Defense BudgETT consulting provides clients with additional, detailed analysis on force structure decisions that enable them to reach decisions that stand up to the test of time and Congress.
We understand many mission-critical decisions and unique scenarios require in-depth and expert review. The Defense BudgETT team has decades of experience in defense analysis, military operations, and security policy development at all levels of the government. We will partner with you to provide comprehensive and integrated analyses that meets your needs, including the following:
- Assessing the balance in warfighting capability provided by key assets (e.g., delivery platforms, mobility, munitions, C4ISR) for a full range of potential threats
- Considering the tradeoffs between military readiness today and modernization for tomorrow
- Comparing the capabilities and return on investment of diverse force improvement options
- Demonstrating the warfighting and savings benefits of various investments in technology
- Responding to fast-paced decision cycles with analytic outputs, often overnight
Defense BudgETT’s consulting and ETT decision modeling technology are designed to produce timely results for the critical cost-capability tradeoff questions facing U.S. military forces.
Defense BudgETT services, including the Enhanced Tradespace Tool and our consulting services, can be purchased using streamlined GSA purchasing. To learn more, visit our page at the GSA website or simply download our current GSA price list.
The strategic planning office within Headquarters Air Force needed support in assessing the cost-capability tradeoffs for Air Force-wide and major command-specific forces.
First, Defense BudgETT personnel conducted analyses of current and future force structures using the ETT decision modeling technology and a second ETT Capability Assessment Model tool. Then, additional detailed analyses by the consulting team allowed them to develop alternative force structure scenarios for various levels of fiscal constraints and anticipated policy changes. Specific analyses included the effects of various Air Force funding levels, divestiture and modernization options, alternative infrastructure strategies, and risk assessments.
The resulting effects were measured against Air Force capabilities (e.g., fighter, inter- and intra- theater lift, tanker, space, C4ISR, Cyberspace, and Agile Combat Support), component force mix (e.g., Active, Guard, and Reserve), and the specific appropriations (e.g., RDT&E, procurement, O&M, military personnel, and military construction) in the Program Objectives Memorandum proposed budget.
The results of the Defense BudgETT analyses were used to create white papers, presentations, cost assessments, and other products to aid in the Air Force decision making process. Defense BudgETT personnel also used the budget-constrained force options to build scenarios used in the play of Futures Games. The Defense BudgETT team provided force-planning expertise in workshops prior to and following the game play. In addition, the decision models created were used for pre and post-game analysis and to help adjudicate military operational outcomes during the course of game play.