NASA Procedures and Guidelines
This Document is Obsolete and Is No Longer Used. Check the NODIS Library to access the current version: http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov
NPR 7120.5C Eff. Date: March 22, 2005 Cancellation Date: November 03, 2008	NASA Program and Project Management Processes and Requirements
| TOC | Preface | Change_Log | Chapter1 | Chapter2 | Chapter3 | Chapter4 | Chapter5 | Chapter6 | Chapter7 | AppendixA | AppendixB | AppendixC | AppendixD | AppendixE | AppendixF | AppendixG | AppendixH | AppendixI | AppendixJ | AppendixK | AppendixL | AppendixM | AppendixN | AppendixO | ALL |

Chapter 2. Program Management Requirements

SPECIAL NOTICE: Use Chapter 2 for Non-Space Flight and Non-Research and Technology Program Management. Use NPR 7120.5D for Space Flight and use NPR 7120.8 for Research and Technology

2.1 Four-Part Program Management Process

2.1.a As a strategic management structure, the program construct is extremely important within NASA. Programs provide the critically important linkage between the Agency's ambitious goals and the projects that are the instruments for achieving them. Programs vary significantly in scope, complexity, cost, and criticality; however, a properly designed and executed program structure inevitably contributes to sound project management being embraced and practiced at lower levels. To initiate individual programs, a Mission Directorate (or Mission Support Office) shall prepare a program Formulation Authorization Document (FAD).

2.1.b The Program Manager is responsible for ensuring that program goals address the Mission Directorate Strategies and Mission Support Office Functional Leadership Plans and that the program's content, which may contain multiple product lines, addresses those program goals. The Program Manager shall be responsible for recommending to the MDAA (or MSOD) the appropriate product line for each project in his/her program. The Program Manager coordinates program content with the Mission Directorate (or Mission Support Office), provides leadership, and is responsible for the successful accomplishment of the program that meets the needs of the customer. This chapter further delineates the management requirements for programs as described in terms of the four-part management process of paragraph 1.7.1. Program Managers shall meet all requirements outlined in this chapter irrespective of the size of the program.

2.1.c The Program Manager is responsible for integration, oversight, and assistance to the program's constituent projects.¹⁸ The program management integration role varies as a function of the level of interdependence of the projects within the program. The following examples illustrate several types of programs. A single-project program (e.g., Cassini) delivers a major capability through completion of one project; in this program type, the Program Manager may also serve in the role of Project Manager and must meet the requirements applicable to both programs and projects. For a program which accomplishes its goals and objectives through completion of multiple, synergistic projects wherein each project individually provides a unique product (e.g., the Mars Program), the Program Manager ensures that the projects collectively contribute to an integrated program objective. For programs that deliver an integrated system-of-systems composed of multiple interdependent projects (e.g., International Space Station), end-to-end system integration and delivery is performed at the program level (i.e., the sum of the project deliveries does not produce the system in the absence of program integration). The program management integration role is more limited in other types of programs where the degree of interdependence is less. Examples are Discovery, in which each project stands alone in contributing to a very broad program objective; New Millennium, in which the projects are interdependent in contributing to technology validation but are not synergistically integrated; and technology programs, which can provide new capabilities for many missions. For basic and applied research programs, the integration occurs through the infusion of new knowledge, data applications, and technological advances. The Program Manager ensures that such advances influence multiple programs.

2.1.d The Program Manager is responsible for the program safety, security, cost, schedule, technical performance, risk, and other management requirements contained in this chapter. The Program Manager should integrate these areas and utilize the experts from line or functional organizations to assist in program formulation and implementation.

2.1.e The Program Manager should develop a cooperative and performance-oriented team that includes the Project Managers. It is imperative that team members be mutually supporting and empower each other to do their functions with full and open communication.

2.2 Program Formulation

2.2.1 Purpose: The purpose of program formulation activities is to establish a cost-effective program that is demonstrably capable of meeting Agency and Mission Directorate (or Mission Support Office) goals and objectives. The program Formulation Authorization Document (FAD) authorizes a Program Manager to initiate the planning of a new program, and to perform the analyses required to formulate a sound Program Plan. A FAD template is found in Appendix A. The PCA is the agreement between the MDAA (or MSOD) and the NASA Deputy Administrator that authorizes transition from formulation to implementation. A PCA can be considered an executive summary of the Program Plan. A PCA template is found in Appendix B.

2.2.2 Requirements: During program formulation, the Program Manager, once selected, shall:

2.2.2.a Prepare a Program Plan.

2.2.2.b Create a program organizational and financial structure.

2.2.2.c Develop a program technical approach.

2.2.2.d Develop a continuous risk management process

Figure 2-1. The NASA Continuous Risk Management Process

2.2.2.e Develop a closed-loop problem tracking process that includes problem or anomaly reporting, problem analysis, and corrective action.

2.2.2.f Present the Program Plan for approval by the MDAA (or MSOD).

2.2.2.g Support the Mission Directorate or the (Mission Support Office) in the preparation of a Program Commitment Agreement, based on the content of the Program Plan.

2.3 Program Approval

2.3.1 Purpose: The program approval process is an ongoing effort by senior NASA management to determine the program's readiness (at key milestones) to continue with formulation, or to proceed to or continue with implementation.¹⁹ To secure program approval, the Program Manager must prepare (or revise) key program management documents (PCA, Program Plan, etc.) and submit them to the Agency PMC at a decision review meeting.

2.3.2 The term "ongoing" is used in paragraph 2.3.1 because the number of key milestones at which decision reviews are required varies from program to program. The number and focus of decision reviews depends on the program's predominant product line and development strategy. Non-flight programs will have at most one decision review--the NAR--occurring between formulation and implementation. Programs dominated by flight systems and ground support projects will have at least two decision reviews--the preliminary NAR occurring during formulation and the NAR. To avoid unnecessary duplication of review events, these decision review meetings are generally timed to coincide with the program's first project preliminary NAR and NAR. For all programs that use evolutionary acquisition there are two additional decision reviews--the Concept Decision Review, occurring before formal formulation activities start, and the Production Review, occurring during implementation before significant production activities start. Table 2-1 shows the required program decision reviews.

2.3.3 NASA will adapt its program evaluations and management accountability hierarchy to accommodate programs that are an evolving system-of-systems. Specifically, when a Mission Directorate uses an evolutionary acquisition approach, decision reviews held by the Agency PMC will occur at the "spiral level," will include the major program elements (i.e., projects), and will be conducted concurrently with the spiral decision reviews. Because this is a new approach to program approval, NASA senior management plans to revisit the number of decision review meetings after some experience has been gained.

Table 2-1. Program Decision Reviews

2.3.4 Requirements: In support of Agency PMC decision review meetings during program approval:

2.3.4.a The Program Manager shall support evaluation by IPAO in accordance with the program evaluation process. (See paragraph 2.5.8 for more detailed requirements.)

2.3.4.b The Program Manager shall prepare a program readiness overview briefing for presentation at the Agency PMC milestone decision review meeting that includes a summary of the program, the status of program documentation and products, concurrence of the TWH on technical requirements (including all variances), and significant risks, all appropriate to the level of program maturity.

2.3.4.c The Program Manager shall prepare (and/or submit) the program documents and products described in Table 2-2. For programs that have a preliminary NAR, an updated FAD is not needed for the NAR.

2.3.4.d At that meeting, the IPAO results and findings, including an Independent Cost Analysis (ICA), are also presented. The Program Manager shall then follow with a presentation of responses to the IPAO findings.

2.3.5 When all presentations are concluded, the Agency PMC convenes an executive session to discuss the material presented and determines whether to recommend approval to the Deputy Administrator. A positive recommendation may be unconditional, or conditional on the Program Manager completing assigned action items, some of which address IPAO findings from the NAR. A negative recommendation by the Agency PMC results in direction to the Program Manager to either address the deficiencies or to terminate the program. When the Deputy Administrator signs the PCA, the program is approved for implementation, and the program's NAR Baseline is formally established.

Table 2-2. Key Program Documents and Product Maturity by Decision Review

2.4 Program Implementation

2.4.1 Implementation of programs requires many actions from the Program Manager. The Program Manager should work closely with Mission Directorate (or MSOD) personnel and with the OCFO to coordinate plans, budgets and schedules. During program implementation, the Program Manager performs and orchestrates the following activities:

2.4.2 Program Control

2.4.2.1 Purpose: Through this activity the Program Manager provides direction and exercises control over the program. The purpose of this activity is to ensure that program implementation is conducted in an effective manner, considering safety, risk, performance, cost, schedule, and quality commitments in the Program Plan. This activity provides management oversight of all aspects of the program, especially oversight and review of the constituent projects. This activity ensures the collection, tracking, reporting, and management of the program according to agreed-upon metrics.

2.4.2.2 Requirements: During implementation, the Program Manager shall:

2.4.2.2.a Have a signed PCA before conducting activities associated with program or program element (project or portfolio) implementation.

2.4.2.2.b Demonstrate a comprehensive program control function.

2.4.2.2.c Prepare and maintain detailed budgets, work authorizations, plans, and schedules.

2.4.2.2.d Oversee acquisition efforts.

2.4.2.2.e Conduct an integrated continuum of reviews. The Program Manager shall conduct the internal program reviews during implementation as specified in the Program Plan.

2.4.2.2.f Disposition all risks before delivery to operations (or the equivalent for a technology program).

2.4.2.2.g Support the Mission Directorate (or MSO) in preparing material for Quarterly Status Reviews (QSRs) to the Agency PMC.

2.4.2.2.h Periodically evaluate the performance of Project Managers and their teams.

2.4.3 Program Advocacy

2.4.3.1 Purpose: The purpose of this activity is to proactively consult and involve customers in program decision forums during implementation to ensure customer satisfaction with delivered products and services within budget and schedule commitments. Program advocacy also includes external outreach to the wider set of stakeholders. The Program Manager works with the Mission Directorate (or Mission Support Office) to advocate for the totality of the program, including advocacy for constituent projects. The MDAA (or MSOD) and Program Manager should ensure an effective interface across Government agencies and international partners, and with the political stakeholders. In completing the education and public outreach plan, the Program Manager ensures integration with the Agency education strategic goals.

2.4.3.2 Requirements: During implementation, the Program Manager shall:

2.4.3.2.a Advocate and promote customer involvement in the implementation of the program to assess progress against commitments.

2.4.3.2.b Produce and execute a plan for education and public outreach by working with Mission Directorate education leads and the NASA Office of Education.

2.4.4 Program Integration

2.4.4.1 Purpose: This activity develops and integrates the overall implementation approach and provides management oversight of all aspects of the program.

2.4.4.2 Requirements: During implementation, the Program Manager shall:

2.4.4.2.a Maintain the continuity of requirements by ensuring that requirements are fully traceable from Agency vision and goals down through program requirements and top-level project requirements.

2.4.4.2.b Ensure that the program is being implemented in a cost-effective manner by continuing to conduct architecture trades, technology assessments, mission analyses, and infrastructure and operational analyses that help structure program-level investments for maximum return.

2.4.4.2.c Ensure that all investment areas (product lines) associated with the program are being managed in an integrated manner so that changes in one program investment area are reflected in all other related investment areas.

2.4.4.2.d Ensure that all cross-cutting management elements of the program (e.g., safety, technology strategy, risk management) are being implemented in constituent projects in accordance with the Program Plan.

2.4.4.2.e Identify and secure facilities, infrastructure, equipment (including GFE), materials, supporting personnel, and services that are required to support multiple projects within the program.

2.5 Program Evaluation

2.5.1 NASA's leadership places a high value on independent review of programs and projects as an unbiased quality check of the engineering and management efforts.

2.5.2 Purpose: The evaluation process utilizes independent review teams composed of knowledgeable, independent experts from outside the advocacy chain of the program. Evaluation supports the approval process by providing findings and supporting data needed to help the Agency PMC decide whether to proceed to the next program phase. Evaluation during formulation assesses whether a program supports the Agency Vision and strategic goals, and whether that program can be successfully conducted within available resources and applicable constraints. Evaluation during implementation assesses whether a program is contributing to the Agency Vision and goals, and is being successfully executed according to the Program Plan. Evaluation also provides findings to enhance the program's technical and programmatic performance.

2.5.3 These evaluations are generally planned to minimize disruptions to the program and avoid unnecessary duplication of review events. In keeping with that policy, NASA will adjust its program evaluations to accommodate programs that are an evolving system-of-systems.

2.5.4 Requests for external audits and assessments of programs may come from the Congress, the NASA Inspector General, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), advisory groups such as Science Advisory Committees, and other similar sources. When requested, the OCE will coordinate responses to external review requests, work in concert with the MDAA (or MSOD) to disposition such requests, and coordinate the scheduling of such activities with the Program Manager and Agency PMC.

2.5.5 Special-purpose independent reviews (e.g., Termination Review) will be conducted when directed by the Agency PMC or Mission Directorate. Requests for special purpose reviews may come to the Agency PMC from customers, line organizations, or others. Elements such as the anticipated inability of a program to meet its commitments, an unanticipated change in Agency strategic planning, or an unanticipated change in the NASA budget may initiate such reviews.

2.5.6 For basic and applied research programs, a Program Implementation Review (PIR) will be held every three years, and conducted consistent with NPR 1080.1, NASA Science Management. All other programs will have a biennial (nominally every two years) PIR by the IPAO throughout implementation at a time designed to minimize disruptions to the program (e.g., at scheduled program milestone reviews). The IPAO PIR is designed to ensure that the program's scope and content remain tightly linked to the Agency Vision and goals, that the program's implementation follows the intent of the Program Plan and that the program is meeting the NAR Baseline performance, cost, and schedule commitments. The IPAO reports the results of such periodic PIRs to the Agency PMC. For basic and applied research programs, the results of the PIRs are also reported to the Mission Directorate Science Management Council (SMC) or equivalent.

2.5.7 For all programs, the general process flow leading to each Agency PMC decision review and PIR is as follows. The Program Manager schedules program site field review events with the IPAO. During the IPAO site field review, the Program Manager presents a detailed program briefing, which demonstrates the program's readiness to continue. This briefing includes a program cost estimate and documentation/data required to conduct an Independent Cost Analysis (ICA). At the end of the IPAO site field review, the IPAO provides a preliminary verbal outbrief to the Program Manager. The IPAO prepares an initial briefing, which includes an Independent Cost Analysis (ICA), and briefs the Program Manager. The Program Manager reviews the facts, assumptions, and findings of the initial IPAO briefing, and provides a formal response to the IPAO. The IPAO and Program Manager brief the cognizant Center management (if applicable) and the Mission Directorate on the findings and program responses. The IPAO prepares a final briefing and issues it to the Program Manager, the Directorate, and to the Agency PMC members. After the final briefing is issued, the Program Manager and the IPAO brief the Agency PMC.

2.5.8 Requirements: To accomplish the ongoing program evaluation process, the Program Manager shall:

2.5.8.a Plan program team and schedule resources to support Independent Assessment (IA) for all required program decision reviews and Program Implementation Reviews (PIRs) (nominally every two years after the NAR approval²¹). For initial planning purposes, the Program Manager should consult Table H-2 in Appendix H. The program's planning schedule may be modified through negotiation with the IPAO.

2.5.8.b Comply with the evaluation Terms of Reference (ToR) for all independent reviews.

2.5.8.c Prepare program briefings and material demonstrating the program's readiness to continue, and present them at the IPAO site field review. These briefings shall include a program cost estimate. (PIRs are designed to measure program performance and compare that performance against the Program Plan. Consequently, the biennial PIR focuses on program activities and generally does not delve into project operations. The Program Manager should, however, plan for some level of project-level analysis in order to assess the delivery of products and services according to the agreed-upon metrics in the Program Plan.) The Program Manager should consult Table H-1 in Appendix H for other assessment criteria.

2.5.8.d Review facts, assumptions, and findings of the initial IPAO briefing, and provide a formal response to the IPAO.

2.5.8.e Comply with external requests for evaluation and audit (e.g., Congress, OMB, NASA Inspector General, GAO, etc.).

2.5.8.f Support any additional independent reviews or technical assessments that may be required during formulation and implementation as directed by the Administrator, Agency PMC, MDAA, MSOD, the OCE (including the NESC), or the Office of Safety and Mission Assurance. The Program Manager shall provide formal responses to action items/recommendations from these reviews for closure.

2.5.8.g Ensure that program engineering data related to failures, anomalies, evaluations, problems, incidents, and Requests for Action (RFAs) are captured, retained, and made available to the TWH and NESC upon request.

2.5.8.h Provide support for a Safety and Mission Assurance Readiness Review (SMARR) prior to any launch or safety critical event or other activity selected by the Chief SMA Officer.

DISTRIBUTION:
NODIS