1 / 21

Milt E. Nappier March 25, 2009

Combatant Commander Exercise Engagement Stakeholder Leadership Team (CE2 SLT) FY 2009 CE2T2 Fiscal Update 2009 Midyear Review Planning. Milt E. Nappier March 25, 2009. FY 2009 CE2T2 Funding. $747M CE2T2 funds available for obligation (less taxes)

lacy
Télécharger la présentation

Milt E. Nappier March 25, 2009

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Combatant Commander Exercise Engagement Stakeholder Leadership Team (CE2 SLT) FY 2009 CE2T2 Fiscal Update 2009 Midyear Review Planning Milt E.Nappier March 25, 2009

  2. FY 2009 CE2T2 Funding • $747M CE2T2 funds available for obligation (less taxes) • O&M -- $670M – 65% of funding issued to date • RDT&E -- $57M (includes $20M for Congressional Adds) -- 100% of funding issued • Procurement -- $20M – 100% of funding issued • Congressional and Undistributed Taxes -- $21.7M • O&M Undistributed Taxes -- $19.7M • RDT&E Undistributed Taxes -- $1.8M • Procurement Undistributed Taxes -- $.2M • OUSD(P&R) Readiness and Training released Midyear Review Planning Guidance March 4, 2009

  3. CE2T2 FY 2009 O&M FISCAL OVERVIEW $ 000 $ 000 1st Quarter Obligations $76,225 11% 2nd Quarter Obligations thru February $259,120 39% 1st Quarter $221,059 33% 2nd Quarter $212,181 32% 4th Quarter $68,231 10% 3rd Quarter $168,533 25% February 2009 September 2008 • FY09 Apportionment Request reflects how PMs planned to execute O&M CE2T2 programs • OSD(C) required justification to support more than 25% of funding per quarter • Shows how PMs are executing O&M CE2T2 programs as reflected in the Execution Management System (EMS) compared to FY09 Apportionment Request • CE2T2 Program on track to achieve at least 65% obligations by end of 2nd Quarter (31 March)

  4. Programs below RED line did not meet February 2009 42% Obligation benchmark for O&M February O&M 2009 Actuals Obligations — Goal 42%

  5. Programs below RED line did not meet February 2009 Obligation benchmarks (Proc 33%; RDTE 46%) February Procurement 2009 Actuals Obligations — Goal 33% February RDT&E 2009 Actuals Obligations — Goal 46%

  6. FY2009 Summary of Program Performance February 2009

  7. FY2009 Financial Status – O&M Actuals versus Annual Allocations Public Law 31 July: 80% Mid-Year Review (notional): 50% February 2009 Goal: 42% Program Obligation Summary

  8. FY2009 Financial Status – Procurement Actuals versus Annual Allocations End of Year Goal: 77% Mid-Year Review (notional): 40% February 2009 Goal: 33% Program Obligation Summary

  9. FY2009 Financial Status – RDT&E Actuals versus Annual Allocations End of Year Goal: 90% Mid-Year Review (notional): 55% February 2009 Goal: 46% Program Obligation Summary

  10. FY2008 Summary of Program Performance February 2009

  11. FY2008 Financial Status – Procurement Actuals versus Annual Allocations Program Obligation Summary

  12. FY2008 Financial Status – RDT&E Actuals versus Annual Allocations Program Obligation Summary

  13. 2009 Midyear Review Planning -- Formats(Tentative)

  14. OUSD(Comptroller) MYR GUIDANCE TBD 2009 Midyear Review (MYR) Scope • FY 2008: CE2T2 RDT&E and Procurement Programs • FY 2009: CE2T2 O&M, RDT&E and Procurement Programs • Notional Midyear Review Benchmarks (Obligation %) Expenditures • OUSD(Comptroller) 2008 Midyear Review Guidance quote: “As with any RDT&E account, the main focus when measuring execution performance is expenditures.” • 2008 Midyear Review RDT&E expenditure benchmark was 35% • No 2008 MYR guidance on expenditures for O&M or Procurement • FY 2008: CE2T2 RDT&E and Procurement Programs • FY 2009: CE2T2 O&M, RDT&E and Procurement Programs • Notional Midyear Review Benchmarks (Obligation %) Expenditures • OUSD(Comptroller) 2008 Midyear Review Guidance quote: “As with any RDT&E account, the main focus when measuring execution performance is expenditures.” • 2008 Midyear Review RDT&E expenditure benchmark was 35% • No 2008 MYR guidance on expenditures for O&M or Procurement OFFICIAL MYR GUIDANCE TBD

  15. EMS Documentation Use file upload feature in EMS to provide documentation to support obligations, etc.

  16. Official format will change – information requested relatively the same • Expect several iterations of these charts • Significant difference this year – OUSD(P&R) will develop MYR charts based on information in the Execution Management System (EMS) • Documentation must be loaded in EMS to support obligations • OUSD(P&R) will forward draft charts to PMs for coordination

  17. Prioritized Unfunded Requirements Due 3 Apr 09 Unfunded Requirements (UFRs)Resource Management PlanInternal Reprioritization • Midyear Review UFRs are requested for CE2T2 Enterprise wide sourcing • Commands/organizations can reallocate up to $500K O&M internally • Appropriation and service boundaries must be adhered to • These reallocations must be reported during periodic JIPT meetings • Command/organizations can reallocate up to $1.5M O&M internally • Appropriation and service boundaries must be adhered to • These reallocations require Director, Readiness and Training Policy and Programs (RTPP) approval • Reallocations greater than $1.5M in O&M require Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Readiness (DUSD(R)) approval • RDT&E and Procurement Reallocation • Must follow JIPT and SAG approval thresholds as O&M appropriation • Can only be made in accordance with applicable fiscal law and procedural guidelines

  18. Prioritized Unfunded Requirements Due 3 Apr 09 Unfunded Requirements (UFRs)Rules of Engagement • UFRs must be approved at GO/FO/SES level and submitted to Mr. Gardner with a copy to Mr. DiGiovanni and Milt Nappier • UFRs must be prioritized by command/organization • OUSD(P&R), in coordination with the Joint Staff, JFCOM and Services (GO/FO/SES level) will prioritize UFRs across CE2T2 Enterprise • O&M UFRs – Submission Limits • COCOM HQ Joint Exercise Support via Joint Staff – 5 maximum • Joint Staff – 3 maximum • JFCOM – 5 maximum • Services – 2 per Service • RDT&E and Procurement • Three UFRs per appropriation • In addition to merits of each UFR, following will also be considered • March 31st (midyear review) benchmarks • Funds unobligated at end of FY2008

  19. Action Items • 5 March Finalize Obligations & Expenditure Plans in EMS • 5 March EMS Update (February Actuals) • 5 March Load/Update Obligation and Expenditure Documentation in EMS • 3 April Unfunded Requirements Due • 5 April EMS Update (March Actuals) • 31 Jul 09 80% O&M Must Be Obligated

  20. BACKUP

  21. DoD Obligation and Expenditure GoalsFY 2009 REQUIRES OUSD(COMPTROLLER) CONCURRENCE

More Related