<div class="description">
<p>Effectively managing the Navy Flight Hour Program (FHP) has historically posed unique challenges. Most notably, CNAF FHP managers have routinely faced a seemingly unavoidable shortfall in flight hour funding requiring the use of creative cash management practices and reliance on defense supplemental appropriations to   continue flight operations to the end of each fiscal year. In an effort to reduce this disparity between budget forecasts and actual program execution requirements, significant changes were recently made to individual pricing models used in formulating OP-20 funding levels. In addition, the Navy's transition to the Fleet Readiness Training Plan (FRTP) in support of the overall Fleet Response Plan (FRP) in July of 2003 resulted in a fundamental shift in funding level requirements and overall program execution. The purpose of this study is to analyze what effect the response to this fundamental shift in the Navy's overall readiness posture, in conjunction with the aforementioned OP-20 budgetary process enhancements, had on the matching of budgeted program dollars with execution requirements.   The methodology for the study will entail an analysis into the specific changes to the budgeting models used in the formulation of OP-20 funding levels, along with a review of the resulting execution changes at   COMNAVAIRPAC (CNAP) in support of the FRP.
</p>
<br>Subjects: Cash management.; CNAP flying hour program; cash management and cost estimation; naval aviation;</div>
<div class="fn value">
<dl><dd>Glenn, Walter H.</dd>
<dd>Otten, Eric E.</dd></dl></div>
Internet Archive identifier