DRRS demo presentation

1
DRRS
Readiness Assessmentfor Dynamic War Planning
August 2003
2
The Challenge

• War planning has become more difficult
• Changing strategic environment
• Driven by world events in real-time
• Compressed assessment and decisiontimelines
• Dynamic planning and rapid readiness assessment
  can help frame issues and alternatives
• Redesign the readiness reporting system to foster
  real-time assessment
• Use technology to fuse current readiness status
  with mission planning and analysis

3
Current Readiness Process
CURRENT OPS PLANS / REQUIREMENTS
ASSUMPTIONS STANDARDS
SCENARIO GENERATION
FORCE ALLOCATION
Collaboration by TWX, Phone Fax
POE
PLANS / POE REQUIREMENTS Forces
Capabilities
OSD
MODIFIED PLANS Who What When
Where
Minimal decision aid automation
JOINT STAFF
Predominantly Manual Processes, Static Data
Dominated by staffing drills and manually
intensive analyses processes
COMBATANT COMMANDERS
Latency, Accuracy and Completeness Issues
READINESS ASSESSMENTS Deficiencies
Risk Residuals Recommendations
GSORTS
MARINES
SERVICES
NAVY
AIR FORCE
JS
ARMY
Stovepipe Data Environments
DEFENSE AGENCIES
Limited or no Readiness Reporting
4
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
5
Can Answer Strategic PlanningQuestions

• Can selected forces arrive per plan requirements?
• Is the plan sustainable?
• Are there force or capability shortfalls?

• What available / assigned units provide required
  capabilities?
• Are identified units ready for assigned missions?
• Are alternative forces required?

A
L
D
O

• What is the impact on personnel, platforms,
  organizations?
• What forces/ capabilities remain for other
  commitments?
• Risk to other missions?

rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt

• What is the mission?
• What is the plan?
• What capabilities are required?

O
O
P
O

• What ongoing ops are we committed to?
• Where are DoD forces today?
• What is their status?

• Explore alternative forces, CONOPS
  uncertainties.
• What if excursions?
• Sensitivity analysis?

6
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
ESORTS
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
7
What is the Current Force Posture and Readiness
Status?

• Where are the forces today?
• Geographical views
• What is their readiness status?
• Performance by Mission Essential Tasks to output
  standards
• Resource status (Personnel, Equipment, Ordnance)

8
What is ESORTS?
Web based software to provide a near real-time
assessment of force and support capabilities

• Captures resources and current performance of
  forces and supporting organizations
• Counts the number or condition of assets e.g.
  equipment, people, supplies, ordnance
• Measures the ability of the unit to meet assigned
  Mission Essential Tasks (MET) to standard
• Allows for force level capability assessment
• Links resource inputs to measured outputs

9
ESORTS Uses METs

• ESORTS capitalizes on the Mission Essential
  Tasks construct to measure readiness for
  assigned missions
• Combatant Commanders Military Departments
  Support Agencies

DPG, CPG, UCP, TSCP
COCOM Missions
CJTF Missions
Component Missions
Corps, Fleet, NAF , MAGTF Missions
COCOM JMETL
Division, MEF, CVBG, Wing Missions
JTF METL
Component METL
Unit METL
Unit METL
10
Focuses on the Mission
Drilldowns could include Subordinate or linked
tasks PMA assessments
Mission assessments provided for overall assigned
missions and major tasks
11
ESORTS Links Unit Outputs and Resources

• Commanders now making military assessments, not
  merely reporting resource shortfalls
• Assessment may not appear to match resource or
  performance status
• Such seeming anomalies have always existed
• Will generate healthy, appropriate discussions on
  
• Resource status
• Exercise/training value and availability
• Inter organizational/agency operability
• Sustainment potential

12
ESORTS is a Real Change.

• In how we report readiness
• Focus on forces and missions
• Includes support and operational units
• Near real time data for planning/assessment
• Enables query and drill down
• In how we assess readiness
• In the context of assigned missions
• Recognizes commanders judgment, resource status,
  observed mission performance
• In how we think of readiness
• Beyond narrow resource accounting
• A complex, multi dimensional issue with real
  subjective elements
• Synonymous with capability

13
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
Scenario Selection Tools
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
14
What is the Mission or Potential War Fighting
Scenario?
Tools that allow for rapid scenario development
and assessment

• What is the mission?
• Win decisively
• Deter forward
• What is the plan?
• OPLAN, CONPLAN, or otherscenario
• Timelines and refining guidance
• Facts and assumptions
• What capabilities/forces are required?
• objectives and capabilities/force requirements

15
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
16
What Force Capabilitiesare Required?
Aids to match required capabilities with
available forces

• What forces are the best choice?
• Availability, readiness, military judgment key
  factors
• Capabilities enhance force selection /
  substitution
• What forces can provide theneeded capabilities?
• METs are the common currencies
• Can be specified in OPLANs / CONPLANs / scenarios

17
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
18
Is the Plan Feasible?
Assessment tools to allow for rapid feasibility
analysis of the scenario

• Is the plan transportation
• feasible?
• Can forces be deployed in time?
• Is the plan sustainable?
• Is there sufficient pre-positioning of materiel?
  
• Can forces be sustained at
• predicted expenditure rates
• Can the infrastructure support the plan?
• Can originating, staging and closure bases handle
  the throughput?

19
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
20
What are the Risks?
Tools to focus on broad based risk assessment

• What are the specific scenario risks?
• What are the key system / capability shortfalls?
  
• What major readiness issues need to be resolved?
• What is the impact on LD/HD assets?
• Whats left after ongoing ops and scenario?
• What key assets remain that would be needed
  for other CPG taskings?
• What key assets do other scenarios require?
• What is the impact on the remainder of NMS?
• What capability shortfalls exist?
• What other readiness issues require immediate
  attention?

21
Focus on Metrics

• Meeting Combatant Commanders Requirements --
  Operational Risk
• Force Availability
• Shortfalls by mission capability (ISR, C2, etc.)
• Shortfalls by unit type (SOF teams, MEUs, etc.)
• Magnitude of Reserve call-up
• Force Closure
• Delays in force arrival due to capacity of
  Mobility system
• Force Substitution Analysis
• Within and across service lines
• Gaps in coverage
• CVBGs/ARGs AEFs in AOR
• Monitoring forces -- Force Management Risk
• OPTEMPO/PERSTEMPO rates and goals
• Reserve component deployment rates and force
  deployment predictability
• Status of Low-Density/High-Demand Assets

22
A Rapid Assessment Process
Feasibility Analysis
Required Force Capabilities
A
L
D
O
rapid gtgtgt assessment gtgtgt
Scenario Selection
Risk Assessment
O
O
P
O
What if Assessments
Current Force Posture/Readiness
23
Enables What if Assessments
Since no plan survives execution, DRRS will
enable rapid assessment of changes

• Operational plan
• Force allocation
• Infrastructure planning assumptions
• Lift availability
• Political assumptions
• Industrial base support assumptions
• Host nation support assumptions
• Coalition contributions
• Attrition planning factors

24
Objective System (DRRS)
CURRENT OPS PLANS / REQUIREMENTS
ASSUMPTIONS STANDARDS
COLLABORATIVE ASSESSMENT PROCESSES (Tool Based)
COLLABORATIVE PLANS FORCE SELECTION PROCESSES
SCENARIO GENERATION
FORCE SELECTION
PLANS / POE REQUIREMENTS Forces
Capabilities
POE
OSD
MODIFIED PLANS Who What When
Where
JOINT STAFF
Data quality issues improved through technology
(automation) and policy changes (who, what, when)
COMBATANT COMMANDERS
READINESS ASSESSMENTS Deficiencies
Risk Residuals Recommendations
DATA ANALYTICS
DISTRIBUTED DATA ENVIRONMENT
Scripted, repeatable analysis processes plus ad
hoc queries
ESORTS
SERVICES
GSORTS
MARINES
NAVY
AIR FORCE
JS
ARMY
AD HOC QUERIES
Data Proxies To Agency DBs
DEFENSE AGENCIES
Integrated data environments support faster, more
reliable and common data access
Data Proxies To Service DBs
Agencies fully integrated in reporting and
assessment processes
25
In Summary

• The Department of Defense Readiness Reporting
  System
• Answers the question Ready for what?
• Measures readiness based on the capabilities
  required to execute specified war plans
• Provides decision support tools for rapid
  scenario development and assessment Dynamic War
  Planning
• Uses a modular analysis framework and an initial
  suite of operational readiness analysis tools

26
DRRS Points of Contact

• COL Pat Sherman, RPA
• Phone [phone]
• E-mail Pat.Sherman_at_osd.mil
• Ralph Feneis, Program Manager, BAH
• Phone [phone]
• E-mail feneis_ralph_at_bah.com
• Donna Dacier, Senior Defense Analyst, BCP
  International
• Phone [phone]
• E-mail Donna.Dacier_at_BCPInt.com
• Ben Campbell, BCP International
• Phone [phone]
• E-mail Ben.Campbell_at_BCPInt.com

27
Back-up
28
Background

• 1999 NDAA, Section 117, directed the Secretary
  to develop a new Department of Defense Readiness
  Reporting System.
• 2000 NDAA required the Secretary of Defense
  provide for an independent study of the
  requirements for a comprehensive readiness
  reporting system for the Department.
• 2001 Defense Planning Guidance for 2003-2007
• Develop guidelines and procedures for a
  comprehensive readiness reporting system that
  evaluates readiness on the basis of the actual
  missions and capabilities assigned to the
  forces.
• 2002 DoD Directive 7730.65 formally establishes
  the Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS)
• Capabilities-based, adaptive, near real-time
  readiness reporting system for the entire
  Department of Defense
• Measures readiness of military forces
  supporting Infrastructure to meet missions
  goals assigned by the Secretary of Defense
• 2003 Contract for DRRS first spiral
  development IOC FY04, FOC FY07

29
Directive Responsibilities

• USD (PR)
• Oversee DRRS, provide implementing instructions,
  develop, field, maintain, and fund ESORTS and
  scenario assessment tools
• Joint Staff
• Conduct JQRR, review Service and Defense Agency
  MET and integration with Combatant Commanders
  JMETs, develop and maintain registry of forces
• Services
• Develop Service METs, identify and include
  measured units in ESORTs, develop standards and
  metrics and report in ESORTS, identify readiness
  deficiencies and strategies for rectifying.
• Combatant Commanders
• Develop JMETs in support of assigned missions,
  report readiness to execute in JQRR, identify
  readiness deficiencies and strategies for
  rectifying.
• USDs and ASD (C3I)
• Provide oversight, approve readiness metrics and
  mission essential tasks, ensure deficiencies are
  addressed in the PPBS
• Heads of other DoD Components
• Develop METs or similar indicators, report
  readiness in context of JQRR scenario, Identify
  and include operational and support organizations