Purpose: Mission Analysis (MA) is a continuous, iterative analysis of assigned mission
responsibilities to identify gaps in current and projected Coast Guard mission capabilities. The purpose of mission analysis is to assess the ability of the Coast Guard to successfully carry out specific missions in the future by analyzing current performance level in
contrast to mission goals. Where a gap in capability exists or is projected to exist, a mission analysis should identify additional functional capability or process changes necessary to fill the deficiency. Commandant (CG-DCO-81) is the process owner for conducting Mission Analyses.
Discussion: DHS and Coast Guard Strategic Goals and Coast Guard Missions are the
starting points that are used to establish the Coast Guard sphere of responsibility for which the Coast Guard conducts ongoing mission analyses. DHS annually issues its Integrated Planning Guidance (IPG) as part of the Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) process (See Chapter 6) to provide a focused statement of DHS priorities given the current and projected view of world and national state of affairs. Mission Analysis should also align with the DHS Strategic Plan and Quadrennial Homeland Security Review report.
*The Coast Guard has the following Non-Homeland Security and Homeland Security Missions:
Non-Homeland Security Missions – Search and Rescue; Marine Safety; Aids to Navigation; Ice Operations; Marine Environmental Protection; and Living Marine Resources.
Homeland Security Missions: Illegal Drug Interdiction; Undocumented Migrant Interdiction; Other Law Enforcement; Ports, Waterways, and Coastal Security; and Defense Readiness.
The sponsor organization should develop and track performance metrics for
legacy/existing systems through OAs to determine if the system (which includes the operators, the hardware/software, and the operational environment) is able to affordably conduct designated missions to the required levels of system performance. This
information will feed the ongoing mission analysis. Included in the Sponsor’s assessment will be decisions regarding retirement/disposal of a system or asset.
The Coast Guard uses the framework of its Missions and DHS guidance as the standard to which it measures and assesses its capabilities to meet its missions. Concepts and scenarios are applied to give context to missions/tasks. Shortcomings between current capability and desired outcomes are identified as capability gaps (implying that tasks or missions cannot be accomplished with existing resources). The shift to a capability- based requirement system is important to meet the needs of the DHS Acquisition Review Process (ARP) in identifying, assessing, and prioritizing CG/DHS capability needs. When capability gaps are identified, the mission manager conducts an analysis to determine if gaps can be closed without having to initiate a materiel solution. This non- materiel analysis is an internal review of the Coast Guard’s DOTMLPF+R/G/S. If changes can be made within the Coast Guard’s current infrastructure to resolve capability gaps, it is the preferred solution. A non-materiel solution is typically faster and less
expensive.
Changes related to DOTMLPF+R/G/S may not eliminate all gaps in capabilities. Remaining capability gaps should be prioritized and presented at a Coast Guard Project Identification Review (ADE-0) through the MAR as candidates to proceed to a Coast Guard major systems acquisition if the preliminary total life cycle cost estimate exceeds DHS thresholds for Level 1 and 2 major acquisitions. A technology assessment is to be accomplished concurrent with the MA. Promising technologies are to be identified that may support the materiel solutions of the MAR.
At ADE-0, the results of the mission analysis are to be presented (including the results of the DOTMLPF+R/G/S analysis and any ongoing Research and Development/Science and Technology initiatives). Recommended projects are identified and presented (with the capability gaps they will close) by the mission program manager; and an initial
affordability determination and technology assessment is presented. Upon successful completion of ADE-0, the ADA will authorize entry into the Need Phase and direct development of a MNS, initial Exhibit 300 and a CONOPS.
The Project Identification Phase is used by the mission manager to perform an ongoing mission analysis to identify shortcomings in Coast Guard capabilities as shown in Figure
15 Mission Analysis Process.
Roles and Responsibilities
Commandant (CG-5) and Sponsor Responsibilities
CG-5 is responsible for conducting the Mission Analysis with support from Sponsors, Technical Authorities, and Support Organizations
Brief VCG at Project Identification Review (ADE-0) Sponsor and Technical Authority Responsibilities Support CG-5 in conducting Mission Analyses
Provide early cost assessment on the proposed materiel solutions Commandant (CG-8) Responsibilities
Provide early affordability assessment on the proposed materiel solutions VCG Responsibilities
VCG authorizes entry into the Need Phase
VCG directs initiation of Resource Allocation Plan, Mission Need Statement, CONOPS, Capability Development Plan and Exhibit 300
3. MISSION ANALYSIS REPORT
Purpose: The Mission Analysis Report (MAR) documents the mission analysis results
and supports initial acquisition strategies.
Discussion: The MAR is a collection, cross-analysis, and documentation of numerous
feeder studies and analyses that look across a number of different mission areas. The MAR is not intended to be an asset oriented analysis.
Format: The MAR is divided into four sections. Section 1 provides a mission
description including a summary of the existing mission, a projection of the future mission and an analysis of mission performance (to include performance measures) and gaps. Section 2 encapsulates the deficiency in functional capability which will prevent the Coast Guard from adequately conducting mission(s) now or in the future. Section 3 provides a range of alternatives, while Section 4 provides justification and preliminary options for satisfying mission capability gaps. If necessary, the MAR should specifically document the need for a materiel solution. Specific guidance and a template for
development of the MAR are contained in Appendix A of this Manual.
Mission Analysis is the responsibility of the Operational Authority. The Mission Manager provides a brief to the Investment Board for initial concept approval and to identify resources (funding and personnel) needed for the analysis. MAR development may, depending on mission complexity, require detailed studies, analysis and extensive commitment of staff resources. The Office of Performance Management & Assessment (CG-DCO-81) will coordinate review and submission of the MAR for approval by DCO. The Vice Commandant will review the MAR as part of the Project Identification Review (ADE-0) and authorize entry into the Need Phase.