BY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER AIR FORCE RESEARCH

BY ORDER OF THE COMMANDER

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY

(AFRL)

AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY

INSTRUCTION 61-108

11 JANUARY 2022

Scientific/Research and Development

MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL OF

TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT FOR

AFRL

COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY

ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available on the e-Publishing website at

www.e-publishing.af.mil for downloading or ordering

RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication

OPR: AFRL/EN Certified by: AFRL/CA

(Mr. Timothy Sakulich)

Supersedes: AFRLI 61-104, 16 October 2013

AFRLI 61-205, 9 January 2016

Pages: 36

This is to be used in conjunction with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 61-101, Management of Science

and Technology; Air Force Material Command Instruction (AFMCI) 62-202, Criteria for Critical

Engineering Positions and 63-1201, Implementing Operational Safety Suitability and

Effectiveness (OSS&E) and Life Cycle Systems Engineering. This instruction applies across the

entire Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) Research and Development (R&D) portfolio

encompassing all programs in Basic Research, Applied Research, Advanced Technology

Development, and Prototype and Experimentation. All existing references to Department of the

Air Force (DAF) publications and forms are applicable to all DAF entities including the DAF and

the United States Space Force (USSF), unless specifically excluded. This publication remains

applicable to AFRL organizations aligned under USSF. This publication may be supplemented at

any organizational level, but all direct Supplements must be routed to the Office of Primary

Responsibility (OPR) of this publication for coordination prior to certification and approval. Refer

recommended changes and questions about this publication to the OPR using the AF Form 847,

Recommendation for Change of Publication; route AF Form 847 through the appropriate

functional chain of command. The authority to waive requirements in this publication resides with

the AFRL Vice Commander (CV). Submit requests for waivers through the chain of command to

the Publication OPR for non-tiered compliance items. Ensure that all records created as a result of

processes prescribed in this publication are maintained IAW Air Force Manual (AFI) 33-322,

Records Management and Information Governance Program, and disposed of IAW the Air Force

Records Information Management System (AFRIMS) Records Disposition Schedule (RDS).

2  AFRLI61-108  11 JANUARY 2022 
 
 
1.  Overview. .................................................................................................................   3 
2.  Roles & Responsibilities. .........................................................................................   3 
3.  Digital Enterprise R&D Management Suite (DEMS). .............................................   6 
Figure  1.  STiTCH Data Architecture. .....................................................................................   8 
4.  Externally operated Digital Business Applications for R&D Management. ...........   8 
Figure  2.  Program Data Flow. .................................................................................................   9 
5.  Programs. .................................................................................................................   9 
6.  R&D Programs. .......................................................................................................   9 
Table  1.  Description and Technical Approval Authority (TAA) for R&D Programs. ..........   11 
7.  R&D Support Programs. ..........................................................................................   12 
8.  Organizational Support Programs. ...........................................................................   12 
9.  Managing R&D Programs. ......................................................................................   12 
10.  Management of the R&DML. ..................................................................................   13 
11.  R&D Program Baselines. .........................................................................................   13 
Table  2.  Baseline Requirements by Program Type. ...............................................................   14 
12.  Program Management Reviews (PMRs). ................................................................   15 
13.  Technology Transition Strategy and the Technology Transition Plan (TTP). .........   17 
14.  Data Management Plans (DMPs). ............................................................................   17 
15.  System Engineering Process. ...................................................................................   18 
16.  Training and Certification: .......................................................................................   18 
17.  Financial Management. ............................................................................................   18 
18.  Ending Programs. .....................................................................................................   20 
Attachment 1—GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES, FORMS, AND SUPPORTING 
INFORMATION    21 
Attachment 2—THE AFRL PROGRAM LIFE CYCLE    27 
Attachment 3—BASELINES    32 
Attachment 4—WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE (WBS)    34 
 
   

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 3

1. Overview. This instruction establishes the structure and procedures for development,

management and review of R&D programs for the AFRL enterprise. Specifically, this document

defines differences in AFRL program types and outlines appropriate management and oversight

procedures based on program total cost, external visibility and other factors. This document details

specific program management and oversight functions to ensure the establishment, monitoring and

annual review of program progress through standard cost, schedule, and performance management

methods. This document also identifies a suite of digital applications designed to support the

Research and Development Program Manager (R&D PM) and other Program Managers (PMs) in

adherence to this guidance. Lastly, this outlines a set of AFRL tailored Systems Engineering (SE)

approaches to support SE principals in planning and executing R&D efforts. This instruction is

intended to provide general guidance to the PM, R&D PM, Mission Organization (Msn

Org)/Directorate Chief Engineer or Systems Engineer. Msn Orgs and Directorates have discretion

in defining internal processes and procedures for complying with this instruction.

1.1. Application. This document establishes policy, responsibilities, and procedures for the

management of AFRL Programs. This instruction applies to all R&D related programs or

efforts managed or executed by AFRL personnel and applies to all efforts on which AFRL has

lead responsibility, whether internally or externally funded.

2. Roles & Responsibilities. The following are the roles and responsibilities of key participants

in the development, approval, and reporting of AFRL Programs.

2.1. AFRL/CC.

2.1.1. Ensures existence of policy and guidance for the implementation and application of

the AFRL program management process.

2.1.2. Serves as the DAF Technology Executive Officer (TEO).

2.1.3. Designates R&D-1 Programs (See Section 6 for R&D program types).

2.1.4. Chairs Enterprise level Program Management Reviews (PMRs) for R&D-1

Programs unless it has been delegated.

2.1.5. Approves baselines for R&D-1 Programs not delegated to a Msn Org Director.

2.1.6. Approves baselines for select R&D-1 Programs.

2.1.7. Issues AFRL S&T logistics and property accountability guidance.

2.2. Director of Engineering (DOE) .

2.2.1. This instruction constitutes AFRL/CC appointment of the AFRL Director of

Engineering (DoE) as the AFRL Technical Engineering Authority (TEA) in accordance

with (IAW) AFMCI 63-1201.

2.2.2. Serves as AFRL Center Senior Functional (CSF) for Engineering and Technical

Management (ETM).

2.3. AFRL Engineering & Technical Management Directorate (AFRL/EN).

2.3.1. Acts in the capacity as the Center Senior Functional (CSF) for Program

Management.

4 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

2.3.2. Ensures that the AFRL Systems Engineering and Program Management (SEPM)

Group promotes R&D program management within AFRL.

2.3.3. Serves as approval authority for the designation of R&D Programs as R&D-1, and

ensures that the approved program type for an R&D program is reflected in the Enterprise

Planning and Programming (EP2) Application (App) and the R&D Master List (R&DML)

report and the PMR template

2.3.4. Maintains the list of R&D-1 programs retained by AFRL/CC as the Technical

Approval Authority (TAA) and those delegated to the Msn Org Directors.

2.3.5. Schedules and assists in preparations of PMRs and other program reviews as

directed by AFRL/CC.

2.3.6. Assists R&D PMs in developing R&D Program baselines and PMR presentations.

2.3.7. Participates in all R&D-1 PMRs, and R&D-2 program PMRs as available.

2.3.8. Reviews and coordinates on baseline documents for R&D-1 programs.

2.3.9. Reviews selected R&D-1 programs and provides reports to AFRL/CC.

2.3.10. Develops, integrates and coordinates on R&D Management processes and program

data requirements with XP, FM, DP, PK, SB, DS, and RC as they relate to the Science and

Technology (S&T) Information Technology Collaboration Hub (STiTCH) applications

suite.

2.4. AFRL Plans and Programs Directorate (AFRL/XP).

2.4.1. Maintains configuration control over technology transition definitions and metrics.

2.4.2. Develops, integrates and coordinates on R&D Management processes and program

data requirements with EN, FM, DP, PK, SB, DS, and RC as they relate to the STiTCH

applications suite.

2.5. Msn Org/Directorate Director.

2.5.1. Ensures divisions, branches, and R&D PMs/PMs implement this instruction.

2.5.2. Supports the Chief Engineer’s role as the R&D Program Management focal point

for the Msn Org/Directorate.

2.5.3. Ensures PMRs are conducted at least annually for delegated R&D-1 Programs and

for R&D-2 and 3 programs within the organization.

2.5.4. Recommends Programs to be designated as R&D-1.

2.5.5. Designates R&D-2 and R&D-3 Programs for the Msn Org.

2.5.6. Serves as TAA for delegated R&D-1 Programs.

2.5.7. Names R&D PMs for R&D-1 and 2 programs within their organization.

2.5.8. Ensures R&D PMs are named for all R&D-3 programs within their organization.

2.5.9. Designates TAAs for all R&D-2 programs within the organization.

2.5.10. Delegates or delegates responsibility for naming TAAs for the R&D-3 programs

within the organization.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 5

2.5.11. Oversees the implementation of Digital Enterprise R&D Management Suite

(DEMS) and its STiTCH Apps as part of their internal business and R&D management

processes.

2.5.11.1. Ensures allocation of appropriate resources per approved R&D program

baseline in accordance with documented AFRL priorities.

2.5.12. Serves as Portfolio Manager by approving and maintaining a control process for

the resources allocated to the Msn Org’s/Directorate’s portfolio of Programs.

2.6. Msn Org/Directorate Chief Engineer.

2.6.1. Serves as the Msn Org/Directorate Senior Engineering and Program Management

focal point and member of the AFRL SEPM Group.

2.6.2. Approves tailored SE processes for programs within their Msn Org/Directorate.

2.6.3. Trains and supports SE and program management practices in accordance with this

instruction.

2.6.4. Reviews and coordinates on all program baselines and PMRs, per TAA request, for

Programs within their Msn Org/Directorate.

2.6.5. Participates in PMRs and other reviews as available.

2.7. AFRL Systems Engineering and Program Management (SEPM) Group.

2.7.1. Develops, promotes, and updates policy, processes, tools and training for the S&E

and PM workforce across the AFRL enterprise to include SE, airworthiness, OSS&E, and

Mission Assurance.

2.7.2. Reviews this instruction and the AFRL SEPM Group roles and responsibilities

defined in AFRLI 61-207 and prepares updates as necessary.

2.7.3. Reviews each tailored Msn Org/Directorate SE instruction for continuity and

consistency with overall AFRL SE policy and recommends alterations as needed.

2.7.4. Maintains an awareness of government, commercial industry, and academic SE and

PM best practices, procedures, and tools and makes them available for use across AFRL.

2.7.5. Liaises with the AFMC Engineering and PM Directorates on issues of mutual

concern.

2.8. Msn Org/Directorate Branch Chiefs and Division Chiefs.

2.8.1. Ensures R&D PMs/PMs follow this instruction in the creation, development,

execution and closure of assigned Programs.

2.8.2. Support allocation of sufficient resources to meet program objectives.

2.9. R&D PMs and Other PMs.

2.9.1. The individual, regardless job series (civilian) or Air Force Specialty Code

(military), named to be the single person responsible for managing the cost, schedule and

performance of a program as defined by the baseline.

6 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

2.9.2. Creates, advocates and manages assigned programs through collaboration with the

appropriate stakeholders.

2.9.3. Makes decisions, in conjunction with the research team, necessary to meet the cost,

schedule, and performance objectives of the program while balancing programmatic and

technical risks.

2.9.4. Identifies a multi-functional program team, as required for the planning and

execution of assigned programs. Works with organizational leadership to include all

necessary members, including functional representation from finance, engineering,

contracting, logistics and others as needed.

2.9.5. Creates and maintains an approved program baseline that is current for the program.

2.9.6. Makes informed decisions utilizing risk management and cost/schedule evaluation

methods.

2.9.7. Works collaboratively with stakeholders to execute tailored SE processes and

transitions technology.

2.9.8. Invites customers as appropriate and in coordination with leadership, to the PMRs

and appropriate program reviews.

2.9.9. Recommends cost, schedule, and performance baseline changes in accordance with

Section 12 of this Instruction.

2.9.10. Prepares and presents to the TAA (or delegated official) PMRs to convey Program

status relative to the baseline on at least an annual basis.

2.10. Msn Org/Directorate Senior Planner.

2.10.1. Ensures all Msn Org and Directorate programs (except as prohibited by other

factors such as classification are created, populated and maintained in the EP2 app.

3. Digital Enterprise R&D Management Suite (DEMS). AFRL utilizes a suite of systems and

applications to enable digitization and integration of the planning, programming, budgeting and

execution data across the enterprise. DEMS consists of a diverse set of applications, including

AFRL-developed and Department of Defense (DoD)-provided business process systems, which

have been designed to work cooperatively as AFRL’s enterprise business system. DEMS enables

digitization and integration of AFRL’s core business practices to promote timely and accurate

decision making. Constituent apps within DEMS may contain additional embedded instructional

guidance which is to be considered supplemental to this Instruction and treated with the same

authority. Higher-level instruction, guidance or policy that conflicts with this instruction will take

precedent.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 7

3.1. S&T Information Technology Collaboration Hub (STiTCH) R&D Management

Apps (STiTCH M-suite). AFRL’s STiTCH Applications (Apps) suite, maintained by

AFRL/RC, is being deployed to enable digitization and integration of planning, programming,

budgeting, and execution data across the AFRL R&D enterprise. Four of the STiTCH apps

most applicable to R&D Management and this instruction include the EP2 app, the PM app,

the Work Unit (WU) app, and the Grants app. STiTCH apps enable timely planning,

programming, budgeting, and execution of core and external funds received by AFRL.

STiTCH apps ensure the management of technical work in support of Department of the Air

Force priorities. These apps have been developed in conjunction with this instruction such that

comprehensive use of these apps constitutes compliance with this guidance. A pictorial

representation of the STiTCH application suite is included as Figure 1 These STiTCH apps

are described in greater detail in the following sections:

3.1.1. The EP2 app allows planners to create, develop, manage and understand AFRL’s

programs at the enterprise level, and captures processes & data use for the executing the

Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) process. The business utility

includes “Touch data once” for enterprise data capture and the elimination of paper based

AFRL data calls. EP2 interfaces with other apps including the PM and Grants Apps and

Comprehensive Cost and Requirement System (CCaRS) to ensure consistency of data

across the AFRL business processes.

3.1.2. The PM app is an AFRL-tailored program management app that provides a robust

set of cost, schedule, performance, and risk-management tools. This app exchanges

program and financial data with EP2 and receives data from the CCaRS to ensure

consistency of data across business processes and to reduce multiple cross app data entries.

This app provides a digital baseline and PMR approval processes and the reduction (or

elimination) of AFRL data calls.

3.1.3. The WU App captures the metadata for the AFRL research efforts, employs

workflows to automate business processes, tracks compliancy, reports data to external

applications (e.g. Unified Research & Engineering Database (URED)) to improve the

effectiveness of our workforce.

3.1.4. The Grants App is a business system that supports numerous Air Force Office of

Scientific Research (AFOSR) business processes. The primary purpose of the Grants App

is to facilitate award and management of research and non-research grants and contracts to

academia and industry across the United States and the world.

8 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

Figure 1. STiTCH Data Architecture.

4. Externally operated Digital Business Applications for R&D Management. DEMS includes

apps provided by DoD, DAF, and other government organizations that are used to support specific

AFRL business processes including financial execution, contract management and other

programming, planning and execution R&D management activities. Examples of externally

operated systems that may be utilized within DEMS include but are not limited to: CCaRS [a

module of Project Management Resource Tools (PMRT)], ConData, Program and Budget

Enterprise System (PBES), Manpower Programming and Execution System (MPES), Defense

Technical Information Center (DTIC), URED repository, and other authoritative systems as

required. AFRL does not hold primary authority for the use of these apps so additional embedded

or higher-level guidance may exist and should be consulted as appropriate.

4.1. DEMS is designed to integrate the planning, programming, budgeting, execution and

management processes across different individual apps to enable Enterprise-wide execution of

the AFRL mission. These apps form the basis of AFRL’s digital approach for comprehensive

planning, programming, budgeting, and execution of the DAF’s R&D mission and are an

important part of the DAF’s digital transformation efforts. Figure 2 details the data flow

between EP2, the PM app, the Grants app and CCaRS illustrating how these apps are integrated

to support management of AFRL’s R&D portfolio. Given the challenges of planning,

programming and managing increasingly complex and collaborative programs, AFRL

personnel are strongly encouraged to use the STiTCH application suite for the accomplishment

of their work. Additional policy and guidance will detail the application and use of these apps.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 9

Figure 2. Program Data Flow.

5. Programs. AFRL defines programs as endeavors undertaken and managed to create products,

services, or results. A program is the highest level of the AFRL Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

and is where programming of funds occurs. Programs are planned and executed with AFRL

appropriated funding and/or with money from external organizations. There are three categories

of AFRL Programs: R&D Programs, R&D Support Programs, and Organizational Support

Programs (see Sections 6-9). AFRL’s DEMS utilizes programs as the highest level of organization

in the financial planning and programming process. As such, all activities executed within AFRL

will connect to a specific program, with a unique identifier, and will be recorded and maintained

within the EP2 app. The PM app will utilize programs, established in EP2, as the highest-level

organizational construct for the execution and management of resources.

6. R&D Programs. These are a specific category of programs within the AFRL taxonomy and

are used to conduct the research and technology development work. These form the basis for our

planning and management structure and are defined as a subset of all AFRL programs in order to

characterize our technology efforts into discretely defined endeavors with clear outcomes or

objectives for effective planning and management. R&D programs utilize a managed process that

measures progression of program performance objectives through established PM and SE tools.

R&D programs are defined as.

6.1. A finite endeavor involving expenditure of manpower and/or funding focused on

technology maturation and delivery of scientific and/or technology products to increase future

warfighter capability. R&D programs utilize a managed process that measures progression of

program performance objectives through established PM and SE tools. R&D programs have

defined performance objectives, a schedule, cost estimate and established exit criteria.

10 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

6.1.1. AFRL R&D Program Life Cycle. The goal of an AFRL R&D program is to

systematically execute approved program resources to progress the development and

transition of identified technical products. As such the lifecycle of programs in AFRL are

defined in seven phases. These phases are defined as: Ideation, Pre-planning, Budgeting,

Pre-execution, Execution, Retirement and Program End. AFRL’s DEMS utilizes this

acquisition construct to monitor the progression of an R&D program through its lifecycle

so all AFRL R&D programs will have a specific phase designation identified within the

EP2, PM, and Grants apps. Additional information on these lifecycles and for utilizing

these phases to aid in the program management process, are provided in Attachment 2.

6.2. Technical Approval Authority (TAA). The TAA is responsible for program oversight.

The TAA approves program baselines, baseline changes and serves as the chair for Program

Management Reviews (PMRs).

6.3. Research and Development Master List (R&DML). All AFRL R&D Programs shall

be defined by type on a single, authoritative R&DML. The R&DML will be assembled from

the authoritative data source in the AFRL STiTCH Apps. R&DML Programs are programs

that are in the Pre-Execution and Execution phases or have funding allocated to them across

the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) years in a President’s Budget (PB) position

submitted to Congress.

6.4. R&D Program Types. All AFRL R&D programs shall be designated by one of the three

program types for purposes of tracking and defining reporting and oversight responsibilities

and authorities. These three types, R&D-1, R&D-2 and R&D-3 will be used to designate

approval and reporting authority for all AFRL R&D efforts. AFRL portfolios as defined in

Attachment 1, are not to be treated as R&D programs and will not be categorized as an R&D

program. All work within AFRL portfolios will be part of identified programs. Table 1

contains the description and decision authority for R&D-1 through R&D-3 programs.

6.4.1. R&D-1 and 2 Programs. These program types have clearly defined and

measurable objectives with products intended for transition in support of DoD capability

development. Specific criteria for R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs are defined in Table 1

R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs are among AFRL’s largest investments and often focus on

specific customer needs through formal or informal transition planning. As such these

higher-visibility programs often necessitate greater AFRL-level engagement and may be

identified by AFRL/CC for direct oversight. Other than being identified as such, R&D-1

programs do not differ from R&D-2 programs in management processes, PMR frequency

and other aspects. If a program meets the criteria in Table 1 for an R&D-1 or 2 program

and if it is believed the program should be designated differently, the Msn Org Chief

Engineer should submit a request with the justification to AFRL/EN for a categorization

decision.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 11

6.4.1.1. The AFRL/CC is the TAA for all R&D-1 programs unless indicated through

delegation. AFRL/EN will maintain a list of programs for which AFRL/CC will retain

TAA designation and will identify the responsible organization for delegated R&D-1

programs. This list will be updated periodically, and notification of the TAA delegation

will be made to the responsible Msn Orgs. The TAA for R&D-2 are the Msn Org

Directors identified as the lead organization unless otherwise indicated. The Msn Org

Director may further delegate TAA responsibility as appropriate. Msn Orgs have broad

discretion in exercising TAA delegation but must maintain consistency with this

instruction.

Table 1. Description and Technical Approval Authority (TAA) for R&D Programs.

R&D

Type

Reason for R&D Type Designation

TAA

R&D-1

 Vanguard Programs

 Special Interest Programs

 TEO designation

TEO or designee

R&D-2

 Does not meet criteria for R&D-1 and;

 Has definable deliverable(s) with a set of

transitionable capabilities to the warfighter

and >$50M Total Program Required Cost

(unburdened)

 TEO or Mission Organization Director

designation

Msn Org Director or

designee

R&D-3

 All other R&D Programs

Mission Organization

Director or designee

Considerations for special interest programs should include factors such as external visibility

and interest, political implications, significant outside funding, Joint Emergent Operational

Needs (JEONs), Joint Urgent Operational Needs (JUONs), Urgent Operational Needs (UONs)

and programs with total required values (unburdened) of >$200 million total for all types and

sources of funding.

Total Program Required Cost is the total estimated cost of the program for all monetary types,

including all external money, across the total life of the program.

6.4.2. R&D-3 Programs. R&D-3 programs constitute most of the technical activities

executed within AFRL. In comparison to R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs, R&D-3 program

structures and approaches are more varied because of broad differences in technological

maturity, total investment and acquisition methodology. As such, Msn Orgs have

discretion in the organization and execution of these program types. The TAA for R&D-

3 programs is may be designated by the Msn Org Director or delegated to the Division or

Branch level.

12 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

6.4.3. Like R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs, R&D-3 programs may focus on clearly defined

transitionable products. However, R&D-3 programs may also be used to organize related

technical projects wherein the products derived from these tasks may include knowledge

products and others that may not transition out of the laboratory or result in the conclusion

of the research area. To ensure that all R&D program technical objectives are current and

appropriately align with DAF priorities, all AFRL programs, including R&D-3, should be

limited in duration and will not exceed 5 years without approval by the program’s TAA.

7. R&D Support Programs. Like R&D programs, R&D support programs are technical

activities contributing directly to AFRL’s research and development mission. However, R&D

support programs are enduring activities intended to support or grow the general technical

capability of AFRL. These programs support more than one R&D program and are therefore

budgeted separately from any specific R&D program. R&D support programs types include:

7.1. Research /Test Labs (Facilities/Infrastructure, Materials, etc. ).

7.2. Modeling, Simulation and Analysis (MS&A) activities (if managed separately from a

R&D Program).

7.3. Research/Test Lab Hardware Acquisition/Upgrade and Maintenance (costs not managed

as part of an R&D Program).

7.4. Research/Test Lab Software Acquisition/Upgrade and Maintenance (costs not managed

as part of an R&D program).

7.5. Other technical activities intended to directly support AFRL’s R&D programs, grants or

other technical activities.

8. Organizational Support Programs. These programs are budgetary activities or

organizational constructs that provide support to organize, train and equip AFRL’s Msn Orgs and

Functional Directorates. Organization Support Programs include all activities, set-asides or

overhead necessary to carry out the AFRL mission but are not accounted for in R&D technical or

R&D support programs. Organizational Support Programs are organized by the following

program types: DAF Assessments (SBIR/STTR, FLEX-4, MDAP); HQ Assessments (HQ BOE

and Corporate Requirements); Other Government Costs (OGC) (All Travel, All Misc/GPC

Supplies, All Training and Work Force Development, ADPE, Fuel); Facilities/Infrastructure –

Non Lab Specific (Msn Org civ pay and non-OGC operations costs of FOG, Divisions, Branches,

etc.); A&AS – Non R&DML Program; Base Operating Support (BOS) – Rome and Maui; Msn

Org Directed Projects (CC/Director, Chief Scientist, etc.); Other Msn Org Civ Pay (Msn Org civ

pay with no direct link to a specific function (i.e. Leadership, Div Chiefs, Branch Chiefs, etc.));

Special Civ Pay (Civ pay for classified reimbursable positions); Civ Pay (Execution year only

program used by FM). These programs are included within EP2 and are used to supply appropriate

budget detail to support annual POM submissions and data-calls.

9. Managing R&D Programs. The R&D PM is responsible for managing R&D Programs from

inception through closure which includes the creation and maintenance of the program baseline

and any additional data required by the Msn Org, Directorate, the TAA or other organizational

processes or procedures.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 13

10. Management of the R&DML. Individual endeavors, projects, sub-efforts or elements,

funded with Budget Authority-3 Advanced Technology Development (6.3 for DAF) or expending

outside (non-AFRL core) funding that meet the criteria for R&D-1 or 2 programs shall be

identified as separate programs and will be tracked and managed as such.

10.1. AFRL/EN will review and update the R&D program type alignment annually in

consultation with the SEPM Group. As part of this process, Msn Orgs and Directorates may

recommend programs to be designated as R&D-1 based on various factors that may include

total program cost, external visibility, cross-Msn Org involvement or other factors

necessitating AFRL/CC oversight. Once established, AFRL/EN and AFRL/XPO will review

the R&DML through AFRL’s Group/Board/Council governance process whose members

include representatives of all HQ Functionals and Msn Orgs. Once approved by the Council,

the R&DML will be maintained by the Msn Orgs and Directorates in the STiTCH suite of

applications.

10.1.1. Changes to the program type, including additions or deletions of any R&D

programs, require a request be submitted through AFRL/EN, to

[email protected] and a response confirming the change must be received prior

to making those changes in the apps. These changes will be collected and presented for

informational purposes through the AFRL governance process on a periodic basis.

Program content will be controlled through the program baseline process.

11. R&D Program Baselines. R&D Program Baselines document the program’s technical

objectives, resource requirements, cost, schedule, and performance parameters that must be met in

order to accomplish the program’s goals. A baseline approved by the TAA is required for all R&D

programs in the execution phase. The initial baseline is approved prior to the program beginning

the execution phase. The initial baseline will normally be reviewed and approved as part of the

Initial PMR, which provides the authorization to begin execution of the allocated and authorized

funding. Additional information on baselines is available in Attachment 3.

11.1. R&D Program Baseline Content. The baseline shall be maintained, coordinated, and

approved either in the PM App, or if not included in the PM App, as a separate document made

available for review in conjunction with PMRs. Standard criteria for programmatic baselines

differ depending on program type. The minimum criteria by program type is detailed in Table

2 AFRL/EN maintains a program baseline template. Additional baseline criteria may be

required based on organization policy and Msn Orgs have discretion in development of specific

program baseline templates.

14 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

Table 2. Baseline Requirements by Program Type.

Baseline Requirements by Program Type

Section

Requirement

R&D-1

R&D-2

R&D-3

Program Scope

Program Overview

Desired Operational Capability

Program Objectives

Description of Products

Product Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)

and/or Technical Performance Measures

(TPMs) and/or Measures of Performance

(MOPs)

Technical Performance Breach Criteria

Program Schedule

Level I WBS and associated Schedule

Level II WBS and associated Schedule

Description of Major Program Milestones

Schedule Breach Criteria

Program Cost

Program Cost Estimate

Allocated Budget by WBS

Required Resources (Personnel and

Facilities)

Cost Breach Criteria

At least one product shall be identified.

MOPs/KPPs and/or TPMs for enduring efforts may be qualitative in nature but must provide a clear

description of the program end-state.

11.2. Re-baselining a Program. During program execution, events or circumstances may

arise causing a program to deviate from its approved baseline. Some of these events or

circumstances are minor and do not significantly affect a program’s technical objectives, cost,

schedule, risk or overall performance. Other events or circumstances can be significant and

require a modification to the approved baseline. This modification is called a program re-

baseline and is required when any of the program breach criteria as defined in the approved

baseline are exceeded.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 15

11.2.1. Circumstances for Re-baselining a Program. AFRL R&D Program Baselines

establish the re-baseline criteria as part of the approved baseline or use the default criteria.

If the baseline does not specify this criteria, then the following default criteria will apply:

any product delivery date changes by 6 months or more, 15% or greater cost change, any

change to a KPP, MOP or TPM. The following criteria will trigger a rebaseline.

11.2.1.1. As a result of a major program restructure that changes the program

parameters beyond the established breach criteria. Examples: externally directed

budget increase or budget reduction/rephrasing, changes in KPPs/TPMs/MOPs, etc.

11.2.1.2. As a result of a program deviation (breach), which is defined as a current

estimate for a KPP/TPM/MOP, a Schedule Milestone, or Cost Estimate that exceeds

the established breach criterial for the threshold values.

11.2.1.3. At the TAA’s discretion if a fact of life program change is so significant that

managing to the existing baseline is not practical.

11.2.1.4. If at least one of the re-baseline criterion is met.

11.2.2. The Re-baseline Process. If one or more re-baseline criteria are met, the R&D

PM shall notify the TAA and those who coordinated on the previously approved baseline

that a PMR must be conducted to review the circumstances and the course of action needed

as well as determining if a program re-baseline is required. This notification and

scheduling action for this PMR must be done within 30 days of the discovery of the breach

with the goal of conducting the PMR as soon as possible.

11.2.2.1. During the PMR, the R&D PM shall identify the circumstances that resulted

in meeting one or more re-baseline criteria, provide recommendations for addressing

issues with the program, and recommend the changes that will be required to the

baseline as a result of those circumstances.

11.2.2.2. The TAA will decide on the appropriate course of action for the program.

Possible COAs include, but are not limited to, temporarily stopping execution of the

program or cancelling the program. The PMR must document the course of action

selected.

12. Program Management Reviews (PMRs). In order to ensure program objectives and

technical measures remain current and achievable within defined cost and schedule parameters, all

programs are required to be reviewed annually by the program’s TAA.

12.1. PMR Content. The required content for R&D-1 PMRs is contained in the template

maintained by AFRL/EN. This template establishes minimum mandatory PMR content and

provides additional content that may be included by the R&D PM as appropriate to address

specific PMR requirements. The PM app incorporates best available PMR guidance and full

use of the app constitutes compliance with this instruction.

12.1.1. PMR content for R&D-2 and R&D-3 programs is subject to the TAA’s discretion,

however, minimum acceptable content must include:

12.1.1.1. A review of the program’s technical objectives and program deliverables

including any technical products, major program milestones, activities requiring

airworthiness certification and other details as determined significant by the delegated

TAA.

16 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

12.1.1.2. An assessment of the R&D PM’s program cost and schedule to ensure

adequacy of resources to achieve the program’s objectives.

12.1.1.3. A review of the program’s financial execution history to ensure expedient

execution of appropriated resources.

12.1.1.4. An assessment of the program’s technical progression toward the program

objectives to include consideration of technical performance measures, achievement of

significant milestones and other factors as appropriate.

12.1.1.5. An evaluation of the program’s risk management process as appropriate.

12.2. Types of PMRs. There are four different types of PMRs associated with R&D programs

– Initial, Periodic, Re-baseline, and Close-out – each of which is described below. R&D-1 and

R&D-2 Programs must complete the initial, periodic, and close-out PMRs. Re-baseline PMRs

shall be conducted as necessary. For R&D-3 programs, each responsible organization may

define the process, although the review should include all minimum PMR criteria referenced

in this instruction.

12.2.1. Initial PMR. An initial PMR is conducted after the detailed planning is complete

and a baseline is drafted. The desired outcome of the initial PMR is to review and approve

the program planning and the baseline. Baseline requirements are defined in Table 2

Approval of the initial PMR and allocation for execution of appropriated funding signifies

the end of the Pre-Execution phase and the start of the Execution phase and is the formal

authority to proceed with program execution including obligation of funds, awarding of

contracts, agreements, and other such activities.

12.2.2. Periodic PMR. The purpose of the periodic PMR is to review the R&D Program

against the Program Baseline. These are conducted after the initial PMR and are required

at least annually for all R&D Programs. The desired outcome is a decision on continuing

the program as planned, to continue the program with a modified plan and baseline, or to

cancel the program.

12.2.3. Re-baseline PMR. The re-baseline PMR is conducted to review the

circumstances leading up to, and the COAs proposed to recover from, a program baseline

breach. The desired outcome of this PMR is to make decisions on the future of the

program. If a decision is made to continue the program with a revised baseline, then a

review of the new baseline content for purposes of approval (similar to an initial PMR) is

required. The content for this type of PMR should be tailored to the individual

circumstances for each occurrence but must, at a minimum, address the breach(es) which

triggered the re-baseline activity.

12.2.4. Close-Out PMR. A close-out PMR for all programs must be conducted to review

the final state of the program. As appropriate, the program’s Key Stakeholders should be

included in the final PMR to ensure the elements of any established Memorandums of

Understanding (MOUs) or Memorandums of Agreement (MOAs) have been addressed,

technology transition procedures are being addressed, and lessons learned have been

captured. The desired outcome is for the TAA to make a final determination to proceed

with close-out activities for the program.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 17

13. Technology Transition Strategy and the Technology Transition Plan (TTP). All R&D-1

and R&D-2 Programs are required to have a documented transition strategy to define a plan for

the deliverable(s). This may be documented in various ways, including formal TTPs,

MOUs/MOAs, Expectation Management Agreements, or other documentation between AFRL and

the receiving organization. This guidance does not direct a specific format, document or structure

for the transition plan and mission organizations have discretion on the how program transition

planning is conducted and documented. R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs are required to have

transition customers identified and a draft transition strategy document prior to entering the

execution phase.

13.1. Transition Strategy Content. Unless governed by other authority requiring a formal

TTP, the transition strategy must contain, at a minimum, the following information:

13.1.1. Description of deliverables to include appropriate technical parameters, KPPs

and/or TPMs and or MOPs

13.1.2. Transition customer(s).

13.1.3. Schedule

13.1.4. Cost estimate of funding needed for transition activities

13.1.5. Acquisition strategy (for transition activities)

13.1.6. Additional information as needed, to include a description of a digital data

package, airworthiness exhibits, or anything the customer may need/request to support

future activities

13.1.7. Signature page including R&D PM, TAA and appropriate transition partners

14. Data Management Plans (DMPs). DMPs are required for all WUs per DoDI 3200.12, DoD

Scientific and Technical Information Program (STIP), Incorporating Change 3, Effective 17

December 2018. To ensure consistency with this Instruction, all programs must have a DMP that

summarizes the data management approach for the program and any associated WUs. Program-

level DMPs must include anticipated data products produced during program execution and shall

describe the program’s approach for transmission, storage, management and disposal of these data.

Because many aspects of DMPs may be common to programs within a technical area, Msn

Orgs/Directorates are encouraged to establish a standard DMP framework that may be tailored by

identification of program-specific data products and/or differences in the program and/or WU’s

data management approach. DMPs should be attached as a document to the PM app and entered

into the WU/Grants app. If not attached in the Apps, they must be available for review during the

annual PMRs. Msn Orgs/Directorates have broad latitude in implementation of these plans.

14.1. Each DMP must contain the following elements:

14.1.1. The types of data, software, and other materials to be produced.

14.1.2. How the data will be acquired.

14.1.3. Time and location of data acquisition, if scientifically pertinent.

14.1.4. How the data will be processed.

14.1.5. The file formats and the naming conventions that will be used.

18 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

14.1.6. A description of the quality assurance and quality control measures during

collection, analysis, and processing.

14.1.7. A description of dataset origin when existing data resources are used.

14.1.8. A description of the standards to be used for data and metadata format and content.

14.1.9. Appropriate timeframe for preservation.

14.1.10. The plan may consider the balance between the relative value of data preservation

and other factors such as the associated cost and administrative burden. The plan will

provide a justification for such decisions.

14.1.11. A statement that the data cannot be made available to the public when there are

national security or controlled unclassified information concerns (e.g., “This data cannot

be cleared for public release in accordance with the requirements in DoD Directive

5230.09.”)

15. System Engineering Process. Each Msn Org/Directorate must document their tailored

application of the SE process in a Msn Org specific Operating Instruction (OI) or supplement to

this instruction. Each Msn Org or Directorate Director is granted authority to waive this

requirement for any Budget Authority (BA)-1 Basic Research (6.1 for Air Force) and any Small

Business Innovation Research (SBIR)/Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs

performed in the Msn Org/Directorate.

15.1. AFRL SEPM Group. The AFRL SEPM Group is the AFRL corporate body

responsible for improving and strengthening the culture, discipline, and consistency of

applying SE processes in AFRL. The SEPM Group is chaired by the AFRL Director of

Engineering (DoE), and comprised of the Msn Org Chief Engineers and deputies including a

representative from AFOSR, others as designated by the chair and an appointed secretariat.

16. Training and Certification: Individuals assigned to an acquisition coded position as

designated in the manpower system of record shall meet the requirements for that position as

defined under The Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA) and the Back-to-

Basics (BtB) guidance and policies for DoD and DAF. In addition, all non-bargaining unit

personnel who manage an AFRL program or project, or who supervise someone who manages an

AFRL program or project, and other R&D workforce individuals that play a substantive role in the

acquisition of R&D technical products, are highly recommended to complete LAB-202, Science

and Technology Program Management Course, between 6 months and one year after the

assumption of these duties in order to “get up to speed” quicker. Note: Completion of LAB 202

is required for these individuals within three years. All other individuals assigned to AFRL are

also highly encouraged to take this course. If individuals assigned to AFRL have previous program

management training and/or experience to satisfy the intent of this course, a waiver to this

requirement can be requested through AFRL/EN.

17. Financial Management. Managing financial execution of R&D programs or projects is a

critical part of the R&D PM’s job. The DoD financial rules and regulations are complex and R&D

PMs must work closely with appropriate AFRL finance team members to assure the fiduciary

requirements can be planned and executed successfully.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 19

17.1. Cost Estimates. R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs will generate cost estimates in

accordance with methodology and documentation guidance from General Accounting Office

(GAO) Cost Estimating Guide, AFI 65-502, Inflation, and the AFRL Financial Management

Cost Estimating Standard Operating Procedure (FZC01) AFRL Cost Estimating Process

Guide. R&D-3 programs will generate cost/program estimates based upon Msn Org FM

recommendation. At a minimum, R&D-3 programs must have a PM generated program

estimate. All PM generated estimates should be coordinated with the organization FM

personnel.

17.1.1. Estimates are required for the Program Baseline and annually to support the PMR.

An annual cost estimate, or update to an existing estimate, is used to inform the planning

and budgeting process and will be compared to the Baseline Cost Estimate to assess the

cost health of the program. Note that the foundation of a sound and credible cost estimate

is a well-defined program. An annual estimate that exceeds the cost threshold as defined

in the program baseline is a baseline breach. All estimates for R&D-1 and R&D-2 programs

will be submitted to AFRL/FZC annually to update the S&T cost library and improve cost

estimating capabilities.

17.2. Coordination. Estimates for R&D-1 programs will be conducted in conjunction with

FZC. For R&D-2 programs, estimates are the responsibility of the lead Msn Org. with roles

coordinated between AFRL/FZC and the AFRL Financial Management Organizational Senior

Functional (AFRL FM OSF). For R&D-2 and R&D-3 program estimates, assistance from

AFRL/FZC is encouraged but will be dependent upon other activities, priorities, and

agreements with AFRL FM OSFs.

17.3. Waivers. The waiver process is maintained by AFRL/FZC. Cost estimate waivers shall

follow the guidance in the Cost Estimating SOP (FZC01) and require AFRL/FZC approval.

17.4. Earned Value Management (EVM). EVM is a key integrating process in the

management and oversight of programs. While implementation of formal EVM is not required

for S&T funded programs, it should be considered for all contract efforts exceeding $20M,

based on a risk assessment and discussion of the value EVM may bring to the technical effort.

If formal EVM is not used, other means for evaluating and tracking contract progress and the

Estimate at Completion (EAC) should be considered in consultation with the financial and

contracts team members. It should be noted that a tailored version of the Integrated Program

Management Data and Analysis Report Data Item Description (DiD) can and should be used

to collect cost and/or schedule data regardless of whether formal EVM is used.

17.4.1. EVM Requirements. Where formal EVM is used, the R&D PM ensures that:

17.4.1.1. The solicitation and contract contains the appropriate Contract Data

Requirements List (CDRL) items.

17.4.1.2. EVM analysis is required as part of the Periodic PMRs for R&D-1 and R&D-

2 programs.

20 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

17.5. Cost Reporting. Standardized data collection procedures and formats are essential for

credible cost estimates for current and future programs. R&D PMs shall incorporate Cost and

Software Data Reporting (CSDR) on all R&D-1 and 2 programs regardless of contract type

valued at more than $20M and on high-risk or high-technical-interest contracts valued at over

$10M. The R&D PM will work with AFRL/FZC or the lead AFRL FM OSF to determine the

appropriate CSDR requirements.

17.6. Financial Management Reviews. Monthly Financial Management Reviews between

the R&D PM and AFRL/FZA or FM staff within the Msn Org are required for R&D-1 and

R&D-2 programs. These reviews will include cost health metrics, EVM analysis when

required, EAC analysis and current year execution analysis. The template is maintained by

AFRL/FZA and the FM Staff within the lead Msn Org.

18. Ending Programs. An AFRL Program or R&D Program can come to a conclusion for two

reasons, completion or cancellation. Completion is successfully meeting the program’s objectives

by the prescribed end date. Cancellation is the inability to achieve the program’s objectives due

to significant issues with cost, schedule, and/or performance, or as the result of a re-baseline PMR

decision to terminate the program, or the need to terminate a program due to funding shortfalls or

the lack of customer support for the technologies being developed.

18.1. Closure Requirements. Several steps are required to be taken to bring a program to

conclusion. These include the following:

18.1.1. Closure Decision. Approval of the final PMR is the formal authority to end the

execution phase and initiate and complete closeout activities.

18.1.2. Work Units. If a contract was an element of the program, the R&D PM and Work

Unit Manager will work through the Contracting Office to verify that all contractual

commitments have been met, all contract deliverables have been received and accepted,

and records were prepared for retirement. The R&D PM will support the Work Unit

Manager and Contracting Officer during close-out of the contract in accordance with

appropriate procedures.

18.1.3. Property Management. The R&D PM will ensure that any equipment or material

and technical data received or produced as a result of the program is properly inventoried,

stored, or disposed of, and the results captured in the Accountable Property System of

Records, as appropriate (reference Air Force Instruction 23-119, Exchange, Sale, or

Temporary Custody of Non-excess Personal Property, most current version available).

HEATHER L. PRINGLE,

Major General, USAF

Commander

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 21

Attachment 1

GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES, FORMS, AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION

References

DODI 5000.02T, Operation of Defense Acquisition System, Incorporating Change 10, December

31, 2020.

DoDI 3200.12, DoD Scientific and Technical Information Program (STIP), Incorporating

Change 3, Effective 17 December 2018.

AFI 61-101, Management of Science and Technology, 13 March 2013.

AFI 23-119, Exchange, Sale, or Temporary Custody of Non-excess Personal Property, 5 June

2001.

AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program, 28 July 2021

AFMCI 62-202, Criteria for Critical Engineering Positions, 27Ootober 2016

AFMCI 63-1201, Implementing Operational Safety Suitability and Effectiveness (OSS&E) and

Live Cycle System Engineering (LCSE), 12 September 2018, with Guidance Memorandum, 21

July 2021.

AFRLI 23-141, AFRL Equipment and Other Laboratory Asset Management, dated 02 September

2021.

Department of Defense Risk, Issue and Opportunity Guide for Defense Acquisition Programs,

January 2017.

MIL-STD-881E, Work Breakdown Structures for Defense Material Items, 6 Oct 2020.

Prescribed Forms

None

Adopted Forms

AF Form 847 Recommendation for Change of Publication

Abbreviations and Acronyms

A&AS—Advisory and Assistance Services

AFI—Air Force Instruction

AFMCI—Air Force Material Command Instruction

AFOSR—Air Force Office of Scientific Research

AFRL—Air Force Research Laboratory

AFRIMS—Air Force Records Information Management System

App—Application

ASP—Acquisition Strategy Panel

22 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

BA—Budget Authority

BtB—Back to Basics

BPAC—Budget Program Activity Code

CAP—Contractor Acquired Property

CCaRS—Comprehensive Cost and Requirement System

CDRL—Contract Data Requirements List

CSFR—Contract Funds Status Report

COA—Course of Action

CSF—Center Senior Functional

CRADA—Cooperative Research and Development Agreement

CSDR—Cost and Software Data Reporting

CTC—Core Technical Competency

DEMS—Digital Enterprise R&D Management Suite

DiD—Data Item Description

DMP—Data Management Plan

DoD—Department of Defense

DoE—Director of Engineering

DTIC—Defense Technical Information Center

EAC—Estimate at Completion

EP2—Enterprise Planning and Programming

ETM—Engineering and Technical Management

EVM—Earned Value Management

FY—Fiscal Year

FYDP—Future Years Defense Program

GAO—General Accounting Office

GFP—Government Furnished Property

GFE—Government Furnished Equipment

JEON—Joint Emergent Operational Need

JUON—Joint Urgent Operational Need

KPP—Key Performance Parameter

MOA—Memorandum of Agreement

MOU—Memorandum of Understanding

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 23

Msn Org—Mission Organization

OI—Operating Instruction

OPR—Office of Primary Responsibility

OSF—Organization Senior Functional

OSS&E—Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness

MOP—Measure of Performance

MPES—Manpower Programming and Execution System

MS&A—Modeling, Simulation and Analysis

PBES—Program and Budget Enterprise System

PE—Program Element

POM—Program Objective Memorandum

PB—President’s Budget

PM—Program Management

PMR—Program Management Review

PMRT—Program Management Resource Tools

PPBE—Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution

R&D—Research and Development

R&DML—Research and Development Master List

R&D PM—Research and Development Program Manager

RDS—Records Disposition System

SBIR—Small Business Innovative Research

SE—Systems Engineering

SEPM—Systems Engineering and Program Management

S&T—Science and Technology

S&TPL—Science and Technology Protection Lead

STITCH—S&T Information Technology Collaboration Hub

STTR—Small Business Technology Transfer

T&E—Test and Evaluation

TAA—Technical Approval Authority

TEA—Technical Engineering Authority

TEO—Technology Executive Officer

TPM—Technical Performance Measure

24 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

TTP—Technology Transition Plan

UON—Urgent Operational Need

URED—Unified Research & Engineering Database

USSF—United States Space Force

WBS—Work Breakdown Structure

WU—Work Unit

Terms

Attribute—A tag (structured data element) applied to a WBS Element for characterizing the

relationship of the element to an analytical portfolio or construct.

Core Technical Competency (CTC)—CTCs represent the technical foundation that is difficult

to duplicate and allows AFRL to provide unique technical leadership. They span basic research,

applied research, and advanced technology development encompassing the people, information,

facilities, equipment, and programs allowing AFRL to solve critical AF and national security

problems.

Deliverable—Hardware, software, or data that is produced by a WBS Element and made available

to the Government. Deliverables include all items, including products and those items that may

not have a residual value except for historical and/or archival purposes. For example a deliverable

that is not a product may include a Cost Funds Status Report (CSFR).

Flex—4 - Funding Laboratory Enhancements Across 4 Categories - A Congressionally directed

program to fund AFRL for the four categories of innovative R&D, rapid transition of technologies,

workforce development, and laboratory revitalizations/recapitalization in support of AFRL

missions. FLEX-4 is budgeted in the POM as an Organizational Support: DAF Assessment

Program for each S&T Program Element. In execution, depending on the specific effort, the

funding is allocated to R&D Programs, R&D Support Programs or Organizational Support

Programs.

Grant—A legal instrument which, consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6304, is used to enter into a

relationship:

(a) -—Of which the principal purpose is to transfer a thing of value to the recipient to carry

out a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by a law of the United States, rather

than to acquire property or services for the Department of Defense’s direct benefit or use.

(b) -—In which substantial involvement is not expected between the Department of Defense

and the recipient when carrying out the activity contemplated by the grant.

Key Performance Parameters (KPPs)—A critical subset of performance parameters

representing those technical capabilities and characteristics so significant that failure to meet the

defined minimum value of performance (the threshold) can be cause for the program or project to

be reassessed or terminated. KPPS are expressed with tolerances, with thresholds and objectives.

They represent the critical performance requirements or objectives and collectively characterize

overall performance in summary form.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 25

Measures of Performance (MOPs)—The measures that characterize physical or functional

attributes relating to the system or product operation, measured, modeled or estimated by specific

testing or simulated conditions. MOPs measure attributes considered important to assess whether

the system or product meets defined requirements or objectives.

Mission Organization—Those organizations in AFRL that are executing the scientific and

medical mission of AFRL. These include AFOSR, AFRL/RD, RI, RQ, RV, RG, RS, RW, RX,

RY, STO and the 711 HPW, and any new organization established to execute scientific and

medical technology missions.

Portfolios—AFRL defines portfolios as collections of programs, projects, or other efforts grouped

together by a common theme such as by Msn Org for management and control or by a common

technology for purposes of achieving strategic objectives. Portfolios are not directly used as a

planning or programming construct within the STiTCH applications suite. However, portfolios

are recognized as an important tool for the categorization and organization of R&D activities

within the AFRL enterprise. As such, the STiTCH applications allow Msn Orgs to organize

Programs internal to the Msn Orgs and across the Enterprise in order to effectively plan and

execute resources to meet AFRL priorities. There are two types of portfolios in AFRL:

Managed Portfolio—One or more programs that are grouped together for management of

resources. These are usually aligned by Msn Org based on the org’s strategic direction and are

used for planning and allocating budget and manpower to the various programs and projects for

which they are responsible. In managed portfolios, all programs and projects belong to a single

portfolio and a single portfolio manager is responsible for the content of the portfolio.

Portfolio management—Is fundamentally different from program and project management.

Program and project management are about planning, execution and delivery, about managing

programs effectively. In contrast, portfolio management focuses on the selection of the right

programs at the right time by selecting and managing programs and projects as a portfolio of

investments.

Championed Portfolio—A collection of programs, projects and/or work elements that are

grouped together for purposes of organization or analysis. These are usually grouped to focus on

cross-cutting strategic technologies, such as autonomy. The programs, projects and work elements

can come from multiple Managed Portfolios. In an analysis portfolio, the portfolio manager is

more of a monitor. These managers do not have direct control over the allocation of resources,

but normally act to advise and advocate for changes within the managed portfolios.

Product—A deliverable that has been identified as a primary outcome from the program. A

product may be hardware, software or knowledge (report, data, etc.) that is likely to have value to

a successor activity or end-user and is intended to be transferred to a recipient for application or

use. A product will generally have program-defined metrics or criteria which may be used to

monitor success.

Projects—Projects are finite endeavors undertaken and managed to create products, services, or

results within a program. Projects are lower level WBS elements and must be subordinate to a

program at Level-I. Projects create specifically defined deliverables and may be used for purposes

of allocating organizational or management roles and responsibilities within a program. Within

the AFRL’s taxonomy for planning and programming, projects will only exist at level-II of the

WBS.

26 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

Resources—People, funding, products, equipment and facilities

Core Resource—Funding appropriated by Congress for an AFRL managed and executed Program

Element (PE) or Budget Program Activity Code (BPAC), AFRL Personnel, AFRL-owned

facilities and equipment.

External Resource—Funding received by AFRL that is not appropriated by Congress for an

AFRL managed PE and/or BPAC for execution on an AFRL program, Non-AFRL personnel,

products, facilities and equipment.

Research and Development Program Manager (R&D PM)—The individual names as the

single individual, regardless of job series (civilian) or Air Force Specialty Code (military)

empowered to make the decisions necessary to meet the cost, schedule, and performance objectives

of the program while balancing programmatic and technical risks.

Technical Performance Measures (TPMs)—TPMs measure attributes of a system or elements

or a system to determine how well it is satisfying, or expected to satisfy, a technical requirement

or objective. TPMs are typically developed directly from MOPs to characterize physical or

functional attributes relating to evaluation of the technical requirements or objectives. These

measures are used to assess interim technical progress, compliance to requirements or objectives

or technical risks.

Technology Transition—The process of inserting critical technology into military systems, or

advancing the realm of the possible, to provide effective weapons and support systems needed by

the warfighter to carry out their assigned missions. In the context of AFRL products, the term

refers to the formal transfer of technology solutions or demonstration of new militarily relevant

capabilities to an end-user, their supporting life-cycle management organization, and/or industrial

partners for use in a fielded systems. Details of a technology transition are typically documented

in a Technology Transition Agreement or Technology Transition Plan.

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)—The WBS is a hierarchical breakdown of the work to be

done in a program. The WBS is used both to organize the planning and programming portfolios

across the AFRL Enterprise and within programs as a deliverable-oriented hierarchical

decomposition of the work to be executed by the team to accomplish the program’s objectives and

create the identified deliverables. The WBS defines the building blocks of the program’s structure

by breaking the programs into smaller, more manageable work elements. Additional information

and guidance on WBS is available in Attachment 4.

WBS Elements—The WBS elements are entries that can be made at any level below level-I of

the WBS. These elements are subordinate to either a program, project or other WBS elements.

They are created to define hierarchical levels and to organize and manage distinct work efforts and

deliverables. Additional information on WBS is included in Attachment 4.

Work Units (WUs)—WUs are separate, single performer-level tasks or awards (Contracts, grants,

task orders, in-house efforts) associated with one or more WBS element(s). They have finite

duration, are reviewed, and are managed by cost, schedule, performance, and risk. WUs satisfy

the ASD(R&E) URED requirements and the research results reporting requirement to DTIC. WUs

are not part of the hierarchical structure of a program. A Program WBS element can be associated

with a single WU while a WU can be associated with multiple Programs and/or Projects/WBS

elements.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 27

Attachment 2

THE AFRL PROGRAM LIFE CYCLE

Figure A2.1. The AFRL Program Life Cycle.

This attachment is intended to describe, and to provide guidance on the effective use of,

AFRL’s life cycle approach for planning, programming and execution of R&D programs. The

purpose of this construct is to provide AFRL’s R&D management workforce a consistent

structure to guide conceptualization, organization, programming and execution of R&D

programs. R&D requirements may come from a variety of sources and are often varied in

developmental timelines. As such, this acquisition construct is intended to serve as general

guidance and one or more of these phases may be skipped as necessary to deliver timely R&D

solutions. While these phases are generally sequential, there is a degree of parallelism that

normally occurs. This may occur, for example when long-lead activities such as acquisition

planning occur in concert with budgeting and planning processes. And while these phases are

defined at the program level, it should be noted that this approach may be helpful during a

significant program rebaseline, especially in cases where the scope is being expanded to add

new products and/or results.

A2.1. Ideation Phase. The Ideation Phase is the initial stage in the R&D acquisition lifecycle

wherein conceptual R&D solutions are identified, matured and preliminarily refined based on

limited or best-available information. The primary objective of this phase is to establish the

customer need, technical feasibility and acquisition readiness of the concept to determine if an

R&D program is appropriate and reasonable. During Ideation, alternative solutions and

acquisition strategies should be assessed and documented. Whenever practical, a defined,

quantitative process employing Modeling, Simulation & Analysis (MS&A) should be utilized

to establish the concept’s technical approach, feasibility, risk, and military utility. At this

phase, the program’s transition strategy should be considered. For R&D efforts, transitions

may be internal to AFRL, through a 3

-party or to an acquisition office.

Recommended outcomes from Ideation include:

a. A basic description of the program to include:

i. Program goal and technical objectives

ii. A statement of customer need

iii. Identification of delivered technical product(s)

iv. Preliminary cost estimate and program period of performance

v. Any constraints, assumptions and scope limitations (e.g. what won’t be accomplished)

28 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

b. Documentation of an analysis of alternatives to include alternative technical solutions

and/or approaches to meet best-available user need

c. Initial MS&A documenting a determination of technical feasibility; acceptable

development or acquisition risk; military utility or other assessments as appropriate

The use of a plan to document these outcomes is highly recommended. The plan will serve as

a constant guide throughout the program to help maintain focus on the primary program intent

and objectives.

A2.2. Pre-Planning Phase. The primary objective of this phase is to develop the basic

program plan and acquisition structure necessary to obtain budgeting approval for the effort.

During this phase, the program solution is refined consistent with available detail and the steps

necessary to meet the objective are planned. It is imperative to identify and include the

appropriate parties early in the process, including representation from the financial,

contracting, and logistics communities, along with the technical experts and others as needed.

Development of all program factors including a program-level the WBS, level III program

schedule, preliminary risk assessment (reference DoD Risk, Issue and Opportunity Guide) and

cost-estimate will likely occur. During this phase, the program’s transition strategy should be

primarily defined. AFRL programs can vary broadly in approach, objective, and complexity..

As such, AFRL Msn Org program development, prioritization, and approval processes may

vary based on organizational needs.

Recommended outcomes from the Pre-planning Phase include:

a. Initial program plan to include:

i. Products with corresponding Technical Performance Measures

ii. Detailed WBS and associated cost estimate

iii. Draft exit criteria

iv. Preliminary risk management plan including identification and quantification of major

program risks and initial risk mitigation strategy

v. Preliminary transition strategy. Create/Update the Program Plan. Obtain and

document program plan approvals by the program’s TAA and program manager. This

should serve as the decision authority to proceed with further planning efforts to mature

the program with the anticipation that budget will be approved. Specific details

identifying each program’s TAA and their respective role in process approval is

described in subsequent sections of this instruction.

A2.3. Budgeting Phase: During this program phase, program budget recommendations are

prepared based on Msn Org priorities. Msn Org recommendations are consolidated and

prioritized by AFRL/XP consistent with AFRL/CC’s guidance. These consolidated

recommendations serve as the basis for AFRL’s POM and establish initial program budget

estimates. Budget estimates are provided to Msn Org program managers and senior planners

to support refinement of selected programs. While this phase is primarily focused on program

buy-plan and POM development and refinement, for the next Fiscal Year (FY) and the Future

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 29

Years Defense Program (FYDP) POM years, early or long-lead acquisition planning may be

appropriate. Establishing or modifying contracts or other acquisition instruments can be

among the longest-lead considerations. During this phase, R&D PMs may mature the

acquisition strategy that will serve to identify any program contractual requirements. Program

security factors may also be considered as part of this phase. R&D PMs are encouraged to

consult their Science and Technology Protection Leads (S&TPLs) to assess applicability of

any classification guides or S&T protection plans as part of this process and should take

appropriate measures to ensure adequate protections.

Recommended outcomes from this phase include:

a. POM program recommendations

b. Approved program budget documentation

A2.4. Pre-Execution Phase. During Pre-Execution, Msn Org Program Representatives

develop detailed program plans. Because aspects of the program acquisition process may

require significant preparation time, Pre-Execution may be initiated once Msn Org leadership

has identified the program as buy-plan or POM priority and may proceed in parallel with the

other Lifecycle Phases.

While program plans may vary based on numerous factors, R&D PM’s should perform a

comprehensive program planning process to consider potential contractual requirements, air

worthiness, test or facility certifications, the need for Government Furnished Property (GFP),

security constraints, RF Spectrum approvals or other factors that may hamper timely program

initiation or execution. This phase may conclude when the Program Manager has matured the

program plan such that the cost, schedule and performance baseline has been approved by the

program’s designated TAA and an initial PMR has been conducted. Any additional

documents needed for the program, such as System Engineering Plans, Test Plans, Execution

Plans, Spend Plans, Risk Management Plans, Cybersecutity, Configuration Plans etc. should

be prepared as necessary. If GFP is required during execution, the R&D PM must engage the

Logistics Support Analyst in the Directorate and ensure the GFP is properly managed and

tracked in accordance with AFRLI 23-141.

Recommended outcomes from this phase include:

a. Mature program plan which may include the following:

i. Program cost, schedule and performance baseline:

ii. Acquisition strategy documentation (ASP)

iii. MS&A, Test and Evaluation (T&E) and/or facility requirements.

iv. Exit criteria

v. Data Management Plan

vi. Program security and S&T Protection plans

vii. Additional documentation/plans as needed

30 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

A2.5. Execution Phase. Execution begins after the Program’s cost, schedule and performance

baseline has been approved by the designated TAA, upon successful completion of the initial

PMR and receipt of funding for execution. It is during this phase that technical products are

developed through in-house or extramural activities that are generally conducted by or

associated with contracts or other assistance instruments. As such, early planning, often in

prior life cycle phases, are crucial to ensure that contracts, MOAs, Cooperative Research and

Development Agreements (CRADAs), or other instruments are available for timely

acquisition.

During this phase, it is important to establish and maintain program configuration control and

communicate with program stakeholders as needed. Progress is continuously monitored and

appropriate adjustments are made and recorded as variances from the original plan. Primary

activities conducted in this phase include oversight and reporting of the work as defined by the

program baseline. Significant deviations from the cost or schedule baseline may necessitate a

rebaseline. Rebaseline criteria may vary between programs but general guidance is provided

in subsequent sections of this instruction.

R&D PMs are encouraged to monitor progress through regular technical exchanges, formal

Design Reviews, or through technical reports or data submittals.

A defined Risk Management process, wherein risks are identified, quantified and mitigated

through a systematic approach, is essential to successful program execution. Risk

Management is detailed extensively in the DoD Risk, Issue and Opportunity Guide and R&D

PMs are encouraged to consult these as appropriate. Risk Management should initiate during

Ideation then is matured and updated as the program progresses.

Successful management of the program’s financial progress is essential to ensure successful

execution. R&D PMs should regularly consult with appropriate financial and planning

functionals to ensure that (a) sufficient funds have been approved to meet the program’s

execution requirements; (b) that these funds have been expediently obligated onto available

contracts and (c) all R&D efforts are expending consistent with the approved program

baseline. R&D PMs should monitor their activities weekly to assess that approved funds are

obligated to meet the execution needs of the activity. Forward financing, defined as the

practice of obligating more funds than required to meet the execution requirements of the

activity, should be minimized to ensure resources are available to pursue new technical

requirements.

Recommended outcomes from this phase may include:

a. Technical reports, program review presentations, and/or other technical deliverables

b. Financial execution documents, reports and presentations

c. Completed documentation not completed at the end of the Pre-Execution Phase

d. Program deliverables, products, and results

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 31

A2.6. Retirement Phase. This phase is the shutdown of the program after the product has

been completed and delivered to its intended user/destination or when an effort is determined

as no longer viable from a research results perspective. During this phase the program

documentation will be finalized and completed and any residual hardware such as

GFP/Government Furnished Equipment (GFE)/Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) must be

dispositioned. R&D PMs are encouraged to coordinate with their work unit managers on

specific requirements and timelines for activity close-out.

A2.7. Program End Phase. This is the final administrative close-out of the program. All

reporting is completed, all tech data is stored/archived per the Data Management Plan and no

additional resources (direct or indirect) are expended against the effort. A program can end in

one of two possible states: Completed or Cancelled.

 Completed: The program came to a natural conclusion within the program’s current

baseline,

 Cancelled: The program is stopped prior to completion of the program’s baseline.

32 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

Attachment 3

BASELINES

A3.1. The program baseline serves as a fundamental agreement between the program’s TAA and

the R&D PM that documents, at a minimum, the program’s cost, schedule and performance or

scope. Approval of the program’s baseline by both parties assures the understanding and

interaction of cost, schedule, and performance or scope. The baseline also provides a clearly

defined reference point for measuring a program’s progress. By tracking, monitoring and

measuring the program’s performance against its baseline, the R&D PM, management and other

stakeholders will be alerted to potential problems, such as cost growth, schedule slip, or

performance shortfalls, permitting early and responsive decisions on the program’s future.

Specific details on the content of the cost, schedule and performance baseline sections are

described below.

A3.2. The cost is the estimated value required to complete the program within acceptable risk, as

defined by the other two parameters -- schedule and performance. Cost is not the same as budget.

The budget is the amount of money available to a program. However, cost is the amount of money

a program will need to achieve its desired objectives as determined by its identified schedule and

performance or scope. The cost is estimated using one or more cost estimating methodologies. If

the budget is less than the cost, this deficiency should either be tracked as a program risk or a

change in the program’s schedule and/or scope must be implemented. If the change to these factors

exceeds one or more of the established breach criteria, a program re-baseline may be required.

A3.3. The schedule must include the start date, end date, deliveries of all products and any major

interim milestones. The schedule should provide as much detail as necessary to convey how

major tasks align with established program objectives while still allowing for PM flexibility in

non-critical path tasks. This section of the program baseline should also include a list of major

milestones with expected completion date and a description of the milestone’s relation to the

program objective(s).

A3.4. The performance section should permit a complete understanding of the program’s scope

and a description of major deliverables. In this section, a clear end-state should be defined that

effectively answers the question of “how do you know when you are done?” Some description of

the technical performance should be included. KPPs can be used and/or possibly TPMs and/or

MOPs if KPPs are not feasible for the particular product. However, it is recognized that direct

measures may not be appropriate for certain fundamental research activities wherein technical

publications are the major output. In these cases, some means of quantifying the end-state of the

program should be included as part of scope definition.

A3.5. While a program baseline must contain the three minimum elements of cost, schedule and

performance supplemental detail pertinent to the planning and execution of the program may be

included based on organizational preference. When including time-sensitive elements such as

transition or risk management elements, regular review of the baseline is encouraged to ensure that

these data remain current.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 33

A3.6. The program’s products should be expressed as either threshold or objective values that

represent the acceptable limits for the performance parameters that must be achieved to meet

program goals. A threshold represents a minimum acceptable value. Failure to attain program

thresholds may degrade product performance, delay the program, or make the program too costly.

The failure to attain program thresholds; therefore, places the overall affordability of the program

and/or the product into question. The objective value is an increment above the threshold that

represents a desired goal associated with an attribute beyond which any gain in utility does not

warrant additional expenditure. An objective can be the same as the threshold when a measurable

increment above the threshold is not significant or useful.

A3.6.1. The area between the threshold and objective represents the R&D PM’s trade space,

where they have authority to trade cost, schedule and performance to complete the program.

If a program’s TPMs and/or KPPs and or MOPs cannot be met within this trade space, a

baseline breach has occurred. In this instance, the PM should consult the TAA to determine

whether the program is still viable. If yes, a re-baseline should be conducted.

34 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

Attachment 4

WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE (WBS)

A4.1. The goal of a WBS is to establish a hierarchical decomposition of the total scope of work

to be carried out in a program to accomplish the objectives and create the required products and

deliverables. The WBS is not a plan nor a schedule; however, the WBS provides a common

framework for the natural development of the overall planning and control of a program and is the

basis for dividing work into definable increments. The program WBS should be developed in draft

at the start of a program and be completed by the end of the Budgeting phase.

A4.2. As defined in this instruction, the level-I of the WBS is defined as the program. Level-II

may be either projects or elements. And, Level-III and lower are WBS elements. Each descending

level of the WBS represents an increasing detailed definition of the program work.

A4.3. A project (WBS Level-II) is financially aligned to a CCaRS record which documents the

approved funding allocated to the program for execution. R&D PMs must allocate budget at the

WBS Level-II or below to maintain consistency with this CCaRS data structure and to provide

appropriate fidelity on program funding requirements.

A4.4. WBS elements, represent lower levels of work effort within a program and are used to

further define, organize and allocate the program’s approach to achieving its objectives. For most

of the AFRL programs, a WBS to level-3 or level-4 should be sufficient for managing the program.

Contract-defined WBSs, if included in the program structure, may further expand on the WBS. In

certain cases, it may be expedient to manage project-level WBSs as separate activities. While this

is permitted by this instruction, a program-level WBS must be maintained for all PMRs and

Baseline approval processes. A notional WBS referencing portfolio, program, project and element

levels is presented as Figure A4.1.

AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022 35

Figure A4.1. WBS Example.

A4.4.1. The benefits of a good WBS includes the following:

A4.4.1.1. Clearly articulates the work required to fulfill the program’s approach to deliver

its technical products.

36 AFRLI61-108 11 JANUARY 2022

A4.4.2. Depicts the relationship of the elements to the overall program plan and to other

program planning elements.

A4.4.2.1. Provides the basis for cost and schedule estimating.

A4.4.2.2. Enables effective planning and assignment of management and reporting

responsibilities.

A4.4.2.3. Provides commonality for program cost, schedule, technical performance and

risk management and reporting.

A4.4.2.4. Provides a framework to assist technical management efforts, providing insight

into risks associated with system element.

A4.5. A WBS can be expressed to any level of detail. For effective management of complex

programs, it may require the WBS definition to go to lower levels. The depth of the WBS should

be balanced such that the level is sufficient to provide clear monitoring of work progress but does

not drive excessive documentation.

A4.5.1. When developing a program WBS the following guidelines should be used:

A4.5.1.1. The WBS should maintain a product focus.

A4.5.1.2. The WBS should encompass the entire scope of work and account for all

deliverables.

A4.5.1.3. Each project or element should represent the sum of all the work of its

subordinate elements.

A4.5.1.4. Each project or element should belong to only one element at the next higher

level.

A4.5.1.5. Each element represents a discrete work effort that can be specifically defined.

A4.5.1.6. Each project or element should have a unique identifier.

A4.5.1.7. The lowest level does not have to be the same for each branch.

A4.5.1.8. The lowest level should not be so detailed it creates an administrative burden to

manage.

A4.6. MIL-STD-881E or the latest version available provides a good reference on the WBS and

the use of WBS for DoD and is also widely used as a general reference in program/project

management outside of DOD. This reference includes illustrated representative examples of WBS

structures for common DoD systems. R&D PMs are encouraged to use this as a guide in the

development of WBSs for AFRL programs.