Integrated Program Assessment Status 28 February 2008

1. Air Armament Center Integrated Program Assessment Status 28 February 2008 Mr. Deryl Israel AAC/EN DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

2. Outline • Integrated Assessment (IA) Update • IA purpose & background • Progress since 2007 Industry Day • Program Sufficiency Review (PSR) summary • FY06-07 activity & results • Lessons learned: How to do better SRs • Lessons learned: How to build better programs • Way Ahead: Plans for 2008

3. Assessment Purpose & Background • Historically, Eglin programs have • Cost overruns of 15%-30% • Schedule slips of 6-12 months • Since FY06, deployed and integrated a suite of assessments to execute AAC’s vision--War-winning capabilities… on time, on cost • Intent is to create and maintain a high-confidence portfolio

4. High-Confidence ProgramsKey Characteristics* • Good “Should-Cost” Estimate • Budget/Cost Estimate alignment • Approved time-phased CDD requirements • Program office resourcing • Requirements stability • Budget stability mechanism • Incremental program plan • Short-duration capability release/production schedules • SDD phase no greater than 6 years • Tech / manufacturing maturity assessment thresholds met • Integrated sustainment and depot strategy • Realistic test planning, Approved IOT&E plan • Life-cycle acquisition strategy—time certain success incentive • Executing according to “plan” • Probability of Program Success (PoPS) measures * As Defined by D&SWS design teams

5. AFPEO/WP Policy, 23 May 07AAC Integrated Assessments • These assessments will help us collaborate with our government stakeholders and industry to improve our acquisition processes and align expectations. • AAC acquisition commanders/directors must effectively employ the assessments during program planning and execution • Assessment leaders will provide results to the PEO/Deputy PEO, Weapons; commanders or directors of appropriate AAC line units; and the AAC Center Senior Functional owning the assessment being reported.

6. Logistics Health Assessment (LHA) INPUTS (FROM STD AAC PRODUCTS) Rollout Spring ‘08 Spiral 2 Assessment Engine Logistics Health Assessment (LHA) Technology Readiness & Integration Assessment (TRA) Systems Engineering Assessment (SEA) Probability of Program Success (PoPS) Program Sufficiency Review (PSR) Probability of Program Success (PoPS) Manufacturing Readiness Assessment (MRA) Cost Sufficiency Review (CSR)

7. TRA/ MRA’ MRA/ TRA’ CSR CSR SEA SEA LHA PoPS PoPS PSR PSR AAC Assessment Life Cycle POM Input MS A MS B MS C Sustainment TRA/ MRA’ MRA/ TRA’ (As Required) TRA’/ MRA’ CSR (As Required) CSR CSR SEA SEA Quarterly Updated LHA LHA Updated Monthly PoPS PoPS PoPS Updated Monthly PSR PSR PSR (As Required)

8. Progress Since 2007 Industry Day • Probability of Program Success (PoPS) • Consistent monthly updates in SMART • Internal audits drive process compliance • Cost Sufficiency Review • Earlier collaboration between staff & programs • Manufacturing Readiness Assessment • Updated guide published 30 Nov 07 • Logistics Health Assessment • Increment 1 design complete; approved by AFMC/A4 • Increment 2 design to include Pre MS B coverage • Sufficiency Reviews • Co-chaired by AAC/EN, 308th ARSW/CL • PoPS-based template; promotes standard work • Action item status reported at program reviews

9. O N D J F M A M J J A S / None / FY08 funding issue / None / None / None Focused Lethality Munition AMRAAM FY08 POM G Y G R Wind-Correct Mun Disp-Ext Range MALD SDD Rebaseline Laser JDAM AMRAAM Rebaseline Air Superiority Target FY08 POM Covert Resupply (COVERS) BLU-122 Rebaseline MALD Universal Armament Interface ALM MK82 DIME Very Small Munition Tactical Laser for Airfield Defense I-500 Penetrator Small Concept Weapon on Predator Adaptive Carriage Enterprise Close Air Support Weapons Hd Tgt Void Sens Fuze Risk Reduct FY06 AAC Sufficiency Reviews Current MAR/Rebaselines since SR/Notes AIR-TO-GROUND PROGRAMS Canceled- major redesign req’d User requirement withdrawn Canceled- producibility issues AIR-TO-AIR PROGRAMS User did not include in POM Contract award: FY10 Plan presented at EWSR COMBAT SUPPORT PROGRAMS AAC/CA Approved Prod Munition Assy Conveyor II MS C NEW CONCEPT PROGRAMS Concept provided to SECAF Concept provided to AFSOC Concept provided to ACC Concept provided to ACC Assessment sent to AFMC/CC Concept provided to SOCOM Concept provided to AFSOC PDRR on track; JCTD starts FY08 20 (13 7 ) 1 2 1 1 3 1 5 1 1 0 2 3 AAC Totals Realistic Realistic, Carries Risk

10. O N D J F M A M J J A S / None / None / None / None – Awaiting N-M decision / None / None / None / None / None – Awaiting N-M decision / None AMSTE-JDAM G G G G G G G R R G JASSM-ER Restructure JASSM Maritime Interdiction JDAM Production Adv Tactical Laser Ext User Eval Hard Tgt Void Sensing Fuze JCTD Laser JDAM SDB II Cost (prior to DoD CAIG rvw) Massive Ordnance Penetrator QRC SFW Production FY10 POM Hard Tgt Void Sensing Fuze AST Business Jet AoA MALD-J SDD AST QF-16 Update CRIIS Rapid Prototype Joint Threat Emitter CRIIS Risk Reduction & SDD P5 Combat Training System Contract award: FY10 Automated Remote Transport Sys FY07 AAC Sufficiency Reviews Current MAR/Rebaselines since SR/Notes AIR-TO-GROUND PROGRAMS User requirement withdrawn AIR-TO-AIR PROGRAMS AoA eliminated concept PDRR Contract award: FY10 COMBAT SUPPORT PROGRAMS Prototype effort: on track Contract award: FY08 CRIIS Test & Training NEW CONCEPT PROGRAMS Extended User Eval JCTD User requirement withdrawn FY08 JCTD; SDD start: FY10 22 (6 16 ) 3 1 4 3 2 3 1 1 1 0 1 2 AAC Totals Realistic Realistic, Carries Risk

11. AAC Portfolio Performance Program Rebaselines: 3

12. AAC Portfolio Performance Program Rebaselines: 2

13. Lessons LearnedHow to do better Sufficiency Reviews Do: • Employ cross-functional approach when completing assessments • Use proper versions of process guides/tools (e.g. PoPS spreadsheet) • Conduct sufficient “deep dives” into appropriate individual assessments • Address weaponeering & mission planning across entire life cycle • Present efficient and effective test plans built with CTA & RTO inputs • Incentivize supplier decision processes when transitioning to production • Identify opportunities to validate manufacturing processes • Carefully select cost/schedule benchmarks • Conduct thorough Cost SRs prior to Program SRs • Use PoPS results in Program SRs to identify, communicate risks Don’t: • Assume all AAC programs will be low-risk efforts • Over-optimistically evaluate programs • View Cost and Program SRs as the IG; they are home team help

14. Assessments Becoming AF Tools • AAC leaders assigned to AFSO21 Develop & Sustain Warfighting Systems (D&SWS) teams • Ms Stokley, AAC/CA, co-sponsored Life Cycle Management; Oversight/Command & Control teams • Ms Rutledge, 708ARSG/CL; Mr Mistretta, AAC/EN; Tech Development team • Mr Walley, 918ARSG/DD; Life Cycle Management team • Assessments endorsed by AFMC/CC; SAF/AQ to create & maintain high-confidence programs • PoPS: key risk management tool & metric • TRAs/MRAs: enable “stage gating” milestones • SEA: moving toward AFMC-wide application • LHA: Sponsored by AFMC/A4 • Sufficiency Reviews: req’d at key decision points • AF-level Implementation planning now underway

15. Building Better ProgramsAttaining High Confidence • Better transition planning, decisions via technology and manufacturing assessments, PoPS, Pre-MS B risk reduction phase* • Iterative requirements that evolve, provide trade space prior to MS B* • Stable requirements for a given increment* • Realistic resourcing ($$ and people)* • Risk-based source selections* • Strong, consistent Systems Engineering processes* • Incremental development w/ discrete offramps* • Incentivize sustainment (affordability/availability)* • Proactive risk management* • Early, active test community involvement in test planning • Up-front weaponeering & mission planning—and resources * Proposed by D&SWS design teams

16. Way Ahead: 2008 Plans • Share AAC processes/lessons learned via D&SWS • Enable running start at other centers • Facilitate PoPS training at other Centers • Personnel from other Centers attend AAC IA events • Design LHA Increment 2 (supports pre-MS B efforts) • Align AAC IA improvements with D&SWS • Integrate near-term AFMC; SAF/AQ decisions • Minimize scrap & rework as AF standards adopted • Continue process standardization • Leverage assessments to streamline doc prep • Summarize key results in AAC Expectation Mgt Agreements • Use assessment products to streamline Life Cycle Mgt Plan creation/updates via Zero Based Documentation pilots