1. Capabilities-Based Assessments (CBAs)
SLIDE 1: Lesson Title, Capabilities-Based Assessments (CBAs)
Initiation to Materiel Development Decision (MDD)

2. Lesson Objectives
Explain the importance of Capabilities-Based Assessments (CBAs) to the Joint Capabilities Integration Development System (JCIDS) and the Defense Acquisition System
Summarize the essential characteristics and qualities of CBAs
Examine the major tasks of an effective CBA effort
Examine CBAs and their relation to the DOTmLPF-P Change Recommendation (DCR) and Initial Capabilities Document (ICD)
SLIDE 2: Lesson Objectives
TAKEWAY: At the end of this lesson, you will know the major characteristics of a CBA and its impact on the JCIDS and acquisition processes.
TIME PER ELO: 1) 25 Min; 2) 20 Min; 3) 15 Min
QUESTION: Before we begin, has anybody worked a CBA? Written an ICD? Please describe your experience…
STORY OR ARTICLE: None

3. CBAs in JCIDS FCB MS C MS B Incremental Development MS A AoA
Full Rate
Prod Decision
Review
Joint Concepts
Capabilities - Based Assessment
MS C
MS B
FCB
Strategic Guidance
Incremental Development
MS A
Technology
Development
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Production & Deployment
AoA
Materiel
Solution
Analysis
Technology Opportunities & Resources
ICD
O&S
User Needs
MDD
CDD
CPD
SLIDE 3: CBAs in JCIDS
TAKEWAY: You’ve seen this chart before and you’ll see it throughout the course. The circled area is where we’re concentrating for this lesson.
QUESTION: Does anybody know of an instance where a CBA ended prior to the ICD or the FCB?
STORY OR ARTICLE: None
DEFINITIONS:
AoA: The AoA is an analytical comparison of the operational effectiveness, suitability, and life-cycle cost (LCC) or total ownership cost (TOC) of alternatives that satisfy established capability needs. Source: Defense Acquisition Guidance (DAG) , Chapter 3.3., paragraph
CDD: The CDD is the sponsor’s primary means of proposing capability solutions to satisfy validated capability requirements and close capability gaps. Source: 14 Oct 2011 Staffing Draft, JCIDS Manual, p. B-28.
CPD: The CPD is the sponsor’s primary means of providing authoritative, testable capabilities for the Production and Deployment (P&D) phase of an acquisition program. Source: 14 Oct 2011 Staffing Draft, JCIDS Manual, p. B-38.
FCB: The FCBs support the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (hereafter referred to as “Chairman” or “CJCS”) and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) in identifying, assessing, and prioritizing (if required) joint military capability needs as specified in title 10, United States Code (USC), sections 153, 154, 163, and Source: CJCSI D, 26 Nat 2009, p. 1.
ICD: The ICD documents one or more new capability requirements, generally identified as the result of a CBA or other analysis, where there are capability gaps associated with the identified capability requirements. The ICD also documents the intent to address some part of the identified capability gap(s) with a non-materiel solution, materiel solution, or some combination of the two. Source: 14 Oct 2011 Staffing Draft, JCIDS Manual, p. B-9.
MDD: The Materiel Development Decision review is the formal entry point into the acquisition process and shall be mandatory for all programs. Source: DoDI , 8 Dec 2008, p. 15.
O&S: The purpose of the Operations and Support Phase is to execute a support program that meets materiel readiness and operational support performance requirements, and
sustains the system in the most cost-effective manner over its total life cycle. Source: DoDI , 8 Dec 2008, p. 28.
AoA: Analysis of Alternatives
CDD: Capability Development Document
CPD: Capability Production Document
FCB: Functional Capabilities Board
ICD: Initial Capabilities Document\
MDD: Materiel Development Decision
O&S: Operations & Support

4. Fundamental goal is to recommend action or accept risk
Solving Gaps
Paths to solving capability requirements
GFM: for materiel (“little m”) approach available in Joint Force
DCR: for materiel (“little m”) approach existing in Joint Force but must be organic or non-materiel approach
ICD: when both materiel and non-materiel approach is needed
CBA is the typical analytical basis to identify capability requirements and associated capability gaps
Recapitalization or replacement: NLT 90 days
More complex or new mission area: NLT 180 days
No extensive detail or pre-determined solution
SLIDE 4: Solving Gaps
TAKEWAY: There’s essentially three different options for the military to solve military problems.
QUESTION: What are examples of systems that bear the scars of inadequate up-front analyses?
STORY OR ARTICLE: Read selections from the Inside Air Force article on MM III Follow-on (actually GBSD) CBA & AoA
DEFINITIONS:
CBA: The CBA is the typical analytic basis to identify capability requirements and associated capability gaps for submission into the JCIDS process. Source: 14 Oct 2011 Staffing Draft, JCIDS Manual, p. A-3.
DCR: A DCR documents the intent to address some part of an identified capability requirement and associated capability gap with a non-materiel solution. The recommend changes to existing capabilities may be in one or more of eight DOTmLPF-P areas. Source: Source: 14 Oct 2011 Staffing Draft, JCIDS Manual, p. B-20
GFM: An organizing construct of processes, policies, organizational information, and tools that informs senior leader decision-making on the global joint sourcing of the defense strategy. Source: DoD Manual , Vol II, 14 Jun 2011, p. 96.
Fundamental goal is to recommend action or accept risk
CBA: Capabilities-Base Assessment
DCR: DOTMLPF-P Change Recommendation
GFM: Global Force Management

5. CBA Overview CBA: Initiated by: Becomes basis for:
Validating capability needs
ANY DoD organization
CBA:
Typical analytic basis of JCIDS
Based upon:
Recommends:
CCJO
SLIDE 5: CBA Overview
TAKEWAY: The CBA is the typical first step to fixing military problems.
QUESTION: What are examples of systems that bear the scars of inadequate up-front analyses?
STORY OR ARTICLE: IEDs’ impact on ground vehicle design. Relate EFV example from Mike Bohn.
DEFINITIONS:
CCJO: 1. Sub element of Support for Strategic Analysis (SSA), critical mid- & longer-term challenges DoD must address. A DPS provides a depiction of a threat to international security, a corresponding mission for U.S. military forces, and a strategic-level concept of operation for carrying out that mission. The SECDEF approves a single set of scenarios intended to serve as a standard by which the senior leadership of the Department can gauge the sufficiency of the Defense Program. A single set of scenarios ensures DOD consistency for studies, war games, and experimentation The Capstone Concept for Joint Operations describes in broad terms the (CJCS’s) vision for how the joint force circa will operate in response to a wide variety of security challenges. It proposes that future joint force commanders will combine and subsequently adapt some combination of four basic categories of military activity -- combat, security, engagement, and relief and reconstruction -- in accordance with the unique requirements of each operational situation. The concept is informed by current strategic guidance, but because it looks to the future, it is intended to be adaptable, as it must be, to changes in that guidance. Source CCJO, v3.0, 15 Jan 2009.
CONPLAN: 1. Any plan for the conduct of military operations prepared in response to actual and potential contingencies. Source: JP A complete and detailed joint plan containing a full description of the concept of operations, all annexes applicable to the plan, and a time-phased force and deployment data. Also called OPLAN. See also operation order. Source: JP 5-0 DPS: 1. The DPS is a Sub element of Support for Strategic Analysis (SSA), critical mid- & longer-term challenges DoD must address. A DPS provides a depiction of a threat to international security, a corresponding mission for U.S. military forces, and a strategic-level concept of operation for carrying out that mission. The SECDEF approves a single set of scenarios intended to serve as a standard by which the senior leadership of the Department can gauge the sufficiency of the Defense Program. A single set of scenarios ensures DOD consistency for studies, war games, and experimentation The Defense Planning Scenarios (DPS) include problem descriptions, assumptions and variations of key parameters developed by OSD, threat descriptions developed by the intelligence community, and outlines of concepts of operations for U.S. forces developed by a Joint Staff-led team of Service and other subject-matter experts. DOD uses the scenarios, along with their associated databases, in developing the Support for Strategic Analysis. Source: DAU Acquisition Community Connection (ACC), DPS definition.
OPLAN: In the context of joint operation planning level 3 planning detail, an operation plan in an abbreviated format that may require considerable expansion or alteration to convert it into a complete operation plan or operation order. Also called CONPLAN. See also operation plan. Source: JP 5-0
Endorsed
CONOPS
Formally- tasked OPLANS and CONPLANs
ACTION w/o excessive rigor
DPSs
CCJO: Capstone Concept for Joint Operations
CONPLAN: Concept Plan
DPS: Defense Planning Scenarios
OPLAN: Operation Plan

6. CBA to MDD JCIDS Acq Conduct of a CBA Capabilities Requirements ICD
ID tasks, conditions, & standards
“What’s the military problem”
MDD
“Bridge”
ID capability gaps & redundancies “Look at the programmed force structure / doctrinal approaches”
ID possible non-materiel & materiel solutions “Address gap or accept risk”
Seam Between Capabilities & Acquisition
ICD
AoA
SLIDE 6: CBA to MDD
TAKEWAY: Three basic analytical phases – “Analysis 101” - identify the environment, identify the gaps, identify possible solutions – form the CBA. These feed into the ICD which the MDA uses to decide whether to cross over into the acquisition process at the MDD bridge.
QUESTION: Any real-world examples of good, bad, or dated up-front analyses?
STORY OR ARTICLE: Relate mundane, everyday analysis (house, car, college) to this “big picture” process.
JCIDS
Acq
Conduct of a CBA
Capabilities
Requirements

7. CBA Breadth: How Wide the Analysis?
Scenarios:
OPLANs
CONPLANs
& DPSs
CONOPS:
Objectives,
Tactics,
Orgs,
etc
Functions:
(tasks)
JCAs
Solution
Types:
Materiel
Non Materiel
Capabilities
Required:
Reduce
Operational
Risk
Performance
Attributes:
General enough so as not to prejudice
Scenarios:
Oplans
& DPSs
CONOPS:
Objectives,
Tactics,
Orgs,
etc
Functions:
JCAs
Solution
Types:
Policies
& Treaties
Capabilities
Desired:
Meet
Operational
Objectives
Performance
Attributes:
Metrics
> precision
= more analyses
= more time ?
CBA
SLIDE 7: CBA Breadth: How Wide the Analysis?
TAKEWAY: Depends on these six interacting factors. Scenarios are THE most important component in scoping a CBA – opponents, environments, & whether it’s near, mid, or far term. The ICD is written to the CONOPS whenever it’s available.
QUESTION: What scenarios have you worked with in your job? How did this connect with current or future weapon systems?
STORY OR ARTICLE: Iranian scenarios in Journal of International Security Affairs article.
Scenarios – conditions – enemies, environments, & access challenges:
OPLAN: Operations Plan - any plan (except SIOP) to conduct military ops. Prepared by unified or specified commander to meet JCS-established requirement.
CONPLAN: Operation Plan in Concept Format - an abbreviated OPLAN.
DPS: Defense Planning Scenario - critical mid- & longer-term challenges DoD must address. A DPS provides a depiction of a threat to international security, a corresponding mission for U.S. military forces, and a strategic-level concept of operation for carrying out that mission. The SECDEF approves a single set of scenarios intended to serve as a standard by which the senior leadership of the Department can gauge the sufficiency of the Defense Program. A single set of scenarios ensures DOD consistency for studies, war games, and experimentation.
Concepts of operation (CONOPS - tasks) – describes the characteristics of a proposed system from the user’s viewpoint. Includes: goals & objectives; strategies, tactics, policies, & constraints; organizations, activities, & interactions; responsibilities & authorities; operational processes; processes for initiating, developing, maintaining, & retiring system
Functions considered (ways) – how to get the job done - also known as Joint Capability Areas (JCAs).
Types of solutions considered (means) – impacted by policy, treaties, etc that might narrow scope (space-based weapons may be ruled out the outset, no MIRVs).
Capabilities desired (effects) - ability to meet a military operational objective.
Performance Attributes (metrics & minimum values - standards) – what to measure & how. More precision = more analysis = more time.
From Jeff – 31 Mar 2011: “The value of the DPSs / ISCs is that they are accepted by the Joint Staff and OSD and if everybody uses them as the input to a CBA, then everybody is working from the same set of assumptions; wrong or right. They level the playing field and essentially stop the entire staffing process from challenging your assumptions and scenarios; the easiest targets when you want to kill something or slow it down. If I, as an analyst, use the ISCs or DPSs as the basis for my CBA to set the tasks, conditions and standards, you can challenge me all you want and I just say, "Noted, but this is what OSD says is the baseline--next question".
I spent 5 years as both a deliberate and contingency war planner at both the COCOM and MAJCOM levels. We never looked at DPSs, they were too far out. Our war plans were based on "real" intel. We developed assumptions for any gaps in intel. Depending on the review cycle, COCOM OPLANs and CONPLANs have a 2-3 year shelf life so they are focused in the very near term and use JSCP-apportioned forces for planning purposes, not the MSFDs.
OPLANs and CONPLANs really have no place in JCIDS due to their time horizon. Shortfalls in OPLANs and CONPLANs need to get addressed through the IPL process. We use to get tasked for Joint Monthly Readiness Reviews where the JS J7 would give us a scenario and we would see how well we could execute--they were a real pain in the ass. Any gaps/shortfalls would be fed into the IPL process. The last I heard they are now quarterly but serve the same purpose.”
DEFINITIONS:
JCA: Collections of like DOD capabilities functionally grouped to support capability analysis, strategy development, investment decision making, capability portfolio management, and capabilities-based force development and operational planning. Source: J7 Future Warfare website. or
CBA
OPLAN: Operations Plan
CONPLAN: Concept Plan
DPS: Defense Planning Scenario
JCA: Joint Capability Area

8. CBA Depth: How Deep the Analysis?
Low Rigor High Rigor
Complexity of assessment
Solution resources required
Consequences of operational failure
Scenario (future) uncertainty
Solution cost, schedule, performance risk
Low
High
JROC CBA preference: avoid high rigor & time-consuming detail – concentrate on recommending action.
CBAs focused on recapitalization or replacement should take 60 to 90 days.
More complex CBAs dealing with large uncertainties should take no more than 180 days – NOT including staffing & approval.
SLIDE 8: CBA Depth: How Deep the Analysis?
BOTTOM LINE: Again, not too deep & not too shallow. Depends on these five interacting factors. However, THE MAIN point is the JROC is interested in action, not overly-analytical rigor. The goal outlined in the JCIDS Manual is a min of 60 days, a max of 90 days for recapitalization, to a max of 180 days for complex assessment topics.
QUESTION: Anybody have a topic of interest? Let’s take a couple of minutes here & use it to figure a general idea of how deep the analysis might be. Do a quick exercise here…
STORY OR ARTICLE: Ground-Based Strategic Deterrence (GBSD) versus a new squad-level defilade defeating capability (XM25 being tested in Afghanistan).

9. CBA Info Sources: Strategic Guidance
QDR
QDR
NSS
NSS
NDS
NDS
NMS
NMS
CBA:
Typical JCIDS analysis
UCP
JSCP
UCP
JSCP
Classified
Guidance
SLIDE 9: CBA Info Sources: Strategic Guidance
TAKEWAY: All research needs to gather data – at the top is strategic guidance. Consistency with the nation’s documentation is a great start.
QUESTION: Has anybody used these documents in their jobs? How important was it to your program?
STORY OR ARTICLE: None
DEFINITIONS:
The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) - mandated by law, DoD comprehensively examines its strategy and performance. Done in 1997, 2001, 2005 and QDR 2001 first flagged the idea of a capabilities-based approach that led to JCIDS.
National Security Strategy (NSS) – issued by the President to meet public law, is an annual national security strategy report due 150 days after taking office.
The National Defense Strategy (NDS) - signed by the SecDef, is substantial guidance on security challenges, key operational capabilities, and operational priorities NDS divided all future security challenges into four categories: traditional, irregular, catastrophic, & disruptive
The National Military Strategy (NMS) - signed by the CJCS, provides an operational context to the NDS.
Classified CBA Strategic Guidance
Guidance on Employment of the Force (GEF) - directs planning for foreseeable, near-term (FY 10-12) operational activities. Built concurrently with the CJCS’s Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP), it establishes linkages from strategy to operations by providing strategic context for planning. It also guides development and integration of campaign, campaign support, and contingency plans as well as integrates operational planning, force management, resources, and posture guidance.
Source: Guidance for Employment of the Force (GEF) & Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan (JSCP) briefing,
Defense Planning Guidance (DPG) - new document created in April of 2010, it replaces two previous strategic guidance documents: the Guidance on Development of the Force (GDF) and the Joint Programming Guidance (JPG). Will probably address planning & programming priorities.
Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan - directs the Services to do strategic planning. The Services take the essence of the JSCP and develop their own Service-unique guidance.
Unified Command Plan (UCP) – another SecDef-level document that provides basic guidance to the COCOMs. It defines their roles, missions, geographic responsibilities, functional responsibilities, and command relationships. The reason the UCP is important (or even central) to your CBA is that the mission or function you are assessing will be executed by a COCOM. The UCP may also define the mission or function and set standards for its execution, which is authoritative guidance you should exploit in your CBA.
GEF
DPG
GEF
DPPG
QDR: Quadrennial Defense Review
NSS: National Security Strategy
NDS: National Defense Strategy
NMS: National Military Strategy
UCP: Unified Command Plan
GEF: Guidance on Employment of the Force
DPG: Defense Planning Guidance
JSCP: Joint Strategic Capabilities Plan

10. CBA Info Sources: Conceptual Guidance
JOE
USJFCOM
JOE**
USJFCOM
CCJO
JOC
CCJO
JOC
JOpsC
Family of
Documents*
J7 - JFDID
CJCSI B
CJCSI B
CBA:
THE analytical basis of JCIDS
JIC
JCA
JIC
JCA
SLIDE 10: CBA Info Sources: Conceptual Guidance
TAKEWAY: Conceptual Guidance is geared toward future military operations, hence very useful to CBAs – typically 8 to 20 years. JCAs are important enough to the CBA process that we’ll go over those in more detail later.
QUESTION: Does anybody have any experience with any of these documents?
STORY OR ARTICLE: None
DEFINITIONS:
Joint Operations Concepts (JOpsC) - a family of joint future documents written using problem/solution. They visualize future ops & describe how future commanders might employ capabilities to meet future military challenges. Ideally, they produce military capabilities that render previous ways of warfighting obsolete and significantly change the measures of success. These go beyond the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP), generally 8-20 years into the future.
CJCSI B, Joint Operations Concepts Development Process, 27 Jan this instruction outlines the processes involved with joint operations conceptual development
Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO) - describes in very broad terms how the future joint force will operate in response to a wide variety of security challenges. It proposes that future joint force commanders will combine and subsequently adapt some combination of four basic categories of military activity: Combat, Security, Engagement, Relief & Reconstruction.
Joint Operating Concepts (JOCs) – (Going away – archived…) overarching concepts that guide the development of future joint force capabilities. They broadly describe how the joint force is expected to operate years in the future in all domains, across the range of military operations, within a multilateral environment, and in collaboration with interagency and multinational partners. Used when there are no CONOPs to write the ICD to.
Joint Integrating Concepts (JICs) – (Going away – archived…) a description of how a Joint Force commander years in the future will integrate capabilities to generate effects and achieve an objective. A JIC includes an illustrative CONOPS for a specific scenario and a set of distinguishing principles applicable to a range of scenarios. JICs have the narrowest focus of all concepts and distill Joint Operating Concepts and Joint Functional Concepts (JFC)-derived capabilities into the fundamental tasks, conditions, & standards needed to conduct a CBA. Used when there are no CONOPs to write the ICD to.
Joint Capability Areas (JCAs) - Joint Capability Areas (JCAs) constitute the DoD capability management language and framework. JCAs are collections of like DoD capabilities functionally grouped to support capability analysis, strategy development, investment decision making, capability portfolio management, and capabilities-based force development and operational planning. JCIDS also uses the JCAs as an organizing construct. Finally, the Functional Capabilities Boards (FCBs) are organized around the nine Tier 1 JCAs and the JCIDS documents link the capabilities identified to the applicable JCAs.
Joint Operating Environment (JOE) 2010 – (NOT going away…) USJFCOM – now J8 & J&, intends for the JOE to inform joint concept development and experimentation throughout the DoD. It addresses future trends, shocks, contexts, and implications for future joint force commanders and others in the national security field. It is speculative in nature and does not suppose to predict what will happen in the next 25 years. Rather, it is intended to serve as a starting point for discussions about the future security environment at the operational level of war.
* Posted at J7 JFDID website - Joint Force Development & Integration Division (JFDID) is responsible for developing & monitoring the implementation plans for joint experimentation & concept development for DoD.
JOpsC: Joint Operations Concepts
CCJO: Capstone Concept for Joint Operations
JIC: Joint Integrating Concept
JCA: Joint Capability Area
JOC: Joint Operating Concept
JOE: Joint Operating Environment

11. CBA Framework: Joint Capability Areas (JCAs)
JCA Definition:
“…currently the preferred method the DoD uses for reviewing and managing capabilities.”
“Collections of like DoD capabilities functionally grouped to support capability analysis…”
Proposed in 2003, there are currently nine JCAs, tiered as far as five levels:
Force Support
Battlespace Awareness
Force Application
Logistics
Command & Control
Net-Centric
Protection
Building Partnerships
Corporate Management & Support
SLIDE 11: CBA Framework: Joint Capability Areas (JCAs)
TAKEWAY: The more a CBA maps to specific JCAs, the better support from the FCB & JROC. This may be the most difficult task a new RM faces: coming up with metrics & performance attributes that eventually translate into MOEs, MOPs, MOSs, test criteria, & the like.
QUESTION: Any experience with using JCAs in day-to-day job?
STORY OR ARTICLE: None

12. Sample JCA & Tiering
2 Battlespace Awareness – The ability to understand dispositions and intentions as well as the characteristics and conditions of the operational environment that bear on national and military decision-making. 2.1 Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance – The ability to conduct activities to meet the intelligence needs of national and military decision-makers Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Planning and Direction – The ability to synchronize and integrate the activities of collection, processing, exploitation, analysis and dissemination resources to meet information requirements of national and military decision-makers Define and Prioritize Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Requirements – The ability to translate national through tactical objectives and needs into specific information and operational requirements for ISR. … 2.2 Environment – The ability to characterize and exploit the meteorological, space and oceanographic information from the sub-bottom of the earth’s oceans up to and including space.
SLIDE 12: Sample JCA & Tiering
TAKEWAY: Each JCA is detailed – this is just one small area that becomes more & more specific. Environment – bottom of the Marianas Trench into Space. Remember, the J7 JFDID site describes all JCAs and all tierings.
QUESTION: None
STORY OR ARTICLE: None

13. Sets conditions for successful acquisition
Value of the CBA & ICD
Proper CBA documented in ICD is critical because it:
Provides foundation for future requirements
Identifies priorities Within Sponsor / Joint portfolio
Identifies military problem being addressed
Identifies timeframe when capability must be delivered
Provides both materiel and non-materiel approaches
In-Class ICD Review Exercise:
Review an existing ICD
Use Checklist derived from JCIDS Template
Prep for actual ICD review and Capstone later this week…
SLIDE 13: Value-Added of Prep & Analytical Work?
TAKEWAY: It’s like any research project - a thorough job up front can pay big dividends later. This is where you set up the conditions to for a successful acquisition program.
QUESTION: None
STORY OR ARTICLE: None
To find an organizing framework. The mission or function the CBA assesses probably covers an enormous range of potential military operations. The documents above offer a number of organizing frameworks (particularly the JCAs…) that will help make the assessment manageable.
To identify overarching priorities. The GEF and the predecessors of the DPPG (GDF & JPG) have been quite aggressive in specifying areas where the DoD should improve, and areas where the DoD can take risk. If these documents offer such advice on areas related to your CBA, use them.
To help set performance standards. A central issue you will have to settle in your CBA is setting the assessment criteria for how well DoD does (or should) perform a mission or task. These documents contain authoritative advice on such criteria, such as friendly losses and collateral damage.
To secure unchallengeable guidance. The CBA team leader faces a number of serious bureaucratic challenges when conducting an assessment If a document signed by the SecDef supports the team’s position, it greatly increases it’s odds of winning the argument.
To avoid pre-determined outcomes. Any DoD initiative has a constituency - they will press for narrowing the study to futures suited to their interests. Using authoritative strategic documents for a framework allows you to resist these pressures.
Source: J8 CBA User’s Guide, citing 2008 DBB report
Sets conditions for successful acquisition

14. 1st Recommendation: Non-Materiel Approaches
Doctrine
Organization
Training
materiel
Leadership
&
Education
Personnel
Facilities
DCR
Policy
SLIDE 14: 1st Recommendation: Non-Materiel Solutions
TAKEWAY: For obvious reasons aside from the regs say so, the CBA exhausts all non-materiel solutions first.
QUESTION: What war stories do you have in fixing military problems using these 7 means? Any real-world good & bad examples?
STORY OR ARTICLE: IEDs’ impact on squad urban operations.
DEFINITIONS:
Doctrine: how we fight – maneuver, combined air-ground campaigns.
Organization: how we organize to fight - divisions, air wings, Marine-Air Ground Task Forces (MAGTFs), etc.
Training: how we prepare to fight - basic training to advanced individual training, various types of unit training, joint exercises, etc.
Materiel: the “stuff” necessary to fight – personal weapons, spares, uniforms, fuel, rations, etc. Don’t confuse this “materiel” – “Little M” with the “Big M” of an acquisition program.
Leadership and education: how we prepare our leaders to lead the fight – from squad leader to 4-star general/admiral, professional development
Personnel: availability of qualified people for peacetime, wartime, and various contingency operations
Facilities: real property - installations and industrial facilities (e.g. government owned ammunition production facilities, depots, schools) that support our forces.
Policy: a principle or rule to guide decisions and achieve rational outcomes.
DOTmLPF - P
Change
Recommendation

15. 2nd Recommendation: Materiel Approaches
Development & Fielding of Information Systems
Or similar technologies with high obsolescence rates
Evolution of existing capabilities
Evolution of Existing Systems
Provide significant capability improvement
Replacing existing system with more capable system
Simple recapitalization
SLIDE 15: 2nd Recommendation: Materiel Solutions
TAKEWAY: These are the current definitions for materiel solutions.
Field test gear with a Stinger
DDG 51, Aegis Guided Missile Destroyer, Arleigh Burke
MQ-9 Reaper with 4 Hellfire, 2 Paveway, &2 Sidewinders
QUESTION: What are other examples of specific systems and where do they fit? Why?
STORY OR ARTICLE: None
 JCIDS specifies these three categories of materiel solutions to capability gaps. These three categories are in the 31 Jul 2009 update to the JCIDS Manual & supersede the four approaches mentioned in the latest (Version 3, dated Mar 2009) of the J-8 CBA User’s Guide. The difference is semantic. First, the term “Information Systems” remain unchanged. Second, J8 combined the terms “evolutionary” and “recapitalization” into “Evolution of Existing Systems”. Lastly, J8 simply renamed “Transformational” to “Breakout Systems”. Keep these small distinctions in mind – you will hear or read all of them as well as when documenting and briefing your assessment to outside organizations.
Development and fielding of Information Systems. Solutions involving information systems or transient solutions that have very limited lifespans. For example, constantly revising computer network defense and attack methods.
Evolution of Existing Systems. Solutions that upgrade existing capabilities. For example, upgrading the M1A1 Tank with the M1A2 or reopening the C-5 line in the 1980s.
Breakout Systems. Solutions that differ significantly in form, function, operation, and capabilities from existing systems and offer significant improvement over current capabilities or transform how we accomplish the mission. For example, conducting loitering surveillance and precision-guided weapons delivery from a single Reaper UAV
Source: JCIDS Manual, 31 Jul 2009, p. A-8
Transformational Systems
Differ significantly in form, function, operation & capabilities
Significant improvement over current
Transforms how we accomplish mission

16. Lesson Learned: good documentation when using these substitutes…
CBA Substitutes
JCTD – Joint Capability Technology Demonstration
Only after a Military Utility Assessment (MUA)
Prototypes
Joint IED Defeat Transition Package
CDD/CPD equivalent - JROC approval & transition to program of record
JUON – Joint Urgent Operational Need (or Service urgent needs process)
May enter JCIDS without an ICD
(FITE)
(JLTV)
SLIDE 16: CBA Substitutes
TAKEWAY: There are 4 other analytical processes that can stand in for a CBA.
JCTD: Future Immersive Training Environment (FITE)
Prototype: Joint Light Tactical Vehicle (JLTV)
JIED Defeat Transition Package: IED robot with Tanglefoot
JUON: Scan Eagle
QUESTION: Any experience or war stories with any of these substitutes?
STORY OR ARTICLE: Later this week will have a guest speaker addressing JUONs.
(IED robot with Tanglefoot)
Lesson Learned: good documentation when using these substitutes…
(Scan Eagle)

17. What an RM Needs to Take Away From This CBA Lesson
Effectively scope the CBA
days – must avoid paralysis-by-analysis
Conduct proper analysis - select representative scenarios with a realistic timeframe for delivery of the capability
Align required capabilities to prioritized JCAs
Use CDTM to develop ICD for correct format and length
Recommend appropriate actions to mitigate gaps
Accept risk
Non-materiel
Materiel
SLIDE 17: What an RM Needs to Take Away from This CBA Lesson
TAKEWAY: These are the highlights of this lesson for the RM.
QUESTION: None
STORY OR ARTICLE: Role of SAC at BMO with Peacekeeper & SCBM

18. CBA Results & Recommendations
CBA Bottom Line
AoA
CBA Findings & Recommendations: vital for the foundation of a successful acquisition
These same results then support the ? analytical document
Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA) Phase
Which starts & supports ?
acquisition phase
Materiel Development Decision (MDD)
Which supports the ? decision
Initial Capabilities Document (ICD)
SLIDE 20 – CBA Bottom Line
TAKEWAY: The CBA impacts EVERYTHING afterward.
QUESTION: None
STORY OR ARTICLE: None
What I’ve presented here should give you an appreciation for the CBA - that whatever happens during the assessment impacts the whole build-up of the JCIDS and DAS processes, mostly from ICD through the AoA. As a Requirements Manager, whether you actually participate in a CBA, staff the documents that reflect CBA results and recommendations, or deal with assessments that occurred before your watch - it’s your job to ensure the analyses and recommendations fully and competently support the needs of our warfighters.
Support the ? document
CBA Results & Recommendations

19. Sources for More Detailed CBA Information
CJSCI H, JCIDS: CJCSI G - TBD 2011
JCIDS Manual: TBD 2011
J8 CBA User’s Guide, V3, Mar 2009 – TBD 2011
Geared toward CBA Team Leaders, Core Team, & Working Groups
Background, context, & detailed CBA procedures
DAU online course CLR 250, Capability-Based Assessments
General CBA overview – more detailed that RQM 310 – access via browse mode
DAU Community of Practice (CoP)
SLIDE 19: Sources for More Detailed CBA Information
Self-explanatory.