The document discusses the integration of NASA's Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process with its Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB). The PPBE process provides strategic guidance to programs and projects, including funding marks and schedule milestones. Projects use this guidance to develop detailed plans and revise their PMBs through formal reviews and new Project Authorization Documents. Challenges can arise when PPBE changes impact a project's plan or budget before its PMB is revised. Effective configuration management and disciplined processes are needed to integrate PPBE guidance into projects' performance baselines and respond dynamically to annual changes.

1. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
The Ares Project Office
PPBE and EVM Integration
www.nasa.gov
www.nasa.gov

2. Objective
• Understand the Planning, Programming,
Budget and Execution (PPBE) process
and how it is integrated into the
Performance Measurement Baseline
(PMB)
2

3. Outline
Budget vs. Funding.
The PPBE Process.
The PMB process.
PPBE and PMB Integration.
Implementation Challenges.
NOA and the PMB.
Conclusion and Discussion.
3

4. Funding & The Federal Budget Process
Funding is the end result of the Federal Budget
Process.
NASA submits proposed budget by FY to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
OMB reviews the budget submittal, makes recommendations
and forwards to the President.
The President approves the proposed budget and forwards it to
Congress.
Congress approves and issues Authorization Acts and
Appropriation Acts.
OMB disburses appropriated funds (this is where the word
“funding” originates) to the Agency.
Each Agency authorizes and distributes funding to Programs,
Projects, and Organizations.
4

5. NASA Funding
NASA Headquarters receives appropriated funds from
OMB.
NASA Headquarters distributes the appropriated
funds to each Mission Directorate (MD).
MD’s authorize funds disbursement to individual
Programs and Projects.
MD’s retains reserves that are disbursed during the
FY.
The Chief Financial Officer (CFO), The Program
Office and the Project Office are responsible for funds
control.
5

6. Budget vs. Funding Summary
Funding and Budget (Performance Measurement
Baseline – PMB) are separate but interrelated.
Changes to the Budget can impact the Funding and
vice versa.
Funding is authorized, monitored and controlled by FY.
Budget is developed, monitored and controlled for the
life-cycle of a project.
The project life-cycle budget can be used to forecast
out-year Funding profiles. Out-year funding profiles do
not necessarily constitute a change to the PMB.
6

7. Budget vs. Funding
FY 09
Funding (Projected)
FY 08
Funding
Funding
FY 07
$ Funding Budget
FY 06
Points Where
Funding Budget Exceeds
Funding
Start Completion
Time Now
Date Date
7

8. The PPBE Process
A planning and budgeting process used by the Agency to
convert strategies and priorities into programs and
budgets.
A focus on “Programming”, high-level, multi-year,
structured analyses of alternative uses of capabilities and
capacities
Key Elements
Alternative uses of capabilities and capacities, including gap and
excess analyses
Multi-year resource implications
Explicit, balanced, and feasible alternative methods of
accomplishment
Trade-off options: needs and costs considered simultaneously
Risk Analysis
Prioritization
8

9. High-level Agency PPBE Process
Planning Programming Budgeting Execution
Programmatic and Operating Plan
Strategic Plan Resources Institutional and
Guidance Guidance Reprogramming
Implementation
Plan
OMB Budget
Program Analyses
Priorities and Alignment
Development Monthly
Phasing Plans
Assessments
Institutional
Performance Infrastructure President’s Analyses of
Measures Analyses Performance/
Budget
Expenditures
(IBPD)
Program Review/
Issues Book
Strategic Program Decision Close-out &
Program Memorandum Appropriation Report (PAR)
Guidance (PDM)
9

10. The PPBE Process (continued)
Purpose
The conversion of information from the Strategic Plan, the
Mission Directorate and Institutional Implementation Plans,
priorities, studies and assessments, and performance measures
into strategic guidance for Mission Directorates, Mission Support
Offices, the Program Offices and the Projects.
Inputs
The inputs for this step are the Strategic Plan or updates, the
Mission Directorate and Institutional Implementation Plans, the
most recent OMB pass-back, and various studies, reports, and
assessments – e.g. program schedules, staffing levels, critical
facilities, etc.
Outputs
Guidance is issued to the Mission Directorates, the Program and
Project Offices to accomplish the specific strategic objectives.
Examples include Initial Operational Capability (IOC) and Full
Operational Capability (FOC) by specific dates. Additionally,
specific budget guidance by FY is given.
10

11. The Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB)
The PMB is a time-phased budget against which EVM
performance is measured. The PMB includes both prime
contractor and NASA “in-house” efforts.
The PMB is the summation of Work Packages (WP) and Planning
Packages (PP) and includes Undistributed Budget (UB) held at the
Project level.
The PMB is developed early in the project life-cycle (typically 6
months post ATP for prime contractors) based on anticipated work
flow, technical requirements and major schedule milestones (CDR,
PDR, Orion 1 flight, etc.).
The PMB is authorized by the Program Office to the Project Office
via a Project Authorization Document (PAD).
The PMB is maintained via formal change control. If the PPBE
changes constitute a revised PAD the PMB must be revised.
11

12. PPBE and PMB Integration
The PPBE provides Agency-level strategic guidance to the Mission
Directorates. The Mission Directorates flow this guidance down to
the Program Office, and then to each Project Office. This guidance
includes specific funding (marks) and schedule direction.
Specific schedule milestones, Ares I-Y, Orion I, IOC, FOC dates.
Specific funding by FY to develop the PMB.
Specific assumptions for future FY planning.
Each Project Office uses this guidance to perform detailed
planning. The Project Office rolls-up the detailed plan (by WBS,
Element, system and/or sub-system) and ensures compliance with
the PPBE guidance.
Once Project Office planning is complete, formal reviews are
conducted between the Program Office and the Project Offices.
When agreement is reached, the Program Office issues revised
PADs to each Project Office.
12

13. Challenges to Developing the Revised PMB
Detailed planning by the Project Offices to meet strategic goals
from the PPBE exceed the funding profile by FY.
Revised direction (contractual via the CO) to prime contractors
and their formal submittal of a new PMB can take months to
complete.
EVM reporting by the prime contractors become antiquated during this
long re-planning period.
Known risk items (sometimes referred to as cost threats) can not
be included in the PMB due to funding limitations.
Work is performed to mitigate risk without approved budget or
schedule.
Poor performance on “in-scope” work can be masked by work
performed that is “out-of-scope”.
Direction has been given to the Project Office to include specific
scope without budget, schedule or written direction.
13

14. New Obligation Authority (NOA) and the
Revised PMB
When the PPBE changes the funding (NOA profile) but a revised
PAD is not issued.
The Project using Inception-To-Date (ITD) actual cost, may create a
new Estimate to Complete (ETC) for remaining effort to match NOA
Profile.
Cost and/or schedule risk can be entered or tracked as one of the
reconciliations from EAC to new NOA profile.
The Project can submit to the Program Office a Budget Change
Request (BCR) requesting new budget using EAC as backup for
request. No changes to PMB will be implemented until the PAD
revision is issued.
Changes to the PMB as a result of the PPBE can include;
Depending on what changes.
Project may replan specific efforts (close open WPs and open new WPs
and covert PPs to WPs)
Project Office may replan the total Project
Rebaseline the entire project which implies setting cum
BCWS/BCWP to ACWP
14

15. NOA Options and Assumptions
Seven Data points used in EVM and NOA (Plan vs Actuals) analysis.
1. BCWS – Budgeted Cost Of Work Scheduled (PMB Budget).
2. BCWP – Budgeted Cost Of Work Performed (Schedule Status).
3. ACWP – Actual Cost Of Work Performed.
4. BAC – Budget At Complete (Sum of PMB).
5. EAC – Estimate At Complete (Latest forecast of total expected cost).
6. NOA – Planned time phased funding profiles.
7. Actuals – Total spent against NOA.
BCWS will equal NOA upon initial implementation of PPBE guidance.
ACWP will equal or be reconcilable to Actuals.
Future PPBE exercises may modify NOA’s.
EAC (1 of the 3 point EAC of Best, Worst, or Most Likely) will be equal to
or reconcilable to future PPBE exercises.
15

16. Conclusion and Best Practices
Revised PPBE guidance will be issued yearly. Projects
must accept this fact and have dynamic tools and
processes to respond.
Disciplined Configuration Management (CM) processes
are essential to documenting and tracking changes that
result from PPBE guidance.
Programs and Projects must resist the urge to
rebaseline each year.
The Program Office should not provide verbal direction
but should provide timely written direction.
16

17. Question and Discussion
17