1. 2015 JROC / JCIDS Overview and 2015 Updates 14 Jan 2015
Dr. Scott Maley
Deputy Chief, Joint Requirements Assessment Division
Joint Staff, J-8, DDR

2. Outline The big picture? Why we have requirements…
The prior JCIDS update? Quick review of Jan 2012 changes…
The upcoming JCIDS update? Continuing evolution for 2015…
Capability Requirement Portfolio Management…
Status:
CJCSI and CJCSI – with editors for DJS signature
JCIDS Manual – JROCM signed, release pending CJCSI signatures
Official release anticipated in Jan 2015

3. Why do we have the JROC and JCIDS?
One reason: acquisition of materiel capabilities for the warfighter
But supporting acquisition is only part of the picture… More than any other body, the JROC is charged with shaping the force
JCIDS
DAS
PPBE 3

4. Departmental Process Interactions

5. Requirements Tradeoffs
Finding the balance between:
CCMD near-term requirements to support CONPLANs and current missions
and
Services’ long range vision & investment plans
Versatile, joint systems
Systems optimized for service missions
Growing demands
Fiscal & political constraints
Geographic specificity
Worldwide applicability
Ambitious requirements
Achievable acquisition strategy
Quantity matters
Quality (High-end capabilities)
COST
PERFORMANCE
(acceptable risk)
Bottom Line: JCIDS is the process by which DoD identifies, assesses, and prioritizes what capabilities the military requires to fulfill its mission. Requirements identified through JCIDS can be addressed in a number of ways, including changes in doctrine, training, organization, or the acquisition of a new system.
Risk – defined as likelihood of an occurrence and the consequence of the occurrence.

6. 10 USC 181 (JROC)

7. Organizational Construct for the JROC

8. Process Lanes

9. JCIDS Guidance Documents

10. Requirements – Acquisition Interaction

11. Desired End-State
Take the Lead in Shaping the Force – Back to JROC and CJCS Title 10
Debate the difficult issues and make difficult choices earlier
Better upfront fidelity on cost/schedule/performance tradeoffs
More analytic rigor and risk/portfolio analysis
Stronger emphasis on prioritizing capability requirements
Better end-to-end traceability to facilitate decision making: Missions – Requirements – Acquisition and DOTmLPF-P – Budget.
More dynamic/iterative process throughout a program’s lifecycle. (Revisit as necessary…strategy shifts, threat changes, etc.)
Make the difficult choices throughout the requirements continuum…

12. What did we change in Jan 2012?

13. 2012 Changes (part 1 of 2)
Consolidated Guidance: CJCSI (JROC Charter), CJCSI (JCIDS), and the JCIDS Manual are the core products
CJCSI (FCBs) and CJCSI (JUONs) cancelled, with content absorbed into the three core documents.
Requirements Training:
Mandated Requirements Management Certification Training (RMCT)
Implemented Study Notification/Repository:
Centralized repository for CBAs and other studies/analyses supporting JCIDS documents to facilitate visibility, collaboration, and re-use
Documents:
Page limits: ICD (10), DCR (30), CDD (45), CPD (40)
Implemented “IT Box” construct – IS ICD.
Institutionalized JUONs and JEONs for urgent/emergent needs.
Clarified joint visibility requirements for all documents
Clarified submission of higher classification documents/issues
(June 2012) Introduced alternate/streamlined document formats

14. 2012 Changes (part 2 of 2) Organizations: Staffing: Post-Validation:
Added CCMDs as full members of JROC
Disestablished the Building Partnerships FCB
Established SAP Integration Group
Established Joint Requirements Assessment Division (JRAD)
Clarified Joint Staff J-7 Role and DOTmLPF-P Endorsement
Staffing:
Streamlined staffing: Deliberate: 83 days. Urgent/Emergent : days
Placed focus on finding “knee in the curve” tradeoffs
Post-AoA review of results/recommendations and draft KPP review
Post-Validation:
More robust Tripwire Process – for cost, schedule, quantity changes.
Institutionalized Capability Gap Assessment (CGA) Process
Introduced a post-fielding assessment for JUONs/JEONs

15. 2015: The Evolution Continues…

16. 2015 Changes (part 1 of 2)
Consolidated Guidance: CJCSI (JROC Charter), CJCSI (JCIDS), and the JCIDS Manual are still the core products
CJCSI (Intelligence Certification), CJCSI (Net-Ready KPP), and JWSTAP Charter (Weapon Safety Endorsement) cancelled, with content absorbed into the three core documents
Significant revision of Intelligence Certification content
Roles/Responsibilities:
Expanded guidance for stakeholder roles/responsibilities in CJCSI 5123
Developing Requirements:
Refined CBA guidance
Focus on leveraging DODAF to streamline development activities
ICD Attributes: “Initial Objective Values” vice “Minimum Values”
Enable more robust leverage of S&T efforts to satisfy requirements
Introduces the Capability-Mission Lattice as a framework for traceability to operational missions
Increased focus on ensuring attributes are measurable and testable

17. 2015 Changes (part 2 of 2) Documents: Staffing: Portfolio Management:
Streamlines document formats (starts with June 2012 alternate formats)
Extends “IT Box” construct to IS CDD
Aligns affordability sections of CDDs/CPDs with new DODI
Content/Endorsement guides for Mandatory KPPs, Weapon Safety endorsement, DOTmLPF-P endorsement, and Intelligence Certification
Requires “validation page” to be combined with JCIDS documents
Staffing:
Merges JSDs of Joint Information and Independent
Integrates Common gatekeeping with DCMO for Defense Business Systems
Enhances guidance for submission and review of higher classification documents/issues, including SAP/SAR and ACCM
Portfolio Management:
Consolidates “post validation processes” and “prioritization” guidance into the “portfolio management” guidance.

18. Capability Requirement Portfolio Management The Key to Robust Integration in an Uncertain Future18

19. Overview
The key objective of the JCIDS process is to facilitate the JROC and its subordinate boards, as informed by other stakeholders in the capability requirements process, to:
Manage/prioritize capability requirements within and across the capability requirement portfolios
Inform assessments, processes, and activities across DOD
Enable the JROC/CJCS to meet statutory responsibilities

20. Process Interactions
The capability requirement portfolios managed under the JCIDS process inform and are informed by other processes and activities across the department.

21. Understanding Portfolio Dependencies
Stakeholders must understand capability dependencies, relationship to the UJTs they enable, and the missions they support.
The CML (next slide) provides a logical construct for dependencies and traceability of capability requirements.
Knowledge of historical decisions and rationale, including past cycles of CGA and PBR, is also critical to make informed assessments and decisions.

23. JRAD Portfolio Tools
The portfolio tools in development specifically allow queries against and integrate information related to:
Mapping defense planning scenarios to UJTs. (J8/FCD)
Mapping UJTs to JCAs. (J7/UJTL)
Mapping validated capability requirements to JCAs. (KM/DS)
Mapping current and recently completed S&T efforts to JCAs. (DTIC)
Mapping validated capability requirements to acquisition programs. (DAMIR)
Mapping acquisition programs to budget data. (CAPE/DRDW)

24. DODAF Architecture Views

25. Innovation through S&T Integration

26. Continuous Assessment
Changes may require reassessment of the capability requirement portfolios to ensure that any impacts are identified and appropriate actions taken to best serve the joint force.
Revisiting previously validated capability requirements for potential adjustment in light of the updated guidance.
Initiating studies or analyses to assess identified gaps or overlaps in the capability requirement portfolios.
Using capability requirement portfolio assessments to inform other Departmental processes or decision making, such as in PBR.

27. Questions? ___________________________________________
Or later/online:
NIPR:
SIPR:
J-8/JRAD (Joint Requirements Assessment Division)
COL Douglas “Doug” Matty, USA
Dr. Scott “Doc” Maley
J-8/JCD (Joint Capabilities Division)
Col James “Mighty” Quinn, USMC
Mr. Randolph “Randy” Wood 27

28. BACKUPS 28

30. Primary Stakeholders/Equities

31. DODAF Viewpoints