Attachment_2_-_PWS_1_Major_Program_Support_PWS.pdf

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SYSTEMS

ENGINEERING

Performance Work Statement in support of

Director, Major Program Support:

Software Engineering and Schedule Risk

Assessments FOUO – Competition Sensitive

Performance Work Statement in support of Director, Major Program Support:

Software Engineering and Schedule Risk Assessments

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 SE Mission

1.2 SE and Program Support Vision

1.3 SE and Program Support Initiatives

1.4 Org Chart (Projected CY15)

2.0 Specific Tasks

3.0 General Product and SME Support Expectations

3.1 SME Support for all Tasks

3.2 Data Management, Strategy, Process and Standards

3.3 SME Support and Product Development for all Tasks

4.0 Technical Oversight and Program Support Activities

5.0 Program Support Activities

5.1 Development Planning

5.2 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews

5.3 Continuous Engagement with Programs

5.4 Systems Engineering (SE) Working Integrated Product Teams (WIPT) and Integrated Product Teams (IPT) Support

5.5 Report to Congress (Program Assessments and SE Activities)

5.6 Systems Engineering and Program Management Support

5.7 Domain Reviews

5.8 Response to and Coordination on GAO, IG and Congressional Reports and Actions

6.0 Program Metrics and Technical Performance Measures

7.0 Schedule Performance Benchmarking

7.1 Development, operation & maintenance of a schedule risk analysis tool

7.2 Schedule health checks and schedule risk assessments

7.3 Schedule synchronization with external programs

8.0 MDAP and MAIS Acquisition Document Development, Review and Coordination

8.1 Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs)

8.2 Acquisition Strategies and Acquisition Program Baselines

9.0 Software (SW) Assessments

9.1 SW Acquisition and Development Review and Analysis

9.2 SW Acquisition Program Documentation Reviews

9.3 SW Performance Measurement, Parametric Modeling, and Analysis

9.4 SWE Policy & Guidance

9.5 SWE Working Groups, Outreach and Community Engagement

9.6 Software Engineering Workforce

10.0 Process and Methodology

10.1 Systemic Root Cause Analysis

10.2 Program Support Process and Focus Areas

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 2

11.0 DoD Policy and Guidance Support

11.1 DoD and JCIDS policy documents

11.2 DAG Chapter 4

11.3 Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) Outline

11.4 DoD Risk Management Guide

11.5 Systems Engineering Request for Proposal Review Guide

11.6 TPM Guide

12.0 Project Management, Workflow Management and Process Support

12.1 Continuous Process Improvement

12.2 Training

13.0 Other Requirements

13.1 Data Rights

13.2 Security

13.3 Work Location

13.4 Travel

13.5 Monthly Progress Reports

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 3

1.0 Introduction

1.1 SE Mission

The Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Systems Engineering (DASD(SE)) is the focal point for all policy, practice, and procedural matters relating to Department of Defense Systems Engineering and its key elements to include technical risk management, software engineering, manufacturing and production, quality, and related disciplines. DASD(SE) develops and grows the Systems Engineering capability of the DoD. DASD(SE) provides guidance and policy to DoD components in the execution of their general and specialty engineering functions across the acquisition process. DASD(SE) is substantively engaged throughout the acquisition life cycle with major and selected acquisition programs across DoD to provide advice, guidance, mentoring and oversight of program technical execution. DASD(SE) supports a disciplined programmatic decision making process by providing an independent source of technical knowledge to key decision makers at critical milestones over the program life cycle.

Across the Department, DASD(SE) applies best engineering practices to:

• help program managers identify and mitigate risks

• shape technical planning and management

• support and advocate for DoD Component engineering initiatives

• provide insight to OSD stakeholders

• identify systemic issues for resolution above the program level

1.2 SE and Program Support Vision

Reduce the cost, acquisition time and risk of our Major Defense Acquisition Programs. The principal focus of the DASD(SE) is on championing Systems Engineering as a tool to improve acquisition outcomes. We maintain continuous technical engagement with each Major Defense Acquisition program, providing technical and engineering planning support, mentoring and oversight over the lifecycle of an acquisition program.

Through program support, DASD(SE) fosters an acquisition environment of collaboration, teamwork, and joint ownership of program success through a proactive program oversight and mentoring process ensuring appropriate levels of Systems Engineering are applied through all phases of the acquisition life cycle.

Our objectives are:

• Shape acquisition solutions and promote early technical planning.

• Promote the application of sound systems engineering and related technical disciplines across the

Department's acquisition community and programs.

• Raise awareness of the importance of effective systems engineering, provide technical insights and drive the state-of-the-practice into program planning and execution

Our approach is: 1) provide policy and guidance that supports service adoption of engineering best practices, 2) support the review and inclusion of appropriate engineering requirements and specifications in Request For Proposals (RFPs), 3) conduct program support assessments and other reviews to identify and quantify technical risks for ongoing development programs, 4) assist programs in addressing and mitigating these risks, 5) ensure that systems engineering activities are adequately planned, supported and resourced through our review and approval of systems engineering plans, 6) support and assess formal program review activities such as PDRs and CDRs, and 7) provide independent engineering assessments to inform acquisition milestone decision makers. The Director, Systems Engineering is ultimately focused on improving the technical performance and reducing the total ownership costs of our major acquisition programs.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 4

1.3 SE and Program Support Initiatives

DASD, Systems Engineering pursues initiatives intended to improve the support and assessment of DoD acquisition programs in the complex technical and operational environments of the future. These initiatives include:

• Leveraging “lighter-weight” tailored Systems Engineering process for urgent needs, rapid fielding and technology insertion within the DoD 5000 acquisition framework. DASD(SE) studies best practices for managing risk by providing tailored systems engineering capabilities to facilitate agile and incremental development and rapid fielding

• Developing new Systems Engineering techniques to formally specify and measure the adaptability

/flexibility/adjustability of defense systems to operate in new and unknown environments/missions. These techniques will enable developers to quantify benefits and cost of flexibility in a rigorous probabilistic sense, and to trade off these cost/benefits against other system design attributes.

• Developing new approaches to address emerging Systems Engineering competencies in complex systems, large scale software, and trusted and secured systems. This initiative will also identify tools and practices to support architecture level assessment of emerging capabilities in system-of-systems initiatives.

• Expanding continuous engagement with Service acquisition efforts, by providing mentorship and support to program offices. DASD(SE) is not focused on Systems Engineering oversight for oversight’s sake; instead our processes are focused on providing information to programs and decision makers to identify and mitigate risks.

• Institutionalizing Development Planning – the application of Systems Engineering to emerging concepts pre-milestone A. The objective of development planning is to ensure that concept development and advanced technology efforts provide the greatest possible leverage in starting new development efforts to include effective requirements development, Analysis of Alternatives and trade studies.

• Managing system vulnerability and mitigate security risk through program protection policy and assessment. Program protection measures include cybersecurity, supply chain risk management assurance (e.g. hardware and software assurance), ,anti-tamper capabilities, and security specialties. DoD systems have become increasingly networked, software-intensive, and dependent on a complicated global supply chain, which has increased the importance of security as a systems engineering design consideration. In response to this new reality, the DoD has established Program Protection/System Security Engineering as a key discipline to protect technology, components, and information from compromise through the cost-effective application of countermeasures to mitigate risks posed by threats and vulnerabilities.

• Identify opportunities for Industry and Government to identify, develop and share Systems Engineering

“Best Practices”. Successful acquisition programs are the result of the teamed capabilities of Government and industry in solving design and development challenges. DASD(SE) is focused on identifying and promoting best systems engineering practices across government and industry through communications, outreach and recognition efforts.

• Better Buying Power (BBP) is based on the principle that continuous improvement is the best approach to improving the performance of the defense acquisition enterprise. DASD(SE) supports BBP initiatives that emphasize achieving dominant capabilities through innovation and technical excellence. This includes for example, leading the DoD’s reinvigorated focus on technical risk management through sounds tools and guidance.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 5

1.4 Org Chart (Projected CY15)

Figure 1: Systems Engineering Organizational Structure

Figure 1 shows DASD(SE) as currently organized to achieve the SE mission.

Figure 2: Major Program Support Structure

Figure 2 illustrates Major Program Support as currently organized to achieve the MPS mission.

The contractor shall work within this organizational structure but shall be prepared to adapt as the organization evolves.

Major Program Support James Thompson

Warfare Domain C3/ISR/Business Communications Fixed Wing and Weapons Land Warfare Rotary Wing and UAS Ships and Submarines Space and Missile Defense

Cross Domain:

Joint Staff and Signature Support Software and Measurement & Analysis Program Protection

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 6

2.0 Specific Tasks

The contractor shall be directly responsible for ensuring the accuracy, timeliness, and completion of all requirements under this Performance Work Statement (PWS). Specifically, the contractor will carry out the following functions:

• Program Support – Warfare Domains • Program Support – Cross Domain Support

The contractor shall provide Professional Engineering Services to monitor, review and assess the systems engineering and development planning activities of the major and select defense acquisition programs. Support outlined in this task shall be provided to support programs in warfare domains such as those shown in Section 1: C3, ISR, Business, Communications, Fixed Wing, Weapons, Land Warfare, Rotary Wing, UAS, Ships, Submarines, Space, Missile, and Missile Defense.

The contractor shall provide Professional Engineering Services to support these programs in: Schedule Risk Assessment and Performance Benchmarking, Software Engineering Measurement & Analysis and in other key cross-cutting organizational process areas as required.

The contractor shall deliver products in accordance with organizational templates and processes, delivery timelines specified in the tasks in this PWS or as set by the Government task lead, and mission needs and organizational process changes. These requirements may best be met with a blend of full time and part-time Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) in appropriate domain areas to support the tasks in this PWS.

3.0 General Product and SME Support Expectations

3.1 SME Support for all Tasks

The contractor, for all tasks in this PWS, shall provide SMEs capable of providing highly technical, rigorous and substantive Systems Engineering findings. The contractor shall provide Systems Engineering and technical SMEs that can apply substantial SE experience, SE expertise and technical analysis continuously to all tasks in this PWS.

While the Program Support focus is on technical and systems engineering analysis, it must be emphasized that real-world experience working within an MDAP and MAIS PMO and the DOD 5000 series Acquisition system is critical. Domain knowledge and operator experience in the appropriate mission area is also important to put technical findings into context and enable analysis of domain-specific capabilities and requirements. The ideal characteristics and experiences of support SMEs include engineering, acquisition, staff, operator and domain expertise. Where Acquisition or operator and domain experience is not held by the technical support SME, it may be best to supplement technical leads with reach-back or horizontal support which can provide essential knowledge and experience to infuse into technical assessments. The contractor shall utilize a collection of SMEs with technical expertise across the complete SE and Acquisition lifecycles, and ensure key DASD(SE) Program Support process areas are supported with relevant expertise.

3.2 Data Management, Strategy, Process and Standards

The contractor shall establish a data management strategy. The contractor shall establish processes, standards, templates, and reference libraries to support the tasks in this PWS. The contractor shall maintain a data management strategy to ensure DASD(SE) technical data and artifacts are systematically identified, acquired, received, stored, effectively retrieved, and maintained on DASD(SE)’s Information Technology systems. The contractor shall provide audits of the data and the adherence and effectiveness of the data management strategy as requested by the Government. The contractor shall ensure all support staff members are regularly trained and that processes and standards are adhered to, configuration controlled and maintained.

3.3 SME Support and Product Development for all Tasks

For planning purposes, the contractor shall anticipate that work products, position papers, briefings and technical abstracts are developed over a period of time, as a culmination of experience, information gained, and exposure to the community, their perspectives and issues; as gleaned from regular working meetings, detailed analysis of draft and final documents; and participation in multiple meetings with seniors that progress the state of the documents

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 7 based upon their feedback and experience. The contractor shall provide document preparation, support and control for briefings, “read-ahead” material, and formal document coordination. The contractor’s activity will often require their in-person, hands-on facilitation, and access to classified, FOUO, and other sensitive/pre-decisional materials, not suitable for public Internet transmission. As topics and timelines mature in the decision process, the contractor shall anticipate more quick response activity, meetings on short notice, and subtle but important last-minute fine-tuning of materials to support the briefing, staffing, and coordination processes.

The contractor, for all tasks in this PWS, shall provide assessments, quality findings and actionable recommendations that shall adhere to DASD(SE) format and be technically substantive with the proper focus on Systems Engineering (SE). Recommendations, proposed positions and advice shall consider and be communicated (verbal and written) for audiences at varying levels including deep technical experts, senior audiences (senior program managers or Defense Acquisition Board and OIPT members). Products and recommendations must also consider the myriad potential senior principal perspectives, context and technical information needs. The contractor shall implement an internal, quality control review process on significant, planned work products before review with the Government Program Support Team Lead (PSTL) or Government Senior Leadership. The contractor shall establish action plans and roadmaps with milestones, and track/report progress to plan for delivering products and completing initiatives.

4.0 Technical Oversight and Program Support Activities

DASD(SE) performs Program Support Assessments (PSAs) using the Defense Acquisition Program Support (DAPS) methodology. The contractor shall provide engineering services, related to the specific tasks in this PWS, in order to support the conduct of cross-functional, multi-disciplinary reviews of Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAP) and Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS) and other special interest programs MDAP, MAIS, and other programs as directed by the DASD(SE). The contractor shall provide emerging thoughts during and immediately after the PSA within timelines established by the PSTL. The contractor shall deliver products according to delivery timelines for PSA related products as set by the Government task lead and in accordance with PSA process changes. The contractor shall support Special Studies, Independent Ad-Hoc, and Focused Reviews & Assessments. The contractor shall support extremely focused, short turn-around highly technical reviews on specific issues as directed by the DASD(SE).

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS, to support the DASD(SE) and DMPS in other technical oversight activities such as: Defense Acquisition Executive Summaries (DAES) assessments for MDAP, MAIS and special interest programs on DASD(SE) oversight; AoA Working Group Meetings and Senior Advisory Group (SAG) meetings; Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT); DAB Planning Meetings (DPMs);

DAB Readiness Meetings (DRMs); Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meetings, RFP Reviews and Peer Reviews

Outreach Support: The contractor shall develop and prepare presentations for meetings and conferences with the Services, Industry and Academia. Examples include OSD and Service SE Forums, NDIA SE Conference, specialty engineering conferences.

MPS prepares and delivers no less than 5 outreach presentations per year.

5.0 Program Support Activities

5.1 Development Planning

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to support of Material Development Decision (MDD) planning for Materiel Solution Analysis phase execution.

DASD(SE) anticipates assisting 5 potential programs per year in Development Planning (DP) activities and approximately 15 Post-MDD programs. DASD(SE) anticipates supporting five (5) MDDs per year

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 8

5.2 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to support System- and Component- Level Systems Engineering Technical Reviews (e.g. System Requirements Review (SRR), System Function Reviews (SFR), Preliminary Design Review (PDR), Critical Design Review (CDR), Production Readiness Review (PRR), Physical Configuration Audits, etc.) and associated working groups and technical interchange meetings to advise the DASD(SE) and the Program Management Office (PMO). The contractor shall provide independent assessments of the adequacy and completeness of technical reviews and assess potential risk identified through participation in the review. The contractor shall report results of technical reviews to DASD(SE) via trip reports delivered within 5 working days following return from the review.

The contractor shall provide detailed written assessments of PDRs and CDRs with supporting rationale in order to prepare the DASD(SE) to advise the USD(AT&L) as to the adequacy of these reviews and support 2366b certifications and Milestone decisions. The contractor shall deliver draft post PDR & CDR assessments within 10 working days and final PDR and CDR assessments within 30 working days following the conclusion of the review.

DASD(SE) participates in approximately 100 Technical Reviews per year of which approximately 15 are System- Level PDRs and CDRs.

5.3 Continuous Engagement with Programs

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to participate in program technical activities; monitor engineering efforts; establish and maintain effective and efficient communication with PMOs and Component counterparts; and review all task specific documentation available to OSD to maintain cognizance of development planning and program SE activities and results for all assigned programs. The contractor shall observe and report on selected SE and SE-related events as part of the continuing support to, and oversight of, MDAPs and MAIS. This continuous program involvement permits DASD(SE) staff to offer advice and recommendations from their OSD perspective and provides feedback on effectiveness of current SE policy and guidance. Insights from continuous engagement will inform DASD(SE) leadership and form the basis of DASD(SE) DAES assessments, shape issues for PSAs and other reviews, and will be summarized in the annual joint report to congress.

DASD(SE) supports a total of approximately 175 active MDAP and MAIS programs and approximately 100 other additional programs.

5.4 Systems Engineering (SE) Working Integrated Product Teams (WIPT) and Integrated Product Teams (IPT) Support

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to support Program Management Office (PMO) led SE IPTs and SE WIPTs to share best practices across the Department, clarify DoD policy and guidance, assist PMO staff in understanding and meeting OSD expectations and provide independent assessments of program strengths, issues and risks.

DASD(SE) participates in approximately 100 IPTs and WIPTs per year.

5.5 Report to Congress (Program Assessments and SE Activities) If required and as specified by the Government, the contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to develop and maintain a program assessment template, approved by DASD(SE), and prepare quality program assessments for approximately 50 Major programs per year. These assessments will be collated into the DASD(SE) annual report to Congress. The contractor shall also prepare SE activity sections which describe the focused SE support by D,MPS for MDAP and MAIS oversight and systemic analysis.

5.6 Systems Engineering and Program Management Support

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to provide subject matter experts (SMEs) with specific domain experience to support the duties, responsibilities and deliverables associated with this task. The contractor shall provide systems engineering and program management (SEPM) support to the DASD(SE) and DMPS through the PSTL, for all DoD Program domain areas, such as those listed below:

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 9

a. C3

b. ISR

c. Business

d. Space

e. Missile

f. Missile Defense

g. Fixed Wing Aircraft

h. Air Launch Weapons

i. Ships

j. Submarines

k. Communications

l. Land Combat Systems

m. Unmanned Aerial Systems

n. Rotary Wing Aircraft

The contractor shall be physically present at and attend approximately 120 or more SE activities and SEPM meetings per month in the Washington National Capital Region (NCR) supporting the PSTL’s on their assigned programs; this involves separate and simultaneous meetings multiple times each month. Subsequent to each meeting the contractor shall provide in a weekly activity report, a clear and concise description of the support provided to the PSTL, D,MPS and DASD(SE) for the week. The contractor shall provide preparation materials to the PSTL, DMPS and DASD(SE) as required, which may take the form of presentations, slides, figures, graphs, charts, models, tables, read-aheads and other relevant inputs in accordance with ODASD(SE) editorial guidance.

The contractor shall provide preparation for the PSTL at least 3 working days prior to the meeting. The contractor shall report results of meetings, track actions, impacts and provide recommendations to DASD(SE) staff via written reports delivered within 3 working days of the meeting or weekly.

The contractor shall support DASD(SE) Government chain of command and collaborate with other stakeholders, contractors across the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), and independent consultants to perform SEPM review assessments. The PSTL will lead these review meetings and the contractor will support by providing a comprehensive, independent assessment to advise the PSTL. The contractor shall provide the PSTL with actionable recommendations to mitigate risks and issues in order to improve program execution. The contractor shall use the Defense Acquisition Program Support (DAPS) methodology as required to perform these reviews and prepare the assessments. The contractor shall develop detailed technical presentations for the PSTL to prepare the DASD(SE) principal for participation in various executive level working meetings with in OSD. The contractor shall deliver a final assessment report, with quality findings and recommendations, within 10-30 calendar days of any site visit, as specified by the Government lead. It is expected that the contractor will need to discover, develop and deliver hundreds of findings and recommendations per year. Quality of findings will be measured by the acceptance rate determined by the PSTL and the Service PMO separately. Findings can be positive, negative or neutral. Negative findings should include the accompanying risk and/or issue, impact, and root cause analysis. The contractor shall deliver quality detailed report inputs per year to support a single collated and adjudicated assessment report to the PSTL and/ or DASD(SE).

The contractor shall support PSTLs in the programs domains mentioned above to support programs in shaping the development of the program’s SEPM technical strategies and technical performance measures; and support development and documenting of these strategies and measures in systems engineering plans; and monitor the execution of the technical strategy via a persistent presence with programs. It’s envisioned that SMEs with expertise in the areas of technical planning, schedule risk analysis, metrics development and tracking, and risk management will be required to support this effort. These SMEs will also support reviews and assessments, as required. Systemic root cause analyses of trends across systems engineering plans using the latest systems engineering plan outline shall be provided on a quarterly basis. Knowledge and use of the DAPS methodology when developing findings and recommendations is required.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 10

5.7 Domain Reviews

The contractor shall develop and maintain Domain Review briefings periodically and shall deliver no less than two major Domain Reviews presentations per year for the specific task listed in this PWS, and as specified by the Government. The contractor shall develop and maintain templates in PowerPoint format to structure the review products. The contractor shall produce quality Domain Review content in various summary levels of detail, structured for various audiences to include forming the basis for preparing the Annual DASD(SE) Report to Congress. The Domain Review products shall concisely articulate the issues, actions, and results of the program engagements and the health of individual programs within the domain. The content of the review shall at least include outcomes of program assessments, leading metrics that capture the status and risk in the programs, and qualitative and quantitative cross-cutting findings across the domain, process or focus area. All technical details shall be consistent with all other DASD(SE) assessment products.

5.8 GAO, IG and Congressional Reports and Actions

If required, the contractor shall support the GAO, IG and Congressional report review process by reviewing;

preparing quality comments and recommendations related to the specific tasks in this PWS. The contractor shall review GAO, IG and Congressional Reports, and any DoD response to these reports for accuracy of SE and SE-related data as they are submitted from the appropriate office and provide written analysis to DASD(SE) for review and submit within 5 working days of receipt or as required by the Government.

DASD(SE) reviews an average of 12 DoD IG, GAO and Congressional Reports per year.

6.0 Program Metrics and Technical Performance Measures

The contractor shall provide engineering services to collect and synthesize major technical performance and execution metrics and develop dashboard metrics, to include leading indicators, which could aid SE assessments and program execution. The effort shall support the requirements levied on DASD(SE) by the 2009 Weapons System Reform Act for tracking and assessing technical performance metrics. The contractor shall apply the processes and standards developed in the Data Management Strategy, required in this PWS, to this Program Metrics task. The contractor shall use sound engineering management tools, methods and metrics to capture, feedback and support all products in this PWS.

The contractor shall identify, design, develop, store, analyze, assess and track metrics and performance measures and execution criteria in support of cross-cutting, root cause analysis, benchmarking and individual MDAP/MAIS program systems engineering risk assessments and integration risk assessments. The contractor shall assess measurement planning in SEPs and other products, on-demand and as required by the Government. Metrics and measures include, but are not limited to process; progress; product and development performance; and production metrics. The contractor shall establish best practice metrics specific and appropriate for specific domain, acquisition and development lifecycle phase and application type. The contractor shall identify, develop and measure throughout the lifecycle, SE technical performance metrics within focus areas including, but not limited to, software, reliability, integration, and manufacturing risk and readiness. Focus areas metrics definition and assessment may require collaboration with other OSD and Service staff, working groups, or industry trade groups.

Program Assessments and Mentoring: The contractor shall use metrics to quantitatively trend program risks and development status for all programs. The contractor shall support PSA and periodic assessments of engineering and integration risks against the PMO’s SEP and risks assessment reports; risk assessments shall be integrated with the PSA report and metrics maintained, tracked and delivered separately for programs throughout their acquisition cycle. The contractor shall update program metric data for each program on oversight a minimum of once every three months and report the data in contractor recommended, government approved formats as part of the quarterly DAES process.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 11

The contractor shall support MPS assess programs quantitatively, including execution to plan, throughout the program lifecycle. For example, in support of developing SE technical risks for CAPE led analysis of alternatives (AoAs), the contractor shall review the AoA documents from an SE perspective and gather and assess baseline metrics to assess technical risk. The contractor shall establish an approach to enable a quantitative judgment in order to assess the degree of risk in the program’s technical design and plans. Further, the contractor will establish an approach and metrics to show which are the most sensitive measures affecting the proposed capabilities and operational effectiveness.

Enterprise Assessments: The contractor shall identify, develop enterprise benchmarking goals, and other significant approaches to enable enterprise- and program-level quantitative systems engineering assessments. The contractor shall be responsible for on-demand, quarterly and annual reporting of program technical performance metrics and product performance metrics, as well as benchmark performance.

Community Engagement and Leading Indicators: The contractor shall work with academia, industry and other government activities to identify and document a set of experience-based indicators that will assist with predicting program success (or failure). The contractor shall continually capture program execution-related metrics resulting from program reviews and interaction with OSD organizations such as PARCA, CAPE, ARA, DPAP, DT&E, L&MR, DOT&E and TWS. This effort focuses on identifying and analyzing indicators of future program performance to assist the Department's oversight move from reactive to proactive. This requires meetings with other organizations as required and at a cadence approved by the Government. These indicators shall be assessed to inform all program reviews and DABs. The contractor shall document indicator data in contractor recommended, government approved formats.

Analysis Methods, Processes, Systems and Tools:

The contractor shall use existing DASD(SE) methods, processes, systems and tools and develop and maintain new methods, products, systems and tools to establish an integrated approach for: assessing individual metrics planning, assessing program and DoD enterprise execution to plan; assessing department-wide trends and practices in planning and execution; and mentoring programs in selecting and using metrics.

The contractor shall design, develop and deliver using Microsoft Access or an equivalent application approved by the OSD CIO, a user-friendly tool that supports the collection, assessment and reporting of system, engineering and integration performance and risk management as well as expected performance profiles, inflection points, benchmarking and trending based on DoD and industry standards. The contractor shall formalize the data collection, analysis, and reporting mechanics; using the SE process develop, administer and maintain the database and analysis tool to support quick turn analyses, performance assessments and reports. The initial system prototype shall be delivered in 4 months, and incrementally updated (no less than quarterly) thereafter. The contract shall perform system administration activities, data inputs, and database maintenance.

7.0 Schedule Performance Benchmarking

7.1 Development, operation & maintenance of a schedule risk analysis tool The contractor shall design, develop, deliver and maintain a schedule risk analysis tool using an equivalent application approved by the OSD CIO and DMPS. The tool shall be underpinned by industry best practices, and support independent assessments of schedule health and schedule risk by DASD(SE) and contractor personnel. The contractor shall use the tool to collect, coordinate and analyze a monthly set of performance metrics and program schedule performance to plan. Insight into Program Management Office schedule performance reports and metrics through independent program touch points shall be exploited to collect other relevant critical performance metrics and assess program health. The contractor shall formalize the data collection, analysis, and reporting mechanics;

using the SE process develop a metrics database, deliver the database and tool, and maintain the database with a user friendly interface to support quick turn analyses of performance assessments and reports. The tool generated

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 12 database shall be incrementally updated quarterly. The contractor shall perform system administration activities, data inputs, and database maintenance with the tool.

7.2 Schedule health checks and schedule risk assessments

The contractor shall use a standard tool to perform a 14 point health check of the major program IMS. The schedule health check report shall provide DASD(SE) with a summary of how well the programs IMS aligns with the 14-point assessment checks.

Additionally, the contractor shall perform a schedule risk assessment using the contractor’s tools of the program IMSs.

The contractor shall perform assessments of the technical schedules of Major Defense Programs. As part of these assessments an in-depth evaluation of the Program’s Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and related components will be performed to inform DoD leadership and provide constructive recommendations for improvement to the Program Offices. To perform this analysis, the contractor shall provide expertise to use appropriate analysis and scheduling tool sets particular to the IMS created by the program (such as MS Project and Primavera scheduling tools). The contractor shall perform rigorous evaluation and analysis of the health, completeness, realism, and soundness of Major Defense Program IMSs.

The contractor shall work in an iterative process with the program’s scheduler to resolve any concerns, questions, and hindrances. Additionally, if the program‘s risks are not identified within the IMS, the analysis team shall work with the program contractor/program office to acquire the appropriate Risk Register to conduct the assessment.

The contractor shall determine the level of schedule risk and identify specific schedule drivers in order to display the cumulative probability associated with different durations. The contractor shall enable real-time trade off analysis and provide further visibility into how the program is performing against the baseline plan. The contractor shall provide a detailed report with results from the SRA along with supplemental analysis delivered in PowerPoint format.

The contractor shall perform schedule health checks and schedule risk assessments on approximately 50 programs per year.

7.3 Schedule synchronization with external programs

The contractor shall perform analyses and independent schedule risk assessments of external programs strongly linked with the MDAP or MAIS program and identify synchronization issues and risks associated with the total program schedule. Some external programs may cross domain lines and some external programs may also be MDAPs or MAIS. The contractor shall perform these analyses as part of the above listed tasks.

8.0 MDAP and MAIS Acquisition Document Development, Review and Coordination

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to support acquisition programs in the review and development of key acquisition documents including, but not limited to: Acquisition Strategies (AS);

Systems Engineering Plans (SEP) with attached documents such as Risk Management Plans, Configuration Management Plans, Reliability Plans; Acquisition Program Baselines (APB); Selected Acquisition Reports (SARs);

Life Cycle Support Plans (LCSPs); AoA Study Guidance and Plans; Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADMs);

DoDIG and GAO reports; OIPT reports; Program Protection Plans (PPP), Cost Analysis Requirements Descriptions (CARD) and other appropriate acquisition related documents contained in DoD 5000.02.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 13

DASD(SE) provides analysis in coordination with DASD(L&MR) and reviews an average of 20 LCSPs per year.

8.1 Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs)

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to support SEP development through SE WIPTs. The contractor shall review, comment on and coordinate SEPs submitted by the Services and Components for approval following the DASD(SE) SEP review process.

DASD(SE) reviews an average of 40 SEPs and approves an average of 20 program SEPs per year with the potential for the total number SEP reviews to increase by approximately two additional SEP reviews per year (cumulative) in each subsequent year.

8.2 Acquisition Strategies and Acquisition Program Baselines

DASD(SE) receives draft Acquisition Strategies (AS) Acquisition Program Baselines (APBs) for review and coordination. The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to review the AS for technical and systems engineering content, technical risk and risk management approach, the soundness of the systems engineering. The contractor shall prepare draft response for DASD(SE) approval and return to requesting organization within 2 working days of receipt.

The contractor shall provide services related to the specific tasks in this PWS to review the APB for technical and systems engineering content focusing on performance, cost and schedule realism and compliance with policy, realism and risk. The contractor shall prepare draft response for DASD(SE) approval and return to requesting organization within 5 working days of receipt.

DASD(SE) coordinates on an average of 25 AS and 25 APBs per year

9.0 Software (SW) Assessments

DASD(SE) conducts and the contractor shall support approximately 30 program software engineering (SWE) assessments, software parametric analyses and software performance measurement assessments per year on specifically directed MDAP, MAIS and special interest programs to include those with very large-scale, highly complex software systems.

The contractor shall provide SWE technical and analytical services in support of DASD (SE) acquisition program responsibilities as described below. For the purposes of this PWS, the term software includes Commercial-off-the- Shelf, Government-off-the Shelf, custom code, firmware, and software assurance applied to Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs), Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS) and other systems as assigned. This task spans all phases of the system and software acquisition and development life cycle and all SW domains from development planning through sustainment. Software domains and systems include, but are not limited to, Infrastructure Systems (e.g. Cloud, Service Oriented Architecture, Enterprise Services, Networks, COTS/GOTS-based), Defense Business Systems, Weapons Systems (e.g. Real Time, Embedded, Safety Critical), Modeling and Simulation, and C4ISR (e.g.

Near Real Time, COTS/GOTS integration).

9.1 SW Acquisition and Development Review and Analysis

The scope of the SW acquisition and development review and analysis task includes support to all reviews activities specified in Section 1of this PWS (to include section 1.2 Systems Engineering Oversight of Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAP) and Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS) and other special interest programs), such as Program Support Assessments, Focused Reviews, Nunn-McCurdy and other acquisition certification reviews, Non- Advocate Reviews (Component and program office requested reviews), system engineering and SWE technical reviews (e.g. PDRs and CDRs), SE WIPTs, and other reviews conducted consistent with policy and program directions.

It is anticipated that a minimum of 30 program specific analyses will be conducted during the 12 month period.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 14

The contractor shall support Program Support activities, including those specified in section 1.2 Program Support Activities with a focus on software engineering. This includes continuous engagement as specified in section 1.3.3 and support to SE WIPTs as specified in section 1.3.4, with a focus on software engineering. A level of interaction with some number of the 30 or more programs reviewed over the previous years will be required to update assessments and capture, track and report quantitative progress of previously reviewed programs.

The contractor shall also support quick-reaction SW reviews which will be required to meet ad-hoc or quick-reaction program engagement plans and requirements.

Accomplishment of this task requires the contractor to attend on-site contractor and program office reviews and meetings as necessary and work in an OSD team environment. The activity requires the contactor staff to synthesize significant programmatic and technical data and information to develop a complete understanding of the acquisition strategy and environment, user and contract requirements as well as the programmatic (cost, schedule, EVM, etc) and technical status of the program to include cost, schedule, technical performance, SW development methods, Performance Measures, etc, and understanding appropriate reporting of risk and quantitative and qualitative software development progress and performance to program management and acquisition executive. This includes a range of technical assessment activities encompassing architecture; design; all aspects of SW development planning and execution to include methods and tools; software assurance; requirements management; data rights; supplier management; risk management; software maturity and quality; verification and validation; IMP/IMS; integration with the requirements of the systems engineering process; SW sustainment planning; etc.

The contractor shall develop and present to DASD (SE) a detailed, written review plan for each assigned review and analysis that will be used to guide and manage accomplishment of the planning, execution, identification of analysis and review products, metrics and documentation of the review. The plan shall include focus areas tailored to address each program’s acquisition strategy; development lifecycle and acquisition phase; and include follow-up investigation of software engineering risks identified in previous reviews or engagements. The contractor shall adhere to DASD (SE) criteria and guidance such as the DAPS and other methodologies or as otherwise directed in accomplishing these reviews, including using any product standards and templates (e.g. for development of data calls, agendas, and detailed and executive-level reports). The contractor shall participate in PSAs other reviews in the development and adjudication of review findings. The contractor shall present all proposed review findings to the DASD (SE) SW team for consideration for submission to the adjudication process. The contractor shall perform on-going surveillance of reviewed programs to refresh review findings and advise DASD (SE) of significant changes in the program baseline or performance. The contractor shall interface with and leverage data and information from other DOD organizations engaged in the estimating and review of SW programs such as the Component cost analysis and SW centers, the OSD CAPE, other USD AT&L organizations, and DCMA. Reporting and monitoring activities associated with this task shall be consistent with the needs of the PSA, SETR review and continuous engagement process.

9.2 SW Acquisition Program Documentation Reviews

The contractor shall support the review of acquisition documents to include, but not limited to, the following:

Acquisition Strategy, CARD, Systems Engineering Plan, SW Acquisition Management Plan, SW Development Plan, DT&E/OT&E Plans, and the Life Cycle Sustainment Plan. The scope of the documents to be reviewed by DASD (SE) is expanding due the increased emphasis on engineering analysis prior to Milestone A, requiring appropriate review Analysis of Alternatives (AOA) outcomes and the development of technical plans to support MS A. It is anticipated that as many as 50 acquisition documents or more may need to be reviewed annually based on anticipated MDAP and MAIS Milestone Reviews. This review process is often iterative for individual documents since documents may recycle through the review process more than once.

The contractor shall:

(1) Review assigned documents to determine adherence to applicable SW policy, guidance, and best practice;

(2) Document, justify, and provide proposed comments using prescribed formats for approval by DASD (SE);

(3) Interface with program offices as well as OSD/ Component staff during this process as appropriate; and

(4) Participate in DASD (SE) and other OSD led adjudication reviews of these documents.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 15

9.3 SW Performance Measurement, Parametric Modeling, and Analysis.

The scope of this task focuses on the:

(1) Collection and analysis of software development data on MDAP and MAIS programs to create organized and validated sets of SW program metrics to further the assessment and evaluation of specific SW development programs and program portfolios;

(2) The use of parametric software estimation models and methods to perform software project analysis of level of effort, size and scope, schedule, risk assessment, maturity and reliability and defect estimates, and resource requirements;

(3) Leveraging SW data and information from Component cost analysis and SW centers and the OSD CAPE; and

(4) Continuous monitoring of the performance of reviewed MDAP/MAIS SW development programs.

This program also includes the continuous refresh and evaluation of the DOD Systemic Software Analysis derived from the DOD PSA Systemic Analysis Data Base. These SW program planning and development activities associated with MDAP/MAIS programs support the Program Support Review process, Nunn-McCurdy and other acquisition certification reviews, Component and program office requested reviews, system engineering and SWE technical reviews, and other reviews conducted consistent with policy and program directions.

It is anticipated that a minimum of 30 program specific analyses will be conducted annually and that the metrics data on over 30 previously analyzed programs will need to be refreshed. Based on prior history, it is likely that the need for quick reaction parametric-based SW project analyses will be required. Accomplishment of this program requires the contractor to attend on-site contractor and program office reviews and meetings as necessary.

The contractor shall establish a dedicated performance measurement, parametric modeling, and analysis capacity to support the DASD (SE) SW Team…