Homeland Security Overview for Bill McCoy, Chair National Security Industry Leadership Council [email protected] CouncilReview National Security Industry

Homeland Security OverviewHomeland Security Overviewforfor

Bill McCoy, ChairNational Security Industry Leadership [email protected]

CouncilCouncilReviewReview

National Security Industry Leadship

Council

Going in Assumption #1

There is NO Box!


Of the eight targeted industries, Missouri can exert

the most leverage in influencingbusiness development in

the national security sector.


The National Security Industry Strategic Plan

Is unconstrained.

Summary and Introduction

• Missouri’s Congressional delegation is very successful in placing Missouri near the top in D/HS-related funding and procurement• We have a strong presence in Defense, Veterans Affairs, Energy (NNSA), and the Intelligence Community – we can improve• We will make the case for additional Justice and Education solutions• We must improve US DHS investment in Missouri• The NSI Strategic Plan is our vision and direction

Council Structure

The Defense and Homeland Security Council is specifically structured to solicit input from large and small business, businesses from Across, within, and outside the State, research And educational institutions, and support groups.

Strategic Plan Development

• Industry Council Structure• SWOT Input• SWOT Analysis• Key Revenue Centers• Mission• Vision• Planning

• Goals• Objectives• Performance Measures

• The Way Ahead

Key D/HS Revenue Center Targets

• Department of Defense • Department of Homeland Security • Department of Energy (NNSA)• Intelligence Community• Department of Veterans Affairs• Department of Justice

DISTRICT 1 $ 7,543,766,657 78.0%

DISTRICT 2 $ 252,523,100 2.6%

DISTRICT 3 $ 109,596,739 1.1%

DISTRICT 4 $ 63,198,878 0.7%

DISTRICT 5 $ 1,338,495,746 13.8%

DISTRICT 6 $ 125,615,117 1.3%

DISTRICT 7 $ 65,716,981 0.7%

DISTRICT 8 $ 42,330,599 0.4%

DISTRICT 9 $ 118,908,258 1.2%

DISTRICT UNK $ 8,203,839 0.1%

$ 9,668,355,915 100.0%*

* Includes all national security-related procurement

MO FY2006 GSA PROCUREMENTSBY US CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT

Defense DetailMajor National Location Rank by Outlay

EXPENDITURES ($000) Total Payroll Grants/

Major Locations Outlays Outlays Contracts

San Diego, CA $7,874,477 $3,537,765 $4,336,712

Fort Worth, TX 6,762,558 257,140 6,505,418

St. Louis, MO 5,342,892 197,110 5,145,782

Washington, DC 5,146,266 1,620,754 3,525,512

Huntsville, AL 4,892,281 283,842 4,608,439

Arlington, VA 4,693,320 2,330,309 2,363,011

Long Beach, CA 4,364,908 57,625 4,307,283

Norfolk, VA 4,350,652 2,957,657 1,392,995

Sunnyvale, CA 3,542,428 48,981 3,493,447

Tucson, AZ 3,239,447 326,921 2,912,526

Defense DetailMajor Missouri Location Rank by Outlay

EXPENDITURES ($000) PAYROLL GRANTS/

LOCATION TOTAL OUTLAYS CONTRACTS

St. Louis 5,342,892 197,110 5,145,782

Fort Leonard Wood 818,324 611,031 207,293

Independence 566,404 15,221 551,183

Kansas City 366,470 160,462 206,008

Whiteman AFB 235,735 189,914 45,821

St. Charles 185,747 11,956 173,791

Hazelwood 170,532 8,288 162,244

Springfield 103,920 74,975 28,945

Olivette 99,254 99,073 181

Jefferson City 81,413 51,719 29,694

Top 10 Contractors Receiving the Largest Dollar Volume of Prime Contract Awards in Missouri (000)

THE BOEING COMPANY $4,879,774

ALLIANT TECHSYSTEMS INC 543,928

ENGINEERED SUPPORT SYSTEMS INC 168,737

NATIONAL BEEF PACKING COMPANY, 96,273

WORLD WIDE TECHNOLOGY HOLDING 83,217

EXPRESS SCRIPTS, INC 71,442

GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC 66,239

STATE OF MISSOURI 44,358

NESTLE S.A. 43,299

WESTAR AEROSPACE & DEFENSE GROUP 41,054

Defense DetailTop 10 Missouri Defense Contractors

Vision

Implementation of a Strategic Plan that results in exceptional growth in Missouri’s

job creation, revenue generation, and investment across the

National Security industry sector.

Mission

To improve Missouri’s revenue generation and job creation

within the National Security industry sector.

Coordination

In the following presentation organizations are identified as lead or supporting. This is not an “assignment” but a recommendation based on organization capabilities and interest. The NSISP will be coordinated with all concerned and leaders will have the right of first refusal.

Budget – Personnel – Legislation

• This is an initiating plan as it does not yet incorporate budget, personnel, and legislative implications.• Budget, personnel, and legislative requirements will become known during the coordination process.• After coordination the Performance Measures will be prioritized based on emerging realities and rebaselined.• Many draft Performance Measures with no budget or personnel impacts, other than staff opportunity costs, are being worked now.

SWOT InputInternal Strengths

1. Political delegation at the federal level relative to D/HS – represents the majority of Missourians

2. Established industry base and supply chain

3. Strong base of new research

4. Upper level education is an advantage, especially in engineering and science sector

5. Central location and transportation infrastructure, including port access

6. More cost effective to do business here

7. Fort Leonard Wood is unique with diverse applications that could be spun off into the Technology Park.

8. Good quality of life

9. Patriotism / traditional values / conservative political nature of Missouri is a D/HS industry advantage

10. Large population of US citizens facilitates security clearance process

11. FEMA regional office located in Missouri offers “one stop shopping for DHS programs

SWOT InputInternal Weaknesses

1. Lack of marketing of industry inside and outside of Missouri

2. Insufficient pay/infrastructure support to attract/retain top professors at research institutions.

3. Lack of collaboration between universities, private sector and government

4. K-12 education is not sufficient for entry into the workforce as non-degreed worker

5. IT infrastructure is still a challenge in out-state, although this is being remedied

6. Difficulty attracting and retaining talent

7. Lack of entrepreneurial culture in out state

8. Bureaucratic difficulty obtaining clearances, especially for small businesses

9. Elevated violent crime rate (525.4/100K pop)

SWOT InputExternal Opportunities

1. Increased spending by Defense and Homeland Security

2. Military installations will grow with new missions

3. New technologies -- nanotechnology / bioscience / battery power / drone aircraft

4. The need for critical manufacturing capabilities

5. Applications of renewable energy resources into military applications

6. Developing response and recovery technologies for natural disaster and terrorist attack.

7. Renewed interest in EMP / nanotechnology protection

8. Interoperable communications contracts

9. Threats to the food supply – Missouri could be the leader in protecting the food supply

SWOT InputExternal Threats

1. Loss of Congressional delegation leadership positions to other States

2. Aggressive competitor states with mature, well-funded marketing operations

3. Other States have contracts to replace current Missouri products

4. Reduced federal D/HS budget outlays

5. Salary - High tech specialists receive premium pay in other States

6. Military installations will decline without new missions

7. Missouri ranks low in per capita funding from DOJ

SWOT AnalysisStrengths / Opportunities Strategies

• Missouri’s leadership in the US Senate and House delegations, coupled with an established industry base and supply chain, put Missouri in a very favorable position to compete for:

• Increased D/HS spending

• Funding associated with refitting the post-war force

• Congressional leadership also provides significant leverage in exploiting new mission opportunities for Fort Wood, Whiteman AFB, Roscrans and NGA operations including:

• Disaster response and recovery

• Military application of renewable resources

• Missouri’s college and university systems produce technical degrees that enable the State to target new technologies, techniques and emerging critical manufacturing capabilities:

• EMP and nanotechnology technology

• Lead the nation in technology and techniques to protect the food supply

SWOT AnalysisWeaknesses / Opportunities Strategies

• Additional focus, funding and match-making will counter weak marketing of Missouri’s D/HS industries and facilitate:

• Capturing companies specializing in D/HS products and services

• Expanding current Missouri D/HS companies

• Generating new start-up companies

• Improved pay and infrastructure support to attract and retain top research professors and other talent and will facilitate discovery, identification, commercialization of new technologies and production techniques

• Various industry councils, workshops and similar venue will improve collaboration among Missouri’s universities, private sector, and government, aiding knowledge flow and enabling new technologies and techniques

• K-12 education will continue to improve with new funding formulae and will better feed the pipeline into Missouri’s technical schools, colleges and universities

• Working with GSA and the Central Security Service will to train new businesses in security clearance procedures will play to Missouri’s traditional citizen and patriotic strengths

• Missouri’s elevated crime rate may be attenuated by working with the Congressional delegation to garner more Department of Justice funding

SWOT AnalysisStrengths / Threats Strategies

• Missouri’s established industry base, supply chain and strong base of new research, coupled with its central location and mature transportation infrastructure can be deployed to defend against competitor states

• Likewise, Missouri companies can be encouraged to team with companies in competitor states have new contracts for current Missouri products

• Our elevated crime rate may be attenuated by working with the Congressional delegation to garner more Department of Justice funding

• Lower costs of doing business in Missouri together with good quality of life can be used to mitigate premium high tech salaries in other states

• Missouri’s military benefits from operational and training roles less susceptible to reductions in D/HS funding and new missions, together with our Congressional delegation’s advocacy, may increase Missouri’s share of D/HS budgets

SWOT AnalysisWeaknesses / Threats Strategies

• Missouri’s elevated crime rate may be attenuated by working with the Congressional delegation to garner more Department of Justice funding

• Additional focus, funding and match-making will counter weak marketing of Missouri’s D/HS industries

• Missouri’s traditional citizen and patriotic strengths can overcome some competitor State’s advantages in marketing

• Likewise educating Missouri’s out-state small and emerging business on competing for federal contracts and security clearance processes, coupled with any competitive edge available from Quality Jobs and other State programs, will generate more wins and a pool of reliable subcontractors

• K-12 education will continue to improve with new funding formulae and will better feed the pipeline into Missouri’s technical schools, colleges and universities, thus making Missouri more attractive to business and less susceptible to premium rates of high tech pay in other states

Linkage Score

• Based on nominative and anecdotal comparison of each Performance Measure pairing and resulting in a “score” for each sequence of pairings• Provides a method to identify and group the Performance Measures with the highest anticipated payoff• Pair-wise comparison using analytical hierarchy process or similar methodology is an option.

Linkage Scores

LINKAGE SCORE CURVE

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1 2 3 4

RANKED LINKAGE SCORES

0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

1.400

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Linkage Score Statistics

DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS

Mean 0.578630897

Standard Error 0.041441152

Median 0.554347826

Mode 0.597826087

Standard Deviation 0.284106225

Sample Variance 0.080716347

Kurtosis -0.28417913

Skewness 0.392541147

Range 1.108695652

Minimum 0.119565217

Maximum 1.22826087

Sum 27.19565217

Count 47

Largest(1) 1.22826087

Smallest(1) 0.119565217

Confidence Level(95.0%) 0.083416711

Linkage Score – First Quartile

1.4.C: Expand current Missouri operations and encourage new start-u[s

1.4.B: Locate headquarters and operations in Missouri

1.2.B: Encourage Missouri basing/training/research/procurement

3.1.C: Encourage Missouri as the preferred site for basing/training/research/procurement

3.6.B: DED work with the BRAC consultant/advocate to develop a strategy for insulating Missouri’s military facilities against BRAC losses .

Linkage Score – Second Quartile

3.2.B: Basing and training

1.2.A: Demonstrate advantages of Missouri locations/population/businesses

3.5.B: Identify NGA and other IC supporting functions and target for relocation to Missouri

4,1,A: Identify key business and research intersections

3.5.A: Introduce NGA to additional Missouri technical intelligence research and development providers

4.1.B: Establish venues to meet and exchange information

3.2.A: Research and development

2.1.B: Encourage an information sharing and teaming milieu among national security contractors in Missouri

3.1.B: Explore identified missions with military commanders/government managers, support groups and Missouri’s Congressional delegation

1.2.C: Implement annual "National Security Industry Day"

3.1.A: Identify appropriate new missions expanding, matching or complementing current endeavors

3.2.C: Procurement

1.3.C: Exploit trade show leads/track and follow-up

1.4.3: Identify trade show and conference targets

4.2.A: Identify and target research professionals and institutions, by name

4.2.B: Determine recruiting and retention shortfalls and develop appropriate countermeasures

1.1.C: Designate Missouri D/HS Centers of Excellence

3.3.A: Veteran medical treatment research using Missouri research facilities

Linkage Score – Third Quartile

5.3.B: Employment issues

5.4.A: Implementation of MMPEC’s legislative measure tasks.

2.2.B: Work with BCS regional project directors and bidders to identify and provide Missouri incentives

3.4.B: Integrate GOCO contractor into Missouri technology fora

1.3.D: Increase number of trade shows and conferences targeted

5.4.B: Implementation of MMPEC’s regulatory and other recommended measure subtasks.

1.4.A: With MERIC, conduct gap analysis by NAICS code

4.3.C: Plan and resource for K-12 success

3.4.A: Facilitate GOCO contractor into advanced technology/manufacturing solutions consulting

3.6.A: DED work with the Governor’s office, legislative committees, MMPEC and MVC to fund and hire a BRAC consultant/advocate.

1.1.A: Identify a tangible geographical region

1.3.A: Improve quality of trade show participation

4.3.B: Work with the Missouri Department of Education to understand K-12 shortfalls preventing entry

4.3.A: Assess entry requirements of business and of technical schools, colleges and universities

2.1.A: Automate the information flow

1.1.B: Apply a unique region name

5.3.A: Tax issues

5.1.B: Find funding to apply to violent crime reduction

Linkage Score – Fourth Quartile

2.1.C: Coordinate with GSA and MERIC to maintain/update database

3.3.B: Integrate DVA facilities and supply chain into Missouri DPS/OHS solutions

5.2.B: GAH Solution implementation

2.2.A: Identify bidder training organizations/opportunities

5.1.A: With Missouri Department of Public Safety/ identify shortfalls in coverage

5.2.A: GAH Legislative solutions

General Goal 1 Overview:Marketing

GOAL: Increase the number of Missouri organizations competing for and winning D/HS Federal revenue center and related contracts, grants, and missions

OBJECTIVE 1: Brand Missouri’s D/HS “product”Performance Measure A: Identify a tangible geographical regionPerformance Measure B: Apply a unique region namePerformance Measure C: Designate Missouri D/HS Centers of Excellence

OBJECTIVE 2: Meet senior military/government resource managers with directive authority/inputPerformance Measure A: Demonstrate advantages of Missouri locations/population/businessesPerformance Measure B: Encourage Missouri basing/training/research/procurement

OBJECTIVE 3: Increase market penetration through trade show and conference participationPerformance Measure A: Improve quality of trade show participationPerformance Measure B: Identify trade show and conference targetsPerformance Measure D: Exploit trade show leads/track and follow-upPerformance Measure C: Increase number of trade shows and conferences targeted

SITUATION: With nearly $20 billion in Federal direct investment in Missouri’s national security industry annually, 50,000 employees, and over 2,300 organizations with national security-related contracts, we are a major player but not branded/identified as a national security center. The preponderance of the direct investment flows into the national security triangle extending west from St. Louis to the Kansas City/St. Joseph region, south Springfield/Joplin, and returning northeast to St. Louis. This region includes Boeing, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency operation, the University of Missouri-Columbia engineering school and Discovery Ridge, Rosencrans Air National Guard Base, National Nuclear Security Administration’s advanced manufacturing facility operated by Honeywell, Lake City Army Ammunition Plant operated by AKN, Whiteman Air Force Base, EaglePicher, the Jordan Valley Innovation Center, Fort Leonard Wood complex, and Missouri University of Science and Technology, among many other organizations engaged in national security-related work.

GENERAL GOAL 1 – MarketingOBJECTIVE 1: Brand Missouri’s National Security Industry “Product”

PERFORMANCE MEASURE A: Recommend a tangible geographical region.ACTION STATEMENT: Work with Department of Economic Development leadership and Missouri Economic Research Information Center staff to identify national security cluster groupings in Missouri. The resultant grouping will be perceptible enough to convey anidentity but expansive enough to assure inclusion of any appropriate area.LEAD: DED MERIC Support: DED BCS Sales , DED BCS MarketingTIMEFRAME: Complete within thirty days of Strategic Plan approval.BUDGET IMPLICATIONS: Minimal.LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS: NoSUCCESS MEASURE: Analysis either validates the geographic region identified in Situation, above, or provides an alternative regional grouping.SIMPLE PM LINKAGE SCORE: .380


PERFORMANCE MEASURE B: Apply a unique region name

NOTE: The unique name/identifier is not intended to replace the traditional “Show Me State” slogan but is intended only as a marketing tool to brand Missouri’s national security industry.

ACTION STATEMENT: The Virginia 28 Corridor, Research Triangle, and Silicon Valley all convey the concept of high tech industry. Branding came from repeated colloquial use of terms in speeches, literature, and media. To achieve a similar branding for Missouri’s national security industry region a working group including representatives from the Department of Economic Development and governor’s office, together with other interested parties will develop a slate of possible unique names/identifiers. DED leadershipwill select the name/identifier to be used.LEAD: DED BCS Marketing and DED BCS SalesSUPPORT: DED MERIC, MMPEC, MP3, Missouri PartnershipTIMEFRAME: Completed within thirty days of Performance Measure A completion.BUDGET IMPLICATIONS: None anticipated.LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS: NoSUCCESS MEASURE: The name selected is propagated in speeches, literature, and media.SIMPLE PM LINKAGE SCORE: .315


PERFORMANCE MEASURE C: Designate Missouri National Security Centers of Excellence (MCNSE).ACTION STATEMENT: In general terms, a center of excellence demonstrates leadership in conducting nationally-recognized research and shaping national security-related public policy, A working group will determine the possible value in creating a MCNSE designation and, if the concept is considered to be worthwhile, develop criteria to identify and establish the threshold for a the designation. The working group will be approved by the DED director or designate within ninety days of Strategic Plan approval. The recommendation for the initial decision for MCNSEs will be briefed to the DED director or designate within thirty days of theworking group selection. The criteria and threshold recommendations will be briefed within six months of the DED initial decision. The working group will develop recommendations for economic or other benefits for inclusion with MCNSE designation. LEAD: DED BCS MarketingSUPPORTING: MMPEC, DPS-OHS, MP3, DED MERIC, DED BCS Sales, research and higher education organizations,TIMEFRAME: The target for MCNSE budget inclusion is FY 2010. BUDGET IMPLICATIONS: To be determined.LEGISLATIVE IMPLICATIONS: YesSUCCESS MEASURE: MCNSE criteria and threshold published, a selection committee formed, and economic benefits included in a DED budget line.SIMPLE PM LINKAGE SCORE: .587


SITUATION: Nearly $20 billion in annual federal investment indicates that Missouri’s current human capital and infrastructure can be leveraged for further contracting and grant success. With over 2,300 Missouri organizations receiving national security-related contracts and grants we have demonstrated our interest in this business sector and our ability to compete and win. The gap analysis (from Goal A, Objective 3, Performance Measure A) will indicate industry segments where additional job creation and revenue generation may be advisable. A shortfall may exist in our knowledge and contacts with military and civilian resource managers that enable us to serve as a conduit for information regarding emerging opportunities.

GENERAL GOAL 1 – MarketingOBJECTIVE 2: Meet senior military and government resource managers

with directive authority and input.

GENERAL GOAL 1 – Marketing OBJECTIVE 2: Meet and influence senior military and government resource managers

with directive authority and input

Performance Measure A: Demonstrate advantages of Missouri locations, population, and businessesAction Statement: Using the MERIC, gap analysis, and marketing and economic information identify Missouri organizations with the capability to address gaps identified. Through resources including the Missouri Military Preparedness and Enhancement Commission, Missouri Veterans Commission, Homeland Security Advisory Council, and other resources identify, meet, and brief senior military and government resource managers regarding targeted opportunities in Missouri.Lead: DED BCS MarketingSupport: DED MERIC, DED BCS Sales, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: OngoingBudget Implications: 1/8 MERIC FTE opportunity cost.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: All identified senior military and civilian resource managers are briefed and influenced.Simple PM Linkage Score: .880

GENERAL GOAL 1 – Marketing OBJECTIVE 2: Meet senior military and government resource managers


Performance Measure B: Encourage Missouri basing, training, research, and procurementAction Statement: Working with leadership in federal executive branch departments and Missouri military sites; college, university and military research, education, and training facilities identify and support forthcoming opportunities for basing, contracts, and grants.Lead: DED BCS Sales Business Development DirectorsSupport: DED MERIC, DED BCS Marketing, MMPEC, MP3, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: Ongoing.Budget Implications: 1/8 MERIC FTE opportunity cost.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Senior military and civilian resource managers exchange information regarding emerging opportunities and become advocates for Missouri success.Simple PM Linkage Score: 1.163

GENERAL GOAL 1 – Marketing OBJECTIVE 2: Meet senior military and government resource managers


Performance Measure C: Implement annual “National Security Industry Day”Action Statement: Increasing the flow of knowledge and facilitating connectivity within the national security industry community encourages teaming for new business and cross-selling among existing businesses. Through resources including MMPEC, MVC, HSAC, and other resources identify, meet, and brief senior military and government resource managers regarding targeted opportunities in Missouri.Lead: DED BCS Marketing and DED BCS Sales Business Development DirectorsSupport: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, Governor’s office, Hawthorne Foundation, Missouri Chambers of Commerce, Missouri Economic Development Council, Missouri military and military support organization, MTC, DED MERIC, MMPEC, MP3, DPS-OHS, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: Schedule the first “National Security Industry Day” for late 2008Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: All Missouri organizations with national security-related contracts or interest and non-Missouri organization, identified in the MERIC gap analysis are invited to set up booths and participate. Simple PM Linkage Score: .728

Situation: Trade shows are a focal point for the national security

industry. Major trade shows can provide access to and open dialogues with otherwise unavailable corporate, government, military, and civilian executives. Identifying all political leadership, senior government and military resource managers and Missouri businesses participating in a conference or exhibition is essential. This provides the venue for Missouri senior executives and delegation to be fully engaged in facilitating investment leads and networking opportunities by:– Executive branch Department and Service secretaries and their

deputies and assistants.– Military members, particularly in the rank of colonel and above

and civilian equivalents.– Missouri businesses.

GENERAL GOAL 1 – MarketingOBJECTIVE 3: Increase market penetration through trade show

and conference participation

Performance Measure A: Improve quality of trade show participationAction Statement: Missouri economic development must be the focus of trade

show and conference participation with other economic development entities participating (PM D). Contact and lead generation are critical (PM C). Planning for trade show and conference participation must include target identification, exploitation, and follow-up plans (PM B). Those working trade shows must be aggressive and experienced in business development and contact management. A professionally developed, updatable slide show highlighting Missouri’s advantages and industry clusters within the national security industry for marketing at conferences, exhibitions and targets of opportunity will enhance our opportunity for success.

Lead: DED BCS Marketing Support: DED MERIC, DED BCS Sales, MTC, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: Funded and completed in MO FY 2009.Budget Implications: Estimate $100K for a slide show, no additional cost for

trade show staff selection.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Delivery of the slideshow stimulating a significant increase

in qualified contacts.Simple PM Linkage Score: .380

GENERAL GOAL 1 – Marketing OBJECTIVE 3: Increase market penetration through trade show




Performance Measure B: Identify trade show and conference targetsAction Statement: Prior to trade shows analyze trade show exhibitors and participants, identify targets based on the gap analysis, and link them to Missouri businesses, particularly those attending the conference or exhibition. Leverage contacts to generate matchmaking opportunities.Lead: DED BCS Sales Support: DED MERIC, DED BCS Marketing, MTC, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: Ongoing.Budget Implications: 1/8 MERIC FTE.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: For each trade show and conference, a target program with a target folder for each target identified.Simple PM Linkage Score: .598

Performance Measure C: Exploit trade show leads – track and follow-upAction Statement: Leads generated at trade shows and conferences are perishable and must

be tracked and followed up to seize opportunities. Among other capabilities, a customized variant of low-end customer relationship management (CRM) software can facilitate success. A CRM variant would facilitate Missouri product identification, business information, contact and call management and understanding/forecasting requirements for Missouri products and handle our service to businesses.

Lead: DED MERIC Support: DED BCS Sales, DED BCS Marketing, MTC, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: Ongoing.Budget Implications: CRM and customization is estimated at $500K.1 FTE for CRM development.1/4 MERIC FTE for CRM operation.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Leads are generated, cross-referenced, tracked, and exploited. Target a

three-hundred percent increase in qualified lead follow-up.Simple PM Linkage Score: .620



Performance Measure D: Increase the number of trade shows and conferencesAction Statement: Trade shows and conferences provide defense against

predatory states as well as offense opportunities to gain new business. As evidenced by the large number of businesses offering products and services at trade shows and conferences, these are high-density target opportunities. Trade show and conferences targeted must be selected to maximize marketing targets, engage new targets at each show, and follow-up on previously engaged targets. One international show each in Europe, the Mideast, and Asia annually and three domestic shows exhibits, and representation at six conferences provide sufficient market exposure.

Lead: DED BCS Marketing Support: Governor’s office, legislative committees, DED BCS Sales, DED MERIC,

MTC, Missouri PartnershipTimeframe: MO FY 2009 and subsequent fiscal years.Budget Implications: Estimate $100K per international trade show shared by the State of Missouri,

St. Louis, and Kansas City with Springfield encouraged to participate.Domestic trade shows are estimated at $25K each, likewise shared by the

State of Missouri, St. Louis, Kansas City, and possibly Springfield.Representation at trade shows and conferences is estimated at $1K per

person.





Performance Measure D (continued):

Legislative Implications: Yes – to the extent the DED funding request is approved.

Success Measures: Trade shows and conferences are funded. As no historic data is available regarding leads, my own Paris Air Show experience of sixty usable lead contacts and eight quality leads is a benchmark. Trade show and conference participation is forecast to result in an increase of 2-3 new business entrants to Missouri annually over a three year horizon, with job creation expected to be six jobs per million gross revenue for manufacturing and thirteen per million for services. Increased orders for existing products and services are targeted at one percent annually over the same time frame.

Simple PM Linkage Score: .500

GENERAL GOAL 1 – Marketing OBJECTIVE 4: Identify, target, approach and recruit companies

SITUATION: Missouri is a major national security-related procurement and service provider and has significant Defense installations and operations. We have the opportunity to leverage existing advantages to increase the competitiveness of existing Missouri enterprises and attract new companies to move to Missouri and conduct business. Missouri is seen as a locus of political power being home to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice Chair, the House Minority Whip, and the House Armed Services Committee Chair and these advantages can be marketed to increase Missouri’s participation in the national security industry marketplace.


Performance Measure A: With MERIC, conduct gap analysis by NAICS codeAction Statement: Working with MERIC and using GSA and other data develop an inventory of

D/HS goods and services procured through GSA and an inventory subset of goods and services procured from Missouri firms. Using this data develop a gap analysis of items potentially procurable in Missouri but not currently procured here, a compendium of potential supplier firms, and identification of classes of materiel for which Missouri currently has no supplier.

Lead: Missouri PartnershipSupport: DED MERIC, DED BCS Sales, DED BCS Marketing, MTCTimeframe: Complete within ninety days of Strategic Plan approval.Budget Implications: Opportunity cost of 1 1/2 FTEs until completion and 1/8 FTE for

maintenance and updating.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Delivery of an approved gap analysis and quarterly updates.Simple PM Linkage Score: .467


Performance Measure B: Locate NSI-related headquarters and operations in MissouriAction Statement: Working with NSI organizations, support organizations, appropriate State

of Missouri departments and committees identify NSI headquarters and operations that may be coming into the inventory or that currently exist elsewhere and may be vulnerable to acquisition. Assess the success and payoff potential and develop a prioritized list of identified targets. Develop market information for top priority targets. Work with D/HS and, as appropriate, national, state, and local leadership to capture priority targets.

Lead: Missouri Partnership Support: MTC, DED BCS Sales Business Development Directors, DED MERIC, DED BCS

MarketingTimeframe: OngoingBudget Implications: To be determined. Funding requirements include travel, market data,

analysis and related activities, products, and services.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Priority targets are engaged and captured.Simple PM Linkage Score: 1.185


Performance Measure C: Expand current Missouri operations and encourage new start-upsAction Statement: Drawing from information developed in the gap analysis, identify additional

products and services that Missouri firms could provide and potential Missouri suppliers. Make Missouri supplier firms and entrepreneurs aware of potential new markets for horizontal expansion and work with them to structure state and local assistance packages to improve their competitiveness.

Lead: Missouri PartnershipSupport: DED BCS Sales, DED BCS Marketing, DED MERIC, MTCTimeframe: Ongoing commencing with delivery of gap analysis. Budget Implications: To be determined. Funding requirements include travel, market data, analysis

and related activities, products, and services; as well as opportunity costs of assistance packages.

Legislative Implications: No Success Measure: Identified targets are successfully engaged and new business creation

emerges.Simple PM Linkage Score: 1.228

General Goal 2 Overview:Competitiveness

GOAL: To increase the number of companies bidding and improve the bid and win rate of Missouri businesses competing for D/HS Federal and related contracts.

OBJECTIVE 1: Identify Missouri businesses bidding on D/HS Federal and related contractsPerformance Measure A: Automate the information flowPerformance Measure B: Encourage an information sharing and teaming milieu among national security contractors in MissouriPerformance Measure C: Coordinate with GSA and MERIC to maintain/update database

OBJECTIVE 2: Improve bid quality and competitivenessPerformance Measure A: Identify bidder training organizations/opportunitiesPerformance Measure B: Work with BCS regional project directors and bidders to identify and

provide Missouri incentives

GENERAL GOAL 2OBJECTIVE 1: Identify Missouri businesses bidding on D/HS Federal

and related contracts.

Situation: Over 2,300 Missouri organizations won national security-related General Services Administration contracts and grants in FY 2006. Missouri ranks 7th in the US in Defense procurements. This is admirable but can be further improved by improving the flow of information and refining state statutes and regulations to provide a competitive edge to Missouri businesses. Competitive proposals often allow for very slim profit margins, thus small savings in estimated costs can mean the difference between winning and losing a bid or grant proposal. We must work with the system to provide Missouri bidders with any advantage possible.



Performance Measure A: Automate the information flow. Action Statement: Develop an historical bidder’s database, including NAICS and keywords,

from contracts Missouri bidders have won and an automated system that matches those NAICS codes and keywords to current GSA Federal Business Opportunities offerings on a daily basis. Encourage Missouri businesses to register with MO PTAC and receive email notification of bidding opportunities matching their NAICS codes and keywords.

Lead: DED MERIC Support: MO PTAC, DED BCS Sales, DED BCS Marketing, Missouri Partnership, MTCTimeframe: NSISP approval plus one year.Budget Implications: Limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: The DED database is implemented. Missouri businesses to register with

MO PTAC and receive email notification of bidding opportunities matching their NAICS codes and keywords.




Performance Measure B: Encourage an information sharing and teaming milieu among national security contactors in Missouri.

Action Statement: Using the bidder’s database (PM A) understand the Missouri NSI marketplace and players, work with BCS industry directors, regional project directors, and development organizations to identify teaming opportunities/other potential bidders.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Support: MO PTACs, DED MERIC, DED BCS Marketing, Missouri Partnership, MTCTimeframe: Database completion plus five years.Budget Implications: None anticipated.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: DED business development directors and regional managers have an

additional tool to assist companies team to win GSA procurement and service contracts.Simple PM Linkage Score: .761



Performance Measure C: Work Quality Jobs and other job creation programs to improve the competitiveness of Missouri businesses bidding on national security industry contracts.

Action Statement: Missouri firms are beginning to pick up on the competitiveness advantages they can accrue from understanding and incorporating Quality Jobs, Enhanced Enterprise Zone, and TIF savings into proposals. As competitive proposals often allow for very slim profit margins, small savings in estimated costs can mean the difference between winning and losing a bid or grant proposal. It is in Missouri’s interest to work with state and local organizations and make bidders aware of cost reduction programs.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Regional Managers Support: DED MERIC, DED BCS Marketing, Missouri Partnership, MTCTimeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri bidders responding to Requests for Proposal, Request for Quote,

and other bidding opportunities are able to incorporate savings into bids.Simple PM Linkage Score: .228

GENERAL GOAL 2 OBJECTIVE 2: Improve bid quality and competitiveness.

Situation: Missouri is a major supplier of NSI products and services and ranks seventh of fifty states in Defense procurement. Missouri had at least 2,300 companies that won NSI contracts and grants in Missouri fiscal year 2007. In addition, Boeing has about 1,200 suppliers (some of which are also reflected in our 2,300 contracts and grants) and other NSI contractors have their suppliers. Missouri has fared very well in NSI contracting and grants and we have the capacity to increase our market share. Increasing Missouri bid wins means improving bid quality.


Performance Measure A: Identify bidder training organizations and opportunities.Action Statement: The mission of the Missouri Procurement Technical Assistance Centers

(MO PTAC) and similar groups is to assist businesses—including small, disadvantaged and women owned firms—in obtaining federal, state and local government contracts. Federal purchasing offices are required by the Small Business Act to "set aside" contracts or portions of contracts for exclusive bidding by small and/or minority owned businesses. Often major prime contractors are also required to subcontract a portion of their government contracts to small firms. Dealing with regulations often keep highly qualified suppliers from selling to the government. PTAC assists businesses identify opportunities and understand the government contracting process in order to take advantage of government sales opportunities.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Regional ManagersSupporting: MO PTACs, DED BCS Sales Business Development Directors, DED BCS

Marketing, MTC, Missouri Economic Development Council, regional and local councils.Timeframe: Ongoing commencing with delivery of gap analysis. Budget Implications: To be determined. Anticipate 1/8 full time equivalent.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri D/HS suppliers increase their market share of Missouri business

opportunities.Simple PM Linkage Score: .130


Performance Measure B: Identify and provide incentives to Missouri bidders.Action Statement: Work with the MO PTACs to assure Missouri companies are registered for

screening and matching of GSA and other federal business opportunities to identify NSI requests for proposal to be performed in Missouri. Missouri economic development organizations can work with MO PTACs and companies to make opportunities available to Missouri suppliers.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Regional ManagersSupporting: MO PTACs, DED BCS Sales Business Development Directors, DED BCS

Marketing, Missouri Economic Development Council, regional and local councils.Timeframe: Ongoing commencing with delivery of gap analysis. Budget Implications: To be determined. Anticipate 1/8 full time equivalent.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri D/HS suppliers increase their market share of Missouri business

opportunities.Simple PM Linkage Score: .522

General Goal 3 Overview:National Security-related Missions (1)

GOAL: Assure growth in Missouri’s national security community.

OBJECTIVE 1: Identify cutting edge missions for Missouri’s military component (Active/Reserve/Guard/Government Civilian/Contractor):

Performance Measure A: Identify appropriate new missions expanding, matching or complementing current endeavors

Performance Measure B: Explore identified missions with military commanders/government managers, support groups and Missouri’s Congressional delegation

Performance Measure C: Encourage Missouri as the preferred site for basing/training/ research/procurement

OBJECTIVE 2: Work with Missouri Office of Homeland Security to identify Missouri advantages to the US Department of Homeland Security in the areas of:

Performance Measure A: Research and developmentPerformance Measure B: Basing and trainingPerformance Measure C: Procurement

OBJECTIVE 3: Identify and pursue additional US Department of Veteran Affairs opportunitiesPerformance Measure A: Veteran medical treatment research using Missouri research facilitiesPerformance Measure B: Integrate DVA facilities and supply chain into Missouri solutions

General Goal 3 Overview:National Security-related Missions (2)

OBJECTIVE 4: Identify and pursue additional US Department of Energy NNSA opportunitiesPerformance Measure A: Facilitate GOCO contractor into advanced technology/manufacturing

solutions consultingPerformance Measure B: Integrate GOCO contractor into Missouri technology fora

OBJECTIVE 5: Identify and pursue additional Intelligence Community opportunitiesPerformance Measure A: Introduce NGA to additional Missouri technical intelligence research and development providersPerformance Measure B: Identify NGA and other IC supporting functions and target for relocation

to Missouri

OBJECTIVE 6: Fund and hire a BRAC consultant/advocate and develop a Base Realignment and Closing (BRAC) strategy to insulate Missouri’s military against BRAC losses Performance Measure A: DED work with the Governor’s office, legislative committees, MMPEC and MVC to fund and hire a BRAC consultant/advocate.Performance Measure B: DED work with the BRAC consultant/advocate to develop a strategy for insulating Missouri’s military facilities against BRAC losses .

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 2: OBJECTIVE 1: Identify cutting edge missions for

Missouri’s national security component (Active/Reserve/Guard/Civilian/Research/Contractor):

Situation: By virtue of the excellent work by its congressional delegations and by creation of a climate conducive to the national security community, Missouri has benefited immensely from its national security sector. The U.S. national security sector is in a perpetual state of evolution and transition to identify and defeat challengers. In Missouri we must leverage our significant capabilities and assets to retain our current revenue centers and actively search out and acquire emerging opportunities. Vigorous information collection and response assures continued growth in the national security sector and forms the best defense against future Base Realignment and Closing (BRAC) commission incursions (although our sources indicate a new BRAC is not currently on the horizon).

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 1: Identify cutting edge missions for Missouri’s national

security component (Active/Reserve/Guard/Civilian/Research/Contractor):

Performance Measure A: Identify appropriate new missions expanding, matching or complementing current endeavors

Action Statement: Establish and expand the capability of military, government civilian, research institutions and contractors to identify and support acquisition of new missions for Missouri’s national security sector.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MERIC, MO PTACs, DED Marketing, DED Regional Managers, military and military

support organizations, and research organizations Timeframe: Ongoing.Budget Implications: Limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Knowledge of all potential new missions for Missouri’s national security

sector.Simple PM Linkage Score: .717



Performance Measure B: Explore identified missions with political leadership, military commanders/ government managers, support groups and Missouri’s Congressional delegation

Action Statement: Through knowledge of emerging missions (identified in PM A, above), assess potential new national security missions, discuss with political, military, government civilian, research institution and contractor leadership, identify targets and support acquisition.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MO PTACs, DED Marketing, DED Regional Managers, military and military

support organizations, and research organizations Timeframe: Ongoing.Budget Implications: Limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri’s political, military, government civilian, research institution and

contractor leadership are aware of all opportunities identified in PM B, above and provide guidance for targeting the most lucrative opportunities.




Performance Measure C: Encourage Missouri as the preferred site for basing/ training/ research/procurement.

Action Statement: Missouri must be positioned in the national security market in such a way that it becomes the generic name and first thought for national security programs (as Coke and Formica are/were euphemisms for soft drinks and countertops in their market space). This performance measure auto-correlates with branding, competitiveness and quality of life.

Lead: DED BCS Sales Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MTC, MO PTACs, DED Marketing, DED Regional Managers, military and military

support organizations, and research organizations Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Impediments to identifying, assessing and acquiring emerging missions

are removed Missouri becomes the national security location of choice.Simple PM Linkage Score: 1.054

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 2: Work with Missouri Office of Homeland Security to identify Missouri advantages to the US Department of Homeland

Security.

Situation: Drawing from the Department of Defense model, Missouri has the potential to provide significant advantages to Department of Homeland Security organizations including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Transportation Security Administration, and others. The information available does not indicate that DHS has fully embraced the DoD model. Leading DHS into Missouri solutions previously engineered by DoD provides a cost-effective channel for further national security sector growth.


Security.

Performance Measure A: Research and developmentAction Statement: Develop a compendium of research and development sites and specialities,

identify DHS access points, decision influencers, and decision makers, and use one-on-one marketing to actively promote Missouri’s sites and specialities to DHS procurement teams,

Lead: MERIC and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MP3, DPS-OHS, DED Marketing, DED Regional ManagersTimeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: 1/8 MERIC FTE for development.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri becomes a first stop consideration for DHS and we increase our

market share of DHS research and development contracts and grants.Simple PM Linkage Score: .772


Security.

Performance Measure B: Basing and trainingAction Statement: Using the compendium developed in PM A, emphasize to DHS

organizations and leaders the ongoing basing and training advantages at Fort Leonard Wood and identify new locations at Rosencrans ANGB, Whiteman AFB and other locations. Use Missouri’s Congressional delegation and existing military organizations and military support organizations to popularize and encourage full DHS consideration of Missouri sites.

Lead: DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, Governor’s office, MP3, MERIC, DPS-OHS,

DED Marketing, DED Regional Managers, military and military support groups.Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: All possible emerging missions are identified and DHS access points,

decision influencers, and decision makers are briefed.Simple PM Linkage Score: .891


Security.Performance Measure C: ProcurementAction Statement: Working with MERIC and GSA develop a capability to match DHS

requirements with Missouri companies, advise Missouri companies of bidding opportunities, and work with companies to apply Quality Jobs and other programs to make them more competitive.

Lead: MERIC and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MO PTACs, GSA, DPS-OHS, DED Marketing, DED Regional Managers, military

and military supports groups.Timeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: 1/8 MERIC FTE ongoing.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri firms demonstrate an improved DHS contract win rate.Simple PM Linkage Score: .696

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 3: Identify and pursue additional US Department of

Veteran Affairs opportunities.

SITUATION: The US Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) operates one of the largest pharmaceutical supply chains in the world and has hospitals and clinics scattered across Missouri. Missouri is home to over 538,000 veterans ranking 15th in both veteran population and DVA outlays. Missouri has a very mature medical research and development community and has the capability and capacity to provide DVA with significant improvements in veteran care and rehabilitation.



Performance Measure A: Market veteran medical treatment research using Missouri research facilities.

Action Statement: Develop a compendium of research and development capabilities and specialties, identify DVA access points, decision influencers, and decision makers, and team with research and development organizations to actively promote Missouri’s capabilities and specialties to DVA research procurers,

Lead: Missouri Veterans Council and MERIC Supporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, research organizations, DED BCS Business

Development Directors, DED BCS MarketingTimeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: Limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri receives first consideration by DVA for DVA research and

development contracts and grants.Simple PM Linkage Score: .587



Performance Measure B: Integrate DVA facilities and supply chain into Missouri DPS/OHS solutions

Action Statement: For emergency planning, Missouri DPS/OHS is encouraged to coordinate with DVA to use DVA’s pharmaceutical supply chains and any underused capacity of DVA hospitals and clinics in Missouri.

Lead: Missouri Veterans Council and DPS-OHS Supporting: MP3, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: Very limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: DPS/OHS and DVA, possibly using the Missouri Private/Public Partnership

framework, explore all possibilities for DVA support to Missouri in an emergency.Simple PM Linkage Score: .152

SITUATION: Missouri’s research community, government, and contractors have evidenced significant individual capabilities in advanced technology and manufacturing. Often information regarding advanced capabilities is not widely known. Missouri has a vested interested in popularizing its advanced capabilities both within the state and in other states and countries. This builds on the excellent work already in progress by the Missouri Technology Corporation (MTC) and others and channels that work into the national security market.

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 4: Identify and pursue additional research community,

government, and contractor participation in advanced technology/manufacturing solutions consulting.



Performance Measure A: Identify Missouri’s research community, government, and contractor participation in advanced technology/manufacturing solutions consulting.

Action Statement: Missouri has a number of public, private, and research organizations with the capability and interest in providing advanced technology and manufacturing consulting to emerging companies in Missouri and in other states. This capacity can be identified in a compendium and marketed, thus generating revenue for the advanced technology and manufacturing consulting services and leveraging the revenue generating capability of Missouri organizations.

Lead: MTC, MERIC and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MP3, Research and higher education organizations, Department of Higher

Education Timeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: Limited in addition to work in progress by MTC.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri’s capabilities are identified in a compendium.Simple PM Linkage Score: .446



Performance Measure B: Facilitate research community, government, and contractor participation in advanced technology/manufacturing solutions consulting.

Action Statement: Using the provider compendium generated in PM A, match capabilities with potential market and advise firms of this capability and contact information to initiate inquiries.

Lead: MTC and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MP3, Research and higher education organizations, Department of Higher Education,

DED BCS Regional Managers Timeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: Limited. Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Emerging Missouri firms are aware of and can access the high technology

consulting and advanced technology/manufacturing solutions they need to be successful.Simple PM Linkage Score: .511

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 5: Identify and pursue additional Intelligence Community

(IC) opportunities

Situation: The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) operations center in St. Louis employs 3,000 and is a major national IC hub. In addition, Missouri has a geospatial center at the University of Missouri – Columbia and programs with related interests at the Missouri University of Science and Technology and others. Senator Bond is the Vice Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Burgeoning intelligence requirements have exponentially expanded the need for intelligence professionals. Many requirements for intelligence and support may be currently contracted to other states.


(IC) opportunities

Performance Measure A: Introduce NGA to additional Missouri technical intelligence research and development providers

Action Statement: We must become better acquainted with NGA leaders and managers, the intelligence community, requirements and procurement process in order to identify and channel Missouri assets that will meet their needs.

Lead: DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, Governor’s office, MTC, MP3, Research and

higher education organizations Timeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: Limited.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: We are aware of the IC’s requirements, have identified organizations that

can meet those requirements, and have developed a channel to make Missouri solutions known to the IC.



(IC) opportunities

Performance Measure B: Identify NGA and other IC supporting functions and target for relocation to Missouri

Action Statement: NGA and the IC are in a state of flux with supporting organizations and functions that may benefit from relocation to Missouri. The task is to identify susceptible organizations and functions and make the case for their relocation.

Lead: MTC and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, MP3, Research and higher education

organizations, military and military support organizations Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Moderate. Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: We have insight into the ICs future requirements and can influence IC

business decisions.Simple PM Linkage Score: .859

GENERAL GOAL 3 OBJECTIVE 6: Fund and hire a BRAC consultant/advocate and develop

a Base Realignment and Closing (BRAC) strategy to insulate Missouri’s military facilities against BRAC losses.

Situation: The Department of Defense, alone, accounts for a direct investment of $9.5 B and and a minimum of 45,000 Missouri jobs. Missouri must be prepared to successfully negotiate the next BRAC round or risk losing a considerable revenue stream. The (MMPEC) Annual Report includes recommendations for insulating Missouri’s military facilities against BRAC losses.



Performance Measure A: DED work with the Governor’s office, legislative committees, and MMPEC MVC to fund and hire a BRAC consultant/advocate.

Action Statement: Missouri must provide funding to contract with a consultant/advocate to assess the possibility of enhancements or losses to Missouri with regard to future BRAC or similar initiatives and to pursue the objectives of the Commission as outlined in the enabling legislation;

Lead: MMPECSupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, Governor’s office, legislative committees,

DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus one year.Budget Implications: Estimated at $150k annually.Legislative Implications: Only to the extent of funding in DED’s budgetSuccess Measure: A consultant/advocate is funded and hired. Simple PM Linkage Score: .402



Performance Measure B: DED work with the BRAC consultant/advocate to develop a strategy for insulating Missouri’s military facilities against BRAC losses

Action Statement: As underscored in PM A, Missouri must be prepared to negotiate the next BRAC round. A BRAC strategic plan will underscore Missouri’s superior capabilities and vice the shortfalls of other states, thus providing a strong negotiating position.

Lead: BRAC consultant/advocateSupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, MMPEC, MP3, Governor’s office, legislative

committees, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus three years.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: DED and the BRAC consultant/advocate develop a strategy to reduce the

risk of BRAC losses.Simple PM Linkage Score: .924

General Goal 4 Overview:Research and Education

GOAL: To improve the research and education environment

OBJECTIVE 1: Work for improved collaboration among Missouri’s private sector, universities and government.

Performance Measure A: Identify key business and research intersectionsPerformance Measure B: Establish venues to meet and exchange information

OBJECTIVE 2: Attract and retain industry-recognized research experts in fields identified above.Performance Measure A: Identify and target research professionals and institutions, by namePerformance Measure B: Determine expert recruiting and retention shortfalls and develop

appropriate countermeasures

OBJECTIVE 3: K – 12 School performance issuesPerformance Measure A: Assess entry requirements of business and of technical schools, colleges and universities against Missouri’s K-12 pipeline output. Performance Measure B: Work with the Missouri Departments of Education and Higher Education to understand K-12 shortfalls preventing entry. Performance Measure C: Plan and resource for K-12 success.

GENERAL GOAL 4 OBJECTIVE 1: Work for improved collaboration among Missouri’s

private sector, universities, research institutions, and government.

Situation: Missouri has world-class research and development facilities both in the public and private sectors. We also have business and commercial interests that can and often do take advantage of our research and development facilities. Many believe the exchange of information and “cross-selling” of capabilities can be improved. Senator Bond’s nanotechnology conference and the advanced power development conference are recent examples of successful information exchange. These models can be copied to facilitate collaboration and commercialization among other components of Missouri’s research and development community.



Performance Measure A: Identify intersections of business and research interest. Action Statement: Work with MTC, MERIC, education, research and development

organizations, and businesses with interests in research and development commercialization to identify and group those with common interests in evidence.

Lead: DED MERIC and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: MMPEC, MVC, DPS-OHS, MP3, research and higher education organizations,

military and military support groups Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Minimal.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: DED produces a listing of research and development organizations and

businesses with research and development interests grouped by categories of mutual interest.




Performance Measure B: Establish venues to meet and exchange informationAction Statement: For organizations identified in PM A, above, devise the best approach to

offer exchange of information. Options may include but are not limited to email exchanges, website chat room discussions, one-on-one meetings, brown bag lunches, and conferences.

Lead: DED Marketing and DED BCS Business Development DirectorsSupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, Hawthorne Foundation, Governor’s office,

MTC, MMPEC, MVC, MP3, research and higher education organizations, military and military support groups

Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Minimal.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Knowledge and information flows freely among identified interest groups.Simple PM Linkage Score: .793

GENERAL GOAL 4 OBJECTIVE 2: Attract and retain industry-recognized research

experts in identified fields.

Situation: Competition for research and development professionals is fierce. Industry-recognized experts are often recruited to new locations because of better research and development facilities as well as competitive salaries and quality of life. Missouri has several excellent research and development facilities and industry-recognized professionals. It is imperative that we retain our current talent pool and attract others.



Performance Measure A: Identify the most appropriate research and development targets in terms of facilities and research professionals.

Action Statement: Work with Missouri research and development, education, and commercial organizations to catalog and understand the most productive research and development targets to expand our capabilities.

Lead: Research and higher education organizations and DED BCS Business Development Directors

Supporting: MP3, DED MERIC Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Minimal.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: A prioritized catalog of research and development facility and professional

targets.Simple PM Linkage Score: .598



Performance Measure B: Determine recruiting and retention shortfalls and develop appropriate countermeasures

Action Statement: Prioritize the catalog in PM A, above, develop a target and contact program, pursue funding for advanced facilities, and approaches to bridge the gap between current salary, facility, and quality of life and the expectations of targeted professionals.

Lead: Research and higher education organizations and DED BCS Business Development Directors

Supporting: Governor’s office, legislative committees, MP3, DED MERIC Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Salary, facility, and quality of life issues are not a hinderance to recruiting

targeted professionals.Simple PM Linkage Score: .598

GOAL 4OBJECTIVE 3: Improve K-12 education pipeline into Missouri

technical schools, colleges and universities.

Situation: Missouri has achieved industry-recognized excellence in its higher education science and technology programs and is an overall exporter of degrees and talent. We are developing a very good community college/ technical school capability. Some of our K-12 schools do not provide their graduates with the level of knowledge required to enter more lucrative technical training programs and career fields.



Performance Measure A: Assess entry requirements of business and of technical schools, colleges and universities against Missouri’s K-12 pipeline output.

Action Statement: Identify education mismatches, schools, and school systems whose graduates fall short of expected entry norms/requirements for Missouri’s higher education science and technology programs.

Lead: Missouri Department of Education Supporting: Department of Higher Education, MP3, DED MERIC, DED BCS Business

Development Directors Timeframe: NSISP approval plus one year.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: A annually updated report summarizing scientific and technical career and

higher education requirements and including listings of K-12 schools failing to meet expected norms for entry into those career fields and higher education institutions.




Performance Measure B: Work with the Missouri Departments of Education and Higher Education to understand K-12 shortfalls preventing entry.

Action Statement: The first step in solving this problem is recognizing the problem exists and understanding the elements creating the problem. The Missouri Departments of Education and Higher Education, together with the K-12 and college and university systems, should be the driving forces in identifying the quality supplied and quality demanded mismatches, with input from business interests.

Lead: Missouri Department of Education Supporting: Governor’s office, legislative committees, Department of Higher Education, MP3,

DED MERIC, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus two years.Budget Implications: Minimal.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: All interested parties reach a mutual understanding of the problem.Simple PM Linkage Score: .370



Performance Measure C: Plan and resource for K-12 success. Action Statement: Develop and resource a plan to resolve shortfalls in quality of education for

students to successfully transition from Missouri’s K-12 system into business and higher education, particularly in science and technology fields.

Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Significant.Legislative Implications: Yes – plan must be funded in the Department of Education budgetSuccess Measure: A plan is agreed upon and the Departments of Education and Higher Education

petition for resources to execute the plan.Simple PM Linkage Score: .467

General Goal 5 Overview:Quality of Life

GOAL: Missouri improves its position as a desirable place to live, work and retire.

OBJECTIVE 1: Improve Missouri’s DOJ budget sharePerformance Measure A: With Missouri Department of Public Safety/ identify shortfalls in coveragePerformance Measure B: Find funding to apply to violent crime reduction OBJECTIVE 2: Develop “Guard at Home” supportPerformance Measure A: Legislative solutionsPerformance Measure B: Solution implementation

OBJECTIVE 3: Work to eliminate barriers to retiring in Missouri or remaining here after militaryPerformance Measure A: Tax issuesPerformance Measure B: Employment issues

OBJECTIVE 4: Improve K-12 and higher education response to military community needs by incorporating MMPEC recommendations as tasks. Performance Measure A: Implementation of MMPEC’s legislative measure tasks. Performance Measure B: Implementation of MMPEC’s regulatory and other recommended measure subtasks.

GOAL 5 OBJECTIVE 1: Improve Missouri’s DOJ budget share.

Situation: Missouri has many excellent attributes that draw families to live and work. According to the US Department of Justice ratings we have a significant problem with violent crime ranking 16th of 52 states and territories with over 525 violent crimes per 100K population, similar to Arkansas, Illinois, and Oklahoma, but higher than Iowa, Kansas, and Nebraska. Missouri ranks 29th in the rate of full-time police employees per 100K population. The correlation between full-time police employees and the violent crime rate is .89 according to United States Department of Justice statistics, indicating more police attention results in lower violent crime rates.


Performance Measure A: Identify shortfalls in policing and coverage.Action Statement: Using Missouri Department of Public Safety (DPS) and Department of

Justice (DOJ) work with MERIC, DPS and DOJ to identify areas with high violent crime rates and low police coverage and recommend solutions.

Lead: MERIC and the Missouri Department of Public SafetySupporting: DOJ, DED Sales Regional Managers, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus one year.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Analysis determines appropriate courses of action and budget/personnel

requirements. Analysis and data are available to make the case for additional police funding and personnel.



Performance Measure B: Find funding to apply to violent crime reduction.Action Statement: Work with the Governor’s office, State legislature, and Missouri

Congressional delegation to secure a larger share of DOJ funding/personnel.Lead: DED BCS Business Development Directors and the Missouri Department of Public

SafetySupporting: Missouri’s Congressional delegation, Governor’s office, legislative committees,

DOJ, DED Sales Regional Managers, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: Significant additional funding to achieve violent crime rate parity with

Kansas, as an example of a state with an “average” violent crime rate.Legislative Implications: Yes – funding requirements are resident on both federal and state

levelsSuccess Measure: Missouri receives funding to increase police presence in targeted high

violent crime areas. The violent crime rate is significantly reduced, thus making Missouri more attractive as a place to live, work, and retire.


GOAL 5 OBJECTIVE 2: Develop “Guard at Home” support

Situation: The Guard at Home program is intended to assist the spouses of Missouri Guard and Reserve members who have been deployed. The objective is to provide services to the families of veterans to address their immediate needs, and build a path to employment to help keep the family from falling into poverty while the family’s primary income earner is on active duty deployment. This program is administered through the Department of Economic Development and funded through $350K in federal workforce funds that support Missouri Career Centers. 197 spouses have enrolled but none have elected to pursue career services, thus no funds have been expended.


Performance Measure A: Develop legislative solutions.Action Plan: Work with the Governor’s office and DED Workforce Development to identify

Missouri statutory adjustments required to better position the program to meet program goals.

Lead: DED Division of Workforce Development Supporting: Governor’s office, legislative committees, MMPEC, MVC, DED Sales Regional

Managers, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: Ongoing through the Missouri FY 2009 legislative cycle.Budget Implications: None.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Needed statutory adjustments are identified. DED has the information it

needs to approach the Governor and legislature with amendments necessary for statutory adjustments.



Performance Measure B: Legislative solution implementationAction Plan: Work with the Governor’s office, appropriate Missouri legislature committees,

and DED Workforce Development to amend Missouri statutes and provide program access to military spouses.


Managers, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: Ongoing through the Missouri FY 2009 legislative cycle.Budget Implications: None.Legislative Implications: Yes – solution requires amendments to current legislationSuccess Measure: The current legislation is amended to facilitate use of federal funding to

address the needs of Missouri’s military spouses. Military spouses use the program to better provide for their families, particularly during and after the military member’s deployment.


GOAL 5 OBJECTIVE 3: Work to eliminate barriers to military

assignment, post military employment, and retirement in Missouri

.

Situation: Missouri has a number of issues that have been brought to the attention of the Missouri Military Preparedness and Enhancement Commission (MMPEC). These include tas, school administration, and employment issues that preclude Missouri from achieving its full potential as a “military friendly” and desirable place to live, work and retire.



Performance Measure A: Tax issues.Action Statement: Missouri statute requires all persons receiving income in Missouri to

complete a state tax return. The Missouri Department of Revenue has limited the requirement significantly for non-resident military members but still requires completion of an extensive form. Many states have completely eliminated this requirement, depending instead on an automated "tax compare" program with the Internal Revenue Service to identify those who should file Missouri returns. Should a military member be occasionally picked up as a nonfiler through the IRS tax compare program the burden of proof is on the military member and can usually be resolved by a copy of the state of residence return. Likewise, should a military nonresident or their spouse be identified through the tax compare program they will be directed to file the appropriate commonwealth tax return. According to the Virginia tax specialist, this is not a large problem in Virginia even with their large active duty military population.

Lead: Missouri Department of Revenue Supporting: Governor’s office, legislative committees, MMPEC, MVC, DED Sales Regional

Managers, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: Ongoing. Anticipate completion prior to April 2008.Budget Implications: Very limited.Legislative Implications: Possibly – Missouri statutes may need to be amended to exempt

non-resident military membersSuccess Measure: DOR adopts a “tax compare” program similar to many other states and

pursues statutory amendments, if necessary. Missouri is identified as a “military friendly” state and military members welcome Missouri assignments.




Performance Measure B: Job issuesAction Statement: Military members leaving active duty or retiring often leave Missouri for

better employment opportunities elsewhere. Recent changes to retirement tax law by Governor Blunt and the Missouri legislature will mitigate the tax liability on retirees as the changes are implemented but both retiring and former military have the skills and often high level security clearances to command better salaries in other states.


Managers, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: Missouri attracts more quality federal and contractor jobs. Military

members leaving active duty or retiring stay and work in Missouri, thus increasing the tax base.


GOAL 5 OBJECTIVE 4: Improve K-12 and higher education response to

military community needs.

Situation: Missouri has achieved industry-recognized excellence in its higher education science and technology programs and is an overall exporter of degrees and talent. We are developing a very good community college/technical school capability. Some of our K-12 schools do not provide their graduates with the level of knowledge required to enter more lucrative technical training programs and career fields. The Missouri Military Preparedness and Enhancement Commission (MMPEC) Annual Report includes recommendations for legislative and regulatory action that addresses shortfalls in Missouri’s educational relationship with Missouri’s military community. MMPEC recommendations are incorporated into the National Security Industry Strategic Plan as performance measures to accomplish Goal 4, Objective 3.



Performance Measure A: Implementation of MMPEC’s legislative measures tasks.Action Statement: Work with the MMPEC, Missouri Departments of Education and Higher

Education and appropriate legislative committees to accomplish MMPEC objectives.

• Ensure resident college tuition continues to be available to the spouse and eligible dependents.

• Ensure tuition waivers exist for the spouse or college-age children of a service member• Ensure children of military personnel being assigned to Missouri military installations are

eligible to enroll in Kindergarten in Missouri• Ascertain and verify that local school districts with military children permit flexibility in

course sequences and deadlines • Ensure the school districts that receive at least 35% of their annual operating revenue as

Federal Impact Aid have a military voting mechanism• Recommend that Missouri become one of the first States to become a signatory to the

Interstate Compact for Educational Opportunity of Military Children when it is released.



Lead: MMPEC and Missouri Department of Education

Supporting: Governor’s office, legislative committees, Department of Higher Education, MP3, MVC, DED BCS Business Development Directors

Timeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.

Budget Implications: TBD.

Legislative Implications: Yes

Success Measure: All MMPEC recommendations are signed into law and the Departments of Education and Higher Education are provided the necessary resources.




Performance Measure B: Implementation of MMPEC’s regulatory and other recommended measure tasks.

Action Statement: Work with the MMPEC, Missouri Departments of Education and Higher Education and appropriate regional and local organizations and boards to accomplish MMPEC objectives.

• Ensure that the Department of Education provides resources to local school districts of Missouri with military children that address the needs of military children

• Ensure local school districts are aware of the number of students in their districts who have military parents assigned in the district or are deployed, including Reserve Components

• Ensure local school districts are aware of the challenges with military enrolling children living with a caretaker while the parents are deployed and take action to provide that those school districts are prepared to address the inter and intra district transfers incidental to such living arrangements

• Ascertain and verify that local school districts are prepared to handle the placement issues in special education and gifted education for the military children transferring to the district

• Ensure local districts permit temporary use of hand carried transcripts for initial enrollment and placement

• Ensure that the Department of Education provides online resources for military parents with children transferring to Missouri schools

• Ascertain and verify that local school districts with military children are prepared to address grading and transcript inconsistencies affecting academic standing, honors and access to advance programs

• Encourage that local school districts of Missouri with military children join the Military Child Education Coalition (See www.MilitaryChild.org);



Lead: MMPEC and Missouri Department of Education Supporting: Governor’s office, legislative committees, Department of Higher Education, MP3,

MVC, DED BCS Business Development DirectorsTimeframe: NSISP approval plus five years.Budget Implications: TBD.Legislative Implications: NoSuccess Measure: All MMPEC recommendations are in appropriate agency regulations and

the Departments of Education and Higher Education are provided the necessary resources.


The Way Ahead

• D/HS Industry Council Plan Review• DED Internal Coordination• Executive Branch Coordination• DED Director Approval

Concurrent with the review, coordinationand approval process commence workon Mission Analysis and Action Plans to accomplish General Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures.

/

?Questions?

Documents

Homeland Security Overview for Bill McCoy, Chair National Security Industry Leadership Council [email protected] CouncilReview National Security Industry