Info
- Utilizzare la checkbox di selezione a fianco di ciascun documento per attivare le funzionalità di stampa, invio email, download nei formati disponibili del (i) record.
Defense acquisition trends, 2015 : acquisition in the era of budgetary constraints / / project director, Andrew P. Hunter, project coordinator, Rhys McCormick, principal authors, Jesse Ellman [and three others], contributing authors, Kaitlyn Johnson, Gabriel Coll
| Defense acquisition trends, 2015 : acquisition in the era of budgetary constraints / / project director, Andrew P. Hunter, project coordinator, Rhys McCormick, principal authors, Jesse Ellman [and three others], contributing authors, Kaitlyn Johnson, Gabriel Coll |
| Autore | Hunter Andrew |
| Pubbl/distr/stampa | Lanham : , : CSIS, Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 |
| Descrizione fisica | 1 online resource (129 p.) |
| Disciplina | 355.6/212 |
| Collana | CSIS reports |
| Soggetto topico | Government purchasing - United States |
| ISBN | 1-4422-5919-1 |
| Formato | Materiale a stampa  |
| Livello bibliografico | Monografia |
| Lingua di pubblicazione | eng |
| Nota di contenuto |
Figures; Tables; Executive Summary; What Is DoD Buying?; Birth of the Defense Innovation Initiative-Third Offset Strategy; A Five-Year Trough Has Developed in the Weapon Systems Pipeline; Services Contracts Surprisingly Resilient; How Is DoD Buying?; Major Acquisition Reform Efforts in 2015 Will Take Time to Deliver Results; Effective Competition Rates Are Steady, Despite Desire to Promote Competition; Contract Outcomes Can Be Examined Using Contract Data; Whom Is DoD Buying From?; Small Vendors Accounted for Their Largest-Ever Share of Defense Contracts in 2014
The Big 5 Defense Vendors Are Winning a Declining Share of R&D Contract ObligationsThe Present and Future of Defense Industry Consolidation; DoD Starts with a Narrow But Sustained Base for Outreach to Silicon Valley; What Are the Defense Components Buying?; Service Acquisition Portfolios Are Shifting In Distinct Ways; Army; Navy; Air Force; 1. Introduction; 1.1. Report Organization; 1.2. DoD Contract Spending in a Budgetary Context; 2. What Is DoD Buying?; 2.1. Innovation, R&D, and Technological Superiority; 2.1.1. Defense Innovation Initiative-"Third Offset Strategy" 2.1.2. Defense Innovation Unit Experimental: Finding New Sources of Innovation2.1.3. Research and Development Contracting during the Budget Drawdown; 2.2. Defense Contract Obligations by Platform Portfolio; 2.3. Defense Contract Obligations by Budget Account; 2.3.1. Procurement; 2.3.2. Operations & Maintenance; 2.3.3. Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation; 3. How Is DoD Buying It?; 3.1. Reforming the Defense Acquisition System; 3.1.1. Better Buying Power; 3.1.2. 2016 National Defense Authorization Act; 3.2. Contract and Fee Type 3.3. Defense Contract Obligation by Rate of Effective Competition3.4. Contract Outcomes beyond the Headlines; 3.4.1. Terminations; 3.4.2. Change Orders; 4. Whom Is DoD Buying From?; 4.1. Changes in the Composition of the Defense Industrial Base; 4.1.1. Army; 4.1.2. Navy; 4.1.3. Air Force; 4.1.4. Defense Logistics Agency; 4.1.5. Products; 4.1.6. Services; 4.1.7. Research and Development; 4.2. The Present and Future Consolidation of Defense Industry; 4.2.1. Top Products Vendors; 4.2.2. Top Services Vendors; 4.2.3. Top Research and Development Vendors 4.3. Silicon Valley Participation in the Defense Industrial Base4.3.1. Narrow Silicon Valley Base; 4.3.2. Persistence in the Top Tier, Tumult Below; 4.3.3. Silicon Valley Avoids Drawdown and Budget Cap Cuts Thanks to HP; 4.3.4. Implications for the Future; 5. What Are the Defense Components Buying?; 5.1. Army; 5.2. Navy; 5.3. Air Force; 5.4. Defense Logistics Agency; 5.5. Missile Defense Agency; 5.6. Other DoD; 6. Conclusion; Appendix A: Methodology; About the Authors |
| Record Nr. | UNINA-9910798265303321 |
Hunter Andrew
|
||
| Lanham : , : CSIS, Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 | ||
| Materiale a stampa | ||
| Lo trovi qui: Univ. Federico II | ||
| ||
Defense acquisition trends, 2015 : acquisition in the era of budgetary constraints / / project director, Andrew P. Hunter, project coordinator, Rhys McCormick, principal authors, Jesse Ellman [and three others], contributing authors, Kaitlyn Johnson, Gabriel Coll
| Defense acquisition trends, 2015 : acquisition in the era of budgetary constraints / / project director, Andrew P. Hunter, project coordinator, Rhys McCormick, principal authors, Jesse Ellman [and three others], contributing authors, Kaitlyn Johnson, Gabriel Coll |
| Autore | Hunter Andrew |
| Pubbl/distr/stampa | Lanham : , : CSIS, Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 |
| Descrizione fisica | 1 online resource (129 p.) |
| Disciplina | 355.6/212 |
| Collana | CSIS reports |
| Soggetto topico | Government purchasing - United States |
| ISBN | 1-4422-5919-1 |
| Formato | Materiale a stampa |
| Livello bibliografico | Monografia |
| Lingua di pubblicazione | eng |
| Nota di contenuto |
Figures; Tables; Executive Summary; What Is DoD Buying?; Birth of the Defense Innovation Initiative-Third Offset Strategy; A Five-Year Trough Has Developed in the Weapon Systems Pipeline; Services Contracts Surprisingly Resilient; How Is DoD Buying?; Major Acquisition Reform Efforts in 2015 Will Take Time to Deliver Results; Effective Competition Rates Are Steady, Despite Desire to Promote Competition; Contract Outcomes Can Be Examined Using Contract Data; Whom Is DoD Buying From?; Small Vendors Accounted for Their Largest-Ever Share of Defense Contracts in 2014
The Big 5 Defense Vendors Are Winning a Declining Share of R&D Contract ObligationsThe Present and Future of Defense Industry Consolidation; DoD Starts with a Narrow But Sustained Base for Outreach to Silicon Valley; What Are the Defense Components Buying?; Service Acquisition Portfolios Are Shifting In Distinct Ways; Army; Navy; Air Force; 1. Introduction; 1.1. Report Organization; 1.2. DoD Contract Spending in a Budgetary Context; 2. What Is DoD Buying?; 2.1. Innovation, R&D, and Technological Superiority; 2.1.1. Defense Innovation Initiative-"Third Offset Strategy" 2.1.2. Defense Innovation Unit Experimental: Finding New Sources of Innovation2.1.3. Research and Development Contracting during the Budget Drawdown; 2.2. Defense Contract Obligations by Platform Portfolio; 2.3. Defense Contract Obligations by Budget Account; 2.3.1. Procurement; 2.3.2. Operations & Maintenance; 2.3.3. Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation; 3. How Is DoD Buying It?; 3.1. Reforming the Defense Acquisition System; 3.1.1. Better Buying Power; 3.1.2. 2016 National Defense Authorization Act; 3.2. Contract and Fee Type 3.3. Defense Contract Obligation by Rate of Effective Competition3.4. Contract Outcomes beyond the Headlines; 3.4.1. Terminations; 3.4.2. Change Orders; 4. Whom Is DoD Buying From?; 4.1. Changes in the Composition of the Defense Industrial Base; 4.1.1. Army; 4.1.2. Navy; 4.1.3. Air Force; 4.1.4. Defense Logistics Agency; 4.1.5. Products; 4.1.6. Services; 4.1.7. Research and Development; 4.2. The Present and Future Consolidation of Defense Industry; 4.2.1. Top Products Vendors; 4.2.2. Top Services Vendors; 4.2.3. Top Research and Development Vendors 4.3. Silicon Valley Participation in the Defense Industrial Base4.3.1. Narrow Silicon Valley Base; 4.3.2. Persistence in the Top Tier, Tumult Below; 4.3.3. Silicon Valley Avoids Drawdown and Budget Cap Cuts Thanks to HP; 4.3.4. Implications for the Future; 5. What Are the Defense Components Buying?; 5.1. Army; 5.2. Navy; 5.3. Air Force; 5.4. Defense Logistics Agency; 5.5. Missile Defense Agency; 5.6. Other DoD; 6. Conclusion; Appendix A: Methodology; About the Authors |
| Record Nr. | UNINA-9910816421203321 |
|
Hunter Andrew
|
||
| Lanham : , : CSIS, Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 | ||
| Materiale a stampa | ||
| Lo trovi qui: Univ. Federico II | ||
| ||
Federal research and development contract trends and the supporting industrial base, 2000-2015 / / Jesse Ellman, Kaitlyn Johnson
| Federal research and development contract trends and the supporting industrial base, 2000-2015 / / Jesse Ellman, Kaitlyn Johnson |
| Autore | Ellman Jesse |
| Pubbl/distr/stampa | Washington, District of Columbia ; ; Lanham, Maryland : , : Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 |
| Descrizione fisica | 1 online resource (77 p.) |
| Disciplina | 338.97306 |
| Collana | CSIS Reports |
| Soggetto topico | Research and development contracts, Government - United States |
| ISBN | 1-4422-7963-X |
| Formato | Materiale a stampa |
| Livello bibliografico | Monografia |
| Lingua di pubblicazione | eng |
| Nota di contenuto |
Federal Research And Development Contract Trends And The Supporting Industrial Base, 2000-2015; Contents; List of Figures; Executive Summary; Federal R&D contracts have been disproportionately impacted by the budget drawdown; DoD is in the midst of a six-year trough in its development pipeline for major weapons systems; The budget drawdown has caused profound changes to the DoD R&D contracting industrial base; Much of the conventional wisdom was incorrect; Introduction; 1. Federal R&D Contracting in Context; Department of Defense; Army; Navy; Air Force; MDA; NASA
Department of Health and Human ServicesDepartment of Energy; 2. Literature Review; Structure of Overall U.S. R&D Funding; How Does R&D Function during a Recession?; Benefits of R&D Spending during a Shock; Magnitude of R&D Spending; Prioritization of R&D spending within an organization; R&D Spending during Times of Shifting Priorities; Changes in R&D Funding; Changes in targets of R&D spending; Conclusion; 3. How Has the Budget Drawdown Affected Federal R&D Contracting? Hypothesis 1: Cuts in R&D due to budget drawdown will be done on a salami slice basis, rather than reflecting a thoughtful prioritization of resourcesDepartment of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings; Hypothesis 2: Newer R&D contracts will bear a disproportionate share of cuts during budget drawdowns; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Department of Energy; Findings; Hypothesis 3: Budget drawdowns will lead to shifts away from early-stage, seed-corn R&D, toward mid- to late-stage R&D tied to high-profile programs; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings Hypothesis 4: Large prime vendors will account for increasing shares of federal R&D during budget drawdownsDepartment of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings; Hypothesis 5: During budget drawdowns, R&D will be increasingly funded out of non-R&D-focused funding accounts; Department of Defense; HHS; NASA; Findings; Hypothesis 6: During budget drawdowns, competitively sourced R&D contracts will attract increasing numbers of offerors; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Basic Research; Applied Research; Advanced Technology Development; Advanced Component Development & Prototypes System Development & DemonstrationOperational Systems Development; Operation of Government R&D Facilities; Findings; Hypothesis 7: The budget drawdown will discourage new entrants into the federal R&D contracting marketplace; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings; Final Thoughts; Appendix: Methodology; Inherent Restrictions of FPDS; Constant Dollars and Fiscal Years; Data Reliability Notes and Download Dates; Detailed Methods; Competition; Vendor Categorization; About the Project Directors and Authors |
| Record Nr. | UNINA-9910798730003321 |
|
Ellman Jesse
|
||
| Washington, District of Columbia ; ; Lanham, Maryland : , : Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 | ||
| Materiale a stampa | ||
| Lo trovi qui: Univ. Federico II | ||
| ||
Federal research and development contract trends and the supporting industrial base, 2000-2015 / / Jesse Ellman, Kaitlyn Johnson
| Federal research and development contract trends and the supporting industrial base, 2000-2015 / / Jesse Ellman, Kaitlyn Johnson |
| Autore | Ellman Jesse |
| Pubbl/distr/stampa | Washington, District of Columbia ; ; Lanham, Maryland : , : Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 |
| Descrizione fisica | 1 online resource (77 p.) |
| Disciplina | 338.97306 |
| Collana | CSIS Reports |
| Soggetto topico | Research and development contracts, Government - United States |
| ISBN | 1-4422-7963-X |
| Formato | Materiale a stampa |
| Livello bibliografico | Monografia |
| Lingua di pubblicazione | eng |
| Nota di contenuto |
Federal Research And Development Contract Trends And The Supporting Industrial Base, 2000-2015; Contents; List of Figures; Executive Summary; Federal R&D contracts have been disproportionately impacted by the budget drawdown; DoD is in the midst of a six-year trough in its development pipeline for major weapons systems; The budget drawdown has caused profound changes to the DoD R&D contracting industrial base; Much of the conventional wisdom was incorrect; Introduction; 1. Federal R&D Contracting in Context; Department of Defense; Army; Navy; Air Force; MDA; NASA
Department of Health and Human ServicesDepartment of Energy; 2. Literature Review; Structure of Overall U.S. R&D Funding; How Does R&D Function during a Recession?; Benefits of R&D Spending during a Shock; Magnitude of R&D Spending; Prioritization of R&D spending within an organization; R&D Spending during Times of Shifting Priorities; Changes in R&D Funding; Changes in targets of R&D spending; Conclusion; 3. How Has the Budget Drawdown Affected Federal R&D Contracting? Hypothesis 1: Cuts in R&D due to budget drawdown will be done on a salami slice basis, rather than reflecting a thoughtful prioritization of resourcesDepartment of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings; Hypothesis 2: Newer R&D contracts will bear a disproportionate share of cuts during budget drawdowns; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Department of Energy; Findings; Hypothesis 3: Budget drawdowns will lead to shifts away from early-stage, seed-corn R&D, toward mid- to late-stage R&D tied to high-profile programs; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings Hypothesis 4: Large prime vendors will account for increasing shares of federal R&D during budget drawdownsDepartment of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings; Hypothesis 5: During budget drawdowns, R&D will be increasingly funded out of non-R&D-focused funding accounts; Department of Defense; HHS; NASA; Findings; Hypothesis 6: During budget drawdowns, competitively sourced R&D contracts will attract increasing numbers of offerors; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Basic Research; Applied Research; Advanced Technology Development; Advanced Component Development & Prototypes System Development & DemonstrationOperational Systems Development; Operation of Government R&D Facilities; Findings; Hypothesis 7: The budget drawdown will discourage new entrants into the federal R&D contracting marketplace; Department of Defense; NASA; HHS; Findings; Final Thoughts; Appendix: Methodology; Inherent Restrictions of FPDS; Constant Dollars and Fiscal Years; Data Reliability Notes and Download Dates; Detailed Methods; Competition; Vendor Categorization; About the Project Directors and Authors |
| Record Nr. | UNINA-9910826701403321 |
|
Ellman Jesse
|
||
| Washington, District of Columbia ; ; Lanham, Maryland : , : Center for Strategic & International Studies : , : Rowman & Littlefield, , 2016 | ||
| Materiale a stampa | ||
| Lo trovi qui: Univ. Federico II | ||
| ||