Page images

Competitive Sourcing. We have completed competitions for 15% of our overall goal of 226,000 positions.

Electronic-Government (e-Goo). We are making progress on meeting the high standards set by the PMA for the submission of information technology business cases, project management, and security. We are actively involved in 18 of the 24 cross-cutting eGov initiatives and have committed $18.5 million this fiscal year to help accomplish these goals.

Budget and Performance Integration. While the Department has always used tools and techniques to assess the performance outcomes of its budget plans, we are now formally documenting these performance indicators, an important step toward realizing our longstanding commitment to producing performance-based budgets. These financial performance indicators are being used throughout the Department's Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process as tools to assess performance against expected outcomes.

Acquisition Excellence Goals

We no longer talk about "reforming" the defense acquisition process, but about ensuring "excellence" in how we do business.

We are working toward achieving three primary outcomes:

• Leveling the playing field for all contractors, giving DoD greateT exposure to new ideas.

• Invigorating the fiscal well being of the defense industry by rewarding good performance.

• Encouraging the strong competition vital to maintaining a healthy industrial base.

Our leading excellence goals are listed in the table below, along with a short description of past and planned accomplishments.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

Adopted a TuB program funding* policy,
which required all budgets to accurately
represent expected costs for the fife of
the program. Took decisive action to
address problems with programs dem-
onstrating poor cost and schedule per-
formance, restructuring some (e.g..
SBIRS-LOW) and canceling others, such
as the Navy Area Theater Ballistic Mis-
sile Defense Program.

Revised the complex and long-standing
DoDD 5000 1 (The Defense Acquisition
System) and DoDI 6000 2 (Operation of
the Defense Acc^asibon System). Both
were approved for immediate imple-
mentation on May 12,2003.

Tergal Performance

FY 2004

Continue to enforce lunding at CAIG estimates, rewarding good program parlonnance and holding manager accountable for poor results.




Improve the

Funded budgets to the estimates pro-
vided by the Department's Cost Analy-
sis Irnprovemenl Group (CAIG)

Continued the Congressioneiy mandated DoO Civilian Acr-uisrbon Workforce Personnel Demonstration
(ACoOeuo) Protect. AcoDEMO b designed to give employtes a flexible, responsive personnel system that
rewards conlributjons and provides line managers with greoter authority over personnel actions. Key features
of the demonstration project include streamline hmng. broad banding, a simplified ctaaaincation eystemjnd a
personnel system thai links ccmpensalion to employees' ccnlributions to the mission through amual perform-
ance appraisals, -p^ Department wi« be transiting from the ACC^
Denxinslration Project during FY 2004.

The history and status of AcoDEMO initiatives are available el,mi)/BCOdemo

Established a new policy for "price-based"
acautstlion". in which the government pays
a lair market price whenever possible to
encourage smaller companies to compete
for defense work.


the Weapon



With the



Initiate High-

Submitted a legislative proposal lo con-
duct another Base Realignment and Clo-
sure (BRAC) round lo rationalize our
infrastructure and eliminate excess capac-

Dunng FY 2003. wa win continue to increase competition, by
stressing that Ihe government no longer expects contractors lo
invest their own funds for defense research and envelopment lo
cover shortfalls in government lunding. This past practice hurt
the abUfty of defense contractors to make reasonable profils.
and discouraged smaller companies for bidding for defense

Accelerate the fielding of weapon systems
using an evolutionary acquisition devel-
opment process. Initiate 15 Advanced
Concept Technology r>monst-alion
(ACTO) projects, such as the GBU-11HB
Themvaberic weapon, and the Dragon Eye
chemical end biological detector.

Analyze excess capacity, to Include
the effect of actions that increase the
joint use of tadWee and consolidalion
of functions, such as the integration of
Navy and Marine Corps tactical air-
craft squadrons.

Irvtiete 14 ACTD projects, such as:
Joint Blue Force Situational Aware-
ness. Adaptive Joint C4ISR Mode,
High Altitude Airship. GRID LOCK.
Tactical Interterometric Synthetic Ap-
erture Radar (1FSAR) Mapping. Foli-
age Penetration-Synthetic Aperture
Radar (SAR). Deployable Cargo
Screening. Tunnel Target Defeat,
Urban Recon. MMraghl Stand. Theater
Support Vehicle. Night Vision Cave,
and Urban Assault and Overwatch.

Conduct detailed
analyses lo develop
the Department's
BRAC recommenda-

Issue final recommendations In May 2005

Inflate 11 ACTO projects.



Readiness and


Force Structure


Increase the Visibility of Trade Space

Section 113 of Title 10, U.S. Code, requires the Secretary of Defense to give military departments and defense agencies written policy guidance on how to prepare their programs and budgets. This guidance must "... list national security objectives and policies; the priorities of military missions; and the resource levels projected to be available for the period of time for which such recommendations and proposals are to be effective."

Too often in the past, the program priorities highlighted in the Secretary's guidance were unaffordable when taken together. Two years ago, Secretary Rumsfeld directed his senior aides to completely rethink how defense guidance was drafted. He asked them to use the

document to define "trade space" that would help him balance investment—and risk—across the entire defense program.

Last year's guidance dramatically improved the Secretary's ability to influence the investment choices made by the military departments and defense agencies by assigning specific program priorities that had to be achieved within fiscal constraints and identifying areas for divesture, as required to stay within those constraints. It also directed some 30 studies be undertaken over the next few months to gain insight into how programs must be structured to achieve synergy in joint operations. Specific, clear standards for future program performance can then be incorporated into the next update of the Secretary's guidance.

Improve the Transparency of Component Submissions

Accurate information is the keystone of good decisions. Accordingly, we are committed to making the program and budget documents prepared by the military services and defense agencies more "transparent" —that is, to clearly align manpower and dollar allocations to a specific set of related activities (called "programs"), so senior level decision makers can see how they directly support the defense strategy.

By converting to a completely paperless data collection process, we have cut the time lag between when services and agencies submit resource plans to our central clearinghouse and when it is verified and published. These data are then loaded to our Defense Program database-Data Warehouse on a website available to resource managers across the Department, along with historical data and a variety of analytical to assist in cross-functional analyses.

In the future, we will continue to standardize and reduce reporting requirements, improve data quality, and reduce workload by directly linking service and agency computers to our central database. We are also working to merging our long-term resource planning and budget databases.

We are now building a series of performance indicators that will measure improvements in data accuracy, completeness, consistency, timeliness, and reporting workload. By FY 2004, all program and budget resource and force data should flow through a single collection point.

Provide Explicit Fiscal Guidance for Program Development

Section 113 of Title 10, U.S. Code, requires the Secretary of Defense to give the heads of the components the resource levels projected to be available for the period of time for which national security objectives and policies and military missions established as priorities under the defense strategy are to be effective. In the past, the assumptions used to set these resource controls were not shared with component organizations. As a result, there was often a "strategy-resource" mismatch, requiring the Military Departments and Defense Agencies to make assumptions regarding the Secretary's priorities in order to balance their internal books.

In the future, we will improve how resources link to the Secretary's policy goals by building feedback control mechanisms. These tools will help set explicit funding targets for high-interest programs, while at the same time identifying programs where some resource risk is allowable. The long-term goal is to give service and agency managers the information they need to make rationale resource decisions that are directly aligned with the performance goals of the defense strategy.

Provide Explicit Budget Review Guidance

One of five government-wide management initiatives, the Budget and Performance Integration Initiative builds on the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and earlier efforts to identify program goals and performances measures, and link them to the budget process. Accordingly, beginning in February 2003, we began reviewing how well military departments and defense agencies:

• Display the linkage of plans-outputs-resources in budget justification materials.

• Expand the treatment of metrics in the FY 2004 congressional justification materials.

• Report on progress made towards the performance goals.

Manage Overhead And Direct Costs

Fully half of our resources go to infrastructure and overhead, and in addition

to draining resources from warfighting, these costly and outdated systems,

procedures and programs stifle innovation as well.

Secretary Rumsfeld, September 10, 2001.

Headquarters across the Department have shrunk by 11.1 percent from 1999 levels, and more changes are coming. We are well on our way to eliminating almost half of 72 acquisition-related advisory boards. Tasks not vital to our "core" military missions are being turned over to more appropriate organizations or eliminated, and military personnel returned to operational units. For example, this year we agreed to transfer 1,800 agents from the Defense Security Service to the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and will begin purchasing services from OPM in FY 2004. By combining the information technology and management systems of both organizations into a single structure, we will cut down on duplicative costs associated with the more than 1 million security checks requested by defense organizations each year—and take a long step

« PreviousContinue »