Navy JCTD Workshop Building a Competitive Proposal and the U.S. Navy Service Selection Process OPNAV N8F S&T (Science & Technology Branch)
Building A Competitive Proposal Must Haves: Valid Requirements Not Duplicative Technology Programmatics Funding Meet JCTD Goals - 1 to 3 year Program - Leave-behind with COCOM Sponsor - Meet Jointness criteria - Transition How: Meet the Need Complement vs. Duplicate Work the Processes and People Obtain Resource Sponsor (RS) support Collaborate Be Joint 2
Meet the Need Integrated Priority Lists (IPL - from CoComs & JCS/J8) Urgent Needs Statements (UNS - from CoComs) Programs of Record (POR - emerging or unmet capability requirements from Acquisition Programs) Capability Gaps (from Services) Most Pressing Military Issues (MPMI -from JCS) US Fleet Forces will address this further US Fleet Forces will address this further 3
Compliment vs. Duplicate Know the Acquisition Community Know the Programs of Record (PoRs) Show where the effort fits in the existing Programmatic Architecture Identify what capabilities will be met that existing and planned systems will not Convince the PoR Managers and their Resource Sponsors of the value 4
Processes and People Acquisition Process Technology Transition Processes JCTD RTT, RDD, INP, TIPS, FNC TTI, DAC, FCT Others People Team Time dependencies 5
Navy Resource Sponsor Support OPNAV ( Not ONR, PEO, PMA, PMW, etc,) Funding (Talk and emails of support do not suffice) OPNAV Resource Sponsors are responsible for the Navy s Investment Strategy 6
Collaborate Be Joint Collaborate Warfare Centers Industry Academia Everyone Joint Services Agencies Coalition Partners Each JCTD must have at least one COCOM Sponsor Each JCTD must have at least one COCOM Sponsor The more COCOM Sponsors the better The more COCOM Sponsors the better 7
JCTD Processes OSD Services COCOMs JCB/JROC OSD executes AC/JCTD program, COCOM is is the customer, Services provide funds 8
Navy JCTD Roles OSD controls the process Dr. Perkins, OSD (Complex Systems) JROC validates the requirements for OSD JCTD selections OPNAV is the Resource Sponsor NXX codes offset existing programs to fund JCTDs ASN (RDA) is Navy lead for JCTDs Endorses Navy-led JCTD selections Monitors executing JCTDs ONR is executive agent for JCTDs CNR validates candidates for technology readiness USFFC and NWDC coordinate CONOPS and Sea Trial efforts N8F S&T is OPNAV lead for JCTDs N8F S&T is OPNAV lead for JCTDs 9
Naval JCTD Development/Selection Process OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP IPR IPR @ ONR ONR Strongest proposals submitted to OSD JCTD WG & RO/SME White Paper Review Aug-Dec ERG/ERG WG ACCEPT OSD CRB USN/USMC Prioritization ERG ASN-RDA Ranking Ltr to OSD ACCEPT REJECT DEFER FCB/JCB/ JROC JCTD WG & RO/SME Review/Mentoring OSD (Selection Decision) REJECT 10
JCTD Naval Execution & Transition OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP Monthly Services Meeting (USN, USMC, USAF, USA) TRB TRB (If required) ERG Status Reports Navy Navy Execution Execution Review Review ERG Status Reports TOG (status) Realignment Decisions Feedback to DUSD AS&C Interface with OSD Oversight Executives, JCTD performers and execution agents, as required. Report to TOG at least yearly or as required. 10 COCOM JCTD/S&T Reviews 11
OPNAV S&T Coordination Structure DUSD (AS&C) DUSD (AS&C) PDASN RDA PDASN RDA USFF USFF N8F S&T Integration N8F S&T Integration MCWL MCWL OPNAV N81 OPNAV N81 OPNAV S&T Advisors OPNAV S&T Advisors ONR ONR N2 Mr. Gary Fagan N4 CDR Michael Kondracki N3/5 Vacant N6 Mr. Ryan Gunst N85 Mr. Tom Schiller N86 Mr. Marc Stockbauer N87 Mr. R. Thad Carmean N88 Mr. Bill McGregor 12
OPNAV Responsibilities Establish/Validate Navy Operational Requirements and Priorities Budget for all Navy Acquisition Programs (FYDP Planning and Programming) Ensure No Duplication of Effort Provide trained and and equipped Naval Naval Forces Forces to to the the Combatant Commanders 13
OPNAV Questions Is there a requirement for it? What capability does it provide? Is it duplicative? Will it transition and to where? If successful, will it be used, purchased, supported when fielded, or become a Program Of Record (POR) or part of a POR? Are the funds programmed to support both the effort and the tail? Is Is a Resource Sponsor committed to to providing the the required life-cycle funding? 14
N8F Coordinates OPNAV JCTD Program N8F ensures OPNAV requirements and resources are identified N8F socializes all JCTD submissions N80 Pillar concurrence and assessment required Flag endorsement of PEs required (or offset identified) OPNAV interfaces (OSD, Services, DASN) Coordinates with FCB Navy POCs JROC validates OSD JCTD selections N81 staffs 15
Navy Selection Process Ranking Considerations Process Timeline FY09 Ranking Results 16
Ranking Considerations FCB/JCB/JROC Fills joint/coalition gap Technical maturity No parallel efforts Navy Military utility Technology readiness OPNAV and Fleet priorities Transition potential Funding requirements COCOM and service priorities 17
Strongly Agree (5) Agree (4) Somewhat Agree (3) Disagree (2) Strongly Disagree (1) JCTD ASSESSMENT FACTORS 1. THE JCTD SUPPORTS JOINT CAPABILITY NEEDS a. Are COCOM(s) Sponsors lined up? b. Are at least two Services/Agencies, Coalition Partners supporting? c. Does the JCTD address Joint and Naval Needs (JCIDS, JUONS, CNO, CMC Guicdance, etc.) 2. FUNDING IS IDENTIFIED, AVAILABLE AND COMMITTED a. Have Naval (and other) Program Elements been identified and committed? b. Are Program Costs Realistic? 3. TECHNOLOGY IS SUITABLE FOR NEAR-TERM APPLICATION a. Is Technology mature and available (TRL 6+)? b. Is Technology 'new' and unique (i.e., does NOT duplicate existing systems)? c. Does the JCTD technology build on FNC Enabling Capabilities? d. Is the Technical Plan and schedule realistic? 4. CONCEPT IS OPERATIONALLY FEASIBLE AND SUITABLE a. Is the JCTD consistent with future CONOPS? b. Does the JCTD support future equipment development and employment plans? c. Does the JCTD map to the Sea Trial CD&E Plan? 5. THE JCTD HAS A STRONG TRANSITION PLAN a. Is the JCTD Transition Strategy clear and in support of joint objectives? b. If this is a new technology, has a PEO or Program Manger been established? 6, RESIDUALS HAVE BEEN PLANNED AND FUNDED a. Is the EUE laid out well, with and residual systems planned? b. Is training and logistics support provided for? 7. THIS JCTD IS A POTENTIAL CANDIDATE FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR a. Is Naval support Confirmed, Probable (TBD), or Uncommitted? b. Are Issues identified likely to be resolved? 18
Navy JCTD Timeline of Events EVENT PERFORMER DATE Develop/Issue Navy Call-For-Proposals letter ONR/ASN (RDA) Aug Initial assessment of Navy-lead candidates ONR/OPNAV/ PDASN (RDA)/ USFF Aug-Sep RS Review and Candidate down select JCTD ERG WG Sep Early COCOM assessment COCOMs Sep-Nov Navy In Process Review (IPR) ONR/OPNAV/ PDASN (RDA)/ USFF Secondary Resource Sponsor review OPNAV Nov-Dec ERG recommendation and submittal to OSD JCTD ERG WG Dec ERG inputs submitted to OSD ASN(RDA) Jan Candidate Review Board (CRB) DUSD(AS&C) Feb-Mar Validate candidates FCB/JCB/JROC May-Jun Develop prioritized list of candidates OPNAV/USFF May-Jun Nov Develop final ranking/ ERG approval JCTD ERG Jun 19
FY10 JCTD Proposals Solicitation and Selection Results ASN(RDA) call letter (Jul 08) 24 new proposals/concepts received 1 selected for Navy endorsement (FW APKWS) 1 later submission by SOUTHCOM also endorsed (RIO) OSD call letter to COCOMs and services (Sep 08) 33 proposals received 24 proposals briefed to the Mar 09 Candidate Review Board OSD letter of Jun 08 requested Service and COCOM ranking 12 selected for prioritization, 3 Navy endorsed proposals included ERG WG developed proposed Navy ranking ASN (RDA) combined Navy Marine Corps Response to OSD 1 Jul 09 Anticipate 6-8 FY10 JCTDs Will Be Approved 20
Selection of Navy JCTD Candidates FY11 Process ASN(RDA) call letter issued July 09 Provides additional time to develop proposals Electronic submittal process thru KIMS Proposal assessment based on CoCom endorsement Relative importance of the Joint problem being addressed Technology Readiness Funding Posture Planned CONOPS Strength of Transition Plan Utility of Planned Residuals Strongest proposals are submitted to OSD draft 21
FY11 Navy JCTD White Paper Call Letter 2 Sep - White Papers and Quad Charts Due 18 Sep - Selection for Proposal Development 14 Oct - Proposals & Briefs Due 17-18 Nov - Naval Proposers Brief Early Dec - Full Proposal Evaluation Jan 15 - Naval-Supported, ASN(RDA) endorsed proposals forwarded to DUSD(AS&C) Any Time - Innovative JCTD Ideas 22
Building a Competitive Proposal Summary State the physical nature of the product Clarify programmatics Contain specific POCs Address Funding and Transition 23
Lessons Learned Technology is a given Where it fits in the existing programmatic architecture is not Decisions matter Informational briefs do not You must make the case No one else can 24