B
Defense Acquisition Notes
This appendix provides a brief overview of the complexity of acquisition in the Department of Defense (DoD) and how that complexity poses challenges for applying data science to defense acquisition. Those challenges are realized in the various categories of data that need to be collected and managed, the domain insight required by analysts, and the complexity in communicating data findings to consumers of the analysis. As with commercial sector, an understanding of both data science and the application domain is necessary for the effective use of data, and this brief introduction illustrates the depth of understanding needed to make meaningful improvements in defense acquisition.
Defense acquisition includes the full life cycle of a system, from conceptualization through development, testing, production, operation, sustainment, and disposal (Box B.1). Thus, acquisition includes not only development and procurement (what some commonly refer to as “acquisition”), but also product support, modification, and disposal of weapon systems.
ACQUIRED ITEMS BY FUNDING AND CONTRACTING CATEGORIES
Financial resources for defense acquisition are categorized in various ways that help Congress control where the resources are spent. Figure B.1 and Box B.2 illustrate how funding levels in different acquisition categories change dramatically over time as budgets evolve over time. These changes hold when adjusted for inflation as well.
One challenge facing acquisition program managers is the management of multiple budgets, including the current budget, the requested budget, the upcoming budget, and the preparation of budgets for future years. Some types of funding can be obligated and expended across multiple years, while others must be obligated within the year it is appropriated by Congress.
The majority of DoD’s supplies, equipment, and services are acquired through contracts. Figure B.2 presents a categorization of these contracted acquisitions from fiscal year 2008 through 2015. Importantly, contract data
for a single contract can have different line items for acquiring goods or services in different categories, thus complicating data collection and analysis.
ACQUISITION PROGRAMS AND CATEGORIES
Programs are the mechanism by which most major acquisitions are undertaken. The acquisition processes, now referred to as “pathways” in
the Adaptive Acquisition Framework, associated with the various programs are tailored to specific types of acquisition (i.e., urgent capability, “middle tier,” major capability, software, business systems, and acquired services—see Figure 2.1; (DoD Instruction 5000.02, 2020).
ACQUISITION MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT LEVELS
The use of data and analyses required in different acquisition scenarios varies across management levels and oversight (Figure B.3). Functional, or tactical data, are required for analyses by engineers, contractors, and subcontractors. At more executive levels, only summary data are generally available or used. From a data science perspective, executives generally need high-level summaries and perspectives, but the staff that develop these summaries need to analyze more detailed data.
COMMUNITIES THAT AFFECT ACQUISITION
Three primary communities enable defense acquisition: the acquisition community itself (DAS), the budgetary and financial management community (PPBE), and the requirements community (JCIDS). In order to acquire anything, both a budget and a validated requirement is necessary. See Figure B.4.
Each of these three communities has its own unique data processes. DoD and the components have their own data systems to support the acquisition, budget, and requirements processes. While data submitted to the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) must conform to data definitions set by OSD in concert with the military departments, program data within each department’s systems have their own data definitions that may not align with seemingly similar data in other departments, which magnifies the complexity of accessing and analyzing data across DoD.
DEFENSE ACQUISITION FUNCTIONS AND THE DATA LIFE CYCLE
As discussed in Chapter 4, data science is applied to defense acquisition through the range of acquisition functions and processes and ultimately in different domains of decisions and supporting analyses and data. Table B.1 helps to illustrate this richness. The interested reader is referred to Anton et
TABLE B.1 Categories of Acquisition Domain Decisions and the Underlying Data and Analysis
Acquisition Function | Example Decision | Relevant Phases of Data Life Cycle |
---|---|---|
Acquisition Oversight | Program satisfies larger portfolio needs | Collect, manage, integrate, and analyze data on current operational systems (commodity, inventory, age, condition, capabilities); simulation, modeling, and analysis of missions (e.g., kill chains). |
Program Management | ||
|
Program affordability | Collect, manage, integrate, and analyze program-related data on costs, schedule, performance, risk, current market, and alternatives |
|
Opportunities for cooperation | Identification and use of data aligned with decisions related to objectives; shared data infrastructure and access; analysis on contracting, intellectual property, equipment and architecture, multi-year procurement, risk |
Production, Quality, and Manufacturing (PQM) | Production management | Collect data on production quality issues (e.g., scrap rates), and manufacturing performance relative to schedule. Management of complex databases; design and analysis for engineering, manufacturing, quality, and reliability |
Acquisition Interface Functions | Meets access and analysis requirements | Identifies, collects, curates, and stores data needed for subsequent analysis (engineering, mission, wargaming) |
Legal Counsel: Request and Act Upon | Program compliant with laws and policies | Collecting memorandums of understanding and relevant documentation; automated use of compliance systems; legal and policy analysis |
SOURCE: Adapted from Figure B.5, from P.S. Anton, M. McKernan, K. Munson, J.G. Kallimani, A. Levedahl, I. Blickstein, J.A. Drezner, and S. Newberry, 2019, Assessing Department of Defense Use of Data Analytics and Enabling Data Management to Improve Acquisition Outcomes, RR-3136-OSD, August, Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3136.html. Courtesy of RAND Corporation.
al. (2019) to understand the details, but the committee presents this extract to help convey a sense of the depth and range of decision, analysis, and data types involved.
THE DEFENSE ACQUISITION WORKFORCE
The breadth of acquisition activities is also reflected in the range of roles and career fields that constitute the Defense Acquisition Workforce (AWF) (Table B.2). DoD currently identifies and tracks 14 acquisition-specific career fields that cover key roles throughout the acquisition life cycle, which differ from the formal military designators and civilian occupational series designated by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). The AWF career fields are populated by personnel from various military fields and OPM occupational series. As of the end of FY 2019, there were 180,355 full-time civilian and military personnel in the AWF (DoD 2019).
WORKFORCE IMPROVEMENT AND TRAINING
In 1986, the Packard Commission Report on defense management found that (1) “compared to its industry counterparts, this workforce is undertrained, underpaid, and inexperienced” and (2) “training should be… centrally managed and funded to improve the utilization of teaching faculty, enforce compliance with mandatory training requirements, and to coordinate overall acquisition training policies” (Inside the Pentagon 1989).
In response, the Defense Acquisition Workforce Improvement Act (DAWIA),1 enacted in 1990, requires the Secretary of Defense to establish education and training standards, requirements, and courses for the civilian and military acquisition workforce (Box B.3). Those responsibilities of the Secretary are generally delegated to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.
As is noted in Box B.3, the Defense Acquisition University (DAU) was established via DAWIA and 10 USC. DAU offers training to military and federal civilian staff and federal contractors, and is headquartered in Fort Belvoir, Virginia. Box B.4 lists the current mission and vison of DAU.
Beyond specific education for acquisition at DAU, AWF members may receive training via the five service academies (U.S. Military Academy, U.S. Naval Academy, U.S. Air Force Academy, U.S. Coast Guard Academy, U.S. Merchant Marine Academy), Air Force Institute of Technology, Naval Postgraduate School, National Defense University, and public and private colleges and universities. Collectively, these institutions offer some programs and courses in data use and analysis, and are adding more to the curriculum.
___________________
1H.R. 5211—101st Congress (1989-1990).
TABLE B.2 Department of Defense Acquisition Workforce Size by Career Field and Component—Civilian and Military (FY2020Q3)
FY 2019 Q4 | Army | Navy | Marine Corps | Air Force | 4th Estate | Totals | %Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Auditing | — | — | — | — | 3,799 | 3,799 | 2.1111% |
Business - CE | 248 | 552 | 35 | 535 | 112 | 1,482 | 0.8% |
Business - FM | 1,758 | 2,446 | 183 | 2,304 | 641 | 7,332 | 4.0% |
Contracting | 8,845 | 6,401 | 580 | 8,505 | 8,230 | 32,561 | 18% |
Engineering | 9,082 | 24,501 | 334 | 10,263 | 2,169 | 46,349 | 25% |
Facilities Engineering | 6,848 | 6,923 | 38 | 791 | 113 | 14,713 | 8.1111% |
Information Technology | 2,021 | 3,969 | 235 | 1,585 | 1,054 | 8,864 | 4.9999% |
Life Cycle Logistics | 6,873 | 6,809 | 668 | 4,040 | 3,472 | 21,862 | 12% |
Production, Quality and Manufacturing | 1,370 | 4,006 | 25 | 494 | 5,573 | 11,468 | 6.3% |
Program Management | 3,533 | 6,062 | 782 | 7,066 | 1,879 | 19,322 | 11% |
Property | 52 | 79 | 19 | 276 | 426 | 0.2% | |
Purchasing | 268 | 375 | 27 | 40 | 460 | 1,170 | 0.6666% |
S&T Manager | 676 | 534 | 3 | 2,916 | 150 | 4,279 | 2.3% |
Test and Evaluation | 1,941 | 3,223 | 125 | 3,352 | 371 | 9,012 | 4.9999% |
Unknown/Other | 7 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 18 | 32 | 0.02020202% |
Totals | 43,522 | 65,882 | 3,036 | 41,914 | 28,317 | 182,671 | |
Component % | 23.8888% | 36.1111% | 1.7% | 22.9999% | 15.5555% |
NOTE: CE = cost estimating; FM = financial management; S&T = science and technology.
SOURCE: Department of Defense, 2019, “Defense Acquisition Workforce Key Information, Overall,” briefing, Washington, DC, FY20Q3, June 30, https://www.hci.mil/docs/Workforce_Metrics/FY20Q3/FY20(Q3)OVERALLDefenseAcquisitionWorkforce(DAW)InformationSummary.pptx.
REFERENCES
Anton, P.S., M. McKernan, K. Munson, J.G. Kallimani, A. Levedahl, I. Blickstein, J.A. Drezner, and S. Newberry. 2019. Assessing Department of Defense Use of Data Analytics and Enabling Data Management to Improve Acquisition Outcomes. RR-3136-OSD. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. August. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3136.html.
DoD (Department of Defense). 2019. “Defense Acquisition Workforce Key Information, Overall,” briefing, FY20Q3. (June 30.). https://www.hci.mil/docs/Workforce_Metrics/FY20Q3/FY20(Q3)OVERALLDefenseAcquisitionWorkforce(DAW)InformationSummary.pptx.
Inside the Pentagon. 1989. “National Security Review 11 DEFENSE MANAGEMENT.” Special Report. July 7. pp. 1-19. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43985715.