What is IPMDAR?

The IPMDAR is an innovative tool that fosters best-practice communication between government contractors and their DoD agency customers. Now a contractually mandated report, it delivers a comprehensive view of a project's performance across technical, schedule and cost dimensions.

Typically prepared monthly for direct procurement and contract projects exceeding $20 million, the IPMDAR offers government customers valuable insights into current project status and future projections. By analyzing its data, customers can quickly identify potential issues that may significantly—and negatively—impact aspects of the project. Think of IPMDAR as an early warning system, like a car’s check engine light, that enables course corrections when needed.

The IPMDAR consists of three key components:

1. Data extracted from the contractor's earned value management (EVM) system
2. Data extracted from the contractor’s scheduling systems
3. A Performance Narrative Report which provides essential context and textually illuminates these two data sets.

This holistic approach allows for more effective collaboration between contractors and their government partners. By combining hard data with narrative explanations, the IPMDAR gives government customers a nuanced understanding of project performance. IPMDAR streamlines the contract execution process, leading to faster and more accurate results and significantly improves contract execution outcomes.

Submitting an IPMDAR to an agency involves specific content and formatting requirements that are crucial for ensuring consistency and clarity in reporting across various defense projects. Two key components make up these requirements: File Format Specifications (FFS) and Data Exchange Instructions (DEI).

File Format Specifications (FFS)

FFS is the blueprint for structuring data within an IPMDAR submission, ensuring all submitted data adheres to a standard. Without FFS, the DoD couldn’t efficiently process and analyze data. For instance, the FFS might dictate that cost data be presented in a specific order, clearly delineating different cost categories. It could also specify how schedule information should be formatted, perhaps requiring particular date formats or the inclusion of specific milestone identifiers.

Data Exchange Instructions (DEI)

Complementing the FFS, the DEI guides you—in detail—through populating the data fields within the IPMDAR submission. The instructions take you beyond mere formatting to explain what information should be included in each report section. Data should be both comprehensive and relevant to the DoD’s needs.

For example, the DEI might outline how to report earned value metrics and specify the calculation methods for cost and schedule variances. It could also include guidance on documenting risk assessments or explaining project scope changes.

JavaScript Object Notation

Both the FFS and DEI are designed to work with JSON (JavaScript Object Notation) encoded files. JSON is a lightweight data interchange format that's easy for humans to read and write while being simple for machines to parse and generate. The DoD's commitment to using modern, efficient technologies in its project management processes reflects this choice.

Use of JSON encoding allows for a more flexible and extensible data structure compared to traditional formats like CSV or XML. Flexibility is particularly beneficial when dealing with complex project data that may not fit neatly into a rigid tabular format.

DoD EVM Central Repository

Once prepared according to the FFS and DEI guidelines, JSON-encoded files are ready for submission. A contractor’s program manager enters them into the DoD EVM Central Repository (CR), a centralized hub for all IPMDAR submissions. The CR is designed to grant easier access and analysis of project data across the DoD.

As the defense industry evolves, IPMDAR requirements may periodically update to reflect new best practices or technological advancements. For contractors, staying informed means staying compliant.

Three key components work together to form a comprehensive view of contract performance:

Contract Performance Dataset

The Contract Performance Dataset (CPD) forms the foundation and is comprised of a complete cost data set. This set includes budgeted and actual costs to date, as well as estimates to complete, typically broken down by control account. Some contracts may require even more granular work package-level detail. By providing this raw cost data, contractors enable government analysts to conduct their own in-depth assessments.

Schedule Performance Dataset

Complementing the CPD is the Schedule Performance Dataset (SPD). It contains the integrated master schedule data, usually accompanied by the contractor's native schedule file. Ideally, schedule activities align with the cost data, offering traceability between the two datasets. The end goal is a more robust schedule analysis by government teams.

Performance Narrative Report

Rounding out the IPMDAR is the Performance Narrative Report, which adds context to the raw data, creating more precise insights. The report includes both a high-level executive summary and a detailed analysis of cost and schedule information. Specific content requirements are outlined in the Data Item Description but generally focus on explaining variances, trends and risks at the control account level—the lowest level of the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) where technical, schedule and cost responsibility exists.

By combining these three components, the IPMDAR aims to foster improved transparency between contractors and government program offices. Proactive program management is the end state.

When it comes to IPMDAR configuration, contractors have several acceptable formats from which to choose. All formats are structured to present crucial project information, ensuring clarity and consistency across different aspects of program management.

The IPMDAR framework encompasses seven distinct formats, each serving a specific purpose in communicating project data:

Format #1 - Work Breakdown Structure

Format 1 focuses on cost and schedule performance, organizing this information according to the product-oriented WBS. A WBS approach allows stakeholders to easily track progress and expenses related to specific deliverables.

Format #2 - Organizational Structure

This format takes an organizational perspective, presenting cost and schedule data based on the contractor's internal structure. Here, the data could be arranged by functional departments or Integrated Product Teams (IPTs), offering insights into how different parts of the organization contribute to project outcomes.

Format #3 - Performance Measurement

Format 3 documents changes to the Performance Measurement Baseline (PMB), a time-phased plan measuring the progress of authorized work. It's a fundamental part of Earned Value Management (EVM).

The PMB is key for project managers to define project parameters, such as scope, schedule and cost. It's created during the project planning phase and then used as a reference point to compare actual performance to the plan during execution.

Format #4 - Staffing Forecasts

Know how many people you’ll need for any given task. Human resource projections can help project managers anticipate resource needs and potential bottlenecks that may arise from inadequate future staffing plans.

Format #5 - Narrative Analysis

For a more comprehensive view, Format 5 offers a narrative analysis of the data presented in other formats. This narrative context helps project teams understand the numbers and the story behind the data.

Format #6 - Master Scheduling

The Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) finds its home in Format 6, laying out the project timeline and key milestones. Tools like Deltek Acumen Fuse can help teams visualize and optimize schedules for better project outcomes.

Format #7 - Time-Phased View

Lastly, Format 7 presents a time-phased view of historical and forecasted costs, giving stakeholders a clear picture of past expenditures and future financial projections. Financial planning throughout the project lifecycle depends mainly on this view.

By leveraging these diverse IPMDAR formats, teams gain a nuanced view of any program's status.

Several Deltek clients have successfully implemented IPMDAR reporting, significantly enhancing their contract management flows:

GE Aerospace

Aerospace giant GE Aerospace leveraged Deltek Open Plan to streamline its earned value programs, using sub-projects and building them into an IPMDAR master schedule. From engineering design milestones all the way to putting an engine in an actual test cell, OpenPlan optimizes data analysis and scheduling. “We do it based on our WBS,” explains Brittany Elwonger, schedule and risk leader for the PMO. “Then we use all the inner project links and look at them from a master level.” It’s a single source of truth for not only project organization but also compliance.

Cybersecurity Contractor

In the IT sector, a cybersecurity firm can use Deltek Acumen to generate comprehensive IPMDAR reports for a sensitive cybersecurity initiative with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The granular cost and schedule data provided through IPMDAR enables the company to demonstrate the impact of supply chain disruptions on project timelines. As a result, they may successfully negotiate a contract modification to account for these unforeseen challenges.

Construction Firm

A construction enterprise can implement IPMDAR reporting using Deltek Costpoint on a large-scale infrastructure project for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Detailed performance data allows contractors to identify inefficiencies in their subcontractor management processes. By addressing these issues early, they can improve project efficiency and maintain their reputation for on-time, on-budget delivery.

Introduced in March 2020, the IPMDAR supersedes the previous Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) requirements, ushering in a new era of data-driven program management. While both the IPMDAR and IPMR serve similar purposes—opening a lens on contract cost and schedule performance—they differ in their approach to data submission and analysis.

The IPMDAR shifts away from the familiar paper-based formats of the IPMR, instead requiring contractors to submit raw performance data in a standardized JSON format, as mentioned. This change enables more sophisticated analysis and automated compliance checks by government stakeholders.

For example, under the IPMDAR, contractors no longer submit pre-formatted reports like the IPMR's Format 1 (WBS) or Format 2 (OBS). Instead, they provide a comprehensive dataset that allows government analysts to generate these views as needed. This flexibility supports more customized performance assessments.

Some government agencies continue to use the IPMR on contracts, preferring its familiar report outputs. But, the trend is moving towards the data-centric IPMDAR approach. Contractors using modern EVM systems, such as Deltek Cobra, can quickly adapt to either method.

Webinar: Demystifying the IPMDAR

Now that the IPMR has graduated to the IPMDAR, does it mean more work for contractors? Or does it actually simplify the reporting process? Join us as we explore how to generate and validate the IPMDAR—and how Deltek’s PPM solutions can help.

Watch the Webinar