Preliminary Project Execution Plan

1. Jim Yeck March 15, 2019 Preliminary Project Execution Plan

2. Plans for Finalizing pPEP Project Governance & Project Office pPEP Agency Scope & Responsibilities Institutional Roles Outline

3. Internal Review (external to DSR prep team) of the Draft Decadal Survey Report Closeout Report Science section tuning Further clarify expected agency and institutional roles Priority needs! Funding for R&D and Interim Project Office Detector fabrication plans Improved requirements flow down DSR Prep Team Response Detailed Recommendation Tracking Detectors and Readout Task Force Decadal Survey Report Internal Review –Yeck Summary

4. Past Priorities Establishing the collaboration and institutional support Coordinating efforts using contributed support Current Priorities Interim Project Organization supported by agencies prepares for CD-1/PDR Secure stakeholder support for the general management approach, i.e., IPSC, IPO, STLs Further develop desired institutional responsibilities Prepare preliminary baseline(s) and execution plan(s) Lead Institutions and the Management Team

5. Lead project institutions and project management team need to be defined well before CD-1 to ensure full ownership of the preliminary baseline and execution plans. Requirements for DOE Lead Lab Established commitment to CMB research Successful project experience Proposed role in delivering project scope (technical stake) Ability to hire key personnel Currently strong interest in this role (~5 options?) NSF MREFC - Similar to DOE Lead Lab requirements, critical role Lead Institutions and the Management Team

6. CMB-S4 requires the engagement and long term support of universities and the DOE HEP labs. Governance - Integrated Project Steering Committee DOE labs and NSF funding recipients, a model informed by experience (LCLS-II, Exascale, ATLAS, etc.) NSF/DOE lead institutions will eventually organize and chair Project Management Traditional project clear lines of accountability and control - PD, PM, Level 2 Managers, etc. Core project team responsible for overall integration and coordination, should include Senior Team Leaders at labs and universities delivering significant scope Project Governance and Management Approach

7. Scientific, Technical, and Project Leadership and Management Technical Collaboration (centered on the subsystem) Institutional Roles DOE labs NSF Private and International L2 Subsystem Delivery

8. Organization Chart for CD-1/PDR project development

9. Possible Agency Scope Splits (~$ for comparison) L3-Separated: L2-Separated:

10. Path to April 2021 (CD-1, 3a, PDR Readiness) • Review organized by Interim Project Office - October 2019 • Lead institutions for the NSF MREFC and DOE MIE will be identified roughly a year before CD-1 and PDR reviews • An “Integrated Project Office” will be established by the lead institutions and take over from the “Interim Project Office” • Integrated Project Office responsibilities include: • Prepare DOE CD-1 and the NSF PDR ... • Internal Readiness Review~ August 2020 • “Director’s Review” ~ October 2020 • CD1/3a, PDR Readiness Review ~ February 2021 • CD1/3a Approval, Ready for PDR ~ April 1 2021

11. Anticipated Role of U.S. Agencies in CMB-S4 NSF (AST, PHY, OPP) and DOE (HEP) Joint Coordination Group Pre-Project: NSF PDR Prep and DOE CD-1 Prep/R&D Support Ongoing Stage 3 Investments Construction: NSF MREFC and DOE HEP MIE Project Possibly 40:60/NSF:DOE Operations: NSF (AST PHY OPP) and DOE HEP Shared CMB-S4 deliverables & data releases Research: NSF and DOE support for key science/publications

12. Management Approach – Common Approach Open and Inclusive • Work directly with stakeholders • Internal reviews, including possibly a Project Advisory Panel, and project reviews incorporated in collaboration meetings Project Director/Project Manager, Integrated Project Office, Level 2 Management (Cost Account Managers) • Establish Baseline, Track Performance, and Manage Changes to the Baseline • Funding Agency Scope – fixed budget with contingency to address delivery risk • In-kind Deliverables – fixed scope, cost risk owned by deliverable owner PM, IPO, L2 Meetings (L2 / CCB) – Weekly • Integration and coordination • Performance and change management Technical Board, Chaired by Technical Coordinators – Weekly • Opportunity for all collaborators to engage, present, and critique • Prepares technical decisions for the L2 / CCB

13. Institutions appoint the STLs (~6-7) with PD concurrence. STL is point-of-contact for the institution’s scope of work. Role includes overall coordination and facilitation of their institution’s activities in support of the CMB S4 Project Responsible for managing all functions at the institution (e.g., technical, staffing, quality, safety, procurement) Primary point-of-contact for the other STLs on inter-institutional coordination issues STLs participate in the Integrated Project Office STLs at DOE labs will interface with the DOE site office and lab project oversight infrastructure Distributed Senior Team Leader (STL) Concept

14. Interim Project Office –Established Now, Funding Requested Institutional Roles in L2 Subsystems – Time to ramp up understanding Governance Model Maturing– Required for DSR Lead Institutional Roles (STLs) – TBD Integrated Project Office – Description needed now for DSR, established after lead institutions identified Summary – Project Organization