Acquisition Research Symposium

Series:
Acquisition Research Symposium

Series Type

Conference

Organizations

Acquisition Research Program (ARP)

Full item page

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 2128

Army Modernization: Steps Needed to Ensure Army Futures Command Fully Applies Leading Practices (GAO-19-132
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2020-05) Keener, J. Kristopher; Acquisition Research Program (ARP); Graduate School of Defense Management (GSDM)
Evaluating the Impacts of Federal Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) Compliance
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2021-05-10) Lucyshyn, William; Hunt, Dylan; Acquisition Research Program (ARP); Acquisition Research Program
Over the last 30 years, the Department of Defense (DoD) slowly became compliant with the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, which required federal agencies to undergo an annual financial audit. In 2018, the DoD finally completed its first audit and continued this trend in 2019. This paper seeks to understand the benefits of producing auditable financial statements, their costs, and any impacts on the DoD's acquisition system. We describe the several forms of accounting and review the academic accounting literature that examines the value of audits. We describe the DoD's preparation for and analyze the results of the two completed audits to look more broadly at the benefits. These include uncovering previously unaccounted inventory and improvements to internal accounting systems, even as no instances of massive waste or fraud were identified. Finally, the utility of management cost accounting is discussed.
Preliminary Findings: Is the Ratio of Investment Between R&D to Production Experiencing Fundamental Change?
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2018-04-30) McCormick, Rhys; Hunter, Andrew; Sanders, Gregory; Acquisition Research Program (ARP); Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)
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 paper uses budgetary and program data to better understand the historical trends in the relationship of production costs to development costs in complex acquisition programs.
Analyzing the Effects of Source Selection Method, Acquisition Type, and Service Component on Acquisition Outcomes
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2017-03) Landale, Karen A. F.; Rendon, Rene G.; Acquisition Research Program (ARP)
For years, one of the most hotly contested debates in contracting and acquisition has been the choice of source selection method and the contract-related consequences of that choice. While policy memos encourage contracting officers to ﾓselect the appropriate source selection process ﾅ to match the specific requirement, meet Warfighter needs, and deliver a contracted solution that will provide the required performance levels at the lowest costﾔ (Kendall, 2015, p. 3), stakeholders on both sides of the table have differing views about how the choice of source selection method affects contract outcomes. Anecdotally, from the perspective of the government, lowest priced technically acceptable (LPTA) procedures offer a faster time-to-contract, as the technical acceptability criteria is binary and the evaluation of priceﾗthe most important factor in LPTA source selectionsﾗis objective. Hence, theoretically, the requirement can be put on contract faster, with less likelihood of protest. The sellersﾒ perspective, however, is that the LPTA source selection method stifles innovation, because price is more important than, say, an innovative approach that may ultimately better serve the government (Calisti, 2015). Critics argue that the LPTA method often results in the selection of a contractor that has undercut the cost of the requirement. They argue that the contractor has essentially achieved ﾓbuy-inﾔ by proposing an unreasonably low price that will later have to be adjusted (i.e., increased) via modification in order to fulfill the terms and conditions of the contract. This sort of gamesmanship of the LPTA method has been the argument of federal contractors for many years. Further, opponents of the LPTA method believe the process represents a ﾓrace to the bottomﾔ price-wise, and mockingly dub the outcomes achieved by LPTA contracts as ﾓLousy Project, Tragic Actﾔ (Weckstein & Delgado, 2012). In other words, opponents feel LPTA source selections produce inferior products and services. Proponents suggest this is not the case, and that by providing clear technical acceptability criteria, the government can avoid receiving inferior products and services. On the opposite spectrum of the best value continuum, the tradeoff (TO) source selection method is anecdotally believed to take more time because of the subjective nature of the evaluation and the increased likelihood of protest. Customers and contractors alike seem to prefer this approach, as it allows customers to feel a certain measure of control over selecting the contractor that represents the best value to the governmentﾗthat by ranking the evaluation factors in terms of importance, they have the option of tailoring the evaluation to fully meet their needs. Contractors also seem to prefer this method, as it allows them to provide innovative solutions to government requirements, without the burden of competing mainly based on price. Proponents of the TO method argue that it results in higher quality products and services because contractors are not ﾓsqueezedﾔ on price. Opponents argue that the method does not necessarily produce better contractual outcomes (i.e., better contract performance), particularly given the anecdotal belief that TO acquisitions take longer to put on contract. Choosing which method is appropriate for a given acquisition is clearly established by policy and is not the focus of this research. Instead, we aim to use scientific methods to confirm or deny the anecdotal beliefs associated with each source selection method. We use multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) methods to determine if statistically significant differences in contract outcomes exist based on source selection method. This first-of-kind research uses actual contract file data from the Air Force and Navy to test hypotheses associated with the anecdotal beliefs. Specifically, we examine whether differences exist in Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) scores and procurement administrative lead time (PALT) based on choice of source selection method (LPTA or TO), while taking into account several different covariates related to the acquisitions. The remainder of this paper proceeds as follows: The Literature Review section provides a detailed review of the contract management process, the best value continuum, and the relationship between contract type and source selection method. Following that is a discussion of the data collection and analysis methodologies, results of the analysis, and finally, a review of practical and managerial implications, as well as limitations and areas for further research.
Analysis of ExFOB Program
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2014-05-01) Demersseman, E. James; Witherill, Michael; Acquisition Research Program (ARP)
Toward Realistic Acquisition Schedule Estimates
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2016-05-01) Franck, Raymond; Hildebrandt, Gregory; Udis, Bernard; Acquisition Research Program (ARP)
Decisions Made During Program Execution as a Root Cause of Nunn-McCurdy Breaches
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2012-05-01) McNicol, David L.; Acquisition Research Program (ARP)
Contractual Flow-Down Clauses: Deterrence to Non-Traditional Defense Contractors from Doing Business with DoD
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2018-04-30) Kaye, Mark F.; Cuda, Daniel L.; Wu, Kevin Y.; Acquisition Research Program (ARP); Naval Postgraduate School (U.S.)
Section 887 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2017 directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a study of contractual flow-down clauses related to major defense acquisition programs (MDAPs) and subcontractors. The MDAP data sample indicates no clear misapplication of flow-down clauses from prime contractors to subcontractors; however, the significant number of flow-down clauses reflects the voluminous nature of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS). The existing and growing burden of regulatory compliance will reduce private sector participation in MDAPs, and the possibility exists that in the future, the Department of Defense may not have ready access to advanced technologies and capabilities for MDAPs that reside in the private sector due in part to this regulatory burden.
Investigation of Leading Indicators for Systems Engineering Effectiveness in Model-Centric Programs
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2021-05-19) Rhodes, Donna H.; Rebentisch, Eric; Moulton, Allen; Acquisition Research Program (ARP); Acquisition Research Program
Digital engineering transformation changes the practice of systems engineering, and drives the need to re-examine how engineering effectiveness is measured and assessed. Early engineering metrics were primarily lagging measures. More recently leading indicators have emerged that draw on trend information to allow for more predictive analysis of technical and programmatic performance of the engineering effort. By analyzing trends (e.g., requirements volatility) in context of the program's environment and known factors, predictions can be forecast on the outcomes of certain activities (e.g., probability of successfully passing a milestone review), thereby enabling preventative or corrective action during the program. This paper discusses continuing research on the adaptation of existing systems engineering leading indicators (developed under the assumptions of document-based engineering) for digital (model-based) engineering. Model-based implications identified in the research are discussed in support of the use of existing leading indicators in digital engineering programs. An illustrative example describes how measurement data can be extracted from a digital system model and composed into indicators. The importance of visualization and interactivity is discussed, especially the potential role of visual analytics and interactive dashboards. Several recommendations for future research are proposed based on interim research findings.
Navy Mobile Apps Acquisition: Doing It in Weeks, Not Months or Years
(Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School, 2016-05-01) Aplanalp, Jacob; Antos, Emily; Driegert, Dave; Burnett, Kevin; Johnson, Kenneth; Acquisition Research Program (ARP)