Program Formulation Activities Across Program Types The following paragraphs describe the activities all program types must

accomplish to develop a sound Program Plan. However, programs vary significantly in scope, complexity, cost, and criticality, and the activities vary as a result. The differences in activities are described by program type in Section 3.3.2.2.

Program Formulation is initiated at approval for Formulation and completes when the Decision Authority approves the program’s transi- tion from Formulation to Implementation at KDP I (KDP C for single- project programs). Authorization of program transition from Formulation to Implementation is documented in the Program Commitment Agree- ment (PCA) and other retrievable program records. The program assists the Mission Directorate in preparing this agreement, as requested. A draft PCA is prepared by KDP 0 and baselined by KDP I. (Single-project programs are the exception: they follow a life cycle similar to projects, so they are approved at KDP C. However, single-project programs are also required to

The FAD is issued by the MDAA to authorize the formulation of a program whose goals will fulfill part of the Agency’s Strategic Plan and Mission Directorate strategies. The FAD describes the purpose of the program, including a clear traceability from the goals and objectives in the Mission Directorate strategies. It describes the level or scope of work, and the goals and objectives to be accomplished in the Formulation Phase. It also describes the NASA organizational structure for managing the formulation process from the Mission Directorate Associate Administrator (MDAA) to the NASA Center program or project managers, as applicable, and includes lines of authority, coordination, and reporting. It identifies Mission Directorates, Mission Support Offices, and Centers to be involved in the activity, their scope of work, and any known constraints related to their efforts (e.g., the program is cofunded by a different Mission Directorate). It identifies any known participation by other organizations external to NASA that are to be involved in the activity, their scope of work, and any known constraints related to their efforts (e.g., the program or project must be cofunded by the external participant). It identifies the funding that will be committed to the program during each year of Formulation. Finally, it specifies the

3.3 Program Formulation

develop a Program Plan and have a PCA, unless the Mission Directorate approves otherwise.)

Major program and life-cycle reviews leading to approval at KDP I (KDP C for single-project programs) are the Acquisition Strategy Meeting (ASM); the System Requirements Review (SRR); the System Definition Review (SDR)/Mission Definition Review (MDR);3 _{the governing PMC review; and} for single-project programs and tightly coupled programs, the PDR. Acquisition Strategy. As early as possible in Formulation, all program types begin to define the program’s acquisition strategy. The Acquisition Strategy is the plan or approach for using NASA’s acquisition authorities to achieve the program’s mission. The strategy includes recommendations from make/buy analyses, the recommendations from competed/directed anal- yses, proposed partnerships and contributions, proposed infrastructure use and needs, budget, and any other applicable considerations. This strategy addresses the program’s initial plans for obtaining the systems, research, services, construction, and supplies that it needs to fulfill its mission, including any known procurement(s); the availability of the industrial base capability and supply chain needed to design, develop, produce, and support the program and its planned projects; identifying risks associated with single source or critical suppliers; and attendant mitigation plans.

The program develops their preliminary strategy, which is informed by the Agency’s strategic planning process, prior to the SRR. The MDAA and AA determine whether an ASM is required. If an ASM is required, the team plans, prepares for, and supports the ASM as part of the formulation of its acquisition strategy. The ASM is typically held early in Formulation and precedes making partnership commitments, but the timing is determined by the Mission Directorate. The results of this meeting are used to finalize the Acquisition Plan. (See Section 3.3.3.5.)

The purpose of the ASM is for senior Agency management to review and agree upon the acquisition strategy before authorizing resource expendi- tures for major acquisitions. This includes implementation of the decisions and guidance that flowed out of the previous Agency Strategic Implemen- tation Planning (SIP) process and consideration of resource availability, impact on the Agency workforce, maintaining core capabilities, make-or- buy planning, supporting Center assignments, and the potential for partner- ships. (See Section 5.8.3.1 for information on the SIP process.) The develop- ment of an acquisition strategy also includes an analysis of the industrial base capability to design, develop, produce, support, and even possibly

3 _{The SDR and the MDR are the same review. Robotic programs tend to use the}

terminology MDR and human space flight programs tend to use SDR. The PCA (see NPR 7120.5,

Appendix D) is an agreement between the MDAA and the NASA AA (the Decision Authority) that authorizes program transition from Formulation to Implementation. The PCA is prepared by the Mission Directorate and documents Agency and Mission Directorate requirements that flow down to the program; program objectives, management and technical approach and associated architecture; program technical performance, schedule, time-phased cost plans, safety and risk factors; internal and external agreements; life-cycle reviews; and all attendant top-level program requirements.

Major Acquisitions are directed at and critical to fulfilling the Agency’s mission, entail the allocation of relatively large resources, or warrant special management attention.

3.3 Program Formulation

restart an acquisition program or project. The plan also includes the mecha- nisms used to identify, monitor, and mitigate industrial base and supply chain risks. The ASM review is based on information provided by the asso- ciated Mission Directorate or Mission Support Office, and results in the approval of plans for Formulation and Implementation. Decisions are docu- mented in the ASM meeting minutes. The results of the ASM are used to finalize the Acquisition Plan. (See Section 3.3.2.)

System Requirements Review. The purpose of the SRR, regardless of program type, is to evaluate whether the program functional and perfor- mance requirements are properly formulated and correlated with the Agency and Mission Directorate strategic objectives and to assess the cred- ibility of the program’s estimated budget and schedule. For uncoupled and loosely coupled programs a KDP 0 may be required, at the discretion of the Decision Authority, to ensure that major issues are understood and resolved prior to proceeding to SDR and KDP I. At a KDP 0, the program shows how it meets critical NASA needs and proves it has a good chance of succeeding as conceived.

System Definition Review/Mission Definition Review. The purpose of the SDR/MDR for uncoupled and loosely coupled programs is to evaluate the proposed program requirements/architecture and allocation of requirements to initial projects, to assess the adequacy of project pre-Formulation efforts, and to determine whether the maturity of the program’s definition and asso- ciated plans is sufficient to begin Implementation. After a successful SDR/ MDR, the program proceeds to KDP I. The program is expected to demon- strate that it (1) is in place and stable, (2) addresses critical NASA needs, (3) has adequately completed Formulation activities, (4) has an acceptable plan for Implementation that leads to mission success, (5) has proposed projects that are feasible within available resources, and (6) has a level of risk that is commensurate with the Agency’s risk tolerance.

The purpose of the SDR/MDR for tightly coupled and single-project programs is to evaluate the credibility and responsiveness of the proposed program requirements/architecture to the Mission Directorate requirements and constraints, including available resources and allocation of require- ments to projects. The SDR/MDR also determines whether the maturity of the program’s mission/system definition and associated plans is sufficient to begin preliminary design. For tightly coupled programs a KDP 0 may be required, at the discretion of the Decision Authority, to ensure that major issues are understood and resolved prior to proceeding to PDR and KDP I. If the KDP 0 is held, the program will be expected to demonstrate how it meets critical NASA needs and that projects are feasible within available resources.

3.3 Program Formulation

program is expected to demonstrate that (1) the proposed mission/system architecture is credible and responsive to program requirements and constraints, including resources; (2) the maturity of the mission/system defi- nition and associated plans is sufficient to begin Phase B; and (3) the mission can probably be achieved within available resources with acceptable risk. Preliminary Design Review. The purpose of the PDR for tightly coupled and single-project programs is to evaluate the completeness/consistency of the program’s preliminary design, including its projects, in meeting all requirements with appropriate margins, acceptable risk, and within cost and schedule constraints, and to determine the program’s readiness to proceed with the detailed design phase of the program.4 _{After the PDR, the program} proceeds to KDP I (KDP C for single-project programs). The program is expected to demonstrate that (1) it is in place and stable, (2) it addresses critical NASA needs, (3) it has adequately completed Formulation activi- ties, (4) it has an acceptable plan for Implementation that leads to mission success, (5) the proposed projects are feasible within available resources, and (6) the program’s level of risk is commensurate with the Agency’s risk tolerance. The decisions made at KDP I (KDP C for single-project programs) establish the ABC for the program. (See Section 5.5.1.)

The general flow of activities for the various program types in Formulation is shown in Figures 3-8, 3-9, and 3-10.

While not part of Formulation, some Implementation activities such as initi- ating project Pre–Phase A may occur during Formulation.

Program Formulation is a recursive and iterative process that requires concurrent development of the program organization, structure, manage- ment approach, management processes and the technical and management products required for program implementation. The level of maturity of each of these items continues to evolve and each item becomes more mature as the program goes through the formulation process. Each of the life-cycle milestones and associated KDPs provides an opportunity for the program and its management to review and assess the program’s progress.

3.3.2.2 Program Activities in Formulation by Program Type