Earned Value Management (EVM) Related and Advanced Topics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Presented at the 2018 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com v1.2 Earned Value Management (EVM) Related and Advanced Topics Unit V - Module 15 1 © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. Welcome to Module 15 Earned Value Management (EVM), in which we discuss the application of an integrated toolset to manage cost, schedule, and earned value in project execution. EVM, properly implemented, should help the program manager establish and execute to a reasonable baseline, thus avoiding the “Dumb and Dumber” situation of being so far behind schedule and over budget that the only prospects for recovery are “So you’re telling me there’s a chance!” © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. 1 Presented at the 2018 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com v1.2 Acknowledgments • ICEAA is indebted to TASC, Inc., for the development and maintenance of the Cost Estimating Body of Knowledge (CEBoK®) – ICEAA is also indebted to Technomics, Inc., for the independent review and maintenance of CEBoK® • ICEAA is also indebted to the following individuals who have made significant contributions to the development, review, and maintenance of CostPROF and CEBoK ® • Module 15 Earned Value Management (EVM) – Lead authors: Jennifer M. Rose, Maureen L. Tedford – Senior reviewers: Richard L. Coleman, Brian L. Octeau, Fred K. Blackburn, Colleen M. Craig – Managing editor: Peter J. Braxton Unit V - Module 15 2 © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. This slide lists the organizational and individual contributors to this module of CEBoK® and its predecessor, the erstwhile Cost Programmed Review Of Fundamentals (CostPROF), over the course of more than a decade. © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. 2 Presented at the 2018 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com v1.2 Outline • Earned Value History • Integrated Baseline Review • Baseline Analysis • DCMA Tripwires • EV, ES, and the IMS • EVM/RM Integration • Advanced EACs • Rules of Thumb Unit V - Module 15 3 © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. This section contains some advanced topics including a discussion on Baseline Analysis and Rebaselining, Advanced discussion on calculating Estimates at Complete, analysis of Earned Value data in conjunction with the Integrated Master Schedule, and some well-known “Rules of Thumb.” © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. 3 Presented at the 2018 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com v1.2 Earned Value History • Cost/Schedule Control System Criteria (C/SCSC) – Established in 1967 by Government – Defined minimal standards for contractor management control systems – Based on studies of Industry and Gov’t practices – Did not impose a specific system • Industry Standard Guidelines for EVMS – Industry-defined standards and practices for managing acquisitions – Recognized by DoD in 1996 as a reliable basis for earned value management http://www.acq.osd.mil/evm/resources/policies-standards.shtml Unit V - Module 15 4 © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. There is a lot of DoD guidance and effort that went into the development and employment of EVMS. Here we just present a high-level history of how EVM came about. EVM was first known as Cost/Schedule Control System Criteria, or C/SCSC (C/SC2 for those mathematicians who like using exponents). Established in 1967, C/SCSC defined a set of criteria for contractors to follow to provide objective, credible project performance data for reporting to the government. C/SCSC was a good start, but was more cumbersome than the EVM used today. Some of the criteria were viewed as too detailed and restrictive, and it hampered the contractor’s ability to manage the program. Some programs ended up maintaining and reconciling two sets of data – one to manage the effort and one to report C/SCSC data to the government. In 1989, DoD shifted the organization responsibility for C/SCSC from the Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller) (USD(C)) to the Undersecretary of Defense (Acquisition) (USD(A)). Shortly thereafter, C/SCSC policy moved from DoDI 7000.2 to DoDI 5000.2. These were important shifts, because they represented a change in focus from financial management (“bean counting”) to program management. In an effort to keep the parts of C/SCSC that were good and revamp the parts that were cumbersome, Industry took the initiative to define a new set of standards and practices for managing acquisitions. The new set was similar to the C/SCSC criteria but allowed more flexibility and freedom in the implementation of EVM. DoD recognized the industry standards in 1996 as a reliable basis for EVM. The cited Wayne Abba article on the Web provides a good overview of the history of C/SCSC and EVM. © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. 4 Presented at the 2018 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com v1.2 Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) • An Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) is conducted after contract award – Government PM and technical staff work jointly with contractor counterparts – Verify the technical content of the PMB – Verify sufficiency of the related budgets and schedules • IBR also supports understanding of risks inherent in the PMB • Typically, follow-on IBRs occur after a major program event (e.g. rolling wave, re-plan, re- baseline, single-point-adjustment or OTB) Unit V - Module 15 5 © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. An integrated baseline review, or IBR, is an opportunity for the Government Program Office to verify the technical content of the PMB and sufficiency of the related budgets and schedules. The Government program management and technical staff work jointly with contractor counterparts to review the technical scope in PMB in conjunction with time-phased budget (BAC) and schedule activities (IMS). Assessing the adequacy of related budgets, schedules, and resources and assuring the management control processes are implemented, increases the Government’s program manager’s confidence in the PMB and the Contractor’s anticipated execution of the work. An IBR also provides insight into underlying management processes that enable steady-state mutual understanding of program management and risks. It solidifies areas requiring extra oversight/attention by establishing and maintaining a mutual understanding of the technical content and risks inherent in the PMB and underlying management control systems. An IBR supports the following objectives: • Ensure the technical content of control accounts is consistent with the contract scope/SOW and WBS • Review contractor's interpretation of the SOW and breakdown of work • Ensure PMB is complete – all work scope captured • Ensure that there is a logical sequence of planned effort consistent with the contract schedule • Assess resource availability for assigned tasks • Proper mix of resources have been assigned to accomplish all requirements • Assess the validity of control account budgets – look at basis of estimate (BOE) and assess risk • Assess validity of earned value methods and understand how contractor plans to measure real accomplishments • Gain a mutual understanding of the cost/schedule management process and the management control processes that are implemented • Understand what is behind the numbers on the contractor’s performance reports An IBR should be viewed as a “continuing process,” not a program “event.” The initial IBR occurs following contract award. Follow-on IBRs occur after a major program event (e.g. rolling wave, re-plan, re-baseline, single- point-adjustment or OTB). As the project matures, on-going PMB assessments determine need for subsequent IBRs. © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. 5 Presented at the 2018 ICEAA Professional Development & Training Workshop - www.iceaaonline.com v1.2 What is Reviewed in an IBR? Product Delivery Planning (Business Case, Program Execution Plan, Requirements Set) (Design, Develop, Test, Production, Deploy) Program Phases and Control Gates SRR PDR TRR IOC FOC Technical / Prog Mgmt Process Framework and • SOW • CWBS/OBS Artifacts enables Schedule Feeds • CWBS Dictionary Standard Work, • Requirements • Technical Framework Templates, • Planning Templates • Product to CWBS mapping • Integrated Master Schedule Resources Planning • BOM • Summary, Intermediate, Detail • Program Management Plan schedules • Control Account Plans- • Risk Management Plan • Vertical and Horizontal Integration Timephased budget and • Program Execution Plan • Schedule Margin / Reserve resources • Technical Planning Assumptions • Critical Path • Weekly name runs Demonstrate and Risks • Schedule Assumptions and Risks • Staffing plans • RAM Relationships in • Dependencies: Internal, External, • Time-phased forecast • Work Authorizations GFx, Legacy / Heritage • Reports (CPR, CFSR) Wall-walks, • Task Descriptions Show • Entry and Exit Criteria Storyboards • Budget Change Request • Resource Loaded Schedule With threaded • BOE traces Risks and Opportunities (Quantified / Qualified) Unit V - Module 15 6 © 2002-2013 ICEAA. All rights reserved. An IBR is conducted by focusing on the end-state but breaking the phases into “manageable pieces.” Delivery artifacts are mapped to technical, schedule, and resource plans and the linkages between the artifacts and the technical, schedule, and cost plans should be reviewed and understood. Attention should be given to the deliverables that precede the Control Gate. Throughout the IBR process (and before and after it is conducted) the team must identify, quantify, and