International Business Planning Job Support Tool (JST)

Overview

Experience has shown that programs with substantial international involvement during Engineering Manufacturing and Development (EMD) and/or subsequent phases can improve both domestic and international acquisition outcomes through development of an International Business Plan (IBP) that guides execution of the International Acquisition and Exportability (IA&E) aspects of the program’s Acquisition Strategy.

The Program Management Organization (PMOs) of programs with substantial international involvement should strongly consider developing and use a program-specific IBP to:

  • Identify and pursue additional international opportunities
  • Plan and synchronize their program’s overall international activities -- International Cooperative Programs (ICPs), Foreign Military Sales (FMS), Building Partner Capacity (BPC), and Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) -- with domestic acquisition efforts

There is no prescribed IBP format, but PMOs should consider and, if applicable, address the following areas during IBP development and implementation:

  • Ongoing and prospective ICP, FMS, and/or BPC efforts (and any applicable DCS activities)
  • Technology Security and Foreign Disclosure (TSFD) approvals and Export Control (EC) authorizations
  • IA&E planning and integration across PMO functional disciplines
  • Stakeholder synchronization activities, including industry, to align with USG/DoD-level Security Cooperation and DoD Component objectives
  • IA&E harmonization activities to enhance a program’s domestic and international acquisition outcomes

The program’s IBP can also be used as a source document for information required in Defense Acquisition Executive Summary (DAES) International Program Aspects (IPA) reporting required on Major Defense Acquisition Programs (MDAPs).

PMOs have the option of developing an IBP as a stand-alone document or integrating IBP content into other PMO plans. Regardless of which approach is used, PMOs should use IBP content to integrate the program’s IA&E activities across PMO functional areas, align program stakeholders, and capture and maintain key IA&E trends and reporting data, and pursue future international opportunities. While the resources needed to develop and execute an IBP will differ from program to program, it’s worth noting that the adage “the plan itself is nothing, the real value is in the planning” applies to IBP efforts as well. This Job Support Tool (JST) provides a suggested approach for developing a best practice-based IBP that focuses on documenting the current baseline, implementing near-term activities, and achieving mid/long-term opportunities as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: International Business Plan (IBP) Time Dimensions

Block diagram that shows the Current Baseline, Near-Term Activities, and Mid/Long-Term Activities with a summary of items that should be documented or pursued in each if these three time dimensions

Organization

This JST provides guidance on developing an International Business Plan (IBP) to assist in implementing the policy requirements of DoDI 5000.02, Enclosure 2, paragraph 7.a, page 92 and the overall IA&E considerations addressed in Defense Acquisition Guidebook (DAG) Chapter 1, paragraph 4.2.8. This JST is organized as follows: Section 1 – Documenting the Current Baseline, Section 2 – Near-Term Activities, Section 3 – Mid/Long-Term Activities, and Section 4 – Best Practices.

Note: Since IBPs contain pre-decisional information they should, at a minimum, be marked and handled as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). Depending on the program’s Security Classification Guide (SCG) and DoD Component practice, portions of the IBP may also need to be classified.

Relationship to Other JSTs

The IA&E Assessment JST provides best practice guidance regarding the conceptual aspects of IBP development. The Acquisition Strategy – International Considerations JST provides best practice guidance regarding DoD documentation requirements for international involvement in DoD acquisition programs that provide the foundation for IBP development. PMOs should use the ICP JST and FMS Systems Acquisition JSTs, as applicable to help address the details of current and future ICP and FMS arrangements in their programs’ IBPs. Finally, the Defense Exportability Integration (DEI) JST (under construction) provides PMOs with a useful resource regarding the Program Protection, TSFD, Export Control, and International Security aspects of IBP development and maintenance throughout the acquisition life-cycle.

Section 1 – Documenting the Current Baseline

A. TSFD-Approved Exportable Configurations

Document the TSFD-approved exportable configurations for on-going ICP, FMS, BPC, and DCS programs

  • TSFD decision-making is often compared to the influence of case law on court decisions. Although program-specific TSFD decisions are often made on a case-by-case basis for a specific transaction (or set of transactions), these decisions are usually influenced by previous precedence on your (or other similar) programs. Documenting your program’s TSFD-approved configurations can assist in pursuing future ICP, FMS, and BPC program efforts.
  • TSFD decisions are documented by the TSFD process owners described in DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) in various forms at the classified or CUI level. Program-related TSFD decisions are implemented by the PMO through the Defense Exportability Integration (DEI) efforts described in DAG Chapter 1-S-4 (DEI) at the classification/CUI levels established in the program’s Security Classification Guide (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.4 (Security Classification Guide) for details). Depending on the program’s TSFD complexity, the classification level of program-related TSFD decisions, and DoD Component practice, a program’s descriptions of the system’s TSFD-approved exportable configuration(s) may be unclassified, CUI, or classified. Consult your program’s Foreign Disclosure Officer (FDO) for advice in this area.
  • Best practice experience has shown that the optimal approach is: a) use of unclassified or CUI level TSFD-approved exportable configuration descriptions in the IBP; and, b) incorporation of key references to classified and CUI TSFD process approval documents that provide guidance on exportable configuration details.
  • This approach provides working level personnel with the “what” aspects of the system’s exportable configuration(s) required for day-to-day acquisition activities while providing “how” and “why” details at appropriate classification levels to PMO and industry personnel based on their need for access to such information to perform exportable configuration-related tasks.

B. On-Going ICP Activities

Describe all on-going ICP activities documenting the information listed below:

  • General Information: Country(s) or international organization, international agreement type and date, scope of effort and duration, configuration description(s) (if applicable), Cooperative Program Personnel (CPP) assignments, etc.
  • Support Method (if applicable): Provide information to help identify future Operations and Support (O&S) phase cooperation opportunities (training method, sustainment method, key domestic/foreign contractors and roles).
  • Program Protection: Address exportability-related program protection measures for exportable system version(s) (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.2 (Program Protection Plan) and DAG Chapter 1 S-10.4 (Security Classification Guide) for details).
  • TSFD and EC: Address Delegation of Disclosure Authority Letter (DDL) (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.5 (DDL) for details), Technology Release Roadmap (TRR) export approval/exemptions activity (see DAG Chapter 1-S-10.3 (TRR) for details), and CPP TSFD approvals (see DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) for details).
  • International Security: Address ICP international agreement-related security considerations and implementation measures (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.6 (Program Security Instruction) for details).
  • Planned Follow-on Efforts: Describe R&D, follow-on procurement, O&S cooperation, etc.

C. Existing FMS Cases and BPC Pseudo-FMS Cases

Describe all on-going FMS and BPC cases documenting the information listed below:

  • General Information: Country or international organization (COCOM for BPC), Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) designator and date, equipment and services provided, configuration description(s), related DCS efforts, Foreign Liaison Officer (FLO) assignments, etc.
  • Support Method: Provide information to help identify future O&S phase cooperation opportunities (training method, sustainment method, key domestic/foreign contractors and roles).
  • Program Protection: Address exportability-related program protection measures for exportable system version(s) (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.2 (Program Protection Plan) and DAG Chapter 1 S-10.4 (Security Classification Guide) for details).
  • TSFD and EC: Address DDL (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.5 (DDL) for details), FMS LOA-related export approval/exemptions activity (see DAG Chapter 1-S-10.3 (TRR) for details), and FLO TSFD approvals (see DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) for details).
  • Planned Follow-on Efforts: Describe plans for future upgrades, follow-on procurement, follow-on sustainment, etc.

D. Existing DCS and DCS/FMS Hybrid Contracts

Describe all on-going DCS contracts and the DCS aspects of DCS/FMS hybrid programs documenting the information listed below:

  • General Information: Company, country, equipment and services provided, configuration description, FMS hybrid related – LOAs, FLO assignments, etc.
  • Support Method: Provide information to help identify future O&S phase cooperation opportunities (training method, sustainment method, key domestic/foreign contractors and roles).
  • TSFD & EC: Address any DCS TSFD and export authorizations (DSP 5, TAA, ITAR exemptions, etc.) related to program ICP or FMS activities as well as any TSFD FLO activities related to DCS/FMS hybrid efforts (see DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) and DAG Chapter 1-S-10 (Program Protection Documentation) for details).
  • Planned Follow-on Efforts: Describe plans for future DCS/FMS hybrid upgrades, follow-on procurement, follow-on sustainment, etc.

E. Analysis & Evaluation -- Key Areas

What is the optimal number of TSFD-approved exportable configurations for the program?

Should the IBP be written at the CUI or classified information level?

What are the pros and cons associated with the IBP’s classification level with respect to balancing broad PMO access and use (to facilitate exportable configuration execution in the acquisition process) versus information security/need to know considerations?

Have all of the program’s ongoing ICP, FMS, BPC, DCS, and DCS/FMS hybrid arrangements been adequately documented in order to provide a basis for day-to-day execution and future planning efforts?

Section 2 – Near-Term Activities

A. Prospective ICP Activities (MOUs and PAs)

Describe any prospective ICP activities by documenting the information listed below:

  • General Information: Country(s) or international organization, international agreement type and date, scope of effort and duration, configuration description(s) (if applicable), CPP assignments, etc.
  • Support Method (if applicable): Provide information to help identify future O&S phase cooperation opportunities (training method, sustainment method, key domestic/foreign contractors and roles).
  • Program Protection: Address exportability-related program protection measures for exportable system version(s) (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.2 (Program Protection Plan) and DAG Chapter 1 S-10.4 (Security Classification Guide) for details).
  • TSFD and EC: Address Delegation of Disclosure Authority Letter (DDL) (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.5 (DDL) for details), Technology Release Roadmap (TRR) export approval/exemptions activity (see DAG Chapter 1-S-10.3 (TRR) for details), and CPP TSFD approvals (see DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) for details).
  • International Security: Address ICP international agreement-related security considerations and implementation measures (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.6 (Program Security Instruction) for details).
  • Planned Follow-on Efforts: Describe R&D, follow-on procurement, O&S cooperation, etc.

B. Prospective FMS, BPC Pseudo-FMS, DCS, and Hybrid DCS/FMS Arrangements

Describe any prospective FMS and BPC cases, DCS contracts, and hybrid DCS/FMS arrangements by documenting the information listed below:

  • P&A Submissions: Country or international organization, date provided, description, configuration, related DCS or DCS/FMS hybrid efforts, as well as outcomes, if known.
  • LOA Submissions: Country or international organization (COCOM for BPC), date provided, Offer Expiration Date, description, configuration, Total Package Approach (TPA) content, related DCS or DCS/FMS hybrid efforts, planned FLO assignments, key domestic/foreign contractors and roles, outcomes if known
  • Program Protection: Address exportability-related program protection measures for exportable system version(s) (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.2 (Program Protection Plan) and DAG Chapter 1 S-10.4 (Security Classification Guide) for details).
  • TSFD and EC: Address DDL (see DAG Chapter 1 S-10.5 (DDL) for details), FMS LOA-related export approval/exemptions activity (see DAG Chapter 1-S-10.3 (TRR) for details), and FLO TSFD approvals (see DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) for details).
  • Planned Follow-on Efforts: Describe plans for future upgrades, follow-on procurement, follow-on sustainment, etc.

C. Analysis & Evaluation -- Key Areas

Could the program’s near-term activities require changes to the existing TSFD-approved exportable configurations for the program (or require creation of variations to them)? If so, these changes should be documented, their potential impacts on the current baseline assessed, and program defense exportability integration execution plans modified, as appropriate, to account for them.

Are there any potential synergies (or disconnects) between the domestic and international acquisition aspects of the program that need to be considered as new ICP, FMS, BPC, DCS, and/or hybrid transactions are negotiated and established? If so, these should be documented, their potential impacts on the current baseline organization and resources assessed, and program execution plans modified, as appropriate, to ensure that the expanded domestic and international workload on the PMO, and industry can be accommodated.

Section 3 – Mid/Long-Term Activities

A. Updated International Market Analysis

Update and document the program’s international market analysis (see the IA&E Assessment JST Section 2.D. for best practice guidance in this area) on a periodic basis considering both cooperative opportunities and potential system sales based on consultations with DoD Component IPO, industry participants, MILDEP R&D organizations, and Security Cooperation Organizations (SCOs) considering the following:

  • Security cooperation objectives
  • Countries’ needs to replace existing comparable systems
  • Emerging foreign requirements and interests
  • OSD/DoD Component acquisition objectives

B. Potential Cooperation

Analyze ongoing, near-term cooperative and sales programs, and use the program’s updated international market analysis to identify potential areas of cooperation across the program’s life cycle considering the type of activities discussed below:

1. Technology Development

  • Conduct future requirements analyses (or similar) efforts under ICP international agreements with countries owning the system through equitable cost sharing among interested participants
  • Cooperatively develop technology needed for future upgrades under ICP international agreements through equitable cost sharing among interested participants

2. System Upgrades

  • If the DoD and foreign countries configurations differ, focus on identifying cooperative opportunities associated with the common core aspects of the system
  • Integrate new technology and capabilities into the system under an ICP international agreement through equitable cost sharing among interested participants
  • Share the non-recurring cost of implementing Engineering Changes Proposals (ECPs) by using funds obtained from one or more customers’ FMS LOAs designated for this purpose. PMOs should consult with their DoD Component IPOs on the how to implement aspects of such arrangements involving multiple FMS customers
  • Investigate sharing the non-recurring costs associated with qualifying new components to address Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) through either ICP or FMS arrangements
  • Evaluate DoD use of system modifications funded solely by partner nations in ICP international agreements or foreign purchasers through FMS LOAs, DCS contracts, or DCS/FMS hybrid efforts

3. Training

Expand DoD operator and/or maintenance training capacity to meet foreign purchaser demands using foreign funding and assets from either ICP international agreements or FMS LOAs.

4. Sustainment

Investigate mutually beneficial sustainment cooperation in areas such as:

  • Performance Based Logistics (PBL) arrangements where costs are equitably shared by the DoD and interested ICP participants and/or FMS customer nation(s)
  • Shared or coordinated investment in Integrated Product Support (IPS) elements where costs are equitably shared by the DoD and interested ICP participants and/or FMS customer nation(s)
  • Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) spares sharing/pooling and/or maintenance arrangements established through ICP international agreements and/or FMS LOAs to reduce overall DoD and foreign partner/customer capital investments
  • FMS Cooperative Logistics Supply Support Arrangements (CLSSAs)

C. TSFD Approvals & EC Authorizations

Identify TSFD approvals and EC authorizations needed to execute future areas of ICP, FMS, and hybrid program cooperation and pursue necessary actions to obtain these authorizations and approvals in areas such as:

  • TSFD and Department of State approvals for new technologies and capabilities for technology development and product upgrades
  • TSFD and Department of State approvals required to implement training and sustainment cooperation through PBL, CLS and/or spares sharing/pooling arrangements including third-party transfer approvals, and ITAR Warehouse Distribution Agreements (WDAs)

Consult DAG Chapter 1-S-9 (TSFD Processes) and DAG Chapter 1-S-10 (Program Protection Documentation) for additional guidance in these areas.

D. Analysis & Evaluation -- Key Areas

Do the existing TSFD and EC approvals for the program take into account future technology development, product upgrade, and training/sustainment cooperation? (Note: experience has shown this is rarely the case.) If not, the PMO should seek TSFD and EC guidance changes, and document them, to plan for their potential impacts on the current baseline and, as appropriate, modify program execution plans to account for them.

Are there any potential synergies (or disconnects) between the domestic and international acquisition aspects in these program areas that need to be considered as the program matures? If so, these should be documented, their potential impacts on the future organization and resources assessed, and program plans modified, as appropriate, to ensure that the envisioned domestic and international efforts in these areas can be accommodated by the PMO and industry.

Section 4 – International Business Planning Best Practices

A. Exportable Configurations

PMOs should fight hard to establish and maintain a reasonable number of exportable configurations for TSFD approval that will accommodate all envisioned ICP/FMS/BPC/DCS transactions and avoid the trap of creating a different exportable configuration for each new partner/customer nation since this will lead to an unmanageable number of configurations as the program matures. Consult DAG Chapter 1-S-4 (Defense Exportability Integration) for additional guidance in this area.

B. Stakeholder Involvement

The IBP should be developed with inputs from a wide array of program stakeholders including, DoD Component, OSD, USG interagency, foreign partners/customers, and U.S. and foreign industry. After obtaining broad (and if necessary, deep) stakeholder input, the PM and PEO should evaluate the tradeoffs and make any difficult choices required to achieve optimal domestic and international acquisition program outcomes.

C. Program Management Perspective

Successful programs find ways every day to balance current, near-term, and future domestic and IA&E aspects using a win-win rather than zero sum game approach. They take a flexible, long-term (rather than rigid, short-term) view of the program’s IA&E aspects. PMOs should use their IBP planning efforts to achieve optimal acquisition outcomes for the DoD and foreign partners/customers across the spectrum of acquisition activities since experience has shown that users will operate the system together in future coalition environments in unanticipated and innovative ways. Consult the DAG Chapter 1 IA&E Supplement for” full spectrum” international business planning guidance on IA&E matters pertaining to your program.

Note: If you would like to provide feedback on this JST, have ideas on how the JST could be improved, have questions on this JST, or would like advice on how to use this JST in the workplace, please send an email to InternationalHelp@dau.mil.

+Notes
+Bookmarks