<mods xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.3" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-3.xsd" ID="P0b002ee1803a2c02">
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States Government Publishing Office</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">publisher</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">pbl</roleTerm>
</role>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">distributor</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">dst</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="corporate">
 <namePart>United States</namePart>
 <namePart>Government Accountability Office</namePart>
 <namePart>National Security and International Affairs Division</namePart>
 <role>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
  <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="code">aut</roleTerm>
</role>
 <description>Government Organization</description>
</name>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<genre authority="marcgt">government publication</genre>
<language>
 <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</language>
<extension>
 <collectionCode>GAOREPORTS</collectionCode>
 <category>Legislative Agency Publications</category>
 <waisDatabaseName>gao</waisDatabaseName>
 <branch>legislative</branch>
 <dateIngested>2010-08-12</dateIngested>
</extension>
<originInfo>
 <publisher>U.S. Government Printing Office</publisher>
 <dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1998-10-15</dateIssued>
 <issuance>monographic</issuance>
</originInfo>
<physicalDescription>
 <note type="source content type">deposited</note>
 <digitalOrigin>born digital</digitalOrigin>
 <extent>26 p.</extent>
</physicalDescription>
<classification authority="sudocs">GA 1.13:NSIAD-99-4</classification>
<identifier type="uri">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4</identifier>
<identifier type="local">P0b002ee1803a2c02</identifier>
<identifier type="former package identifier">f:ns99004</identifier>
<recordInfo>
 <recordContentSource authority="marcorg">DGPO</recordContentSource>
 <recordCreationDate encoding="w3cdtf">2010-08-12</recordCreationDate>
 <recordChangeDate encoding="w3cdtf">2011-03-23</recordChangeDate>
 <recordIdentifier source="DGPO">GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4</recordIdentifier>
 <recordOrigin>machine generated</recordOrigin>
 <languageOfCataloging>
  <languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm>
</languageOfCataloging>
</recordInfo>
<accessCondition type="GPO scope determination">fdlp</accessCondition>
<extension>
 <docClass>REPORT</docClass>
 <accessId>GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4</accessId>
 <reportNumber>NSIAD-99-4</reportNumber>
 <subject>Weapons systems</subject>
 <subject>Concurrency</subject>
 <subject>Cost effectiveness analysis</subject>
 <subject>Defense cost control</subject>
 <subject>Defense procurement</subject>
 <subject>Procurement practices</subject>
 <subject>Testing</subject>
 <identifier>DOD Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration Program</identifier>
 <type>Letter Report</type>
 <seriesAbbrev>NSIAD</seriesAbbrev>
</extension>
<titleInfo>
 <title>Defense Acquisition: Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration Program Can Be Improved</title>
</titleInfo>
<abstract>Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the current Advanced
Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) program, focusing on: (1)
whether the selection process includes criteria that are adequate to
ensure that only mature technologies are selected for ACTD prototypes;
(2) whether guidance on transitioning to the normal acquisition process
ensures that a prototype appropriately completes product and concept
development and testing before entering production; and (3) the
Department of Defense&apos;s (DOD) current practice of procuring more ACTD
prototypes than needed to assess the military utility of a mature
technology.&lt;p/&gt;GAO noted that: (1) through the determination of military value of
mature technologies and their use in the acquisition process, ACTDs have
the potential to reduce the time to develop and acquire weapon systems;
(2) however, several aspects of the ACTD program can be improved; (3)
DOD&apos;s process for selecting ACTD candidates does not include adequate
criteria for assessing the maturity of the proposed technology and has
resulted in the approval of ACTD projects that included immature
technology; (4) DOD has improved its guidance on the maturity of the
technologies to be used in ACTD projects but the revised guidance
describes several types of exceptions under which immature technologies
may be used; (5) where DOD approves immature technologies as ACTD
program candidates and time is spent conducting developmental
activities, the goal of reduced acquisition cycle time will not be
realized; (6) further, guidance on entering technologies into the normal
acquisition process is not sufficient to ensure that a prototype
completes product and concept development and testing before entering
production; (7) the guidance does not mention the circumstances when
transition to development may be appropriate or the kinds of
developmental activities that may be appropriate; (8) while commercial
items that do not require any further development could proceed directly
to production, many ACTDs may still need to enter the engineering and
manufacturing development phase to proceed with product and concept
development and testing before production begins; (9) through the ACTD
early user demonstration, DOD is expected to obtain more detailed
knowledge about its technologies before entering into the acquisition
process; (10) however, in the one case in which an ACTD has proceeded
into production, DOD made that decision before completing product and
concept development and testing, thereby accepting programmatic risks
that could offset the schedule and other benefits gained through the
ACTD process; (11) DOD&apos;s current practice of procuring prototypes beyond
those needed for the basic ACTD demonstration and before completing
product and concept development and testing is unnecessarily risky; and
(12) this practice risks wasting resources on the procurement of items
that may not work as expected or may not have sufficient military
utility and risks a premature and excessive commitment to production.</abstract>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="HTML rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4/html/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4.htm</url>
 <url displayLabel="PDF rendition" access="raw object">https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4/pdf/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4.pdf</url>
</location>
<identifier type="preferred citation">GAO/NSIAD-99-4</identifier>
<location>
 <url displayLabel="Content Detail" access="object in context">https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-99-4</url>
</location>
<note>Letter Report</note>
<extension>
 <searchTitle>GAO/NSIAD-99-4; Defense Acquisition: Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration Program Can Be Improved;
            </searchTitle>
</extension>
<subject>
 <topic>Weapons systems</topic>
 <topic>Concurrency</topic>
 <topic>Cost effectiveness analysis</topic>
 <topic>Defense cost control</topic>
 <topic>Defense procurement</topic>
 <topic>Procurement practices</topic>
 <topic>Testing</topic>
 <topic>DOD Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration Program</topic>
</subject>
</mods>