Independent Program Oversight (IPO) FAQs

Balanced Program and Project Management Solutions

Independent Program Oversight (IPO) Frequently Asked Questions

What is Independent Program Oversight?
What are the key descriptors or attributes of an IPO?
What does the IPO do?
In practice, what does an IPO look like?
How is an IPO implemented?
What is an IPO not?
What are typical tasks of an IPO?
What is the investment cost of an IPO?
What are the Five Steps for Implementing an IPO?

What is Independent Program Oversight?
Independent Program Oversight (IPO) is a support function performed by highly experienced and skilled practitioners in program management who are independent of contractor biases and political influences. The IPO’s job is to proactively inform the government decision maker (i.e., the sponsoring executive and/or program manager) on (1) the true and real-time status of his or her program, (2) progress toward mission/business objectives and results, (3) technical feasibility, relevance, and performance, and (4) existing and new alternative strategies and approaches that enhance program progress and mitigate risk.

Simply speaking, an IPO is an independent office or function that provides oversight, insight, and foresight of program activities achieve performance accountability and program results.

What are the key descriptors or attributes of an IPO?

Independent
Free of conflicts-of-interest
Advisory
Trusted
Factually-aware
Accurately-informed
Focused on program objectives and results, and cost, schedule, and performance goals.

What does the IPO do?
It makes everyone – government and contractor alike – accountable. It consistently tells the true status of a program. It provides transparency to relevant facts (e.g., changing requirements, costs overruns, etc). It exposes detrimental influences impacting scope, time, and resources. It provides clarity of understanding to the decision maker. It allows the government program manager to exercise his or her inherently governmental responsibility to make informed decisions at the right times, keeping the program on track to achieve its mission/business objectives and results, and cost, schedule, and performance goals.

In practice, what does an IPO look like?
An IPO can be thought of in several ways: Philosophically, it is a concept that places value on the independence of program management in all forms and implementations. Practically, an IPO is an organization which, by design, is “fire-walled” from detrimental influences, is conflicts-of-interest free, and has access to information and data from all sources on the progress of a program or project. From a large initiative perspective, an IPO is an acquisition strategy that sets aside a portion of the total acquisition requirements as a separate competition for IPO services.

Back to Top

How is an IPO implemented?
An IPO could be established and add critical value at any level of the organization: the agency, acquisition executive, or individual program.

The IPO is chartered by and receives its authority from the sponsoring executive. It also receives authority via provisions in contracts and subcontracts that provide the IPO access to information and data critical to understanding the program’s status. Sources for this information are: the functional program offices, the prime contractor (i.e., systems integrator), any subcontractors, and the Program Management Office (PMO) if one exists outside of the IPO.

The IPO works very closely with the program manager; they share the s

ame program objectives and accountabilities. In essence, the IPO’s job is to make the program manager successful by delivering program results.

What is an IPO not?
An IPO is not an auditing, compliance, IV & V, or Inspector-General-type function that assesses or measures what was done or not done in the past.

An IPO is a real-time and interactive activity that focuses on the success criteria of a program or project, and impacts program activity as it evolves. An IPO typically involves reviews and assessments to determine program management capability, program/project effectiveness, and progress in order to impact current performance.

The IPO is not an additional Program Management Office (PMO) or Enterprise Program Management Office (EPMO). It is not a repetitive layer of program management or program oversight.

If a PMO exists, an IPO function might be incorporated to enhance program transparency and performance. If a PMO does not exist, an IPO might include PMO functionality because operational program management is essential for managing complex initiatives. In either case, the core IPO function must remain independent.

What are typical tasks of an IPO?

Conducts multidisciplinary reviews at designated decision milestones.
Validates the Independent Government Cost Estimate and cost analysis methodology.
Provides independent assessment of cost and schedule achievement, earned value reports, and methodologies.
Recommends approaches for programmatic and technical risk mitigation.
Assesses process maturity against accepted standards of performance.
Provides independent due diligence on critical risk aspects of a program.
From a position of independence, proactively advises the government decision maker.

What is the investment cost of an IPO? It depends on the size of the program and maturity of existing program management functions. A good estimate is 3-6 percent of the annual program cost. If the IPO organization includes PMO support, costs would be greater. Very significant savings can be realized in the form of cost avoidance – that is to say, the cost of program or project delays and failure could be huge.

What are the Five Steps for Implementing an IPO?

Contract – IPO services must be acquired via an appropriate contractual vehicle, possibly a full-and-open competition conducted with the prime contractor.
Charter/Structure – An internal agreement and structure must be established to provide authority and independence for the IPO.
Contract Modifications – Contracts must be written or modified to provide the IPO access to program information and data.
Assessment – An assessment of program management maturity, including the effectiveness of the PMO if one exists, must be conducted and deficiencies corrected.
Executive Commitment – The sponsoring executive and program manager must openly endorse the IPO and the expectations for team (PM, IPO, Contractor) success. A win/win/win culture for program success must be embraced by all.