1. Army Program Guidance Memorandum Overview - POM 05-09
COL Dane Rota
Chief, Resource Integration Office, Assistant Chief of Staff for Installation Management
19 September 2002 1

2. Agenda
Background
Structure & Terms
FY04-09 Summary
FY05-09 Structural Proposal
Road Ahead

3. The Army Corporate PPBES Process
SA,
CSA
- Strategic guidance for planning, programming and budgeting
SA/CSA provide guidance throughout the process
G-3, G-8, and ASA(FM&C) work side-by-side
Program Evaluation Groups
Co-chaired by ARSTAF and Secretariat GO/SES
PEGs build POM in their lanes based on SA/CSA guidance
G-3, G-8, and ASA(FM&C) provide AOs on each PEG
Planning Program Budget Committee (PPBC)
DG-3, G-8-PAE, and DASA(B) serve as co-chairs
PPBC recommends changes within each PEG
Integrates planning, programming, and budgeting
Senior Review Group (3-Star/SES Attendees)
Co-Chaired by USA and VCSA; looks across PEGs
G-3, G-8, and ASA(FM&C) are members
Recommends final decisions on TAP, POM & Budget
Army Resources Board
Chaired by SA; Vice-Chaired by CSA
Final decisions and approval
ARB
6 PEGs
PPBC
SRG
Secretariat and ARSTAF (HQDA) are involved at every level from PEG to ARB
The goal is for the Program (POM) to become the Budget (BES)

4. Program Manager Responsibilities
Program (MDEP) Managers are expected to:
Be technical experts on all aspects of their programs:
Policy, program and data changes
Document all assumptions and decisions
Ensure their planning processes are synchronized with the PPBES process
Planning must be detailed enough to support Does/Does Not analysis in the event of funding level changes
Track the execution of program - at least quarterly. Ensure that program is executing as planned and/or know reasons why not.
Coordinate all requests for budget data with ACSIM RIO
RIO will ensure that info is coordinated with ABO, DCSOPS and PAED so that the Army speaks with “one voice”
Bottom Line: PPBES is a “zero sum game” and a program that can’t defend its resources will lose them

5. The Army Plan (TAP) Overview
Section I
Relates National, OSD, and Joint strategic guidance
Provides Army leadership’s vision and direction
Army Strategic Planning Guidance (ASPG) DAMO-SS
Section II
The
Army
Plan
Relates guidance to Army Core Competencies
Produces prioritized operational capabilities
Army Planning Priorities Guidance (APPG) DAMO-ZR
Purpose: Prioritized Planning guidance for Programming and Budgeting
Section III
Uses operational capabilities from APPG
Identifies objectives and Title 10 resource tasks by PEG
Army Programming Guid. Memo (APGM) PAED
This slide provides an overview of the concept for The Army Plan from the reengineering initiative and as approved by the SPC - now PPBC -and the DCSOPS in In practice, getting these processes synchronized has been a challenge. The SA and CSA approved the TAP in 1998; the next TAP was prepared and used, but not formally approved by the Army leadership. Over the past two years, the TCP has essentially substituted for the Section I, ASPG, guidance; and Section II was produced consistent with TCP. At present, the Draft Strategic Planning Directive (DAMO-SS and -ZR) suggests that TCP will continue to substitute for the ASPG and complement TAP.
Under the concept of the reengineered TAP, the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Army would be engaged in formulating and providing the long-term strategic guidance to the Army. This would be the foundation for the Secretariat and Army Staff to formulate the key capabilities and metrics for resource programming and ultimately budgeting. The SA and CSA would approve these capabilities and the programmers would act to incorporate them in Section III guidance and the actual POM. And, equally as important, the Army would use the capability in resource justification discussions.
Section I integrates policy, guidance, and future environment assessments from sources external to the Army along with the Army leadership’s vision, and sets the azimuth for the Army. The section identifies the foundation for the rest of the TAP. The present foundation is built on the six Core Competencies (from FM-1) that answer the question, “Why have an Army?” Core Competencies describe what the nation — the American people and their elected representatives — expect from their Army, now and in the future.
Section II uses the broad strategic direction and the Core Competencies to define the objectives, tasks, and capabilities required to produce each competency.
Section III uses the capabilities and metrics, as well as programmatic considerations, to provide explicit programming guidance.

6. Products that Guide Program & Budget Development
SA/CSA Guidance
Message to HQDA
Tells the Army to Program for the Vision in POM FY05-09
Program Guidance
For Official Use Only
Army Program Guidance Memorandum FY04-09
TAP FY Section III, Army Program
Goals, Objectives, Sub-Objectives and Tasks
Guidance Memorandum (APGM) FY02-07
INTRODUCTION
Broad, General Guidance
Title 10 Functions
Goals
Objectives
Sub-objectives
Resource Tasks
SA/CSA Letter
Technical Guidance
For Official Use Only
Technical Guidance Memorandum FY04-09
Specific Guidance to each PEG
Directs specified level of funding for some programs
Army will direct vision programmatics
Contains Administrative and coordinating instructions
TAP Section III (APGM*)
* APGM - Army Program Guidance Memorandum
DPAE Letter

7. Purpose: APGM The APGM provides:
POM Challenge: To allocate manpower & funding (annual $15B) against validated requirements to produce a balanced program of People, Readiness, & Transformation.
The APGM provides:
Senior leader intent and broad, general guidance, in terms of risk levels, to RIO for initial POM build.
The link between Operational Capabilities and Programming. TAP sections I (ASPG) and II (APPG) address operational capabilities (Readiness & Warfighting). TAP section III (APGM) addresses PEG Title 10 functions in all areas such as People, Readiness, and Transformation.
MDEP evaluation and prioritization prior to the POM build.
APGM priorities are determined based on these definitions

8. Risk Categorized Tasks
APGM Structure FY 6 22 48
188
518
FY04- 09
6 (1)
21 (2)
48 (5)
195 (34)
522 (87)
Goals
Objectives
Sub-Objectives
APGM Structure
Introduction section is new
Layout -- goal, objectives, sub-objectives, resource tasks -- is pyramidal.
Each task is assigned a Risk Category
MDEPS are aligned to tasks
Risk Categorized Tasks
MDEPs

9. Installation PEG Goals
Title 10 Function
Army’s FY POM Goals
TOA
FY04
Co-Chairs
Installation
Transformation of Installations: This program continues the transformation of installation and environmental management. By FY2020, Army facilities must fully support and satisfy our warfighting needs, specifically the force projection, protection, readiness, training and sustainability requirements defined for the Objective Force, while providing Soldiers and their families with a state of physical, mental, and emotional well being commensurate with that of the society they defend. This means developing policies and programs that efficiently maintain essential services and infrastructure to execute the Army’s (Active, Army National Guard and Army Reserve) assigned missions and responsibilities. CONUS installations will be the tactical assembly areas for the Objective Force and must be prepared to support rapid, sustained deployment directly into combat operations around the globe.
$15.1B
ASA(I&E)
ACSIM

10. APGM FY04-09 Approved Changes
Created 2 New MDEPs:
Munitions Response
Field Force Engineering.
Terminated 1 MDEP (Mobility Construction)
Realigned/Consolidated MDEPs
E  ERVT
Resource Task Risk Categories
Increased Transformation MILCON from 2 to 1
Transferred Resource Task Responsibility
Chemical Demilitarization from Equipping PEG to Installation PEG.
Training and Power Projection SBCT MILCON Projects from Installation PEG to Training and Sustaining PEG.

11. APGM Structure PEG Vision Resource Framework Mapping
Leverage FY04-09 APGM and map Resource Tasks to the Vision Resource Framework
Write PEG Goal.
Create the Vision Resource Framework Objectives – Readiness, People, Transformation, as applicable.
Create and/or Modify existing Sub-Objectives and Tasks as necessary to map to Resource Task level.
Associate MDEPs to Resource Tasks, as appropriate, maintaining Risk Category level.

12. Initial Staff Guidance (APGM FY05-09)
Review APGM FY04-09 as a Baseline.
Include Anti-Terrorism and Force Protection, Homeland Defense, and War on Terrorism Requirements in your Objectives, Sub-Objectives, and Tasks, as required.
Maintain a decisive win capability at a high state of readiness.
Continue irreversible Transformation momentum; continue to take acceptable risk in the Legacy Force
Use the OSD Force Sizing Construct for capabilities based planning.
Maintain Installations and Infrastructure Improvements.
Sustain People Programs.
Increases in resource task Risk Categories must be offset by decreases in resource task Risk Categories by near equivalent $ amounts.
Provide input for an initial draft for HQDA staffing.

13. Change Process Narrative Text Document
Use MS Word Revision Editor (Track Changes) for all submissions
Retain formatting
“Goal through MDEP” Proposed Change Issues
Terms and Change Actions
Issue Slides
Use PAED format as template for all issues
Retain Formatting

14. Road Ahead   10 Sep 02 APGM Kickoff Meeting
18 Sep 02 APGM Process Brief
30 Sep - 4 Oct PEG briefings to Chief, PDD
(Draft Issue Charts due)
7-14 Oct 02 APGM Issues Development
15 Oct 02 PEG Issue Charts & Narratives due
23 Oct -1 Nov APGM Narrative Staffing w/ HQDA
13 Nov 02 CoC
19 Nov 02 PPBC
22 Nov 02 SRG
TBD SA/CSA Approval
18 Dec 02 APGM Published 

15. BACK UPS

16. Capabilities Based Planning Strategy to Resources
Plans / Requirements / Resources
OSD Force Sizing Construct
Planning Priorities
PEGs
Vision Resource Framework
Translating OSD Strategy to The Army Vision Resource Framework

17. APGM Task Risk Categories
Risk Category 0 - Explicit tasks/special interests (not included in priorities 1-3) for which specified levels of performance must be achieved.
Risk Category 1 - Tasks whose performance significantly affects the Army’s ability to perform its missions and where very little risk is acceptable - The Army’s expected outcome will likely occur in most all areas of the specific program.
Risk Category 2 - Tasks whose performance significantly affects a Title 10 function and where some risk is acceptable - The Army’s expected outcome will likely occur in all “key” areas of that specific program, while in some “non-key” areas, the expected outcome may not occur.
Risk Category 3 - Tasks whose performance enables key elements of Title 10 functions, and where moderate risk is acceptable - The Army’s expected outcome for some “key” area of that specific program is not likely to occur.

18. APGM Terms and Change Actions
Objective/Sub Obj/Task Creation - new intra-PEG language articulating the start of a new Objective, Sub-Objective, or Task in the APGM narrative text.
Objective/Sub Obj/Task Change - alters the language or intra-PEG location of an Objective, Sub-Objective, or Task in the APGM narrative text.
MDEP Creation - starts a new Management Decision Package (MDEP) to assist with the management of a resource requirement and funding.
Transfer - move MDEP resources inter-PEG.
Move - administratively realigns MDEPs intra-PEG.
Roll - transfer resources from a given Management Decision Package (MDEP) into a different MDEP to attain a more manageable alignment. This effectively terminates the original MDEP.
Split - divide resources from a given MDEP between the original MDEP and one or more MDEPs.
Rename - change the MDEP name to something that more accurately describes the nomenclature of the MDEP, as it evolves over time, but does not end the audit trail.
Termination - effectively end the functional use and audit trail of the MDEP.
Risk Category Increase – Proposed increases in Resource Task Risk Categories must be offset by decreases in Resource Task Risk Categories by near equivalent $ amounts.

19. Risk Assessment
Definition of Risk: The likelihood that the expected outcome will not occur
Why assess risk: The ability to define what may happen in the future and to choose among alternatives lies at the heart of the PPBES process.
Quantifying Risk: The ability to quantify risk depends on two conditions:
Quantifiable historical data and
The belief that the future will resemble the past
Subjective Assessments: For the most part, these two conditions do not hold true, therefore, risk assessment is a subjective matter
Examples:

20. Issue M12 - Sub-Objective Creation
Issue: Create Sub-Objective “Executive Agent Responsibilities.”
Discussion:
Creates unique Sub-Objective for Executive Agent programs formerly found in Sub-Objective “Well-Being”.
Create Sub-Objective sentence to read:
“Provide support for programs that relate to Executive Agent responsibilities and readiness.”
CoC: Concur

21. Issue M13 - Task Change CoC: Concur
Issue: Realign the Tasks from Sub-Objective “Well-Being” to “Executive Agent Responsibilities.”
Discussion: Change the numbering of the following Tasks:
Task to Provide for the operation and maintenance of the United States Army Parachute Team.
Task to Maintain correctional facilities that provide treatment services, vocational training, education resources and administrative and management functions.
Task to Resource JROTC to support a ramp from the currently resourced 1,555 schools to the 1,645 Congressional ceiling by FY05.
Task to Maintain funding support for Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts activities.
Task to Maintain support for Army Bands.
Task to Maintain the National Committee of Employer Support for the Guard and Reserve.
CoC: Concur

22. Issue S4 – MDEP Rename
Issue: Rename MDEP RJT9 (Deployment Outload) to “Power Projection.” Deployment Outload does not appropriately represent its function.
Discussion:
Recommend changing the MDEP RJT9 name from ‘Deployment Outload’ to “Power Projection” to more adequately describe its purpose.
To fund the construction, repair and maintenance of critical strategic deployment infrastructure at both CONUS and OCONUS Power Projection Platforms – to include all IBCT installations, and Tier I depots.
To fund both sea and air Emergency Deployment Readiness Exercises and APS-3 (prepo afloat) draw exercises.
To procure Army unit mobility containers for Force Package 1 / Force Support Package 1 units.
To resource analyses, studies and technology demonstrations that define future Army power projection requirements that enable achievement of the deployment goals expressed in the Army Vision.
CoC: Concur with new name “Power Projection Outload”

23. Issue E4– MDEP Creation SRG: Concur
Issue: Create MDEP FPLL “Common Missile” by Splitting the Common Missile PE C70302 & from MDEP FPLE (Aviation Rockets & Missiles) (Risk Category 1).
Discussion:
Move program to comply with HTI policy. Common Missile program reaches across several platforms (aviation, maneuver).
MDEP FPLE is currently associated with Task (Precision Engagement-Deep) (Risk Category 1).
SRG: Concur

24. Issue M5 - MDEP Creation via Split
Issue: Create MDEP “PARF” (AC Subsistence) (Risk Category 1) via Split from MDEP PAMP (Pay & Allowances(Military Personnel)) and add to Task (AC Pay & Allowances) (Risk Category 1).
Discussion:
This is an ABO MPA division raised Issue.
Purpose: To facilitate the tracking of unique requirements of subsistence program within the Military Personnel, Army appropriation.
Map new MDEP to Task (AC Pay & Allowances) (Risk Category 1).
Proposed Split MDEP PAMP is currently associated with Task (AC Pay & Allowances) (Risk Category 1).
MM PEG: Concur
SRG: Concur

25. Issue S7 – MDEP Creation via Roll
Issue: Create new MDEP “VALT” (Army Logistics Transformation) for Task (Strategic Logistics Program) (Risk Category 1) by Rolling MDEP VRML (Revolution in Military Logistics) already in Task (Strategic Logistics Program) (Risk Category 1). Terminate MDEP VRML.
Discussion:
The Army developed a phased approach to move logistics into the 21st century. The “revolution” phase of Logistics Automation is complete.
Initiatives in the Army Logistics Transformation MDEP integrate improvements to logistics readiness, effectiveness and efficiency.
Army Logistics Transformation is a more accurate description of the MDEP.
MDEP VRML is currently associated with Task (Strategic Logistics Program) ( Risk Category 1).
SRG: Concur

26. Issue T5-MDEP Roll SRG: Concur
Issue: Roll MDEP VTPA (Panama Canal Treaty (Army)) into TSSO (SOUTHCOM, USARSO, JTF-B) and update description to reflect receipt of remaining VTPA requirements in Task (Resource Support to Nation Assistance Programs) (Risk Category 2). Delete Task (Panama Canal Treaty) (Risk Category 2) & Terminate MDEP VTPA.
Discussion:
Only MCA requirements remain in VTPA thru FY 04. There are no longer any Panama Canal Treaty requirements or obligations. Remaining VTPA requirements cover a Day care Center and USARSO HQ’s. Vieques moratorium decision pending. Remaining VTPA requirements can be managed by Appropriation & Command in new MDEP
Task (MDEP TSSO) (Risk Category 2) Supports operational costs of the Army presence in USSOUTHCOM AOR. Proposed new definition should read:
“Supports operational costs of the Army presence in USSOUTHCOM AOR. Supports OCONUS deployment for training of active/reserve component units to the AOR (includes in-country costs of this training), and the operating cost of Joint Task Force-Bravo. Includes requirements for the relocation of USARSO, Army tenants, USSOUTHCOM and TIP Executive Agent.”
MDEP VTPA is currently associated with Task (Panama Canal Treaty) (Risk Category 2).
SRG: Concur

27. Issue E21 –Task & MDEP Transfer
Issue: Transfer Task (Chemical Demilitarization) (Priority 0) and associated MDEP, VCHM (Chemical Demilitarization) from EE PEG to the II PEG. Delete Task
Discussion:
On 12 Dec 01 the Secretary of the Army directed the transfer of the Chemical Demilitarization program from ASA (ALT) to the ASA (I&E) for all program planning, programming, and budgeting.
II PEG will create a new Task “ ” (Chemical Demilitarization) (Priority 0) using the identical language in the former Task and likewise associate MDEP VCHM (Chemical Demilitarization) in the new Task.
No Offset Required: $4.8B Priority 0 Transfer
II PEG: Concur
CoC: Concur