Fit For Purpose Example Capability Analysis 11 May 2010

1. Fit For Purpose Example Capability Analysis 11 May 2010 Shelton Lee (Contractor) Architecture, Standards & Interoperability Directorate Office of the DoD Deputy Chief Information Officershelton.lee@lmco.com

2. Introduction • Use Capability Viewpoint models to capture 3 alternatives • Alt1 – DOTMLPF solution (training) • Alt 2 – Minor Materiel solution • Alt 3 – System solution • Supporting models: • Alt 1: OV-4, OV-6a • SV-1 hierarchy • SV-1 interface model, OV-6c • Capability Measures Matrix • Fit for Purpose View based on the data • Dashboard

3. 1 Determine the intended use of the architecture 5 2 3 4 6 Conduct analyses in support of architecture objectives Collect, organize, correlate, and store architecture data Determine scope of architecture Determine data required to support architecture development Document Results IAW Decision-Maker needs List of architecture data Fit-for-Purpose Presentations Fit-for-Purpose Use Selected Collection Methods 3.2 5.1 6.1 4.1 3.1 Review list of architecture data and determine if it meets the use cases Assist with the Architect’s data collection processes Verify the data collected meets the use cases Determine how data needs to be presented Provide list of data needed and use cases DM2 Conceptual Data Model & Logical Data Model Model to DM2 Concept List Potential Collection Methods Example Uses Legacy Products User Requirements Example Presentations Methodology: DoDAF V2.0 Six-Step Architecture Development Process Decision Makers Architect Manager Subject Matter Experts Subject Matter Experts Analyst Architect

4. What is a Capability “The ability to achieve a desired effect under specified standards and conditions through combinations of means and ways across DOTMLPF to perform a set of tasks to execute a specified course of action.” Source: CJCSI 3170.01G, Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System

5. Survival Time in Cold Water

6. Determine Data Required Immersion in cold water can quickly numb the extremities to the point of uselessness.  Cold hands cannot fasten the straps of a lifejacket, grasp a thrown rescue line, or hold onto an over-turned boat.   Within minutes, severe pain clouds rational thought.  And, finally, hypothermia (exposure) sets in, and without rescue and proper first aid treatment, unconsciousness and death Normal body temperature of course, is 98.6.  Shivering and the sensation of cold can begin when the body temperature lowers to approximately 96.5.  Amnesia can begin to set in at approximately 94, unconsciousness at 86 and death at approximately 79 degrees.

7. Search & Rescue Concept of Operations When the US pilot is shot down or has a mishaps resulting with the pilot in water the request to organize the search and rescue operations is forwarded to the Coalition SAR coordinating unit. The SAR coordinating unit tries to obtain available rescue pick-up resources and synchronize them with medical facility to be used during the operation. Under normal situations this is not a problem.

8. Search & Rescue As-Is State & Problem Statement • In sea states of 7 or greater there are inadequate resources available to perform a successful search & rescue • Rescue Rate is 40 percent in sea states 7 or greater • Require significant US military and other government resources resulting in little or no positive outcome

9. Search & Rescue To-Be State & Desired Operational Outcome • Goal: Achieve a Rescue Rate of 100 percent in • high sea states of 10 or less

10. CV-2 Capability Hierarchy • Use CV-2 to show • Capability with Desired Effect – High Sea State Rescue • Current state capability and target state alternatives

11. Alternative 1 - DOTMLPF • Alternative 1 is a DOTMLPF Solution • Requires Training for new skills • OV-4 shows org chart with new skills

12. Alternative 2 – Materiel Solution • Alternative 2 is a materiel solution – improved jumpsuit for pilots • Capability decomposed into a SV-1 showing Pilot equipped with new Waterproof Thermal Jumpsuit

13. Alt 3 – Major System Solution Major system solution To be defined by system architecture Including high level SV-1

14. Alternative 3 – OV-6c Event Trace • OV-6c Event Trace Model used to capture new sequencing • Used to determine Measure of Effectiveness of new capability

15. Alternative 1 – Target Process Flow • OV-6c Event Trace Description used to capture new process flow • Could be simulated to determine Search Time, Rescue Time, etc.

16. Alternative 2 – Materiel Solution Source: Mr. Peter Gibbs, Q.G.A. Survival Systems Ltd. Dartmouth, Nova Scotia

17. Alternative 3 – Major System Solution Source: Dr. C.J. Brooks Survival Systems Ltd. Dartmouth, Nova Scotia

18. Measure Guidelines: • Keep measures simple. A simple measure requires only a single measurement (e.g., hours to develop an operation order). • 2. Measures and criteria should reflect an understanding of activity. • 3. Measures and criteria should reflect how an activity contributes to mission success. • 4. Measures should be sensitive to the impact of conditions. • 5. Measures should be developed that distinguish among multiple levels of performance. • 6. Measures should focus on the outputs, results of performance, or on the process to • achieve the activity. • 7. Measures should try to take advantage of the strengths of both absolute and relative scales. Source: Joint Mission Thread Measures Development Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) Draft , 3 May 2010

19. Fit For Purpose Views • Observations: • Alternative 1 and 3 have shorter Search Times • Alternative 2 does NOT address search time or Rescue Time • Alternative 3 ONLY address search time, not rescue time

20. Fit For Purpose Views • Observations: • Alternative 1 presents the highest Risk Factor but also the highest “Feasibility Level” • Alternative 3 the lowest Risk Factor but lowest Feasibility Level

21. Fit For Purpose Views • Observations: • Alternative 3 provides the highest survival rate, at the greatest cost. • Alternative 1 and 2 provide a much improved Survival Rate at significantly less cost

22. Capability Metrics • Using Measure/Measure Type • Capture Capability Metrics in a matrix format • This is based on as-is and/or to-be architecture descr • Provides basis for quantitative analysis • Capabilities across the top • Measure Type on the side • Measure and UoM in cells

23. Fit for Purpose CV-2 Model • CV-2 Capability Taxonomy view with FfP Dashboard Indicators • High-low status bars, “speedometer” gauges aid in AoA

24. Capability-Based Assessment (CBA) If a Capability-Based Assessment (CBA) is available, the measures development process should leverage information already developed as a part of the JCIDS process. The CBA identifies scenarios, military objectives, mission outcomes, associated desired effects, and task representations. This process lines up well with the JMT construct and the Senior Warfighters Forum (SWarF) prioritized list of capability attributes (Table 3) for battlespace awareness, command and control, logistics, and net-centric capabilities.