Major dod acquisition programs

GAO has found a correlation between implementation of certain practices and improved cost and schedule performance see table. Statute required DOD to establish guidance for rapid prototyping and rapid fielding pathways. These pathways are to provide a streamlined acquisition process for programs intended to field capabilities within 2 to 5 years.

DOD has taken steps to improve oversight of its costliest MTA programs, but challenges remain to tracking cost and schedule performance. The 13 programs GAO reviewed were expected to last about 4 years on average, although most planned follow-on efforts. DOD issued guidance in December that increased oversight for MTA programs, including requiring certain business case documentation to help assess whether programs are well-positioned to field capabilities within 5 years. These document requirements were consistent with a June GAO recommendation.

GAO found that while most MTA programs it reviewed were lacking some or all of these documents at program initiation, they had made significant progress in receiving approval of these documents by the time of this review see figure.

GAO observed inconsistent cost reporting and wide variation in schedule metrics across MTA programs, which pose oversight challenges for Office of the Secretary of Defense and military department leaders trying to assess performance of these programs. For more information, contact Shelby S. The BBPI definition applies to all life cycle costs and is about identifying ways to reduce program cost by looking at things such as challenging learning curves, dissecting overheads and indirect costs, and targeting cost reduction with profit incentive.

It assumes "business as usual" for the acquisition program and is used for budgeting purposes in the PPBE process. Any realized savings from should cost initiatives are available to the service to reinvest in the program or apply to other pressing needs.

Analysts need extensive information about an acquisition program in order to estimate its cost to the detail required by the various display formats identified in the life cycle cost model. The CARD completely describes the system whose costs are to be estimated; it should define the program in sufficient detail so that no confusion exists among the many parties who may be concerned with estimating the program's cost.

This document was rescinded by DODI The CARD should be considered a "living document," updated in preparation for all milestone and program reviews, if not annually. The updates reflect any changes that have occurred, or new data that have become available, since the previous milestone or program review. DoD Instruction A draft version of the CARD is required days prior to the milestone or decision review; the final version is required 45 days prior to the milestone or decision review.

Preparation of the CARD should be coordinated with other program documents so that all final program documents are consistent with one another. Legal and Regulatory Requirements. The CAPE has the following functions related to cost analysis: 1 Conduct independent cost estimates and cost analyses. Component Cost Analysis Agencies All DoD Components have established their own agencies to serve as their lead organization for cost analysis and cost estimating actions and to act as liaison between the component and the CAPE.

Program office personnel involved with conducting or reviewing POEs should be aware of their respective Component's agency and contact that organization as appropriate on cost related issues. The Cost Review Process. Figure 3. Figure 3 displays the cost review process for obtaining a Secretary of Defense program decision for a major weapon system. Each service prepares for the CAIG meeting differently. In each service, the program team prepares the POE with in-house or contractor personnel. However, non-government personnel are not allowed at the CAIG meeting.

The CCE, if required, is prepared by the component's cost analysis agency, if one exists, or by some other office independent of the acquisition and development chain of command.

The CAPE report takes into consideration all the factors and information shown in the bottom portion of Figure 3. There must be cost consistency among all documents. Life cycle cost estimates are essential sources of information for the materiel acquisition process. They provide the cost information to support the acquisition milestone decision process as well as the development of acquisition program budget requests.

Life cycle costs can be viewed from three different perspectives: funding appropriations, WBS and life cycle cost categories. The WBS breaks down costs into hardware-related categories and helps ensure that no costs are overlooked.

At each milestone beginning with program initiation, as many as three life cycle cost estimates the POE, the ICE and the CCE may be prepared to support the acquisition decision process for a new system. Except when specific estimates are required by law, the program's milestone decision authority decides which estimates will be prepared to support each milestone and decision review.

Please note that you should expect to receive a response from our team, regarding your inquiry, within 2 business days. You may be trying to access this site from a secured browser on the server. Please enable scripts and reload this page. Turn on more accessible mode. Turn off more accessible mode. Skip Ribbon Commands. An adjustment under this subsection shall be effective after the Secretary transmits a written notification of the adjustment to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.

You must be logged in to post a comment. Leave a Reply Cancel reply You must be logged in to post a comment.