“Ladies and Gentlemen welcome to today’s hearing on Measuring Performance:  Developing Good Acquisition Metrics.  Today’s hearing is the third in a series of hearings exploring how we determine if the Department of Defense is getting what it pays for in the acquisition system. 

 “We have with us today Mr. David Fitch, Director of the Acquisition Leadership Learning Center of Excellence at the Defense Acquisition University and former Dean of the Defense Systems Management College.  Mr. David Patterson, Executive Director of the National Defense Business Initiative, former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and former Executive Director of the Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment, and Dr. Dan Nussbaum of the Naval Postgraduate School, former Director of Cost Analysis for the Navy.

 “In our previous two hearings, we’ve learned that there are a lot of pitfalls and shortcomings in the Department of Defense’s systems for measuring performance in acquisition.  The Department’s current metrics are highly susceptible to error, whether it is because the baselines that serve as the basis for tracking programs are unrealistic; because we measure individual programs in isolation rather than the system as a whole; or because metrics are still in their infancy for the 80% of the acquisition system that is not major weapon systems; or some combination of all of the above. 

 “By some measures, the system is failing miserably.  GAO’s report that major defense acquisition programs are expected to overrun their budgets by $296 billion is definitely a failing grade.  If you judge by systems in the field, you get a better grade.  U.S. troops have the best equipment of any military in the world, bar none. 

 “What is perhaps most troubling to this committee, which has oversight as a primary responsibility, is that we really don’t know the answer to this question.  We don’t have reasonable, reliable, and complete metrics that tell us the acquisition system is succeeding or failing.

 “The purpose of today’s hearing is to try and develop a better understanding of how we might develop those metrics for the future.  Our witnesses today have all studied the acquisition system deeply, and in fact, all have decades of experience as practitioners in the acquisition field, as well as their academic expertise. 

 “I would note that the House-version of the acquisition reform legislation currently pending, known as the WASTE TKO Act, directs DOD to address the question of performance assessment in a significant way.  The conference committee on that bill will be meeting later today, and I look forward to bringing some of the wisdom from today’s hearing into that process. 

 “Now let me recognize my colleague from Texas, Mr. Conaway for his opening remarks.”