Defense_Acquisition_Guidebook _dated_5_May_10.pdf

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest you use the online version whenever possible.

Please visit https://dag.dau.mil to ensure you have the most up to date information

Defense Acquisition Guidebook Dated: May 5, 2010

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest you use the online version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook whenever possible. https://dag.dau.mil guidebokk@dau.mil Defense Acquisition University

5/5/2010

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

DEFENSE ACQUISITION GUIDEBOOK

Foreword

The Defense Acquisition System exists to manage the Nation's investments in technologies, programs, and product support necessary to achieve the National Security Strategy and support the United States Armed Forces. In that context, our continued objective is to rapidly acquire quality products that satisfy user needs with measurable improvements to mission capability at a fair and reasonable price. The fundamental principles and procedures that the Department follows in achieving those objectives are described in DoD Directive 5000.01 and DoD Instruction 5000.02.

The Defense Acquisition Guidebook is designed to complement those policy documents by providing the acquisition workforce with discretionary best practice that should be tailored to the needs of each program.

Acquisition professionals should use this Guidebook as a reference source supporting their management responsibilities.

As an "on-line" resource, the information is limited only by the user's interest or need. Some chapters contain general content; they provide individual topic discussions and describe processes and considerations that will improve the effectiveness of program planning. Some chapters may provide a tutorial on the application of these topics to the acquisition framework. Depending on the subject matter, a chapter may contain general background information, tutorial discussions, and/or discussions of the detailed requirements for each milestone decision and phase. All chapters contain non-mandatory staff expectations for satisfying the mandatory requirements in DoD Instruction 5000.02

Each chapter is designed to improve understanding of the acquisition process and ensure adequate knowledge of the statutory and regulatory requirements associated with the process. Discussions, explanations, and electronic links to related information enable the "reader" to be efficient, effective, innovative, and disciplined, and to responsively provide warfighting capability. Each chapter lists potential ways the program manager or assigned manager can satisfy mandatory process requirements and meet staff expectations for other activities. Differences of view regarding discretionary practice will be resolved by the Milestone Decision Authority.

The Guidebook is intended to be an electronic reference source rather than a "book." The "reader" "navigates" the information instead of "leafing" through hundreds of physical, collated pages. "Navigation" is electronic movement through the reference system.

Chapter 1, Department of Defense Decision Support Systems, presents an overview of the Defense Department's decision support systems for strategic planning and resource allocation, the determination of capability needs, and the acquisition of systems.

Chapter 2, Defense Acquisition Program Goals and Strategy, discusses acquisition program goals and the topics the program manager should consider in developing a strategy for the acquisition program. It addresses the required information associated with the Acquisition Program Baseline, the Technology Development Strategy, and the program's Acquisition Strategy.

Chapter 3, Affordability and Life-cycle Resource Estimates, addresses acquisition program affordability and resource estimation.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Chapter 4, Systems Engineering, covers the system design issues facing a program manager, and details the systems engineering processes that aid the program manager in designing an integrated system that results in a balanced capability solution.

Chapter 5, Life-cycle Logistics, provides the program manager with a description of Life-cycle Logistics and its application throughout the system life-cycle, from concept to disposal.

Chapter 6, Human Systems Integration, addresses the human systems elements of the systems engineering process. It will help the program manager design and develop systems that effectively and affordably integrate with human capabilities and limitations; and it makes the program manager aware of the staff resources available to assist in this endeavor.

Chapter 7, Acquiring Information Technology, Including National Security Systems, explains how the Department of Defense complies with statutory and regulatory requirements for acquiring Information Technology and National Security Systems and in using a network-centric strategy to transform DoD warfighting, business, and intelligence capabilities. The chapter also provides descriptions and explanations of the Clinger-Cohen Act, the Business Management Modernization Program and many other associated topics and concepts, and discusses many of the activities that enable the development of net-centric systems.

Chapter 8, Intelligence, Counterintelligence, and Security Support, describes program manager responsibilities regarding research and technology protection to prevent inadvertent technology transfer, and provides guidance for and describes the support available for protecting those technologies.

Chapter 9, Integrated Test and Evaluation, discusses many of the topics associated with test and evaluation, to include oversight, Developmental Test and Evaluation, Operational Test and Evaluation, and Live Fire Test and Evaluation. The chapter enables the program manager to develop a robust, integrated test and evaluation strategy to assess operational effectiveness and suitability, and to support program decisions.

Chapter 10, Decisions, Assessments, and Periodic Reporting, prepares the program manager and Milestone Decision Authority to execute their respective management and oversight responsibilities.

Chapter 11, Program Management Activities, explains the additional activities and decisions required of the program manager, not otherwise discussed in earlier chapters of this Guidebook.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Chapter 1 -- Department of Defense Decision Support Systems

1.0. Overview

1.1. Integration of the DoD Decision Support Systems

1.2. Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) Process

1.3. Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)

1.4. Defense Acquisition System

1.0. Overview

1.0.1. Purpose

1.0.2. Contents

1.0.1. Purpose

This chapter provides background information about the environment in which the Department of Defense must operate to acquire new or modified materiel or services.

1.0.2. Contents

Section 1.1 presents an overview of each of the three, principal, decision support systems used in the Department of Defense to acquire materiel and services, and describes the integration of those systems. Sections 1.2 through 1.4 provide details of each of these systems: Section 1.2 discusses the Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution process, employed by the Department of Defense to conduct strategic planning and make resource allocation decisions;

Section 1.3 discusses the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System used to determine military capability needs; and Section 1.4 discusses the formal Defense Acquisition System used to acquire that capability.

1.1. Integration of the DoD Decision Support Systems

The Department of Defense has three principal decision-making support systems, all of which have been significantly revised over the past few years. These systems are the following:

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) Process - The Department's strategic planning, program development, and resource determination process. The PPBE process is used to craft plans and programs that satisfy the demands of the National Security Strategy within resource constraints.

Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) - The systematic method established by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for identifying, assessing, and prioritizing gaps in joint warfighting capabilities and recommending potential solution approaches to resolve these gaps. CJCS Instruction 3170.01 and the JCIDS Manual describe the policies and procedures for the requirements process.

Defense Acquisition System - The management process by which the Department acquires weapon systems and automated information systems. Although the system is based on centralized policies and principles, it allows for decentralized and streamlined execution of acquisition activities. This approach provides flexibility and encourages innovation, while maintaining strict emphasis on discipline and accountability.

Illustrated together in Figure 1.1.F1, the three systems provide an integrated approach to strategic planning, identification of needs for military capabilities, systems acquisition, and program and budget development. The next three sections provide brief introductions to each of these decision support systems.

Figure 1.1.F1. DoD Decision Support Systems

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

1.2. Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) Process

The purpose of the PPBE process is to allocate resources within the Department of Defense. It is important for program managers and their staffs to be aware of the nature and timing of each of the events in the PPBE process, since they may be called upon to provide critical information that could be important to program funding and success.

In the PPBE process, the Secretary of Defense establishes policies, strategy, and prioritized goals for the Department, which are subsequently used to guide resource allocation decisions that balance the guidance with fiscal constraints.

The PPBE process consists of four distinct but overlapping phases:

Planning. The planning phase of PPBE is a collaborative effort by the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff, in coordination with DoD components. It begins with a resource-informed articulation of national defense policies and military strategy known as the Guidance for the Development of the Force (GDF). The GDF is used to lead the overall planning process. This process results in fiscally constrained guidance and priorities - for military forces, modernization, readiness and sustainability, and supports business processes and infrastructure activities - for program development in a document known as the Joint Programming Guidance. The Joint Programming Guidance is the link between planning and programming, and it provides guidance to the DoD Components (military departments and defense agencies) for the development of their program proposals, known as the Program Objective Memorandum (POM).

Programming. The programming phase begins with the development of a POM by each DoD Component. This development seeks to construct a balanced set of programs that respond to the guidance and priorities of the Joint Programming Guidance within fiscal constraints. When completed, the POM provides a fairly detailed and comprehensive description of the proposed programs, including a time-phased allocation of resources (forces, funding, and manpower) by program projected six years into the future. In addition, the DoD Component may describe important programs not fully funded (or not funded at all) in the POM, and assess the risks associated with the shortfalls. The senior leadership in OSD and the Joint Staff review each POM to help integrate the DoD Component POMs into an overall coherent defense program. In addition, the OSD staff and the Joint Staff can raise issues with selected portions of any POM, or any funding shortfalls in the POM, and propose alternatives with marginal adjustments to resources. Issues not resolved at lower levels are forwarded to the Secretary for decision, and the resulting decisions are documented in the Program Decision Memorandum.

Budgeting. The budgeting phase of PPBE occurs concurrently with the programming phase; each DoD Component submits its proposed budget estimate simultaneously with its POM. The budget converts the programmatic view into the format of the congressional appropriation structure, along with associated budget justification documents. The budget projects resources only two years into the future, but with considerably more financial details than the POM.

Upon submission, each budget estimate is reviewed by analysts from the office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Their review ensures that programs are funded in accordance with current financial policies, and are properly and reasonably priced. The review also ensures that the

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest budget documentation is adequate to justify the programs presented to the Congress. Typically, the analysts provide the DoD Components with written questions in advance of formal hearings where the analysts review and discuss the budget details. After the hearings, each analyst prepares a decision document (known as a Program Budget Decision, or PBD) for the programs and/or appropriations under his or her area of responsibility. The PBD proposes financial adjustments to address any issues or problems identified during the associated budget hearing. The PBDs are staffed for comment and forwarded to the Deputy Secretary of Defense for decisions. These decisions are then reflected in an updated budget submission provided to the OMB. After that, the overall DoD budget is provided as part of the President's Budget request to the Congress.

Execution. The execution review occurs simultaneously with the program and budget reviews. The execution review provides feedback to the senior leadership concerning the effectiveness of current and prior resource allocations. Over time, metrics are being developed to support the execution review that will measure actual output versus planned performance for defense programs. To the extent performance goals of an existing program are not being met, the execution review may lead to recommendations to adjust resources and/or restructure programs to achieve desired performance goals. PPBE Biennial Cycles. In 2003, the Department adjusted its planning, programming and budgeting procedures to support a two-year cycle that results in two-year budgets. The revised process is described in Management Initiative Decision (MID) 913, dated May 22, 2003. The concept in MID 913 is consistent with submission of a biennial DoD budget that is part of the President's Budget request to Congress for even-numbered fiscal years (FY) (e.g., the FY 2008 President's Budget, submitted to Congress in February 2007, contained justification material for both FY 2008 and FY 2009). In this cycle, the even-numbered years are called on-years, while the odd-numbered years are called off-years. Figure 1.2.F1 displays a nominal timeline for the PPBE phases in an on-year.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Figure 1.2.F1. Typical PPBE Biennial Cycle, "On-Year"

In practice, Congress does not actually provide the Department with biennial appropriations. An amended budget justification must be submitted for the second year of the original biennial request so that Congress will appropriate funds for that second year. The Department uses a restricted process in the off-year to develop an amended budget that allows for only modest program or budget adjustments. Figure 1.2.F2 displays a nominal timeline for the limited off-year process.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Figure 1.2.F2. Typical PPBE Biennial Cycle, "Off-Year"

Minimum changes to policy, strategy, or fiscal guidance are intended for the off-year. There may be no issuance of revised Guidance for the Development of the Force or Joint Programming Guidance. If revised Joint Programming Guidance is provided, it would contain only minor revisions (although it could direct studies to support major decisions on strategy or program choices for the future GDF/JPG). In the off-year, the DoD Components do not provide revised POMs or budget estimates. Instead, the DoD Components are allowed to submit Program Change Proposals (PCP) and/or Budget Change Proposals (BCP) to account for fact-of-life changes (e.g., program cost increases or schedule delays). BCPs and PCPs are limited to a single issue and must identify resource reductions to offset any program or budget cost growth. PCPs address issues over a multi-year period, whereas BCPs address issues focused on the upcoming budget year. PCPs are reviewed in a manner similar to on-year program issues, and BCPs are resolved through the issuance and staffing of PBDs.

From a larger perspective, the biennial PPBE cycle is designed to support and implement policy and strategy initiatives for each new four-year presidential administration. Figure 1.2.F3 depicts alignment of the biennial PPBE cycle over a four-year term.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Figure 1.2.F3. PPBE Two-Year Cycles Corresponding to Four-Year Presidential Terms

In the first year of the administration, the President establishes a revised National Security Strategy, which establishes:

(1) the worldwide interests, goals, and objectives that are vital to the national security; and (2) the foreign policy, worldwide commitments, and national defense capabilities necessary to implement the national security goals and objectives. Once the new administration's National Security Strategy is established, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, leads the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The QDR is a comprehensive review of all elements of defense policy and strategy needed to support the national security strategy.

The National Defense Strategy is then used to establish the plans for military force structure, force modernization, business processes, supporting infrastructure, and required resources (funding and manpower). The QDR final report is provided to Congress in the second year of the administration. In the PPBE process, the QDR final report serves as the foundation document for defense strategy and business policy. Since this document is not available until the second year, the first year of the administration is treated as an off-year, using the President's Budget inherited from the previous administration as a baseline. In the second year, which is treated as an on-year, the Guidance for the Development of the Force and Joint Programming Guidance are rewritten to implement the QDR of the new administration.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

1.3. Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)

JCIDS plays a key role in identifying the capabilities required by the warfighters to support the National Security Strategy and the National Defense Strategy. Successful delivery of those capabilities relies on the JCIDS process working in concert with other joint and DOD decision processes. JCIDS procedures support the Chairman and Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) in advising the Secretary of Defense on identifying and assessing joint military capability needs.

JCIDS is a joint-concepts-centric capabilities identification process that allows joint forces to meet future military challenges. The JCIDS process assesses existing and proposed capabilities in light of their contribution to future joint concepts. The JCIDS process was created to support the statutory requirements of the JROC to validate joint warfighting requirements. JCIDS is also a key supporting process for the DOD acquisition and Planning, Programming, and Budget Execution (PPBE) processes. The primary objective of the JCIDS process is to ensure the capabilities required by the joint warfighter to successfully execute the missions assigned to them are identified with their associated operational performance criteria. This is done through an open process that provides the JROC the information they need to make decisions on required capabilities. The requirements process supports the acquisition process by providing validated capability needs and associated performance criteria to be used as a basis for acquiring the right weapon systems.

Additionally, JCIDS provides the PPBE process with affordability advice supported by the capabilities-based assessment (CBA), and identifies capability gaps and potential materiel and non-materiel solutions. While it considers the full range of doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel and facilities (DOTMLPF) solutions, for purposes of this Guidebook, the focus is on the pursuit of "materiel" solutions.

JCIDS acknowledges the need to project and sustain joint forces and to conduct flexible, distributed, and highly-networked operations. JCIDS is consistent with DoD Directive 5000.01 direction for early and continuous collaboration throughout the Department of Defense. JCIDS implements a capabilities-based approach that leverages the expertise of government agencies, industry, and academia. JCIDS encourages collaboration between operators and materiel providers early in the process. JCIDS defines interoperable, joint capabilities that will best meet the future needs. The broader DoD acquisition community must then deliver these technologically sound, sustainable, and affordable increments of militarily useful capability to the warfighters.

JCIDS informs the acquisition process by identifying and assessing joint military capability needs which need a materiel solution; these identified capability needs then serve as the basis for the development and production of acquisition programs. JCIDS is fully described in CJCS Instruction 3170.01, signed by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This instruction establishes the policies for JCIDS, and provides a top-level description of the process. A supplementary manual, the JCIDS Manual, provides the details necessary for the day-to-day work in identifying, describing, and justifying joint warfighting capabilities. The manual also includes the formats that describe the content required for each JCIDS document.

For major defense acquisition programs or major automated information systems subject to OSD oversight, the products of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System process directly support the Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) and Information Technology Acquisition Board (ITAB) in advising the Milestone Decision Authority for major milestone decisions. Figure 1.3.F1 is a simplified portrayal of the nature of this support. JCIDS provides similar support to

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest other acquisition programs, regardless of the milestone decision authority. Where appropriate, the JCIDS process and its products may be tailored when applied to automated information systems.

Figure 1.3.F1. JCIDS and Defense Acquisition

Figure 1.3.F1 depicts several key points. First, JCIDS is based on a series of top-down analyses ultimately derived from formal strategic-level guidance, including the National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy, Joint Vision 2020, and the Report of the Quadrennial Defense Review. Second, these analyses assess existing and proposed capabilities in terms of their contribution to emerging joint warfighting concepts. Moreover, rather than focusing on the capabilities of individual weapon systems in isolation, the analyses assess capabilities in the context of integrated architectures of multiple interoperable systems. Third, from these overarching concepts, the JCIDS analysis process identifies capability gaps or shortcomings, and assesses the risks associated with these gaps. These gaps may be addressed by a combination of materiel and/or non-materiel solutions (non-materiel solutions would be changes to doctrine, organization, training, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities). Fourth, recommended materiel solutions, once approved, lead to acquisition programs. JCIDS documents are provided for these programs at each acquisition milestone and guide the subsequent development, production, and testing of the program. Further information on Capabilities-Based Assessment, as well as the nature and role of the Initial Capabilities Document, Capability Development Document, and Capability Production Document can be found in the JCIDS Manual.

For Acquisition Category I and IA programs, and other programs designated as high-interest, the JROC reviews and validates all JCIDS documents under its purview. For Acquisition Category ID and IAM programs, the JROC makes

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest recommendations to the DAB or ITAB, based on such reviews. Section 181 of title 10, United States Code, establishes JROC responsibilities. The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairs the JROC, and is also a member of the DAB.

The other JROC members are the Vice Chiefs of each military service. The "Expanded JROC" staff brings together key stakeholders from across the department and Interagencies, when appropriate, to shape decisions in support of the Joint warfighter. These stakeholders provide advisory support to the JROC.

Related Link: Capabilities-Based Assessment User's Guide

1.4. Defense Acquisition System

The Defense Acquisition System is the management process for all DoD acquisition programs. DoD Directive 5000.01, The Defense Acquisition System, provides the policies and principles that govern defense acquisition. DoD Instruction 5000.02, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, establishes the management framework that implements these policies and principles. The Defense Acquisition Management System is an event-based process. Acquisition programs proceed through a series of milestone reviews and other decision points that may authorize entry into a significant new program phase. Details of the reviews, decision points, and program phases are found beginning with in paragraph 3 of Enclosure 2 of the Instruction. The Instruction also identifies the specific statutory and regulatory information requirements for each milestone and decision point.

One key principle of the defense acquisition system is the use of acquisition categories, where programs of increasing dollar value and management interest are subject to increasing levels of oversight. DoD Instruction 5000.02 Enclosure 3 identifies the specific dollar values and other thresholds for these acquisition categories. The most expensive programs are known as Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs) or Major Automated Information System (MAIS) programs.

MDAPs and MAIS programs have the most extensive statutory and regulatory reporting requirements. Some elements of the defense acquisition system only apply to weapon systems, some element only apply to automated information systems, and some elements apply to both. DoD Instruction 5000.02, Enclosures 2, 3, and 4 provide specific details.

The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics (USD(AT&L)) is the Defense Acquisition Executive (DAE). The USD(AT&L) reviews ACAT ID programs and is the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). A Defense Acquisition Board (DAB), chaired by the USD(AT&L), provides advice on critical acquisition decisions. DAB members are senior officials from the Joint Staff, the Military Departments, and staff offices within OSD.

The DAE may delegate decision authority for an MDAP to the DoD Component Head, who may, and generally will, delegate decision authority to the Component Acquisition Executive. Such delegation makes the program an ACAT IC program.

The DAE is also the MDA for MAIS programs that are ACAT IAM programs. An Information Technology Acquisition Board (ITAB) provides the DAE advice on critical acquisition decisions for ACAT IAM programs. The DAE may designate the ASD(NII) as the MDA for selected MAIS programs.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

As with MDAPs, the DAE may delegate decision authority for an MAIS to the DoD Component Head, who may, and generally will, delegate decision authority to the Component Acquisition Executive. Such delegation makes the program an ACAT IAC program.

Both the DAB and the ITAB are further supported by a subordinate group in OSD known as an Overarching Integrated Product Team (OIPT). Each OIPT facilitates communication and vets issues before the DAB or ITAB meets. In this facilitator's role, the OIPT charters Working-level Integrated Product Teams for each review and manages their activities.

At the Milestone Decision Review, the OIPT leader provides the DAB or ITAB members with an integrated assessment of program issues gathered through the Integrated Product Team process as well as various independent assessments.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Chapter 2 -- Acquisition Program Baselines, Technology Development

Strategies, and Acquisition Strategies

2.0. Overview

2.1. Program Goals

2.2. Pre-Systems Acquisition: Technology Development Strategy (TDS)

2.3. Systems Acquisition: Acquisition Strategy

2.4. Acquisition Strategies and Acquisition Plans

2.0. Overview

2.0.1. Purpose

2.0.2. Contents

2.0.3. Strategies and Plans

2.0.1. Purpose

The purpose of this Chapter is to provide program managers (PMs) the information and guidance needed to develop and maintain the Acquisition Program Baseline (APB), the Technology Development Strategy (TDS) and the Acquisition Strategy (AS) all required to effectively manage the program. The APB serves to document what the PM will deliver in terms of cost, schedule and performance. The TDS and AS describe the PM's plan to achieve the cost, schedule and performance goals and summarize the program planning and resulting program structure.

This Chapter will be updated as policy and statute evolve.

2.0.2. Contents

Section 2.1 describes the Acquisition Program Baseline. Section 2.2 discusses the Technology Development Strategy, and Section 2.3 discusses the Acquisition Strategy leading to the achievement of the program goals.

Section 2.4 is a high level summary of some fundamental differences between an acquisition plan and an Acquisition Strategy.

2.0.3. Strategies and Plans

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

The Technology Development Strategy (TDS) and the Acquisition Strategy share many common required information elements, and each is the guiding strategy for the prospective phase of the Defense Acquisition Management System. The Acquisition Strategy and TDS should be forward looking and contain the key aspects of the program or pre-program efforts to execute the objectives of the phase, and the overall strategy to operational status. The TDS and Acquisition Strategy also include the detail for various plans, data and milestone information. The Acquisition Strategy and TDS must also satisfy statutory and regulatory information requirements for entry into the upcoming acquisition phase. The best strategy documents also distill the essence of managing the program or pre-program affordably, on schedule, and delivering the prescribed performance across the life cycle.

Both strategies guide the associated phase of acquisition and address the requirements supporting the development. Each increment should have its own program strategy document (AS or TDS), or minimally have a distinctly separate annex from the ‘core’ program strategy document. A strategy document annex for an increment can leverage the core program information when appropriate.

Acquisition Plan. Programs and pre-programs often combine the Acquisition Strategy (or TDS) and Acquisition Plan into a single document. An Acquisition Plan is a formal written document prepared by the Contracting Officer and the Program Manager (PM) reflecting the specific actions necessary to execute the approach established in the approved Acquisition Strategy and guiding contractual implementation, as referenced in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 7.1 and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Subpart 207.1. An Acquisition Plan does not require Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) approval and is not an Acquisition Strategy requirement, however the Plan may be included at the PM's discretion. See section 2.4 for further distinctions between an Acquisition Strategy and an Acquisition Plan, and section 2.3.10 Business Strategy for further procurement considerations.

TDS and Acquisition Strategy. The TDS and Acquisition Strategy content requirements have changed as a result of implementation of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (WSARA). The TDS is the pre-program strategy document preceding the Acquisition Strategy in most cases as pre-programs evolve into programs moving through the milestones in the acquisition management system. The TDS should serve as an information baseline for efforts that continually evolve during the progression through the acquisition management system assuming successful program initiation at Milestone B. The Acquisition Strategy content requirements vary according to program phase/milestone. For instance a Production and Deployment phase strategy will have a greater sustainment focus and include equipment valuation information that would not be included in an Engineering and Manufacturing Development phase Acquisition Strategy. Conversely, as the program progresses the Acquisition Strategy should reflect less technology maturation efforts as the technologies should be mature prior to production. A TDS or an Acquisition Strategy should be a forward looking document with only the minimum sufficient background information to facilitate understanding of the forward looking strategy.

Development of a TDS or Acquisition Strategy requires collaboration between the MDA, PM (or pre-program "PM"), their staffs, and the functional communities engaged in and supporting DoD acquisition throughout the full life cycle. A well-developed strategy optimizes the time and cost required to satisfy approved capability needs, and maximizes affordability throughout the program life cycle. The charge of DoD executive leadership

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest is to use common sense and sound business practices in developing the Acquisition Strategy and executing the program. The PM should utilize Integrated Product and Process Development principles to assist in development of the strategy and execution of the program.

In this Chapter, the information elements for a TDS and an Acquisition Strategy are aligned by section to facilitate correlation for efforts that choose to use this Chapter as an initial strategy document 'template' (i.e., Section 2.2.xyz is for the widget schedule in a TDS, and Section 2.3.xyz is for the widget schedule in an Acquisition Strategy). There currently is no required format for a TDS or Acquisition Strategy, but the information headers (sub-section titles) are derived from source requirements, with OSD organizational considerations mixed in. Using the information headers from this Chapter can facilitate the review and approval process for TDS and AS documents.

TDS, Acquisition Strategy, Systems Engineering Plan (SEP), and Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP). The Acquisition Strategy or TDS, SEP, and Test and Evaluation Strategy (TES) or TEMP should all align, with minimal overlap. The Acquisition Strategy or TDS should describe the integrated plans that identify the acquisition approach, and describes the business, developmental, and support strategies to manage program risks and meet program objectives while balancing cost, schedule and performance. The SEP should describe the technical planning and systems engineering processes that will be used to develop and manage the system and/or technical product development. The TES or TEMP should articulate how the technologies and system products will be tested to verify maturity and capability.

TDS and Acquisition Strategy Approval Process. An Acquisition Strategy or TDS requires the concurrence of the Program Executive Officer (PEO) (for programs in all acquisition categories) and the DoD Component Acquisition Executive (CAE) (for Acquisition Category (ACAT) ID and IAM programs) prior to approval by the MDA. MDA approval of the Strategy may precede a Milestone decision (e.g., to allow release of a Final Request for Proposals); however, programs may not proceed beyond a Milestone decision without an MDA-approved Strategy.

The efforts defined in the approved program strategy for a given phase of the acquisition management system (e.g. EMD) must align with efforts performed and included in the contract(s) for that phase. An AS that is approved for Milestone B approval should be consistent with efforts performed during the EMD phase, and be updated during that phase to reflect changes with the EMD strategy. An updated AS must be approved prior to Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) and Full Rate Production (FRP) RFP release, but no later than the Milestone C or FRP decision by the MDA.

For ACAT ID anticipated programs the OSD entry point for a TDS or Acquisition Strategy is office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics (OUSD (AT&L)) Acquisition Management; for ACAT IAM anticipated programs it is office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration (OASD (NII))/DoD Chief of Information Officer (CIO). Engagement with OSD regarding a TDS or an Acquisition Strategy to be approved by the DAE/MDA should begin not later than when the PM is ready to sign the document. For ACAT ID programs, pre-programs, or Special Interest programs with DAE oversight, documents will be coordinated across the OSD staff in both a Draft and a Formal round of coordination. The Formal coordination round is time driven and at the Senior Executive

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

Service(SES)/General Officer/Flag Officer level and initiates only after the CAE signs the document; Draft coordination includes the non-SES-level work that precedes Formal coordination. More specifics about the coordination business rules will be in Chapter 10 when they are finalized.

Administrative. Acquisition Strategy and TDS documents need to be marked for proper handling. Classified documents, or classified Acquisition Strategy or TDS appendices, should be handled in the appropriate manners separate from the main unclassified Acquisition Strategy or TDS content. A TDS or Acquisition Strategy should be considered to be For Official Use Only (FOUO), marked appropriately, and handled as controlled unclassified information. Additionally if the document contains proprietary information or is competition sensitive it should be so marked.

In addition to FOUO and other appropriate markings, it is a good idea for a TDS or Acquisition Strategy to have a distribution statement. An example follows:

Distribution Statement – Distribution authorized to U.S. Government Agencies and their contractors; Other requests must be referred to [enter the cognizant PEO program office].Program Office), Address, City, State, Zip Code.

Programs that wish to use this Chapter as a template for their TDS or Acquisition Strategy should note that some fundamental elements such as an executive summary, signature page, overview or background, table of contents, acronym list, etc are not covered in this Chapter at this time. These requirements will be satisfied in each document.

2.1. Program Goals

2.1.1. The Acquisition Program Baseline (APB)

2.1.1.1. APB Approval

2.1.1.2. Trade-Offs

2.1.1.3. APB Management

2.1.1.4. APB Content

2.1.1.5. APB for an Evolutionary Acquisition Program

2.1. Program Goals

Program goals are the measurable cost, schedule, and performance parameters necessary to describe program objectives. The most critical ones are articulated as Key Performance Parameters or Key System Attributes. The

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

MDA should approve or define the cost, schedule and performance goals for Major Defense Acquisition Programs, and office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) should evaluate the cost goals.

2.1.1. The Acquisition Program Baseline (APB)

DoD Instruction 5000.02 requires every program manager to propose and document program goals prior to, and for approval at, program initiation for all Acquisition Category (ACAT) programs. The APB satisfies the requirements in 10 USC 2435 and 10 USC 2220 for ACAT I Programs. The APB is an important document for program management and should reflect the approved program being executed.

A separate APB is required for each increment or sub-program of a major defense acquisition program (MDAP). Increments can be used to plan concurrent or sequential efforts to deliver capability more quickly and in line with the technological maturity of each increment. When an MDAP requires the delivery of two or more categories of end items that differ significantly in form and function, subprograms may be established.

Program goals consist of an objective value and a threshold value for each Key Performance Parameter (KPP)/Key System Attribute (KSA) parameter. Cost, schedule and performance are intrinsically linked and the threshold and objective values of all program goals should be developed with these relationships in mind. The program manager (PM) is responsible for managing the trade space between program goals within the bounds of cost, schedule and performance.

Objective values represent the desired operational goal associated with a performance attribute beyond which any gain in utility does not warrant additional expenditure. Generally, the objective value is an operationally significant increment above the threshold. An objective value may be the same as the threshold when an operationally significant increment above the threshold is not useful.

Thresholds represent the minimum acceptable operational value below which the utility of the system becomes questionable. For performance, a threshold represents either a minimum or maximum acceptable value, while for schedule and cost parameters, thresholds would normally represent maximum allowable values. The failure to attain program thresholds may degrade system performance, delay the program (possibly impacting related programs or systems), or make the program too costly. The failure to attain program thresholds, therefore, places the overall affordability of the program and/or the capability provided by the system into question.

As noted above, each APB parameter must have both an objective and a threshold. For each performance parameter, if no objective is specified, the threshold value will serve as the objective value, and if no threshold is specified, the objective value will serve as the threshold value. For schedule and cost parameters, there are specified default threshold values: the default threshold for schedule is the objective value plus 6 months; and the default threshold for cost is the objective value plus ten percent of the objective value. Despite these guidelines, the PM may propose with justification an appropriate threshold value to optimize program trade space, subject to Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) and user approval.

This PDF version of the Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) is current as of May 5, 2010. A new/updated PDF of the DAG will be posted on or about the 5th of each month or as needed. The online DAG is a living document that will be updated whenever necessary. Consequently, the PDF version may not contain the most current guidance. We suggest

The PM derives the APB from the users' performance requirements, schedule planning and requirements, and best estimates of total program cost consistent with projected funding.