Colors of Money and the implicit implications of the DoD Budget on Innovation Acquisition…

The total numbers aside, it is the percentages of each funding type (color) and the relative ratio of each funding type to each other that forces certain limitations to innovation planning. First of the five funding types, only three are of any possible use to innovation acquisition, and they are each of drastically reduced availability for innovation use. In order, RDT&E then O&M then Procurement are probably, possible, then plausible for innovation acquisition. It is important to also remember that each of those funding type all have an ever increasing amount of the funding already spoken for by existing needs and requirements. Innovation is always a sliver of the any funding type available.

Some interesting observations of the ratios of funding. O&M is double Procurement, and RDT&E is 3/4 of Procurement. For example, if we spent only the equivalent amount of funding operating and maintaining our equipment as we do procuring it each year, that on leaves a 25% increase over RDT&E available for other purchases via O&M. That is all to say that even though O&M is the largest percentage of the budget, it’s also mostly allocated already in any annual funding scenario due to the implicit requirements driven by past and current procurements. So RDT&E projects are always fighting a priority battle for two possible funding decisions. First, the small part of O&M that’s variable year-to-year at commanders discretion. Second, the fight for requirements fulfillment to replace or offset existing capabilities already planned for funding. Both of which are limited in over all funding amounts, and driven by current and future command functional priorities. Ultimately it is just important to remember that there is no giant pot of available money anywhere, especially for non-weapon system backend support systems that always end up low in a priority consideration.