In recent decades, there have been numerous attempts to rein in the cost growth of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) acquisition programs. Cost growth is the ratio of the cost estimate reported in a program's final Selected Acquisition Report (SAR) and the cost-estimate baseline reported in a prior SAR issued at a particular milestone. Drawing on prior RAND research, new analyses of completed and ongoing weapon system programs, and data drawn from SARs, this study addresses the following questions: What is the cost growth of DoD weapon systems? What has been the trend of cost growth over the past three decades? To address the magnitude of cost growth, it examines cost growth in completed programs; to evaluate the cost growth trend over time, it provides additional analysis of a selection of ongoing programs. This sample of ongoing programs permits a look at growth trends in the more recent past. Changes in the mix of system types over time and dollar-weighted analysis were also considered because earlier studies have suggested that cost growth varies by program type and the cost of the program. The findings suggest that development cost growth over the past three decades has remained high and without any significant improvement.

Cost growth in DoD acquisition programs has been a long-standing concern of senior policymakers and members of Congress. In recent decades, there have been numerous attempts to rein in this growth. Some changes involve reforms to the acquisition process, while others entail legislation. The RAND Corporation has a long history of studying cost growth in defense acquisition, with research reaching back to the 1950s.

Previous studies have shown that the Department of Defense (DoD) and the military departments have historically underestimated the cost of new weapon systems. Quantifying cost growth is important, but the larger issue is why cost growth occurs. To address that issue, this analysis uses data from Selected Acquisition Reports to examine 35 mature, but not necessarily complete, major defense acquisition programs similar to the type and complexity of those typically managed by the Air Force. The programs are first examined as a complete set, then Air Force and non-Air Force programs are analyzed separately to determine whether the causes of cost growth in the two groups differ. Four major sources of cost growth were identified: (1) errors in estimation and scheduling, (2) decisions made by the government, (3) financial matters, and (4) miscellaneous sources. Total (development plus procurement) cost growth, when measured as simple averages among the program set, is dominated by decisions, which account for more than two-thirds of the growth. Most decisions-related cost growth involves quantity changes (22 percent), requirements growth (13 percent), and schedule changes (9 percent). Cost estimation (10 percent) is the only large contributor in the errors category. Less than 4 percent of the overall cost growth is due to financial and miscellaneous causes. Because decisions involving changes in requirements, quantities, and production schedules dominate cost growth, program managers, service leadership, and Congress should look for ways to reduce changes in these areas.

With the advent of the information age, both commercial industry and the Department of Defense are moving towards complex R&D-intensive systems over the simpler, mass-produced systems of the industrial age. This CSIS report analyzes the historical trends in the relationship of production costs to development costs in complex acquisition programs. To understand this phenomenon, the study team examines it at two different levels. The first is the macro investment level where portfolio management trade-offs are made between aggregate development and procurement and between programs. The second level is individual programs where the ambitions of the program and the underlying technology shape the resources required for a program to complete development.

This testimony is an analyses of DoD¿s budget requests and preliminary projections for FY 2011 through 2028. Those projections are based in part on the President¿s 2010 budget request and budget justification materials the Admin. provided to the Congress with that request. Among the other sources consulted to supplement this analysis were DoD press releases and briefing materials and the Sec. of Defense¿s announcement in April 2009 of changes to the nation¿s defense plans. The long-term demand for defense resources could be larger than the auditor¿s base projections. The auditor estimates that supporting the number of deployed service members would require recurring annual appropriations of about $20 billion in 2010 dollars. Illus.