0. Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) and the Defense Acquisition System (DAS) Requirements and Acquisition Management In the 21st Century

1. Lesson Objective
Summarize the relationship between the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) and the Defense Acquisition System (DAS).
Highlight recent changes to the DAS
Link JCIDS to Milestones and Phases of the DAS
Emphasize current strategic guidance
Highlight Better Buying Power Initiatives Related to Capability Requirements

2. Changes – 2008 Defense Acquisition Management System
No longer on model
The Materiel Development Decision precedes entry into any phase of the acquisition management system
Entrance Criteria met before entering phase
Evolutionary Acquisition or Single Step to Full Capability
IOC
Technology Opportunities & Resources
Materiel
Solution
Analysis
FRP
Decision
Review
FOC
Materiel Development
User Needs
PDR
CDR
AoA
Pre-Systems Acquisition
Systems Acquisition
Sustainment
Post CDR
Assessment
Technology Development
Production & Deployment
Operations &
Support
Engineering &
Manufacturing Development
Post PDR A B C
EA dropped from policy
CDD
Validation
New
Development
RFP Release
New
Program Initiation
PDR & CDR still required; but not as decision points
Name changed to Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction (same activities)
Three Categories
Deleted
No longer called “Defense Acquisition Management System (DAMS)”, or “Defense Acquisition Management Framework”.
Now referred to as the “Defense Acquisition System (DAS)” and “Program Models”

3. Defense Acquisition System DoDI 5000.02, January 7, 2015
Materiel
Development
Decision (MDD)
CDD
Validation
Development
RFP Release
IOC
FOC
FRP
Decision A B C
ICD
draft
CDD
CDD
CPD
Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP)
Materiel Solution Analysis
Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Operations
& Support
OT&E
Production & Deployment
Program Model 1, Hardware Intensive Program
5 Phases
3 Milestone Decisions – A, B, C
4 Other Decision Points:
Materiel Development Decision (MDD)
Capability Development Document (CDD) Validation Decision Development RFP Release Decision
Full-Rate Production (FRP) Decision
“Mandatory” Entry at Materiel Development Decision (MDD)
DoDI Program Models:
Model 1: Hardware Intensive Program. The figure on the chart shows a model of a hardware intensive development program such as a major weapons platform. This is the classic model that has existed in some form in all previous editions of DoDI It is the starting point for most military weapon systems; however, these products almost always contain software development resulting in some form of Hybrid Model A. This model will be used in this lesson to describe the common milestones, other decision points, and phases of the acquisition process. Other models described in DoDI are a variation of this model:
Model 2: Defense Unique Software Intensive Program
Model 3: Incrementally Fielded Software Intensive Program
Model 4: Accelerated Acquisition Program
Hybrid Program A: Hardware Dominant, Software Intensive
Hybrid Program B: Software Dominant
Acquisition programs use these models as a starting point in structuring a program to acquire a specific product. The structure of the program and the procedures used should be tailored as much as possible to the characteristics of the product being acquired, and to the totality of circumstances associated with the program including operational urgency and risk factors.
Program Managers and Milestone Decision Authorities (MDAs) tailor program strategies and oversight, including program information, acquisition phase content, the timing and scope of decision reviews and decision levels, based on the specifics of the product being acquired, including complexity, risk factors, and required timelines to satisfy validated capability requirements. When there is a strong threat-based or operationally driven need to field a capability solution in the shortest time, MDAs are authorized to implement streamlined procedures designed to accelerate acquisition system responsiveness.
CPD: Capability Production Document
ICD: Initial Capabilities Document
FOC: Full Operational Capability
IOC: Initial Operational Capability
RFP: Request for Proposal

4. Program Models and the Requirements Manager
Examples of Model 1: Major Weapons Platform
This may be considered the classic model but with large software components in most programs program managers are now likely to use a hybrid model . (Hybrid A - chart 8)
Program models are starting points from which to tailor an acquisition program
Tailored program models reflect the type of program and the PM’s acquisition strategy, however, the responsibilities of the RM are essentially the same regardless of model.

5. Model 2: Defense Unique Software Intensive Program
Full Deployment Decision
(FDD)
CDD
Validation
Development RFP Release Decision
Full
Deployment (FD)
IOC
Materiel Development Decision A B C
Build 1.1
Limited
Deployment
Risk Reduction
Build 1.2
Build 0.1
Build 1.3
Integration
Build 1.4
Build 2.1*
Build 1.5
OT&E
Sustainment Disposal
Materiel Solution Analysis
Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Production &
Deployment
Operations & Support
= Milestone Decision
= Decision Point
Legend:
Complex, usually defense unique, software program that will not be fully deployed until several software builds have been completed.
Examples: command and control systems and significant upgrades to the combat systems found on major weapons systems such as surface combatants and tactical aircraft.
Several software builds are typically necessary to achieve a deployable capability.
*The actual number and type of builds during the program will depend on system type.

6. Model 3: Incrementally Fielded Software Intensive Program
CDD
Validation
Full Deployment Decision
(FDD)
Full
Deployment
(FD)
Development RFP Release
Materiel Development Decision
Limited Fielding
Decisions
IOC A B
Risk
Reduction
Build
Build 1.1
Build 1.2
. . .
Build 0
Build 1.n
OT&E
Sustainment
Materiel Solution Analysis
Risk
Reduction
Development &
Deployment
Operations &
Support
Development RFP
Release Decision
Limited Fielding Decisions
FDD FD
IOC B
Increment 2
Build 2.1
Build 2.2
. . .
Build 2.n
OT&E
Sustainment
Risk
Reduction
Development &
Deployment
Operations &
Support
Development RFP
Release Decision
Limited Fielding Decisions
FDD FD
IOC B
Increment N
Build n.1
Build n.2
. . .
Build n.n
Sustainment Disposal
OT&E
Risk
Reduction
Development &
Deployment
Operations &
Support
This model will apply in cases where commercial off-the-shelf software, such as commercial business systems with multiple modular capabilities, are acquired and adapted for DoD. This model is distinguished by the rapid delivery of capability through multiple acquisition increments, each of which provides part of the overall required program capability.

7. Model 4: Accelerated Acquisition Program
Preliminary Design Review
Materiel Development Decision
IOC
FOC
A/B C
OT&E
Sustainment Disposal
Materiel Solution Analysis
Concurrent Technology Maturation, Risk Reduction, and Development
Concurrent
Production and Deployment
Operations & Support
= Milestone Decision
= Decision Point
Legend:
Applies when schedule considerations dominate over cost and technical risk considerations.
Compresses or eliminates phases of the process and accepts the potential for inefficiencies in order to achieve a deployed capability on a compressed schedule.
Used when technological surprise by a potential adversary necessitates a higher-risk acquisition program.
Shows one example of tailoring for accelerated acquisition and many others are possible.

8. Model 5, Hybrid Program A (Hardware Dominant)
CDD
Validation
Development RFP Release
FOC
FRP
IOC
Materiel Development Decision A B C
Build 1.1
LRIP
Risk Reduction
Build 1.2
Build 3.1
Build 0.1
Build 1.3
Build 3.2*
Integration
Build 1.4
Build 2.1
Build 1.5
OT&E
Sustainment Disposal
Materiel Solution Analysis
Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Production & Deployment
Operations & Support
Combines hardware development as the basic structure with software intensive development that is occurring simultaneously with the hardware development program.
In hardware intensive development, the design, fabrication, and testing of physical prototypes may determine overall schedule, decision points, and milestones, but software development will often dictate the pace of program execution and must be tightly integrated and coordinated with hardware development decision points.
*The actual number and type of builds during the program will depend on system type.

9. Model 6. Hybrid Program B (Software Dominant)
CDD
Validation
FDD
Development RFP Release
Materiel Development Decision FD
IOC A B C
Build 1.1.1
Limited
Deployment LD)
Build 1.1.2
Build 1.3.1
Build 1.0.1
Build 1.1.3
Integration
Build 1.3.2*
Build 1.2
OT&E
Sustainment
Materiel Solution Analysis
Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Production and Deployment
Operations & Support
Development RFP
Release Decision
IOC
FDD FD B C
Increment 2 LD
Build 2.1.1
Build 2.1.2
Build 2.3.1
Build 2.1.3
Integration
Sustainment Disposal
Build 2.2
OT&E
Build 2.3.2
Technology Maturation &
Risk Reduction
Engineering & Manufacturing Development
Production and Deployment
Operations & Support
Depicts how a software intensive product development can include a mix of incrementally fielded software products or releases that include intermediate software builds.

10. Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) / Defense Acquisition System (DAS)
Development RFP Release
CDD Validation
FRP A B C
MDD
Draft
CDD
ICD
CDD
CPD
Strategic Guidance
Joint Concepts
Capabilities - Based Assessment
Materiel
Solution Analysis
Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
Engineering &
Manufacturing
Development
Production & Deployment
Operations & Support
President
SECDEF
CJCS
Joint
Community
Sustainment
Disposal
Although a MDD is required for all programs to enter the acquisition process, at the MDD the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) will authorize entry into the appropriate phase based on technology maturity and risk.
JCIDS
DAS
CDD: Capability Development Document
CPD: Capability Production Document
FRP: Full-Rate Production
ICD: Initial Capabilities Document
MDD: Materiel Development Decision
RFP: Request for Proposal

11. Strategic Guidance – Joint Concepts – JCIDS – Acquisition
National Security Strategy
National Defense Strategy
National Military Strategy
Unified Command Plan
Defense Planning Guidance
Quadrennial Defense Review
Capabilities-
Based
Assessment
Current
Joint Warfighting
Capabilities
Future
Joint Warfighting
Capabilities
Family of Joint Concepts
Supporting Concepts
Depth and detail to single & multiple JOCs
Joint Operating Concepts (JOCs)
Link strategic guidance to future military operations
Capstone Concept for Joint Operations (CCJO)
Chairman’s vision for how Joint Force will defend the nation
Acquisition
MDD A B C
FRP
JCIDS
ICD
CDD
CPD
Affordability
JCAs
Cost
Service concepts, multiservice concepts, &
CONOPS written within the joint community
Intelligence
Threat

12. JCIDS and Acquisition (Interim DoDI 5000.02, Nov 2013)
Identification of Capability Requirements
Analysis of Alternatives (AoA)
Acquisition Strategy (AS)
Test & Evaluation (T&E) Master Plan (TEMP)
System Engineering Plan (SEP)
Life Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP)
Operational Mode Summary/Mission Profile (OMS/MP)
Technology Demonstrated
Initial Key Performance Parameters/ Key System Attributes (KPPs/KSAs) AS
TEMP
SEP
LCSP
OMS/MP
Final Design
Developmental T&E (DT&E)
Operational Assessments (OA)
Revise KPPs/ KSAs AS
Acquisition Pgm Baseline (APB)
TEMP
SEP
LCSP
OMS/MP
Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP)
Initial Operational T&E (IOT&E)
Full-Rate
Production
(FRP) AS
APB
TEMP
SEP
LCSP
OMS/MP
President, SECDEF & Chairman:
Operational Planning
CBAs & Other Studies
Exercises/Lessons Learned
JCTDs/JUON/JEON/ Experiments
JIEDDO Initiatives
Defense Business Sys
Strategic Guidance
OSD/Joint Staff
Outputs
Integrated Security Constructs
Joint Concepts
Mission & Problem
Capability Gaps
Tasks
Performance
Conditions
Operational Risk
Non-Materiel Approaches
Materiel Approaches
Recommendations
LRIP
FOT&E
Materiel
Development
Decision
CDD
Val
RFP
Rel
MS A
MS B
MS C
Activity
FRP
Select Joint
Concept
Develop CONOPS
Capabilities-Based Assessment /
Other
ICD
Materiel Solution Analysis
Draft
CDD
Technology Maturation & Risk Reduction
CDD
Engineering &
Manufacturing
Development
CPD
Production & Deployment
CCMD
Analysis of
Alternatives (AoA)
Competitive
Prototyping
Develop, test, LRIP & Full Rate Production, deploy to warfighter, IOC
Military Services
Validates ICD
Reviews AoA Results
Validates CDD
Validates CPD
JROC action for JROC Interest programs (ACAT I & IA)
SECDEF
Joint Staff / Joint Requirements Oversight Council / OSD
OSD (AT&L, CAPE), Services and OSD (DOT&E) Joint Staff (JROC)
Select Materiel
Solution
Develop, Test, Produce &
Field
Policy
Identify Capability Requirements
Version: 17 Dec 2013
Getting The Front End Right is Key 12

13. Current National Strategies
National Security Strategy
May 2010, President Barack Obama. Renew American leadership…; build upon sources of strength at home, while shaping an international order
National Defense Strategy
QDR 2014 –, Secretary of Defense Hagel, Consistent with the strategy
Jan 2012, Sustaining U.S Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, President Obama and Secretary of Defense Panetta
Strategic Direction to the Joint Force
Feb 2012, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff - General Dempsey
National Military Strategy
Feb 2011, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff - Admiral Mullen

14. QDR 2014- Sec Def The 2014 QDR advances three important initiatives.
First, it builds on the Defense Strategic Guidance, published in 2012, by outlining an updated defense strategy that protects and advances U.S. interests and sustains U.S. leadership.
Second, the QDR describes how the Department is responsibly and realistically taking steps to rebalance major elements of the Joint Force given the changing environment.
Third, the QDR demonstrates our intent to rebalance the Department itself as part of our effort to control internal cost growth that is threatening to erode our combat power in this period of fiscal austerity.
We will protect the health of the All-Volunteer Force as we undertake these reforms.
Hon. Chuck Hagel
Secretary of Defense
2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) Report to Congress, March 4, 2014

15. QDR 2014 – Defense Strategy
The 2014 QDR embodies the 21st century defense priorities outlined in the 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance*.
The Department’s defense strategy emphasizes three pillars:
Protect the homeland, to deter and defeat attacks on the United States and to support civil authorities in mitigating the effects of potential attacks and natural disasters.
Build security globally, in order to preserve regional stability, deter adversaries, support allies and partners, and cooperate with others to address common security challenges.
Project power and win decisively, to defeat aggression, disrupt and destroy terrorist networks, and provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
*Sustaining U.S Global Leadership: Priorities for 21st Century Defense, Jan 2012
See student reference folder for more information on QDR 2014

16. Better Buying Power (BBP)
Better Buying Power Gateway:

17. Better Buying Power (BBP) Impact on Requirements Management
Achieve Affordable Programs.
Mandate affordability as a requirement – require Milestone Decision Authority (MDA)relief to exceed affordability caps – similar to requiring requirements validation authority relief to exceed KPP thresholds
Control Costs Throughout the Product Life Cycle
Implement should-cost management – may free-up funds to buy more warfighting capability
Eliminate redundancy with warfighter portfolios
Build stronger relationships with the requirements community to control costs
See student reference folder for more information on BBP