FY14_BusinessCase_-_AEIS.docx

Department of the Air Force

748 Supply Chain Management Group

AFSC Enterprise Information System (AEIS)

Business Case

Version 1.3

21 November 2013

Based on Business Case Template Version 3.0, May 2012

Document Revision History

Table of Contents

Business Case: AFSC Enterprise Information System Version 1.2, 17 October 2013 i Problem Statement Signature

Functional Sponsor: Date:

KATHRYN J. JOHNSON, Brig Gen, USAF Director of System Integration DCS/Logistics, Installations & Mission Support

Problem Statement Approval

IRB Chair: Date:

ELIZABETH A. MCGRATH

Vice Chair Defense Business Systems Management Committee

Business Case: AFSC Enterprise Information System Version 1.20, 17 October19 August 2013 1 Executive Summary AEIS is an Air Force web-based CORE system, workflow tool and set of collaboration capabilities that were designed to support key logistics enabling functions to include: finance, human resources , and engineering management within the Supply Chain Management community. Primary capabilities include: 1) enhancing financial visibility and analytical support by integrating data from legacy financial systems with budget, distribution, forecast, and execution management functionality; 2) human resource management data validation, correction, and automation supporting vacancy fill requests, human resource authorizations, and the appraisal process; 3) Reliability and Maintainability R&M engineering decision support for the 86K unique assets under Consolidated Sustainment Activity Group-Supply (CSAG-S) management. Benefits to the mission include massive automation of manual processes, significant manpower savings, standardized analytical models, a forum to collaborate narratives and manage priorities, consistent data used across the user community, and automated error identification. Additional benefits include end-to-end management of logistics enabling functionality following the lifecycle of depot level reparable assets from acquisition budgeting, sustainment budgeting, engineering for R&M improvement, and managing the personnel resources to insure the logistical mission of getting the right parts to the right place at the right time. These capabilities directly support lifecycle supply chain management (acquisition & sustainment) within Working Capital Fund CSAG-S management.

ROM Cost Estimate: AEIS FY14 modernization efforts only are estimated to be approximately $366,000.

Introduction Purpose Obtain Investment Review Board (IRB) Chair approval of the above described Problem Statements to receive funding required to resolve the identified problems. Full system assessment was conducted during the Business Process Re-Engineering (BPR) Exercise for the Fiscal Year (FY)14 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Organization Execution Plan (OEP) submission.

Background AEIS is currently organized under AFSC; however its user base expands across all MAJCOMs, Air Logistics Complexes, HQ Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC), Air Force Life-Cycle Management Center (AFLCMC), and Depot Maintenance organizations. Users include but are not limited to Financial Managers, Commodity Program Managers, Funds Holders, Item, Equipment Specialists, Resource Control Officers, Engineers, Financial Analysts, Resource Managers and Supervisory Personnel. AEIS configuration and development meets Department of Defense (DoD) and Air Force required standard of quality. Quality expectations include non-quantifiable elements of usability and intuitive design as well as quantifiable measures of uncompromised data accuracy and reliability. The overall expectation for financial data is 100% accuracy based on transaction level data reflected in legacy financial systems with automated discrepancy notification to trigger resolution.

Historically, status quo of the current capabilities often represents manual processes that are both time consuming and unreliable as it relates to the required data. AEIS not only speeds the business process and decreases cost, but also delivers a more secure and agile service with an enhanced quality of process. AEIS has transformed business process from the inefficient batch process flow into a synchronized near real-time flow providing quicker access to accurate and near real-time information through streamlined data routing, thereby increasing the quality of decision making. The business processes are more visible, so the process and its operational quality are more transparent, better measured and better managed. While offering the return on investment of an integrated single system, multi-modules allows AEIS to adopt business processes for each module without impacting any of the processes of other modules. Return on investment is extended to that of simpler operations, better support, and easier maintenance. Applying this methodology of standardization across the different modules provides benchmarking data that can be used to compare processes. Standard interfaces and open standards are built to make it easier to integrate processes. AEIS allows an accurate and centralized consolidation of information gathered from various sources. Following standard practices and abiding to industry standard processes and application development helps create a better integrated environment. This reduces the need for custom code, but also allows the use of software generic templates and interfaces with only minor configuration changes. An integrated system provides the most effective data and information storage, and thereby, improves the efficiency and reliability of business processes.

Problem Statement “As-Is” Analysis The Problem Financial Management Functionality - Metric Financial Tool (MFT) Module Problem: Scalability to support additional users based on additional demand for support as well as flexibility in data displayed to correspond to perspective of new users.

Vision: Development for expansion of datasets to incorporate more organizational levels across the AFSC scope of operations, datasets outside traditional AFSC Area of Responsibility to increase customer base and user visibility, expanding metrics/charts automation and ad-hoc/custom generation, predetermined baseline sets, systematic upgrades, and core program restructuring required to align with current code standards following a .Net infrastructure and enhanced Object Oriented Programing.

Human Resource Management - Manpower Analysis Tool (MAT) Module Scalability to support additional users based on additional demand for support as well as flexibility in data displayed to correspond to perspective of new users.

Vision: Development for expansions of datasets to support a broader user base, enhanced metrics reporting similar in scope to requirements within the MFT module, systematic upgrades and core programming restructuring required to align with current code standards following a .Net infrastructure and enhanced Object Oriented Programing.

Reliability & Maintainability Engineering Management - MSD/GSDMPST Module Problem: Development for expansion of datasets to support business process changes resulting from policy changes, enhanced metrics reporting, and process management traceability within the system to step end-user through various business process scenarios.

Vision: Design and function changes to adapt to unanticipated user requirements on limited basis. Minimal functional development is anticipated at this time.

Problem Description and Context From a strategic perspective and in order to continue to support the AF Logistic community AEIS requires the capability for increased versatility, higher performance, and greater efficiency as user base expands to include a wider enterprise. Logic of software required for decisions to be implemented with speed and accuracy without the human operator in the decision-making loop. AEIS also requires the capability to support business process changes resulting from policy changes, enhanced metrics reporting, and process management traceability within the system to step end-user through various business process scenario. The contexts in which these problems affect the AEIS modules are described below.

MFT Module – Metrics Financial Tool: the Consolidated Sustainment Activity Group – Supply (CSAG-S) Working Capital Funds have historically been managed using Microsoft Office applications and processes that are manual intensive. Considerable manpower is spent extracting financial data from multiple legacy systems, summarizing the results and reporting progress to management officials. Manual transcription errors are common. Further, there are numerous financial data calls throughout the year (e.g., critical unfunded) that require significant resources to collect data, summarize the result, and brief management. Measuring financial goals and execution against those goals is all accomplished manually. Financial management processes are non-standardized across the enterprise. This has occurred because each location has its own way of doing business MAT Module – Human Resource Tool: human resource data critical to leadership in order to adequately support their mission are scattered between large legacy systems and locally developed Excel spreadsheets. Individuals spend more time collecting data and populating spreadsheets than they do analyzing their manpower resources and making decisions on how to better manage the limited human resources. The annual appraisal and feedback process is largely manual and dependent on cumbersome spreadsheets to accumulate and disburse information. Information to ensure FIAR complicance is not maintained in a single location and readily available. Many of these problems have occurred because Microsoft Office applications are not robust enough for our mission and legacy systems do not provide necessary capabilities.

MPST Module – Engineering Project Management: Configuration management and control is a significant problem associated with this process because it is managed using Access databases and manual spreadsheets that multiple individuals contribute to without a method of version control, which causes confusion over which version is current. Human error and time is wasted for each individual that must track and update. The database is manually populated by manually transcribing data from multiple legacy systems which takes considerable time and introduces human transcription error. Significant manual effort is required to prioritize the projects for funding and for tracking the execution of the funds.

Root Cause Analysis The root causes for the variety of limitations and related opportunities seen across all functional activities are as follows:

1. Lack of robustness in COTS/GOTS (e.g., Microsoft Office Suite) applications. Personnel are capable of using many of these applications; however the tools were not designed to support the more complex aspects of USAF mission. Joint use of these applications using share drives is an option, but requires Enterprise Information Technology Data Repository (EITDR) registration, certification & accreditation and significant documentation that far exceed the benefit that could be derived. Further, COTS/GOTS applications were not designed to manage the numerous data sets and millions of records required to adequately support the mission.

2. Legacy systems are difficult and expensive to modify. Many of the Air Force legacy systems are designed on old programming standards and infrastructures that are not easily adapted to the ever changing supply chain processes. These systems cannot be modified to add-on new web capabilities without redesign of the entire system which is cost prohibitive.

3. Manpower constraints have exacerbated the problem because individuals are covering multiple desks and it is progressively more difficult to keep up with processes that are manual intensive. This drive the need for automation of business processes in the interest of time and efficiency.

DOTMLPF-P Constraints, “As-Is” State Table 1 – DOTMLPF-P Constraints, “As-Is” State DOTMLPF-P Analysis was conducted at the System level. Analysis specific to an individual module will be annotated separately within the table as needed.

“To-Be” Analysis High-Level Outcomes (HLOs) Table 2a - HLOs

Strategic Management Plan (SMP) for MFT

Standardize available toolsets across enterprise user community Goal 2: Strengthen DoD Financial Management

SMP for MAT

Standardize available toolsets across enterprise user community Goal 3: Build Agile and Secure Information Capabilities

SMP for MPST

Goal 3: Build Agile and Secure Information Capabilities

Scalability to support MFT user base increase

- Decrease in usage of non-standard system data

A: Contract support will be funded C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

Scalability to support MFT user base increase

- Homogenous across current coder skillsets

C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

- Decrease in usage of non-standard system data

A: Contract support will be funded C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

- Homogenous across current coder skillsets

C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

A: Contract support will be funded C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

Table 2b – HLOs and Measurement Criteria

Business Case: AFSC Enterprise Information System Version 1.20, 17 October19 August 2013 7 Business Process Re-Engineering (BPR) Table 3a – Business Outcomes

Scalability to support MFT user base increase

Facilitate centralized data source management Reference BPR Submission 2014 AEIS - Business_Process_Reengineering_Assessment_Form_Version2_4 and ACART Assertions are Posted AFAR SharePoint

Scalability to support MAT user base increase

Facilitate centralized data source management Reference BPR Submission 2014 AEIS - Business_Process_Reengineering_Assessment_Form_Version2_4 and ACART Assertions are Posted AFAR SharePoint

Grow using community Reference BPR Submission 2014 AEIS - Business_Process_Reengineering_Assessment_Form_Version2_4 and ACART Assertions are Posted AFAR SharePoint

Table 3b – Business Outcomes and E2E Alignment (“To-Be” State)

Perform Cost Assignment

Develop Cost Reports Compare Forecast to Actual Performance

Compare Results to Performance Measurement Criteria

Conduct Research

Consolidate and Interpret Results

Conduct Oversight Analysis

Formulate Report Manage Financial Assets and Liabilities

Forecast, Plan, Program, Budget and Funds Distribution and Control

Financial Reporting

Perform Cost Assignment

Develop Cost Reports

Hire-to-Retire Manage Travel

Sustain Human Resources

Manage Human Resources Compensation and Reimbursements

Manage Travel

Manage Human Resources Information Manage Travel

Manage Personnel Sustainment

Manage Compensation and Reimbursement

Manage Travel

Manage Human Resource Information

Perform Cost Assignment

Develop Cost Reports

Concept-to-Product

Develop Product/Project Concept Compare Forecast to Actual Performance

Conduct Research

Consolidate and Interpret Results

Conduct Oversight Analysis

Formulate Report

Collect and analyze Requirements Forecast, Plan, Program, Budget and Funds Distribution and Control

Financial Reporting

Financial Reporting

Manage Financial Assets and Liabilities

Manage Acquisition Oversight Integration

Business Case: AFSC Enterprise Information System Version 1.20, 17 October19 August 2013 9 Table 3c – Business Outcomes and Measurement Criteria (“To-Be” State)

Benefits

C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

A: Contract support will be funded C: Contract scope is sufficient D: Infrastructure is able to support

Business Case: AFSC Enterprise Information System Version 1.20, 17 October19 August 2013 10 DOTMLPF-P Impact, “To-Be” State Table 4 – DOTMLPF-P Impacts, “To-Be” State

DOTMLPF-P Analysis was conducted at the System level. Analysis specific to an individual module will be annotated separately within the table as needed.

Recommended Course of Action Obtain approval of the Problem Statements by the Investment Review Board (IRB) Chair allowing implementation of the Vision Statements provided for each Problem Statement in Section 3.0 above.

Rough-Order-of-Magnitude (ROM) Cost Estimate ROM Cost Estimate: AEIS FY14 modernization efforts only are estimated to be approximately $366,000.

Business Case: <Insert initiative name, version, date here> 12 image1.jpeg