Skip to main content

Defense Acquisitions: Perspectives on Potential Changes to Department of Defense Acquisition Management Framework

GAO-09-295R Published: Feb 27, 2009. Publicly Released: Feb 27, 2009.
Jump To:
Skip to Highlights

Highlights

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2008 directed GAO to report on potential modifications of the organization and structure of the Department of Defense (DOD) for Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAP). In preparing the report, the review was required to include the feasibility and advisability of seven potential modifications of DOD's organization and structure for MDAPs. We were charged with reporting on the feasibility and advisability of (1) establishing a process in which the commanders of combatant commands (COCOM) assess and provide input on the capabilities needed to successfully accomplish their missions over a long-term planning horizon of 15 years or more; (2) establishing a materiel solutions process for addressing identified gaps in critical warfighting capabilities, under which the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD (AT&L)) circulates among the military departments and appropriate defense agencies requests for proposals for technologies and systems to address such gaps; (3) revising the acquisition process by establishing shorter, more frequent acquisition program milestones; (4) requiring the milestone decision authority (MDA) to specify at the time of milestone B approval the period of time that will be required to deliver an initial operational capability (IOC) to the commanders of the relevant COCOMs; (5) establishing a new office to provide independent cost and performance estimates; (6) requiring certifications of program status to the Defense Acquisition Executive (DAE) and Congress prior to milestone approval; and (7) modifying the role played by Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces in the requirements, resource allocation, and acquisition processes. In carrying out this review, as Congress directed, we obtained the views of current and prior senior DOD acquisition officials, currently serving senior military officers involved in setting requirements, and other experts including some who participated in previous reviews of DOD's organization and structure for carrying out the acquisition of major weapon systems.

Full Report

Office of Public Affairs

Topics

AccountabilityBudget functionsCost analysisDecision makingDefense capabilitiesDefense cost controlDefense economic analysisDefense procurementDevelopment systemsEvaluationFederal agency reorganizationGovernment owned equipmentMilitary materielMilitary procurementModificationsPerformance measuresProcurementProcurement planningProcurement practicesProduction systemsProgram managementRequirements definitionStrategic planningSystems designTestingWeapons systems