Defense Acquisitions: Assessment of Progress Made on Block 2006 Missile Defense Capabilities and Oversight Page: 2 of 19
This text is part of the collection entitled: Government Accountability Office Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
GAO
Accountability. Integrity. Reliability
Highlights
Highlights of GAO-08-608T, a testimony
before the Subcommittee on Strategic
Forces, Committee on Armed Services,
United States Senate
Why GAO Did This Study
Funded at $8 billion to nearly $10
billion per year, the Missile Defense
Agency's (MDA) effort to develop
and field a Ballistic Missile Defense
System (BMDS) is the largest
research and development program
in the Department of Defense
(DOD). The program has been
managed in 2-year increments,
known as blocks. Block 2006, the
second BMDS block, was
completed in December 2007. By
law, GAO annually assesses MDA's
progress.
This testimony is based on GAO's
March 2008 report that addressed
MDA's progress in (1) meeting
Block 2006 goals for fielding assets,
completing work within estimated
cost, conducting tests, and
demonstrating the performance of
the overall system in the field, and
(2) making managerial
improvements to transparency,
accountability, and oversight. GAO
reviewed the assets fielded;
contractor cost, schedule, and
performance; and tests completed
during 2007. GAO also reviewed
pertinent sections of the U.S. Code,
acquisition policy, and the charter
of a new missile defense board.
GAO made several
recommendations that included (1)
adding sufficient scope to tests to
enable an assessment of the BMDS'
suitability and effectiveness and (2)
developing a cost estimate for each
block and requesting an
independent verification of that
cost. DOD agreed with GAO's
recommendation to estimate the
full cost of a block, but only
partially agreed with adding scope
to developmental tests.
To view the full product, including the scope
and methodology, click on GAO-08-608T.
For more information, contact Paul Francis,
(202) 512-4841, francisp@gao.gov.DEFENSE ACQUISITIONS
Assessment of Progress Made on Block 2006 Missile
Defense Capabilities and Oversight
What GAO Found
In the past year, MDA has fielded additional and new assets, enhanced the
capability of some existing assets, and achieved most test objectives. MDA
did not meet the goals it originally set for the block. Ultimately, MDA fielded
fewer assets, increased costs by about $1 billion and conducted fewer tests.
Even with the cost increase, MDA deferred work to keep costs from
increasing further, as some contractors overran their fiscal year 2007 budgets.
Deferring work obscures the cost of the block because such work is no longer
counted as part of Block 2006. The cost of the block may have been further
obscured by a way of planning work used by several contractors that could
underestimate the actual work completed. If more work has to be done, MDA
could incur additional costs that are not yet recognized. MDA also sets goals
for determining the overall performance of the BMDS. Similar to other DOD
programs, MDA uses models and simulations to predict BMDS performance.
GAO was unable to assess whether MDA met its overall performance goal
because there have not been enough flight tests to provide a high confidence
that the models and simulations accurately predict BMDS performance.
Moreover, the tests that have been done do not provide enough information
for DOD's independent test organization to fully assess the BMDS' suitability
and effectiveness.
GAO has previously reported that MDA has been given unprecedented funding
and decision-making flexibility. While this flexibility has expedited BMDS
fielding, it has also made MDA less accountable and transparent in its
decisions than other major programs, making oversight more challenging.
MDA, with some direction from Congress, has taken significant steps to
address these concerns. MDA implemented a new way of defining blocks-its
construct for developing and fielding BMDS increments-that should make
costs more transparent. For example, under the newly-defined blocks, MDA
will no longer defer work from one block to another. Accountability should
also be improved as MDA will, for the first time, estimate unit costs for
selected assets and report variances from those estimates. DOD also
chartered a new executive board with more BMDS oversight responsibility
than its predecessor. Finally, MDA will begin buying certain assets with
procurement funds like other programs. This will benefit transparency and
accountability, because to use procurement funding generally means that
assets must be fully paid for in the year they are bought. Previously, Congress
authorized MDA to pay for assets incrementally using research and
development funds. Some oversight concerns remain, however. For example,
MDA has not yet estimated the total cost of a block, and therefore, cannot
have a block's costs independently verified-actions required of other
programs to inform decisions about affordability and investment choices.
However, MDA does plan to estimate block costs and have them verified at
some future date. Also, the executive board faces a challenge in overseeing
MDA's large technology development efforts and does not have approval
authority for some key decisions made by MDA.United States Government Accountability Office
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
United States. Government Accountability Office. Defense Acquisitions: Assessment of Progress Made on Block 2006 Missile Defense Capabilities and Oversight, text, April 1, 2008; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc290640/m1/2/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.