Listing 1 - 6 of 6 |
Sort by
|
Choose an application
Choose an application
Choose an application
Naval research --- Naval Research Laboratory (U.S.) --- United States.
Choose an application
Special forces (Military science) --- Military planning --- Decision making --- Data processing.
Choose an application
This report examines mechanisms, sources, and inter-Service agreements for funding special operations forces (SOF) operations and provides recommendations to reduce the frequency and duration of disputes between the United States Special Operations Command (SOCOM), the Military Departments, and Geographic Combatant Commands over their respective funding responsibilities for SOF, especially with respect to when Service Common (Major Force Program (MFP) 2) and SOF Peculiar (MFP 11) funds should be used. The Geographic Combatant Commanders, in accordance with guidance received from the President and Secretary of Defense, generate requests for unplanned activities and operations, sometimes in response to unanticipated events. Such events fall outside planned and programmed activities, creating validated operational support requirements that are unfunded and/or unbudgeted. Each time this occurs, it leads to prolonged negotiations to work out funding responsibility disputes among a variety of stakeholders to secure the funding necessary to execute the new requirement. SOCOM's Global SOF Network (GSN) envisions increased use of SOF, which would further increase the frequency of such disputes and could be hindered by current funding processes, motivating the research conducted to produce this report. If the President and Congress agree to expand the use of SOF as described by the GSN concept, it would be necessary to increase the flexibility of funding available for validated but unfunded operations. To increase the effectiveness of SOF, the Department of Defense needs funding solutions that are responsive to global events while enabling effective financial stewardship that satisfies the needs of all stakeholders.
Unified operations (Military science) --- Military planning --- Military & Naval Science --- Law, Politics & Government --- Armies --- Planning --- War planning --- Joint operations (Military science) --- Unified commands (Military science) --- Military administration --- Military policy --- Military art and science --- Strategy --- Tactics --- U.S. Special Operations Command --- United States. --- Finance. --- Appropriations and expenditures. --- Rules and practice. --- United States --- Military policy. --- D.O.D. --- DOD (Department of Defense) --- Mei-kuo kuo fang pu --- Ministerstvo oborony SShA --- Министерство обороны США --- National Military Establishment (U.S.) --- US Special Operations Command --- USSOCOM --- SOCOM --- Military planning.
Choose an application
This report discusses how a structured methodology called Strategy-to-Tasks can help the U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) improve its resource allocation and management process. Analysis of USSOCOM's processes and program requirements suggests that RAND's Strategy-to-Tasks methodology might be able to accomplish the task of linking USSOCOM's programs and resources to national security strategy. Specifically, the methodology meets three critical requirements in USSOCOM's program that do not now exist: (1) a top-to-bottom linkage of Special Operations Forces (SOF) programs; (2) a more disciplined Planning, Programming, and Budgeting System (PPBS) that includes a clearer understanding of the resource issues (the process includes analytical tools and linked databases); and (3) a structured process that involves the components in the resource debate. The study created a baseline taxonomy that provides a traceable audit trail from national security and military strategies through operational concept to force elements. It also fosters operationally oriented statements to the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and Congress about special operations force capabilities.
Listing 1 - 6 of 6 |
Sort by
|