Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

AT&L Update Tracking AT&L Initiatives AT&L reorganization

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "AT&L Update Tracking AT&L Initiatives AT&L reorganization"— Presentation transcript:

1 AT&L Update Tracking AT&L Initiatives AT&L reorganization
5000 streamlining Uniquely identifying tangible items and the Financial Management Enterprise Architecture DCMA changes Virtual DAES process Small business opportunities Looking for innovative ideas

2 Tracking AT&L Initiatives Summary
Of 98 Recommendations reviewed for additions to the AT&L Initiatives Management Tracking list: 71% have been Completed, are being addressed outside the tracking list or were already an initiative on the tracking list 17% became New Initiatives 12% not recommended for pursuit Integrate requirements and acquisition processes Institutionalize evolutionary acquisition and spiral development Implement “Hold Harmless” policy and guidance Develop Acquisition & Logistics Integration approach from the acquisition perspective Apply 6 Sigma implementation to AT&L processes My staff in AT&L looked at a total of 98 recommendations made at different forums as potential AT&L Initiatives. The PM Conference last April had 9 breakout groups that made the majority of the recommendations – 76 total. Other recommendations came from PMT 401 Students, the Atlanta XXVIII Executive Seminar and the AIAA Conference We found that 71% of the recommendations have since been completed, were already part of an existing initiative, or are being addressed outside the AT&L initiatives, e.g. through the DPG. 17% of the recommendations you made did turn into five new initiatives, listed on the slide. There does need to be a greater emphasis on the alignment of requirements generation and acquisition processes in the joint environment so that requirements, acquisition and resource decision makers can work collaboratively and have continuous interaction in the overall context of mission area capabilities. Although evolutionary acquisition and spiral development are terms that have been in use within the Department for over a year, we realized from the many recommendations that we needed more work in this area to clearly define the terms and processes. In order to clarify the language, changes were made and you can see the result of these changes in the interim DoD 5000 policy. Implementing “hold- harmless” which is the FY02 statute that can hold the government accountable for work provided by the working capital funded activities, is almost complete, with the final policy awaiting Mr. Aldridge’s signature. The initiative to develop acquisition and logistics integration from an acquisition perspective reflects the need to develop guidance in a weapon systems acquisition process context, where integrated planning practices among engineering, logistics and contracting functions were applied that resulted in successfully achieving total life cycle systems management at a significantly lower cost. A final guidebook outlining the practices and tools is planned for next year. The initiative to apply 6 sigma to our processes is still being investigated as to how and if, it should be implemented to our AT&L processes. We decided not to pursue 12% of the recommendations because they were outside AT&L’s control, for example, such as the recommendation from the PM Workshop Breakout Group 6 that recommended having a task force level funding wedge not tied to a specific program. We actually did approach the comptroller on this idea, but they pointed out that Congress would not support an unidentified funding wedge. Detailed tracking information will be available on Conference website

3 AT&L Reorganization in a Nutshell
AS IS Approximately $2B 20 O&M Programs 40 RDT&E Programs 2 Procurement Programs ~1,090 People 480 Govt 80 Military Many “Others” 1 Major Defense Acq. Program All OSD Science & Tech (~$1B) ¼ of DoD 6.1 RDT&E $ “Bigger” than most Defense Agencies TO BE Less $ Less Direct Management of Resources Fewer “Business” Areas ~ 15% Fewer People Oversee Vice “Own” S&T Funding Refocused Mission Support OSD Focus: Oversight & Policy Action Plan Divest/Devolve Programs that Could be Performed Elsewhere - sizable staff reduction Kill/Descope Non-Relevant Programs - frees funding for other uses Realign/Restructure Staff to Streamline Organization - create synergy targets AT&L Policy – no dedicated deputies Minimized Reports Produced Wherever Possible - asked for legislative relief as needed Significant Realignments Office of Director, Interoperability Merged into Office of Defense Systems (formerly Strategic & Tactical Systems) - Systems & Mission Integration (formerly Interoperability): System-of-Systems solution to operational needs - Systems Engineering: Policy, disciplines, best practices - Acquisition Programs: Oversight, acquisition management practice Office of Director, Acquisition Initiatives Merged into Office of Defense Procurement - Program Analysis: Contracting and business management strategies on major systems - Acquisition Regulations: Communicate implementing procurement regulations and guidance - E-Business: Information technology solutions within framework of End-to-End Procurement Model and DoD Financial Management Modernization Program - Workforce: Acquisition training and career development - Policy: Analysis & Develop innovative policy and business solutions

4 Revised Acquisition and Requirements Generation Policy
Current policies cancelled and interim policy issued by DEPSECDEF on October 30th Less prescriptive policy environment that fosters efficiency, flexibility, creativity and innovation Need to encourage additional streamlining during coordination of final version of DoD & .2 Final Directive and Instruction planned for January 15, 2003 Requirements Generation Portions of CJCSI B dealing with MNS and CRD eliminated on October 7, 2002 New document capability-based and mission area focused Objective to provide better support to the joint warfighter Revised Joint Staff Instruction early 2003 DepSecDef letter cancelled current DoD Directive , DoD Instruction and DoD Regulation A separate DepSecDef letter issued Interim Guidance that will serve as the “baseline” for the finalized and re-issued Directive and Instruction. The Regulation will not be re-issued and is now discretionary. The discretionary practice is now and will remain available via the DAU web-site. We want to encourage additional streamlining during the finalization process. The Defense Acquisition Policy Working Group is working on an accelerated schedule now per DepSecDef direction. Significant portions of the Requirements Generation System as described in Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction B also being revised. The Mission Needs Statement (MNS) will be replaced by a mission area focused and capabilities-based document.  Concepts depicted in the Capstone Requirements Document (CRD) will be captured within mission area architectures as they are defined. Intent is to avoid producing stovepiped solutions that are not based on the capabilities required by the joint warfighter Both efforts are being closely coordinated. Future Joint Warfighting Capabilities require a more Innovative Business Culture

5 Uniquely Identifying Tangible Items and the Financial Management Enterprise Architecture
The OUSD(AT&L), working with the DoD Components and Industry, is developing policy for uniquely “marking” various commodities (property, parts and consumables). Presently, DoD does not have a standard policy for uniquely identifying or marking tangible items. The new policy is expected to prescribe the use of international standards and industry best practices. Uniquely identifying tangible items is critical to the successful development of the DoD Financial Management Enterprise Architecture, which will result in future integrated business and financial systems that must accurately and timely record the cost, location, etc. of such items. Uniquely identifying and marking DoD tangible items or assets is essential to effective asset management. The Department must know where its assets are located, when they move or transfer, what they cost and their condition, as well as a host of other important management information, and such information must be timely and accurately recorded in DoD business and financial information systems. The only way this will be accomplished is by uniquely identifying and marking such assets; however, today DoD has not issued acquisition policy and guidance that ensures that its assets are properly identified and marked. Accordingly, I have directed that AT&L working with the Components and industry develop such policy. The concepts and requirements of the policy to be developed will be incorporated in the FMEA being developed by the Comptroller and Team IBM, and will be a critical element of future business practices and systems. Heads up—the policy will prescribe the use of existing international standards.

6 DCMA Business Initiatives
CONTRACT CLOSEOUT Contract performance Not Complete Until Closeout Focus on Contracts Physically Complete for More Than 7 Years Baseline of 3,869 Open Contracts Reduced by 48% CURTAILMENT OF INSPECTIONS Sept AT&L Proposal to SAEs to Curtail DCMA Inspections and Surveillance Activities for Specified Low Value/Low Risk Requirements Applies Resources to Higher Risk/Higher Pay Off Efforts Contract Closeout: Strategy is to Close All Physically Complete Contracts As Quickly As Possible Minimize Expiring Funds and Contractor Payment Issues Some Statistics:     Total number of overage contracts has been reduced from 20,000 to 16,900.       48% of all contracts completed for 7 years, or longer, have been closed.     88% (395/448) of all cost-type contracts, over 8 years old, under $1M in value, and 56% (104/187) of all cost type contracts, greater than 8 years old, over $1M in value, are now closed.   Contract closure is a vital first step to implementing the Department’s end-to-end business processes initiatives including financial management modernization, electronic contracting and corporate databases. Curtailment of Inspections AT&L proposed to SAEs to Limit Inspections in the following 3 Instances: Change 1: Revise DFARS Part 46 to limit Government source/origin inspection on contracts under $250,000 to those situations where the head of the contracting activity has approved and verified that all three of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) there are significant contract technical requirements (e.g., drawings or test procedures), and (2) critical product features/characteristics or specific acquisition concerns have been identified, and (3) the contract is awarded to a manufacturer/producer, or contract is awarded to a dealer/distributor and specific government verifications have been identified as necessary and feasible to perform. On contracts failing one or more of these conditions, product quality assurance will be limited to destination inspection and/or user determinations of item fitness for use. Change 2: Discontinue DCMA production surveillance on contracts assigned Criticality Designator “C” (not major systems or urgent needs-see FAR ), unless contracting/program offices identify specific concerns to DCMA and request specific production surveillance. Change 3: Discontinue all DCMA production and quality assurance surveillance/reporting on any follow-on spares contracts placed with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) with continuing production capability, unless contracting/program offices identify specific concerns to DCMA and request specific production and/or quality assurance surveillance.

7 Virtual DAES Long-term Objective: Data Mining Capability to access data at Services’ Program Management Offices (PMOs) Access limited to authorized users Near-term focus: Enhance Consolidated Acquisition Reporting System (CARS) Provide Electronic Access to Earned Value Management (EVM) Info To Senior Management Improve Access and Assessment of DAES Information Provide Quad Chart Capability Commence Virtual DAES Reviews in 2nd Qtr 2003 The CARS Working Group (WG) has been reactivated. CARS WG membership includes representatives from the Services and the OSD offices that submit DAES assessments. The CARS WG distributed a “Data Mining/Virtual DAES Process Survey” to the Acquisition Community on October 18, 2002. The survey is intended to identify what acquisition data is available and whether data resides in an electronic media, and if so, where the data resides. CARS data base has been converted from Data Base (Dbase) Files to Oracle. CARS Field Version software will allow the Program Management Offices to input data into the CARS Oracle data base. EVM data accessible through the web for those with a browser and a password. OSD analysts will be able to input DAES assessments into the database, and DAES “Stop Light” charts can be automatically produced. Flexible “Quad Chart” system for displaying Program Data information from the CARS Oracle data base is in development.

8 Small Business Opportunities
PEO/SYSCOM Accountability Projected Deterioration FIXES Tactical PMs review impending actions for small business opportunities Strategic Proactive Planning

9 I need BOLD ideas from you on:
Innovative Ideas I need BOLD ideas from you on: How to make the process more efficient and effective Are legislative changes needed Are changes in executive branch processes needed Are internal DoD changes needed─things that we are doing that we don’t need to do or shouldn’t be doing SECDEF wants to: Raise initiatives along the lines of freedom to manage and pushing decision making down.  Give people responsibility and accountability.  Too much duplication in how we do our work today. Move toward a truly joint military. Brainstorm on what we need to manage better and decide quicker. Put more on the table, not being constrained by previous “nos”.

Download ppt "AT&L Update Tracking AT&L Initiatives AT&L reorganization"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google