afgm2018-90-01.pdf

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

WASHINGTON, DC

AFGM 2018-90-01

31 May 2018

MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION C

ALMAJCOM-FOA-DRU

FROM: SAF/MG

1790 Air Force Pentagon Washington, DC 20330-1790

SUBJECT: Air Force Guidance Memorandum: Air Force Strategy, Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (SPPBE) Process

ACCESSIBILITY: Publication is available for downloading on the e-Publishing web site at www.e-Publishing.af.mil.

RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication.

By Order of the Secretary of the Air Force, this Air Force Guidance Memorandum

(AFGM) is the first instance of a to-be published Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force, Management (SAF/MG) publication that immediately implements policies and procedures to be followed in executing the Air Force Strategy, Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (SPPBE) Process. In collaboration with the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, Financial Management and Comptroller (SAF/FM) and Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Plans and Requirements (AF/A5/8), the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force, Management (SAF/MG) oversees the development, evaluation, maintenance, and process improvement of SPPBE procedural policy. This AFGM details the current roles, responsibilities, and requirements of SPPBE process participants and stakeholders, coordination requirements, deliverables, and process change management. This policy will not be interpreted or implemented in any manner that would tend to undermine or conflict with Congressional assigned roles and responsibilities of impacted offices. The AF SPPBE process will remain responsive to changes the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) makes in OSD’s PPBE process.

Compliance with this memorandum is mandatory. To the extent its directions are inconsistent with other Air Force publications, the information herein prevails, in accordance with AFI 33-360, Publications and Forms Management. This memorandum applies to all Air Force organizations, including Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard units participating in the Air Force SPPBE process.

Ensure that all records created as a result of processes prescribed in this publication are maintained IAW Air Force Manual (AFMAN) 33-363, Management of Records, and disposed of

IAW Air Force Records Information Management System (AFRIMS) Records Disposition Schedule (RDS).

This memorandum becomes void after one year has elapsed from the date of this memorandum, or upon publication of an Air Force instruction of the same policy and procedures, whichever is earlier.

MARILYN M. THOMAS, SES

Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force, Management and Deputy Chief Management Officer

Attachment:

Strategy, Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution Current State Playbook

United States Air Force (USAF)

Strategy, Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (SPPBE)

Current-State Playbook

Version 4.1 09 December 2016

Version 4.1 4

Table of Contents

1.0 – SPPBE Current-State Playbook

1.1 – Introduction

2.0 – SPPBE Process Documentation Approach

2.1 – Approach – Documenting the Current Process

2.2 – Approach – Defining the Roles and Responsibilities

2.3 – Approach – Using this SPPBE Current-State Playbook

2.4 – Process Change Management

3.0 – High-Level SPPBE Phase Handoffs

3.1 – High-Level SPPBE Process Summary

4.0 – SPPBE Phase 0 – Strategy

4.1 – Strategy Process Summary

4.2 – Strategy Process Map Summary

4.3 – Description of Process Steps: Strategy Phase

5.0 – SPPBE Phase I – Planning

5.1 – Planning Process Summary

5.2 – Planning Process Map Summary

5.3 – Description of Process Steps: Planning Phase

6.0 – SPPBE Phase II – Programming

6.1 – Programming Process Summary

6.2 – Programming Process Map Summary

6.3 – Description of Process Steps: Programming Phase

7.0 – SPPBE Phase III – Budgeting

7.1 – Budgeting Process Summary

7.2 – Budgeting Process Map Summary

7.3 – Description of Process Steps: Budgeting Phase

8.0 – SPPBE Phase IV – Execution

8.1 – Execution Process Summary

8.2 – Execution Process Map Summary

8.3 – Description of Process Steps: Execution Phase

Appendix

I. References and Supporting Information

Version 4.1 5

II. Abbreviations and Acronyms

III. Terms of Reference

IV. Business Process Mapping Notation Process Map Definitions

V. SPPBE SIPOCs

VI. SPPBE Detail Maps and RASCIs

VII. SPPBE Concurrent Program and Budget Review Process

VIII. Programming Concurrent RMD Detail Process Maps

IX. Budgeting Concurrent RMD Detail Process Maps

Version 4.1 6

Document Control

SAF/MG is the designated Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for the management of this playbook and will cooperate with SMEs in their respective areas that impact this playbook.

Additionally, SAF/MG shall:

Maintain this playbook with all attachments on the _____ SharePoint site under

Coordinate reviews on an annual basis with AF/A5/8 and SAF/FM Update the Version History section of this document Coordinate approval and acceptance of this playbook with the AF Leadership listed in the Co-Sponsor Approval section of this document

Version History

<DD Month YYYY> <Publication Iteration> <Author>

27 July 2016 Version 1 Publication SAF/MG

24 August 2016 Version 2 Publication SAF/MG

20 October 2016 Version 3 Publication SAF/MG

09 December 2016 Version 4.1 Publication SAF/MG

Version 4.1 7

1.0 – SPPBE Current-State Playbook

1.1 – Introduction

The SPPBE process guides the AF alignment of resources to requirements while responding to policy and fiscal constraints from the Department of Defense (DoD). The AF supports the DoD in facilitating resources and prioritizing capabilities to align equipment, manpower, and support that enables the DoD to make fiscally sound decisions in support of the National Security Strategy (NSS) and the National Defense Strategy (NDS). The DoD Directive (DoDD) 7045.14 establishes and outlines the SPPBE process to develop, validate, approve, and implement fiscally sound decisions by leveraging past decisions and actions to develop and attain a future strategic vision.

The AF SPPBE process consists of five distinct, but overlapping phases; Strategy, Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution. The Planning, Programming, and Budgeting phases are comprehensively documented in this playbook to establish a consistent and standardized SPPBE process with clearly defined requirements, work products, and roles and responsibilities.

As a critical input into SPPBE, Strategy high-level process and requirements are annotated in this playbook for the user’s edification. The Execution phase is also documented with high-level requirements, definitions, and work products.

The SPPBE process is a standard DoD process implemented every cycle in the AF. However, there are a few external factors that may impact the timely delivery of work products and responsibilities in the process. Based on SME feedback, there are four main, high-impact external factors that the AF must react to and mitigate in order to successfully complete the SPPBE process. The four main external factors that may have the greatest impact to the AF SPPBE process are the following:

Presidential election changes the administration and guidance to the AF Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) decides when Quadrennial Defense Reviews

(QDRs) are conducted to analyze strategic objectives and potential military threats OSD releases separate DoD Chief Information Officer (CIO) Strategic Planning

Guidance (SPG) and Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) OSD releases Program Objective Memorandum (POM) Issue Papers late in the cycle

The Presidential Election changes the administration and guidance to the AF, which impacts the SPPBE process by altering SPPBE timelines and strategic guidance that are incorporated into the SPPBE process. To mitigate changes in strategic guidance and rework, the Planning process is delayed until the Presidential State of the Union address in mid-January. This delay compresses the timeline to approximately 2 months. Additionally, miscommunication of the new administration guidance and direction may create confusion in clearly understanding the strategic objectives of the AF. The delay in Planning combined with miscommunication of new administration guidance results in unclear deadlines and objectives for Programming and Budgeting stakeholders.

Version 4.1 8

The OSD decides when QDRs are conducted to analyze strategic objectives and potential military threats, which impacts the SPPBE process by creating irregular and infrequent strategic guidance changes that may affect the Air Force Strategy and the Strategic Master Plan (SMP). Due to the irregular release of QDRs, the AF is limited in planning and allocating dedicated resources to effectively react and align to the new SMP guidance. Additionally, the Strategy, Planning, Programming, and Budgeting processes work proactively ahead of a current cycle to finalize work products for the Execution of current and past cycle funds. Alignment to the new SMP creates rework to the previous SPPBE cycle, current SPPBE cycle, and future SPPBE cycle work products. With limited resources, the AF is forced to prioritize and compress timelines to rework key work products in order to adjudicate per newly published QDR guidance.

The OSD releases separately DoD CIO SPG and DPG, which impacts the SPPBE process by potentially releasing contradictory guidance. The SPPBE process creates work products aligned to the first published guidance for the current and future SPPBE cycles. With the release of the secondary guidance, the AF must review the new guidance and re-align work products to the new, secondary guidance. This realignment creates rework and requires additional resources to review and adjudicate the work products to comply with the released guidance. This requires the AF to allocate current resources to rework work products on compressed timelines in order to align work products to both the DoD CIO SPG and DPG.

The OSD releases POM Issue Papers late in the cycle, which impacts the SPPBE process by decreasing the available time for stakeholders to review and provide sufficient responses to the Issue Papers and compresses their overall timeline. OSD dictates the AF process to review Issue Papers concurrently, causing the categorization of Issue Papers to Programmatic or Budget Issue Papers. Separate and concurrent reviews of the Issue Papers are conducted in the Programming and Budgeting phases in order to complete the processes prior to be President’s Budget (PB) rollout. Further high-level detail of this concurrent process is in this playbook in Appendix VII.

These four external factors are critical to note and maintain stakeholder awareness in completing the AF SPPBE process. The current version of this playbook documents the current sequential process and not the process alternatives or reactions caused by the above external factors.

The SPPBE Current-State Playbook is the first step of an ongoing SPPBE process improvement effort where additional work will be required to further identify, document, and implement process improvements, including efforts to:

Seek efficiencies, reduce duplication of effort, and optimize timelines Better distinguish the Planning and Programming roles Ensure Planning retains its strategic/long-term role Provide meaningful opportunity for strategic participation by Headquarters AF (HAF) horizontal integrators (Assistant Secretaries and Deputy Chiefs of Staff) Align AF regulations, delegations, statute, and policy

Version 4.1 9

2.0 – SPPBE Process Documentation Approach

SPPBE SMEs provided process definitions, activities, business rules, and roles and responsibilities through a series of 1-day workshops and a 5-day rapid improvement event (RIE).

The outcomes of these workshops and RIE are illustrated below in Figure 1, and were compiled, documented, and organized by utilizing suppliers, inputs, processes, outputs, and customers (SIPOC) methodology, process maps, process narratives, and roles and responsibilities matrices (Responsible, Accountable, Supportive, Consulted, Informed (RASCI) model) to document the current-state AF SPPBE process. Additional methodology detail for “Documenting the Current Process” and “Defining the Roles and Responsibilities” are located in Sub-sections 2.1 and 2.2 of this playbook.

Figure 1 - Key Activities and Outcomes of the SPPBE Effort:

2.1 – Approach – Documenting the Current Process

In order to codify the current-state SPPBE process, SMEs identified key activities and impactful information to initiate, transform, and produce outputs. The output of a previous key process activity informs the next key activity in that process flow as a new input of information for development and transformation in that key activity step.

The current-state SPPBE sequential process incorporates and aligns Manpower inputs, as well as Strategic Basing inputs into the SPPBE phases. Additionally, the interaction between the SPPBE processes and Manpower processes are identified via applicable work products developed and

Version 4.1 10 passed between the two aligned processes. Supporting process work products are annotated on maps and in narrative in this playbook by inputs, aligned to a SPPBE key activity, and are labeled using SPPBE requirement name and supporting prerequisite requirement name.

The SIPOC methodology captures and documents a high-level summation of key process activities and the corresponding linkages between organizations (suppliers, customers), supplied information (inputs), and received information (outputs). The SIPOCs are used to illustrate the information handoffs in each separate phase of the AF SPPBE process and may be referenced in Appendix Section IV.

In order to develop more detail and define the processes, SMEs provided process details to identify and align the roles for completing a particular process activity step. This accompanying narrative provides supporting information, step prerequisites, and the decisional requirements in order to complete the applicable key activity step. The current-state process map documentation codifies the AF SPPBE process flow and outlines the requirements for aligning the roles and responsibilities of key process stakeholders to be accountable for successful completion of a process. The applicable SPPBE process maps are incorporated in Appendix Section V of this playbook.

2.2 – Approach – Defining the Roles and Responsibilities

Organizations have equity in the SPPBE process and are responsible for completing process activity steps that create informational pushes and pulls for the next incoming and outgoing key activities of the process. Documentation of these organizations’ process activity steps and their functions are captured by utilizing the RASCI model.

The definition of RASCI is below:

Responsible / OPR: the office who is the doer or builder of the work products Accountable / Approval: the office to whom "R" is accountable and is the authority who provides oversight on work before it is effective Supportive: the office who provides resources or plays a supporting role in completion of the activity Consulted / Coordinated: the office who reviews work content and provides feedback and/or expertise necessary to complete the process step Informed: the office who needs to be notified of results but need not necessarily be consulted

2.3 – Approach – Using this SPPBE Current-State Playbook

This document contains contextual information regarding the AF SPPBE process and includes Manpower interactions. The SPPBE Current-State Playbook contains detailed process definitions that are documented in process maps, narratives, and RASCIs. The accompanying process maps provide a visual representation of the activity steps required to successfully complete each phase of the SPPBE process.

Version 4.1 11

RASCI models codify the process roles and responsibilities High-level process maps provide an overall visual summation of the major activity steps included in each separate SPPBE phase SIPOCs provide a different high-level view of key process activity linkages between organizations (suppliers, customers), supplied information (inputs), and received information (outputs) and was used as the starting point to create the detailed process maps

Process maps graphically depict all activity steps and corresponding inputs and outputs associated with each phase of the SPPBE process

Narratives provide descriptions of work performed for each activity step in the process maps and also provides contextual information on how to complete the process

To navigate this playbook; utilize the left hand navigation pane by clicking on the “View” tab in the tool ribbon, and select “Navigation Pane” in the “Show” section.

Then, click on the triangles beside each section to view the contents and expand the relevant selection. This allows the reader to navigate to that section, process maps, and individual steps.

Hovering over a step in the navigation pane reveals the entire step title. The reader is able to click and drag the right border of the navigation pane to widen.

This playbook remains as a living document that can be revised or expanded by SPPBE key stakeholders to support future modifications, as needed. It has been produced in a manner that allows functional areas to extract relevant portions of the SPPBE process for use in their respective areas of responsibility. When adhered to, this playbook ensures standardization and promotes awareness of SPPBE across the AF.

2.4 – Process Change Management

SAF/MG is the OPR for evaluating, maintaining, and administering changes to the SPPBE process within this playbook and associated SPPBE policy documents and Air Force Instructions. AF/A5/8 and SAF/FM are the functional SPPBE policy and process owners. Prior to implementing organizational changes, role changes, responsibility changes, work product changes, and process and process-relevant changes, key stakeholders shall submit process change requests to SAF/MG for review and impact assessment. SAF/MG will coordinate requests across the SPPBE key process stakeholders to ensure changes do not negatively impact efficiency and effectiveness of the overall process.

The SPPBE change management process, as illustrated below in Figure 2, defines the process for requesting and approving any additional SPPBE Current-State Playbook changes or updates moving forward, as necessary.

Version 4.1 12

Figure 2 – SPPBE Change Management Process:

Version 4.1 13

3.0 – High-Level SPPBE Phase Handoffs

The SPPBE lifecycle involves the following five major phases–Strategy, Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution. The graphic below, Figure 3, illustrates critical exchanges of key deliverables between each of the phases in the SPPBE process. Some phases overlap, which results in participants providing multiple inputs into parallel SPPBE cycles, each representing an activity affecting different fiscal years (FYs). These inputs and outputs between the phases of SPPBE occur concurrently with multiple cycles, however, these inputs and outputs also occur sequentially for a single cycle.

The following list aligns key deliverable AF inputs to the respective SPPBE phase:

Strategy Inputs: AF Strategic Environment Assessment (AFSEA), Previous AF Strategy and SMP, and 30-Year Plan: Approved

Planning Inputs: AF Strategy, AF Future Operating Concept (AF FOC), AF SMP, 30- Year Plan Assessment, and SPG

Programming Inputs: POM Preparation Instruction (PPI), Program Guidance Memorandum (PGM), Zero Balance Transfers (ZBTs), Zero Based Reprogrammings (ZBRs), Disconnects / Initiatives / Offsets (D/I/Os), Plan to Program Guidance (PPG):

Final, Resource Allocation Plan (RAP): Final, 10-Year Integrated Plan, 30-Year Plan, POM Courses of Action (COAs), POM: Approved, Program Decision Memorandum (PDM) and Program Budget Decision (PBD): Published, Final Appropriations and Authorizations, Execution Data, Omnibus, and Reprogramming Workbook

Budgeting Inputs: POM: Approved, Budget Estimate Submission (BES), Justification Book (J-Book): Exhibit Automation System (EAS) Data, J-Book: Integrated Budget Documentation and Execution System (IDECS) Data, PDM: Final, Execution Data, Omnibus, and Reprogramming Workbook

Execution Inputs: J-Book, PB: Published, and Backcasting Options

Version 4.1 14

Figure 3 – Handoffs and Feedback Loops throughout the Phases of the SPPBE Process:

3.1 – High-Level SPPBE Process Summary

The SPPBE current-state process, as illustrated in Figure 4, includes phases as a framework to determine future capabilities and provide opportunities to re-examine prior decisions in light of evolving threats, economic conditions, and security concerns.

The phases of the SPPBE process are defined as follows:

Strategy articulates strategic guidance and establishes priority areas for investment, institutional change, and developing operational concepts to build an Air Force capable of overcoming future challenges

Planning translates strategic guidance into an integrated, balanced, and prioritized AF Plan to guide Capability Development (CD), Programming, Budgeting, and shape Leadership strategic communications

Programming allocates Future Year Defense Program (FYDP) resources guided by the AF Plan, Congress, OSD, Fiscal Guidance, and Fact-of-Life changes; reinforces the AF strategic message

Budgeting updates POM pricing, applies Fact-of-Life changes and economic assumptions, incorporates Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and OSD directed changes, codifies justification, and defends the budget to Congress by echoing the AF strategic message

Execution expends the resources provided by Congress to achieve the AF Strategy

Version 4.1 15

Figure 4 – Forward Phase Interactions of the SPPBE Process:

The SPPBE process utilizes previous cycle work products as a baseline in creating current cycle work products. The high-level connection of previous cycle to the current cycle is illustrated below in Figure 5.

Figure 5 – Previous Phase Interactions of the SPPBE Process:

Version 4.1 16

4.0 – SPPBE Phase 0 – Strategy

4.1 – Strategy Process Summary

The AF Strategy development establishes strategic priorities to achieve AF goals and define capabilities. In accordance with (IAW) DoDD 7045.14, the AF strategic plan effectively postures defense resources to align with and support the U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives. Strategy development begins with the Chief of Staff (CSAF) vision and ends with implementation and assessment of the AF SMP. The AF Strategy will evolve over time, requiring the resource allocation process to be equally flexible to strategic changes. During the AF Strategy phase, AF/A5S creates the AFSEA, AF FOC, AF Strategy, and the AF SMP in order to initiate the Planning phase.

4.2 – Strategy Process Map Summary

The Strategy process is outlined in the below figure and provides a high-level summary of the process in the following section based on SME discussions and inputs.

Figure 6 – Strategy Process Summary Map:

A F

/A

S

Manual Task

Collapsed Sub‐ Process

Event‐Based Gateway

Exclusive Gateway

Inclusive Gateway

Parallel Gateway

Information Asset Message Flow

Sequence Flow

Conditional Flow

Group

Data Store

Annotation

Sh ap e K e y

Start

End

Intermediate Message Event (Catching)

Intermediate Message Event (Throwing)

Intermediate Timer Event

Version 4.1 17

4.3 – Description of Process Steps: Strategy Phase

0.0 Strategy Phase Process

Description: The Strategy phase of the SPPBE process develops AF strategic documents that provide inputs for the Planning phase processes. The Strategy phase concludes with the implementation and assessment of the AF SMP.

Successfully implementing SMP objectives that require significant resourcing involves close integration of the AF Strategy and SMP into the Planning phase.

As such, AF/A5S provides near and mid-term strategic inputs at the beginning of the Planning cycle.

0.01 Create

AFSEA

Activity Performer: AF/A5S Description: AF/A5S creates the current cycle AFSEA based on AF leadership guidance and is leveraged to create Planning guidance. The AFSEA is updated every 4 years and provides a concise, common baseline for AF strategic planning regarding the anticipated future strategic environment and the associated implications from an Airman’s perspective for delivering Global Vigilance, Global Reach, and Global Power through air, space, and cyberspace over the next 20 years. AF/A5S develops the AFSEA by: (1) compiling global trends based on research of existing projections from multiple authoritative sources; (2) determining which global trends are most relevant to the future AF operating environment over the next 30 years; (3) considering plausible alternative futures based on these key trends for the USAF to identify common features between them relevant to USAF strategic planning; and (4) determining implications relevant to AF strategic planning while avoiding solutions. AF/A5S collaborates with the HAF Strategy offices during the development of the AFSEA.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): AFSEA: Previous Cycle, AFSEA: Draft with Manpower Implication Comments Output(s): AFSEA

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A5SG Accountable: AF/A5S (2-Star) Supportive: AF/A1M Consulted: N/A Informed: AF/A5SS

Version 4.1 18

0.02 Create AF

FOC

Activity Performer: AF/A5S Description: The AF FOC provides a 20-year vision of how the AF plans to conduct core missions in order to help overcome the national security challenges that are described in the AFSEA. AF/A5S leverages the previous cycle AF Strategy to develop the current cycle AF FOC, which is then incorporated into the current cycle AF Strategy. This overarching force development concept is not a directive, but provides context and direction for the AF Strategy, AF SMP, and subsequent wargaming and concept development. The AF FOC is reviewed every 2 years and is updated when there are changes in the AFSEA. The AF FOC is leveraged during the development of Planning guidance in the Planning phase.

AF/A5S collaborates with the HAF Strategy offices during the development of the AF FOC.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): Previous AF SMP, Previous 30-Year Plan, DPG, AFSEA, AF FOC:

Draft with Manpower Implication Comments Output(s): AF FOC

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A5SC Accountable: AF/A5S Supportive: AF/A1M, SAF/AQ

Informed: AF/A5SS

Version 4.1 19

0.03 Create AF

Strategy

Activity Performer: AF/A5S Description: The AF Strategy considers future challenges articulated in the AFSEA over a 30-year planning horizon and identifies strategic vectors for creating capable and ready forces to overcome those challenges, as envisioned in the AF FOC. AF/A5S uses DoD strategic documents, as well as AF leadership guidance in order to develop the current cycle AF Strategy. The AF Strategy is informed by the AFSEA, as well as the NSS, NDS, National Military Strategy (NMS), and interim guidance provided by the President or the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF). The AF Strategy is updated every 4 years or as needed to respond to changes in AFSEA-derived implications or updated SecAF and CSAF guidance. AF/A5S collaborates with the HAF Strategy offices during the development of the AF Strategy. AF/A5S uses the AF Strategy to inform the current cycle AF SMP.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): 30-Year Plan Assessment, AF FOC, Previous 30-Year Plan, DPG Output(s): AF Strategy

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A5SS Accountable: AF/A5S Supportive: AF/A5SG, AF/A5SC, AF/A5SW, AF/A5SM, SAF/AQ

Informed: N/A

Version 4.1 20

0.04 Create AF

SMP

Activity Performer: AF/A5S Description: AF/A5S creates the AF SMP based on senior leadership guidance in the AF Strategy. The AF SMP operationalizes the AF Strategy on a 20-year timeline by translating AF strategic objectives into authoritative planning direction, aligning activities across the AF, and providing a mechanism to track progress in achieving the AF Strategy. During the development of the AF SMP, AF/A5S conducts various strategic assessments of the following items: AF Strategy, previous AF SMP, POM, final appropriations/authorizations, as well as the previous cycle RAP. AF/A5S collaborates with the HAF and MAJCOM Strategy offices during the development of the AF SMP.

The AF SMP contains additional contextual information in the AF SMP Annexes, which include: the Human Capital Annex, Strategic Posture Annex, Capabilities Annex, and the Science and Technology Annex. Each annex focuses on a foundational element of the AF Strategy and translates the comprehensive goals and objectives outlined within the AF SMP into tangible actions and priorities. Both the AF SMP and its associated annexes are comprehensively updated every 2 years based on assessing progress toward goals and objectives and SecAF and CSAF strategic guidance. Furthermore, the AF SMP and its associated annexes are leveraged to create Planning guidance during the Planning phase.

Business Rule(s): Utilize wargaming insights, wargaming recommendations, and strategic implementation assessments in support of developing AF SMP.

Input(s): AF Strategy, Previous AF SMP, POM, Final Appropriations / Authorizations, Human Capital Annex: Final, Strategic Posture Annex, Science & Technology Annex, Capabilities Annex Output(s): AF SMP

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A5SS Accountable: AF/A5S Supportive: AF/A5SG, AF/A5SC, AF/A5SW, AF/A5SM, AF/A1M, SAF/AQ Consulted: AF Functionals, CFLs, MAJCOMs

Version 4.1 21

0.05 Assess AF

Strategy / SMP

Activity Performer: AF/A5S Description: AF/A5S assesses the current cycle AF Strategy and AF SMP and incorporates them into the Planning phase. Assessments provide AF leadership insight on: progress towards achieving stated strategic priorities, actionable feedback that can be used to modify the AF Strategy and AF SMP, and strategic alignment evaluations to shape decision making and outcomes. Strategic assessments help distinguish whether the overall direction of the AF Strategy is being achieved through specific actions, proposals, and process outcomes.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): AF Strategy, AF SMP Output(s): 30-Year Plan Assessment

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A5SM Accountable: AF/A5S Supportive: N/A

Version 4.1 22

5.0 – SPPBE Phase I – Planning

5.1 – Planning Process Summary

The Planning phase of the AF SPPBE process is the link between the Strategy and Programming phases by determining the long-term needs of the AF through a strategic and resource informed perspective. In collaboration with key stakeholders across the HAF, Core Function Leads (CFLs), and the Air Reserve Component (ARC), AF/A8XP assesses and incorporates an analysis of AF capability, capacity, and readiness in relation to existing conditions, projected threats, and Joint Force requirements. A key outcome of the Planning phase is an executable, credible, and transparent AF plan that contains additional context regarding options for concepts, capabilities, and policies that delivers the force in a resource-constrained plan. The Planning guidance establishes a series of strategic vectors that creates a capable future force, and directs future capability development efforts aligned to those critical AF strategic vectors.

The Planning phase also translates long-range AF strategy and shapes senior leadership’s strategic communications for the overall AF SPPBE process. Planning guidance is a starting point for CFLs, and HAF Planners, including HAF Panel representatives, to develop the Core Function Support Plan (CFSP) and the SPG for directed products, which enables a balanced allocation of resources across a 30-Year Plan that enhances Global Vigilance, Global Reach, and Global Power across the range of military operations.

The Planning phase produces the 30-Year Plan, the 10-Year Integrated Plan, and the PPG all of which are updated each Planning cycle to accurately reflect any additional impactful modifications throughout the course of this phase. In addition, the Planning phase produces detailed guidance in regards to strategic capability and resource decision-making throughout the SPPBE process in its entirety. The 30-Year Plan gradually builds towards an affordable topline position to succeed across the core mission areas, and establishes the necessary foundational capabilities for the AF. The 10-Year Integrated Plan serves as a vector that realigns the AF Planning Choices towards the 30-Year Plan and also provides achievable targets for the duration of two sequential FYDPs.

5.2 – Planning Process Map Summary

The high-level Planning phase process is outlined below in Figure 7 and summarizes the detailed Planning process, as well as roles and responsibilities, which can also be found in the Appendix Section V for more information. The detailed Planning phase process maps provide in-depth contextual information that contains the specific process performer(s) (swim lanes), activities, inputs, and outputs. The RASCI model documents the detailed roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders that are involved with the completion of each activity step that occurs in this phase.

Version 4.1 23

The following is a list of Planning maps detailed in Appendix Section V:

1.00 – Planning

1.02 – Develop Strategic Baseline

1.05 – Develop the 10-Year Integrated Plan

In addition, a SIPOC model is in Appendix Section IV. The SIPOC provides a different view of the Planning phase and key process activity linkages between organizations (suppliers, customers), supplied information (inputs), and received information (outputs) and was used as the starting point to create the detailed process maps.

Figure 7 – Planning Process Summary Map:

SPPBE: 1.0 Planning Phase Processes Rollup

Version 4

1.02 Develop Strategy Planning Baseline

1.05 Develop 10-Year Integrated Plan

1.0 Planning

(1.01)

1.0 Planning

(1.06 – 1.25)

Manual Task

Collapsed Sub‐ Process

Event‐Based Gateway

Exclusive Gateway

Inclusive Gateway

Parallel Gateway

Information Asset Message Flow

Sequence Flow

Conditional Flow

Group

Data Store

Annotation

Sh ap e K ey

Start

End

Intermediate Message Event (Catching)

Intermediate Message Event (Throwing)

Intermediate Timer Event

1.0 Planning

(1.03 – 1.04)

RAP

10-Year Integrated Plan: Draft

Out-put

PPG:

Final

Input

POM

Submission

Input

30-Year Plan

Input

Execution Data:

Current Year

Input

PB: Previous Cycle Final

Input

RAP: Previous Cycle

Input

Strategic Basing

Opportunities/ Actions

Out-put

Plan, Program, and Execution

Fidelity

Input

Inflation/Escalation Factors:

Previous PB Cycle

Input

AF SMP,

AF Strategy, AF FOC

Input

30-Year Plan Assessment

Input

Environmental Changes

Input

DPG

Input

JPG

SPG

Input

Initiative

(CSAF,

SAF, HAF)

Input

POM

Submission

Input

Strategic Basing

Opportunities/ Actions

Input

Previous Year COAs: Risk Assessment

Out-put

CFSP:

Final

Out-put

RAP:

Final

Input

SPG:

Manpower Guidance

Input dRAPv1:

Manpower Estimates by Initiative with Assumptions Brief

Input

Manpower Estimates:

10-Year

Integrated Plan

Input

Manpower Guidance:

PPI

Input

ICEs/SCPs/NACAs:

Position Papers (Previous Cycle)

Input

POEs:

Position Papers (Previous Cycle)

Input

Affordability Criteria

Version 4.1 24

5.3 – Description of Process Steps: Planning Phase

1.0 Planning Phase Process

Description: The Planning phase of the AF SPPBE process brings together AF senior leadership to determine the priority and sequence of the AF Strategy objectives, and applies available AF resources to achieve those objectives;

these resource allocation decisions provide direction to the Programming phase processes during the development of the POM.

1.01 Evaluate Plan, Program, and Execution Fidelity

Entry: Planning Phase is initiated by reviewing previous cycle and current cycle work products, current AF Strategy, and most recent PB.

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: The Planning phase begins with the review and analysis of the inputs listed below and results in a planning baseline. This baseline is a draft resource allocation plan position (dRAP) and is modified throughout planning year until a final RAP is created as part of the 30-Year Plan and handed over to AF/A8P as input to start their POM creation cycle. This activity step initiates the Planning phase of the SPPBE lifecycle.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): Execution Data: Current Year; PB: Previous Cycle; 30-Year Plan;

POM Submission; RAP: Previous Cycle; Strategic Basing Opportunities/Actions, Affordability Criteria Output(s): Plan, Program, and Execution Fidelity

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A8P Consulted: CFLs Informed: N/A

1.02 Develop Strategic Planning Baseline (Sub-process)

Description: The Strategic Planning Baseline is developed at the beginning of each new annual Planning cycle. The previous cycle POM influences Planning as an input in order to create a resource baseline at the macro-level. The Strategic Planning Baseline provides the starting point for CFL and HAF Planners to develop CFSPs and other SPG directed products and analyses.

This baseline is comprised of the POM integrated baseline for the FYDP and also the current RAP beyond the FYDP (i.e., for FY19 Planning cycle, FY18 POM integrated baseline and FY18 RAP).

Business Rule(s): Data analysis performed by AF/A8XP, informed by the FYDP and RAP is a data comparison analysis that verifies the objectives and permissions changed based upon IT function modifications.

Version 4.1 25

1.02.01 Retrieve Final PB Position from Previous SPPBE Cycle

Entry from Planning 1.0 Process, Step 1.01.

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP reviews the previous year PB with SME support from AF/A8P and AF/A1M to confirm the final PB position in preparation for distribution.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): PB: Previous Cycle, Inflation/Escalation Factors: Previous PB Cycle, Plan, Program, and Execution Fidelity Output(s): PB: Previous Cycle

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A8P Consulted: N/A Informed: N/A

1.02.02 Convert Programming Position to Planning Level of Detail

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP, with SME support from CFLs, incorporates inflation/escalation factors from the current year and the previous cycle's PBs into a Planning instruction.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): Inflation/Escalation Factors: Previous PB Cycle, PB: Previous Cycle Output(s): PB in Planning Form Parallel Gateway: Proceed to Step 1.02.03 and Step 1.02.04.

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: CFLs Consulted: AF/A8P

Version 4.1 26

1.02.03 Create POM Baseline

(ABIDES)

Activity Performer: SAF/FMB Description: SAF/FMB creates POM Baseline and uploads into Automated Budget Interactive Data Environment System (ABIDES) database.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): Inflation/Escalation Factors: Previous PB Cycle, PB: Previous Cycle Output(s): POM Baseline Extension Proceed to Step 1.02.05.

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: SAF/FMB Accountable: SAF/FMB Supportive: N/A Consulted: N/A Informed: N/A

1.02.04 Merge Prior RAP Post-FYDP to PB in Planning Form

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP combines the previous cycle RAP and the PB in Planning form in order to publish a RAP.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): RAP: Previous Cycle, PB in Planning Form Output(s): RAP: Copy, Send Notification: Update Manpower and Programming Execution System (MPES)

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A1M

Version 4.1 27

1.02.05 Overwrite FYDP Years

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP incorporates the final Planning PB and the RAP copy to make appropriate modifications and adaptions to the previous FYDP in order to calculate an updated TOA for the current year FYDP to create the initial draft RAP. Costing of the draft RAP is validated by SAF/FMC.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): POM Baseline Extension, RAP: Copy; Plan, Program, and Execution Fidelity, Manpower Estimates by Initiative with Assumptions Brief Output(s): Draft RAP (dRAP)v0: FYDP Years

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: N/A Consulted: AF/A1M, SAF/FMC Informed: CFLs, HAF Planners

1.02.06 Calculate TOA for Out-Years

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP copies previous cycle’s near-term, mid-term and far-term TOA allocation to establish the dRAPv0 converted to the planning cycle’s constant year dollar values. Additional support is provided to AF/A8XP by SAF/FMC to cost strategic programs.

Business Rule(s): AF/A8XP copies TOA from the previous POM, and PB.

Input(s): dRAPv0: FYDP Years Output(s): dRAPv0: Total Obligation

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: SAF/FMC

Informed: CFLs, HAF Planners

Version 4.1 28

1.02.07 Edit Transition between FYDP and Out-Years

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP, with SME support from the CFLs, adapts the first iteration of the draft RAP to produce an updated version that further identifies the current and future year financial plan.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): dRAPv0: Total Obligation, dRAPv1: Manpower Estimates by Initiative with Assumptions Brief Output(s): dRAPv1, Send Notification: Update MPES

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: CFLs Consulted: AF/A1M Informed: N/A

1.02.08 Publish Strategic Planning Baseline

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP aligns Strategic Planning objectives to the financial projections of the FYDP. It is published across the AF and the draft RAP is updated with the Strategic Planning Baseline. For the purposes of completing this activity step, note that the Strategic Planning Working Group (SPWG) is an AF/A8X O-6 (or equivalent) led, cross-functional inclusive body that reports to AF/A5/8. Primary function includes planning force prioritization, investments, and trades aligned with Strategy, Planning, and Programming process and as informed by the Capability Development Council (CDC), coordinates CFL inputs via the CFSP process, and assesses the planning force against strategic objectives and CDC guidance. SPWG key stakeholders are identified by the AF Planning Governance Structure and defined in Appendix

III.

Business Rule(s): Strategic Planning Baseline must incorporates newly identified Planning resources.

Input(s): dRAPv1 Output(s): RAP Proceed to Planning 1.0, Step 1.03.

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A9, SAF/AQ, HAF Planners Consulted: AF/A1M Informed: CFLs, AF/A5R, AF/A5S, AF/A8P, SAF/FMC, SAF/LL, SPWG, AF Corporate Structure (AFCS)

Version 4.1 29

1.03 Develop SPG

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: The annual SPG outlines the requirements for the upcoming Planning cycle. It incorporates the DPG and emphasizes the AF SMP as the foundational roadmap to guide Planning activities and build a balanced 30- Year RAP. The document assigns actions to implement Planning Choices; lead and/or support the development of CFSPs; lead and/or support specific studies, initiatives, and other plans; and contribute to the 10-Year Integrated Plan.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): DPG, AF Strategy, AF SMP, AF FOC, 30-Year Plan Assessment, RAP, Environmental Changes, Joint Planning Guidance (JPG), SPG:

Manpower Guidance, SPG: Approved or Disapproved Planning Governance Decision Output(s): SPG, Send Notification: Develop SPG Manpower Guidance

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A9, AF/A5R, AF/A5S, Capability Development Working Group (CDWG), AF/A1M Consulted: CFLs, HAF Planners Informed: N/A

1.04 Determine Approval on SPG

Activity Performer: Planning Governance Description: Approves the identified strategic objectives published by AF/A8XP. AF/A8XP is responsible for completing this activity step and generating work products with SME support from AF/A8X.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): SPG Output(s): SPG: Approved or Disapproved Planning Governance Decision Exclusive Gateway: If ‘Disapprove,’ proceed to Step 1.03. If ‘Approve,’ proceed to Sub-process Step 1.05.

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: Planning Governance Accountable: AFCS Supportive: AF/A8XP Consulted: CFLs, HAF Planners

Version 4.1 30

1.05 Develop 10- Year Integrated Plan (Sub-process)

Description: Enterprise-wide plan to drive the AF along SMP vectors toward an interim state aligned with the AF FOC. Characterized by clear, consistent, and transparent Planning efforts; contains and sequences key actions and decisions; guides the development of subsequent RAPs and CFSPs; defines enterprise-level Planning options and alternatives; provide increased decision space and a strategic narrative with demonstrable priorities. It will be inextricably linked to CFSPs. The 10-Year Integrated Plan will be revisited annually and revised to the extent necessary as determined by senior leadership.

Business Rule(s): The 10-Year Integrated Plan must inform Core Function Support Plans.

1.05.01 Initiate Mission Analysis

Entry from Planning 1.0, Step 1.04.

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: Review/update Planning facts, assumptions, and tasks; agree upon desired end state; draft COA to reach desired end state. In-Progress Review, Analysis (IPR A) – Brief results of Mission Analysis to HAF 2- Letters and Vice Commander (CV) to gain vector check; refine 10-Year Integrated Plan based on feedback; issue a Fragmentary Order (FRAGO) to SPG if appropriate.

Business Rule(s): AF Strategy, SMP, and AF FOC must inform and influence the strategic priorities of the 10-Year Integrated Plan. AF/A8XP is responsible for facilitating this activity step and generating work products with SME support from the SPWG.

Input(s): RAP, 30-Year Plan Assessment, SPG, AF FOC, Environmental Changes, AF SMP, Manpower Impacts: IPR A Output(s): IPR A: Draft

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: SPWG Supportive: HAF Planners, CFLs, AF/A9, AF/A1M Consulted: Planning Governance

Version 4.1 31

1.05.02 Refine Mission Analysis

Activity Performer: SPWG Description: The SPWG is responsible, with SME support from CFLs, to refine the Mission Analysis with additional data for analysis integrity for AF/A8XP to review with the Planning Board and Planning Council for feedback. SPWG key stakeholders are identified by the AF Planning Governance Structure and defined in Appendix III.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): IPR A: Draft, SPWG Manpower Refined: IPR A Output(s): IPR A: SPWG Refined

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: SPWG Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: CFLs, AF/A1M Consulted: N/A Informed: N/A

1.05.03 Finalize Mission Analysis

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP finalizes, with SME support from CFLs, the Mission Analysis for review with the Planning Board and Planning Council for feedback that will be incorporated in the COA development and recommendation.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): IPR A: SPWG Refined, Finalized Manpower Updates: IPR A Output(s): IPR A: Finalized

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: CFLs, AF/A1M Consulted: HAF Planners

Version 4.1 32

1.05.04 Present IPR A Mission Analysis Products (PBoard)

Activity Performer: Planning Governance (PBoard) Description: The Planning Board, chaired by AF/A8XP, is briefed and assesses the finalized Mission Analysis Products to provide comments for incorporation into COA development and recommendation.

Business Rule(s): Must review all possible COAs and assesses each separate COAs ability to satisfy AF strategic requirements.

Input(s): IPR A: Finalized, Manpower Impacts Briefing: IPR A Output(s): IPR A: PBoard Comments

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: Planning Governance (PBoard) Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A1M Consulted: CFLs Informed: HAF Planners

1.05.05 Present IPR A Mission Analysis Products (PCouncil)

Activity Performer: Planning Governance (PCouncil) Description: The Planning Council, chaired by AF/A8XP is briefed and assesses the finalized Mission Analysis Products to provide comments for incorporation into COA development and recommendation.

Business Rule(s): Must review all possible COAs and assesses each separate COAs ability to satisfy AF strategic requirements.

Input(s): IPR A: PBoard Comments Output(s): IPR A: PCouncil Comments Exclusive Gateway: If ‘Comments,’ proceed to Step 1.05.06. If ‘No Comments,’ proceed to Step 1.05.07.

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: Planning Governance (PCouncil) Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A1M Consulted: CFLs Informed: HAF Planners

Version 4.1 33

1.05.06 Refine IPR A

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP is responsible for compiling and incorporating comments from the Planning Board and Planning Council to refine the Mission Analysis which will inform drafting the initial COAs.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): IPR A: PCouncil Comments, Manpower Information Support Slide/Spreadsheet: IPR A Refined Output(s): IPR A: Refined PCouncil Feedback

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A1M Consulted: CFLs Informed: N/A

1.05.07 Initiate COA Development

Activity Performer: AF/A8XP Description: AF/A8XP is responsible for incorporating the Planning Council and Planning Board Comments to inform the initial drafting of COAs.

Previous year COAs are utilized with their accompanying risk assessment as a baseline to draft the current cycle COAs. The COA draft incorporates a Problem Statement, Planning Facts, Assumptions, and Investment Priorities.

COA development includes changes in strategy, technology, political environment, and other additional offsets.

Business Rule(s): N/A

Input(s): IPR A: Refined PCouncil Feedback, Previous Year COAs: Risk Assessment, IPR A: PCouncil Comments, Manpower Information Support Slide/Spreadsheet: COAs Output(s): Initial Draft COAs

Roles and Responsibilities Responsible: AF/A8XP Accountable: AF/A8XP Supportive: AF/A1M Consulted: CFLs

Version 4.1 34

1.05.08 Refine COA Development

Activity Performer: SPWG Description: The SPWG provides COA supportive data to inform the strategic direction and financial objectives that will be leveraged to inform Strategic Planning Choice Options and Wargame COAs.