1
Hydrology Program ExecutionAccountability and Planning
HIC Meeting
January 25, 2006
NWSTC Kansas City, MO
2
Outline
AHPS• Status and Reporting
• Planning
• Discussion/Recommendation Topic
• Initial Project Prioritization Process
AWIPS HOSIP
• Discussion/Recommendation Topic
• HIC interaction
3
AHPS Definition: AHPS Service Location A NWS River Forecast Service location will be considered an AHPS
location when both of the following criteria are met: • Observed and/or forecast information available graphically via the web • Probabilistic forecast products delivered via the web or directly to customers
Caveats: • Closed gauges or sites that have otherwise cancelled service: Will not subtract
the points - document• Sites with probabilistic products but no observed or forecast hydrograph on the
web. Two types of sites:• Have observations but WFO hasn’t created the web page information and isn’t
producing the hydrograph. Regions would ask the WFOs to set up the information to create AHPS pages for those sites. Document where no web page created.
• Only have observations occasionally (often no hydrograph). Same as above, WFOs should set up the web pages and appropriate notice about availability of hydrograph would be displayed. Other information would be available to users along with the probabilistic products.
• Sites with probabilistic products delivered directly to the customers • Observations on the web. Put message under probabilistic tabs to direct customers to
RFC for the products.• No observations ever. These sites could still be counted as AHPS points and will be
tracked. (should not be many)
4
AHPSStatus and Plans
Fiscal YearThreshold
AHPS Locations
PlannedAHPS Locations
to Date(12/31/05)
ActualAHPS Locations
to Date(12/31/05)
Prior Years 717 717 717
2004 426 426 426
2005 233 233 254
2006 268 34 40
2007 309 - -
2008 308 - -
2009 316 - -
2010 316 - -
2011- 2014 1,118 - -
TOTAL 4,011 1,410 1,437
5
AHPSFY06 Status and Plans
•Will need updates on FY06 plans
•Target of 268 revised down from original 308 target
• Maintain FY06 target – revise FY07 plans to include extras
•Coordinate with HSD or HICs?
River Forecast Center
Reported to Date
(9/30/05)
From Theme Team Base
Pending Corrections
Arkansas Basin 114 66 1 Alaska 13 7 -1 Colorado Basin 70 6 California/Nevada 46 0 Lower Mississippi 28 15 Middle Atlantic 151 0 Missouri Basin 126 23 25 North Central 339 0 26 Northeast 95 33 Northwest 66 69 Ohio Basin 252 0 17 Southeast 61 20 West Gulf 36 16 TOTAL 1397 255 68FY05 reported 1st Q FY06 13Total FY06 Target 268
6
Reporting Metric for NOAA IT Programs - Earned Value
Integrate three performance measures:• Cost
• Schedule
• Work Accomplished
Activities “earn value” as they are completed.• The value earned is the budgeted cost of the
activity completed to date.
7
AHPS Earned Value
Activity tracked for AHPS: Number of locations implemented each month
Track Cost Variance and Schedule Variance on monthly basis
Purpose: Ensure program doesn’t get too far off track
Guidance: Stay within +/- 10% of plan
8
AHPS Example
OHD IT EVMS Graph for FY06
$3,500
$3,700
$3,900
$4,100
$4,300
$4,500
$4,700
Oct Nov 1st Qtr Dec J an Feb 2nd Qtr Mar Apr May 3rd Qtr J un J ul Aug 4th Qtr SepFiscal Year
Dol
lars
in $
K
Plannned Value (BCWS)
Earned Value (BCWP)
Actual Cost (ACWP)
9
AHPS Earned Value
Results• If results >10% over plan – working more
effeciently – budget could be cut
• If results >10% under plan – not performing as planned – may need to cut or stop program
Lesson• Good planning is needed
Will work with HSD/HICs to improve plans
10
AHPS Planning
Improvements for FY2007
11
AHPS PlanningTheme Teams Goals of FY06 AHPS Planning Changes
• Provide more time for plan development• Continue theme teams with revisions
• Reduce number of teams (some program area work plans to be developed by HQ staff for review)
• More time for teams• More guidance• Increased responsibility - output OSIP/HOSIP
documents• Develop initial plan, revise based on real budget,
revisions if needed during year
• Simplify ARC review
12
FY06 AHPS Work Plan ProcessTheme Team Responsibilities
Duties• Review status of ongoing projects• Identify potential new projects
• Develop initial HOSIP/OSIP documents – SON, NID, Concept of Operations, Business case information
• Develop deliverable, cost, schedule information• Prioritize projects – deliver proposed work plan
Resources• Current projects planned to extend – HOSIP/OSIP
documents• Annual Guidance Memorandum• AHPS Program Plan• Input from technical representatives• Team Charter• User feedback (surveys and AHPS web page comments)
13
AHPS PlanningFY06 Theme Teams
Participants• 33 Team Leaders/members
• 22 Technical Representatives
Teams considered 106 projects• 42 projects funded, 64 not funded
• 15 new projects
14
AHPS PlanningTheme Team Feedback
Received 10 surveys (~55 participants)• Theme team leaders and members
• Technical representatives 2 months was enough time
• Some concerns about scheduling around shifts Good mix of people on teams Not enough cross referencing of projects Clarify process for submitting new proposals Identify projects mandated to continue
15
Alternatives for AHPS Prioritization
Status quo (current theme teams ) One group reviews and prioritizes all
projects Other??
16
Proposal: One-Group Review
Problem: Dividing all projects up into separate teams for prioritization makes it difficult to evaluate projects between teams
Proposed solution: Put together one group to review and prioritize all projects
17
One-Group Review Proposal (cont.) Group reviews list of current projects (status and proposal
for upcoming year) Send project proposals to OHD for additions to the list Through series of conference calls the group goes
through the list getting additional information on projects Each group member prioritizes the list Create consolidated prioritized list Additional call for final discussion and set the final list (to
be sent to ARC, etc. for final review) Projects would then be funded in priority order until the
money runs out for that period
18
One-Group Review ProposalQuestions
Who is in “the group”? What documentation needed for new
projects? Can projects be partially funded to keep
them going?
19
AWIPS Process Improvements
20
AWIPS Process Improvements
Motivation: Feedback from Regions that SW needs to be better, and output more responsive to user needs.
Process Changes: All development organizations required to document and get approval from field representatives for requirements, user interface changes, and testing
Development Organizations can use their own internal processes or OSIP
21
AWIPS Process Improvements (cont.) Purpose: Improve the quality of software
being delivered to the prime contractor and the field.• It is NOT to create a slow moving bureaucracy, but to
ensure developers coordinate with users prior to delivering software.
Value: The field now has direct control over the progress of software development. The required reviews give the field control over the quality of the software they receive.
Will be implementing over OB7 and OB8 cycles
22
AWIPSProcess Reviews
Requirements Review * Design Review Code Review User Review * Test Review * GFS Handoff Readiness Review Integration Readiness Review
* Field Representative Approval Required
23
AWIPSField Involvement
HOSIP helps document early reviews for AWIPS (requirements)
Need field involvement for later reviews and testing• Required by AWIPS
• Will improve final software when a release is fielded
• Field involvement coordinated by developers• Contact HSD when additional input needed?
24
AWIPS Schedule
Build Dev. Delivery Deploy
OB 6 Feb. 2006
OB 7.1 March 2006 Aug. 2006
OB 7.2 July 2006 Dec. 2006
OB 8.1 Nov. 2006 Apr. 2007
OB 8.2 March 2007 Aug. 2007
OB 8.3 July 2007 Dec. 2007
Note: SREC for OB8: now - April
25
AWIPSBuild 8 SREC Candidates (Hydrology) OB8 DRs (new & existing) NWS Directives Changes (most likely RiverPro changes) Operating System & Other COTS Upgrades Integrated Warning Tool IWT Complete Integration of RFC QPE Tools into a Common National QPE
System Continue Operational Implementation of Distributed Hydrologic
Modeling (DHM) Replace SACSMA Frozen Ground Algorithm WHFS Site-Specific Hydrologic Prediction (SSHP) Model Enhance NWSRFS Streamflow Regulation Accounting Tools Re-Implement/Modernize the NWSRFS Interactive Calibration
Program (ICP) Synchronize RFC Archive Database and IHFS Database Meta Data Continue Migrating WHFS HydroView Into D2D
26
HOSIPSummary Stage 1
• Collection & Validation Stage 2
• Concept Exploration & Definition Stage 3
• Applied Research & Analysis Stage 4
• Operational Development Stage 5
• Deployment (AWIPS, Nexrad, etc.)
Gate 1
Gate 2
Gate 3
Gate 4
27
HOSIPHIC Interactions
Since November, all HICs invited to attend meetings for Gates 2, 3, 4 • Experimental – to be reviewed at HIC meeting
OHD has felt contributions from the DOHs and HICs has been very valuable
Review Options• Continue with all HICs invited to all calls
• Rotating representative HIC or HICs
28
Backup Slides
29
$0
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
Jan
Mar
May Ju
lSep Nov Ja
nM
arM
ay Jul
Sep Nov
CALCULATING VARIANCESCALCULATING VARIANCESCALCULATING VARIANCESCALCULATING VARIANCES
Schedule Variance (EV-PV)Schedule Variance (EV-PV)$475K - $575K = -$100K$475K - $575K = -$100KSPI (EV/PV) = 0.826SPI (EV/PV) = 0.826
Cost Variance (EV-AC) Cost Variance (EV-AC) $475K - $665K = -$190K$475K - $665K = -$190KCPI (EV/AC) = 0.714CPI (EV/AC) = 0.714
AC = $665KAC = $665K
PV = $575KPV = $575K
EV = $475KEV = $475K
Actual Cost $665KActual Cost $665K
Planned Value $575KPlanned Value $575K
Earned Value $475KEarned Value $475K
30
FY06 Work Plan ProposalFY06 Work Plan ProposalInitial Work Plan Development ProcessInitial Work Plan Development Process
1. Draft Work Plans
Theme teams and HQ program area leaders
2. Integrate plansRecommend budget allocations
APC
3. Recommend adjustments to budget allocations across all work plans and recommend priority changes within plans
ARC
4. Establish budget allocations
NHPM
5. Adjust plans based on Step 4 budget allocation
Theme teams, etc.
6. Integrate, adjustRevised budget allocation
APC7. Review revised budget allocation, generate final appeals
ARC
8. Establish work plans
NHPM
APC – AHPS Program Coordinator
ARC – AHPS Review Committee
NHPM – NOAA’s Hydrology Program Mgr