Rhys McCormick – författare

In a time of austerity, the U.S. Department of Defense has drawn budgetary savings primarily from reductions in private-sector contracting. The 2000-2012 edition of this report by National Security Program for Industry and Resources (NSPIR) at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) examines this trend as well as its broader implications for defense industrial policy. The report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research and development by the U.S. Department of Defense overall and by key components. The 2000-2012 report investigates seven key facets of the defense industrial base and provides detailed answers to pressing acquisition policy questions.

In a time of austerity, the U.S. Department of Defense has drawn budgetary savings primarily from reductions in private-sector contracting. The 2000-2012 edition of this report by National Security Program for Industry and Resources (NSPIR) at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) examines this trend as well as its broader implications for defense industrial policy. The report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research and development by the U.S. Department of Defense overall and by key components. The 2000-2012 report investigates seven key facets of the defense industrial base and provides detailed answers to pressing acquisition policy questions.

This report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research & development (R&D) by the Department of Defense (DoD) and its key components. In provides an in-depth look at trends in DoD contracting since 2000, and provides an initial picture of the impact that sequestration has had on DoD contracting and the supporting industrial base. This fourth edition of the DoD report updates reports from previous years and provides greater breadth of analysis. The report examines trends in DoD contracting, breaking down DoD contract spending by a variety of contract and vendor characteristics. The report then uses this data to address key policy questions related to DoD contracting.

This report analyzes contracting for products, services, and research & development (R&D) by the Department of Defense (DoD) and its key components. In provides an in-depth look at trends in DoD contracting since 2000, and provides an initial picture of the impact that sequestration has had on DoD contracting and the supporting industrial base. This fourth edition of the DoD report updates reports from previous years and provides greater breadth of analysis. The report examines trends in DoD contracting, breaking down DoD contract spending by a variety of contract and vendor characteristics. The report then uses this data to address key policy questions related to DoD contracting.

This report focuses on the institutional foundations that enable—or, at times, hinder—federated approaches to defense. Successful defense collaboration in a budget-constrained environment is predicated on the ability and willingness of the United States to provide assistance and/or equipment to allies and partners. Accordingly, the report describes the context for refining US institutional foundations, as well as findings in key issue areas, such as priorities/strategic guidance, foreign military sales, export controls, technology security and foreign disclosure, and acquisitions and requirements processes. The report also includes actionable recommendations on how the United States and its partners could integrate their defense capabilities in support of shared interests.

This report focuses on the institutional foundations that enable—or, at times, hinder—federated approaches to defense. Successful defense collaboration in a budget-constrained environment is predicated on the ability and willingness of the United States to provide assistance and/or equipment to allies and partners. Accordingly, the report describes the context for refining US institutional foundations, as well as findings in key issue areas, such as priorities/strategic guidance, foreign military sales, export controls, technology security and foreign disclosure, and acquisitions and requirements processes. The report also includes actionable recommendations on how the United States and its partners could integrate their defense capabilities in support of shared interests.

This study examines contracting trends at the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). It relies on empirical analysis of DoD contracting transaction data from the open-source Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS). The authors seek to identify and study emergent trends in the contracting data and marry that analysis with discussion of changing goals and methods for the larger acquisition system.

The U.S. Army currently faces a difficult truth: without changes to its modernization strategy, the Army risks losing qualitative tactical overmatch. A lost procurement decade and recent, significant modernization funding declines have resulted in an Army inventory that remains heavily leveraged on the “Big Five” programs, originally procured in the 1970s and 1980s. Meanwhile, technology proliferation has made potential state and nonstate adversaries increasingly capable; shrinking the U.S. overmatch advantage and in some cases surpassing it. While current and projected future Army modernization funding is below historical averages, necessitating increased modernization funding to ensure continued U.S. qualitative tactical overmatch, the Army’s modernization problem cannot be fixed only by increasing modernization funding. Additional funds also need to be accompanied by an updated Army modernization strategy that presents a compelling case for modernization funding and sets clear priorities for fulfilling future operational requirements.

The presence of a technologically superior defense industrial base has been a foundation of U.S. strategy since 1945. While the implementation of the budget cuts in the Budget Control Act of 2011 has caused concerns for the industrial base, the resulting debate has been lacking in empirical analysis. The purpose of this research is to measure the impact of the current defense drawdown across all the tiers of the industrial base. This report analyzes prime and subprime Defense Department contract data to measures the impacts of the drawdown by sector to better understand how prime and subprime contractors have responded to this external market shock.

In light of Section 881 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017, which expanded the legal definition of the National Technology and Industrial Base (NTIB) to include the United Kingdom and Australia, this report informs NTIB partners on barriers and opportunities for effective integration. The expansion of the NTIB is based on the principle that defense trade between the United States and its closest allies enables a host of benefits, including increased access to innovation, economies of scale, and interoperability. In order to reap the greatest benefits of a new era of NTIB, this report uses the lessons learned from study of the present state of integration to identify areas of opportunity for policy reforms and greater cooperation.

This report analyzes the current state of affairs in defense acquisition by combining detailed policy and data analysis to provide a comprehensive overview of the current and future outlook for defense acquisition. This analysis will provide critical insights into what DoD is buying, how DoD is buying it, from whom is DoD buying, and what are the defense components buying using data from the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS). This analysis provides critical insights into understanding the current trends in the defense industrial base and the implications of those trends on acquisition policy.

With the advent of the information age, both commercial industry and the Department of Defense are moving towards complex R&D-intensive systems over the simpler, mass-produced systems of the industrial age. This CSIS report analyzes the historical trends in the relationship of production costs to development costs in complex acquisition programs. To understand this phenomenon, the study team examines it at two different levels. The first is the macro investment level where portfolio management trade-offs are made between aggregate development and procurement and between programs. The second level is individual programs where the ambitions of the program and the underlying technology shape the resources required for a program to complete development.

A central player in the DoD’s organizational approach to communications is the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA). Today, DISA manages the Defense Information Systems Network (DISN)—a communications network serving as the core connectivity between the various networks of the military services and defense agencies, operating around the world and across the internet with data storage systems, satellite communications, and other advanced data transport capabilities. In addition, DISA plays a critical role in providing security for a wide range of the DoD’s computer systems. This CSIS report begins with a discussion of the rapidly evolving environment in which DISA is operating in order to provide context for understanding DISA’s operations, DISA’s recent changes, and the ways in which DISA’s mission is likely to be transformed in the coming years, with a focus on areas that will require careful management by DISA and DoD leadership. It then examines contract data from DISA and related agencies to illustrate how these changes have manifested in DISA’s spending and its organizational and operational approach. It concludes with a discussion of the choices confronting policymakers who are considering decisions on DISA’s future.