1 [insert briefing type here] [insert program name here] for [insert name and organization of person(s) to be briefed here] [insert “month day, year” of

1

[insert briefing type here][insert program name here]

for[insert name and organization of

person(s) to be briefed here]

[insert “month day, year” of brief here]

Briefed by:[insert briefer’s name here]

[insert briefer’s organization code here]

[insert briefer’s phone number here]

[Insert briefer’s e-mail address here]Insert program

logo in this area

Distribution Statement

2

Programlogohere

Key Stakeholders

Name Organization

APM

MDA

DT Coordinator

COMOPTEVFOR (OTD)

COMOPTEVFOR (OTC)

CNO (N912)

CNO (N-sponsor)

JITC

DOT&E (if required)

Others (as required)

-PMW, SYSCOMS, Service

3

ProgramlogoherePurpose of Briefing

4

ProgramlogohereBriefing Outline

5

Programlogohere

Program Overview

• ACAT

• Program Phase

• Milestone or Decision that this phase of test will support

• Mission

• Inventory Objective (quantities)

6

Programlogohere

ADM Exit Criteria andAction Item Status

R Required at this time, but not completed

G Completed

Y In progress & on schedule

Program Information StatusApproved

DateComments

ADM Exit Criteria

ADM Exit Criteria 1

ADM Exit Criteria 2

ADM Exit Criteria N

Action Items

Action Items 1

Action Items 2

Action Items N

7

ProgramlogohereConcept/Requirement

8

Programlogohere

System OverviewComponent/System Description

9

Programlogohere

System OverviewCapability Enabler

10

Programlogohere

Deployed/MobileUnits

BASE

IMAFISC

PierConnections

CLINIC

TRNG CENHQ

TELEPORT/STEPLong Haul (DISN & Commercial)

TRAININGCENTER

USN/USMCLOGISTIC BASE

NAVALAMPHIBIOUS

BASE

NOC

BASE

MC AIRSTATION

End-to-End Connectivity

NMCI atthe Pier

Development StrategyEnd-to-End Capability

11

Programlogohere

Program OverviewAccomplishments/History

12

Programlogohere

Program OverviewPrevious Guidance

(if Required)

13

Programlogohere

Acquisition Coordination Team (ACT)• The following (Program Name) ACT members have been briefed on the program status and concur with the fielding of (Program Name).

Program Manager VariesAcquisition PM VariesProject Engineer VariesResource Sponsor VariesRequirements Sponsor VariesContracts Mr. David Ryan SPAWAR 02 (858) 537-0314Contracts Mr. Mark Lopez SPAWAR 02 (619) 524-7168Contracts Ms. Marcia Rutledge SPAWAR 02 (619) 524-7201Legal Mr. David Beale SPAWAR 00C-1 (619) 524-7049Operational Test Director VariesAcquisition Management Ed Butrovich PEO C4I-AM (619) 524-7652Technical Director (Comms & Networks)

Charlie Suggs PEO C4I-TD (619) 524-7237

Technical Director (C2/ISR) Greg Settelmayer PEO C4I-TD (619) 524-7182T&E Manager John Hartford PEO C4I-T&E (858) 537-8914T&E Requirements Coordinator Varies OPNAV, N912PEO Installations Susan Senese PEO C4I-M (858) 537-0620Fleet Modernization Ruth Youngs Lew PEO C4I-M (858) 537-0613PEO Logistics Joe Frankwich PEO C4I-AM (619) 524-7314Business Financial Manager(BFM)

Susie Drew/ Program BFM

PEO C4I (619) 524-7359

Comptroller Yvonne Carlson SPAWAR 01 (619) 524-7125Cost Analysis Mourad Yacoub SPAWAR 01-6 (619) 524-7160Command Information Officer Jacqueline Todd SPAWAR 08 (619) 524-7063Counterintelligence Kurt Fabrizio SPAWAR 00-NCIS (619) 524-7152

Env., Safety and Health Jerry Olen SPAWAR/ NFESC (858) 537-0255

System Security/Information Assurance

Ed Burr PEO C4I (619) 524-7519

Spectrum Management Dave Southworth SPAWAR (619) 553-3248Interoperability Certification / Information Support Plans

Greg Settelmayer/ Charlie Suggs

PEO C4I-TD (619) 524-7182/ (619) 524-7237

Manpower Analysis Janet Garrington SPAWAR 04H (858) 537-8950Security Pat Varney SPAWAR 08 (858) 537 8898Human Systems Integration Carol Robinson SPAWAR 05-5 (858) 537-8907C4I Technical Authority Dennis Pinkard SPAWAR 05 (858) 537-0673

14

Programlogohere

Program Information and Documentation Status

R Required at this time, but does not exist B Requires development or updating w/in 12 months

O Required at this time and under development/update G Current, with all required approvals

Y In approval cycle. Expected Date in Comments NR Not required. Rationale in Comments

Program Information StatusApproved

DatePlanned

DateComments

ACAT Designation LetterAcquisition Decision MemorandumAcquisition Program BaselineAcquisition StrategyAffordability AssessmentAnalysis of AlternativesCAIV Objectives CDD/CPDClinger-Cohen ComplianceEnv. Safety & Health EvaluationEVMIA StrategyInformation Support Plan (ISP)InfoSec Certification and AccreditationInitial Capabilities DocumentJITC Interoperability CertificationLCCE/Economic Analysis/ICEIndependent Logistics AssessmentLow Rate Initial Prod (LRIP) DecisionNavy Training System Plan (NTSP)OP Test PlanPost-Deployment Performance ReviewProgram Protection PlanRisk Assessment Safe for Test CertificationTechnology Development Strategy (TDS)Test & Evaluation Master PlanTest Results (DT&E/OT&E/FOT&E)

15

Programlogohere

[insert program name]Program Overview Chart

DATE OF REPORT: MM/DD/YYYY

PM / Sponsor Cost Schedule PerformanceProgrammaticCompliance

LogisticsContract

Execution

Contact Info hereContact Info here

Description:Program Start Date: MM / YY[Insert program description here]

Joint or International:[Insert joint or International details]

Key Performance ParametersKPP Objective Threshold DemoOP Avail .90 .90 .98S/W Reliability 200 hrs 200 hrs 1000 hrsS/W Mean 5 sec 5 sec 3.2 secxxxx x x x

Acquisition ObjectivesQuantity 650IOC 12 / 99Target Price (unit) $Various$M (FY XX) $610.12

Contractor DataContractor Litton DSDValue / Type $NA / GSAStart / Complete APR97 / APR03

Contractor XXXValue / Type $XX / XXXStart / Complete XXX / XXX

Cost Data ($ in M)*Cost Objective Threshold Current Est.R&D 0 0 0Proc 300.3 300.3 380O&S 250.5 250.5 276.1xxxx x x x

* Values from last approved APB

(IT) ACAT Level:MDA:

Budget Source:

OverallVolatility

Contract Execution Ratings:G= CPI/SPI .95 or >Y= CPI/SPI .85 -.94R = CPI/SPI < .85

APPR $M Subhead Project Total PY CY BY BY+1 BY+2 BY+3 BY+4 To Complete TotalRDT&E,N - OPN,P - Qty - OPN, I - Qty - OMN - Spares - SCN - OCF - Total -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$

OSD T&E Oversight: Y/N

SCHEDULEFY by QuartersMilestones

TestingDevelopmentProductionInstallation

R&D / Studies

FY 00I II III IV

FY 01I II III IV

FY 02I II III IV

FY 03I II III IV

FY 04I II III IV

FY 05I II III IV

FY 06I II III IV

FY 07I II III IV

201

CDR

3 3

SVR

MS IIIDMS-IIB&C

FOT&E

LRIP

OPEVAL

5

IOC MSD FOC

Microsoft Word Document

16

Programlogohere

Insert Program Name: ADNSCurrent FY: XXXX

INC II Budget:(Most Current Budget) * See Note 1Then-Year $K

APPN PY FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 To Complete TotalRDT&E 428 200 - - - - - 628 OPN 21,128 17,091 12,500 3,691 - - - 54,410 OMN 1,461 3,692 4,913 5,392 5,141 4,760 3,551 28,910

Total 23,017 20,983 17,413 9,083 5,141 4,760 3,551 83,948

QTY Inc II Procurement 38/4 38 9 11 100 QTY Inc II Installation 9/4 53 23 11 100

* See Note 2Then-Year $K

APPN PY FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 To Complete Total

RDT&E 428 200 - - - - 628

OPN 20,673 19,373 11,403 4,494 - - - 55,943 OMN 1,461 3,692 4,913 5,392 5,141 4,760 3,551 28,910

Total 22,562 23,265 16,316 9,886 5,141 4,760 3,551 85,481

DELTA (Budget Minus LCCE Feb-05)Then-Year $K

APPN PY FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 To Complete TotalRDT&E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - OPN 455 (2,282) 1,097 (803) 0 0 0 (1,533) OMN 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

Total 455 (2,282) 1,097 (803) 0 0 0 (1,533)

Affordability by Increment

Notes

1. FY05 includes 11 LRIP systems and 27 Increment II Upgrade Kits which are on CODE B hold pending FRP

2. Target Inventory Objective of 110 systems

* Current procurement and install schedule includes 96 ships and 4 shore sites

* Remaining 10 systems planned for FY09 not shown in table, Program direction expects INC III installation to begin and INC II to end in FY09

17

ProgramlogohereSPAWAR 01-6 Cost Risk

Rating RISK

1.0-2.0 LOW

>2.0-3.0 MODERATE

>3.0-4.0 HIGH

>4.0-5.0 VERY HIGH

Cost-Weighted RatingRating Methods Rating Data

1 The basic method used to perform this analysis is exceptionally well documented and time tested; one or more other techniques have been used to verify the estimate provided.

1 Very complete, well-authenticated, highly relevant data, such as recent contractor actual costs, official catalog prices, etc. have been used.

2 The basic method used to perform this analysis is well documented, but no double-check or authentication has been possible.

2 The data used generally are relevant and from a reputable source; however, they are incomplete, preliminary, or not completely current.

3 The basic method used to perform this analysis has been documented, but has not been widely used or approved.

3 The data used have been obtained from official or standard sources; however, notable inconsistencies, lack of currency, or gaps in data reduce the confidence in the estimate.

4 A highly arbitrary method of analysis has been used.

4 The data used to make the estimate are highly suspect, or doubtful relevance, very sparse in quantity, and characterized by major inconsistencies.

5 The analysis is almost pure guesswork, and little or no confidence can be placed in it.

5 An almost total lack of current, reliable, relevant data makes the cost estimate completely uncertain.

Source: FAA Life Cycle Cost Handbook, 3 June 2002

Two Digit Confidence Index

Two Digit Confidence Index *METHOD. DATA METHOD. DATA

SCORE 1.64 1.48 1.54 1.33

TOTAL LCC PROGRAM COSTS ONLY

* Confidence Index based on weighted averages

18

Programlogohere

Cost as an Independent Variable(CAIV)

19

ProgramlogohereAnalysis of Alternatives

KPP ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4

KPP 1

KPP 2

KPP 3

KPP 4

LCC ($TYM)Then Year Millions

$ $ $ $

20

Programlogohere

• Source Documents:– Typical source documents that effect strategy are ICD/CDD/CPD,

AoA, etc.

• Approach: Single Step or Evolutionary – Each increment requires a MS C and if development a MS B.

These could be supported by one CDD containing all capabilities and multiple CPDs supporting each increment of useable capability. Each increment could use the same CDD (revalidated each time) for the MS B and would have a separate CPD for the MS C. This method supports Evolutionary acquisition, the preferred approach. See CJCSI 3170 for other Evolutionary approached

Acquisition Strategy (Requirements and Approach)

21

Programlogohere

Acquisition Strategy (Program Structure)

Concept Decision

Milestone A

RFP Development

Milestone B

Contract Award

Development Test/OA

Milestone C/LRIP Decision

Operational Test

IOC

FRP Decision

FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10

22

Programlogohere

Acquisition Strategy (Business Approach)

Current ContractsProgram Product or Service Total Contract ValueCompeted Contract Type Period of Performance Approved AP

Y or N FFP 10/1/03 - 9/30/04 Y or N

New Procurement Actions• Proposed [name of effort] Contract

– Competitive or Sole Source (if sole source provide justification– Contract Type:– Estimated contract value: – Period of Performance:– Acquisition Objectives:– Estimated Contract Award:– Status of Acquisition Plan:

23

Programlogohere

Contractor Name, Contract Number, Contract Type, Short Contract Title

Contract EV Metrics and Performance Projections

YSolvency (Provide

comments in notes page)

PEO and Program Manager/PMS-XXX, Program Acronym, ACAT XX, Date Reported

Microsoft Excel Worksheet

Cost Schedule Variance Trends

($30,000)

($25,000)

($20,000)

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

J-98

J-98

A-98

S-98

O-98

N-98

D-98

J-99

F-99

M-99

A-99

M-99

J-99

J-99

A-99

S-99

O-99

N-99

D-99

J-00

F-00

M-00

A-00

M-00

J-00

J-00

A-00

S-00

O-00

N-00

D-00

Do

lla

rs i

n T

ho

us

an

ds

Cost Variance ($1,460) Sched Variance ($809) Mgmt Reserve $1,968 10% Thresholds PM VAC ($24,000) CONTR VAC ($22,500)

START

COMPLETE

CPI:

SPI:EVM Gold Card

24

ProgramlogohereCPARS/IPARS/Award Fee Matrix

Contractor PM Name/Gov’t PM Name Date of Review: ddmmmyy

Contractor:

Program:

Contract Number:

Item: (CPAR, IPAR or AF) AF CPAR AF AF IPAR CPAR IPAR AF IPAR IPAR IPAR CPAR

Period Ending: (Mmm YY) Jan 02 Apr 02 Jul 02 Jan 03 Mar 03 Apr 03 Jun 03 Jul 03 Sep 03 Dec 03 Mar 04 Apr 04

Months Covered: (NR) 6 12 6 6 3 12 3 6 3 3 3 12

Areas to Evaluate

a. Technical (Quality of Product) EXC EXC EXC EXC

(1) Product Performance VG VG VG VG

(2) Systems Engineering SAT SAT SAT SAT

(3) Software Engineering MARG MARG MARG MARG

(4) Logistics Support/Sustainment UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT

(5) Product Assurance EXC EXC EXC EXC

(6) Other Technical Performance EXC EXC EXC EXC

b. Schedule SAT SAT SAT SAT

c. Cost Control MARG MARG MARG MARG

d. Management UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT UNSAT

(1) Management Responsiveness EXC EXC EXC EXC

(2) SubContract Management VG VG VG VG

(3) Program Mgmt and Other Mgmt SAT SAT SAT SAT

e. Other Areas MARG MARG MARG MARG

(1) Communications EXC EXC EXC EXC

(2) Support to Government Tests EXC EXC EXC EXC

Award Fee Percentage: 85% 70% 90% 84%

N00000-00-C-0000

Contract Start Date:

Estimated Completion Date:

MMM YY

MMM YY

((Contractor Name))

((Program Name))

25

Programlogohere

LOGISTICS SUPPORT

(Compliance with DoD/SECNAV 5000 series and policy documents)

Logistics Requirement Compliance Exception Notes

Independent Logistics Assessment (ILA)

GREEN/YELLOW/RED Rating?

When completed?

Navy Training System Plan (NTSP)

NTSP completed? Sustainment Training in Place? YES/NO

Diminishing Manufacturing Sources & Matl. Shortages (DMSMS)

DMSMS Process/Tool used to ID Obsolescence challenges?

YES/NO

Unique Identification (UID) Policy implementation

DFARS Clause 252.211-7003 in contract/contract mods?

YES/NO

Digital Product and Technical Data

Manuals, Drawings, Illustrations available in approved digital

formats?

YES/NO

Human Systems Integration (HSI)

HSI factors addressed in AS, SEP, and NTSP?

YES/NO

Performance Based Logistics (PBL) implementation

PBL strategy considered and decision documented in BCA?

YES/NO

26

Programlogohere

Program AssessmentInstallation Readiness

Place the assessment rating

icon here. Delete the remaining.

Place the assessment rating

icon here. Delete the remaining.

Afloat ShipClass/Shore System FY QTY APPN

Total Procurement

($)Total Install

($)

ECP/ (EC or FCB)

Install Documentation

StatusAfloat - SCD/ILS

CertShore -

WorkScope/FRCB

System Draw ing

Status ICD or IRD (if applicable)

Certif icationSSIL/P P L Status

DITSCAP Info

IATO/ATO Status

AfloatExample

SystemName FY07 20 OPN 200K 20K 100%

ECP XXX

SCD Phase I - ApprovedILS Cert - Approved Approved

IATOApproved None

FY08

FY09

FY10

FY11

ShoreExample

SystemName FY07 10 80%

Workscope - CompletedFRCB - Approved Approved

ATOApproved None

FY08

FY09

FY10

FY11

Fielding Issues

Budget Installs Thru FYDPBy Fiscal Year

% of Budgeted Installs in

Spider

Install Readiness Status

Assessment

27

ProgramlogohereNESI SUMMARY

Technical Evaluation Summary

Count ScoringNo Evaluation

No Compliance (0)

Low Compliance (1)

Some Compliance (2)

Complete Compliance (4)

Waived

Waived (Registered)

131 Total Tests

Evaluation Count

Total Score

2.26 Mean Score

Best Possible Total Score

Percent of Best Possible Score

Acquisition Evaluation Summary

Count ScoringNo Evaluation

No Compliance (0)

Low Compliance (1)

Some Compliance (2)

Complete Compliance (4)

Waived

Waived (Registered)

35 Total Tests

Evaluation Count

Total Score

3.31 Mean Score

Best Possible Total Score

Percent of Best Possible Score

28

ProgramlogohereNESI Status

0

1

2

3

4

Acq

uis

itio

n

0 1 2 3 4

Technical

No Compliance

Complete Compliance

Some Compliance

Low Compliance

The “Mean Score” from each summary chart automatically

creates the Maturity level.

The “Mean Score” from each summary chart automatically

creates the Maturity level.

29

Programlogohere

Interoperability(Net Ready)

30

Programlogohere

PEO C4I Review Checklist

31

Programlogohere

PEO C4I Review Checklist

32

Programlogohere

PEO C4IReview Checklist

33

Programlogohere

PEO C4IReview Checklist

34

Programlogohere

e

LIK

EL

IHO

OD

e

d

c

b

a

CONSEQUENCEdcba

HighMedium

Low Medium

Risk Advisory Board:[Mr. X, PMA xxx][Ms. Y, XYZ Corp][Ms. Z, DASN YY]

• •

•

• A brief description of Issue # 4 and rationale for its rating.

• Approach to remedy/mitigation


• Approach to remedy/mitigation• A brief description of Issue # 3 and rationale for its rating.




















•

• •

Acronyms:[IMA= Intermediate Maintenance Activity]

Program Risk Assessment

Acrobat Document

35

ProgramlogohereKey Issues

No further action required

Significant interest outside Program

Cannot be solved within the Program

Legend

Issue Due Date Response Status

36

Programlogohere

Other Decision Factors and Challenges

• [List as appropriate]

• Example: Acquisition Coordination Team, Chaired by [insert name] concurred that [insert program name] is ready for OT&E on [date]

• Example: Acquisition Coordination Team, Chaired by [insert name] concurred that [insert program name] is ready to enter SDD Phase

37

ProgramlogoherePM Assessment

38

ProgramlogohereRecommendations