Attachment_J.3_Instruction_Manual_107-01-001-01.pdf

OHS Instruction Manual 107-01 -001-01, Department of Homeland Security Manual for the Operation of the Joint Requirements Integration and Management System

Issue Date:

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

UNDER SECRETARY FOR MANAGEMENT

'l/31 ljt, Date f

Instruction# 107-01-001-01

Revision # 00

Table of Contents

Enclosure A: Overview

1.0 Purpose

1.1 Manual Intention

1.2 Augmentative Purpose

1.3 Manual lnformation

1.4 Applicability

1.5 References

1.6 Background/Key Terms

1.7 Definitions

1.8 Procedures

1.9 Information Technology

1.10 OHS Research and Development (R&D) Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)

2.0 Releasability

Enclosure B: Requirement Identification and Document Generation

1.0 Analysis, Study Plans, and Document Development Guidance

1. 1 Objective

1.2 Approaches to Analysis

1.3 Types of Capability Analysis

2.0 Capability Documentation

2.1 Purpose .............................................................. ,

2.2 Capability Documents .........................................'

2.3 Materiel Capability Documents

2.4 Determination of Appropriate Actions within JRIMS

2.5 Document Sequencing

2.6 Precedence of Recommended Approaches

Enclosure C: JRIMS Gatekeeping, Coordination & Validation

1.0 JRIMS Gatekeeping: Initial Screening and Designation

1.1 Overview

Instruction # 107-01-001-01 ii

JRIMS Gatekeeper

JRC Analysis

Document Submission

JRIMS Gatekeeping Activities

Screening of Compliant Documents

Actions for Other Submissions

Deliberate Coordination & Validation

Overview

Coordination Timelines

Coordination Process for CARs and NMCRs

Joint NMCR Tracking and Implementation

Coordination Process for Materiel Documents

The CAR Document

Pre-Coordination (5 business days)

Document Review and Commenting Stage (15 business days)

Comment Adjudication Stage (20 business days)

JRC Analysis Review Stage (10 business days)

PT Review Stage (10 business days)

Validation Stage (10 business days)

Endorsement Stage (10 business days for Joint Interest; 20 business days for

DMAG Interest)

Post-Validation Documentation

Tasking Documentation

Coordination and Validation of Changes to Previously Validated Documents

Materiel Solutions Approach Tracking and Implementation

Urgent Operational Need (UON) Coordination and Approval

Overview

Coordination and Approval within the UON Process

Solution Fielding Timelines ii iii

Assessment of Operational Utility

Enclosure D: Joint Assessment of Requirements

Overview

Roles of DHS Organizations

JAR Process

Assessment Criteria

Cycle

Assessment Criteria Considerations

Unity of Effort

Desired Effect

Acceptability

Feasibility

JAR Execution

Cycle

Prioritization Framework

Capabilities Analysis Guide................................................................A-1

Purpose...........................................................................................................A-1

CA Activities.................................................................................................A-1

Traceability ..................................................................................................A-1

Level of Rigor...............................................................................................A-1

CA Process Steps ...........................................................................................A-2

Identify the Scope and Basis of Study .........................................................A-2

Identify Necessary Capabilities ....................................................................A-3

Identify Capability Gaps/Overlaps................................................................A-4

Assess Risk .................................................................................................A-5

Assess Non-Materiel Approaches ................................................................A-5

Assess Materiel Approaches .......................................................................A-6

Documentation.............................................................................................A-7

Capability Analysis Study Plan Development.....................................B-1 iii iv

Purpose...........................................................................................................B-1

Required Elements..........................................................................................B-1

JRC Responsibilities .......................................................................................B-2

JRIMS Gatekeeper ......................................................................................B-2

JRC Analysis ...............................................................................................B-2

CASP ...........................................................................................................B-2

CASP Checklist...............................................................................................B-3

CASP Sample Template and Guidance ..........................................................B-4

CAR Development ............................................................................ C-1

Purpose.......................................................................................................... C-1

Overview of Required Outputs ....................................................................... C-1

Required outputs from the capability analysis includes:.............................. C-1

Format and Guidance ................................................................................. C-1

CAR Checklist ................................................................................................ C-2

CAR Sample Template and Guidance ........................................................... C-4

NMCR Development ......................................................................... D-1

Purpose.......................................................................................................... D-1

Required Precepts ......................................................................................... D-1

Format and Guidance .................................................................................... D-2

Cover Page................................................................................................. D-2

Signature and Validation Page ................................................................... D-2

Executive Summary .................................................................................... D-3

Operational Context .................................................................................... D-3

Threat Summary ......................................................................................... D-4

Capability Discussion .................................................................................. D-5

Proposed DOTmLPF-R/G/S Change Recommendations ........................... D-6

Appendices ................................................................................................. D-7

NMCR Checklist............................................................................................. D-8

MNS Development .............................................................................E-1 iv v

Purpose...........................................................................................................E-1

MNS Development ..........................................................................................E-1

MNS Review and Approval .............................................................................E-2

MNS Checklist.................................................................................................E-3

MNS Updates and Revalidation ......................................................................E-5

MNS Sample Template and Guidance............................................................E-6

CONOPS Development .....................................................................F-1

Overview .........................................................................................................F-1

What is a CONOPS? ...................................................................................F-1

How does the CONOPS fulfill its purpose?..................................................F-2

Outputs ........................................................................................................F-2

Preparation of the CONOPS........................................................................F-3

CONOPS Checklist .........................................................................................F-3

CONOPS Sample Template and Guidance ..................................................F-15

ORD Development ............................................................................ G-1

Purpose.......................................................................................................... G-1

ORD Overview............................................................................................ G-1

Discrete Segments/Projects........................................................................ G-3

ORD Preparation ........................................................................................ G-3

ORD Approval............................................................................................. G-3

ORD Revisions ........................................................................................... G-3

ORD Checklist................................................................................................ G-5

ORD Sample Template and Guidance......................................................... G-11

Urgent Operational Need (UON) Format and Template.................... H-1

Format and Guidance .................................................................................... H-1

Cover Page. Cover Page which includes the following: ............................. H-1

Executive Summary .................................................................................... H-1

Scope.......................................................................................................... H-2

UON Checklist................................................................................................ H-3 v vi

Glossary of Terms............................................................................... I-1

Acronym Guide .................................................................................. J-1

Table of Figures

Figure 1: DHS Acquisition Framework

Figure 2: Appropriate Actions within JRIMS

Figure 3: Document Sequencing

Figure 4: Document Combining and Splitting

Figure 5: JRIMS Gatekeeping

Figure 6: JRIMS Deliberate Coordination and Validation

Figure 7: JRIMS UON Coordination and Approval Process

Figure 8: Joint Assessment of Requirements

Figure 9: Tier Structure

Table of Tables

Table 1: Assessment Criteria Considerations

Table 2: Organizational Categories ............................................................................F-22 vi

MANUAL FOR THE OPERATION OF JRIMS

ENCLOSURE A: OVERVIEW

Purpose.

Manual Intention

This manual is not intended as a standalone document. Readers are encouraged to become familiar with the Directive 107-01, Joint Requirements Integration and Management System and the Directive 071-02, Joint Requirements Council before reviewing this manual.

Augmentative Purpose

This manual augments Directive 107-01, Joint Requirements Integration and Management System and Directive 071-02, Joint Requirements Council with detailed guidelines and procedures for the JRIMS process to facilitate robust capability validation, portfolio management, and timely and cost-effective development of solution approaches.

Manual Information

This manual provides information regarding activities including identification of capability requirements and gaps, development of solution approaches, gatekeeping, coordination and validation, and management of portfolios.

Applicability

This manual is applicable throughout the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), with the exception of the Office of Inspector General. It applies to all capability analyses conducted by DHS Components.

References

Homeland Security Act of 2002, P.L. 107–296, November 25, 2002.

Title 6 United States Code (USC), Section 112 “Secretary Functions”

Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA), Title 40, United States Code, Chapter 113, Subchapter II; December 19, 2014

DHS Delegation 0100.2 “Delegation to Deputy Secretary”

DHS Directive 102-01, Acquisition Management Directive

DHS Directive 071-01, DHS Leadership Forums

DHS Directive 071-02, Joint Requirements Council

DHS Directive 107-01, Joint Requirements Integration and Management System

DHS Instruction Manual 102-01-001 Acquisition Management Instruction Guidebook

Secretary Johnson Memorandum for DHS Leadership, “Strengthening Departmental Unity of Effort,” April 22, 2014

Secretary Johnson Memorandum for DHS Leadership, “DHS Joint Requirements Council,” June 26, 2014

Secretary Johnson Memorandum for DHS Leadership, “Establishment of Integrated Product Teams,” August 25, 2015

Charter for the Department of Homeland Security Joint Requirements Council, November 13, 2014

Background/Key Terms

JRIMS. JRIMS ensures traceability between the Department’s strategic objectives and the capability investments (both non-materiel and materiel).

JRIMS enhances DHS executive decision-making by validating all capability needs and prioritizing those capabilities. Validation helps to assess traceability and feasibility. It also ensures all capability needs, requirements and recommended solution approaches are cost-informed.

Roles.

Deputy’s Management Action Group (DMAG). The DMAG is a Deputy Secretary chaired decision-making body established by Secretary’s Unity of Effort memorandum. It provides direction and guidance to the JRC; reviews JRC validated capability gaps, needs and requirements; and endorses and/or directs related follow-on JRC activities.

Joint Requirements Council (JRC). The JRC is established as a recommending body to the DMAG. It is chartered by the Secretary as a Component-composed, Component-chaired council to develop and lead the Department's Component-driven joint requirements process. The JRC governs JRIMS execution and provides the DMAG with materiel and non-materiel (DOTmLPF+R/G/S1) cost-informed recommendations on capability needs and solutions approach for capability development and portfolio optimization.

JRC Chairperson. The JRC Chairperson rotates annually among the Operational Components. The Chairperson ensures the JRC adheres to DHS and JRIMS operating procedures and that JRC decisions are supported by appropriate analytic rigor.

Director, JRC. Directs the activities of the JRC staff in executing JRIMS activities and in other matters as directed by the JRC

1 DOTmLPF+R/G/S: Doctrine, Organization, Training, materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, Facilities and Regulations, Grants and Standards.

Chairperson. Serves as the JRIMS validation authority on behalf of the JRC. Maintains awareness of efforts to fulfill identified capability gaps. Tracks the fulfilment of non-materiel and materiel solution approaches for validated capability needs.

JRIMS Gatekeeper. Screens capability documentation submitted by Sponsors for compliance with JRIMS templates and standards.

JRC Analysis. Provides recommendations to the Director, JRC on validation and prioritization of necessary Department capabilities and associated capability development solutions approach. Assists the JRC in the execution of the JRIMS and related training and education activities, and other efforts as directed by the JRC.

Portfolio Teams (PTs). Serve as the JRC's strategic integrators for their designated functional areas. Advise Sponsors during execution of their requirements analysis, coordinates the capability documentation process, and identifies additional instances of capability fragmentation, overlaps, or redundancies not initially identified by the Sponsor. Manage mission area priorities to inform JRC recommendations. Make independent validation and prioritization recommendations to the Director, JRC based on subject matter expertise within their functional areas and is inclusive of Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Program Accountability and Risk Management (PARM) participation. The JRC will use the Homeland Security Enterprise Architecture (HLS EA) as the organizing construct for portfolio alignment.

Definitions2

Capability. The means to accomplish a mission, function, or objective.

Capability Documentation. The production of artifacts that articulate the results of capability needs (and associated gaps) identified through the capability generation process. JRIMS capability documents are discussed in Enclosure B, 2.2.

Capability Fragmentation. Instances when capabilities are manifested in multiple DHS Components to meet the same need and where opportunities exist to more efficiently meet missions, functions, or objectives.

Capability Gap. Instance of a capability is required by DHS and/or its stakeholders/partners to perform a mission, function or objective, 2 Definitions align with DHS Lexicon but they do not currently possess it and there are no plans for it to be provided by existing programs.

Capability Generation. The process through which necessary capabilities (and associated capability gaps) are initially identified by Sponsor-guided analysis and then subsequently staffed, reviewed and refined within JRIMS until they are validated or rejected by the

JRC.

Capability Management. The process through which the JRC validates and prioritizes necessary capabilities. Those validated necessary capabilities are then recommended for implementation and tracked and assessed through materiel and non-materiel implementation processes.

Capability Overlap. Instance when multiple DHS Components have capabilities with similar goals, support similar activities, or target similar mission needs.

Capability Redundancy. Instance when additional or alternative capabilities exist across DHS, to include those with primary application in other or related mission/ functional areas, which maintain a degree of overall functionality in case of loss or failure of another but which may, following analysis of required capacity, provide opportunities for efficiencies across the Department.

Requirement. Condition or capability that must be met or possessed by a system, product, service, result, or component to satisfy a contract, standard, specification, or other formally imposed document; includes the quantified and documented needs, wants, and expectations of the sponsor, customer, and other stakeholders.

Sponsor. Any DHS Component that submits capability documentation into JRIMS and supports it through the entire acquisition life cycle. The Sponsor may change based on the role(s) assigned to specific organizations.

Validation. Process of evaluating a system or component (including software) during or at the end of the development process to determine whether it satisfies the specified user’s needs. The process of ensuring requirements are traceable to strategic objectives and of assessing recommended solutions approach to address gaps in required capability for feasibility and cost-informed (based on initial rough order of magnitude (ROM) costing).

Procedures

This manual provides procedural guidance for the overall JRIMS process.

1.8.1 JRIMS Process.

JRIMS is a process by which the Department reviews and validates capability requirements, associated gaps, and proposed solution approaches to mitigate those gaps. The process enhances DHS executive decision-making by validating requirements and prioritizing joint capabilities. Validation of requirements confirms they are traceable, feasible and cost-informed.

1.8.2 Gaps.

Components will use the JRIMS process to identify and validate capability gaps and materiel and/or non-materiel solution approaches to mitigate those gaps.

Manual Use.

Components use this manual, in conjunction with the Directives outlined in

1.5 of this section, to guide them in the identification of capability requirements; development of appropriate documentation that will capture requirements, gaps and solution approaches; and the coordination and validation of those documents.

Proposed Capabilities.

Proposed capability needs that are designated as Single-Component by the JRC, (capabilities executed solely by the submitting organization and is not designated as DMAG interest (See Enclosure C, Section 1.6)), will be approved according to MD 102.01 and validated by the Component designated Validating Authority.3,4

Acquisition Life Cycle Framework (ALF).

Figure 1 provides an overview of how key JRIMS documents developed in accordance with this manual are sequenced in relation to the DHS ALF.

The DHS ALF is structured to operate within a series of acquisition phases each leading to an Acquisition Decision Event (ADE) except in the case where Produce/Deploy/Support leads to termination and disposal. The JRC focuses on identifying and validating needed capabilities pre-ADE 0 and between ADE 0 and ADE 1. The JRC PTs provide consulting services to PARM regarding alternative materiel and non-materiel solutions approaches between ADE 1 and ADE 2A. The JRC continues to be involved in ensuring requirements remain valid throughout the life cycle. Where materiel solutions include information technology (IT)

3 Proposed capabilities that are designated as joint or DMAG interest will be approved per MD

102.01 and validated by the Director, JRC or Chairperson, JRC respectively. Single-

Component capability needs are submitted in accordance with MD 102-01. The JRC will validate all major programs (Level 1 and Level 2).

4 The JRC will designate capability documents that indicate the need for a major program as

“DMAG Interest”.

capability needs, CIO assists in making IT resource recommendations on a proposed solutions approach.

Figure 1: DHS Acquisition Framework

Requirements Identification and Document Generation.

1.8.6.1 Enclosure B, Section 1.0 outlines the various processes which a Sponsor can use to identify their capability requirements, associated gaps, and proposed materiel and non-materiel capability solutions for submission into the JRIMS process for review and validation. The enclosure also includes discussion of Capabilities-Based Assessments (CBAs) and other studies, as well as means for notifying stakeholders of study initiation and posting of study results and related data.

1.8.6.2 Enclosure B, Section 2.0 outlines the different types of capability documents used to articulate requirements, gaps, and materiel and non-materiel fulfillment solution approaches.

Gatekeeping, Coordination, and Validation.

1.8.7.1 Enclosure C, Section 1.0 outlines the gatekeeping processes for all incoming requirements documents prior to deliberate or urgent coordination and validation.

1.8.7.2 Enclosure C, Section 2.0 and 3.0 outlines the deliberate coordination process used for the review and validation of the majority of capability requirements, associated gaps, and proposed fulfillment solution approaches, ensuring the appropriate analytic rigor and assessment by a wide range of stakeholders across the Department.

1.8.7.3 Enclosure C, Section 4.0 outlines the coordination process for expedited review and validation of urgent capability requirements that, if left unmitigated, would result in loss of life or imminent failure to a mission, function, or objective. Use of this process is only appropriate where the deliberate process cannot be tailored to address the capability requirements in a timely fashion.

Joint Assessment of Requirements.

Enclosure D, discusses the Joint Assessment of Requirement (JAR) process. The JRC, CFO, PARM, Office of Policy (PLCY) and, when addressing IT capability needs, CIO will use the JAR process to produce an integrated assessment of the Department’s capability requirements.

This integrated assessment will prioritize the Department’s capability requirements and inform senior leadership’s efforts to managing the Department’s capability-based portfolios.

Information Technology

The JRIMS processes described in this manual are intended to integrate with and inform IT processes defined by the CIO. For IT resource management, CIO defines IT processes and policies to include the development processes and life cycle, and the overall policies for all capital planning, enterprise architecture, and project management and reporting for IT resources. These processes are integrated with the JRC and the other Management Directorate lines of business, and they are aligned with MD 102-01. IT projects are characterized by a large degree of uncertainty at the outset. As such, oversight of IT resources must be flexible and recognize the need to adjust course based on frequent feedback and learnings developed throughout the life of the program. JRC validated capability gaps identified by sponsors will be used as inputs to IT investment planning, but the ensuing acquisition life cycle will follow incremental delivery and agile development practices as defined by the CIO.

DHS Research and Development (R&D) Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)

Throughout the validation process the JRC will forward potential R&D investments to the IPT process. In addition, the IPTs will inform the JRC of maturing R&D capabilities to support its validation process.

Releasability

This manual is approved for public release. Distribution is unlimited.

ENCLOSURE B: REQUIREMENT IDENTIFICATION AND DOCUMENT GENERATION

Analysis, Study Plans, and Document Development Guidance

Objective

The fundamental objective of the Sponsor analysis is to identify and define capability5 needs and existing gaps. Where the capability analysis identifies a capability gap, it also documents the need for an additional or new capability.

This documentation of the capability gap is used to develop new requirements, which, when fulfilled, ensures that the Component has the tools and resources to accomplish assigned missions, functions, or objectives.

The Component is responsible for the execution of capabilities to meet their assigned missions. Therefore, they have the greatest interest in the optimal fulfillment of the capability needs. This gives Components a unique set of responsibilities for driving, confirming the appropriateness of, and substantiating the performance of, the mission capabilities.

Sponsors may pursue a variety of approaches to determine the necessary capabilities. Their selection of analytic approach depends on a number of factors, including the time required and/or allocated to execute the assessment and the scope of the activities being reviewed. The Sponsor needs to tailor their analytic approach to suit the issue. The approach provides the JRC or other validation authority with reliable, traceable data that is sufficient to inform and support a validation decision.

While the Sponsor is most interested in examining the various aspects of their necessary capabilities in significant detail, the essential capability analysis elements (for eventual submission to JRIMS) are to:

Identify the high-level necessary capabilities

Establish traceability from those necessary capabilities to the tasks, missions, and overall department strategic guidance and authorities;

and

Establish quantifiable measures of success and metrics that sufficiently indicate that the desired effect has been achieved

Sponsors compare each identified capability gap to their current and programmed future capabilities to determine if any of the gaps present an unacceptable level of risk to accomplishing the department’s missions, functions, or objectives. Unacceptable risks would warrant further

5 A capability is the means to accomplish a mission, function, or objective. DHS Lexicon, Terms and Definitions 2014 Edition development of materiel or non-materiel capability fulfillment solution approaches to mitigate or eliminate the capability gaps.

Sponsors may recommend the most appropriate approach to address the capability gap and mitigate or manage risk.

Approaches to Analysis

When the Sponsor undertakes an analytic approach, they are required to consider and address the following areas:

Describe the mission/function/capability and the problem being assessed

Identify and assess previous studies and other analytic products applicable to the topic

Identify capabilities and tasks required to meet mission objectives

Identify measurement of successful accomplishment of the mission, function, or objective (i.e., metrics and required levels)

Assess the current status of fielded and operating capabilities in terms of performance, capacity, readiness and resources

Identify gaps between the necessary capabilities identified and current or programmed capabilities across the Department

Identify key actors that are currently, or could/should be included in the execution of the mission or would be impacted by the mission

Assess the risks of identified capability gaps that impact the Department’s ability to fulfil its missions, functions and objectives

Evaluate potential non-materiel and materiel approaches as solutions that mitigate part or all of the gaps and/or to satisfy the necessary capabilities

Recommend current or future Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E) efforts which could result in a solution

Recommend the most appropriate approach to be taken to mitigate the gaps and reduce risk

Types of Capability Analysis

A Capability Analysis (CA) provides a robust assessment of a mission area (or similarly bounded set of activities) to determine the capability and capacity of the Department to successfully complete the mission, function, or objective. The analytical work conducted as part of a CA provides the traceability between DHS strategic guidance, mission areas, threat assessments, and development of necessary solutions. An in-depth guide on conducting a CA is provided in Appendix A. Types of CAs include:

Capabilities-Based Assessment (CBA). A CBA is an examination of a current mission’s needs and the Component’s ability to perform that mission.

Components may have their own methodologies for conducting CBAs, which may be used to conduct analysis that forms the basis of documentation submitted to JRIMS, provided these processes address the requirements of JRIMS submissions. Activities within a CBA may include:

Define tasks based on mission needs

Identify hazards and assess risks

Identify risk control and mitigation options

Evaluate risks and potential gain of different actions

Execute the decision

Monitor the situation

Business Case Analysis (BCA). A BCA is a general analytic approach used to identify and present alternatives and supporting information to leadership for a decision. Components may have their own methodologies for conducting a BCA. Provided that these processes address the required JRIMS document contents, Components may provide their own BCA for submission to JRIMS. A BCA presents all relevant facts and issues, available options, and a recommended action. The BCA:

Defines the mission, scope, and boundaries of the function under study

Clearly defines the organization, manpower, costs, and resources of the current function

Presents a comparison to other possible sources

Presents options for consideration with an analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of each option

Lessons Learned. Lessons learned may serve as the basis to identify necessary capabilities, if the documentation suggests that mitigation of capability gaps and reduction of risk is worth the resources required to implement the change. It may be necessary to perform additional analysis of lessons learned prior to development of necessary capability documents for validation by the JRC.

Mission Analysis. The purpose of mission analysis is to assess the ability to successfully carry out a specific mission in the future. The projected future mission is described as the current mission gap and the impact of current deficiencies on operational effectiveness. Potential solutions are identified that would fulfill the mission requirements. A comparison is made between the current mission capability and its costs versus an estimated life cycle cost range for potential alternatives.

Capability Documentation

Purpose

Capability documents serve as a means for Sponsors to document capability gaps and corresponding new or modified capability requirements, along with other relevant information. These documents can also present opportunities to increase efficiency and effectiveness through the identification of capability redundancy, overlap, and fragmentation. This documentation is consolidated in the JRIMS Knowledge Management and Decision Support (KMDS) system which serves to improve Department-wide visibility on capabilities and capability requirements. It also supports validation and prioritization determinations throughout the system.

Capability documents are generally submitted only when the Sponsor deems the risk of unmitigated capability gaps to be unacceptable.

All capability documents are drafted in accordance with the formats provided below and, other than for Urgent Operational Needs (UON), submitted to the JRIMS Gatekeeper for review via the processes outlined in Enclosure C. Submitted at different times, each capability document undergoes the JRIMS process.

Capability documents are staffed for review and validation by the JRC or the designated Component validation authority. Capability documents are not used to support validation of successor capability documents or to support other capability analysis until they have been validated by the appropriate authority.

Validated capability documents, including those validated at the Component level, are archived in KMDS in order to provide visibility to all stakeholders. The validated capability documents in KMDS serve as the basis for development of individual materiel and non-materiel solutions, a primary source of information for assessment within and across portfolios, and support for acquisition, resourcing, and other decisions across the Department.

Capability Documents

Sponsors develop the following capability documents for entry into JRIMS:

Capability Analysis Report (CAR). Submitted to JRIMS, a CAR is an assessment of the Department’s ability to fulfill a mission, objective, or function. It provides traceability between strategic guidance; operational missions and objectives; threat and hazards; and necessary capabilities. The

CAR identifies capability gaps, redundancies, fragmentation, and overlaps;

and provides recommendations for either a materiel or non-materiel approach to mitigate those gaps/overlaps. Development of a CAR can be fulfilled by any or part of the above recommended approaches to analysis. The analysis documented in the CAR supports the development of Non-Materiel Change Recommendation (NMCR) and/or Mission Need Statement (MNS). A guide to CAR development is included in Appendix C to this manual.

Non-Materiel Change Recommendation (NMCR). A NMCR is prepared after completion of the CAR and recommends partially or wholly mitigating one or more identified capability gaps with non-materiel solutions, through changes to one or more of the ten DOTmLPF-R/G/S areas. The ten DOTmLPF-R/G/S areas are:

Doctrine: Authoritative statements of one or more guiding principles. Doctrine encompasses the fundamental principles which guide an organization and shapes the effort. Policy includes the process implemented through plans and procedures towards realization of doctrine and guides the effort. Strategy is the solution approach to achieve policy goals and accomplishes the effort.

Implementation of change recommendations to DHS doctrine which are validated in the JRIMS process are coordinated with existing development and/or revision processes.

Organization: An element with varied functions enabled by a structure through which individuals cooperate systematically to accomplish a mission and directly provide or support joint capabilities. Subordinate elements of organizations coordinate with other elements and, as a whole, enable the higher-level unit or element to accomplish its mission. This includes the staffing required to plan, operate, sustain, and reconstitute joint capabilities.

Implementation of change recommendations to joint organizations which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing processes.

Training: A method of providing information to individuals, units, and staffs using doctrine or other procedures to prepare personnel to respond to mission requirements considered necessary by the Components to execute their assigned or anticipated missions.

Training also pertains to non-materiel aspects of operation and maintenance of materiel solutions. Implementation of change recommendations to training programs which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing development and/or revision processes.

Materiel: All items (including ships, aircraft, radios, IT resources etc., and related spares, repair parts, and support equipment, but excluding real property, installations, and utilities) necessary to equip, operate, maintain, and support Departmental activities without distinction as to its application for administrative or operational purposes. The letter “m” in the acronym is usually lower case since NMCRs do not advocate new materiel development, but rather advocate increased quantities of fielded materiel solutions or use in alternate applications. Implementation of change recommendations to existing materiel which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated with the Sponsor(s) responsible for the materiel impacted by the recommended change.

Leadership & Education: Professional development of leaders is the product of a learning continuum that comprises training, experience, education, and self-improvement. Education complements training, experience, and self-improvement to produce the most professionally competent individuals possible. Implementation of change recommendations to leadership and education programs, which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing development and/or revision processes.

Personnel: Entity responsible for ensuring that qualified personnel exist to support necessary capabilities across the Department. The Components accomplish this through synchronized efforts to ensure success of ongoing operations, thereby meeting mission objectives.

Implementation of change recommendations to joint personnel which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing development and/or revision processes.

Facilities: Real property, which consists of one or more of the following: buildings, structures, utility systems, associated roads and other pavements, and underlying land. Implementation of change recommendations to facilities which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing processes.

Regulations: A Department statement of general applicability and future effect, which is intended to have the force and effect of law, and is designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy, or to describe the procedure or practice Department requirements.

Implementation of change recommendations to regulations which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing development and/or revision processes.

Grants: A legal instrument of financial assistance between the Department, or pass-through entity, and a non-federal entity.

Implementation of change recommendations to grants which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing development and/or revision processes.

Standards: The common and repeated use of rules, definitions, conditions, guidelines, or characteristics for products or related processes, procedures and production methods, and related Department management systems practices. Implementation of change recommendations to standards which are validated in the JRIMS process is coordinated through existing development and/or revision processes.

The DOTmLPF-R/G/S analysis generally results in one or more NMCRs without the need for the preparation or delivery of any additional capability documents.

NMCRs that impact only the Sponsor’s organization may be reviewed, validated, and implemented in accordance with the policies and procedures of the Sponsor’s organization. However, these documents are submitted to JRIMS for information in order to permit the JRC to maintain awareness and visibility of on-going efforts across the Department.

If the Sponsor or the JRC determines that a NMCR impacts multiple Components, then the Sponsor generates a NMCR for review and validation within JRIMS.

Materiel Capability Documents

There are three types of materiel capability documents which are successor documents to the CAR. They are as follows:

Mission Need Statement (MNS). The purpose of the MNS is to summarize, at a high level, specific functional capabilities required to accomplish DHS and Component missions and objectives. The MNS is used to provide a strategic framework for acquisition planning and capability delivery. The sponsoring Component develops the MNS in sufficient detail for reviewers to understand the need for the capability. The MNS provides the basis for rendering an acquisition decision/initial authorization to proceed to an acquisition program or project. The MNS is prepared and validated during the Need Phase of the DHS Acquisition Life Cycle Framework (ALF) to support ADE 1 per DHS MD 102-01. A guide to MNS development and formatting is attached in Appendix E to this section.

Concept of Operations (CONOPS). The CONOPS is both an analysis tool and a formal document that describes how an asset, system, or capability will be employed and supported. It identifies the capabilities needed to perform the missions and fill the gaps expressed in the MNS, and to assist in identifying and selecting balanced solutions in the Analysis of Alternatives (AoA) or Alternative Analysis (AA) process. The CONOPS describes a proposed asset, system, or capability in terms of how it will fulfill the user requirements, its relationship to existing assets, systems, capabilities or procedures, and the ways it will be used in actual operations or business processes. It identifies the asset, system, or capability characteristics from the viewpoint of any individual or organizational entity that will use or who will operate or interact directly with it. An initial or preliminary CONOPS may be prepared in the Need Phase of the ALF and will be revised, finalized, and validated during the Analyze/Select Phase of the ALF to support ADE 2A.

More information on development of the CONOPS is included in the DHS Systems Engineering Life Cycle (SELC) Guidebook and a guide to CONOPS development and formatting is attached in Appendix F to this section.

Operational Requirements Document (ORD). High level operational requirements are reflected in the ORD. Operational requirements are defined to capture the business or top level operational user needs without regard to the technical aspects of the solution. Operational requirements describe the mission, objectives, and operational capabilities that are desired in the proposed solution. Operational requirements trace to one or more of the capability gaps documented in the MNS. Additional operational requirements can be derived from the CONOPS. Operational requirements consist of both operational effectiveness requirements and operational suitability requirements. Operational effectiveness requirements describe what a capability or system is supposed to do at the operational level (e.g., detect defined explosive threats in a particular operational environment).

Operational suitability requirements describe what a system is supposed to “be” (e.g., reliability, personnel safety, ruggedness or survivability). The ORD will also include the Critical Operation Issues (COIs) from the Operational Test Authority. Initial operational requirements may be identified in the Need Phase of the ALF. Operational requirements will be refined, finalized, and validated during the Analyze/Select Phase of the ALF and documented in the ORD to support ADE 2A. More information on development of the Operational Requirements is included in the DHS SELC Guidebook and a guide to ORD development and formatting is attached as Appendix G.

Determination of Appropriate Actions within JRIMS

Issues Not Requiring Action. Not all capability gaps result in an associated JRIMS action, as each is a balance between the risk acceptances of a capability gap, the availability of cost-effective or affordable mitigation approaches, the life cycle costs associated with developing and sustaining a solution, and other factors.6

2.4.1.1 New capability documents may not be necessary if the Sponsor identifies solutions currently available, or in development.

6 Risk Acceptance is the explicit or implicit decision not to take an action that would affect all or part of a particular risk. Risk acceptance is one of four risk management strategies, along with risk avoidance, risk control, and risk transfer.

2.4.1.2 If solutions which can satisfy the Sponsor’s requirements do not exist in the Department, but the Sponsor recommends accepting risk of no further capability development, then it may not be necessary to generate a capability document (pending further review of the Sponsor’s recommendation.)

Figure 2: Appropriate Actions within JRIMS

Issues Requiring JRIMS Action. If the Sponsor identifies necessary capabilities which they cannot satisfy internally with currently available or programmed solutions, there could be a capability gap that may require further action.

2.4.2.1 If solutions which can satisfy the Sponsor’s requirements exist elsewhere in the Department, but is organic to the Sponsor’s organization, the JRC in coordination with PARM and CIO, for IT solutions, will consider this request during review:

Sponsors articulate why leveraging other capabilities of the Department is not appropriate to fulfill the mission, function, or objective. The JRC, in coordination with PARM (and CIO for IT related solutions) will consider this request during review.

To leverage only portions of fielded capability solutions (to be integrated into one or more of the Sponsor’s other solutions) the Sponsor may generate an NMCR for validation in JRIMS to establish the requirement.

2.4.2.2 If solutions that satisfy the Sponsor’s necessary capabilities do not exist in the Department, the Sponsor has three primary options:

For non-materiel solutions that impact only the Sponsor organization, the Sponsor reviews, validates, and implements the identified solution in accordance with policies and processes of that Component.

For non-materiel solutions that impact more than the Sponsor organization, the Sponsor generates an NMCR for validation in JRIMS to establish a new non-materiel solution in the Sponsor’s organization.

If necessary capabilities can be satisfied through a materiel approach (or a combination of material and non-material) the Sponsor generates a MNS and its successor documents (CONOPS and ORD) for validations in JRIMS.

Figure 3: Document Sequencing

Document Sequencing

Capability document sequences do not have to follow a linear progression. It is particularly important to recognize the interdependent relationship between developing a CONOPS and the ORD. See the Solutions Engineering Section of the SELC Guidebook for more discussion of the ORD and CONOPS development.

The CAR is the most common starting point to document necessary capabilities. In some cases, a CAR may result in a combination of materiel and non-materiel approaches.

When a non-materiel solution is identified, an NMCR is developed.

When a materiel solution is identified, a MNS is developed.

2.5.3.1 A MNS leads to an initial CONOPS which is both an analysis tool and a document that describes how an asset, system, or capability will be employed and supported in response to a gap identified in the MNS. The MNS and initial CONOPS will result in an initial set of proposed operational requirements.

2.5.3.2 Upon completion of the AoA/AA and the final CONOPS, the final operational requirements will be defined. The preferred solution must be entirely consistent and complementary with the final operational requirements and the final user-approved CONOPS.

2.5.3.3 Once the final operational requirements are defined, the ORD is prepared.

Figure 4: Document Combining and Splitting

Combining and Splitting Sequences.

2.5.4.1 An NMCR may be developed without a validated CAR, provided that the NMCR specifies the necessary capabilities and associated gaps for review and validation.

2.5.4.2 One CAR may lead to the creation of both a NMCR and MNS when there are both non-materiel and materiel solutions proposed.

One MNS may lead to the creation of multiple successor documents (for example, multiple CONOPS/ORDs), each of which may contribute to satisfying the necessary capabilities and closing or mitigating capability gaps identified in the MNS.

Two or more MNS may lead to the creation of a single CONOPS or ORD, when the capability solution to be developed satisfies more than one necessary capability and closes/mitigates more than one associated capability gap.

Updates to Documents.

2.5.5.1 Updates to a capability document may be required if the Sponsor proposes changes to the necessary capabilities after validation, or if changes are made in Departmental strategy, guidance, or authorities. If updates are required:

2.5.5.2 The validation authority retains change authority, unless otherwise delegated in the validation memo. The validation authority issues a signed new or updated validation memo to indicate approval of the updated document.

2.5.5.3 The updated documents are not authoritative until the document and associated signed validation memo are provided to the JRIMS Gatekeeper for archiving.

2.5.5.4 In accordance with the guidance in this Manual, the Sponsor reviews each predecessor document for continuing relevance, prior to the development of successor documents.