1. Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE)
RQM403
Requirements Executive Overview Workshop
Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE)
Requirements Management Certification Training

2. Outline PB 18 Overview PPBE Overview and Updates
DoD Budget Request
H.R. 601
PPBE Overview and Updates
Building Blocks
FYDP and Program Elements
FY PPBE Process and Schedule
This is the outline for the PPBE session.
There are couple of overview charts…
There are a few charts on the PPBE building blocks…..namely, FYDP (the Future Years Defense Program, MFP (Major Force Programs), and program elements.
This will be followed by the timing, key players, and key documents in the PPBE process.
Lastly, there are charts of the schedule for this PPBE cycle, which is FY10-15.

3. FY 2018 Budget Request Base Budget Request:
Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO): Total
$574.5 billion
$64.6 billion
$639.1 billion
Base budget request is $52 billion above DoD’s share of the FY 2018 Defense budget cap in current law
Must increase the Defense budget cap in order to adequately protect
U.S. national security
Since enactment of the BCA, the world has become a more dangerous place with rising terrorism and more aggressive potential adversaries
Under the BCA, the military has become smaller, readiness has eroded, and modernization has been deferred
This budget begins to balance the Defense program and establishes a foundation for rebuilding the U.S. military into a more capable, lethal and ready joint force

4. FY 2018 Themes Improving warfighter readiness
More aircraft in the air, ships at sea, troops in the field, and munitions on hand to rebuild the current force
Address evolving national security challenges
Retain counterterrorism/counter insurgency competencies
Preserve competitive advantage versus major adversaries
Sustain capability development for new warfighter concepts
Recapitalize and modernize nuclear enterprise
Prioritize key investments in cyber and space capabilities
Focus on innovation to maintain technological advantage
Sustain the finest fighting force in the world
Identify reforms to improve efficiencies and achieve cost savings

5. DoD Funding from 9/11 Through FY 2018 Request
(Discretionary Budget Authority)
$800
$700
691
687
666
666
645
639
606
601
163
$600
159
578
581 65
187
153
580
115
560 83
534 82 85 59 63
$500
169
468
479
437
124 79
$400 73 91
345
316 17
$300 29
$200
287
328
365
377
400
411
431
479
513
528
528
530
495
496
497
521
523
574
$100 $0
FY01
FY02
FY03
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12
DoD Topline, FY 2001 – FY 2018
(Current Dollars in Billions)
Base Budget OCO/Other Budget
FY13
FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18
Numbers may not add due to rounding

6. Military Construction and Family Housing, Other
FY 2018 Base Funding
By Appropriation Title
By Military Department
Military Construction and Family Housing, Other
$11.9
Military Personnel,
$141.6
Defense Wide
$100.4
RDT&E,
$82.7
Army
$137.1
Procurement,
$115.0
Air Force
$165.5
Navy
$171.5
O&M,
$223.3
FY 2018 Request: $574.5 billion

7. Military Construction and Family Housing, Other
FY 2018 OCO Funding
By Appropriation Title
By Military Department
Military Construction and Family Housing, Other
$.8
Military Personnel,
$4.3
RDT&E, $.6
Procurement,
$10.2
Defense Wide
$9.6
Air Force
$17.5
Army
$28.9
O&M,
$48.6
Navy
$8.5
FY 2018 Request: $64.6 billion

8. FY 2018 Total Base and OCO Funding
By Appropriation Title By Military Department
Military Construction and Family Housing, Other
$12.6
Defense Wide
$110.1
RDT&E,
$83.3
Military Personnel,
$146.0
Army
$166.0
Air Force
$183.0
Procurement,
$125.2
Navy
$180.0
O&M,
$271.9
FY 2018 Request: $639.1 billion

9. FY 2018 President’s Budget Military End Strength
Military Component
PB18
PB17
fl. PB17-PB18
FY 20161/
FY 20172/
FY 2018
fl. FY17-18
Active Components (AC)
Army
475,400
476,000 --
450,000
+26,000
Navy
324,557
326,492
327,900
+1,408
322,200
+5,700
Marine Corps
183,604
184,426
185,000
+574
182,000
+3,000
Air Force
317,883
321,125
325,100
+3,975
317,000
+8,100
TOTAL AC
1,301,444
1,308,043
1,314,000
+5,957
1,271,200
+42,800
Reserve Components (RC)
Army Reserve
198,395
199,000
195,000
+4,000
Navy Reserve
57,980
58,175
59,000
+825
58,900
+100
Marine Corps Reserve
38,453
38,940
38,500
-440
Air Force Reserve
69,364
69,000
69,800
+800
69,200
+600
Army National Guard
341,589
343,000
335,000
+8,000
Air National Guard
105,887
105,700
106,600
+900
TOTAL RC
811,668
813,815
815,900
+2,085
802,300
+13,600
Army AC + RC
1,105,384
1,018,000
980,000
+38,000
Navy AC + RC
382,537
384,667
386,900
+2,233
381,100
+5,800
Marine Corps AC + RC
222,057
223,366
223,500
+134
220,500
Air Force AC + RC
493,134
495,825
501,500
+5,675
491,900
+9,600
TOTAL AC + RC
2,113,112
2,121,858
2,129,900
+8,042
2,073,500
+56,400
1/ FY 2016 Actuals
2/ FY 2017 reflects request for additional appropriations projected end strength levels
Reverses end strength reductions – FY K higher than PB17

10. Focus on Technology Innovation
Funds science and technology to further innovation ($13.2 billion)
Supports DoD, academic, and industry partnerships with initiatives like Army Research Lab Collaborative Research Alliances ($58.7 million), Defense Innovation Unit-Experiment (DIUx) ($54 million), and the pilot program with In-Q-Tel ($60 million)
Examples of technology initiatives
Alternative navigation technologies (e.g., Assured Positioning Navigation, and Timing (Army), Atomic Clocks with Enhanced Stability (ACES) (DARPA))
Directed energy weapons (e.g., Self-protect High Energy Laser Demonstrator (Air Force), High Energy Laser Tactical Vehicle Demonstrator (Army))
Electromagnetic spectrum technologies (e.g., Electromagnetic Maneuver & Control Capability (Navy))
High speed strike weapons (e.g., Hypersonic Flight Demonstrations (Air Force, DARPA), High-Speed Propulsion Technology (DARPA, Air Force, Navy))
Establishment of Hypersonics defeat program within the Missile Defense Agency
Low-cost unmanned systems (e.g., Low Cost Unmanned Air Systems Swarming Technology (LOCUST) (Navy), Perdix (Strategic Capabilities Office))
Investment across DoD to counter illicit Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and other multi-domain unmanned or autonomous threats
DoD seeks to accelerate delivery of new capabilities

11. H.R. 601
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018 and Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Requirements Act, 2017
provides $15.25 billion in emergency funding to support disaster response and assistance
Suspends debt limit through December 8, 2017
Provides FY 2018 appropriations through December 8, 2017 for the continuing projects and activities of the Federal Government
Secretary Mattis September 8, 2017 Memo
Outlines impacts of CR to DoD and operations

12. PPBE Phases Planning (OSD Policy) Programming (OSD CAPE)
Assess capabilities / review threat
Develop guidance
Programming (OSD CAPE)
Turn guidance into achievable, affordable packages
Five-year program (Future Years Defense Program)
Budgeting (OSD Comptroller)
Test for efficient funds execution
Scrub budget year
Prepare defensible budget
Execution Review (concurrent with program/budget review)
Develop performance metrics
Assess actual output against planned performance
Adjust resources to achieve desired performance goals
Brief Overview of PPBE phases: There are three phases: planning, programming and budgeting. The major difference is that we now have a review of program execution/program performance concurrent with the program and budget review (NOT Army’s PPBES)
Planning: QDR 2001 shifted the basis of defense planning from a "threat-based" model that dominated thinking in the past to a "capabilities-based" model
Capabilities-based model:
– Focuses on how an adversary might fight rather than specifically who the adversary might be or where a war might occur.
– Recognizes that it is not enough to plan for large conventional wars in distant theaters. Instead, the United States must identify the capabilities required to deter and defeat adversaries who will rely on surprise, deception, and asymmetric warfare to achieve their objectives.
Strategic Planning Guidance (SPG)/Guidance for the Development of the Forces (GDF) and Joint Programming Guidance (JPG): Marching Orders for next phase
Programming:
Components develop Program submissions based on guidance developed in the Planning phase
OSD, OMB & Joint Staff review for priority, affordability
Info captured in the FYDP
Budgeting:
Components develop budget submissions
OSD(C) reviews budget inputs, with emphasis on funds execution
Ultimate aim, to submit a defensible President’s Budget thru OMB to Congress
Execution Review
Overlays both Program Review and Budget Review processes
In past emphasis on input, “how much to spend on each program”; now emphasis is on output, “what are we getting for our money?”
Using performance metrics to examine program execution
Let’s look at the years reviewed in the PPBE process…

13. Key PPBE Action Officers
AIR FORCE: Program Element Monitor ( PEM )
Works for Air Force SAE (SAF/AQ)
Each Air Force program element is assigned a PEM
Interfaces with Using Commands, Material Command, Air Staff, Air Secretariat, OSD, and sometimes Congress
A PEM may be responsible for more than one program element
NAVY: Requirements Officer ( RO )
Works for resource sponsor on OPNAV staff (e.g., Navy Aviation resource sponsor is N98)
Interfaces with Using Commands, Systems/Developing Commands, OPNAV Staff, Navy Secretariat (especially the Navy CAE, ASN/RDA), and OSD
ARMY: Department of Army Systems Coordinator (DASC)
Works for Army SAE (ASA/ALT)
Interfaces with Using Commands, Developing Commands, Army Staff, Army Secretariat, OSD, and Congress
Importance of Headquarters Action Officers in the PPBS process
Each service does it somewhat differently with different players. AF = PEMs, Navy = ROs, Army = DASCs
Important point about AOs is that it is absolutely essential the PMO stay connected to, and maintain open lines of communication with the PPBS AOs . This is especially true during POM build when Services are RESOURCING and prioritizing programs. Though it is important that PMO’s know what AOs are up to, it is equally important that PMO’s ensure that AOs know what is going on in their programs and keep them up to date and informed. PPBS Action Officers field questions about programs from Congress, OSD, Users, etc. on a regular basis--and they don’t always have time to confer with the PMO.

14. Service Resource Role Differences
AF – PEM
A – DASC
N – RO
Military
Civilian
G-3
A-5
Resource Sponsors
AF CSAF
A-1………..………………A-11
Sec AF SAF/AQ
N-8
G-8
SAF/ FMP
PEM
A CSA
G-1……………….……..…G-8
Sec A ASA (ALT)
DASC
N CNO
N-1………..……………….N-9
Sec Nav ASN (RDA) RO

15. Future Years Defense Program (FYDP)
Computer Database Maintained by OSD CAPE
Contains Approved Force Structure and Resources for all Defense Programs
Updated 2 Times for the FY PPBE Cycle:
POM/BES – Sep 2017
President’s Budget (PB) – Feb 2018
Reflects PY, CY, BY, + 4 Out-Years
3 additional years for force structure only
Component PPBE databases
Navy: PBIS
Air Force : ABIDES
Army: PROBE
Computer database maintained by Dir (PA&E)
Summarizes forces, equipment, and resources
Comprises one prior year (PY), the current year (CY), the “biennial” budget years (BY1 and BY2), four additional years for resources (POM) and three additional years for force structure only
It is a “living” record reflecting the decisions made in the various phases of PPBE
Updated two times per year to reflect the
POM/BES (Aug/Sep), and
President’s Budget (Jan/Feb) submissions
Why two budget years?
The process was intended to produce a two year budget. However, Congress appropriates one year at a time. So, we have “off-years/odd-years”. Originally, OSD and the Components were expected to “tweak” the 2nd year of the President’s Budget/POM as part of an off year effort
APOM by the Air Force
Mini-POM by the Army
Program Review by the Navy
However, there have been changes in this off-year/odd-year process, starting in calendar year 2003.
TRANSITION: Let’s take a look at how the FYDP is structured 17 18 19 20

16. Future Years Defense Program (FYDP)
DOD APPROPRIATIONS
RDT&E
Procurement
Military Construction
Military Personnel
Ops & Maintenance
Other D E F O A
Strategic Forces
(1) T I A H
General Purpose Forces
(2) R G E E
Command, Control, Comm, Intell & Space
(3) N F N R
MAJOR FORCE PROGRAMS A A
Mobility Forces
(4) O C R V R I
Guard & Reserve Forces
(5) M Y C E
Research and Development
(6) Y E S
Teaching Points:
Data is divided into 11 “Major Force Programs” (MFP) for DoD internal management uses during the planning and programming phases of PPBE.
Data is also divided into five Appropriation categories (plus one catch-all “other” category, which simply represents the various other appropriations that exist -- although we in the acquisition community are not normally very interested in their details) for use by Congress when reviewing budget requests and enacting budget authority.
Data is also divided into service or component categories.
Important to note here that the data in any single category (for example: RDT&E, Army or Strategic Forces) from any one of the three major divisions (i.e., Appropriation, Component or MFP) can contain data from any or all of the remaining two major divisions (for example: Strategic Forces could contain data from all five appropriations and all four Components).
The lowest level of detail in the FYDP database is the program element, which is explained on the next chart…..
Central Supply & Maintenance
(7)
Training, Medical, & Other Personnel Activities
(8)
Administration and Associated Activities
(9)
Support of Other Nations
(10)
DOD COMPONENTS
Special Operations Forces
(11)
Space
(12)

17. Program Elements
PROGRAM ELEMENT (PE): Smallest aggregation of resources normally controlled by OSD
PE NUMBER: Used to track and identify resources; seven digit number followed by an alphabetic suffix
PROGRAM 2 (GENERAL PURPOSE FORCES)
A - Aircraft Engine CIP
N - F/A-18 Squadrons
F - AMRAAM
PROGRAM 3 (C3, INTEL & Space)
A - Joint Command and Control Program (JC2)
N - Aerial Common Sensor (ACS)
F - NAVSTAR GPS (User Equipment)
A - ARMY
N - NAVY
M - MARINE
F - AF
D - OSD
C - MDA
E - DARPA
J - JCS
S - DLA
BB - SOCOM
DBD - DFAS
Program Elements are the lowest level of detail in the FYDP database.
Program Elements are a tool OSD uses to track resources by program, system, or function so they can see how much is being spent on them.
PEs can be very broad, containing several programs. They also can be very specific, covering a single component of a weapon system. It all depends on the visibility OSD wants to maintain.
These are some examples of Program Elements (PEs), use F-22.
Seven digit code followed by a letter suffix designating the applicable component or agency.
The first two digits indicate the MFP to which the PE belongs. Although a PE is limited to a specific MFP, it is not in most cases, limited to a single Appropriation.
All programs and all resources have PEs. The entire FYDP database can be listed by PE. There are a few thousands of them.
Most acquisition programs have two program elements: one that begins with “06” for the development effort and one that begins with something other than “06” for the production and O&S effort.
Ref: DoD H

18. PPBE – Planning Phase - Led by USD (P)
YEAR 1
FEB/MAR
Elapsed Time: Months
YEAR 2
APR/MAY
President
National Security Council
CIA/DIA/JCS/OSD
CIA – Central Intelligence Agency
COCOM – Combatant Commander
CPR – Chairman’s Program Recommendation
DIA – Defense Intelligence Agency
DPG – Defense Planning Guidance
DSR – Defense Strategy Review formerly known as the Quadrennial Defense Review
JCS – Joint Chiefs of Staff
NDS – National Defense Strategy
NMS – National Military Strategy
NSS – National Security Strategy
OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense
USD(P) – Undersecretary of Defense (Policy)
NSS
Every
4 Years
Guidance for POM/BES submission and OSD Program & Budget Review
OSD
NDS
DSR
DPG
Level
New slide - Removed reference to SPRs
With one exception, this slide depicts the “new” annual Planning phase that is to be used for the PPBE cycle starting in Calendar Year 2010 and which will, ultimately produce the Defense portion of the President’s Budget for FY2012. The one exception to the annual process is the QDR which is conducted in the 1st year of an administration and submitted to Congress in the 2nd year.
The DPPG replaces the GDF (Guidance for Development of the Force) and the JPG (Joint Programming Guidance) and is signed by the SECDEF.
The FEAs are intended to address major issues for the SECDEF early in the POM/BES review process. For the Calendar Year 2010 process the SECDEF has selected eight major issues.
The Director, CAPE is the Executive Secretary for the FEAs and tri-chairs the process with the VCJCS and the USD(P). Issues nominated but not selected for the FEA review process will be addressed by the DEPSECDEF through the Deputy’s Advisory Working Group (DAWG).
JCS
Planning Phase focus:
Threat vs. Capabilities
Update strategy
Guidance for Programming & Budgeting
NMS
Level
CPR
(JCS,
COCOMs,
SERVICES)

19. OSD/OMB Budget Hearings
PPBE – Integrated Program/Budget Review
Year 2 SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
Year 3 JAN/FEB
DoD
“Large Group”
BES – Budget Estimate Submission
CAPE – Cost Assessment & Prgm Evaluation
COCOM – Combatant Commander
CPA – Chairman’s Program Assessment
DMAG – Deputy’s Management Action Group
FYDP – Future Years Defense Program
MBI – Major Budget Issues
OMB – Office of Management and Budget
PB – President’s Budget
POM – Program Objectives Memorandum
RMD – Resource Management Decision
SLRG – Senior Leader Review Group
3-Star Group
OSD/
CAPE
Issue
Resolution
POM
Issue
Teams
SECDEF/DEPSECDEF
SLRG & DMAG
CPA
JCS
Components/
Defense
Agencies
Program Review focus:
Compliance with DPG
RMDs (?)
BES
USD(C) &
OMB
Adv Questions/
OSD/OMB Budget Hearings
MBI PB
This slide shows the FEAs, initiated in the previous chart (Planning Phase) continuing to be conducted into the Integrated Program/Budget Review time period. The issues included in the FEAs are to be resolved through the Large Group (similar in make-up to the Defense Senior Leadership Conference, as listed in DoD D , DoD Senior Governance Councils). The output of the Large Group, as well as that of the DAWG-addressed issues that were not selected by the SECDEF for FEAs, is provided to the SECDEF/DEPSECDEF. All other POM issues are addressed under the existing process led by the CAPE.
Asterisks (TBD) indicate that the organizations may be re-named or realigned, or that activities (MBI and reclama process) may or may not be conducted. Asterisks were placed based on feedback from OSD POCs.
The results of the review process for both the BES and the POM will be documented, as appropriate in RMDs. It is expected that an RMD will have two annexes – one for program-related decisions and the other for budget-related decisions.
DoDD specifically addresses the membership of the Defense Senior Leadership Conference, the Senior Leader Review Group, and the Deputy’s Advisory Working Group. The membership of the “Small Group”, the “Large Group”, and the “Large Group Plus” has been referred to in the media but not codified as of May 2010.
FYDP
Update
FYDP
Update
Services / PEO / PM
Answer / Reclama
Budget Review focus:
- Pricing Phasing
- Funding policies - Budget execution

20. FY 19–23 Program & Budget Review Schedule
May–Aug 17 National Defense Strategy Review May 17 Fiscal Guidance Issued 15 Aug 17 Strategic Review Results Aug & 6/7 Sep 17 Component POM Briefs to 3-Star/DMAG 5 Sep 17 Component Program/Budget Submissions (databases lock) 15 Sep 17 Budget Justification Materials to OSD/OMB 18 Sep 17 Issue Nominations 25 Sep 17 Issue Nomination Disposition Sep-Dec 17 Program/Budget Review 8 Dec 17 Program/Budget Decisions Complete Dec 17 Budget Lock Feb 2018 PB 19 Released

21. Backups

22. PPBE - Program Review CAPE POM JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DoD
CAPE – Cost Assessment & Prgm Evaluation
CPA – Chairman’s Program Assessment
DEPSECDEF – Deputy Secretary of Defense
DoD – Department of Defense
DMAG – Deputy’s Management Action Group
DPG – Defense Planning Guidance
FYDP – Future Years Defense Program
POM – Program Objectives Memorandum
PDM – Program Decision Memoranda
SLRG – Senior Leader Review Group
SECDEF – Secretary of Defense
Components/
Defense
Agencies
Issue
Resolution
SECDEF / DEPSECDEF
SLRG & DMAG
POM
CAPE
CPA
JCS
FYDP
Update
3-Star Group
Teams
DoD
“Large Group”
PDM
Program Review focus:
Compliance with DPG

23. Services / PEO / PM Answer / Reclama OSD/OMB Budget Hearings
PPBE – Budget Review
BES – Budget Estimate Submission
FYDP – Future Years Defense Program
MBI – Major Budget Issues
OMB – Office of Management and Budget
OSD – Office of the Secretary of Defense
PEO – Program Executive Officer
PB – President’s Budget
PM – Program Manager
PBD – Program Budget Decision
USD(C) – Undersecretary of Defense (Comptroller)
Components/
Defense
Agencies
BES PB
MBI
USD(C) &
OMB
FYDP
Update
Services / PEO / PM Answer / Reclama
DEC JAN FEB
PBDs
Adv Questions/
OSD/OMB Budget Hearings
Budget Review focus:
Pricing
Funding policies
Phasing
Budget execution

24. DoD Budget: Sec Def Mattis Memo, 31 Jan 2017
Phase 1: Improve Warfighting Readiness – the FY 17 Budget Amendment
Due to OMB NLT 1 March 2017
$30B: $25B base and $5B OCO; AKA RAA
Submitted to OMB 10 March 2017; submitted to Congress 16 March 2017; above budget caps
$14.8B appropriated in Def Appn Title X, Additional Appns; all OCO funded
Phase 2: Achieve Program Balance – the FY 18 PB Request
Will conduct a comprehensive but accelerated FY 18 budget review
Will include
Buying more critical munitions
Funding facilities sustainment at a higher rate
Building programs for promising advanced capability demos
Investing in critical enablers
Growing force structure at the maximum responsible rate
Due to OMB NLT 1 May 2017 ($52B over BCA cap for FY 18)
Proposing offsets from domestic appropriations
Budget roll-out to the Hill 23 May 2017
HASC, SASC, and HAC-D expected to mark before August 2017 recess
SAC-D appears to be waiting for budget committees actions on the national debt
Phase 3: Build Capacity and Improve Lethality – the National Defense Strategy (NDS) and FY Defense program – Fiscal Guidance May 2017
NDS closely coordinated with the National Security Strategy (NSS) to be signed by President Trump
Strengthen military and improve how DoD does business (includes horizontal integration to improve efficiency and take advantage of economies of scale)

25. Defense Budget Request
($ in Billions)
DoD = 639
DoD = 619
DoD = 606 65
DoD BBA
Level = 524 70 83
DoD BCA
Level = 522
Total = +52
549
523
574
2017 Request
2017 Enacted
2018 Request
DoD OCO
DoD
Numbers may not add due to rounding

26. Process for SD Decision
PB18
Service POMs
Injects
Review Criteria
Process for SD Decision
Budget Review
Army
Navy
USAF
USMC
SOCOM
MDA
Other
components
SPRs
(~$20B initiatives)
Ground Combat
CP2
Third Offset
Space
Munitions
Contested Mobility
Stress on the Force
SecDef Priorities
Five Challenges (CRIKCT)
Innovative Capabilities & Operational Concepts
Big Bets (Space, Cyber, EW)
Force of the Future
Principled and Inclusive Security Network
Reform
Issue Teams
Topline
Supplemental
Economic Assumptions
Execution
3 Stars
DMAGs
SD Decisions
Issue Papers
($87B accepted)
Russia/ERI
Cyber, ISR, Space & Nuclear
OCO & Readiness
Innovation & Third Offset
PDM
(November)
Components submit balanced BES
Tab 4 – PPBE

27. OSD/OMB Budget Hearings
PPBE – Program/Budget Submission/Review
Yr 2 JUL SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
Year 3 JAN/FEB
DoD
“Large Group”
BES – Budget Estimate Submission
CAPE – Cost Assessment & Prgm Evaluation
COCOM – Combatant Commander
CPA – Chairman’s Program Assessment
DMAG – Deputy’s Management Action Group
FYDP – Future Years Defense Program
MBI – Major Budget Issues
OMB – Office of Management and Budget
PB – President’s Budget
POM – Program Objectives Memorandum
RMD – Resource Management Decision
SLRG – Senior Leader Review Group
3-Star Group
OSD/
CAPE
Issue
Resolution
POM
Issue
Teams
SECDEF/DEPSECDEF
SLRG & DMAG
CPA
JCS
Components/
Defense
Agencies
Program Review focus:
Compliance with DPG
RMDs
This slide shows the FEAs, initiated in the previous chart (Planning Phase) continuing to be conducted into the Integrated Program/Budget Review time period. The issues included in the FEAs are to be resolved through the Large Group (similar in make-up to the Defense Senior Leadership Conference, as listed in DoD D , DoD Senior Governance Councils). The output of the Large Group, as well as that of the DAWG-addressed issues that were not selected by the SECDEF for FEAs, is provided to the SECDEF/DEPSECDEF. All other POM issues are addressed under the existing process led by the CAPE.
Asterisks (TBD) indicate that the organizations may be re-named or realigned, or that activities (MBI and reclama process) may or may not be conducted. Asterisks were placed based on feedback from OSD POCs.
The results of the review process for both the BES and the POM will be documented, as appropriate in RMDs. It is expected that an RMD will have two annexes – one for program-related decisions and the other for budget-related decisions.
DoDD specifically addresses the membership of the Defense Senior Leadership Conference, the Senior Leader Review Group, and the Deputy’s Advisory Working Group. The membership of the “Small Group”, the “Large Group”, and the “Large Group Plus” has been referred to in the media but not codified as of May 2010.
BES
USD(C) &
OMB
Adv Questions/
OSD/OMB Budget Hearings
MBI PB
FYDP
Update
FYDP
Update
Services / PEO / PM
Answer / Reclama
Budget Review focus:
- Pricing Phasing
- Funding policies - Budget execution

28. Senior Leader Review Group AKA “The Large Group”
Secretary of Defense
Deputy Secretary of Defense
Secretary or Under Secretary of the Army
Secretary or Under Secretary of the Navy
Secretary or Under Secretary of Air Force
Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
Vice Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
Under Secretary of Defense (AT&L)*
Under Secretary of Defense (Policy)*
Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)
/Chief Financial Officer*
Under Secretary of Defense (Intelligence)*
Under Secretary of Defense (P&R)*
Commandant or Assistant Commandant
of the Marine Corps
Director of Administration and Management
Chief or Vice Chief of Staff of the Army
Chief or Vice Chief of Naval Operations
Chief of Staff or Vice Chief of the Air
Force
General Counsel
ASD (Legislative Affairs)
ASD (Networks & Information
Integration/Chief Information Officer
ASD for Public Affairs
Director, Cost Assessment and Program
Evaluation
Director, Joint Staff
Deputy Chief Management Officer
Chief, National Guard Bureau
This is the membership of the Senior Leader Review Group, chaired by SecDef.
* Or Principal Deputy

29. DPPG (was GDF and JPG; now DPG for FY 13-17)
4 Major Changes in the FY PPBE Cycle DepSecDef memo, dated 9 Apr 10
DPPG (was GDF and JPG; now DPG for FY 13-17)
One Budget Year (was two on the “on years”)
Makes this an annual budget cycle vs a biennial budget
Focus on a 5-Year Period
Changed FY12-17 period to FY 12-16
DOD Conducting Front End Assessments
Eight issues with SecDef oversight via the “Large Group”
All other issues led by DepSecDef via the DAWG (now DMAG)
NOTE: FY PPBE Cycle had six issues

30. Defense Appropriations “Colors of Money”
Military Personnel (MILPERS)
Active & Reserve Forces
Operation & Maintenance (O&M)
(civilian Salaries, supplies,
spares, fuels, travel, etc…)
Environmental Restoration
Former Soviet Union Threat
Reduction
Overseas Humanitarian,
Disaster, & Civic Aid
Procurement
Aircraft
Missiles
Weapons
Weapons & Tracked Combat
Vehicles
Ammunition
Other Procurement
Shipbuilding & Conversion
Marine Corps
Defense wide procurement
National Guard & Reserves
Research, Development, Test &
Evaluation (RDT&E)
Basic Research
Applied Research
Advanced Technology Development
Advanced Component Development
& Prototypes
System Development & Demonstration
RDT&E Management Support
Operational Systems Development
Military Construction (MILCON)
Facilities
Family Housing
Base Realignment & Closure (BRAC)
Other
Defense Health Program
Chemical Agents & Munitions
Destruction
Drug Interdiction & Counter-Drug
Activities
Joint Improvised Explosive Device
Defeat Fund
Rapid Acquisition Fund
Office of the Inspector General
RDT&E
PROC
MILPERS
O&M
MILCON
Teaching Point:
In the unlikely case the term “colors of money” is not familiar. This also shows a break out of the major appropriations.
The different RDT&E budget categories are also referred to as different colors of money by some.

31. FM Scope: From Requirement to Capability
Planning, Programming,
Budgeting and Execution
Life Cycle
Cost
Annual
Funding
Cost
Analysis
Estimate
ICE
Funding
Policies
Full
Funding (Exceptions)
FYDP DPG POM RMD
MFP PE BES
CAIV
CCA
Fiscal
Environment
Incremental
Funding
POE
AoA
Congressional
Enactment
HAC HASC HBC
SAC SASC SBC
President’s
Budget
Budget
Resolution
Authorization
&
Appropriation
Laws
Acquisition Program Baseline
This chart is intended to show how we get from “Requirement” to “Capability” from a Financial Management perspective…..
Starting with the lower left cloud, “Operational Concept”, as this is where it all starts for any discipline in acquisition. Operational Concept is the same as JCIDS plus. It includes the capability documents generated through the JCIDS process as well as a capabilities- based analysis and all acquisition programs have an acquisition program baseline (APB), which is a signed document between the program manager and the milestone decision authority in the acquisition chain of command. The agreement is on cost, schedule and performance parameters for a specific program.
Operational concept leads to the first major area of Financial Management (FM), “Cost Analysis”. This includes doing a cost estimate, which is the foundation for the rest of the FM process.
The second major area of FM is “Funding Policies”. This involves taking the cost estimate and turning it into a budget. Understanding funding policies is an important part of developing the budget.
The third major area of FM is “PPBE”. This is the DoD process for allocating resources. We take a budget and submit it up the chain to get buy-in from our service/agency and OSD. This session will focus on this area.
The end of the PPBE process is the president’s budget submission to Congress. This leads to the fourth area of FM, “Congressional Enactment”.
The end of “Congressional Enactment” is the Authorization and Appropriation laws, which leads to the fifth and final area of FM, “Budget Execution”. Budget execution relates to actual appropriated funds.
Now let’s focus on PPBE.
Operational
Concept
Force Structure
Modernization
Operational Capability
Readiness
Sustainability
Feedback
Commitment Reprogramming
Capabilities-Based
Assessment
Capability Docs
Budget Authority Obligation Expenditure Outlay
Budget
Execution