Statement of Work for Automated PickPOCIT System Project Prepare a high level Statement of Work which defines the work and deliverables for the attached pr

Statement of Work for Automated PickPOCIT System Project Prepare a high level Statement of Work which defines the work and deliverables for the attached project.Suggested template is attached.Statement of Work The Automated Picker Package On-line Customer Inventory Transit Project
(aka PickPOCIT – pronounced “Pick Pocket”)
CONTRACT ANNOUNCEMENT
Inventory Specialists Inc. (ISI) has recently been awarded a $9M contract by OK.COM to design,
produce, and demonstrate a prototype automated inventory picker and mailer for their company.
OK.COM is attempting to rival Amazon in its ability to quickly get orders in the hands of their
customers as quickly as possible.
The system architecture is based on inventory management hardware and software (IMS) developed
by ISI and must take inputs from the Automated Order Taking (AOT) software developed for OK.COM
by SAP Software and Solutions. AOT can take orders from both customers on-line as well as from
company customer service personnel. If the merchandise is in stock, AOT then generates an order
output that the PickPOCIT system must be able to process. PickPOCIT will then automatically locate
the product in the warehouse; select the product off the warehouse shelve; box it if necessary, and,
depending on the customer selected shipping method (2-day or standard delivery), generate and paste
a UPS or USPS mailing label on the box before delivering it to the shipping department. If the shipment
is less than 5 lbs., and it is being delivered to an address within 15 miles of the shipping facility, the
package will be prepared for delivery to the customer using a drone that ISI will purchase from Drone
Delivery Systems, Inc. If the package is to be delivered by the drone, it must be delivered within 30
minutes of the customer’s order. OK.COM will provide the AOT software as “customer furnished
equipment (CFE) at no cost to ISI.
ISI proposed the PickPOCIT System concept based on the adaptation of its well-proven and low cost
IMS hardware and software, and a well-planned OK.COM system integration and performance
demonstration program. Previous versions of IMS have been able to:
•
•
•
Take in and process 200 orders a minute
Utilizing “First-In/First-Out” logic, process, locate, package, and prepare for Shipping an order
within three minutes
Mean Time Between Repairs – 2500 hours of continuous operation
These performance specifications are not to be compromised as a result of this application for the
PickPOCIT Project.
In short, ISI proposed a Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS), Best Commercial Practices, Event Driven
approach to the development, production, and demonstration of the prototype system. OK.COM
stipulated in their Request for Proposal (RFP) that industry specifications and standards be used and
that the prototype system must accept input from the AOT software provided as CFE from OK.COM.
ISI is formally certified ISO9000 compliant. ISI proposed a project of twelve (12) months duration
and was the lowest price bid. The contract is fixed price ($9M) with a potential additional award fee of
3%, split 60/40 on schedule and performance.
PickPOCIT Demo. Contract_V9_5-7-20
1
STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES
OK.COM seeks to acquire, install, and test an automated stock picker and mailer capability to get
orders to their customers via a drone, UPS, or USPS depending on the size of the package and/or the
delivery time the customer selects. The system must be installed, tested, and operational by next
summer in its Baltimore, Maryland warehouse in time for an operational test already coordinated and
scheduled for month 11 providing validation with schedule margin in advance of “Black Friday” 2020
holiday shopping rush. If this prototype capability works, OK.COM plans to purchase 50 PickPOCIT
systems, one for each warehouse, of which there are 50 warehouses around the United States and
Canada.
PROJECT PLAN SUMMARY
ISI will develop, install, train operators and administrators, and support the demonstration test of the
PickPOCIT system.
The PickPOCIT project will consist of:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Software refinement in order to implement the SAP AOT software.
PickPOCIT installation and test at the OK.COM warehouse in Baltimore, Maryland.
System Administrator Training.
Providing technical and training support during of an operational test during month 11.
Major Milestone Events for the PickPOCIT project are:
Event
Contract Award
Project Baseline
SEMP (System Engineering Master Plan)
TEMP (Test & Evaluation Master Plan)
PDR (Preliminary Design Review)
CDR (Critical Design Review)
System Integration Tests
Full System Demonstration Tests
System Installation
Operator and System Administrator Training
Support Operational Test
Contract Test Report and all Final Documentation
PickPOCIT Demo. Contract_V9_5-7-20
Date
August 31, 2019
1 month after award
2 months after award
3 months after award
4 months after award
6 months after award
7 months after award
8 months after award
9 months after award
10 months after award
11 months after award
12 months after award (August 31, 2020)
2
STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) Template – Guidelines
[TITLE]
1.0
Engagement Summary: This section should include:
• Date Requested
• Requested By
• Vendor
• Point of Contact for Vendor
2.0
Objective: This section is intended to give a brief overview of the specialty area and
should describe why the work is being pursued, and what you are trying to accomplish.
3.0
Scope: This section includes a statement of what the SOW covers. This should include
the technology area to be investigated, objectives/goals, and major milestones for the
effort.
4.0
Background: Identify appropriate documents that are applicable to the effort to be
performed. This section includes any information, explanations, or constraints that are
necessary in order to understand the requirements. It may include information about the
sponsor program or relationship to previous, current and future operations. It may also
include techniques previously tried and found ineffective.
5.0
Tasks / Technical Requirements:
5.1
This section contains the detailed description of tasks which represent the work
to be performed that are contractually binding. Thus, this portion of SOW should
be developed in an orderly progression and presented in sufficient detail to
establish the feasibility of accomplishing the overall program/project goals.
All periods of performance should be aligned with the accomplishment of major
project tasks or milestones. The SOW should explicitly define the milestones
and deliverables associated with each task and period of performance.
Identify the major tasks in separately numbered sub-paragraphs. Each major
task should delineate, by subtask, the work to be performed by year and number
each task using the decimal system (e.g. 4.1, 4.1.1, 4.1.1.1, 4.2, etc.).
5.2
The tasks must be definite, realistic, and clearly stated. Use “the contractor
shall” whenever the work statement expresses a provision that is binding. Use
“should” or “may” whenever it is necessary to express a declaration of purpose.
Use active voice in describing work to be performed.
5.3
Do not use acronyms or abbreviations without spelling-out acronyms and
abbreviations at the first use; place the abbreviations in parenthesis immediately
following a spelled-out phrase.
5.4
If presentations/meetings are identified in the schedule, include the following
paragraph in the SOW: “Conduct presentations/meetings at times and places
specified in the contract schedule.” Or specify the appropriate schedule in terms
of months after award.
6.0
7.0
Deliverables/CDRLs:
6.1
The Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) serves as the contractual definition
of the data item deliverables the contractor is required to generate under a
contract. The CDRL spells out the information to be contained in the data and
the frequency of submission of the data. Data requirements are not necessarily
limited to technical information; they may be periodic reports such as monthly
progress reports or cost reports; project or test results reports; manuals;
briefings; etc.
6.2
Describe other deliverables, in addition to those listed below, to be provided
under a resultant contract such as hardware, software, etc.
6.2.1
Monthly/Quarterly Status or Cost Reports: Specify the frequency, in
terms of days/months after contract award.
6.2.2
Miscellaneous Data Submissions (Point Papers, Research,
Correspondence, Briefings & Related Documents): Submission
frequencies and dates will be dictated in the SOW.
6.2.3
Patents – Report of Subject Inventions (Interim Reports): Provide
report(s) every 12 months from the date of the contract as identified in the
DFARS 252.227-7039 (Patents – Reporting of Subject Inventions (using
DD Form 882)) and FAR 52.227-11/FAR 52.227-12 (Patent Rights –
Retention by the Contractor) (h) reporting on utilization of subject
inventions.
6.2.4
Final Report: Submission within 15 days of completion of period of
performance. Contract format acceptable.
Scheduling: This section will identify the schedule for the work to commence and
complete as well as state where the work will be performed.
Event
Date
8.0
Success Criteria: This section will state what constitutes successful completion of the
work covered in the SOW.
•
•
•
9.0
Xxx
Xxx
Xxx
Risks, Assumptions: this section will state key risks and assumptions.
•
•
•
Xxx
Xxx
Xxx
10. Approvals
Signature
Project Manager
Approval
Customer
Approval
Date
Inventory Specialists, Inc (ISI)
Introduction
Inventory Specialists, Inc (ISI) is a high-technology company, privately owned and operated for
profit. The company was founded about ten years ago by Sid Jones and a small group of
experienced software designers who left the Southern Software Co. to set up a small company to
produce leading edge inventory management software. The software produced by Jones and his
associates are at the high end in quality and advanced design, and have become well known for
being very stable, user friendly, and intuitive. The company’s highly responsive and effective
customer support has earned an increasing demand for its products.
The company gradually expanded to include hardware, and three years ago decided to change its
name to ISI and enter the inventory management market in areas where innovative engineering,
rapid response, and affordable products are required. This venture succeeded beyond Jones’
expectations, and at this juncture the company has a staff of 250 employees and has recently
acquired new quarters with space for further growth.
Operations
The company’s gross business is about $95 million per year, one-half of which is expended inhouse and the other half goes for subcontracted services. About 80% of the company’s work is
for commercial concerns, with the remaining 20% involving state and local government
contracts.
Commercial programs are generally acquired by competitive bidding in response to a published
Request for Proposal (RFP). The contracts ISI has won have been generally of the Fixed Price,
Cost Plus Fixed Fee, or Cost Plus Incentive Fee types, depending on the degree of risk involved.
ISI is a fully integrated operation including hardware/software development and test laboratories,
computing facilities, technical information services and administrative support.
Personnel
Sid Jones is President and Chief Executive Officer of ISI. His early associates, Rich Reynolds
and Gerald Garcia are Vice President for Engineering and Vice President for Business,
respectively. Three years ago, Victoria Valley joined the company as Vice President for
Programs after 15 years of program management and marketing experience with General
Software, Inc. Jean Stapleton, Director of Product Operations, is involved in most management
decisions because of her seniority and key function.
Of the company’s 250 employees some 200 are software and hardware developers and skilled
technicians. About 50% of the personnel are engaged in hardware and software development
engineering operations; 25% in product integration and test operations; 5% in technical program
management; 15% in administrative support and 5% in staff functions.
The company is a matrix organization. Program managers are primarily responsible for the
accomplishment of the technical work and delivery of the product within budget and schedule,
and for interfacing with the customer. Software Development and Product Operation managers
are responsible for the actual development and production of the product and for its technical
capability and integrity.
General Organization
The top-level organization of ISI, showing the principal staff and operating functions
that report to the Office of the President, is depicted in Figure 1. Because the company is
relatively small, the management and staff operations are correspondingly limited. Top
management consists of the President and three Vice Presidents, responsible for engineering,
business operations, and programs, respectively.
At the staff level, the Directors of Quality Control and Human Resources report directly to the
President. The Programs Office, managed by Jim Sams, houses the program managers for
current major tasks, and reports to the VP for Programs. The marketing function, which in larger
organizations is handled by a Director of Marketing and staff, is the responsibility of the VP for
Programs. There is no Chief Counsel at the staff level; legal advice is obtained when needed
from a consulting legal firm.
At the operating level, the VP for Software doubles as the Director of Software Development,
while the VP for Business serves as Director of Administrative Operations. These ‘duplicate
listings’ are indicated by an asterisk (*). The Director of Product Operations reports to the
President.
The majority of ISI stock is held by the officers of the company. The President, Vice
Presidents and the Director of Product Operations serve as the Management Committee, shown
in Figure 1a, which meets semi monthly to report on their respective operations and to advise on
program areas.
President and CEO
Sid Jones
Director, Human
Resourses
Director, Quality Control
Dana Deming
VP Software/Hardware
Development
Rich Reynolds *
Director,
Software/Hardware
Development
Rich Reynolds
Alli Apple
VP Business
VP Programs
Gerald Garcia *
Victoria Valley
Director, Product
Operations
Jean Stapleton
Director, Administrative
Ops
Manager, Programs
Office
Integration and Test
Group
Gerald Garcia
Jim Sams
PIT
Chief Architect
Financial Services Group
Installation Group
ECA
AFG
PFF
Architecture Group
Support Services Group
Customer Service
ECAG
ASG
(PCS)
Systems Test Group
Quality Control Group
ETG
ETQ
Software Development
Group
Product Improvement
Group
ETS
ETI
Hardware Group
ETH
Figure 1. Top-Level Organization of ISI
President and CEO
Sid Jones
Director, Product
Operations
Jean Stapleton
VP Programs
Victoria Valley
VP Engineering
VP Business
Rich Reynolds
Gerald Garcia
Figure 1a. ISI Management Committee
Administrative and Product Operations
The organization of the Administrative Operations Department, headed by Gerald Garcia, is
shown in Figure 2. It consists of two groups: Financial Services, managed by Ruth Simms and
Support Services, managed by Stephen Lota. The former is responsible for contracts and
purchasing, accounting, payroll and management information, while the latter handles shipping
and receiving, office services, plant services and computer support services. All operations are
integrated by extensive use of information networking, with a tradition of teamwork and service.
Director, Administrative Ops
Gerald Garcia
Financial Services Froup (AFG)
Support Services Group (ASG)
Contracts and Purchasing
Shipping and Receiving
Accounting
Office Services
Payroll
Plant Services
Management Information
Computer Services
Ruth Simms
Stephen Lota
Figure 2. ISI Administrative Operations
The Product Operations Department organization is illustrated in Figure 3. The Planning,
Scheduling and Documentation Staff plans and oversees the flow of work in the department. The
Integration and Test Group, managed by Priyanka Moorjani, is responsible for testing
components built in-house or contracted out, assembling them, conducting system tests and
performing the appropriate quality assurance functions.
Director, Product Ops
Jean Stapleton
Planning, Scheduling, and
Documentation Staff
Integration and Test Group (PIT)
Installation Group (PFF)
Integration
Product Installation
Customer Service
Quality Control
Product Training
(PCS)
Software/Hardware Test
Figure 3. ISI Product Operations
Hardware and Software Engineering Department
The Hardware and Software Engineering Department is the largest operating unit of the
company with a staff of 130. As seen in Figure 4, it is organized into six groups under the
leadership of the Software Development Director, Rich Reynolds.
Director
Software/Hardware
Development
Rich Reynolds
Chief Architect
(ECA)
Architecture Group
(ECAG)
Systems Test Group
Quality Control Group
(ETG)
(ETQ)
Software Development
Group
Product Improvement
Group
(ETS)
(ETI)
Figure 4. ISI Engineering Department
Hardware Group
(ETH)
The Architecture Group (ECAG) is comprised of 10 people and is led by Pete Handle. They are
responsible for choosing a standard way of pursuing application development and creating,
defining, or choosing an application framework for the applications. They are also responsible
for recognizing potential reuse in software and hardware applications by observing and
understanding the broader system environment; creating component designs; subdivide a
complex application, during the design phase, into smaller, more manageable pieces; grasp the
functions of each component within the application; understand the interactions and
dependencies among components; and communicate these concepts to developers. They also
lead the development of functional requirements, interface definitions, and preparation of
technical proposals.
The 20-member Systems Test Group (ETG), led by Estelle Aker, conducts testing on a complete,
integrated system to evaluate the system’s compliance with its specified requirements. ETG
testing takes, as its input, all of the “integrated” software and hardware components that have
successfully passed integration testing and also the software system itself integrated with any
applicable hardware system(s). The purpose of integration testing is to detect any inconsistencies
between the software units that are integrated together (called assemblages) or between any of
the assemblages and the hardware.
The eight four person Quality Control Group (ETQ), led by Hector Zapata, is responsible for
software and hardware quality control to check whether the project follows its standards
processes, and procedures, and that the project produces the desired internal and external
(deliverable) products.
The Software Development Group (ETS) is led by Robert Burns. This group of 60 people
develops the SUS software products which involves writing and mainlining source code and is
involved between the conception of the desired software through to the final manifestation of the
software.
The Product Improvement Group (ETI) is led by Susan Bettersome. This 19-person group is
involved in research, new development, prototyping, modification, reuse, re-engineering,
maintenance, and other activities that result in new software products.
The Hardware Group (ETH) is led by Dave Morrill. This 10-person group is involved in
research, new development, prototyping, modification, reuse, re-engineering, maintenance, and
other activities that result in new products that require hardware.
ISI Cost Structure
ISI uses 1880 hours for a staff year calculation of productive direct labor. The average loaded
staff year cost by labor category is shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Average Labor Cost by Category
Labor Category Average Cost
per Staff Year ($K)
Senior Manager
Manager
Senior Scientist
Scientist
Senior Engineer
Engineer
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment