Attachment_3_-_PWS_2_Major_Program_Support.pdf

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

Performance Work Statement in support of

Director, Major Program Support

FOUO – Competition Sensitive

Performance Work Statement in support of Director, Major Program Support

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 Systems Engineering Oversight of Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAP) and Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS) and other special interest programs

4.1 Program Support Assessments (PSAs)

4.2 Special Studies, Independent Ad-Hoc, Focused Reviews & Assessments

4.3 Defense Acquisition Executive Summaries (DAES) for MDAP and MAIS

4.4 AoA Working Group Meetings and Senior Advisory Group (SAG) meetings

4.5 Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT) meetings

4.6 Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meetings

4.7 OIPT Reports and DAB Acquisition Decision Memorandums

4.8 U.S. Code Title 10 Section 2366a and b Certifications

4.9 Request for Proposal (RFP) Reviews and Peer Reviews

4.10 Outreach Support

4.11 Reach Back SMEs and consultants for assessment reviews, PSAs, performance assessments and specialized studies

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 Domain 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 MDAP and MAIS Acquisition Document Development, Review and Coordination

7.1 Systems Engineering Plans (SEPs)

7.2 Acquisition Strategies and Acquisition Program Baselines

7.3 Selective Acquisition Reports (SAR) and MAIS Annual Reports (MAR)

8.0 Program Protection / System Security Engineering

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 2

8.1 System Security Engineering Policy and Guidance

8.2 Safeguarding Information and Information Sharing Activities:

8.3 Cybersecurity for Weapons Systems

8.4 System Security Engineering Assessments

8.5 Program Protection Plans and Approval Process

8.6 Program Protection Plan (PPP) Preparation Guide Outline and Guidance

9.0 Process and Methodology

9.1 Defense Acquisition Program Support (DAPS) Methodology

9.2 Systemic Root Cause Analysis

9.3 Program Support Process and Focus Areas

9.4 Integration Risk Assessment and Metrics

9.5 Mission Thread Analysis

9.6 Lifecycle Intelligence Mission Data (IMD) Planning

10.0 DoD Policy and Guidance Support

10.1 DoD and JCIDS policy documents

10.2 DAG Chapter 4

10.3 Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) Outline

10.4 DoD Risk, Issues, and Opportunities Management Guide

10.5 Systems Engineering Request for Proposal Review Guide

10.6 TPM Guide

11.0 Support to Joint Staff

11.1 Requirements and Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) support

11.2 Support to Joint Mission Area Analysis and System Integration

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 5000.2 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 (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 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 also provide Professional Engineering Services to support programs in cross-domain areas such as those shown in Section 1: Joint Staff and Signature Support, Program Protection/ System Security Engineering and in other key cross-cutting process areas such as Integration Risk Assessment, Mission Thread Analysis and Complex System Integration.

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 Program Management Office (PMO) and the DOD 5000.2 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 Leads (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 Systems Engineering Oversight of Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAP) and Major Automated Information Systems (MAIS) and other special interest programs

4.1 Program Support Assessments (PSAs)

DASD(SE) performs Program Support Assessments (PSAs) using the Defense Acquisition Program Support (DAPS) methodology. The contractor shall provide engineering services to plan, organize, and support the conduct of cross-functional, multi-disciplinary reviews of MDAP, MAIS, and other programs as directed by the DASD(SE).

These reviews focus on systems engineering but touch on all technical planning and technical management aspects of a program, including, for example, Family of Systems and System of Systems requirements, interfaces, dependencies, and processes. Reviews are conducted early enough in a program to provide the Program Manager (PM) with recommendations designed to reduce program risk. The contractor shall prepare a PSA Plan for approval, coordinate all team activities; participate in the PSA execution; develop, integrate and adjudicate detailed findings and recommendations; synthesize the detailed findings into executive summaries and reports; coordinate the results with the PM; and submit the findings and report summaries to the DASD(SE) in Power Point format for approval.

The contractor shall prepare materials to present the review findings and recommendations to pre-DAB, pre- Overarching Integrated Product Team (pre-OIPT), OIPTs, and if requested, to the DAB and other DAB preparatory meetings such as the DAB Readiness Meeting (DRM). The contractor shall deliver PSA plans 50 calendar days before the site visit, and final reports within 30 calendar days of the final site visit or 5 days prior to the DRM, whichever occurs first. 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.

DASD(SE) conducts approximately 15 PSAs per year with the potential for the total number of PSAs to increase by approximately one additional PSA per year (cumulative) in each subsequent year. As such, we expect the number of PSAs to have potentially increased by 33% five years from now (to a total of 20 PSAs). The total number of PSAs may surge by as many two additional PSAs in any given year.

4.2 Special Studies, Independent Ad-Hoc, Focused Reviews & Assessments The contractor shall conduct extremely focused, short turn-around highly technical reviews on specific issues as directed by the DASD(SE). These reviews may or may not follow the DAPS methodology as required by the Government, and generally require high levels of expertise not maintained within the full time staff.

Focused Reviews are similar to PSAs but may differ with regard to scope, sponsorship and reporting. Unlike PSAs, which are required by DODI 5000.02, Focused Reviews may be requested by certain authorities with an interest in the program, such as the PEO, the PM, or the CAE. Focused Review teams may report solely to the review sponsor

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 8 and to others only with the sponsor’s approval; such reviews may be requested for any program regardless of ACAT level. As an example, DASD(SE) may support Focused Review teams to provide information to Senior Decision makers (to include Congress) on specific program risk areas such as manufacturing, software, integration and combinations of other areas. DASD(SE) may also provide information to the Secretary of Defense to certify if a restructured program has management and structure adequate to control program cost. The contractor shall deliver final Focused Review reports within 30 calendar days of the final site visit.

DASD(SE) conducts an average of 10 ad-hoc reviews or special studies per year.

4.3 Defense Acquisition Executive Summaries (DAES) for MDAP and MAIS The contractor shall develop and submit Defense Acquisition Executive Summary (DAES) assessments for MDAP, MAIS and special interest programs on DASD(SE) oversight. OUSD(AT&L) Acquisition Resources and Analysis (ARA) manages the Defense Acquisition Management Information Retrieval (DAMIR) system to capture DAES reports and associated supporting information. The contractor shall maintain appropriate engagement with DAES programs necessary to provide relevant, insightful, and accurate assessments backed by objective data (e.g. analysis of TPMs). The contractor shall prepare proposed DAES assessments no later than the 8th working day of each month or as specified by the Government. If available, the contractor shall review the PM’s inputs and incorporate relevant information into their assessment. The contractor shall recommend changes as appropriate to the final report. The contractor shall provide an objective recommendation with supporting rationale on what DAES programs DASD(SE) should offer as candidates at the monthly DAES candidate selection meeting. The contractor shall prepare and present briefings and background material in support of the DAES candidate selection pre-brief meeting and the DASD(SE) pre-brief meeting for selected monthly DAES reviews.

DASD(SE) prepares DAES assessments on an average of 20 MDAP and 10 MAIS programs per month, and 3 selected DAES program pre-briefs per month.

4.4 AoA Working Group Meetings and Senior Advisory Group (SAG) meetings

The contractor shall support the PSTL during CAPE led AoA working group meetings and D,MPS during AoA SAG meetings. Support includes analysis and consideration of possible tradeoffs and risks for the full range of alternatives that could satisfy validated capability requirements documented in the Initial Capabilities Document (ICD). The contractor shall review and analyze available material and develop and brief preparatory material and briefing presentations to the PSTL and D,MPS prior to working group and SAG meetings. DASD(SE) supports an average of 20 AoA working group and 30 SAG meetings per year.

4.5 Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT) meetings

The contractor shall support the Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT) process by preparing recommendations and findings, including strengths and risk areas, from PSAs and continuous engagement with program offices. The contractor shall advise the PSTL, DASD(SE), OIPT Lead and other relevant staff organizations of PSA and other findings in briefing form. The contractor shall participate in DAB preparation meetings and prepare draft DASD(SE) coordination on OIPT reports.

DAB Planning Meetings (DPMs) will be held approximately two months before each scheduled DAB and focus on issues anticipated at the DAB, expediting the DAB process by identifying any new information requirements to support the decision, by identifying any alternatives that may need significant preparation time or analysis and by identifying any actions needed to deal with major concern already raised.

DAB Readiness Meetings (DRMs) will be held approximately two weeks before each scheduled DAB and focus on DAB-associated issues and determine the readiness of programs to proceed to a DAB discussion/decision.

The contractor shall support DRMs and DPMs prior to each scheduled DAB, including defining and preparing presentations of DAB-associated issues, to prepare the DASD(SE) to participate in the determination of program readiness to proceed to a DAB discussion/decision.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 9

DASD(SE) participates in an average of 60 OIPTs per year with the potential for the total number of OIPTs to increase by approximately two additional OIPTs per year (cumulative) in each subsequent year. As such, we expect the number of OIPTs in this regard to have potentially increased by approximately 13% five years from now (to a total of 68 OIPTs). DASD(SE) anticipates supporting a DRM and a DPM for each DAB scheduled.

4.6 Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meetings

The contractor shall support the DAB processes by assessing programs and preparing the DASD(SE), ASD(R&E) or other principals to participate in major program decision reviews. Assessment findings and recommendations and are presented in Power Point format. The assessments are developed from PSAs, other reviews, collaboration with other stakeholders, and recurring systems engineering (SE), Software Engineering (SwE), and Program Protection (PP) support to program offices. Prior to DABs, the contractor shall prepare recommended SE positions on DAB readiness, support development of ADM language and exit criteria and prepare draft DAB Readiness Functional Checklists.

DASD(SE) participates in an average of 50 DABs per year.

4.7 OIPT Reports and DAB Acquisition Decision Memorandums

The contractor shall support the OIPT and DAB processes by reviewing, preparing quality comments and recommendations to inform and prepare senior leadership, and coordinating for approval the individual reports and memorandums which support the program decision making process.

The contractor shall review draft Acquisition Decision Memorandum (ADMs) for accuracy of SE and SE-related data as they are submitted by the OIPT lead and/or ARA and provide written analysis to DASD(SE) for review and submit to ARA within 3 working days of receipt.

DASD(SE) reviews an average of 60 ADMs per year.

The contractor shall review OIPT reports for accuracy of SE and SE-related data as they are submitted by the OIPT leads and provide written analysis to DASD(SE) for review and submit to the OIPT lead within 5 working days of receipt.

DASD(SE) reviews an average of 60 OIPT reports per year.

4.8 U.S. Code Title 10 Section 2366a and b Certifications

The contractor shall assist and coordinate in the preparation of Milestone A Certifications in accordance with Section 2366a of Title 10 US Code focusing on the technical underpinnings of the certifications.

The contractor shall assist and coordinate in the preparation of Milestone B Certifications in accordance with Section 2366b of Title 10 US Code focusing on the technical underpinnings of the certifications.

DASD(SE) anticipates supporting approximately 15 2366a or 2366b certifications per year.

4.9 Request for Proposal (RFP) Reviews and Peer Reviews

The contractor shall prepare DASD(SE) principals for participation in DPAP led Peer Reviews which provide independent OSD evaluation of MDAP and MAIS Requests for Proposals (RFPs) with a focus on Systems Engineering equities.

DASD(SE) participates in an average of 5 RFP peer reviews per year.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 10

4.10 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.

DASD(SE) prepares and delivers no less than 5 outreach presentations per year.

4.11 Reach Back SMEs and consultants for assessment reviews, PSAs, performance assessments and specialized studies

To meet rapidly changing DoD regulatory and statutory demands, SECDEF and USD(AT&L) Better Buying Power initiatives, DASD(SE) requires a diverse cadre of very senior and/or very specialized SMEs experienced in DoD acquisition, Program Management, Systems Engineering and technology to support all DASD(SE)- and DMPS-led reviews and activities, develop improvement plans, and refine SE processes and performance assessment methods.

The existing Defense Acquisition Program Support (DAPS) methodology and other relevant DASD(SE) processes are considered to be highly effective. However, the ability of the DASD(SE) to evolve and respond rapidly with support from senior and/or specialized experts is critical to meeting the Department’s acquisition goals. The contractor shall provide experts as required and approved by the DMPS to support engagements of major programs to include Systems Engineering and Program Management (SEPM) reviews and assessments as described in this task. The contractor shall provide a blend of senior and/or specialized SMEs, to evolve and meet rapidly changing regulatory and statutory requirements to include usage of targeted and metrics-based performance assessments. As requested and within Government-defined time-windows, reach-back support shall ensure senior leadership has the required awareness and preparation on evolving requirements and SEPM issues and can effectively address the rapidly evolving acquisition challenges facing the Department. The contractor shall collect, report and analyze relevant metrics, and assess program performance against the metrics and requirements. In addition, the contractor shall provide special project support to the Director, Major Program Support (DMPS) with highly specialized experience in SE oversight for all assigned programs. The contractor shall provide Senior Technical Advisors and specialized SMEs to the DMPS that have specialized experience in example areas such as sonar, radar, aerospace, space synchronization, combat systems, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) and Communications, ship systems, submarines, helicopters and other areas as required. The Senior Advisors and specialized SMEs shall support all tasks in this TWS with a focus on review support as well as technical and product metrics support. The contract shall provide expert advice to the D,MPS for relevant systems engineering principles and best practices. It is envisioned that the contractor will need to maintain a diverse pool of 30 or more on-call systems engineering and domain experts and consultants to support this PWS. Reach back SMEs and consultant support is typically planned in increments, or as specified by the Government, based on the required support.

5.0 Program Support Activities

5.1 Development Planning

The contractor shall participate in the support of Material Development Decisions (MDD) by evaluating Initial Capabilities Documents (ICDs), Analysis of Alternative (AoA) plans and guidance, and planning for Materiel Solution Analysis phase execution. The contractor shall assist DASD(SE) in assessing acquisition community understanding of the capability gap to assess evidence of consideration of alternatives from across the spectrum of potential materiel solutions; and assess that solutions proposed for evaluation are relevant and technically feasible, and that the proposed scope for the AoA is technically appropriate. DASD(SE) anticipates assisting 5 potential programs per year in Development Planning (DP) activities; approximately 15 Post-MDD programs. DASD(SE) anticipates supporting five (5) MDDs per year, 20 AoA events and 30 SAG meetings.

The contractor shall coordinate on Analysis of Alternative (AoA) Study Guidance and Plans. DASD(SE) receives draft Analysis of Alternative (AoA) Study Guidance and Plans from OSD CAPE or other sources for review and

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 11 coordination. The contractor shall review AoA study guidance and plans to ensure consideration of alternatives from across the spectrum of potential materiel solutions, technical feasibility of the proposed alternatives for consideration, and adequate guidance for the assessment of technical risk and other systems engineering issues in the conduct of the AoA. The contractor shall review AoA Study Guidance and Plans to ensure adequate planning and resourcing of technical and engineering assessment in the Analysis of Alternatives. The contractor shall prepare draft response and coordinate for DASD(SE) approval within 10 working days of receipt.

DASD(SE) coordinates on an average of 10 AoA Plans per year.

The contractor shall provide support for leading and managing the Development Planning activities. The contractor shall develop, prepare, and coordinate draft guidance documenting recommended best practices for DP activities for DASD(SE) consideration and approval. The contractor shall provide recommended inputs for DASD(SE) weekly staff meetings and weekly activity reports on the status of DP activities. The contractor shall provide technical and management inputs to data calls, briefings, articles, and reports as required. The contractor shall develop, prepare, and coordinate meeting minutes for high level meetings such as the Developmental Planning Working Group.

5.2 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews

The contractor shall participate in 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& 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 participate in program technical activities; monitor engineering efforts; establish and maintain effective and efficient communication with PMOs and Component counterparts; and review all program-related 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 represent DASD(SE) in 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.

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 12

5.5 Report to Congress (Program Assessments and SE Activities) If required and as specified by the Government, the contractor shall 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 Domain Systems Engineering and Program Management Support The contractor shall 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:

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 provide SMEs and be responsible for reviewing and assessing all aspects of the systems engineering and program management (SEPM) process to include program requirements documents, concepts of operations, program technical design and development plans, models, architectures, interfaces, interdependencies and other systems specification documentation. The contractor shall support SEPM review assessments through the engagement and review of documentation acquired from the program office, knowledge online systems, meetings, slide presentations, integrated data environments and any other means available to ensure persistent presence, maintain continuous engagement and provide SEPM assessments at DASD(SE) specified touch points. The contractor shall access, acquire, review and comment on approximately 100 or more technical documents per program, and assess program risk based on the adequacy and quality of the program documentation. Assessment reports shall be maintained and kept current and reviewed with Government leadership as requested by the DMPS at least quarterly. Reports shall consist of quad charts, dashboards, written technical assessments and SEPM risk assessments.

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

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 13 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.

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 program domains listed in this PWS, as well as in process and focus areas, 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 Response to and Coordination on GAO, IG and Congressional Reports and Actions

The contractor shall support the GAO, IG and Congressional report review process by reviewing; preparing quality comments and recommendations; and coordinate for approval the individual comment resolution matrices which support the DASD(SE) position, convention and format for these type of reports.

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

8 October 2015 COMPETITION SENSITIVE Page 14

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.

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,…