Risk Management for Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Flight Projects
Authors: Rose James R. 
Published: November 2021

RISK MANAGEMENT IN THE PROGRAM/PROJECT ENVIRONMENT:

The Risk Management process is assuming greater influence in the process of Project and Program Management. The requirements of NPG 7120.5A [NPG, 1998] have created inroads for the results of identifying risk to influence project decisions. Program needs and the interdependencies of risks among projects are receiving increasing attention on major JPL projects. Creating Risk Management plans and requiring risk reporting are beginning to make project personnel aware of the benefit of identifying and mitigating potential future adverse consequences and understanding the trade-offs involved in spending reserves for prevention as opposed to recovery from problems. Risk-based decision-making in the planning phase is allowing risks balancing to be considered, and hard decisions in the cost-capped environment require even reduction in expected mission return in order to provide adequate performance assurance.

RISK ASSESSMENT TOOLS USED IN DESIGN AND ASSURANCE:

The paper will describe the use of Risk-revealing checklists and compilations of engineering guidance principles as enabling tools for comprehensive risk identification. Also, effective risk assessment methods (such as Failure Modes Effects Analyses (FMEAs), and Probabilistic Risk Analyses (PRAs) will be discussed. Tracking tools appropriate to maintaining cognizance of risk will be covered.

INTEGRATING RISK AND MANAGING PROJECT RESOURCES:

JPL is in the process of identifying a standardized Risk Management methodology, which is based on the two pioneering methodologies developed on the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) and Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) projects. Criteria for assessing risk will be “normalized” with tailoring allowed. Database tools are available now to support this approach for flight projects. The Risk Management team at JPL has developed such a tool, which is in use on many of our projects. An advanced version of the JPL tool has been demonstrated which will provide options for quantitative analysis and resource management trade-offs. Implementation of risk tracking metrics in cost and schedule management systems, and design tools, will allow change to be quickly detected. Also, experience on the MGS project suggests that project management can make effective use of risk impact assessments based on cost, and can therefore gain insight into the effective use of project reserves. Utilizing common risk metrics between the risk management process and design metrics, Problem/ Failure Reports (PFRs), earned value reporting, and other management areas will provide more confidence in the impact of project decisions.

INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS AND THE SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT OFFICE (SMO):

The requirement to balance faithful service to the project customer while at the same time provide an objective assessment of the health of the project to the JPL administration and to the agency will be facilitated through the SMO function. Risk Assessments using criteria common to those that the project uses but identification and assessment by independent “eyes” will allow added possibility for early detection and correction of problems. This will enhance the Risk Management effectiveness on the project, and undoubtedly increase the likelihood of mission success.