Headquarters U.S. Air Force Integrity - Service -

Headquarters U.S. Air Force Integrity - Service - Excellen ce Acquisition Strategy Panel (ASP) Template This template is for guidance and is not mandatory Rank, Name Office Symbol Date of Briefing Version # Please refer to the notes section for valuable guidance Updated: April 18 Outline Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF) Program Structure Program Schedule Factors shaping strategy Capability Needs Affordability Program Cost Est./Funding Program Risks Technology Transition Acquisition Strategy Framing Assumption Proposed System Engineering 2 Product Support Strategy Test and Evaluation Business Considerations Competition Strategy/Market Research Contract Parameters Data Rights

Small Business What Worries me Recommendations Back-Up Program Office Industrial Base/ International Cooperation Additional Acquisition Topics Samples HQ AF ASPs will be scheduled for 1 hour I n office t e g goal r i t should y - S be e rtovpresent i c e - no E more x c ethan l l e~30-35 n c e charts. Program Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF) (Decisions Requested & Key program information) Decisions you are requesting Approve Acquisition Strategy (see notes) Approve Applicable delegations/waivers (e.g., Source Selection Authority) Major Issues List show stoppers What are your concerns? Losing Funding Dont wait to the end to bring up the negatives! 3 Notes I See nteg r i t y page - S e r for v i cadditional e - E x c e l linformation ence Program X Structure (Strategy on a page) Requirements/Direction

Using Organization(s) Capabilities Document ICD, CDD, CPD Joint requirement Decision Authority MDA PEO Program AFPEO/XX ACAT Level SSA FMS Technical Risk ADM Delegations: In work - e.g.., SSA, ASP Chair, LCMP Financial Data Strategy Est. Contract Value (Pre-EMD) Est. Total Program (qty) - $ Fund Type (Pre-EMD) e.g.., 3600 New Start (Congressional) Competitive or sole source Incremental Contract Type Estimated Contract Award Schedule MS A MS B IOC Integrity - Service - Excellence 4 Sample Program X Schedule Time Now FY: 2014 2015 2016 Milestones: Concept Decision MS A 2017 2018

MS B 2019 2020 CDR 2021 MS C 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 IOC (6/6) FRP Development RFP Review Capabilities Documents ICD CPD CDD Tech Demo LEGEND Program Milestone Govt Milestone Major Contract Events RFP Rel CA Development EMD PDR CT&E IBR Logistics PRODUCTION


Discuss the capability required (AS Template Para 2) Effect of Capability and gap it will mitigate CONOPS, OV-1 Key Performance Parameters (KPPs) and Key System Attribute (KSAs) Discuss Reliability, Maintainability and Availability requirements Acquisition Approach (Evolutionary) as it relates to meeting need Address length of the Increments (see footnotes on length) Discuss what collaboration has been accomplished in developing these capabilities. How has industry been involved? How have they influenced requirements? Identify requirements Industry has indicated they cant meet either in the capability document or the affordability goal I n t e g r i t y - SSee e r vnotes ice - Excellence Factors Shaping Strategy Affordability Requirement Discuss your affordability goals (AS Template Para 8.2.1) Do you have enough information to develop an affordability goal? Using both the average unit acquisition cost and average annual operating and support cost per unit what will you be able to present at MS A/B? Discuss strategy for achieving this KPP like topic Identify specific contract provisions (e.g., goals and Incentives in RFP) Identify changes to quantities such as EOQs that are necessary to achieve target Identify schedule changes necessary to achieve goal Impact of procurement rate (EOQ) and schedule on the affordability goal What is the source of the Affordability Requirement? Integrity - Service - Excellence 8 Affordability Caps: Notional System Cost Drivers & Trade Excursions Plan Description Trade Excursion

Affordability Goals Description Cost Target Speed/Range Tradeoff Review 2Q FY11 - Reliability Growth RAM Study 3Q FY11 - Engine Redesign NAVAIR /CTR Focus Group 3Q FY11 Independent Logistics Assessment 3Q FY12 NAVAIR Tiger Team 3Q FY12 JROC Review 4Q FY12 - Range Readjustment APUC Date $27.8M O&S $40.3B - Prognostics & Health Mgmt. - F/A-XY Avionics Reuse - Reduced Ordnance Load Discussion Points: #1 #2 #3 ofi the I n Indicate t e g r i tthe

y source - Serv c e Affordability - E x c e l l Cap ence 9 Factors Shaping Strategy - Cost Capability Analysis Discuss what is included in the acquisition strategy to help find the right balance between operational capabilities and affordability How will the acquisition strategy examine the trade space between operational requirements and cost? Discuss the plan for conducting cost capability analysis during the TMRR phase to identify opportunities to trade off operational capabilities to achieve a more affordable program Which requirements are the most costly and/or risky? Which requirements could result in cost savings if adjusted? Where is the knee in the cost capability curve for the most costly or risky requirements? How do you plan to engage with industry to get their understanding of how requirements might be traded off to make the program more affordable? I n t eFOCUS g r i t y IS - SON e r THE v i c TMRR e - E xPHASE cellence 10 Factors Shaping Strategy Program Cost Estimate/Funding Identify your cost estimate and methodology (AS Template Para 8) Identify the Confidence level (55-80%)* Include LCC estimate (product support %) Identify if it is a Program Office Estimate/Service Cost Position Address any AFCAA/OSD CAPE issues that may exist Specifically address funding shortfalls

Explain your budget plans RDT&E plan for executing obligation and expenditure Explain what MAJCOM commitment exists to cover shortfall as applicable 11 *See Provide an overall funding chart (see next chart) Notes Page Proffer a fully funded Acquisition Strategy I n t e g r i t y - SSee e r vNotes i c e - Page Excellence Mandatory Acquisition to O&S Cost Ratio Total Req'd Acq (BYXX$M): 4,456 Total Req'd O&S (BYXX$M): 10,358 Program Funding & Quantities ($ in Millions / Then Year) RDT&E Prior $ (PB 17) Current $ (POM 18) Delta $ (Current - Prior) Required1 $ Delta $ (Current - Required) Prior FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 (BY yyyy) PAUC: APUC: FY21 FY22 Curr Est D Current 55.7M +4.6% 50.4M -3.2%

D Original +10.2% +60.2% FY18-22 To Comp Prog Total Prim ary Line Items: APPN 0400D - BA 7 - PE 1160403BB; APPN 1319N - BA 5 - PE 0604262N; APPN 3600F - BA 5 - PE 0401318F 108.0 108.0 108.0 - PROCUREMENT Prior $ (PB 17) Current $ (POM 18) Delta $ (Current - Prior) Required1 $ Delta $ (Current - Required) FY16 30% 70% 32.4 30.0 (2.4) 32.4 (2.4) 44.2 43.1 (1.1) 44.2 (1.1) 45.1 45.6 0.5 45.6 - 37.9 38.3 0.4 46.0 (7.7) 12.4 12.5 0.1 15.0 (2.5) 5.3 5.4 0.1 6.5 (1.1)

3.2 3.2 4.0 (0.8) 103.9 105.0 1.1 117.1 (12.1) - 288.5 286.1 (2.4) 301.7 (15.6) Prim ary Line Item s: APPN 0300D - BA 2 - BLI 1000CV2200; APPN 1506N - BA 1 - BLI 0164; APPN 3010F - BA 4 - BLI V022A0 - 99.9 99.5 (0.4) 99.9 (0.4) MILCON 150.4 148.2 (2.2) 150.4 (2.2) 200.2 203.1 2.9 203.1 - 304.8 309.2 4.4 312.3 (3.1) 618.6 522.9 (95.7) 528.1 (5.2) 627.6 530.5 (97.1) 535.8

(5.3) 360.1 538.1 178.0 543.5 (5.4) 2,111.3 2,103.8 (7.6) 2,122.8 (19.0) 2,257.3 1,954.5 (302.8) 1,974.1 (19.5) 4,618.9 4,306.0 (313.0) 4,347.1 (41.2) Primary Line Item s: APPN 0500D - BA 1 - PE 1140494BB; APPN 1205N - BA 1 - PE 0204696N Prior $ (PB 17) Current $ (POM 18) Delta $ (Current - Prior) Required1 $ Delta $ (Current - Required) - - - 6.1 6.1 6.1 - 2 SYSTEM O&M Prior $ (PB 17) Current $ (POM 18) Delta $ (Current - Prior) Required1 $ Delta $ (Current - Required) 1.3 1.4 0.1 1.4 -

1.6 1.7 0.1 1.7 - - 2.1 2.0 (0.1) 2.0 - 2.3 2.1 (0.2) 2.1 - 3.0 3.0 3.0 - 9.0 8.8 (0.2) 8.8 - 15.3 12.6 (2.7) 12.6 - 25.6 22.8 (2.8) 22.8 - Prim ary Line Items: APPN 0100D - BA 1 - PE 1120172BB; APPN 1106N - BA 1 - PE 0206312M 8.3 8.3 8.3 - 10.4 11.4 1.0 11.4 - 26.5 29.2 2.7

29.2 - 37.8 41.6 3.8 41.6 - 55.0 60.5 5.5 60.5 - 91.4 98.6 7.2 98.6 - 221.1 241.2 20.1 241.2 - 5,904.8 (5,904.8) 235.5 255.6 20.1 6,160.4 (5,904.8) 257.3 261.8 4.5 261.8 - 369.2 376.6 7.4 387.4 (10.8) 670.9 579.0 (91.9) 586.7 (7.7) 690.2 598.5 (91.7) 604.9 (6.4)

457.7 642.9 185.2 649.1 (6.2) 2,445.3 2,458.8 13.5 2,489.9 (31.1) 2,272.6 1,967.1 (305.5) 7,891.4 (5,924.3) 5,168.5 4,870.5 (298.0) 10,832.0 (5,961.5) TOTAL Prior $ (PB 17) Current $ (POM 18) Delta $ (Current - Prior) Required1 $ Delta $ (Current - Required) QUANTITIES 108.0 108.0 108.0 - 138.4 135.6 (2.8) 138.4 (2.8) 204.2 201.0 (3.2) 204.3 (3.3) 3 Prior Qty (PB 17) 0 2 3 4 6 12 12

0 34 41 80 Current Qty (POM 18) 0 2 3 4 6 10 10 10 40 35 80 Delta Qty (Current - Prior) 0 0 0 0 0 (2) (2) 10 6 (6) 0 Required1 Qty 0 2 3 4 6 9 9 9 37 38 80 Delta Qty (Current - Required) 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 (3) 0 Note 1. Requirement Source: [e.g., OSD CAPE ICE, July 2017] Note 2. O&M requirement assumes [e.g., a service life to 2035; includes ctr field mx, petro/oil/lube, spare/repair parts, depot mx, sustaining engineering & software mx.] This line does not include $8.3M (FY18-22) of Acquisition-related O&M for program office expenses, nor does it include O&M-funded disposal costs. Note 3. Quantities in FY16-17 are funded with RDT&E. Version POM 18.1 Integrity - Service - Excellence

Program Risks Sample Chart (AS Template Para 6) Insufficient funding to execute aircraft buys Date Consequence Likelihood Driver: Two Forward Price Rate Agreement (FPRA) increases (driven by a reduction in the base vs. predictions, erosion in the commercial business, efficiencies in production, a recent strike, and pension liabilities) and potential additional rate impacts due to Pension Protection Act compliance and projected business base loss in FY14 due to fewer aircraft buys are creating budget pressure to execute yearly budgeted a/c quantities and pressurizing APB and Nunn-McCurdy acquisition thresholds. Mitigation Plan: Finalize technical evaluation and negotiation Assess future rate increases and impacts on FYDP(ongoing) Pension Protection Act assessment (AIR 4.2 Lead) Business base (DCMA lead) Continue to Pursue cost reduction/control initiatives Update program managers cost estimate Engage Service for funding resolution Support PEO(A)/DCMA rate control initiative with company Date: Oct 10 (FRP decision) Ability to Achieve Affordability Goals to Meet Inventory Objectives Driver: Higher than anticipated costs due to enterprise growth (overhead rates); raw materials; cabin; supplier performance; increased labor hours. Two rate increases (driven by a reduction in the base vs. predictions, erosion in the commercial business, efficiencies in production, a recent strike, and pension liabilities) have recently created additional budget pressure. Mitigation Plan: Establish Affordability plan Implement GFE CRIs (Engines, OTO) Obtain Advanced Procurement in FY10 Execute Long Term Agreements/Long Term Contracts Finalize inspection requirements Assess impacts of PB11 Budget and rate increases with Lot 7 Production Proposal Include spares in production contract Complete Business Case Analysis for MYP If supported by BCA, ensure MYP budget approval/lay-in and implement MYP to begin in FY14 Date: On-going Failure to Meet Total Ownership Cost Reduction Goals Driver: Delayed I and D level standup, dynamic component DL&T disposition, extended ICS, items not making reliability targets Mitigation Plan: Conduct BCA for long term sustainment/PBL strategy Stand up Organic Intermediate and Depot Level repair Approval of H-1 DL&Ts Execute 5 year Interim Support Plan contract awards CILR drives component redesign efforts/BCAs Date: Ongoing

Supply Chain Management to Support Increase to FRP Driver: Poor performance of key suppliers, long lead times (bearings, forgings, castings), LLT purchase orders, staffing, parts shortages, and limited capacity in critical suppliers Mitigation Plan: Obtain Advanced Procurement in FY10 Hire Govt Supply Chain Manager (V-22) Identify dual source for critical suppliers Rationalize supply base Place reps on-site at critical suppliers Hire staffing to meet demand Utilize company gated process for outsourcing Award FY10 Long Lead Support Prime key supplier visits with govt reps Production Readiness Review (support FRP decision) Date: COMPLETE Jul 10 (Risk will be closed) SEE NOTES PAGE and BACKUP SLIDES Integrity - Service - Excellence 13 Sample Chart Critical Technology Element Technology Readiness (AS Template Para 6.3) TRL Incr 1 9 X 6 Incr 2 (TRL) X 9 X 8 X 9 X 9 X

7. System prototype demonstration in a operational environment X 5 X 6 X 6 X X 6 X 9 X 8 X 8 X 9. Actual system flight proven through successful mission operations 8. Actual system completed and flight qualified through test and demo 7 9 Technology Readiness Levels 6. System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment 5. Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment 4. Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment 3. Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proofof-concept 2. Technology concept and/or application formulated 1. Basic principles observed and reported

I n t e g See r i t yNotes - S e rPage vice - Excellence 20 14 PRE-DECISIONAL NOT FOR RELEASE Acquisition Strategy SAMPLE Framing Assumption #1 Purpose-built will be competitive with existing designs Framing Assumption Implications Expectations Basic aircraft and training system designs will be complete through vendor-conducted CDRs Enter at MS B Limited EMD of deltas to meet spec PDR and competitive prototype waivers applicable* Best-value source selection must consider risk Contractor flight data to validate performance Single step to full capability Single award for EMD, Prod and ICS

RAA in 2023 FOC in 2031 *Air Force will still conduct comprehensive PDR and Critical Design Review (CDR) events postcontract award in support of Better Buying Power (BBP) 3.0 Strengthen organic engineering capabilities and SAF/AQs OTB Initiative. See Notes I n t ePage g r i for t y more - S eexamples r v i c e - ofE framing x c e l l assumptions ence 15 PRE-DECISIONAL NOT FOR RELEASE Acquisition Strategy Sample Framing Assumption #2 APT requirements only Framing Assumption Implications Expectations Mature technologies and systems available Single step, limited EMD, waivers etc. AETC sole customer Separate PPBE process for other T-38 owners Separate Planning Programming Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) process for APT derivative use capabilities r i t-y S - S v iicce e- E- x E

c exl c l een cl e I n t e gI nrt ietg y eerr v lence IOC 2023 16 Acquisition Strategy Alt Sample Framing Assumptions Assumption* Implications** Expectations*** Design is Mature Production Schedule to IOC will be concurrency possible achieved Threat levels Capability changes will not change unlikely much in the next 5 years Costs to stay on track Commercial demand will reduce unit cost Production cost Est is realistic No additional funding needed nor cost growth Schedule Incentive will motivate Ktr Schedule will be achieved Warfighter IOC date will be met Metric**** Schedule growth below historical median

See Notes pages for information 17 Integrity - Service - Excellence Proposed Acquisition Strategy The Acquisition Strategy defines the approach the program will use to achieve full capability: either evolutionary or single step; it should include a brief rationale to justify the choice. (AS Template Para 3) 18 If evolutionary acquisition approach, summarize the cost, schedule, and performance drivers for the increment under consideration, and the plan to transition from the initial increment to later increments. Specify any unique program circumstances Are you replacing an existing system (modification or new capability) New Start Is this a joint program? Identify Service(s)/DoD Components; Service-specific technical and operational differences; roles and responsibilities; and program funding If MS B or C total planned production and LRIP quantities. If LRIP quantity exceeds 10% provide justification. Address and regulatory tailoring necessary for program efficiency SEE BACK UP for sample charts on alternatives considered and rationale I n t e g r i t y -forSthe e strategy r v i cselected e - Excellence Business Strategy 19 Integrity - Service - Excellence Competition Strategy/Market Research Competition Strategy (7.1) (BBP Initiative) (AS Template Para 7.1) Explain how a competitive environment will be sought, promoted, and sustained throughout all program phases. Summarize the competition strategy for the upcoming phase

Where head-to-head competition is not possible, explain how dissimilar competition or other competitive approaches will be used Market Research (7.2) (AS Template pare 7.2) Summarize research conducted and results. Indicate the specific impact of those results on the various elements of the program. Plans for continuing market research to support the program throughout development and production. Plans for getting industry insights on potential requirements and cost trade space to support AFs cost capability analysis Sole Source Authority(AS Template Para 7.5..1.5) 20 Identify legal authority and basis Planned Action to obtain future competition (e.g., buying tech data package & associated intellectual property rights Integrity - Service - Excellence Competition Strategy/Market Research Source Selection Approach List the known sources (AS Template Para 7.5.5) Source Selection Procedures/Organization (AS Template Para 7.5.4) Address the Source Selection experience of the team (see notes) Best Value approach (e.g., Trade-off/Lowest Price Technically Acceptable) Only use LPTA when able to clearly define Technical Acceptability Evaluation Criteria with Weighting Tied to Risks and Significant Discriminators Evaluation CriteriaSection L&M criteria Factor/subfactor weightings Identify the criteria that will be used to select the winning bidder. Indicate how those criteria reflect the key government goals for the program. How will data and data rights acquisition be evaluated Be prepared to Discuss in detail See notes section for OSD guidance 21 Integrity - Service - Excellence Contract Parameters Contract Type (BBP Initiative) (AS Template Para 7.5) Need to discuss the rationale for your contract type

What measures are in place to control contract costs? Describe type & number of contracts expected & why you chose that approachwill this reduce program risk? Have you considered breakout of subsystems? Contract Structure (Length, Options, CLINs) Special Terms and Conditions E.g., Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI), Pricing Matrix, Warranty of Data (DFARS 252.246-7001), warranties, Advance procurement If an Undefinitized Contract Action (UCA) is planned discuss rationale and what led to this situation as well as get well plan Subcontractor Management 22 Make or Buy considerations Integrity - Service - Excellence Contract Parameters Contract Incentives Discuss planned Incentives (AS Template Para 7.5.2) What are the key program risks and how can incentives help to mitigate risks and improve probability of success? What Objective Incentives were considered and why? Award Fee 23 How is award fees linked to the acquisition outcomescost, schedule and performance? How is award fee tied to specific challenges, commitments & delivered capability versus just effort Are there negative incentives for overrun or poor performance?

If more than one incentive is planned explain how the incentives complement each other and do not conflict. Why will the incentive motivate the contractor? Integrity - Service - Excellence Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy 24 What do you need? (AS Template Para 7.6) What technical data rights & deliverables will be needed throughout the systems life cycle? Are they sufficient to ensure competition at both prime & subcontract level throughout lifecycle (including system/subsystem upgrades & maintenance (CLS/ Depot). What are minimum rights the Air Force can accept, (e.g., rights sufficient to operate, train, maintain, & install new equipment, competition)? Summarize prior contracts associated with delivery of technical data & rights in tech data How will you buy it? Discuss strategy to buy technical data/data rights starting in the Technology Development phase. For a competitive procurement, describe evaluation factors that will be used to assess the price and adequacy of the technical data during source selection. Discuss use of options for delivery of technical data and obtaining additional rights in the technical data. Assess merits of including a priced contract option for future (or deferred) delivery of technical data and intellectual property rights. (See DOD 5010.12-M Chapter 5 for pricing data.) Discuss strategy for acquiring SW (source code, documentation, and development artifacts) How will you manage it? What approach will be used to ensure delivery and adequacy of data? e.g., use of withholds, warranties, engineering data guidance conference & sub-ktr reviews How will program office verify contractors assertion of restricted use & release of data? SEE NOTES PAGE Integrity - Service - Excellence Small Business What does your Industrial Base Survey indicate is the small business (SB) Capability? (BBP Initiative) (AS Template Para 7.5.7) Identify NAICS ($s or employee size standard) and Product Service Code (PSC) used based on market intelligence Is this acquisition appropriate for a SB set -aside? If so, what are your recommendations? Breakout opportunities? Are there any bundling or consolidation decisions?

If no prime opportunities, describe your plan for SB participation Identify planned contract incentives to encourage aggressive SB subcontracting Identify percentage requirements for SB subcontracting How will small business be evaluated in source selection? Discuss your plan for post award monitoring Integrity - Service - Excellence 25 Systems Engineering (SE) Outline the open systems architecture approach, combined with technical data rights, the government will pursue in order to ensure a lifetime consideration of competition (AS Template various) Is there a reference implementation architecture and set of default standards for your domain of operation? Modular system and design disclosure: Have you identified key interfaces, data elements and sub-systems (incl. S/W) which should be open / common / standard? Systems Engineering Tradeoff analysis Discuss key requirements impacting Acquisition Strategy 26 Show your approach to determining how cost varies as the major design parameters and time to complete are traded off against each other Discuss requirements maturity and stability Discuss how Reliability, Maintainability and Availability are addressed in the SRD (AS Template Para 7.5.10) Integrity - Service - Excellence Systems Engineering Cont Discuss status of initial manufacturing concepts and their implementation (preMS B/C)? What is the status of LRIP manufacturing capabilities and ability to ramp up to full rate production? Status of Production Readiness Review What are the critical manufacturing elements? Plans for addressing manufacturability and maturity

Describe key SE components of the RFP and contract Identify SE RFP requirements and selection criteria (or address in the source selection part of brief) Identify SE contractual provisions to ensure contractor implements proposed approach 27 Is a configuration management plan required and, if so has one been developed? Have defense exportability features been considered in the initial designs (BBP Initiative) (AS Template pare 10.3) Integrity - Service - Excellence Cybersecurity & Resiliency Acquisition Strategy Panel Chart CyberSecurity and Resiliency Program Protection Cybersecurity (to include Trusted Systems and Networks (TSN)) Authority and Date concurrence SRD/ Spec Statement of Objectives (SOO) / Statement of Work (SOW) / Performance Work Statement (PWS) Request for FAR / DFARS Sufficiency Proposal / AFFARS Assessment (RFP) Section Clauses L / Section M Ex: Section 2.3 Ex: G

Critical Program Information / Anti-Tamper (AT) Security Management Cyber Resiliency Integrity Service Excellence 28 See Notes Page (AS Template Para 7.4) Mandatory Metrics Data Antecedent Actual Original Goal Current Goal Current Estimate/ Actual Materiel Availability 76% 80% 77% 71% Materiel Reliability 37 hrs 50 hrs 50.5 hrs 48 hrs Ownership Cost 245.6B

385.5B 395.1B 395.1B Mean Down Time 12 hrs 20 hrs 18 hrs 15 hrs Metric Product Support Strategy Sustainment Approach Current (initial CLS covering total system) Future (sub-system based PBL contracts) Issues Shortfall in O&M funding in FYDP Reliability and availability estimates are below goals LCSP requires update before DAB Resolution POM request for O&M restoration submitted Reliability improvement plan with clear RAM goals up for final signature LCSP in draft * Test or fielding event data derived from _______ Notes:

Today MS B Sustainment Schedule MS C IOC FRP BCA FOC BCA O&S Data Sustainment BCA BCA PBL Recompete LCSP LRIP Contract Award Avionics PBL CLS Start PBL Recompete Antecedent Cost ABC Original Baseline ABC Current Cost 1.0 Unit-Level Manpower 3.952 5.144 5.750 2.0 Unit Operations 6.052 6.851 6.852 3.0 Maintenance 0.739

0.605 0.688 4.0 Sustaining Support 2.298 2.401 2.401 5.0 Continuing System Improvements 0.129 0.025 0.035 6.0 Indirect Support 1.846 1.925 1.956 15.046 16.951 17.682 Cost Element Total Depot Standup Cost based on average annual cost per squadron Total O&S Costs Antecedent ABC Base Year $M 102,995.2 184,011.9 I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - EThenxYear c $Me l l e n c e245,665.3 395,147.2 Blended Partnership

Startup 29 Test and Evaluation Describe the T&E Strategy and how it supports the acquisition and requirements strategies (See notes). Identify issues regarding availability of production representative test articles, test facilities, Systems Integration Labs, Collaborative Development Environments Also describe capability shortfalls of the test ranges. Have you developed your TEMP? Do you have the time, budget, and assets required for test Are the Critical Operational Issues (COIs) linked to Critical Technical Parameters (CTP) and Measures of Effectiveness (MOE)? Is DDT&E and DOT&E involved? If so, what is their position regarding integrated testing economies What specific challenges are addressed through your test strategy? How have you incorporated Modeling and Simulation into your strategy and what challenge does this address 30 Integrity - Service - Excellence What Worries Me 31 This is an opportunity to communicate internal concerns to the SAE Discuss any issues that are of a particular concern to the PEO and PM (examples might be) OSD Oversight issues Funding instability Technical transition issues Congressional Interest Requirements stability Integrity - Service - Excellence

Recommendation Approve Acquisition Strategy Concept Allow program to draft Acquisition Strategy Approve applicable delegations Approve waivers and deviations Way ahead to AFRB and OSD DAB Staff reviews/OIPT (PEO reviews) 32 Integrity - Service - Excellence Back-Up See Footnotes for additional information 33 Integrity - Service - Excellence Back-ups Program Office Industrial Base Capability and International Cooperation Risk Additional Acquisition Topics Samples Affordability Should Cost Source Selection Acquisition Strategy Lessons Learned/FAR Part 2

Integrity - Service - Excellence 34 Program Office Organization, Experience and Manpower Provide Organizational Structure (Org Chart) (AS Template Para 9.1) Resources Address Critical manpower positions / program office manning & facilities Program Office Staffing & Support Contractor Resources Available to PM Identify Deputy PM, chief program engineer, lead program system engineer, lead cost analyst, product support manager and engineering data management officer (EDMO), contracting officer, financial manager, T&E Identify any shortage of personnel Identify current DAWIA (APDP) certification levels for all key government personnel (SPMs, PMs, etc) 35 Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) PMA tenure agreement Integrity - Service - Excellence Program Org Chart Sample OSD/AT&L SAF/AQ User ACC/A5XX PEO Col B Martin Lt Gen JP Jones Depot OO-ALC/XYZ Col Al Griggs PM Col John Smith

Program Control Maj D. MacArthur PC IPT 2 Captains 1 GS-12 5 Contractors Contracts Ms. Jane Smith Contracts IPT 2 Captains 1 GS-12 Sys Eng Maj Kelly Johnson Sys Eng IPT 2 Captains 1 GS-12 5 Contractors PSM Lt. Col T. Jones Test Maj C. Yeager Support IPT Test IPT 1 Captain 1 GS-12 4 Contractors 2 Captains 1 GS-12 5 Contractors Integrity - Service - Excellence 36 Industrial Base Capability and International Cooperation Industrial Capability Address industrys capability to design, develop, produce, support (product technology obsolescence, replacement of limited-life items, regeneration options for unique manufacturing processes, and conversion to performance specifications at the subsystems, component, and spares levels) , and, if appropriate, restart a program.

Address the need for government action necessary to ensure a robust US Industrial and Technical base Are new industrial base capabilities required? US or off-shore manufacturing? Diminishing Manufacturing Sources (DMS) International Cooperation/Foreign Military Sales 37 Do you have sufficient data and data rights for DMS? Defense Exportability considered in the design of the system? I n t eSee g r Notes i t y -section S e r to v iaddress c e - Ethese x c etopics llence Additional Acquisition Topics (if not addressed elsewhere) 38 Program Protection Planning Anti-Tamper Protection of Critical Program Information Information Assurance Trusted Foundry Clinger Cohen Act Certification progress (CCA) Environmental & Manufacturing/Quality Engineering Interdependencies/Interoperability

Information Technology Human Systems Integration Environment, Safety, Occupational Health Spectrum Management/Supportability Integrated Digital Environment Management (may address in the data rights section) Government Furnished Equipment/Property Modeling and Simulation Corrosion Control Intelligence Mission Data (IMD) Integrity - Service - Excellence Risk Mitigation Sample Risk ID & Title / Category Risk Statement: E.g.., Cost proposal exceeds budget Impact: Address impact of risk Likelihood: 4 Consequence: 4 Risk Rating: High (Red) Risk Management: Address mitigation approach (Describe risk handling plan, milestones and risk closure criteria. Specifically address cost, schedule and performance impacts and cost/schedule reserve (margin). Indicate what resources are required to cover the risk. What is the the performance impact?) Post Risk Management Rating: Likelihood=1, Consequence =2 (GREEN) All High and Moderate Risks should be identified. Recommend Program Office prepare a Risk Mitigation chart and provide in back-up Integrity - Service - Excellence

17 Should Cost Summary $M Total Acq Will Cost (ICE) FY12 Budget Authority 81.6 [Current Year] PB FY13 62.4 100.0 100.0 [Should Cost Initiative Title] Phase 1 Test Activities Phase 2 (Contract Award) Flight Body-2 Streamline Training Net Should Cost Savings Total Should Cost Estimate FY14 33.0 100.0 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 To Complete Total 1,090.7 198.4 213.5 207.9 153.7 97.3

42.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 500.0 800.0 (1.4) (11.0) (24.6) (22.5) (24.5) (1.4) (11.0) (70.3) (24.5) (26.0) (23.2) (26.0) 0.0 100.0 (12.4) 87.6 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 (24.6) 75.4 (47.0) 53.0 (49.2) 50.8 0.0 100.0 (133.2) 666.8 379.2

Realized Planned Realized FY13: $ 1.400M; EMD Phase 1 Aircraft Integration Ensure all1Should Cost Initiatives are PEO FY13: $11.000M; EMD Phase Test Activities Approved in CCaRS and values are consistent. Planned Use Back-up slides to elaborate on each FY16-FY18: $70.292M; EMD Phase 2 (Contract Award) Source Selection Savings initiative. FY 17: $24.500M; Flight Body-2 FY18: $26.000M; EMD Phase 2 Test Activities I n t e g r i t y - S e r v i c e - E x c e l l e n c e See Notes Page Source Selection Sample Evaluation Criteria Selection Top Risks Mitigation ACTS Availability AEHF Launch Ops Terminal Control Functions System Performance Architecture Fielding study System Engineering Integrated Process Management Section L System Data Management 41

DMSMS Robust Systems Engineering OPS Architecture Section M Software Development SCA Compliance Operator Terminal Control Specialty Engineering Integrity - Service - Excellence Program Monitoring Software Engineering Sample Identify criteria weighting 42 Source Selection Integrity - Service - Excellence Basis for Selecting Proposed Strategy The ChallengeProgram Needs Strategy N o t i o n al S A M P L E 1) Meets need date 2) Migrates to architecture 3) Satisfies the Net Ready KPP

4) Utilizes existing equipment 5) Maximizes insulation from other program risks 6) Manages internal program constraints/dependencies 7) Other upgrades, computer processors, resources (labs & people) Best fits in a fiscally constrained environment Seven Key Items Used to Develop Strategy 43 Integrity - Service - Excellence Alternate S ASolution M P L E Trade Space Strategy 1 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 Strategy 4 Strategy 5 Need Date G Y G R R Migrates R Y G Y

G Satisfies Net Ready R R R Y G Utilizes Equipment R R G R G G G Y G R G R G R Y G R G R R Insulation

from others Manage Constraint s Fits Fiscal Constraint s RED = No YELLOW = Partially GREEN = Yes Integrity - Service - Excellence 44 Lessons learned on what not to say in a briefing On being asked about the contract incentive share ratios a PM said we selected those because it was policy PMI have no idea why that is on the chart! PM (shortly to be a former PM) when being asked about program CostI dont worry about that, my FM can handle the question PMOnly reason I briefed that is because it was a part of the Template On being asked about requirements not quite sure I was on vacation so I dont know We are red in everything but overall we are yellowish-green I am not sure what progress we have made on our KPPs "I don't know!" -- The PM after being asked what is being incentivized on his main contract

We were mandated to go Fixed Price Final onePMOnly reason I briefed that is because it was a part of the Template (we hate being blamed for that one!!!) Integrity - Service - Excellence 45 Some Items to Consider in Preparing Briefing Feedback from Other Reviews Incentives Schedule Briefer unable to explain schedule flow and margins for potential slips SORAP did not align with program scheduleensure AFMC involved early for sustainment funding Risk Did not Focus on highest risk areas Could not explain rationale for share ratios and ceiling Inadequate to control cost Failure to adequately identify risk, or address mitigation plan once identified PMs overly optimistic Risk Mitigation inadequately addressed just indicating the SPO would work harder Working harder is not a risk mitigation strategy Source selection criteria did not relate to program technical risks Source selection factor weightings were out of sync with program priorities Funding

Did not align with requirements or schedule Need to present a fully funded program Need to clearly identify costs by increment & map to budget documents Small slip in contract award from end of FY A to beginning of FY B can mean loss of FY A funding Be mindful that management reserve not used in the year of execution likely taken Integrity - Service - Excellence FOR Information ONLY FAR Part 2 What constitutes Source Selection information Source selection information means any of the following information that is prepared for use by an agency for the purpose of evaluating a bid or proposal to enter into an agency procurement contract, if that information has not been previously made available to the public or disclosed publicly: (1) Bid prices submitted in response to an agency invitation for bids, or lists of those bid prices before bid opening. (2) Proposed costs or prices submitted in response to an agency solicitation, or lists of those proposed costs or prices. (3) Source selection plans. (4) Technical evaluation plans. (5) Technical evaluations or proposals. (6) Cost or price evaluations of proposals. (7) Competitive range determinations that identify proposals that have a reasonable chance of being selected for award of a contract. (8) Rankings of bids, proposals, or competitors.

(9) Reports and evaluations of source selection panels, boards, or advisory councils. (10) Other information marked as Source Selection Information See FAR 2.101 and 3.104 based on a case-by-case determination by the head of the agency or the contracting officer, that its disclosure would jeopardize the integrity or successful completion of the Federal agency procurement to which the information relates. Integrity - Service - Excellence 47 Cost Driver/ Operational Requirements Trade space See notes Requirement Cost Driver (i.e. KPP, KSA, other attributes) KPP 1 : Radar System Performance 48 Proposed Relaxed Requirements Increase search update interval by 5 seconds Operational Risk/Impact Reduces TBM growth capability KPP 2: Sustainment Material Availability Relax from 64% to 50% Possibly unable to meet optimum 36 mo. maintenance cycles so as to maintain Mission Readiness KPP 3: Mission Execution (Comm) Partially enable wireless communication Unable to provide full C3 capability

reduce responsiveness Reduced System Capability Change in Cost (e.g. LCCE, APUC, RDT&E, Production, O&S, etc.) Reqd power aperture decreased by 15% $50M reduction in RDT&E Req 2 new aircraft instead of 3 $9B reduction in LCCE Integrate with only basic wireless capability $10M reduction in RDT&E Integrity - Service - Excellence NEW SLIDE Factors Shaping Strategy - Cost Capability Analysis Discuss how the right balance between operational capabilities and affordability is achieved Discuss the plan for conducting cost capability analysis to identify opportunities to trade off operational capabilities to achieve a more affordable program Which requirements are the most costly and/or risky? Which requirements could result in cost savings if adjusted? Where is the knee in the cost capability curve for the most costly or risky requirements? How do you plan to engage with industry to get their understanding of how requirements might be traded off to make the program more affordable? Integrity - Service - Excellence 49

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Presentation: Program Overview

    Presentation: Program Overview

    Analysis of VAC vs. VAP2. Multicenter, retrospective study. Evaluated a novel surveillance paradigm for VACs: screening ventilator settings. Blinded critical care physician reviewed 52 randomly selected patients with VAC (defined by protocol) or VAP (determined by IPs based on VAP...
  • Blank Jeopardy - ATTRA

    Blank Jeopardy - ATTRA

    What is internal parasite infection? Prevent this by using guardian animals. What is predation? Clostridium Types C&D, and T What is the main vaccination usually given to sheep and goats? Fundamental condition for good health. What is good nutrition, or...
  • Pediatric Ingestions Emergency department 11/10/17 Case 1:  18

    Pediatric Ingestions Emergency department 11/10/17 Case 1: 18

    Soon after, refused to eat. Afebrile with normal vital signs and no respiratory distress. Oropharynx and lung exam are clear. What, if any, imaging is recommended? Is a surgical consult indicated. Can he be safely discharged home? ... Seizure ....
  • [1603] CYP2D6 Pharmacogenomics - From Genotype to Phenotype

    [1603] CYP2D6 Pharmacogenomics - From Genotype to Phenotype

    CYP2D6 Pharmacogenomics: From Genotype to Phenotype. Simon Kung, M.D. Mayo Clinic. Associate Professor of Psychiatry
  • Command Individual Augmentee Coordinator (CIAC) Training

    Command Individual Augmentee Coordinator (CIAC) Training

    Navy-Wide CIAC Assignment, Contact, and Health Assessment Metrics (Sailor contacted at least once) 14,185 IA Records CIAC Assigned 39967 39996 40025 40053 40088 40116 40151 40182 40207 40238 40242 40249 40256 40263 40268 40277 40284 40291 40298 40305 40312 40319...
  • We can think of numbers being on a

    We can think of numbers being on a

    We can think of numbers being on a number line: These numbers are all positive numbers. The number line can also continue on past 0: These new numbers are negative numbers. We can use our number lines to work out...
  • MedEd My AFP Experience Matthew Machin Vascular Surgery

    MedEd My AFP Experience Matthew Machin Vascular Surgery

    Matthew Machin. Vascular Surgery HF at Imperial College London . MedEd. IT IS A VERY GOOD IDEA TO APPLY FOR THE AFP. Med. Ed. APPLY. Research interest. ACF PhD. Autonomy - the SJT . Surgery. 4 months of sociable hours...
  • FINAL EXAM REVIEW - Perkins Science

    FINAL EXAM REVIEW - Perkins Science

    Complement fixation refers to the insertion of complement proteins C5 through C9 into the bacterial cell membrane such that they form a pore, the membrane attack complex. Describe the role of the thymus in cell-mediated immunity.