Inside this

issue:

EVM for Program

Managers (PMs)

1

Test Metrics Status

Update

2-3

New EVM Data Item

Description (DID)

4

Integrated Baseline

Reviews: NAVAIR

Changing with the Times

5-6

New Acquisition

Leadership 7

Farewell to

Ms. Allison Stiller

8

Calendar 8

Crossword Puzzle 9

Department of the Navy (DON)

Earned Value Management (EVM)

Quarterly Newsletter

October 2019

Starting in January 2020, The Baseline will broaden its focus to incorporate content for the

Program Management (PM) Community. While the quarterly newsletter will continue to provide

updates and articles for EVM practitioners, a new section entitled “EVM for PMs” will address topics

of interest related directly to Project and Program Managers. The topics will range from the age-

old questions of “Why EVM?” and “Why does EVM Cost so Much?” to modern issues of “Tailoring the

EVM Requirement” and “Effective Use of Schedule Margin”. Also offered will be practical tips and

resources for understanding and improving the use of EVM in the PM community. The Naval

Center for Earned Value Management (CEVM) is interested in hearing your ideas on topics you

would like to see covered. We are also looking for contributors. Contact Brenda Bizier at

brenda.bizier@navy.mil with your ideas for articles or your original contribution of a case study or

Integrated Program Management (IPM) lessons-learned story.

EVM for Program Managers (PMs)

Written By: Brenda Bizier—CEVM

The Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) Earned Value Management System (EVMS) Test Metric Change Control

Board (CCB) met in July 2019 and completed its review/dispositioning of all the recommended Test Metric updates. The

updated Test Metrics—Version 3.4—have been approved and released to the DoD organizations and Defense Industry for use

in EVMS surveillance and compliance activities. They are on the DCMA public website—https://www.dcma.mil/HQ/EVMS—

entitled "EVMS Compliance Metric Templates" within the link "Metrics Templates v3.4." The "Metrics Tracking and Data Artifact

List" provides the details of each Test Metric update including the current configuration (v3.4), identifying new and deleted

metrics, and the rationale for the update (column entitled "Revision Comments").

In summary, there are currently 141 Test Metrics reflecting an overall decrease of two from the previous configuration v3.3.

The final population includes three deletions: 06A203a, 06A206a, and 19A301a. The deletions and supporting rationale are

outlined in the "Deletions" worksheet of the "Metrics Tracking and Data Artifact List." Test Metrics 06A203a and 06A206a have

been combined within an expanded Test Metric 06A212a. Test Metric 19A301a has been incorporated into a new Test Metric:

19A401a. The final population also includes just one new Test Metric: 19A401a.

All 141 EVMS Test Metrics were updated to v3.4 even if there were no changes; updating all metrics to the newest version

number will be the process going forward. On the "Metrics Tracking and Data Artifact List", Columns E and F have been added

to assist identifying the new Test Metrics approved compared to those that were simply updated, respectively, at the latest

CCB. Of the 141 Test Metrics in v3.4, a total of 105 were modified in some manner, with Test Metric 06A212a being the most

significant.

In addition, 39 Test Metrics were modified to reflect the resolution of the Statistical Sampling Methodology issue. The EVMS

TMSS v3.4 Process Category Status cited below identifies all Test Metrics where Statistical Sampling Methodology is an option.

Page 2 October 2019

Test Metrics Status Update

Written By: Tad Kelly—NAVSEA

All 39 Test Metrics that identify “Sampling” as an option for testing the data cite the DCMA Zero-Based Sampling Plan

Acceptable Quality Level (AQL) of 4.0%.as the standard sampling methodology to use. As the following Table indicates, the

scale of Sample Sizes for testing different Lot Sizes at the 4% AQL ranges from a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 29.

For the last year, the DCMA Test Metric CCB has been meeting quarterly. However, since the backlog of Change Requests has

been successfully resolved, the CCB will only be meeting twice a year with the next session scheduled for January 2020. Future

CCB efforts will be focused on reviewing "Threshold" levels (used for assessing potential issues) to determine if there is

sufficient data derived during implementation to warrant an update. Lastly, the CCB will continue to review any emerging Test

Metric recommended updates. NAVSEA-05C8 is the point of contact for coordinating the review of DON recommended updates

with the EVMS CCB.

Page 3 October 2019

Test Metrics Status Update cont.

Page 4 October 2019

New EVM Data Item Description (DID)

Written By: Brenda Bizier—CEVM

The DoD’s Office of Acquisition, Analytics and Policy (AAP) EVM Division is scheduled to release the new Integrated Program

Management Data Report (IPMDR) Data Item Description (DID) in January 2020, coinciding with the publishing of an updated

DoDI 5000.02 that is anticipated to be significantly scaled down. Motivated by a drive for improved efficiency and data, the

move to the new DID also includes a transition from eXtensible Markup Language (XML) to JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)

data file formats. Another benefit emphasized with the new DID is the ability to take advantage of phased delivery options of

EVM data, facilitating earlier situational awareness and risk mitigation.

According to AAP, the legacy file format has significant duplication since it is based on human readable/printable formats. With

the new DID, unnecessary (e.g., share ratio) or duplicative data—including between Format 1 (WBS) and Format 2 (OBS)—is

removed. Instead, the underlying data can be obtained and formatted as needed. The additional level of detail provided with

Element of Cost values at the Control Account Level and future forecast time-phased Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled and

Estimate To Complete supports improved cost/schedule integration, better quality analysis, and data-driven surveillance with

the aim of turning EVM from a reporting process into a dialog.

Along the way, the effort evolved to encompass other process improvements such as phased delivery options of IPMDR data

including two-part variance analysis (Executive Summary and Detailed Analysis) and ensuring the variance analysis was

intentional. The result is expected to put more relevant data in the hands of the Program Managers more quickly, facilitating

earlier situational awareness and risk mitigation.

Industry and Service Agency EVM Stakeholders (including the Navy) have been working with AAP for the past two years to

develop the new DID. Final comments were submitted at the end of September, and the IPMDR DID is currently making its way

through the final approval stages.

The new DID is significantly reduced in length, moving the majority of the EVM definitions and tailoring guidance to a new

IPMDR Implementation Guide (IPMDR IG). The IPMDR IG is intended to be released with, or shortly after, the new DID.

Requests For Proposal (RFPs) initiated after the release of the new DID will be required to implement the IPMDR. The existing

contracts and RFPs already in process are not required to use the new IPMDR DID but have the option of changing. Users will

still have the ability to receive EV data in the standard IPMR Formats, as AAP is developing a data file “viewer” that will be made

available on their website and will extract the data submissions in the current IPMR formats.

The CEVM team will work with the Naval SYSCOMs to update the language used in the Statement of Work (SOW) and Contract

Data Requirements List (CDRL) templates in anticipation of the new DID release. Ensuring proper communication of pending

changes to the PM and Contracting community will be critical ahead of the new DID release. The CEVM, working with AAP, will

compile a one-page report for the Contracting and PM communities highlighting the changes/benefits moving from the IPMR

DID to the IPMDR DID.

Continue to monitor the AAP EVM Division website (https://www.acq.osd.mil/evm/#/home) for additional information.

Page 5 October 2019

Integrated Baseline Reviews:

NAVAIR Changing with the Times

Written By: Victor Thomas—NAVAIR

Earned Value Management (EVM) has been around the Department of Defense (DoD) for over half a century. It grew out

of a need to better manage the increasing complexity of DoD programs. Over those years, we have seen the process of

reviewing contractor’s Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB) evolve from reviewing reams of paper documents in

the days of the Minuteman Program to the modern computer age of using electronic documents in preparing for the

Integrated Baseline Review (IBR). While the old technique involved painstakingly spending hours or days trying to trace

through documents to assess a contractor’s EVM System integrity, today this can be accomplished relatively quickly with

the help of automated tools and improvements in generating and accessing baseline data.

Historically, most government organizations have had their own way of preparing for and performing IBRs. Today, there

are several guides designed to explain the purpose for this process along with its importance for identifying and

mitigating program risk. The National Defense Industrial Association Guide to the IBR and the Office of the Secretary of

Defense Program Managers’ Guide to the IBR both identify the IBR as a means to asses risk in the areas of Technical,

Schedule, Cost, Resources and Management Processes.

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) used these documents to develop an IBR approach for use on NAVAIR programs

across the Department of the Navy. The aforementioned guides focus on the same areas to be assessed but provide no

direct guidance on an assessment process or contingencies for tailoring. Below is the 5-Step IBR process that NAVAIR

initially established which for many years has been used successfully and even emulated by several Government

Suppliers. The emphasis with the 5-Step process was on sustained involvement of the Government team throughout the

iterative baselining process.

Original NAVAIR 5-STEP IBR Process

Page 6 October 2019

Integrated Baseline Reviews cont.

The original process determined which Control Account Managers (CAMs) would be interviewed based on the amount of

the program budget for which they were responsible, typically the top 80% of the PMB budget.

With increased emphasis on “Speed to the Fleet” and Agility, NAVAIR has updated the IBR approach to allow for increased

tailoring and streamlining in alignment with program risk. The “Updated” IBR process is referred to as a “Risk-Based IBR

Process”. The revised process considers exceptional performance and is more responsive to the needs of the customers

and ultimately, the warfighter. The CAM Interview selection process is based on work identified both on the program

Critical Path and in the risk register. A list of potential CAMs is presented to the Program Management Air (PMA) IBR

Lead, who can then add additional CAMs to the list, if desired.

Additionally, the IBR assessment approach has been modified to reduce travel time and provide more time to deliver

product to the warfighter by allowing more flexibility in executing the requirements in Step 2 “Prime Management

Systems Assessment” and Step 3 “Subcontractor IBRs”. The Management Systems Assessment typically is only conducted

for contractors (or teams) new to EVM and participation in Subcontractor IBRs is optional and risk-driven. When

necessitated, travel for either is often combined with other program events or eliminated by substituting virtual data

reviews and interviews. The importance of risk assessment in both of these areas has remained unchanged with the

updates and are addressed at Total Contract IBR, if not before.

To support these changes, NAVAIR established an IBR Database to store past IBR information and track and trend

contractor risk vulnerabilities by location. A Supply Chain Network database was also developed to store information on

all suppliers supporting a particular program and provide insight into any of their potential risk area vulnerabilities. The

information from these two databases and the report from the Subcontractor IBRs are analyzed as part of the risk

investigation for upcoming IBRs.

These changes and the subsequent reduction in required travel have resulted in a welcome saving of the time and

expense spent on conducting an IBR. The NAVAIR Risk-Based IBR approach has been seamless to the PMAs and well

received by industry partners.

Updated NAVAIR Risk-Based IBR Process

Page 7 October 2019

New Acquisition Leadership

Principal Civilian Deputy

Assistant Secretary of the Navy Research, Development

and Acquisition

Mr. Frederick J. (Jay) Stefany began serving as Principal Civilian Deputy for the

Assistant Secretary of the Navy Research, Development and Acquisition in

October 2019. His responsibilities include oversight and policy for Navy and

Marine Corps research, development, and acquisition programs for shipbuilding,

aviation, space, weapon systems, and communication systems. This portfolio

includes oversight of more than 100,000 people and an annual budget in excess

of $50 billion as well as hundreds of technical development, procurement, and

sustainment programs for the Department of the Navy. Mr. Stefany also leads the

Department’s Acquisition Corps.

Mr. Stefany recently served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Ship

Programs beginning in April 2018. In this role, he was responsible for executive

oversight of all naval shipbuilding programs, major ship conversions, and the

modernization and disposal of in-service ships. He was also responsible for

executive oversight of cost, schedule and performance of surface ship,

submarine, and Marine Corps combat systems, electronic warfare systems,

shipboard radars, and Navy missile defense programs.

Previously Mr. Stefany served as Executive Director, Amphibious, Auxiliary and

Sealift Office, Program Executive Office, Ships. He provided executive leadership

to 200 personnel and oversaw one of the broadest acquisition portfolios in the

Navy, including more than $30 billion in complex shipbuilding procurements.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy

Ships

Ms. Bilyana Anderson began serving as Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy

for Ship Programs in September 2019. In this role, she is responsible for

executive oversight of all naval shipbuilding programs, major ship conversions,

and the modernization and disposal of in-service ships. She is also responsible

for executive oversight of cost, schedule and performance of surface ship,

submarine, and Marine Corps combat systems, electronic warfare systems,

shipboard radars, and Navy missile defense programs.

Most recently, she served as the Executive Director, Program Executive Office,

Integrated Warfare Systems (PEO IWS) within the Naval Sea Systems Command

(NAVSEA). Ms. Anderson directed the Acquisition and Fleet support of the

Surface Navy’s 155 combat systems, weapons, radars, and related international

and foreign military sales programs. The mission of PEO IWS is to develop,

deliver and sustain operationally dominant naval combat systems for Sailors and

Marines. Ms. Anderson was responsible for an organization of over 400 civilian

and military personnel and 128 programs and projects with an annual

acquisition budget of $6 billion.

Previously she served as the Executive Director for Combatants in the Program

Executive Office Ships (PEO Ships), where she provided executive leadership to

more than $46 billion in complex, new construction shipbuilding programs

defining the 21st century surface combatant fleet. Her responsibilities spanned

multiple major program offices including: DDG 1000, DDG 51, Electric Ships

Office, and Ships Acquisition Management. As the Executive Director, she

oversaw a staff of approximately 150 civilian and 15 military personnel.

Frederick J. Stefany

Bilyana Anderson

Page 8 October 2019

Note: Red font indicates Federal Holiday

October November December

Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 11 12 13 14

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 29 30 31

Calendar

EVM Events

15 October SUPSHIP Quarterly EVM Meeting

24 October NAVSEA PM College “EVM for PMs” Training

19-21 November AAP EVMS Adjudication Team Review of IPMDR Implementation Guide

10-12 December CPM IPMW 2019, Baltimore, MD

Acquisition Key Events

16 October LPD 17 Gate 6/CSB (RD&A Chair)

30 October Stem to Stern—Sustainment

1 November CH-53K Gate 6/CSB/Acq Strat (RD&A Chair)

11 November SSC Gate 6/CSB (RD&A Chair)

12 November RDA Ask Me Anything (AMA) - Fusion Chat

25 November P-8A Gate 6/CSB (RD&A Chair)

After nearly 30 years in the Acquisition Community, Ms. Allison Stiller retired in

October 2019.

Ms. Stiller’s most recent roles was serving as Principal Civilian Deputy for the

Assistant Secretary of the Navy Research, Development and Acquisition. Her

responsibilities included oversight and policy for Navy and Marine Corps

research, development, and acquisition programs for shipbuilding, aviation,

space, weapon systems, and communication systems. This portfolio includes

oversight of more than 100,000 people and an annual budget in excess of $50

billion as well as hundreds of technical development, procurement, and

sustainment programs for the Department of the Navy. Ms. Stiller also led the

Department’s Acquisition Corps.

Ms. Stiller entered the Senior Executive Service in January 2004. She has spent

nearly 30 years in the Department of Defense’s acquisition community. Prior to

her current position, Ms. Stiller served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the

Navy for Ship Programs. In this capacity, she was responsible for executive

oversight of all naval shipbuilding and associated weapon systems programs,

major ship conversions, and nuclear ship refuelings, as well as the maintenance,

modernization and disposal of in-service ships.

Throughout her career, Ms. Stiller’s leadership and performance has been

recognized by numerous awards including the Presidential Rank Award

(Distinguished and Meritorious) and the Department of the Navy’s Superior and

Meritorious Civilian Service awards.

In retirement, Ms. Stiller and her husband will be relocating from the Northern

Virginia area to Hilton Head, SC. They plan to travel and spend time with their

two dogs. Ms. Stiller will certainly be missed by the RDA Community.

Farewell to Ms. Allison Stiller

Allison Stiller

2 December DCGS-N Gate 6/CSB (PMD Chair)

4 December Stem to Stern

5 December SSN Gate 6/CSB (RD&A/CNO Co-Chair)

10 December SM-6 Gate 6/CSB (PCD Chair)

17 December MQ-25 Gate 6/CSB (RD&A/CNO Co-Chair)

10

Page 9 October 2019

Crossword Puzzle

This publication was created by the Naval Center for Earned Value Management (CEVM) with contributions from the Systems

Commands. Please contact us at 703-695-0510 for any questions on the content of this publication. For more information on

EVM within the Department of the Navy: http://www.secnav.navy.mil/rda/OneSource/Pages/CEVM/CEVM.aspx.

Previous Edition’s

Crossword Answers: