Program Award Fee Evaluation

1
(Program) Award Fee Evaluation
Technical Performance 2nd Award Fee Period (Post
PDR through CDR)
Xxxxxx Yyyyyyy DCMA (XXXX) XXX-XXX-XXXX
2
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Evaluation Criteria 1) Requirements Definition
Development and maintenance of system and design
spec. for (Program) Development of test plan
for (Program) and ensuring traceability of
req.. 2) Contractor's systems engineering
performance in effectively using system design to
maximize WCS characteristics Demonstrate
control of the system engineering process through
reviews and informal meetings Establish
processes that control system-engineering
processes for transition to production of
(Program) Demonstrated ability to exploit
commercial technology and rapid evolution of
technology to improve system
3
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Evaluation Criteria 3) Contractors plan and
implementation of continuous improvement is
software design and development, software
management, as well as software productivity
improvements. The contractor shall accomplish
verification during unit test and requirements
shall be traceable through code and unit test.
The software shall be Hardware
independent Testable Intuitive to operate
Uncomplicated to integrate 4) The contractors
performance in hardware engineering and design
efforts to mitigate (Program) production risk
through improved elements of producibility (No
comments on this section)
4
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Strengths 1 - Development and
maintenance of system and design spec. for
(Program) DCMA and (Contractor) audit on 10/27/00
verified the use of Dynamic Object Oriented
Requirements System (DOORS) to manage requirement
development and Requirements Verification
tractability (RVT) per (Contractor) EPI and
(Program) job instructions. In addition, it uses
DOORSNet to disseminate the information, via the
internet, to all registered (Program) Program and
Community users. Changes to requirements are
documented via Problem Reports (PRs) and are
controlled via the Problem review Board (PRB) and
the Program Configuration Control Board(PCCB).
1 - Development of test plan and ensuring
traceability of req. System Test Plan, CDRLXX
has established the process for verification of
Configuration Verification Items (CSCIs). The
test team, during I2, verified the allocated
requirements in the SSS. Even though increment
5 is the only formal software delivery, the
contractor is treating all increment
documentation as formal and thus minimizing risk
downstream.
5
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Strengths 2 - Demonstrate
control of the system engineering process through
reviews and informal meetings Formal customer
reviews (e.g. Incremental Design Review (IDR),
Critical Design Review (CDR)), are planned and
executed at regular intervals. These reviews are
conducted per (Contractor) requirements and
address system-level requirements, objectives,
and issues. Resulting action items are tracked
for resolution. Formal IPT reviews are
conducted on a weekly basis, including
interaction between groups such as Software
Development, System Test and Verification,
Engineering Review Board (ERB), and the Program
Configuration Control Board (PCCB). Daily peer
reviews are planned and conducted for the Problem
Review Board (PRB), Detailed Design and code walk
through. Additionally, informal meetings are
conducted on an as needed basis. All reviews
are conducted per (Contractor) or (Program)
procedures and/or job instructions.
6
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Strengths 2 - Establish
processes that control system-engineering
processes for transition to production of
(Program) Contractor has written processes, Job
Instructions (JIs) for most of the critical
processes affecting the software development
process. Examples are System Architecture View
Set JI-xxx, Code and Unit Test JI-xxx, and System
Level Testing JI-xxx. 2 - Demonstrated
ability to exploit commercial technology and
rapid evolution of technology to improve
system Contractor is successfully using a Rapid
Development Life Cycle (RPDL). This process uses
incremental builds that start with the (Old
Program) proven baseline. Currently they are
using lessons learned from I1 and I2 to improve
the processes used in I3 and subsequent
increments. This is evident in discussions
between working groups - SEIV and SW IPTs. There
is significant use of cutting edge tech. such
as DOORSNet, Architecture Based Design, Cool-jex
for design, DOORS and xrunner, data extraction
tools for system test, and Clearcase and Clear
Quest for Config. Management and Problem report
Control and documentation.
7
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Strengths 3 - The software
shall be Hardware independent Common services
is currently the most mature and stable CSCI. It
is successfully using YYYYY to transparently
interface different hardware software
platforms. Additionally, Java and HTML HCI coded
CSCIs (xxx, xxx, xx, xx, xx) have some machine
independent capabilities. Testable Draft
versions of requirements traces to test plan
documents and draft versions of requirements
traces to test case steps are manually
implemented in test procedure documents. This is
done by exporting requirement allocations from
YYYY, via spreadsheet, to the respective test
plan or test procedure, and adding the step
traces.
8
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Strengths 3 - The software
shall be (continued) Intuitive to
operate Testers/operators indicate the Graphical
User Interface (GUI) and workflow has improved in
(Program) vs. (Old Program). The interface is
Microsoft like, and users of MS products easily
pick up the menus and workflow. The GUIs are
primarily developed using YYYY which makes the
interface more robust and portable between
platforms. The XXX IPT interfaces with other
CSCI teams, user groups, and the community for
product improvement input. Uncomplicated to
integrate A Software Integration Plan
(Program)-xx-xxxx was created to establish the
methodology to ensure software products can be
compiled into a deliverable build that meets
customer operational requirements.
9
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Weaknesses 1 - Development and
maintenance of system and design spec. for
(Program) Increment 4 total requirements from 438
(PDR) to 568 (Current) 2 - Demonstrate control
of the system engineering process through reviews
and informal meetings Aggressive review schedule
takes up a lot of time that could be used for the
development and production of software
products. 2 - Establish processes that control
system-engineering processes for transition to
production of (Program) Most of the processes
have not been audited for compliance by
(Contractor) SQE.
10
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Ktrs Performance Weaknesses 2 - Demonstrated
ability to exploit commercial technology and
rapid evolution of technology to improve
system New/inexperienced developers have a
significant learning curve to efficiently use
these processes. Also, there have been licensing
issues ands developers have been locked out of
some applications due to lack of licenses -
contractor is monitoring this issue. 3 -
Testable Exporting of requirements from YYYY is
not automatically done. 3 - Intuitive to
operate Terminology used on (Program) differs
from (Old Program). 3 - Uncomplicated to
integrate Currently system test is required to
load software via tape and not per the required
MO disks. Additionally, there are some work
arounds required to integrate the software prior
to System Tests for I2 and I3.
11
Award Fee Evaluation for Technical - DCMA
Impact of Ktrs Performance on Program
Execution The program SW development IPTs are
committed to meeting customer requirements
through defined plans and meeting schedules and
milestones without adversely impacting product
quality. Some requirements have been
re-allocated to Increment 4 (I4) and therefore
the risk to that increment has increased.