Execution flexibility is DoD jargon for delegated authority to move money. It is the most direct way to increase decision speed. Since 1960, execution flexibility has dramatically decreased in Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) and Procurement. DoD saw a ten-fold increase in the number of budget line items, a four-fold decrease in reprogramming, and the elimination of unobligated balances.
This study investigated four potential sources of execution flexibility available—innovation funds, Program Element (PE) consolidation, reprogramming, and expired funds.
That was from the executive summary of our latest report at GMU’s Center for Government Contracting, Execution Flexibility and the Valley of Death. Here are the key findings:
Increasing execution flexibility does not require major overhauls of laws or regulations
The ability to define the content of budget line items is completely within the control of Congress and DoD if they can work together. The general direction of action is clear: Larger and more broadly justified budget line items that contain a portfolio of efforts, along with timely access to lower-level execution metrics.
Innovation Funds
The first recommendation is to create a cohort of warfighting exercises resourced by innovation
funds. The goal should be operationalizing prototypes and validating requirements. A merit-based
selection process such as commercial solutions opening should be used by chief technology officers to allocate component-specific funds of roughly $100 million each. Congress could create “boards of advisors” to monitor use of the funds in the year of execution.
PE Consolidation
The second recommendation provides a means for the program offices to receive these efforts across the valley of death through some level of PE [program element] consolidation. This can be done through two principal approaches. First, propose certain PEs with more flexibility to expand the scope of projects without a new start. Second, group well-defined programs under a single PE to help balance execution. The most logical method for consolidating PEs is by capability area, mission thread, or program within each Program Executive Office (PEO). The services could each select two or three pilot consolidated PEs from PEOs for congressional consideration, for example. A rule of thumb such as a $20 million minimum PE size can be encouraged for these pilots.
New Starts
The third recommendation is to continue the prior approval process for new starts and terminations at current thresholds, but tweak the definition such that prior approval is only required if the effort is above threshold for the fiscal year, rather than for the life of the effort… Letter notification will still be maintained, providing Congress 30 days to deny the action.
Reporting
The fourth recommendation is to improve transparency through real-time reporting capabilities that provide insight below the PE level.
Of the above, only New Starts requires a change to the regulations (FMR Vol. 3). The rest can be done without any changes to laws or regulations. As we discussed the matter with various stakeholders, it became clear to us that large increases in the reprogramming thresholds or uses of expired funds were not feasible near-term paths to execution flexibility.
Be sure to read the whole report, tons of data and insights throughout!
And for more on this topic, register for the GMU/DAU conference on November 4, 2022! I will host a PPBE discussion with Ellen Lord and Mike Brown. Top officials from both sides of the valley of death will also be there, USD R&E Heidi Shyu and USD A&S Bill LaPlante, as well as Center Fellow Shay Assad. Hope to see you there!
Leave a Reply