Personnel/Pay Modernization

Update Brief

Ann Stewart

Special Assistant to OPNAV N1B

For Pers/Pay Modernization September 2012

• 2009: DIMHRS Program cancelled “I would say that what we've gotten for a half billion dollars is an unpronounceable acronym [DIMHRS].”

- U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates

• 2010: UNDER SECNAV directs BPR and further requirements

determination for Navy IPPS-N “…FPPS is still at a pre-Milestone A level of effort, and that further development of the requirements is

necessary” - U.S. Undersecretary of the Navy Robert Work

• DEC 2010: VCNO designates OPNAV N1 as Navy’s end to end

business process owner for personnel and pay matters ”…you will ensure the most effective alignment and integration of requirements across the Navy, and/or

de-conflict divergent priorities as appropriate.”

• SEP 2011: IPPS-N CONOPS completed and approved

• MAR 2012: Capability Based Assessment Completed

• MAY 2012: UNDER SECNAV requests cancellation of FPPS and

leveraging its investment in NSIPS for personnel and pay improvement “…the Department of the Navy will rapidly deliver meaningful increments of personnel capability through

NSIPS modernization.” - U.S. Undersecretary of the Navy Robert Work

History

2

• Generate efficiencies throughout MPTE

• Increase accountability and audit readiness

• Provide improved service to Sailors

• Facilitate informed management decision making

• Improve fleet readiness

Desired Effects of IPPS-N

3

• Inefficient personnel and pay systems and processes

• Rigid and non-responsive personnel and pay systems

• Limited interoperability and information exchange across

Navy personnel and pay functions

• Inaccuracies across the personnel and pay functions

• Lack of information sufficiency to support personnel and pay

tasks

• Inadequate financial audit capability

• Lack of commander’s visibility on personnel within their area

of responsibility (AOR)

• Ineffective tracking of career transitions and Sailor status

(active component and reserve component) (AC and RC)

• Lack of an integrated and robust personnel service delivery

model

Capability Gaps Identified

4

Pers/Pay Maturity Model

Complexity and Cost

Reduction Stage

Service Level

Excellence

Strategic Business Enablement

and Enterprise Focus

Stage 1

Stage 2

Stage 3

US Navy

5

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2) Record of Emergency Data

3) Dependency Application

4) Enhanced Drill Scheduling

5) Consolidate field level PCS order writing capability

Stage 1: Reduce complexity to generate efficiencies

and increase audit readiness

B. Build the foundation for an authoritative data environment

C. Re-engineer personnel and pay business processes 1) Reduce end-to-end process cost

2) Improve audit capability

D. Improve training for problematic processes

1) Activity gains

A. Move labor intensive, high audit risk

functions into NSIPS environment

1) Navy Performance Appraisal

Reporting Solution

6

A. Implement re-designed personnel

processes for standardization,

efficiency, control, and audit

B. Allow self-service where appropriate

C. Leverage web technologies where

appropriate

Stage 2: Improve the quality of personnel and pay

services to Sailors and command leaders

D. Continue to improve data quality and access for

personnel asset visibility and tracking.

E. Increase training for military Pers/Pay workforce and

command leaders

7

A. Implement a single “My Navy”

portal to provide one stop shop for

Pers/Pay services

B. Leverage mobile technologies

where appropriate

C. Increase information quality and

timeliness for analysis and to

provide improved personnel asset

visibility for commanders

Stage 3: Enhance informed decision making to support

the Navy enterprise

8 8

Pers/Pay Modernization is bigger than the IPPS-N

Technical Solution (additional gaps identified in CBA)

• Organizational alignment of Personnel and Pay Enterprise

• Defining roles, access and controls for personnel and pay

functions – significant concern with protecting PII

• Training for all Pers/Pay “Actors” to prevent errors

• Financial, Pay and Audit Issues – DOD wide priority

• Assess the current military pers/pay workforce and

determine future needs

• Personnel service delivery

• Document retention issues

Pers/Pay Modernization

9

• PASS program transitioning to N1 NLT 1 OCT 2013

• Standardizing processes, growing and maturing the

capability of NPC Customer Service Center (PERS-1)

• Increasing training support – NSIPS job performance aids,

end-to-end process guides, Personnel Specialist Job Duty

Task Analysis (PS JDTA)

• Re-engineered Navy retirements process (collapses 9

separate retirement processes into 3 processes)

• Started re-engineering separations processes

• As-is business process mapping for pay and FM underway

• Data governance processes in place; initial technical

capability for an authoritative data environment in

development

Status

10

FY 13

Model FM/Pay As-Is processes

Separations, Accessions, Promotions, Assignments, Adverse Actions, Retention

Business Process Evaluation and Requirements

FM

/Pa

y

BP

E

Pe

rso

nn

el B

PIs

P

ers

on

nel

BP

E

FY 14

Navy Performance Appraisal Reporting System (80% reduction in paper forms, error rate reduction 25% to <3%, OMPF updates within

48 hours)

Record of Emergency Data/Dependency Application (Audit readiness for entitlements, sailor self-service, reduced manual effort)

Workflow, E-Forms, Digital Signature

Automated self-service capability

Enhanced Drill Management (Reduction of $600M RPN audit risk, reduced Navy Reserve labor, increased accuracy

of drill muster)

Auditable records for drill pay, automated self-service

Standardized, auditable order

writing

Model To-Be FM/Pay processes

Begin NSIPS Modernization Development: Retirements and Separations

Data

D

ev

11

Establish Authoritative Data Environment & Enterprise Service Bus

Implement

in NSIPS

Pers/Pay Modernization Timeline FY13 and FY 14

PCS Round-up (Reduction of ADA $200M MPN risk, increased audit readiness for all

PCS orders, reduction of manual order writing)

• Are we hitting the right targets?

• What other head-hurters are out there?

• Where do we need to focus our collective

resources to get the most significant

improvement?

• Your input is appreciated! Ann.stewart@navy.mil

Questions and Input

12