What are EVMs execution practices U.S. companies use to relate foreign work/expenditures in achieving its PMB? How does this impact IBR execution?
Any contract awarded with the US Department of Defense that meets the EVM applicability (cost or incentive type contract, contract value >$20M, period of performance is > 18 months, and the work is discretely measurable) must follow all the same EVM reporting requirements regardless if they are a foreign or domestic company.
The prime contractor must manage all of the subcontractors to ensure their reporting is in compliance. Additionally, if the subcontractor is a major sub, meaning their portion of the contract is greater than $20M, the subcontractor also must report detailed EVM data to the government program office. In this scenario, the government program office would receive 2 sets of reporting data; 1 from the prime contractor which encapsulates the entire contract effort, and 1 from the major subcontractor which includes only their portion of the effort.
Best practice during an IBR is for the Control Account Manager (CAM) interviews to be held at the contractor’s facility. This may be difficult when working with a foreign company. The main reason for in-person interviews is to make it a “show-me” type review instead of “tell-me”. Contractors may also be more comfortable explaining their process in their own facility/office vice traveling for the IBR.
At the end of the day, it is most critical that the government can talk directly to the contractor personnel who will be managing the schedule/cost data (CAMs). If it is not feasible to travel to the foreign location, perhaps you could perform the interviews remotely over zoom, or even hold the meetings at the prime contractor’s location.
One other item to consider is that a successful IBR is more of a process instead of an event. The USAF IBR Process Guide is a good framework to consider for any IBR. The guide covers considerations for RFP/Pre-award, immediate post-award, and then breaks the actual IBR itself into 2 phases. Phase I is dedicated to evaluating artifact quality and assessing data integration. Phase II is when Business Office and CAM discussions are conducted. Laying out a deliberate framework, such as shown in the guide, may help communicating the expectations for a foreign company (and may assist with any language barriers that may exist).
Air Force Integrated Baseline Review (IBR) Process Guide, Version 3.0 20 September 2012: