NPOESS Data Quality Monitoring (DQM)

Interface Functionalityat DoD Centrals Update

COPC Action Item 2008-1.7

Jim Vermeulen

13 November 2008

Background:

Contract Source Selection included DQM at all 4 centrals (2003)

NGST proposed removing the DQM from all centrals except NESDIS in 2005 as part of a cost reduction action.

The removal of these DQM's was initially non concurred by the DOD centrals

Prolonged series of contentious meetings the visibility of which extended to the highest levels of leadership in both the IPO and NGST/Raytheon.

The issue could not be resolved until IPO/NGST agreed to retain all DQM functionality at the DoD sites which will allow each DoD central the option of procuring and operating its own DQM if it so chooses and re-visit the issue in the NPOESS era.

DQM Requirements• Calibrate and Validate Data

• The IDPS shall be capable of displaying Data Quality Notifications (DQN) - Monitoring

• The IDPS shall display, to a Data Quality Engineer (DQE) missing values of a sensor parameter for DQE selected geographic area – Anomaly Resolution

• The IDPS shall provide the capability for a DQE to generate and display standard deviations and data trending

• The IDPS shall alert the IDP operator when data thresholds and parameters have been exceeded - Alerting

• The IDPS shall be capable of monitoring data quality notification parameters and compare them to configurable thresholds defined in Data Quality Threshold Tables (Data Tuning)

Issues with no DQM at DOD

• NGST maintains argument that the data is the same at all 4 Centrals

• DOD Centrals claim how can it be the same data when different files are read/written utilized and manipulated through out the various IDPS system processing chains

• How can DOD centrals proactively monitor for anomalous data coming out of the DOD IDPS?

• How can DOD applications be tuned specifically for DOD functionalities and requirements?

Risks at DOD Centrals with no DQM

• DOD Centrals have to approve NPOESS Program Documentation ECRs in 2008 before IDPS installs. Architecture can change due to DOD IA constraints

• Inability to pro-actively monitor IDPS data at DOD

• Inability to tune IDPS data to DOD applications

Current Status • Continue to monitor ongoing Anomaly Data Resolution Study

via NPOESS User Conclave and Customer Forum.

• IPO/Contractor are putting rigorous CM procedures in place with Centrals involvement (hardware and software).

• Centrals noted the need for beta testing (various time frames for different sensors and products) before ops integration. IPO continues to address the issue with the contractor.

• Central access to contractor Work Request System (WRS).

• Contractor providing software tools including match-up verification, quality control, and file differencing analysis.

Summary• NPOESS acknowledges desire for DQM capability

• Ongoing Anomaly Resolution Study – DOD Centrals want to know how anomalous data activity will be resolved

• NPOESS architecture readily accepts DQM deployment to DoD Centrals

• ROM costs for DQM deployment at AFWA are similar to DQM deployment costs for the Navy

• NPOESS Customer Forum Action Item – What are the costs of DQM that are not built into IDPS functionality?

Recommendations• Continue to monitor and mitigate RISK

– Monitor launch and installation scheduling changes

– Receive updated Software and CM tools delivery

– Program budget cut monitoring and functional changes

– Assess Operational Risks

– Assess Contractual Risks

– Assess algorithm changes

• Set up automated data integrity checking between NESDIS and DOD Centrals

• Recommend Closure

Questions?