Sign In
  • Question

    1. What are the advantages of each in supply chain with diminishing suppliers? 2. Which system is found to be most successful in the IT/MAIS environment, given security is a key metric? 3. Given a culture that places emphasis on EVM, what key arguments can be used to influence shift to PBL/PPP? 4. Is the delta between PBL and EVM related to the use of a Cost Plus vs a Fixed Price contract?


    Answer

    The four questions above inadvertently imply that Earned Value Management (EVM) and Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) in support of a Performance Based Logistics (PBL) product support strategy are mutually exclusive.  This is not the case.  EVM has historically been practiced on Cost type contracts, and therefore, if the PBL PPP contract was a Fixed Price type contract, EVM would generally not have been applied.  However, as you may know, some PBL contracts are actually Cost contracts, and may already have had to apply EVM cost/schedule/performance management techniques.  In addition, per DoDM 5000.04-M-1, the DoD Cost and Software Data Reporting (CSDR) Manual of November 2011, all ACAT IAM, IAC, IC, and ID programs over $50M and high-risk or high-technical interest contracts between $20M and $50M now have to report costs via DD 1921-4, Contractor Sustainment Report (DD 1921-4) – regardless of contract type. And because this requirement is tied to an EVM-type contract Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), there really is no difference between Cost and Fixed Price efforts that meet the thresholds in terms of their adherence to EVM.  Please click on the following link for more details on cost reporting:  http://dcarc.cape.osd.mil/CSDR/CSDROverview.aspx

    These questions imply that EVM and a PBL PPP are similar in function. This is not the case either.  EVM is a management technique that relates resource planning to schedules and to technical cost and schedule requirements. All work is planned, budgeted, and scheduled in time-phased "planned value" increments constituting a cost and schedule measurement baseline. There are two major objectives of an EVM system: to encourage contractors to use effective internal cost and schedule management control systems; and to permit the customer to be able to rely on timely data produced by those systems for determining product-oriented contract status.  For more on EVM, please click on the following link:  https://acc.dau.mil/evm

    On the other hand, PBL PPPs are a specific kind of performance based product support arrangement whereby industry has an agreement with an organic depot maintenance activity to deliver measurable performance outcomes (such as weapon system, subsystem or component availability) that are ultimately tied to warfighter performance requirements.  A PBL PPP would typically be based on a long-term support arrangement rather than the purchase of individual elements of support—such as parts, repairs, and engineering support. 

    But be that as it may, here is some specific food for thought on these four questions: 

    1.  What are the advantages of each in supply chain with diminishing suppliers?
    Response: 
    EVM does not focus on the supply chain; but rather on measuring budgeted work against actual completion data. 
    PBL arrangements have proven beneficial in addressing Diminishing Manufacturing and Material Shortages (DMSMS) issues.  By including DMSMS issues up front in the contract requirement as a risk driver and criteria for award, support providers are motivated to use proactive DMSMS tools and processes, and to ensure visibility, cooperation and coordination across the supplier base.  

    2.  Which system is found to be most successful in the IT/MAIS environment, given security is a key metric?
    Response:
    As a management technique, EVM is applied to both hardware and software programs.  The primary security issue with EVM of all types is related to data warehousing.

    In terms of PBL PPPs, there are examples for IT MAIS programs, such as the 2013 OSD PBL Award Winner, the U.S. Marine Corps AN/TSQ-239(V) Combat Operations Center (COC) PBL PPP. The AN/TSQ-239(V) is the Marine Corp’s premier Command and Control (C2) capability, with the largest variant comprised of over 3,000 Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS) and Non-Developmental Items (NDI).  The PBL organization includes the Marine Corps Program Office, the U.S. Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare System Center (SSC) Atlantic as the Product Support Integrator (PSI), and General Dynamics as the Product Support Provider (PPP).  The PBL PPP initiative is based on shared near real time data as well as forward deployed PSP technicians. Please click on the following link within the PBL Community of Practice (CoP) for more information:  https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=527436

    3. Given a culture that places emphasis on EVM, what key arguments can be used to influence a shift to PBL/PPP?
    Response:  Since the use of EVM and PBL PPPs is not an either/or proposition, a shift from one to the other is not necessary.

    4. Is the delta between PBL and EVM related to the use of a Cost Plus vs a Fixed Price contract?
    Response:  If one were to assume that all PBL efforts were Fixed Price contracts, and that EVM applied only to Cost Plus efforts, this would be a “delta”.  However, since PBL and EVM are practiced in both Cost Plus and Fixed Price contract environments, this difference is not germane.  

    Open full Question Details