Ashworth & Associates Specific Team Past Performance

The Prime Contractor, Ashworth & Associates LLC, has no previous defense contracts, and, therefore, no DoD contracting past performance.  We have, however, put together a team of contractors who have a significant history of providing DoD and Seaport e customers with significant contract support services.  They are all registered in the SeaPort-e Contractor Information Registration (CIR) site as required in Section L, paragraph 2.7 of the RFP.  Please refer to each of our listed Team Members Seaport-e web portals for specific Team experience over the past 3 years.

As a new company, Ashworth’s past performance information is composed of the experience of its founders, listed below.

Mr Faison, founder of Ashworth and Associates LLC, graduated from NC State University and immediately went on active duty in the U.S. Navy.  He was commissioned as an Ensign after graduation from Officer Candidate School.  He served in five ships, as a Tartar missile officer, terrier Missile Officer, Weapons Officer, Operations Officer, and Executive Officer.  His weapons experience includes MK 74 TARTAR missile fire control system and the TARTAR and STANDARD (MR) missiles; MK 76 TERRIER missile fire control system, and the TERRIER and STANDARD (ER) missiles; MK 116 Underwater Battery Fire Control system with MK 45 torpedo and ASROC missile, including all variants; MK 68 gun fire control system plus the MK 42 mods 7, 8, and 9 5"54 gun mounts; NTDS; CLASSIC OUTBOARD II (prototype, employment only); and the MK11, MK13, and MK10 mods 5, 6, and 7 guided missile launching systems. Specific experience included responsibility for tactical employment, operation and maintenance of the systems mentioned above.  In 1971 and 1972 he was served in Fleet Command Advisory Unit, US Naval Forces, Viet Nam, where he was a senior advisor to Vietnamese commanding officer of four Republic of Viet Nam Navy ships and boats.

In 1978, Mr Faison was transferred to Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, where he was to receive an education in the responsibilities of a weapons engineering subspecialist.  He graduated in 1980, with a MS in Electrical Engineering (digital signal processing option) with distinction, the Navy’s version of honors.  During his time at NPS, Monterey, he conceived of and researched the possibility of providing an automatic target recognition capability for surface-to-surface missiles, both Harpoon and the new Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missile (TASM).  The idea was attractive enough to Rear Admiral Walter Locke, Director of Joint Cruise Missile Program Office (JCMPO), that he funded material and travel costs associated with the effort.  The effort started with research into pattern classification theory and application to identification of non-cooperative targets.  The approach used was based on research work performed by government scientists and engineers form then Naval Weapons Center, China Lake, California. This research led to discovery that radar returns from targets include much more information than originally expected, and usually taught, at that time, in radar courses.  Digitization of the radar return revealed information based on the target silhouette, with its resolution based on distance between location of a target’s principal scatterers and the pulse width of the radar.  Non-Cooperative Target recognition (NCTR) was also determined to be a function of how well the target classifier was trained on individual target profiles and the target angle of the ship.  Mr. Faison used innovative pulse width processing to increase resolution of the return by additional signal processing and using obscure mathematical transforms.  Training data was collected using U.S. Navy ships of opportunity by collecting, digitizing, and storing returns from an actual Harpoon seeker tracking the ships – which required specially designed and built digital circuits.  The recorded digitized radar return pulses were then used by the computers at NWC, China Lake, to produce training information – calculated values of specific variables in the actual classifier software.  The results are still classified.  RADM Locke directed that an application for a patent be filed immediately in order to protect the Navy’s rights to the classifier.

While assigned as Department Head of the Cruise Weapons Department at the then Naval Surface Weapons Engineering Station, Port Hueneme, Mr. Faison was considered to be the Station’s Tomahawk and Harpoon Program Manager, although he was, at times, also a contributor to the engineering and technical functions of the program.  In this role he was responsible for in-service engineering and integrated logistics support of over 200 Harpoon capable ships in the active fleet. In addition to the engineering and technical support for deployed Harpoon Weapon Systems (HWSs), he was also responsible for providing system engineering support services to the Program Office in NAVSEA during the design, development and testing of a major upgrade to the HWS.  The HWS upgrade was designed, built and tested by a contractor, and the installation in a Navy test ship was supervised and assisted by Mr. Faison’s department engineers and technicians.  A modified OPEVAL was conducted and the upgrade delivered to the Fleet earlier than planned, with no major or minor discrepancies.  At that time Tomahawk was still pre-acquisition-milestone C and not expected to be deployed for some number of years.  As the JCMPO Acquisition Engineering Agent and designated In-Service Engineering Agent, Mr. Faison assisted the program office in land-based system testing to the Tomahawk Weapon Control System (TWCS) at the Pacific Missile Range (PMR), Point Mugu, California, plus training for the designated test ships.  AT the time there were two variants of the weapon control system, armored-box launcher (ABL) version, the MK 37 TWS, and vertical-launched version using the Vertical Launching System (VLS), the MK 41 TWS launching three variants of missiles, conventional land attack (TLAM-C), nuclear capable land attack (TLAM-N), TASM.  Throughout this period Mr. Faison was required to attend many different meetings consisting of DOD representatives, flag officers, and senior executives from the five primary contractors, where he presented status, schedule and performance briefings.  He was responsible for the installation and check-out (INCO) for both ABL and VLS Tomahawk variants as well as Navy Development Test and Evaluation (DTE) in preparation for OPEVAL.  The Mk 37 TWS OPEVAL was described as having four major discrepancies and several minor discrepancies.  When the four major discrepancies were corrected, the MK 37 TWS was announced as achieving Initial Operational Capability (IOC).  The OPEVAL for the MK 41 TWS achieved IOC with no major discrepancies and less than five minor discrepancies.  When he retired from active Naval service, he was awarded a Meritorious Service Medal for his performance and contributions.

Upon his retirement he assumed the role of Aegis Program Manager at Integrated Systems Analysts (ISA).  As such he was a participant in, and responsible for the company’s Aegis contracts in NAVSEA and at NSWC White Oak and Dahlgren.  At NAVSEA he provided system engineering and program management in support of PMS 400B, the combat system development division, 400E, the financial services division, and 400F, the life-time support division.  In an early meeting he was asked to provide the 400B3 branch head with a briefing on how the program could improve its support for the combat system development community and, eventually, the fleet.  He proposed that, since there was already a Planning Yard for Aegis Ships, perhaps there should be a Planning-Yard equivalent for the combat system, whose function would be to ensure the combat system design, development, test, and support happens in accordance with the baseline upgrade program and meets the requirements for overhauls and installations of the baseline upgrades. Within a year, PMS 400B had adopted the idea and appointed NSWC DD to the role, although it was called something else.  Mr. Faison was promoted from Program Manager to Operations Center Manager.  When Mr. Faison left ISA, he performed as a weapons engineering consultant for CACI Systems at their NSWC

Dahlgren office, where he worked on applying Total Quality Management (TQM) to engineering processes in the Tomahawk Division.  Within four months he joined Southeastern Computer Consultants, Inc. (SCCI) as a principal engineer for their Tomahawk systems engineering contract.  In three months he was promoted to Program Manager of the contract, where he led the systems engineering effort and became responsible for managing all system and software engineering contracts assigned to SCCI's System Engineering Division. He was responsible for planning, including for all efforts in the Division, including manpower, resources, controls, and coordination efforts for all system and software engineering, logistic and training support tasking.  He executed management functions conforming to established Government processes and standards, and was responsible for all contract system engineering efforts, ensuring that customer-expected products were developed consistent with programmatic decisions and guidance provided by the Government.  He conducted program reviews with technical and management customers, prepared staffing plans, budget estimates, prepared schedules, and tracked actual expenditures for all tasks associated with the contract.  He also managed staffing adjustments on contracts to conform to budgets and tasking while preserving technical quality and performance of the work force.  He was responsible for performance of all SCCI employees in the Fredericksburg facility, and for all customer relations with Government contracts under the division as well as for procurement, maintenance, and leasing of all state-of-the-art hardware, software and peripheral components necessary for SCCI connectivity to customer LANs in support of customer tasking

As a member of a Tiger Team, he participated in the definition of responsibilities for Lead Laboratory for ATWCS and TWCS.  This definition effort significantly changed the method in which the Strike Systems Division conducted business. He performed strategic planning and engineering analyses for future software-intensive systems, and developed program schedules for major upgrades to existing software systems.  Mr. Faison guided assigned staff in defining program requirements to satisfy fleet needs and in translating those requirements into system concepts and plans.  He monitored staff engineers working in requirements analysis, functional analysis/allocation, and system level design synthesis, plus supported his customers in translating broad initial operational requirements into new concepts of operation.  He was responsible for generating operational descriptions, concepts of operations, operational sequences, and engineering descriptions of interfaces associated with each WCS capability, and, additionally, supervised development of functional and physical descriptions that allowed continual prototyping and development efforts consistent with programmatic decisions and guidance provided by the government.  He led the group that defined enhancements for improved weapon system performance, and accommodated system upgrades; reviewed and analyzed operational requirements documents to determine the impact upon surface weapon systems; and formed teams to conduct design studies defining technical approaches to satisfy the requirements.  He supported all software engineering activities associated with preliminary design, and was responsible for updating the associated engineering documents by using appropriate software engineering environment tools.   He supervised internal program reviews and analyses of software trouble reports and software change requests to identify and verify cause, value, and impact of prospective changes on the affected systems prior to deployment and also assisted staff engineers in the review and analysis of test plans, specifications and procedures for compliance with higher level requirements.  Using requirement traceability tools, he helped to assure proper flow of all requirements from system-level documentation through functional and operational testing and provided technical input to engineering staff members who participated as design presenters at SRRs, PDRs, CDRs & IPRs.


Mr. Faison was also responsible for the preparation and maintenance of engineering management plans (especially Computer Resources Life Cycle Management Plans) in support of the customer's software support activity (SSA) functions, plus he directed and participated in training necessary for gaining the required experience with system engineering tools used to perform software design, requirements traceability, document development, and documentation maintenance. 

As part of his responsibilities while working at the Terrorist Screening Center, Mr Faison provided detailed, specialized system engineering and technology infrastructure support in the areas of IS business requirements analysis and definition, system requirements analysis and functional decomposition, design synthesis, and operational support for complex electronic information collection, processing, dissemination, and control systems.  Provided detailed, in-depth testing of three special purpose information systems, used by the Terrorist Screening Center (TSC), an organization established as a multi-executive-branch department team, administered by the FBI.  ISs supported were the Terrorist Screening Data Base (TSDB); Secure Flight, a new Transportation Security Agency (TSA) IS; and a TSC single-purpose system called the Encounter Management Application (EMA).  Familiar with the Terrorist Watchlist Data Exchange Standard (TWPDES), an XML-based information exchange model.  Moved to a team of business analysts who designed and prepared system-level design documents for additional capabilities for TSDB and EMA.  For four additional years I was assigned software design responsibility for several specific new capabilities to be incorporated into TSDB and EMA.  Each of the new capabilities required preparation of a general, system level design document, and specific requirements necessary for developing the software.  I also assisted developers and testers in determining proper operation of the new capabilities as well as system-level performance of the new software versions.

As Program Manager and principal engineer for another employer’s Identity Protect (IDProtect) contract, as part of a system engineering team, Mr. Faison defined IDProTECT Master and Enrollment Station requirements.  In this capacity, he reviewed and provided comments on system engineering documents including the Functional Description Document (FDD), CM Plan, Master Test Plan, IDProTECT requirements, System Design Description, Operational Concept Document, Software Requirements Specification, ILS Plan, Risk Management Plan, WBS, IMS, IPS, and system training plans.  He prepared the contract team for and assisted in conducting technical reviews such as the System Functional Review (SFR) and the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) for the IDS AN/PYX-1 Identity Dominance System, and provided risk management program support. In a later effort, he was the company’s principal engineer for the joint version of the IDProtect program, called JPIv2 Program, under U.S. Army control and management.  In this part of the effort he was responsible for reviewing and revising early, pre-milestone B technical documentation, for the System Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) and for the System Safety Plan.