evm central repository reporting compliance data quality findings l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
EVM Central Repository: Reporting Compliance & Data Quality Findings PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
EVM Central Repository: Reporting Compliance & Data Quality Findings

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 23

EVM Central Repository: Reporting Compliance & Data Quality Findings - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 235 Views
  • Uploaded on

EVM Central Repository: Reporting Compliance & Data Quality Findings. January 29, 2009. Russ Vogel Acquisition Resources and Analysis, Enterprise Information & OSD Studies Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Russell.vogel@osd.mil

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'EVM Central Repository: Reporting Compliance & Data Quality Findings' - filbert


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
evm central repository reporting compliance data quality findings

EVM Central Repository:Reporting Compliance & Data Quality Findings

January 29, 2009

Russ Vogel

Acquisition Resources and Analysis, Enterprise Information

& OSD Studies

Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition,

Technology and Logistics

Russell.vogel@osd.mil

(703) 845-6677

overview how we use the data
Overview: How We Use The Data

Providing Timely and Accurate Key Acquisition Data

evm cr metrics as of 1 5 2009
EVM-CR Metrics (as of 1/5/2009)
  • Number of programs reporting:
    • MDAP: 69
    • MAIS: 11
  • Number of contracts/tasks reporting:
    • MDAP: 166
    • MAIS: 17
  • Number of Submissions
    • Total: 3586
    • Monthly: >250 New Submissions
  • Number of Users
    • Total: 1303
    • Active: 394
  • Downloads Per Months: >2000
evm cr reporting compliance
EVM-CR Reporting Compliance
  • In September 2008, began first level data quality review of submission to the EVM-CR
    • Goals
      • Compliance with CDRLs: timeliness and completeness (e.g., are all the required formats being submitted)
      • Compliance with policy: data submission form factor (e.g., EDI)
      • Alignment to other OSD (and service) data systems (e.g., DAMIR, AV SOA)
    • Coordinating activities with Service-level Acquisition Staff to make corrective actions as required.
  • Findings: Most programs making effort to meet requirement
    • As of Jan 2009, many of the identified issues are being worked on and we’re seeing good progress.
    • As expected: normal, day to day “mistakes” (e.g., forgot to hit the SUBMIT button)
    • Beginning to tackle the more difficult issues
evm cr reporting compliance process data quality issues
EVM-CR Reporting ComplianceProcess & Data Quality Issues
  • Easy fixes (requiring minor software changes, better guidance/training)
    • Mislabeling submission file (e.g., identifying an XML file as an X12 TS839)
    • Data errors (contract numbers, contractor name, “as-of date” not as expected)
    • Missing Components of the submission (e.g. no Format 5)
      • For example, submitting a partial data package on due date and then on a subsequent day submitting missing file(s) as a “re-submit”
      • Requirement: submit a complete data package as a single event
    • Submissions against wrong submission events
  • Data Validations Rules / Sanity Check
    • Examples
      • BCWS must be less then or equal to BAC
      • TAB must equal CBB unless an OTB is specified
    • Potential Causes
      • Incomplete submission (missing data in EDI/XML file)
      • Some issues identified (and corrected) in EVM-CR data processing routines that read EDI/XML files
      • Validation rules may need to be updated (theory vs. reality)
evm cr reporting compliance process data quality issues6
EVM-CR Reporting ComplianceProcess & Data Quality Issues
  • Submitted EDI or XML files not processing
    • Again, some issues identified and corrected in EVM-CR data processing routines that read EDI/XML files
    • Non-compliant XML
      • Current policy / requirement is EDI X12 compliant with TS-839 format (e.g., WINSIGHT TRN format)
      • EVM-CR also supports XML consistent with WINSIGHT XML-Schema
      • Not all XML files are acceptable (e.g. Excel saved as XML)
    • What should be included in XML
      • WINSIGHT too flexible
      • Need: one reporting period at “reasonable” reporting level
      • Example: In one case a single XML file is 300+ megabytes requiring “zipping”
  • May require re-examining CDRL language and DID language to clarify or tighten requirement
significant alignment issues
Significant Alignment Issues
  • EVM-CR “contract tasks” not aligned with “effort numbers”
    • “Effort Number” is an internal OSD database key used for organizing reporting activities below the contract level
    • EVM-CR submissions at Contract or lower “Contract tasks” levels
      • Used when multiple CPRs are required on a contract each month
      • E.g. A “total CPR” plus multiple component CPRs
        • Reporting by CLINS / Delivery Orders (e.g. T-AKE, DDG, AB3, MPS, …)
        • Teaming relationships (e.g. V-22)
      • Problems
        • Component CPRs may or may not sum to total properly
        • Multiple component CPRs provided without total (or total not EDI)
        • Typically ad-hoc methods (comment) for identifying total CPR
  • Internal OSD/Government Alignment Issues
    • Contract reporting requirements need to be aligned with presentation and data needs of leadership (and IT systems)
      • Effort numbers without matching tasks
      • Tasks without matching effort numbers
    • Aligning CDRLs to EVM Policy (e.g., reducing tailoring such as elimination of EDI requirement)
summary
Summary
  • Why Is This Important?
    • Automation/integration with other data systems (AV SOA, DAMIR, MilDep, etc) provides timely access and visibility to contract reporting levels for stakeholders and decisions makers.
    • Data is being used by senior leadership: e.g., trip-wire analysis
      • Alignment necessary: Reporting must role up to contract level properly
      • No room for double counting or gaps
  • Current Activities
    • Continue working with Services to coordinate corrective actions on data alignment and quality issues.
    • Updating EVM-CR and on-line documentation and training materials to clarify requirements
    • Working the bigger issues case by case
      • Looking at CDRLs and alignment to policy
      • Aligning data submissions to other OSD IT systems
av soa governance and technical approach
AV SOA Governance and Technical Approach

Acquisition Services

UsersDefense Acquisition Decision Making

Governance of Data:

  • Definition of key data elements
  • Assignment of responsibility for the authoritative copy of the specified data elements
  • Provision of access to governed data

Business Tools

Business Applications

Web UserInterfaces

Discoverable and Accessible

Discoverable and Accessible

Exposure

Access to Authoritative Data

D a t a G o v e r n a n c e

Enterprise

Services

Enterprise

Services

D a t a G o v e r n a n c e

Authoritative Data

Army

Air Force

Navy

DoD

Federal

Other

SOA Separates Data from Application and Tools

at l av soa pilot data services
AT&L AV SOA Pilot Data Services
  • Data brought under governance for the pilot include 140 elements in the following major categories, which correspond to the AT&L AV SOA services
    • EVM – EVM elements used in the Demo, plus contract elements included in DAMIR’s “Contract Data Point” and/or reported on the Contract Performance Report (CPR)
    • Nunn-McCurdy Unit Cost – Current estimate vs. APB (current and original) at total-appropriation level (RDT&E & Procurement), by fiscal year for comparison
    • Budget – Current President’s Budget and POM/BES submission, by appropriation and fiscal year, to provide a reference point for analysis
    • Milestone – Program milestones as agreed upon in the APB
    • Science & Technology – To compare Key Performance Parameters, thresholds, and objectives to current measurement and to identify critical technologies
    • Program Administration – To organize/view information by program, sub-program, budget activity, program element, budget line item, and/or project code
at l av soa pilot as of 1 8 2009
AT&L AV SOA Pilot – As of 1/8/2009

Army

AIM

Air Force

Static Source

Army

Static Source

Navy

Static Source

Navy

Dashboard

OSD/PA&E

CR

Data System Manager and Location

Application/Tools Used

# of Programs

Data Repository

Repository Location

Authoritative Data Available

Unavailable or Static Data

Displays Published

Army

WS

SOA Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)

Radford Army Ammunition Plant

Radford, Virginia

PEO EIS

Ft. Belvior, Virginia

  • 10
  • 3 S&T Elements
  • Contracts
  • Cost & Funding
  • Performance
  • Schedule
  • Unit Cost
  • Track to Budget

DAMIR

Navy

WS

NMCI

Navy Annex Arlington, Virginia

ASN RD&A

(Management & Budget)

Arlington, Virginia

SPAWAR

Charleston, South Carolina

  • 15
  • 1 S&T element
  • 1 Admin element

AF

WS

  • Contract EVM
  • Nunn-McCurdy
  • Milestones
  • Contracts by Location
  • Performance

K-Scope

AT&L

WS

754th ELSGGunter AFS

Montgomery, Alabama

754th ELSGHanscom AFB

Massachusetts

Air Force

SMART

  • 12

1 Admin element

SPAWAR

Charleston, South Carolina

DAMIR

WS

OSD/ARA

DAMIR

AT&L

Arlington, Virginia

  • All of the Above

AT&L

Arlington, Virginia

  • 12 elements
  • Current APB
  • Contract Details
  • Contract EVM
  • Nunn-McCurdy
  • Budget
  • Milestones
  • Science & Technology

AV SOA

Portal

CR

WS

SPAWAR

Charleston, South Carolina

  • 27

PA&E

Arlington, Virginia

PA&E

Arlington, Virginia

SPAWAR

Charleston, South Carolina

  • 58 elements
  • EVM data
  • Data cleanup needed on some contracts

Data Source

Data Display

slide18

AV SOA EV Data Findings

  • To date USA AIM, CR, DAMIR have been integrated with AV SOA.
  • For the pilot :
    • The most current EV data is often from Army and not from CR
    • The most current CR EV often exists in PDF format which is not consumable by AV SOA web services
    • Contract Effort Number is missing from CR data. It is either null or zero.
    • We will pull from the latest EV Source (MILDEP or CR)
    • Extra logic and error handling was required to map CR
av soa ev data findings as of date report period end date
AV SOA EV Data Findings: As Of Date/Report Period End Date
  • Discriminating Field for AV SOA.
  • For reference:
    • As of – Central Repository
    • Reporting Period End Date – AV SOA
    • Report Date – MILDEP (AIM)
  • Used to determine most current available CPR/EVM report.
  • Report Date is initially pulled from the MILDEP contract and then used to align data from CR.
  • Using a CPR As Of Date AV-SOA programmers select the most recent report. Within AIM we often find a Report End Date more current.
  • Often our logic is defaulting to incorporating EV data from MILDEP.
  • Recommend that MILDEP Report Date and CR As Of Date should be identical for a given Reporting Period.
av soa ev data findings non consumable data
AV SOA EV Data Findings: Non Consumable Data
  • CR has no error/status code that CPR data is not consumable. Only indicator is a blank file.
  • It appears that consumable report availability is lagging within CR.
  • Recommend CPR consumable status be reflected through CR Web Services.
av soa ev data findings mismatch in contracts from mildep and cr
AV SOA EV Data Findings: Mismatch in Contracts from MILDEP and CR
  • AV-SOA is obtaining an MDAP’s Contract list from the MILDEP system.
  • Contract listing is used to query CR .
  • For Example : MIM-104D (Patriot MEADS CAP) – PNO 531
    • DAAH01-02-C-0075  (Not being reported by MILDEP)
    • DAAH01-03-C-0164 (Reported by both)
    • NAMEAD-04-C-6000 (Reported by both)

MILDEP only shows 2 contracts.

av soa ev data findings contract effort number
AV SOA EV Data Findings: Contract Effort Number
  • AV SOA Definition : The effort number within the contract if multiple efforts within the contract are being tracked separately. DI MGMFT 81466A: Enter the contract number and the applicable Contract Line Item Number (CLINs).
  • AV SOA “required” field
  • Often in contracts without multiple efforts where no separate Contract Effort Number is delineated. AV-SOA is currently publishing a “-1”.
  • Recommendations?