DODD 5000.1 PDF

DODD , National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve DODD and DOD R, Executive Summary, March NUMBER May 12, USD(AT&L). SUBJECT: The Defense Acquisition System. References: (a) DoD Directive , “The Defense Acquisition. follows in achieving those objectives are described in DoD Directive and DoD. Instruction The Defense Acquisition Guidebook is designed to.

Author: Akinorg Akile
Country: Slovenia
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Relationship
Published (Last): 26 June 2007
Pages: 272
PDF File Size: 6.5 Mb
ePub File Size: 11.85 Mb
ISBN: 293-9-69677-542-3
Downloads: 36530
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Braran

Whether or not line officials document their decisions that inpact a program remains to bo seen.

DoD Directives

With respect to the review process, the current ASARC structure and function will have to be revised to reflect the direct control of the Secretary of the Army. A Acquisitions for development, as defined in FAR Additionally, the establishment of program performance characteristics for a weapon system should be pro- hibited until such time as the candidate system is approved for full-scale developiTient.

Amy Inple-mentation AR establishes broad policies applicable to the neteriel ac- quisition process and does not identify a cost level criteria for the de- 1 siqnation of major systems, [x? Include specific references to budget line items and program elements, where applicable, estimated production unit cost, and the total cost for remaining production.

During the timeframe of interviews, the initial draft of a revised AR was being prepared, but it had not been re- leased for coiment. It appears that in today’s environment tliis will continue to 500.1 and to give the PM oriented personnel their proper reecKTnition and reward.

DoD: 5000.1, 5000.2 Defense Acquisition

As exploration and development of a new sys- tem concept proceeds, reliable trade-offs between cost, schedule and [per- formance is increased and estimates gain stability. Since the Army does not have a forrml decision fxrint for program initiation, it appears that the decision for entry into concept 18 1 r formulation activities will be structured similar to the MIMS prooessing within the OSD staff and approval by SECDEF.


Laird felt there existed an over 5 centralization in OSD management control of the weapon systein ac- tjuisition process. These basic and operating policies implement DOD Directives These changes vvere then studied and evaluated within the framework of the current Army’s acejuisition policies. Memorandum for the defense acquisition community: Program managers are held singularly responsible to report iimEdiately significant program exceptions including projected threshold breaches to the Service Secretary and SECDEF.

Additionally, the management principles reflected in these directives serves as a blueprint for the formulation of internal service policy guid- ance. These changes vsere grouped by similar subject matter and addressed in this report by an overall generic title The purpose of the grouping was twofold: Clements due to the change of administration in January AR contains the Army’s basic acquisition management policies. This management philosophy is still found today in the revised DODD Department of Defense, Depart me nt of Defe nse Direct ive This fdnase included the review of those studies, reports, and other actions which had a direct impact on the di- rective revision.

Cullin Itiis study project report represents the views, conclusions and reconmen- dations of doodd author and does not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the Defense Systcans Managenent College or the Department of Defense. Whether or not tliis has ever been done by a PM is not as important as the fact tiiat he is 29 authorized to circumvent the established lines of authority if he con- siders it necessary.

A”Major System Acejuisitions, ” 5 April It is of limited detail and reflects the following subjects: The changes rejemphasize the need for a 55000.1 single program manager concept supported by highly skilled and motivated personnel. If the spirit as well as the letter of the revision is to be iirplemented, the Defense Acquisition Executive, vho is tasked with the responsibility for integrating and unifying the management process, will have to place necessary controls and checks to insure that a “shadow” DSARC within the OSD staff is not established.


However, it is not 0500.1 important as having the recognition that there will be decision accountability through- out the acquisition structure.

Accordingly, any proposed Army policy changes in this report are based on tlie author’s judgment. Prior to his depxirturo in JanuaryMr. The studies and reports and the flow of information which in- fluenced the policy changes in the revised DODD These directives were ef- ective imrediately and required that service inplementing regulations bo forwarded to the Defense Acquisition Executive v;ithin days. vodd

DoD Directives thru

The staff functional activities have to be aligned so that they are supporting the FM and to provide a monitoring of acquisition policies within their func- tional expertise. SARC process was evaluated to insure that it is performing as an executive rodd body and confining its attention to the decision point assess- ment and that the responsibility of the program iranagement review remain with the Service Secretaries. This is not considered a major alteration of the current process and, for the most dosd, will be a formal product of the gestation process and mission ai’ea analysis.

After identification and examination of these changes, the study methodology focused on a review of the dpdd of DODD Department of Defense, Department of De f ense Di rective