A new report found that the Department of Defense is not effectively managing acquisition programs operating under continuing resolutions. In the Audit of the Impact of Continuing Resolutions on DOD Acquisition Programs, published Thursday, the department’s Office of Inspector General, or OIG, the Pentagon did not track or adequately communicate the impact of CRs on acquisition programs.
Table of Contents
DOD OIG’s Report Findings
One of the issues the OIG found is the lack of guidance for requests to exempt programs from CR. In fiscal 2024, military services submitted a total of 87 acquisition-related anomaly requests, but only one was approved by Congress.
Officials also reported a lack of clarity on whether programs undergoing administrative change would be considered a new start. The OIG said the problem stemmed from the Pentagon not communicating how the new start constraint could apply to existing programs.
Moreover, the DOD’s budget execution reviews did not take into account delayed or limited funding under CRs.
As a result, CRs led to program delays, which could affect national security and defense. Officials also shared that CRs created additional administrative burdens and cost inefficiencies.
As a result, CRs led to program delays, which could have a negative effecy on national security and defense. Officials also shared that CRs created additional administrative burdens and cost inefficiencies.
“Because the DOD did not track the impact of CRs, the impact on national security, the Defense Industrial Base, and program costs and schedules across the DoD is unknown,” commented Brett Mansfield, deputy inspector general for audit at the Pentagon. “Better processes for tracking the actual impacts will help the DoD to communicate to Congress the consequences of CRs on DOD acquisition programs.”
How DOD Can Improve
The OIG made several recommendations to the under secretary of defense (comptroller) and the department’s chief financial officer.
One recommendation is to develop a method to track the impacts of CRs on acquisition programs. The OIG also advised the DOD to establish parameters for anomaly requests.
Related Articles
The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday voted 26-3 to pass a bill that would appropriate $851.9 billion in discretionary defense funding for fiscal year 2026. Weapons Systems Procurement The committee said Thursday the proposed FY 2026 Defense Appropriations Act would allocate $171.3 billion for weapon systems procurement and $140.5 billion for platform research, development and testing. The measure includes a $280 million increase in funding for F-135 spare engines and an additional $500 million for F-35 sustainment spare parts; an additional $216 million for drone and counter-drone tech capabilities; $4.6 billion more for air and missile defense efforts; and a
NASA wants to team up with industry to develop advanced space technologies for future commercial or government use. The space agency on Wednesday issued an announcement of collaboration opportunity, or ACO, to solicit partnership proposals. Managed by the Space Technology Mission Directorate, the ACO gives industry partners access to NASA subject matter expertise, facilities, software and hardware to accelerate and enhance capability development. According to NASA, the ACO will be open for five years and will serve as an umbrella opportunity for topic-specific appendices that would be released every six to 12 months to address evolving needs. For the 2025
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., head of the Department of Health and Human Services, and other government and healthcare technology leaders have committed to delivering a patient-centric digital health ecosystem. At an event hosted by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services at the White House, over 60 companies pledged to collaborate and deliver results that benefit the public in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, 11 health systems and providers said they will support patient use. Seven electronic health record companies pledged to facilitate data exchange. According to Kennedy, bureaucrats and entrenched interests have made health data inaccessible to patients,