...
80
Technical Impact
Describe specific impacts to the program and your
accounts
 Technical Impacts
 Does level of maturit...
81
Refer back to root-cause for cost
and/or schedule variance
analysis :
 ESD
 Size/weight/power
 Noise/vibration
 Tes...
82
Schedule Impact
Describe specific impacts to the
program and your accounts
 How many days, weeks,
months is the slip?
...
83
Cost Impacts
Describe specific impacts to the program and your accounts
Cost Impacts
 What is the cumulative cost vari...
84
 Finish late
 Start next task late
 Redesign required
 More testing required
 Additional costs
 Customer notifica...
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
Corrective Actio...
86
Corrective action plan answers:
 Who?
 What?
 When?
 How much?
Describes specific actions to alleviate or minimiz...
87
WHAT WILL HAPPEN?
Overtime (schedule)
 Fewer people (cost)
 Reduced resources
 Alternate people (senior, specialize...
88
Dos & Don’ts
Do Not Use:
 Over Run
 Under Run
 Behind Schedule
 Ahead of Schedule
 Out of Scope
 Hope
Use :
 Unf...
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
Demonstration
VA...
90
VAR Corrective Action Register
 The purpose of the section is to explain the enhancements to the
VAR Corrective Action...
91
0
5
10
15
20
25
2008-01
2008-02
2008-03
2008-04
2008-05
2008-06
2008-07
2008-08
2008-09
2008-10
2008-11
2008-12
2009-01...
92
Executive Review Metrics - Sample
Subsystem CAM
2008-01
2008-02
2008-03
2008-04
2008-05
2008-06
2008-07
2008-08
2008-09...
93
Additional Fields
 Added fields are:
 Date Recorded,
 Reporting Period (CPR (Contract Performance Report)),
 Date f...
94
VAR CAM Metrics
 The VAR CAM Metrics sheet has been developed to automatically
calculate and provide metrics for each ...
95
Automation Menu
96
CAM List Per Latest PD
 Drop-down menu for CAM
field is cleaned up to include
list of all CAMs per latest PD
from whic...
97
Auto-Selections
 To maintain consistency and avoid multiple versions of the same
meaning, the fields shown below are d...
98
Validation
 If you still do type the value that does not match the ones from the
drop-down list the value will not be ...
99
Tip: Executing
In order for the code to execute
correctly make sure that the filter in
ON. You can toggle filter on and...
100
Legend and Criteria
Aging calculation is based on the number of days between time now
and due date for all non-closed ...
101
Visual
Clicking Open Items will automatically list all items
that require attention and have OPEN status.
Clicking Ope...
Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader:
Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic
APG VARs Scoreca...
103
ORION VARs Scorecard - Sample
VARs Scorecard used to evaluate each CAMs variance report
Note: The quality of the exp...
104
ORION Variance Report Scorecard
BOCAM Ken
BRAINARD Mike
ENGBLOM Thor
LARSON Chris
RICHARDSON Donna
ACM -
Contro
Proble...
105
ORION Variance Report Scorecard
BOCAM Ken
BRAINARD Mike
ENGBLOM Thor
LARSON Chris
RICHARDSON Donna
ACM - Attitud
Contr...
106
ORION Variance Report Scorecard
BOCAM Ken
BRAINARD Mike
ENGBLOM Thor
LARSON Chris
RICHARDSON Donna
ACM - Attitud
Contr...
107
VARs –Most Missed Items
 Impact:
 LRE/ETC Impact
 Impact on other accounts/Program
 Quantified Impact in $
 Corre...
108
Format Consistency
For multiple SV / CV / VAC Drivers be consistent in numbering for CM
CV/SV & CUME CV/SV where appli...
109
VAR Scorecard Results - Sample
Management Review
By CAs & CAMs
 Problem Analysis
 Max Score = 4
(4 areas graded)
 I...
110
64.5
7270.5
108
70
108
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Scores Total
Problem Analysis - What happened and Why ?
Task/Project Impa...
111
ORION and APG EVMS Organization Chart –
November 08 – June 09
Executive VP and General Manager
Advanced Programs Group...
113
Thank you for participation!
VARIANCE ANALYSIS COST SCHEDULE PMP EVMS TRAINING BY LANA RADOVIC
Prochain SlideShare
Chargement dans…5
×

VARIANCE ANALYSIS COST SCHEDULE PMP EVMS TRAINING BY LANA RADOVIC

KEY VARIANCE ANALYSIS COST SCHEDULE PM TRAINING BY EVMS LEADER LANA RADOVIC

VARIANCE ANALYSIS COST SCHEDULE PMP EVMS TRAINING BY LANA RADOVIC

  1. 1. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic April 27, 2009 Variance Analysis Training
  2. 2. 2 Module 1 Contract Work Breakdown Structure Module 2 Contract / Project Budgets Module 3 Scheduling & Scope/Schedule/Cost Integration Module 4 Control Account Plan / RAM Module 5 EV Application Module 6 Work Authorization Module 7 Schedule Status Module 8 Subcontract Management Module 9 ACWP & Estimated Actuals Module 10 Performance Data Analysis Module 11 Estimate to Complete (ETC) Module 12 Variance Analysis Reporting Module 13 Material Management Module 14 Baseline Change Management Module 15 CAM Interview Methods Welcome to Variance Analysis Training 2
  3. 3. 3 Training Objectives  Upon completion of this training, participants will:  Know what an Variance Analysis is and how it fits into the EVMS process  Know the importance of an accurate Variance Analysis Report  Know how to develop an Variance Analysis Report 3
  4. 4. 4 VAR Course Outline  Training Objectives  Variance Analysis Purpose  Data Flow & Functions  Roles and Responsibilities  Government & Company Policies and Requirements  Contract Performance Reports CPR  Variance Analysis Report CPR Format 5  Repositories, Data Analysis & Reports  Variance Analysis Considerations  Root-Cause Analysis  Impact Analysis (Technical, Cost, and Schedule)  Corrective Action Plan 4
  5. 5. 5 VAR Course Outline  Variance Analysis Examples  Thresholds,  Schedule vs. Cost,  Current Month  Cumulative .  At Completion  Reporting Levels vs. Drivers  Applications Demo:  wInsight VAR Capabilities for CAMs  Application of EVMS  VAR in PM Meetings  VAR Corrective Action Register and Metrics  VAR CAM Scorecard and Metrics
  6. 6. 6 Index of Terms EVMS:  PMB – Performance Measurement Baseline  BCWP – Budgeted Cost for Work Performed Earned Value or the Budgeted Value of Work Accomplished  ACWP – Actual Cost of Work Performed or Actual Costs  BCWS – Budgeted Cost for Work Scheduled or Planned Budget  BAC – Budgeted Cost at Completion  EAC – Estimated Cost at Completion/LRE – Latest Revised Estimate  VAC – Variance at Completion  CV / SV – Cost/Schedule Variance  CPI / /SPI – Cost/Schedule Performance Index or Cost/Schedule Efficiency  TCPIEAC – To complete Performance Index Other:  CPR – Contract Performance Report  DID – Data Item Description  SDRD – Supplier Data Requirements Description  RW – Rolling wave  PP – Planning Package  BCR – Baseline Change Request  CP – Critical Path  ME – Month-End; MM – Mid-Month  CM – Current month  CUME – Cumulative  BOM – Bill of Material  PR – Purchase Requisition  PO – Purchase Order  AI – Artificial Intelligence
  7. 7. 7 DoD EVM policy  Whether to apply EVM to a contract therefore Variance Analysis Report Format 5?  What is the contract type  Cost, incentive, or  Firm-fixed price?  What is the dollar value of the contract ($20 million or above)?  If cost or incentive type and is valued at $20 million or greater, under the revised policy the contract would require the implementation of EVM.  Exempt is non-schedule based work - FFP contracts  Either A way to avoid EVM requirements but high risk  Or EVM Optionally requested by PMs or required by customer
  8. 8. 8 EVMIG  ≥ $50M REQUIRED Includes: Contracts for highly classified, foreign, and in- house programs.  Must use ANSI/EIA-748 compliant and validated management system (think of PAV)  CPR (all formats) is required  Integrated Master Schedule is required  Schedule Risk Assessment (SRA) is required  ≥ $20M but < $50M REQUIRED Includes: Contracts for highly classified, foreign, and in-house programs.  Must use ANSI/EIA-748 compliant management system. No validation.  CPR Formats 1 and 5 are required.  Integrated Master Schedule is required. Not required for: Firm-fixed price contracts. (Requires business case analysis and MDA approval.) Not recommended for: Contracts less than 12 months in duration. OPTIONAL May not be appropriate for: Non-schedule based contract efforts, e.g., level of effort. Variance analysis cPr Format 5 Variance analysis cPr Format 5
  9. 9. 9 Government Requirements - DID  DATA ITEM DESCRIPTION  TITLE: CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT (CPR)  NUMBER: DI-MGMT-81466A CPR in general = competitive edge
  10. 10. 10 MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEM DESCRIPTION  Sections covering Variance analysis in MCSD:  7.2. Variance Analysis  7.2.1. Variance Analysis Report  7.2.2. Variance Thresholds  7.2.3. Schedule Variance (SV)  7.2.4. Cost Variance (CV)  7.2.5. IMS Schedule Variance  7.2.6. Variance at Completion (VAC)  7.2.7. Performance Indices  7.2.7.1. Schedule Performance Index (SPI)  7.2.7.2. Cost Performance Index (CPI)  7.2.7.3. To Complete Performance Index (TCPI) ≥ $50M REQUIRED Includes: Contracts for highly classified, foreign, and in-house programs. Must use ANSI/EIA-748 compliant and validated management system (think of PAV)
  11. 11. 11 VAR Goal & Purpose  Contain cost growth  Minimize cost and schedule impacts to the program  Monthly narrative supporting formal customer reporting  Audit trail of problem analysis, impact and corrective action  Required when thresholds are breached  Primary communication vehicle and consolidated formal interpretation of program status  Decision making trigger for the program managers  Reported at the control account level at which the work is being performed  Detects variances that otherwise could go unnoticed  Induces preventive/corrective actions
  12. 12. 12  Variance Analysis Report Summarizes Root-Cause, evaluates impacts and provides corrective actions strategy  Insight in the future success of the program  Correlation and impact on other teams/accounts  Variance can be indirectly caused by problems on other accounts  Critical path analysis should include implications on other accounts and program  Analyzed at least monthly by the CAM with support from business operations and program planning Variance Explanations
  13. 13. 13 VARs Data Flow & Functions Responsibility of the CAM If an EAC impact is included, it is also reviewed and approved by the Program Manager Based on month-end data and provided to the CAMs by Finance for completion and return Reviewed and approved by Program & Business Management Consolidated per SDRD – CPR (Contract Performance Report) Format 5 Signed and Approved Submitted to Customers (Internal/External)
  14. 14. 14 Responsibility  CONTROL ACCOUNT + MANAGER Assigned = CAM  Responsible For ALL assigned Control Accounts and corresponding subtasks (lower level CAs, WPs, PPs)  Reference to Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM)  Intersection of OBS and a Control Account  Program Manager Assigns The Control Account Manager (CAM)  One CAM per Control Account  Multiple Control Accounts per CAM  Responsibility entails the work within the  Scope  Schedule  Budget
  15. 15. 15 Customer End Gov VARs Data Flow & Functions - Overview VARs Data VARs Data Program Planning Control and Finance Start CPR Format 5 CPR Format 5 SDRD CPR SDRD CPR EAC Approved? EAC Approved? NoNo YesYes ApprovalApproval Inputs Reviews Inputs Reviews Program & Business Management YesYes NoNo ExchangeExchange ExchangeExchange CAM EAC Impacted? EAC Impacted? Completed VARs Completed VARs ExchangeExchange
  16. 16. 16 Project X EVMS Chart EXAMPLE Distributed Budget = 689 AUW = 506 CBB = 741 BAC = 732 EAC = 826 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Sep-06 Nov-06 Jan-07 Mar-07 May-07 Jul-07 Sep-07 Nov-07 Jan-08 Mar-08 May-08 Jul-08 Sep-08 Nov-08 Jan-09 Mar-09 May-09 Jul-09 Sep-09 Nov-09 Jan-10 Mar-10 May-10 Jul-10 Sep-10 Nov-10 Jan-11 Mar-11 May-11 Jul-11 Sep-11 Nov-11 Jan-12 Mar-12 May-12 Jul-12 Sep-12 Nov-12 Jan-13 Mar-13 May-13 Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 $inMillions Completion Date BCWS ACWP Time Now Schedule Variance BCWP Cost Variance MR = 8.9 ; UB = 43.4 ETC Variance at Complete FuturePast
  17. 17. 17 SOW WBS OBSRAM Control Accounts WP PP IMS Resources Resources Resources Resources CPR Format 5 CPR Format 1,2,3,4 CAP PMB ChargeNumbers WADs Actuals Cost & Schedule Integration Start End
  18. 18. 18 Steps in Variance Analysis CPR Format 5 CPR Format 1,2,3,4 CAP ETC IMS Updates BCWS BCWP VAC BAC EAC PMT % Complete LOE 100-0 50-50 QBDs Labor Non-Labor BOMsPOsPRs Labor Non-Labor Rates Actuals Accruals Commitments Estimated Actuals BCRs AUW UB MR CV SV ACWP Start/Finish Dates/ETC Excel Input Sheets StartEnd
  19. 19. 19 ACWP Cost– Rate Analysis  ACWP Affects:  CV Cost Variance  VAC Variance At Completion  EAC Estimate At Completion (EAC =ACWP+ETC)  EAC Affects VAC (VAC-BAC=EAC)  Therefore ACWP affects VAC Start End
  20. 20. 20 Baseline Changes Scope, Schedule, Budget BCWS & BAC Analysis  BCWS Affects:  SV Schedule Variance  BAC – Changes  VAC  BAC Affects:  VAC Variance At Completion  BCWS - changes IMS Updates Excel Input Sheets Start End
  21. 21. 21 BCWP Performance Analysis  Affects:  SV Schedule Variance  CV Cost Variance Excel Input Sheets Start End
  22. 22. 22  ETC Affects:  VAC  EAC (ACWP+ETC)  EAC Affects VAC  Therefore ETC affects VAC ETC Estimate to Complete Analysis Excel Input Sheets StartEnd
  23. 23. 23 Review WBS Levels and Elements Customer Reporting Level CA Control Account  Internal Reporting& Lower level CAs Control Accounts  WPs Work packages  Charge Numbers Budget elements (EOC – Element of Cost)  Internal Labor (BR1, BR3, etc. – not ETC )  Regular material  Travel  Subcontractors (labor and non-labor)  Consulting (labor and non-labor)  ODC (Other Direct Costs – Education, Publications, Meals per FAR and Contract)
  24. 24. 24 VARs Frequency - Sample SDRD B-001 533M SDRD B-003 CPR Fmt1 SDRD B-003 CPR Preliminary Final ME: 8-Jan-09 15-Jan-09 Dec 5-Feb-09 12-Feb-09 *533Q Jan 5-Mar-09 12-Mar-09 Feb 6-Apr-09 13-Apr-09 Mar 6-May-08 13-May-08 *533Q Apr 4-Jun-08 11-Jun-08 May  VARs submittal to the customer i.e. CPR (Contract Performance Report) Format 5 occurs Typically once a month during final CPR (Contract Performance Report) submittal.  Preliminary VAR Format 5 CPR (Contract Performance Report) is optional with Remaining Preliminary CPR (Contract Performance Report) Formats (Formats 1-4) which are normally delivered 2 weeks before final CRPs
  25. 25. 25 Thresholds  Per DID Section 2.2.6.4 …“Significant variances as specified in the contract shall be fully explained in Format 5. If the contract does not specify variance analysis thresholds, the contractor shall provide appropriate variance analyses. (See Section 2.6.3.) “  Depend on program complexity, size and type  Highlight areas requiring management attention  More strict in high risk areas  Fluctuate over time
  26. 26. 26 Thresholds & Implications  Customer & Internal Level WBS accounts that trip the customer defined thresholds require explanations  Internal CAs variances (and corresponding WPs variances) typically roll up into a higher-level customer defined reporting level CAs requiring explanation unless offset by opposite variances – to watch out for!!!  Internal Orbital CA level thresholds < Customer CA reporting thresholds  IMPORTANT: Look at the lower level Control Accounts, Work packages, Elements of Costs variances  At a higher level no variance can be a results of offsetting but significant variations at lower levels – e.g. favorable variance is offset by unfavorable even though both require corrective action  Looking at the higher level WBS is not enough
  27. 27. 27 Thresholds Example LM Variance Tresholds: ± 10% and $100K ± 10% and $200K ± $5M Problem Cause 3 CM Cumulative At Completion 1 CV * * * 2 SV * * Impact 3 CM Cumulative At Completion 1 CV * * * 2 SV * * Corective Action 3 CM Cumulative At Completion 1 CV * * * 2 SV * * 1 Cost Variance 2 Schedule Variance 3 Current Month
  28. 28. 28 To Watch out For  EVMS normally excludes FFP; however, if CPR required by contract:  FFP billed price (with fees) will be reported as ACWP  BCWS will equal BCWP – non-schedule based work  PMT technique  Mixed PMTs within a single CA should be proportionate  Disproportionate LOE and Discrete Mix can result in incredible VAR report due to offsetting nature of LOE if greater than Discrete – masks the problems  100 % LOE accounts by nature have no schedule variance automatically – what if actuals are zero? If work has not started?
  29. 29. 29 Reports & Data Repositories For Variance Analysis
  30. 30. 30 WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? Location: Scenario: eCAM Notebook Best Case Server Folder Most Likely e-mail Worst Case Location: Scenario: eCAM Notebook Best Case eCAM Notebook Most Likely Server Folder Worst Case NOWFUTURE
  31. 31. 31 Best Case - eCAM Notebook
  32. 32. 32 Best Case - eCAM Notebook  Host Root Location:  vamaindataApgOrionA_Program Management16_Control_Account_Mg  Also available via OrbNet
  33. 33. 33 Reports & Data Repositories EVMS VALIDATION Applying Artificial Intelligence
  34. 34. 34  eCAM notebook is being continuously improved and until final; diverting to server locations via Explorer is possible  Goal in the future is to utilize eCAM notebook 100%  Below is the example of how VAR files are structured on the server right now while eCAM notebook is being finalized: Most Likely Case – Server via Explorer Reports currently utilized to result in final Variance Analysis Reports Officially CPR Format 5
  35. 35. 35 CAP – CONTROL ACCOUNT PLAN Program: Description: Approval: CEVFEB09 February 2009 Working File Program Manager Run Date: Status Date: Functional Manager 3/6/2009 10:06 2/22/2009 Cost Account Manager Orbital Rpt Lv[21] WP MAY_07 JUN_07 JUL_07 AUG_07 SEP_07 OCT_07 NOV_07 1.6.4.1.05 Cost/Schedule Mgmt and Reporting 16410501-LAB-IMP-W01 BCWS 1,838 2,182 1,723 1,838 2,182 1,838 1,608 16410502-CNSLTNG-CSM-W01 BCWS 29,307 35,168 27,841 29,307 35,168 29,307 26,376 16410502-LAB-IMS-W01 BCWS 14,701 2,182 0 0 0 0 0 16410502-LAB-IMS-W02 BCWS 0 17,687 15,735 0 0 0 0 16410502-LAB-IMS-W03 BCWS 0 0 0 27,302 32,762 27,302 24,571 16410502-SUB-CSM-W01 BCWS 9,325 11,190 8,859 9,325 11,190 9,325 8,392 16410502-SUB-IMS-W01 BCWS 12,788 24,043 19,034 0 0 0 0 16410502-SUB-IMS-W02 BCWS 8,881 15,531 16,357 0 0 0 0 16410502-SUB-IMS-W03 BCWS 0 0 0 51,235 61,482 51,235 46,112 16410502-TVL-CSM-W01 BCWS 0 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 1,388 16410503-LAB-CPR-W01 BCWS 7,168 12,361 2,050 0 0 0 0 16410503-LAB-CPR-W02 BCWS 0 0 0 21,106 25,327 21,106 18,996 16410504-LAB-CSM-W01 BCWS 21,505 37,187 29,452 30,938 37,187 30,938 27,830 CAP – CONTROL ACCOUNT PLAN The Control Account Plan (CAP) report MONTHLY SPREAD Provides TIME-PHASED Details for BCWS BCWP ACWP ETC Also used to support IBRs and joint surveillance reviews (JSRs). The Control Account Plan (CAP) report MONTHLY SPREAD Provides TIME-PHASED Details for BCWS BCWP ACWP ETC Also used to support IBRs and joint surveillance reviews (JSRs).
  36. 36. 36 CLASSIFICATION (When Filled In) CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT FORM APPROVED OMB No. 0704-0188 1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3. PROGRAM 4. REPORT PERIOD a. NAME a. NAME a. NAME a. FROM (YYYYMMDD) b. LOCATION (Address and ZIP Code) b. NUMBER b. PHASE XXXXX b. TO (YYYYMMDD) c. TYPE d. SHARE RATIO c. EVMS ACCEPTANCE CPAF NO X YES (YYYYMMDD) 5. CONTRACT DATA a. QUANTITY b. NEGOTIATED d. TARGET PROFIT/ e. TARGET f. ESTIMATED g. CONTRACT i. DATE OF OTB/OTS COSTAUTHORIZED UNPRICED WORK FEE PRICE PRICE CEILING (YYYYMMDD) 1 6. ESTIMATED COST AT COMPLETION 7. AUTHORIZED CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE MANAGEMENT ESTIMATE CONTRACT BUDGET VARIANCE a. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) AT COMPLETION BASE (1) (2) (3) a. BEST CASE 666,137 c. SIGNATURE d. DATE SIGNED b. WORST CASE 740,153 (YYYYMMDD) c. MOST LIKELY 703,145 740,153 37,008 8. PERFORMANCE DATA LM Rpt Lvl[21] CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK BUDGETED ESTIMATED VARIANCE ITEM SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (14) (15) (16) 1.1.8 Special Research 0 0 0 0 0 390 390 409 0 -18 390 409 -18 1.3.2 System Configuration 30 30 42 0 -12 2,967 2,954 2,695 -13 259 4,708 4,600 108 1.7.1.1 Management -4,059 -4,059 1,937 0 -5,996 24,387 24,387 28,205 0 -3,818 77,172 81,196 -4,024 1.7.1.2 Systems Engineering 567 536 454 -31 82 15,947 15,648 13,480 -299 2,168 28,561 29,728 -1,167 1.7.1.3.02 Data -226 -217 171 9 -389 4,319 4,279 5,585 -40 -1,306 8,340 9,625 -1,285 1.7.1.3.08 Electrical Power Subsystem 0 0 0 0 0 139 139 78 0 60 139 78 60 1.7.1.3.07 Mechanisms 10 10 0 0 9 3,563 3,563 5,290 0 -1,727 3,569 5,325 -1,756 1.7.1.3.07 Thermal Control 60 60 13 0 47 1,373 1,372 1,124 -1 248 1,692 1,469 224 1.7.1.3.09 Constructions 120 265 1,212 145 -947 27,984 27,720 28,930 -264 -1,210 39,926 42,239 -2,314 1.7.1.3.10 Rotation 21,016 20,806 8,588 -210 12,218 197,923 189,430 277,342 -8,493 -87,912 523,084 649,833 -126,749 1.7.1.3.13 Pyrotechnics -1 -47 23 -46 -70 2,023 1,888 2,176 -135 -288 3,678 6,072 -2,394 1.7.1.3.18 Navigation 241 199 133 -42 67 7,137 7,028 5,921 -109 1,107 10,891 9,792 1,099 1.7.1.3.17 Instrumentation -67 -78 28 -11 -106 756 745 886 -11 -141 1,024 1,212 -188 1.7.1.8 Test, Verification and Certification 102 102 286 1 -183 4,463 4,456 4,139 -8 317 10,008 9,736 272 1.7.1.7.01 Hardware 129 56 204 -72 -148 5,564 5,491 9,525 -73 -4,034 6,883 11,159 -4,275 1.7.1.7.02 Design and Production -810 -844 179 -34 -1,023 1,614 1,602 2,942 -12 -1,340 2,874 4,315 -1,441 b. Cost of Money 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c. Gen. and Admin. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d. Undist. Budget 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45,516 29,769 15,747 e. Sub Total 17,111 16,820 13,269 -291 3,551 300,549 291,092 388,727 -9,458 -97,635 768,456 896,556 -128,100 f. Management Resrv. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,704 0 0 g. Total 17,111 16,820 13,269 -291 3,551 300,549 291,092 388,727 -9,458 -97,635 777,160 0 0 9. Reconciliation to CBB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a. Variance Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b. Total Contract Variance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -9,007 -92,986 740,153 853,863 -113,710 FORMAT 1 - WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE Orbital Proprietary c. ESTIMATED COST OF CPR Format 1 –Starting Point CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION CV SV CV SV ACWP BCWP ACWP BCWP VAC EAC BAC BCWS BCWS - - = - = = - = - =
  37. 37. 37 CPR Format 1– BE/EOC/Resource Review internal performance reports to quantify variances by cost element Review internal performance reports to quantify variances by cost element VAC CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION CV SV CV SV
  38. 38. 38 CPR Format 1– Orb CA, WP & EOC Identify WPs Not only CAs creating variances isolate significant labor rate variances Identify WPs Not only CAs creating variances isolate significant labor rate variances VAC CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION CV SV CV SV
  39. 39. 39 COST PERFORMANCE REPORT Form Approved FORMAT 1 - WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE OMB No. 0704-0188 CONTRACTOR CONTRACT PROGRAM REPORT PERIOD NAME NAME NAME FROM (YYMMDD) Orbital Sciences Corporation February 2009 Working File 90126 LOCATION NUMBER 21839 Atlantic Blvd. Dulles, VA 20166 RH6-291357 TO (YYMMDD) TYPE SHARE RATIOPHASE (X one) 90222 CPAF RDT&E PRODUCTION Contract Data QUANITY NEGOTIATED COST EST. COST AUTHOR- TARGET PROFIT/ TARGET PRICEESTIMATED CONTRACT ESTIMATED CONTRACT IZED UNPRICED WORK FEE PRICE CEILING CEILING 1 234,455 370,713 47,726 7.89 282,181 438,770 262,516 398,407 ESTIMATED COST AT COMPLETION AUTHORIZED CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE MANAGEMENT ESTIMATE CONTRACT BUDGET VARIANCE NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) TITLE AT COMPLETION BASE (1) (2) (3) BEST CASE 0 605167.425 -605,167 SIGNATURE DATE SIGNED WORST CASE 0 (YYMMDD) MOST LIKELY PERFORMANCE DATA LM Rpt Lvl[21] CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION CAM ACTUAL ACTUAL CWBS[20] BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE LATEST WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK REVISED ITEM SCHEDULEDPERFORMEDPERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULEDPERFORMEDPERFORMED SCHEDULE COST BUDGETED ESTIMATE VARIANCE (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) 1.1.8 Special Studies HILDEBRAND John 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.1.8.01 Orion ALAS-11 Evaluation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CAMTotals: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LM Rpt Lvl[21]Totals: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RADOVIC Lana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6.4.1.05 Cost/Schedule Mgmt and Reporting 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6.4.1.05A Cost/Schedule Mgmt and Reporting 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6.4.1.06 Financial Management 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.6.4.1.06A Financial Management - R2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CPR Format 1– Orb Reporting CA Orb Reporting CA level Identify IPTs and performing organization and other CAs (e.g. givers/receivers) contributing to cost variance Identify IPTs and performing organization and other CAs (e.g. givers/receivers) contributing to cost variance VAC CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION CV SV CV SV
  40. 40. 40 CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT FORM APPROVED OMB No. 0704-0188 1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3. PROGRAM 4. REPORT PERIOD a. NAME a. NAME a. NAME a. FROM (YYYYMMDD) Orbital Sciences Corporation February 2009 Working File b. LOCATION (Address and ZIP Code) b. NUMBER b. PHASE 2009 / 01 / 27 21839 Atlantic Blvd. Dulles, VA 20166 RH6-291357 b. TO (YYYYMMDD) c. TYPE d. SHARE RATIO c. EVMS ACCEPTANCE CPAF NO X YES (YYYYMMDD) 2009 / 02 / 22 5. CONTRACT DATA a. QUANTITY b. NEGOTIATED d. TARGET PROFIT/ e. TARGET f. ESTIMATED g. CONTRACT i. DATE OF OTB/OTS COSTAUTHORIZED UNPRICED WORK FEE PRICE PRICE CEILING (YYYYMMDD) 6. ESTIMATED COST AT COMPLETION 7. AUTHORIZED CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE MANAGEMENT ESTIMATE CONTRACT BUDGET VARIANCE a. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) AT COMPLETION BASE (1) (2) (3) a. BEST CASE 0 c. SIGNATURE d. DATE SIGNED b. WORST CASE 0 (YYYYMMDD) c. MOST LIKELY 438,770 605,167 166,397 8. PERFORMANCE DATA LM Rpt Lvl[21] CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK BUDGETED ESTIMATED VARIANCE ITEM SCHEDULEDPERFORMEDPERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULEDPERFORMEDPERFORMED SCHEDULE COST (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (14) (15) (16) 1.1.8 Special Studies 372 372 3 -17 372 3 -17 1.3.2 System Safety 1.xx 1.xx 3 -2 x76.3 x74.7 xx7.3466 -1x.41 x7.4x3 318 31x.6 4 1.6.4.1 LAS Management and Administration x37.1 x3x3.1 3.x664 16 146.x41 x71.6344 x71.6344 x17.7x71 x73.73 34.76x3 36xx.344 -1x6.x7x 1.6.4.2 LAS Systems Engineering and Integration 72 76.xx1x 374 5 2 14,648 143x.6x61 1x46.64 -x.7 16.6x1 xx33.7x3 x1x1x.3x x1.11 1.6.4.3.02 Command and Data Handling (C&DH) 12 12 x3. 7x.164 -61.3x 43x.66 4x1.74x4 2 -47 -74.x33 6.x637 742 -6.3x1 1.6.4.3.05 Electrical Power Subsystem .xx -.xx 13x.4 13x.4 74 8 13x.4 74 8 1.6.4.3.06 Mechanisms 6 6 1 0 334.x 334.x 37.63x -163 33.x7 1x7.43 -17x.1x4 1.6.4.3.07 Passive Thermal Control 3 4.3x x4.x3 2 16.4x 1x.4x74 1x4.63 1 -1 11 1,476 1,314 16x.1 1.6.4.3.09 Structures 1 x73.x67 4x.1 117 -18 x637.47 x6147.34 x63.477 -3.6xx -x.6xxx x7.x x7.1x4 -1,314 FORMAT 1 - WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE c. ESTIMATED COST OF CPR Format 1– Customer Report. CA Customer Reporting CA level VAC CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION Roll-up your findings into a higher CAs level variance explanations Up to Customer CA reporting level Roll-up your findings into a higher CAs level variance explanations Up to Customer CA reporting level CV SV CV SV
  41. 41. 41 CLASSIFICATION (When Filled In) CONTRACT PERFORMANCE REPORT FORM APPROVED OMB No. 0704-0188 1. CONTRACTOR 2. CONTRACT 3. PROGRAM 4. REPORT PERIOD a. NAME a. NAME a. NAME a. FROM (YYYYMMDD) b. LOCATION (Address and ZIP Code) b. NUMBER b. PHASE XXXXX b. TO (YYYYMMDD) c. TYPE d. SHARE RATIO c. EVMS ACCEPTANCE CPAF NO X YES (YYYYMMDD) 5. CONTRACT DATA a. QUANTITY b. NEGOTIATED d. TARGET PROFIT/ e. TARGET f. ESTIMATED g. CONTRACT i. DATE OF OTB/OTS COSTAUTHORIZED UNPRICED WORK FEE PRICE PRICE CEILING (YYYYMMDD) 1 6. ESTIMATED COST AT COMPLETION 7. AUTHORIZED CONTRACTOR REPRESENTATIVE MANAGEMENT ESTIMATE CONTRACT BUDGET VARIANCE a. NAME (Last, First, Middle Initial) AT COMPLETION BASE (1) (2) (3) a. BEST CASE 666,137 c. SIGNATURE d. DATE SIGNED b. WORST CASE 740,153 (YYYYMMDD) c. MOST LIKELY 703,145 740,153 37,008 8. PERFORMANCE DATA LM Rpt Lvl[21] CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE BUDGETED COST COST VARIANCE WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK WORK BUDGETED ESTIMATED VARIANCE ITEM SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST SCHEDULED PERFORMED PERFORMED SCHEDULE COST (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (14) (15) (16) 1.1.8 Special Research 0 0 0 0 0 390 390 409 0 -18 390 409 -18 1.3.2 System Configuration 30 30 42 0 -12 2,967 2,954 2,695 -13 259 4,708 4,600 108 1.7.1.1 Management -4,059 -4,059 1,937 0 -5,996 24,387 24,387 28,205 0 -3,818 77,172 81,196 -4,024 1.7.1.2 Systems Engineering 567 536 454 -31 82 15,947 15,648 13,480 -299 2,168 28,561 29,728 -1,167 1.7.1.3.02 Data -226 -217 171 9 -389 4,319 4,279 5,585 -40 -1,306 8,340 9,625 -1,285 1.7.1.3.08 Electrical Power Subsystem 0 0 0 0 0 139 139 78 0 60 139 78 60 1.7.1.3.07 Mechanisms 10 10 0 0 9 3,563 3,563 5,290 0 -1,727 3,569 5,325 -1,756 1.7.1.3.07 Thermal Control 60 60 13 0 47 1,373 1,372 1,124 -1 248 1,692 1,469 224 1.7.1.3.09 Constructions 120 265 1,212 145 -947 27,984 27,720 28,930 -264 -1,210 39,926 42,239 -2,314 1.7.1.3.10 Rotation 21,016 20,806 8,588 -210 12,218 197,923 189,430 277,342 -8,493 -87,912 523,084 649,833 -126,749 1.7.1.3.13 Pyrotechnics -1 -47 23 -46 -70 2,023 1,888 2,176 -135 -288 3,678 6,072 -2,394 1.7.1.3.18 Navigation 241 199 133 -42 67 7,137 7,028 5,921 -109 1,107 10,891 9,792 1,099 1.7.1.3.17 Instrumentation -67 -78 28 -11 -106 756 745 886 -11 -141 1,024 1,212 -188 1.7.1.8 Test, Verification and Certification 102 102 286 1 -183 4,463 4,456 4,139 -8 317 10,008 9,736 272 1.7.1.7.01 Hardware 129 56 204 -72 -148 5,564 5,491 9,525 -73 -4,034 6,883 11,159 -4,275 1.7.1.7.02 Design and Production -810 -844 179 -34 -1,023 1,614 1,602 2,942 -12 -1,340 2,874 4,315 -1,441 b. Cost of Money 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c. Gen. and Admin. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d. Undist. Budget 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45,516 29,769 15,747 e. Sub Total 17,111 16,820 13,269 -291 3,551 300,549 291,092 388,727 -9,458 -97,635 768,456 896,556 -128,100 f. Management Resrv. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,704 0 0 g. Total 17,111 16,820 13,269 -291 3,551 300,549 291,092 388,727 -9,458 -97,635 777,160 0 0 9. Reconciliation to CBB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a. Variance Adjustment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 b. Total Contract Variance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -9,007 -92,986 740,153 853,863 -113,710 FORMAT 1 - WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE Orbital Proprietary c. ESTIMATED COST OF EVMS Validation Artificial Intelligence CAM CA Status Interpretation Timson Sam 2.2.5.02 Project X -22 Evaluation This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Marson Mickey 2.3.2.2K System Safety - CO#22 Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule? Marson Mickey 2.4.42 Project X Test Stop Work This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.05.02 Emulator Sub Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.05.02 Emulator Sub3 Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule? Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.05.05 Emulator VTR Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) Timson Sam 2.6.4.2.02 Project Management Negative Performance in Current Month Timson Sam 2.6.4.2.02C Project Management - CLA-5a CO#22 This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Richey Dan 2.6.4.2.02A Configuration Managment - R2 Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month and no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) No BCWS but there is a budget. Taylor Kim 2.4.03 Project X Restructure Proposal This task is 100% complete but the EAC does not equal Actuals;however, actuals appeared in the current month . (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Rich Pam 2.4.07 Ext Adapter Proposal Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) Timson Sam 2.4.22 Project X Change Order 5 This task is 100% complete but the EAC does not equal Actuals. Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Timson Sam 2.4.29 Project X R2 Prelim SBU ImpactNo performance taken due to no budget; however, actuals accumulate - candidate for BCR or transfers of actuals Timson Sam 2.4.45 Project X Change Order #22 This task has no actuals in the current month; however, performance was taken. Material? Missing accruals? fixing prior month performance? LOE? Performance taken after obtaining budget at PRB, whereas actuals accumulated in the past w/o BAC? Timson Sam 2.4.49 Project X Evaluation of Rev 003 of SOW, SDRD, DL This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.02K Software Engineering - CO#22Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule? CAM CA Status Interpretation Timson Sam 2.2.5.02 Project X -22 Evaluation This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Marson Mickey 2.3.2.2K System Safety - CO#22 Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule? Marson Mickey 2.4.42 Project X Test Stop Work This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.05.02 Emulator Sub Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.05.02 Emulator Sub3 Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule? Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.05.05 Emulator VTR Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) Timson Sam 2.6.4.2.02 Project Management Negative Performance in Current Month Timson Sam 2.6.4.2.02C Project Management - CLA-5a CO#22 This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Richey Dan 2.6.4.2.02A Configuration Managment - R2 Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month and no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) No BCWS but there is a budget. Taylor Kim 2.4.03 Project X Restructure Proposal This task is 100% complete but the EAC does not equal Actuals;however, actuals appeared in the current month . (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Rich Pam 2.4.07 Ext Adapter Proposal Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?) Timson Sam 2.4.22 Project X Change Order 5 This task is 100% complete but the EAC does not equal Actuals. Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Timson Sam 2.4.29 Project X R2 Prelim SBU ImpactNo performance taken due to no budget; however, actuals accumulate - candidate for BCR or transfers of actuals Timson Sam 2.4.45 Project X Change Order #22 This task has no actuals in the current month; however, performance was taken. Material? Missing accruals? fixing prior month performance? LOE? Performance taken after obtaining budget at PRB, whereas actuals accumulated in the past w/o BAC? Timson Sam 2.4.49 Project X Evaluation of Rev 003 of SOW, SDRD, DL This task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Blom Jim 2.6.4.2.02K Software Engineering - CO#22Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule? Background Artificial Intelligence Output Analysis Provided to CAMs for further investigation
  42. 42. 42 EVMS Validation Criteria Sample Criteria:  Actuals accumulate but no scheduled work in the current month therefore no performance taken in the current month (ahead of schedule?)  Cumulative scheduled work is zero, actuals are greater than zero - ahead of schedule?  Current month scheduled is zero, performance is not 0, actuals are greater than zero. Fixing prior month performance in this month or behind schedule?  Current month scheduled is zero, actuals are zero while performance is not 0. Fixing prior month performance in this month?  Missing Performance  Negative Performance in Current Month and/or Cumulative  No performance taken due to no budget; however, actuals accumulate or accumulated in the prior months - candidate for BCR or transfers of actuals Background Artificial Intelligence Output Analysis Provided to CAMs for further investigation
  43. 43. 43 EVMS Validation Criteria  No performance taken due to no budget; however, actuals were accumulated - was candidate for BCR - however, actual were transferred resulting in negative CM and CUME ACWP - verify and address the transfer in corrective action.  A task has no actuals both in the current month and cumulatively; however, performance was taken. Material? Missing accruals? LOE and really behind of schedule?  A task has no actuals in the current month; however, performance was taken. Material? Missing accruals? fixing prior month performance? LOE? Performance taken after obtaining budget at PRB, whereas actuals accumulated in the past w/o BAC?  A task has no cumulative (and CM) actuals; however, performance was taken. LOE? Material? Missing accruals? Charging occurs at the incorrect account? Transfer if necessary. Performance taken after obtaining budget at PRB, whereas actuals accumulated in the past w/o BAC? Background Artificial Intelligence Output Analysis Provided to CAMs for further investigation
  44. 44. 44 EVMS Validation Criteria  A task is 100% complete and ahead of schedule; however, actuals appeared in the current month ( Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Rate or other adjustments? Overstated performance?).  A task is 100% complete but the EAC does not equal Actuals. Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR for projected additional in-scope change?  A task is 100% complete, EAC does not equal Actuals; and actuals appeared in the current month. (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR for projected additional in- scope change?  A task is 100% complete; however, actuals appeared in the current month (Subs? Material? Legging invoices? Anticipating addl. Budget - Submitting BCR? Rate or other adjustments?). Background Artificial Intelligence Output Analysis Provided to CAMs for further investigation
  45. 45. 45 RESULT = CPR Format 5RESULT = CPR Format 5 Customer Reporting CA levelCustomer Reporting CA level VAC CVSV CURRENT PERIOD CUMULATIVE TO DATE AT COMPLETION Obital Reporting CA levelObital Reporting CA level Variance Report Consolidated from Internal Reporting level Variance Reports for Each CAM and CAs Orb CAOrb CA  Customer CACustomer CA Variance Report Consolidated from Internal Reporting level Variance Reports for Each CAM and CAs Orb CAOrb CA  Customer CACustomer CA
  46. 46. 46 Additional Data Repositories For Variance Analysis
  47. 47. 47 Transition CAM CAM FutureNow
  48. 48. 48 Management Review  EVMS Application - wInsight  In Conjunction with VAR Format 5 CPR deadlines, VARs are summarized, and briefed to the management in CAM meetings  EVMS Charts are presented and items requiring management attention are addressed  wInsight is utilized to produce the graphic EVMS charts
  49. 49. 49 Management Review - Clarification for Interpretation w e 4,387 4,387 4,346 BAC 7,234 EAC 7,583 4,346 Cum CPI 6,921 CPI*SPI 6,921 3 MO AV 8,155 Cum CPI1.010 3 MO CPI0.000 TCPI-EAC0.879 Should Read: 2007 MAY 2008 JAN 2009 DEC 2010 DEC TimeNow Complete 4,387 4,387 4,346 BAC 7,234 EAC 7,583 4,346 Cum CPI 6,921 CPI*SPI 6,921 3 MO AV 8,155 Cum CPI1.010 3 MO CPI0.000 TCPI-EAC0.879 EAC EAC EAC 0 BCWS 4,387 BCWP 4,387 ACWP 4,346 BAC 7,234 EAC 7,583 ETC 4,346 Cum CPI CPI*SPI 3 MO AV Cum C 3 MO TCPI- To compare to our CAM generated estimate, system generated estimates at completion EACs are provided and are based on: 1. Cum CPI – Cumulative Cost Performance Index 2. Cum CPI – Cumulative Cost Performance Index and Cum SPI – Cumulative Schedule Performance Index 3. 3 MO AV – 3 months average This is CAM generated estimate at completion EAC based on CAM inputs Compareto 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 2007 MAY 2008 JAN 2009 DEC 2010 DEC Orbital Sciences Corporation RH6-291357 CPAF PROD Element: (Aggregate) Name: CAM/IPT=AmorosiCum Element Performance TimeNow Complete DollarsinThousands BCWS 4,387 BCWP 4,387 ACWP 4,346 BAC 7,234 EAC 7,583 ETC 4,346 Cum CPI 6,921 CPI*SPI 6,921 3 MO AV 8,155 Cum CPI1.010 3 MO CPI0.000 TCPI-EAC0.879
  50. 50. 50 Management Review Supplemental EVMS / VAR Analysis  The thresholds represent the changes/deltas since the previous reporting period  The thresholds deltas are set for CV, SV and VAC  The thresholds are not VARs/Format 5 thresholds  The thresholds represent the changes/deltas since the previous reporting period  The thresholds deltas are set for CV, SV and VAC  The thresholds are not VARs/Format 5 thresholds  EVMS Application - wInsight  In Conjunction with VAR Format 5 CPR deadlines, VARs are summarized, and briefed to the management in CAM meetings  wInsight is utilized to produce additional information analysis @ CA level to include comparison with previous month as well as EVMS variances for the management review purposes
  51. 51. 51 http://vawinsight1/wsweb/login.asp
  52. 52. 52 wInsight Dashboard Artificial Intelligence
  53. 53. 53 wInsight Dashboard AI VAR Analysis
  54. 54. 54 wInsight Dashboard AI VAR Analysis
  55. 55. 55 wInsight Dashboard AI VAR Analysis
  56. 56. 56 wInsight EVMS 6 Period Summary Project X Task 164 Task 1891 Task 1321K
  57. 57. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic Apply Your Knowledge Variance AnalysisVariance Analysis
  58. 58. 58 Time Dimension • Incremental/Current month (Increments of time-phased data – for each current month) • Cumulative (inception to date data) Incremental and cumulative deal with performance to date can provide meaningful indications when latest performance differs from earlier performance. Involves cost and schedule variances (schedule and cost performance/efficiency indexes): CV = BCWP – ACWP CPI = BCWP/ACWP SV = BCWP – BCWS SPI = BCWP/BCWS
  59. 59. 59 Interpretation & Deducing If CPI = BCWP/ACWP & CV= BCWP-ACWP  If BCWP>ACWP  CPI>1  CV>0 Favorable Cost variance – Informal term “cost underrun” If CPI = BCWP/ACWP & CV= BCWP-ACWP  If BCWP<ACWP  CPI<1  CV<0 Unfavorable Cost Variance –  Informal term “cost overrun” If SPI = BCWP/BCWS & SV= BCWP-BCWS  If BCWP>BCWS  SPI>1  SV>0 Favorable Schedule Variance –  Informal term “ahead of schedule” If SPI<1 & SPI = BCWP/BCWS  BCWP<BCWS If BCWP<BCWS  SP<1  SV<0 Unfavorable Schedule Variance –  Informal term “behind schedule”
  60. 60. 60 Key Elements of Analysis Problem Cause AnalysisProblem Cause Analysis  Identify the root-cause of the problem  Give reasons for the variance  Address last month, cum and/or at completion  Address cost variances and schedule variances separately  For cost variances, determine if cause is rate or volume  Address important drivers with as much quantification as possible ~95% $ of all drivers Impact AnalysisImpact Analysis  Identify the impact on the immediate task and/or other tasks  Identify the impact on the total program/contract  For schedule variances, indicate weeks of impact and effect on others  Address EAC implications and Risks Corrective Action PlanCorrective Action Plan  Identify specific corrective action  Implement corrective action plan  Identify specifically who is going to do what by when  Is the variance recoverable?
  61. 61. ProblemProblem CauseCause AnalysisAnalysis ImpactImpact AnalysisAnalysis CorrectiveCorrective Action PlanAction Plan CVCV VACVAC SVSV CVCV VACVAC SVSV CVCV VACVAC SVSV ScheduleSchedule Critical PathCritical Path TechnicalTechnical ImpactImpact Cost ImpactCost Impact HorizontalHorizontal On Control AccountOn Control Account VerticalVertical On Other CAsOn Other CAs On ProgramOn Program Approximately Quantify:Approximately Quantify: $$ value for Each Drivervalue for Each Driver Days/MonthsDays/Months DurationDuration DatesDates Risks / OpportunitiesRisks / Opportunities EAC Change/LREEAC Change/LRE VAC?VAC? Root-Cause #1Root-Cause #1 Root-Cause #2Root-Cause #2 Root-Cause #nRoot-Cause #n Root-Cause #1Root-Cause #1 Root-Cause #2Root-Cause #2 Root-Cause #nRoot-Cause #n ……of $Xof $X ……of $Xof $X ……of $Xof $X ……of $Xof $X ……of $Xof $X ……of $Xof $X UnfavorableUnfavorable FavorableFavorable UnfavorableUnfavorable FavorableFavorable ExternalExternal InternalInternal ContractContract CustomerCustomer Who?Who? What?What? When?When? Approx.Approx. DateDate How much?How much? CorrectiveCorrective Action?Action? Recovery?Recovery? YesYes NoNo WhyWhy?? NOWNOW PASTPAST ResultsResults of earlierof earlier corrective actionscorrective actions (Previous(Previous Corrective actionCorrective action follow-upfollow-up)) CurrentMonthCurrentMonthCumulativeCumulativeCurrentMonthCurrentMonthCumulativeCumulativeCurrentMonthCurrentMonthCumulativeCumulative VARs Flow Chart
  62. 62. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic Root-Cause Analysis Variance AnalysisVariance Analysis
  63. 63. 63 Root-Cause Analysis  A good Root-Cause analysis:  Starts with Root-Cause analysis of What happened and Why?  Uses phrase “Favorable/Unfavorable cost/schedule variance” – not ahead/behind schedule or overrun/underrun  Is clear and concise - identifies reasons for the variance  Defines each underlying root cause/driver of the problem separately  Highlights Significant Problems (Not all problems)  Accounts for the majority of the variance reasons (at least 95%)  Focuses on Quantitative Analysis (Not Qualitative)  Emphasis should be on what is significant and should refer to quantitative data  Apportions total variance to each problem/cause  Addresses CV and SV separately  Specifically, SV explanation:  States which tasks were performed ahead or behind schedule and why  States whether or not any of the tasks are on the critical path IDENTIFICATION = HALFWAY TOWARDS A SOLUTIONIDENTIFICATION = HALFWAY TOWARDS A SOLUTION
  64. 64. 64 Questions to ask for Cause/Problem Analysis  Detail questions to ask for Cause/Problem Analysis  Schedule  Questions:  What tasks are not being started, completed or slipping?  Is an “upstream” or predecessor task the root cause?  Why is internal plan not being met?  What is the cause of the tasks not being met?  Is the cause internal or external?  Cost  Questions:  What tasks have the cost variance?  What is causing the tasks to cost more or less than plan?  Is the cost variance driven by volume (more hours required to complete work)?  Is the cost variance driven by direct labor rates (skill mix or adequate proficiency)?  Why is internal plan not being met?  Is the cost variance driven by indirect rates (burden performance)?  Is the cost variance driven predominately technical?  Is the cost variance driven by non labor (travel, ODC, material, subcontractors, etc) Root-Cause Analysis
  65. 65. 65  The task is less complex and will be completed earlier than planned.  Early effort has been confined to tasks which are less complex than those that follow.  The task has been overstaffed early in order to recognize the establishment of a higher priority.  Deliveries of hardware have been accomplished in advance of need date.  Earned value may be incorrect and require an adjustment in the next reporting period.  The plan is poorly time-phased and the current status is not reflective of what is really happening. Behind BCWS BCWP Ahead Root-Cause Analysis Favorable Schedule Variance SV = BCWP - BCWS CPI = BCWP / BCWS BCWP > BCWSSV > 0 SPI >1
  66. 66. 66 Unfavorable Schedule Variance  The task is more complex than originally planned.  Early effort has been more complex than the effort that follows.  Delays in staffing have slowed progress.  Hardware deliveries are late.  Redesign of rework activities has delayed progress.  Data from another organization (drawings or technical analysis) - late  Additional requirements have been established or changed.  Higher priority has been established on other work.  The plan is poorly time-phased.  Earned value may be incorrect and require an adjustment in the next reporting period. BCWP AheadBehind BCWS Root-Cause Analysis SV = BCWP - BCWS SPI = BCWP / BCWS BCWP < BCWSSV < 0 SPI <1
  67. 67. 67  If Unable to start on time possible reasons could include:  Predecessor task not completed  Lack of firm specifications  Key resource not available (people, equipment, material)  Funding unavailable  Change to the original plan (customer/program driven)  If Taking longer then expected possible reasons could include:  Learning Curve  Errors  Retesting  More analysis needed  Redesign  Changes  Parts delayed/rejected  Resources diverted  Equipment problems (Orbital, Subs)  More documentation required (drawings) Unfavorable Schedule Variance Root-Cause Analysis SV = BCWP - BCWS SPI = BCWP / BCWS BCWP < BCWSSV < 0 SPI <1
  68. 68. 68 SV - Reference to DID  “Explanations of schedule variances and the impact on the contract shall be performed in parallel with the schedule analysis called out by the IMS DID.“ IMS DID, DI-MGMT-81650, to be used in conjunction with DID DI-MGMT-81466A. (See 2.2.6.4 and 2.2.6.5)  2.4.1.10.2 “Over Target Schedule Agreement. The Government and the contractor shall agree on the new performance measurement schedule prior to reporting it in the CPR. The contractor shall provide pertinent information in Format 5 on any schedule milestones that are inconsistent with contractual milestones, beginning the month the schedule is implemented and each month thereafter.” Root-Cause Analysis
  69. 69. 69  Delayed billing (Subs, Contractors, IWAs)  Efficiencies  More technicians vs. engineers  Rate changes (should be discussed separately)  The complexity of the task is less than originally estimated.  The less complex tasks have been completed early.  The task is primarily LOE and has not been fully staffed.  Earned value may be incorrect and require an adjustment in the next reporting period.  Material or services have been used but not paid yet.  Material or services were less expensive than planned.  The plan is poorly time-phased. CV = BCWP - ACWP CPI = BCWP / ACWP BCWP > ACWP Root-Cause Analysis Favorable Cost Variance CV > 0 CPI >1
  70. 70. 70  The task is more complex than originally planned.  The more complex tasks have been completed early.  Program priorities have resulted in application of resources in an inefficient manner – more overtime – additional staffing – job shop.  Delays in receipt of data have resulted in implementation of work-a-rounds to make schedule – more overtime – additional staffing – job shop.  Changes, redesign, additional requirements, or unplanned in- scope effort.  The plan is poorly time-phased.  Earned value may be incorrect and require an adjustment in the next reporting period.  Rate and/or use variance Root-Cause Analysis Unfavorable Cost Variance CV = BCWP - ACWP CPI = BCWP / ACWP BCWP < ACWPCV < 0 CPI <1
  71. 71. 71  Underestimated  More expensive: Parts/Material, Equipment, Subcontractors, Suppliers  Labor in Transition  Knowledge Transfer  Turnover  More engineers vs. technicians  Incentives for suppliers  Rework  Risk mitigation  Rate changes (should be discussed separately) Root-Cause Analysis Unfavorable Cost Variance CV = BCWP - ACWP CPI = BCWP / ACWP BCWP < ACWPCV < 0 CPI <1
  72. 72. 72 Variance at Completion  At Completion VAC = BAC – EAC ( totals – data projected at the end of the project) deal with: Estimate of the final cost overrun/underrun :  Changes in EAC might be a prelude to BCR and baseline change in some cases  Changing EAC MIGHT require BAC updates when, for instance, MR is approved based on the previously presented EAC and BCR process completion BAC reflects baseline distributed budget at the time of the report (affects VAC whenever a BCR is implemented, new RW is planned out, PP are developed, budget is distributed, etc.)  Changing BAC should always implicate EAC evaluation if not previously done  Insuring that EAC is updated is important if updating EAC did not precede BAC updates
  73. 73. 73 Causing cost and/or schedule variance:  ESD  Size/weight/power  Noise/vibration  Test failures  Inspection issues  Defective parts  Alignment/Interface  Software  Systems  Changes  Supplier support  Integration  Scope creep Technical problems Root-Cause Analysis
  74. 74. 74 Rate and Volume/Usage/Price Analysis  For Labor, separately identify:  amounts attributable to rate changes  amounts applicable to hours worked;  For Material, separately identify:  amounts attributable to material price changes  amounts applicable to material usage;  For Overhead rate changes, separately identify:  amounts attributable to overhead rate changes  amounts applicable to overhead base changes or changes in the overhead allocation basis. Root-Cause Analysis
  75. 75. 75 Rate Impact Example Write-Up LM AX 1.6.4.3.10 Propulsion ($865.321) 1.6.4.3.09 Structures ($60.133) 1.6.4.3.06 Mechanisms ($9.240) 1.6.4.6.01 Flight Hardware AIP ($8.548) 1.6.4.3.13 Pyrotechnics ($6.781) 1.6.4.1 LAS Management and Administration ($4.860) 1.3.2 System Safety ($1.292) 1.6.4.3.07 Passive Thermal Control ($0.945) 1.1.8 Special Studies ($0.117) 1.6.4.3.05 Electrical Power Subsystem $0.051 1.6.4.3.16 Wiring $0.936 1.6.4.6.02 Flight Test Article Design and Production $2.054 1.6.4.3.02 Command and Data Handling (C&DH) $5.519 1.6.4.5 LAS Test, Verification and Certification $6.623 1.6.4.3.15 Guidance, Navigation and Control (GN&C) $7.266 1.6.4.2 LAS Systems Engineering and Integration $15.834 Grand Total ($918.954)  For the accounts that have negative amounts (favorable) in the table below , accounts with predominant non-labor, the write- up should be: The rate adjustments for CY 200X, reflected in the current month, are favorably affecting _________Type CA Name_______ Cost Variance by $___Type Amount____.  For the accounts that have positive amounts (unfavorable) in the table below, accounts with predominant labor, the write-up should be: The rate adjustments for CY 200X, reflected in the current month, are unfavorably affecting _________Type CA Name_______ Cost Variance by $___Type Amount____.
  76. 76. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic Impact Analysis Variance AnalysisVariance Analysis
  77. 77. 77  Describes specific Cost, Schedule and Technical Impacts to the Program AND to other Functional areas or other tasks in the WBS for each of the variance drivers and root causes  Schedule Impact on Interfaces  Horizontal – Vertical  Critical Path  Identify key IMS line items impacted and dependencies.  Identify changes to float  Includes approximate dollar value of the cost/schedule/technical impact and include duration changes and date impacts  Assesses the impact to the EAC/LRE based on these variances and quantifies risks and opportunities  If there is no task impact or program impact, explains why not Impact Analysis Impact Analysis
  78. 78. 78 RISKSRISKSRISKSRISKS Covers AUWCovers AUW If MR isIf MR is Credited uponCredited upon CFRCFR Covers AUWCovers AUW If MR isIf MR is Credited uponCredited upon CFRCFR IN-SCOPEIN-SCOPE CHANGESCHANGES COsCOs IN-SCOPEIN-SCOPE CHANGESCHANGES COsCOs FUTURE,FUTURE, UNANTICIPATED,UNANTICIPATED, IN-SCOPE WORKIN-SCOPE WORK FUTURE,FUTURE, UNANTICIPATED,UNANTICIPATED, IN-SCOPE WORKIN-SCOPE WORK MRMRMRMR PROGRAMPROGRAM MANAGERSMANAGERS DECISIONDECISION NOT TO USENOT TO USE MRMR PROGRAMPROGRAM MANAGERSMANAGERS DECISIONDECISION NOT TO USENOT TO USE MRMR OVERRUNSOVERRUNSOVERRUNSOVERRUNS Out-of-scopeOut-of-scope WorkWork Out-of-scopeOut-of-scope WorkWork NOTNOT MRMR NOTNOT MRMR Address BCR and MR Changes Impact Analysis
  79. 79. 79 MR Reference to DID  Per DID Section 2.2.4.6 Management Reserve. “…shall not be used to offset cumulative cost variances…Amounts of MR applied to CWBS elements during the reporting period shall be…explained in Format 5.”  Per DID Section 2.4.2.3 Performance Measurement Baseline (End of Period). …”effects of all significant changes, including the authorized changes, allocations of MR made during the period, and changes to time phasing due to internal replanning or formal reprogramming. The reasons for these changes shall be explained in Format 5.” Impact Analysis
  80. 80. 80 Technical Impact Describe specific impacts to the program and your accounts  Technical Impacts  Does level of maturity impact completing your tasks or other subtasks?  Is the variance resulting in a change in solution or approach?  Are there adequate resource available to mitigate technical impact?  Who “downstream” or what successor tasks are impacted by your schedule variance? Impact Analysis
  81. 81. 81 Refer back to root-cause for cost and/or schedule variance analysis :  ESD  Size/weight/power  Noise/vibration  Test failures  Inspection issues  Defective parts  Alignment/Interface  Software  Systems  Changes  Supplier support  Integration  Scope creep Base on Root-Cause Analysis Technical Impact
  82. 82. 82 Schedule Impact Describe specific impacts to the program and your accounts  How many days, weeks, months is the slip?  Is there adequate slack to absorb the schedule impact?  Are you slipping any major milestones?  Is the critical path impacted?  Are Risks tracked in IMS?  Quantification of cost impact (i.e., EAC change) should be submitted for review, action, or approval. Impact Analysis
  83. 83. 83 Cost Impacts Describe specific impacts to the program and your accounts Cost Impacts  What is the cumulative cost variance?  Do you expect the cost trend to continue?  Address the Estimate at Complete and revisions needed.  Will the schedule variance affect the future cost?  Risks / Opportunities  Quantification of cost impact (i.e., EAC change) should be submitted for review, action, or approval. Impact Analysis
  84. 84. 84  Finish late  Start next task late  Redesign required  More testing required  Additional costs  Customer notification  Safety issue  Overtime required Additional equipment / people  Specialist / Consultant  Out of specification (power/weight/size) Supplier penalties  New supplier to be qualified  Government approvals needed  Will need quicker turnaround from purchasing, suppliers  More risk Impact Examples Impact Analysis
  85. 85. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic Corrective Action Plan Variance AnalysisVariance Analysis
  86. 86. 86 Corrective action plan answers:  Who?  What?  When?  How much? Describes specific actions to alleviate or minimize the impact Includes the individual, resources, or organization responsible for the required action Includes schedules for the corrective action: completion dates, and recovery dates – if no recovery answers why? Includes Corrective action follow-up -results of earlier corrective actions Identifies mitigation plans for any areas of Risks or Opportunities Describes workaround plans incorporated into IMS Corrective Action Plan Corrective Action Plan
  87. 87. 87 WHAT WILL HAPPEN? Overtime (schedule)  Fewer people (cost)  Reduced resources  Alternate people (senior, specialized)  Lease equipment (bigger, better, faster)  Analysis/Testing  Special Software  Employ Consultants  Tiger team  Loosen specifications (customer approval?)  Eliminate tasks – Descope  Re-prioritize tasks  Cheaper material – use of existing material  Redesign  Buy vs. Build (Off-shelf vs. In-house)  Parallel vs. Prototype/Waterfall Corrective Action Plan
  88. 88. 88 Dos & Don’ts Do Not Use:  Over Run  Under Run  Behind Schedule  Ahead of Schedule  Out of Scope  Hope Use :  Unfavorable  Favorable  Unfavorable  Favorable  Unplanned In-Scope  Anticipated And…do not “do not’s”And…do not “do not’s” And…do not “do not’s”And…do not “do not’s”  Corrective Action Plan
  89. 89. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic Demonstration VAR Corrective Action Register & Metrics Management ReviewManagement Review
  90. 90. 90 VAR Corrective Action Register  The purpose of the section is to explain the enhancements to the VAR Corrective Action Register.  VB code automates filtering of any ongoing, open or closed items – and any other – open for suggestion  User will not have to manually go through the list of action items  All selections are automated via single button click  Some of the fields contain drop-down menus to maintain consistency  Information integrity Validation is implemented  Management Review Metrics page is auto populated
  91. 91. 91 0 5 10 15 20 25 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Taylor Gick McFarland Larson Kozero Zwicker Davis Engblom Mullen Pettis Hildebrand 0 5 10 15 20 25 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Taylor Gick McFarland Larson Kozero Zwicker Davis Engblom Mullen Pettis Hildebrand Executive Review Metrics - Sample Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 2 0 0 0 23 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 1 0 0 0 2 13 15 20 17 8 9 11 16 0 0 0 112 Total 1 0 0 0 2 16 18 23 20 11 13 13 18 0 0 0 135 Open Items - Over 60 Days Past Due Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 3 3 3 4 2 2 0 0 0 23 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 1 0 0 0 2 13 15 20 17 8 9 11 16 0 0 0 112 Total 1 0 0 0 2 16 18 23 20 11 13 13 18 0 0 0 135 Open Items - Over 60 Days Past Due
  92. 92. 92 Executive Review Metrics - Sample Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Open Items - Over 30 and under 60 Days Past Due Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Open Items - Over 30 and under 60 Days Past Due Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 Open Items - Under 30 Days Past Due Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 4 Open Items - Under 30 Days Past Due Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Total 4 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 OBE Items Subsystem CAM 2008-01 2008-02 2008-03 2008-04 2008-05 2008-06 2008-07 2008-08 2008-09 2008-10 2008-11 2008-12 2009-01 2009-02 2009-03 2009-04 Total PM, Cost and Schedule Management` Hildebrand 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Avionics and Power Pettis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Systems Engineering Mullen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Software Engblom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Production and Operations Davis 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pyro Zwicker 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Structures, TPS, Mechanisms Kozero 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S&MA Larson 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G&NC McFarland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jettison Motor,Abort Motor Gick 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Attitude Control Motor Taylor 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Total 4 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 OBE Items
  93. 93. 93 Additional Fields  Added fields are:  Date Recorded,  Reporting Period (CPR (Contract Performance Report)),  Date for the end of the reporting period,  Cur/Cum/At Comp variance type,  SV/CV variance type,  Variance $ Value (to be incorporated from the CPR (Contract Performance Report) format 1 and included along with corresponding Current or CUME, Cost or Schedule variance lines),  Assigned To – other than CAM who will be doing the actual work (mitigating, corrective action implementation),  Level of Importance – at PM discretion to determine from high, medium to low,  Aging low less than 30 days, medium between 30 and 60 days, and greater than 60 days
  94. 94. 94 VAR CAM Metrics  The VAR CAM Metrics sheet has been developed to automatically calculate and provide metrics for each CAM, by each period, and totals for:  Items older than 60 days  Items older than to 30 days and less than or equal to 60 days old  Items less than or equal to 30 days old
  95. 95. 95 Automation Menu
  96. 96. 96 CAM List Per Latest PD  Drop-down menu for CAM field is cleaned up to include list of all CAMs per latest PD from which the user can choose  Only 1 CAM is allowed in the CAM column  Assigned to Column can include all others involved in closing the corrective action
  97. 97. 97 Auto-Selections  To maintain consistency and avoid multiple versions of the same meaning, the fields shown below are developed to provide drop- down lists with build in acceptable values  No need to type unless you prefer so
  98. 98. 98 Validation  If you still do type the value that does not match the ones from the drop-down list the value will not be accepted  The error message will indicate that you either need to select correct value or type it correctly
  99. 99. 99 Tip: Executing In order for the code to execute correctly make sure that the filter in ON. You can toggle filter on and off by clicking the Filter On/Off button In order for the code to execute correctly make sure that the filter in ON. You can toggle filter on and off by clicking the Filter On/Off button The indication that the filter in on are down-arrows in each title- block; likewise, when the filter is OFF no arrows will be shown The indication that the filter in on are down-arrows in each title- block; likewise, when the filter is OFF no arrows will be shown
  100. 100. 100 Legend and Criteria Aging calculation is based on the number of days between time now and due date for all non-closed items Closed items will not have aging calculated but should have date closed populated
  101. 101. 101 Visual Clicking Open Items will automatically list all items that require attention and have OPEN status. Clicking Open Items will automatically list all items that require attention and have OPEN status. Note: If any part of the status verbiage contains word “OPEN” that item will be output as a part of the results In other words the user does not have to be exact in order to get correct output However, formatting will apply only to “OPEN” items Note: If any part of the status verbiage contains word “OPEN” that item will be output as a part of the results In other words the user does not have to be exact in order to get correct output However, formatting will apply only to “OPEN” items Automatically formatted red if over 60 days OR OPEN Automatically formatted red if over 60 days OR OPEN Clicking CLOSED Items will automatically list all items that have been resolved and have Closed status. Clicking CLOSED Items will automatically list all items that have been resolved and have Closed status. Note: If any part of the status verbiage contains word “CLOSED” that item will be output as a part of the results In other words, the user does not have to be exact in order to get correct output However, conditional formatting will apply only to “CLOSED” items Note: If any part of the status verbiage contains word “CLOSED” that item will be output as a part of the results In other words, the user does not have to be exact in order to get correct output However, conditional formatting will apply only to “CLOSED” items Automatically formatted green if Closed or less than 30 days Automatically formatted green if Closed or less than 30 days Clicking IN PROCESS Items will automatically list all items that have been resolved and have Ongoing status. Clicking IN PROCESS Items will automatically list all items that have been resolved and have Ongoing status. Note: If any part of the status verbiage contains word “ON-GOING” that item will be output as a part of the results In other words, the user does not have to be exact in order to get correct output Note: If any part of the status verbiage contains word “ON-GOING” that item will be output as a part of the results In other words, the user does not have to be exact in order to get correct output Automatically formatted yellow if ongoing or OBE OR between 30 and 60 days Automatically formatted yellow if ongoing or OBE OR between 30 and 60 days
  102. 102. Presenter EVMS Process Leader:Presenter EVMS Process Leader: Svjetlana Lana RadovicSvjetlana Lana Radovic APG VARs Scorecard & Metrics Management ReviewManagement Review
  103. 103. 103 ORION VARs Scorecard - Sample VARs Scorecard used to evaluate each CAMs variance report Note: The quality of the explanations often significantly influence award fee if part of evaluation criteria Data provided on time  Time for review with PM  Time to make revisions Assumptions:  For the questions where "IF APPLICABLE" Only is indicated, if CAM has indicated that the question is "not applicable" CAM earned the score;  CAM earned no score if no comments were made (e.g. no impact on critical path would earn 1 point while no comment at all will earn 0 points)  CAMs with no explanations required earn 100%
  104. 104. 104 ORION Variance Report Scorecard BOCAM Ken BRAINARD Mike ENGBLOM Thor LARSON Chris RICHARDSON Donna ACM - Contro Problem Analysis - What happened and Why ? 1.6.4.2 LAS Systems Engineering and Integration 1.6.4.3.10.02 Jettison Motor(Propulsion) 1.6.4.3.1 (Prop Have all of the variances with broken thresholds been addressed? (CV, SV, Current, Cume, At Completion) -IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 1 o Is there a clear and concise explanation of the reasons (each root cause/driver defined separately) for the variance accounting for the majority of the variance (at least 95%)?(Is there apportioned approx. $ variance amount for each problem/cause) 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 1 o Did the CAM indicate and discuss specifics of what created/caused the variance? IF APPLICABLE: External Influences i.e. Design, verification, or requirements changes Contract / Customer Issues Internal Influences i.e. Organizational Issues, Staffing, Labor Rate Variances 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 1 o Does the CAM state which tasks caused the favorable or unfavorable Cost and Schedule variance and why, and whether the tasks causing Schedule variance are on critical path -IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 1 o VAR Scorecard – Root-Cause
  105. 105. 105 ORION Variance Report Scorecard BOCAM Ken BRAINARD Mike ENGBLOM Thor LARSON Chris RICHARDSON Donna ACM - Attitud Control Moto Task/Project Impact - How will this problem affect my Control Accounts and any others ? 1.6.4.2 LAS Systems Engineering and Integration 1.6.4.3.10.02 Jettison Motor 1.6.4.3.10.03 A Does the CAM describe specific Cost Impacts for each of the variance drivers and root causes - i.e. continuing cost trend, impact on ETC/LRE -IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA Does the CAM describe specific Schedule Impacts for each of the variance drivers and root causes - i.e. how many days, weeks, months is the slip in the schedule, is there adequate schedule reserve to absorb the impact, what is the impact to major milestones or successor tasks, is there critical path impact -IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA Does the CAM describe specific Technical Impacts for each of the variance drivers and root causes - i.e. level of maturity, change in solution/approach, adequate resources available -IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA Does the CAM describe specific Impacts to to the Program AND/OR other Functional areas or other tasks in the WBS - IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA Did the CAM quantify the impact - included approximate dollar value of the cost/technical impact and and include duration changes and dates of the schedule impacts? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA If there is no impact, did the CAM explain WHY? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA VAR Scorecard – Impact
  106. 106. 106 ORION Variance Report Scorecard BOCAM Ken BRAINARD Mike ENGBLOM Thor LARSON Chris RICHARDSON Donna ACM - Attitud Control Moto Corrective Action Plan - What do I plan to do about the problem ? 1.6.4.2 LAS Systems Engineering and Integration 1.6.4.3.10.02 Jettison Motor 1.6.4.3.10.03 A Has the CAM discussed specific practical or warranted actions or set of actions being taken (or to be taken) to alleviate or minimize the impact of each root cause/driver? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA Does the corrective action include completion dates, individuals responsible, resources necessary, and get well dates? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA Is each corrective action defined separately for each root cause? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA If there is a significant variance, did the CAM identify any areas of Risks or Opportunities? -IF not APPLICABLE, has the CAM indicated it? 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA If there is no hope for recovery or no action being taken, is that stated and is there an explanation why? -IF APPLICABLE 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA If ongoing variance had the CAM discussed corrective action follow-up-Included results of earlier corrective actions? -IF APPLICABLE 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA 0 .5 1 or NA VAR Scorecard – Corrective Action
  107. 107. 107 VARs –Most Missed Items  Impact:  LRE/ETC Impact  Impact on other accounts/Program  Quantified Impact in $  Corrective Action:  Completion dates, get well dates, responsible people  Risks & Opportunities  Follow-up on previous month’s corrective action promise (credit what has been already done)  General: If not applicable, mention it
  108. 108. 108 Format Consistency For multiple SV / CV / VAC Drivers be consistent in numbering for CM CV/SV & CUME CV/SV where applicable.  Explanation: 1) For Driver 1 2) For Driver 2 3) For Driver 3  Impact: 1) For Driver 1 2) For Driver 2 3) For Driver 3  Corrective action: 1) For Driver 1 2) For Driver 2 3) For Driver 3
  109. 109. 109 VAR Scorecard Results - Sample Management Review By CAs & CAMs  Problem Analysis  Max Score = 4 (4 areas graded)  Impact analysis  Max Score = 6 (6 areas graded)  Corrective action  Max Score = 6 (6 areas graded) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1.3.2SystemSafety 1.6.4.1LASManagementandAdministration 1.6.4.2LASSystemsEngineeringandIntegration 1.6.4.3.02CommandandDataHandling(C&DH) 1.6.4.3.05ElectricalPowerSubsystem 1.6.4.3.06Mechanisms 1.6.4.3.07PassiveThermalControl 1.6.4.3.09Structures 1.6.4.3.10.01AbortMotor (Propulsion) 1.6.4.3.10.02JettisonMotor(Propulsion) 1.6.4.3.10.03ACM(Propulsion) 1.6.4.3.13Pyrotechnics 1.6.4.3.15Guidance,NavigationandControl(GN&C) 1.6.4.3.16Wiring 1.6.4.5LASTest,VerificationandCertification 1.6.4.6.01FlightHardwareAIP-MGSE 1.6.4.6.01FlightHardwareAIP-EGSE 1.6.4.6.02FlightTestArticleDesignandProduction Problem Analysis - What happened and Why ? Task/Project Impact - How will this problem affect my Control Accounts and any others ? Corrective Action Plan - What do I plan to do about the problem ? Sample Results by CA for CPR Format 5
  110. 110. 110 64.5 7270.5 108 70 108 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Scores Total Problem Analysis - What happened and Why ? Task/Project Impact - How will this problem affect my Control Accounts and any others ? Corrective Action Plan - What do I plan to do about the problem ? VAR Scorecard Results - Sample Management Review Total Program  Problem Analysis  70 out of 108 points  Impact analysis  70.5 out of 108  Corrective action  64.5 out of 72 Results for Program X CPR Format 5
  111. 111. 111 ORION and APG EVMS Organization Chart – November 08 – June 09 Executive VP and General Manager Advanced Programs Group Sr. Director Finance Senior VP and Deputy General Manager Senior VP and Deputy General Manager Prgm Planning / Control and Business Systems Lana Radovic Representing Finance EVMS Team Lead Consultant Lead Consultant (H&A) Vice President Business Operations Financial Planning & Analysis Contracts & Cost Estimating Government Compliance Represents EVMS Validation Team Members (17)
  112. 112. 113 Thank you for participation!

×