From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Annual "Quick Look" Assessment of Weapon Programs Audio interview by GAO staff with Michael Sullivan, Director, Acquisitions and Sourcing Management Related GAO Work: GAO-12-400SP: Defense Acquisitions: Assessment of Selected Weapon Programs Released: March 2012 [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. It's March 2012. This year, GAO conducted its 10th annual assessment of the Department of Defense's weapon system acquisitions, an area that is on GAO's high-risk list. A group led by Mike Sullivan, a director in GAO's Acquisition and Sourcing Management team, prepared this year's review. GAO's Jeremy Cluchey sat down with Mike to learn more. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] Can you talk about what GAO reviews in this annual report? [ Mike Sullivan: ] Yeah, the annual report as you know has been around for about 10 years now, and we proposed to Congress that we do this quick look, which really looks at all of the major weapon system acquisition programs, gives a quick assessment—a two-page assessment—of each one of those in terms of three types of risk that we look at: there's technology risk, there's design risk, and there's … then there's production risk, as a program moves through. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] You mentioned the portfolio of programs, and based on what your team looked at this year, can you describe the current state of DOD's portfolio of major defense acquisition programs? [ Mike Sullivan: ] There's 96 currently in the portfolio, and so if you think of this portfolio as you would maybe a stock portfolio, a mutual fund, or something like, there's 96 different assets in this portfolio. They're all different ages; some of them are very old. F-22, for example, I think is actually leaving the portfolio this year. It's one of the older ones. C-17 is an older … is a tanker program that's through production now and is leaving the portfolio. And as those older programs leave the portfolio, they take a lot of their cost growth and schedule delays with them. And on the other side, they have new programs coming in that are pretty fresh and clean and have not been through … you know, their cost estimates are still pretty new, their schedule estimates are new, there's a lot of optimism on the programs, so that change over, just like anything else, I guess, just like a stock portfolio—you can get rid of toxic assets, if you will, and you can try to do better next time. So for the 96 on cost and schedule, the state of the portfolio is that cost went up by about $75 billion across the 96 programs. That's about 5 percent when you're thinking about a portfolio that's worth $1.6 trillion. That's the total amount of money that will be invested in all of these programs over their lifetimes, which can be as long as, you know, 20 or 30 years. About half of that money that's been spent, some programs are done, but there's still another $800 billion left to invest in these programs. So it's very important to get these things right as they come in. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] You mentioned the cost growth that took place between last year and this year. Can you talk about some of the areas where DOD saw significant cost growth here? [ Mike Sullivan: ] Yeah. Well, the most significant cost growth and I think the most visible to most people that follow defense acquisitions would be the Joint Strike Fighter, which has had its share of cost growth over the last couple of years, and it's been well publicized. But, as I said earlier, the cost of the portfolio now is around 1.6 trillion. It increased about 75 billion from last year. And about 39 billion of that—75 or 52 percent of that cost growth—was all from the Joint Strike Fighter. So, this one program, which is by far the biggest program in the portfolio, it dwarfs all other programs in comparison. It's the biggest program acquisition in the history of our nation really. So more than half of all the cost growth in the portfolio can be attributed to that program. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] For taxpayers focused on the federal budget and interested in how defense dollars are being spent, what's the bottom line of this report? [ Mike Sullivan: ] Well, I think the bottom line of this report continues to be that as anyone who reads the report will see, we have an enormous amount of national asset, taxpayer's dollars, invested in major weapon systems. A lot of times, that money isn't spent as efficiently as it could be. You know, that's the big takeaway. I think when you're talking about $1.6 trillion over 96 programs, it really is incumbent upon the Department of Defense, the Congress, the GAO, everyone to take stewardship over those tax dollars, oversee those very carefully, and get more bang for the buck than we're getting today. [Background music] [ Narrator: ] To learn more, visit gao.gov and be sure to tune in to the next episode of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from the congressional watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office.