Army program office estimate

Although these uncertainties occur simultaneously in practice, each is treated analytically independent of the other with sensitivity analysis or mathematical probability techniques. In light of shrinking defense budgets, DoD is focusing on reducing the overall cost of the DoD establishment and its major subdivisions i. Total Ownership Cost TOC is defined as the sum of financial resources needed to organize, equip, sustain, and operate the system, while meeting national goals, policies, and standards of readiness, environmental compliance, safety, and quality of life concerns.

The TOC for Defense systems consists of the costs to research, develop, acquire, own, operate, and dispose of weapon and support systems.

LCC includes not only acquisition program direct costs, but also the indirect costs attributable to the acquisition program i. For example, indirect costs would include the infrastructure that plans, manages, and executes a program over its full life and common support items and systems. Acquisition program managers are charged with minimizing TOC through the continuous reduction of LCC for their systems.

Should cost is implemented by the program manager. While "should cost" is implemented throughout the program, it is focused on early planning efforts to make sure we are using trade-off analyses to design a system that meets the warfighter requirements while being cost conscious. The PM identifies specific opportunities for reducing cost. The FAR definition of "should cost" relates to developing a negotiating position for production contracts.

The focus is on identifying inefficiencies in contractor production processes and overhead to find areas that could be streamlined or changed to save costs.

The BBPI definition applies to all life cycle costs and is about identifying ways to reduce program cost by looking at things such as challenging learning curves, dissecting overheads and indirect costs, and targeting cost reduction with profit incentive. It assumes "business as usual" for the acquisition program and is used for budgeting purposes in the PPBE process. Any realized savings from should cost initiatives are available to the service to reinvest in the program or apply to other pressing needs.

Analysts need extensive information about an acquisition program in order to estimate its cost to the detail required by the various display formats identified in the life cycle cost model.

The CARD completely describes the system whose costs are to be estimated; it should define the program in sufficient detail so that no confusion exists among the many parties who may be concerned with estimating the program's cost. This document was rescinded by DODI The CARD should be considered a "living document," updated in preparation for all milestone and program reviews, if not annually. The updates reflect any changes that have occurred, or new data that have become available, since the previous milestone or program review.

DoD Instruction A draft version of the CARD is required days prior to the milestone or decision review; the final version is required 45 days prior to the milestone or decision review.

Preparation of the CARD should be coordinated with other program documents so that all final program documents are consistent with one another. Legal and Regulatory Requirements. The CAPE has the following functions related to cost analysis: 1 Conduct independent cost estimates and cost analyses. Component Cost Analysis Agencies All DoD Components have established their own agencies to serve as their lead organization for cost analysis and cost estimating actions and to act as liaison between the component and the CAPE.

Program office personnel involved with conducting or reviewing POEs should be aware of their respective Component's agency and contact that organization as appropriate on cost related issues. The Cost Review Process.

Figure 3. Figure 3 displays the cost review process for obtaining a Secretary of Defense program decision for a major weapon system.

Each service prepares for the CAIG meeting differently. In each service, the program team prepares the POE with in-house or contractor personnel. However, non-government personnel are not allowed at the CAIG meeting. The CCE, if required, is prepared by the component's cost analysis agency, if one exists, or by some other office independent of the acquisition and development chain of command. The CAPE report takes into consideration all the factors and information shown in the bottom portion of Figure 3.

There must be cost consistency among all documents. A complete list of documentation required at each milestone is available from the Army Systems Acquisition Review Council Executive Secretary. As programs move toward their respective milestone decisions, certain required documents are developed and become available to the analyst; they can be used to produce cost estimates using conventional cost estimating methodologies.

To properly cost an acquisition program, extensive information about it must be identified. Without the detailed information, life-cycle cost data cannot be derived. The intent is to define the program to a sufficient level of detail that captures quantities, fielding, sustainment, and training strategies. Currently, multiple estimates are developed to support acquisition decisions; the program office has an estimate that it develops internally, and the service cost centers develop a cost estimate.

These estimates are built on the program description and capabilities as defined in the CARD. Estimates that are close to one another may mean that there are sufficient data to accurately project costs and that there should be confidence in the estimate. Estimates that are far apart usually indicate little supporting data or that the program contains risks. Although multiple estimates help identify the range of possible costs, decision makers usually require a single estimate. In the past, decision makers were asked to pick an estimate without knowing the underlying quality of the data sources used, assumptions made, or methodologies.

We are committed to providing the training, both formal and informal, to improve the professionalism of the acquisition workforce by engaging our students both in the classroom and on the job.

General: CAPE is part "think tank," part consulting firm, and part investigative agency. Our employees all wear the broad job title of Operations Research Analyst, reflecting the breadth of issues being considered within the Department of Defense on a day-to-day basis.

CAPE is seeking highly talented professionals with graduate education in quantitative fields, as well as demonstrated analytical ability.

Since the issues CAPE works with tend to be broad, it is necessary to have a desire and ability to see the big picture and to rapidly acquire knowledge beyond a particular field of expertise. An excellent ability to communicate, both orally and in writing, is essential. CAPE has professionals in the fields of mathematics, physics, biochemistry, molecular biology, chemistry, aeronautical engineering, computer science, economics, and many other related technical fields.

CAPE periodically has vacancies for Schedule B Excepted Service Operations Research Analysts in a variety of areas, which can include: Analyzing proposed systems related to intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance degree in the physical sciences, engineering, math, or operations research desired Developing metrics for the Secretary of Defense Performing campaign analyses in the assessment of programs Preparing independent cost estimates of current and proposed DoD systems Analyzing proposed tactical aircraft systems Working for CAPE Working for the Federal Government - Benefits Operations Research Analyst Questionnaire Optional Demographic Information?

Federal government websites always use a. Before sharing sensitive information online, make sure you're on a. CAPE'S MISSION Provide the Department of Defense with timely, insightful and unbiased analysis on resource allocation and cost estimation problems to deliver the optimum portfolio of military capabilities through efficient and effective use of each taxpayer dollar. Develop a broad range of well-thought out capability and program alternatives that enable the Secretary and other civilian and military leaders of the Department to make decisions that improve our nation's defense.

Provide ever deeper insight into the costs of major acquisition programs that enables responsible budgeting and proactive management decisions so that the Department can control cost and achieve savings. Build the skills of the Department's analytical workforce to continue to advance the frontiers of systems analysis and answer tough questions for generations to come.

We encourage an environment of open thinking and continuous improvement. We treat colleagues with fairness and respect. We place the utmost confidence and trust in our people, CAPE's most valued asset. About Leadership Susanna Blume. PDF designed for doublesided printing, blank pages are intentional. Release March, Release May, Released May, Released February, Released April, Released May 7, Released July 26, Released June 2, Release December, Visit the CADE website.