Within JCIDS, the JROC is  supported in its duty to review and validate joint capability needs by the  Joint Capabilities Board and six Functional Capabilities Boards. The Joint Staff Has Initiated Efforts to Prioritize Capability Needs, but Implementation Processes Are Not Fully Developed and Clearly Documented

The Joint Staff is undertaking efforts to improve the ability to prioritize  capability needs from a joint perspective through JCIDS and to align  those needs with available budget resources. We have  previously reported that JCIDS’s ability to align resources to balance  competing needs could be improved if it had an analytic approach that  provided a means to review and validate proposals to ensure that the  most important capability needs of the department are being addressed. In addition to validating capability  proposals, according to Joint Staff officials, the JROC has begun  examining how the services’ existing programs can support joint  operations to reduce duplication of capabilities. New JCIDS Processes Are Not Fully Developed and Clearly Documented

The Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has sought some policy  changes and, according to officials, provided other direction to implement  changes in the JCIDS process, but the new approach to managing  requirements and considering affordability is still evolving and has not  been fully developed and clearly documented. However, the guidance does  not clearly outline criteria and measures for demonstrating progress  toward meeting the goal of aligning needs with available resources or  clearly communicate the goals and the analytic approach envisioned to  support JROC decision making. However, unless the Joint Staff takes steps to define and  institutionalize the new approach by adhering to the key principles of  results-oriented management, it is not clear whether the current  momentum in implementing an analytic approach through JCIDS will be  sustained. JCIDS guidance requires that sponsors of potential major defense  acquisition programs include sustainment information in capability  development documents, which detail proposed solutions to fulfill  capability needs. suggests that gaps in  JCIDS guidance requires sponsors of major defense acquisition programs  to address sustainment based on four metrics—materiel availability,  operational availability, reliability, and ownership cost (renamed operation  and support cost in January 2012). Table 2 outlines examples of key review criteria within each  of the four sustainment metrics under the guidance in effect through  December 2011. Our analysis of six capability development documents found that all of the  documents provided information on all of the required sustainment  metrics. However, we found that the completeness of information  reported for all of the metrics’ key criteria varied. Updated JCIDS guidance issued in January 2012 still does not  clearly require program sponsors to report on the individual criteria for  each of the sustainment metrics. Without complete and detailed information on each of the individual  criteria elements, the JROC may not be in the best position to weigh the  costs and benefits of a proposal within a capability portfolio. Recommendations for Executive Action

To help sustain momentum for efforts to bring a capability portfolio  approach to the JCIDS process and to improve the quality of sustainment  information reported in capability development documents, we  recommend that the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as the  JROC Chairman, take the following two actions:
Revise and implement guidance to reflect changes to the JCIDS  process as well as to establish criteria and measures for determining  the relative importance of capability needs across capability areas and  assessing progress. Appendix I: Observations on Reporting Provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011

Section 862 of the Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for  Fiscal Year 2011 requires the Comptroller General to carry out a  comprehensive review of the Joint Capabilities Integration and  Development System (JCIDS) and to submit to the congressional defense  committees a report on the review. To assess the extent to which the JROC has considered aspects of the  availability and operational support requirements of weapon systems— called sustainment—when validating the requirements of proposed  capability solutions, we reviewed relevant DOD and Joint Staff policy  documents and related guidance outlining the requirement to develop and  report sustainment metrics for capability documents.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Department of Defenses Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) is charged with assisting in the prioritization of capability needs from a joint perspective and helping guide investments. The JROC is supported by the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) process. However, a congressional committee and GAO have expressed concerns about the extent to which JCIDS has been effective in prioritizing capability needs. The Ike Skelton National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 required GAO to provide a report on the effectiveness of JCIDS in several areas. In addition to responding to this direction, GAO has more broadly evaluated the extent to which (1) the Joint Staff has developed and implemented an analytic approach to prioritize capability needs and (2) the JROC has considered aspects of the availability and operational support of weapon systemscalled sustainmentwhen validating the requirements of proposed capability solutions. To do so, GAO analyzed capability documents, reviewed relevant guidance and law, and interviewed officials.

What GAO Found

After studying the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) process since September 2010, the Joint Staff began initiating actions in October 2011 to better prioritize capability needs and align those needs with available budgetary resources. Specifically, according to Joint Staff officials, the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) has begun to consider the benefits and affordability of new capabilities within the context of joint capability areas and to evaluate possible duplication before validating new capability requirements. The Joint Staff has begun to implement a new approach to support JROC prioritization of capability needs, but the new approach is still evolving and has not been fully developed and clearly documented. New guidance does not clearly outline goals of the new approach, develop and communicate the analytic approach envisioned to support JROC decision making, or set out criteria and accompanying measures of progress. GAO previously reported that JCIDSs ability to prioritize needs could be improved if it had an analytic approach to reviewing and validating proposals that would help ensure that the most important capability needs of the department are addressed. Until the Joint Staff takes steps to fully develop, document, and institutionalize the new analytic approach, it is not clear whether the current momentum for improving the JCIDS process will be sustained.
JCIDS guidance in effect through December 2011 required that sponsors of potential major defense acquisition programs address sustainment information in capability development documents according to four metricsmateriel availability, operational availability, reliability, and ownership cost. Each of these metrics includes a set of potentially reportable criteria or data, which are listed as review criteria and are suggested, but not clearly required by the guidance, to be included in the metric. Based on GAOs analysis of six capability development documents, GAO found that all of the documents provided information on the four required sustainment metrics, but the completeness of information for all of the metrics key criteria varied. Further, in some cases information that should have been included, according to Department of Defense officials, was not provided. The Joint Staff issued updated JCIDS guidance in January 2012, but the guidance still does not clearly require program sponsors to report on the individual criteria for each of the four sustainment metrics. Without complete and detailed information on each of the individual criteria elements, the JROC may not have the information it needs to make the most informed decisions when validating the requirements of proposed solutions intended to mitigate capability gaps.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (1) revise and implement JCIDS guidance to reflect recent changes to the process and establish criteria and measures for determining the relative importance of capability needs and (2) require program sponsors to address each criterion in JCIDS guidance related to sustainment in capability documents. DOD partially concurred with GAOs recommendations.