In my last post about acquisition, I cited a recent Defense Science Board report on 'Fulfillment of Urgent Operational Needs.' I walked you through some of the board's findings, and now I wanted to go through the task force's recommendations.
The first recommendation is that the Secretary of Defense formalize a dual acquisition path. "Deliberate" and "rapid" acquisition are incompatible processes as currently configured in DOD, according to the task force.
A second recommendation has the executive and legislative branches establishing a fund for rapid acquisition and fielding. Will that solve or add to current money problems? Look how inflated the budget became under the auspices of "Supplemental Funding" (now known as Overseas Contingency Operations funding). Would an "urgent needs fund" have the same problem?
The task force also recommended the SecDef establish a new agency called the Rapid Acquisition and Fielding Agency. The RAFA would fall under the purview of the Pentagon Acquisitions chief. It would be a joint agency headed by a 3-star.
Initial funding and billets for RAFA would be based on absorbing and integrating existing programs and organizations. The task force also suggested DOD establish a streamlined, integrated approach for rapid acquisition.
I'll ask you as I did in my last post - once you sort through the jargon, do these recommendations sound viable? And even if there - how well (and quickly) do you think they would be put into place?