In this report, the authors assess how the complex array of roles, responsibilities, and authorities (RRA) that shape the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) process are first defined in policy and related guidance and then implemented in practice by a diverse variety of stakeholder organizations at strategic, operational, and tactical levels of execution.

Optimizing Foreign Military Sales Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities

Lisa Saum-Manning, Jefferson P. Marquis, Irina A. Chindea, Daniel Elinoff, Theiline Pigott, Elliott Brennan

ResearchPublished Aug 8, 2024

In June 2022, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin directed the Department of Defense (DoD) to identify potential improvements to the delivery of defense capabilities to international security partners through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) system. The FMS Tiger Team, co-led by the Deputy Under Secretary for Policy and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, identified specific challenges within the FMS system and proposed solutions aligned to strategic outcomes sought by the National Defense Strategy to improve capability delivery to allies and partners. That effort revealed that roles, responsibilities, and authorities (RRA) issues can contribute to timeliness and efficiency problems. As a result, the Deputy Secretary of Defense directed the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) to engage the RAND National Security Research Division to conduct research aimed at (1) articulating how RRA challenges impede the FMS process and (2) developing recommendations to address them.

To do this, the authors reviewed the laws, policies, authorities, and related guidance that govern the process to gain a baseline understanding of how FMS functions on paper. They also reviewed past reform efforts and interviewed more than 100 FMS stakeholders with over 1,300 work years of collective experience within the security assistance (SA) community to better understand how the process works in practice.

Key Findings

DSCA lacks sufficient authorities to direct the FMS implementation process and to hold pertinent organizations accountable

  • In many cases, authorities and guidance exist on paper but do not go far enough to enable optimal oversight and enforce program requirements.
  • DSCA lacks the authority to hold accountable service implementing agency officials for failing to meet case development timelines and standards and to keep DSCA apprised of problems related to major FMS proposals and cases.

Leading security assistance organizations could undertake additional responsibilities related to FMS

  • FMS is a security assistance program and therefore falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of State (DoS), yet DoS is often absent from key decision points when FMS stakeholders need guidance the most.

Implementing organizations also lack line authority to compel action from acquisition community partners

  • Although implementing organizations have distinct configurations, command structures, and roles, they share similar challenges and authorities with DSCA and the Office of the Secretary of Defense in terms of lacking the ability to compel case management organizations that fall outside their line authority to provide visibility into a variety of FMS implementation activities.

Duplicative roles, particularly in the Army FMS enterprise, further impede the FMS process

  • While there are a multitude of stakeholders, most of their roles and responsibilities are adequately discreet, and redundancy is not an impediment to case delivery timelines. However, there are certain circumstances in which similarities among these roles can cloud and slow the process, and this is seen most often in Army FMS cases.

Recommendations

  • Amend Department of Defense Directives (DoDD) and service regulations to give DSCA enforcement authority in areas it is responsible for overseeing and managing.
  • DoS and DoD should identify, clarify, and codify additional responsibilities for managing FMS requirements.
  • Amend DoDD and service regulations to give leading DoD security assistance organizations enforcement authority in areas they are responsible for overseeing and managing.
  • Improve clarity on operational-level roles and responsibilities; the Army should explore organizational restructuring options to reduce duplication.

Order a Print Copy

Format
Paperback
Page count
104 pages
List Price
$26.00
Buy link
Add to Cart

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: RAND Corporation
  • Availability: Available
  • Year: 2024
  • Print Format: Paperback
  • Paperback Pages: 104
  • Paperback Price: $26.00
  • Paperback ISBN/EAN: 1-9774-1330-7
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.7249/RRA2631-1
  • Document Number: RR-A2631-1

Citation

RAND Style Manual
Saum-Manning, Lisa, Jefferson P. Marquis, Irina A. Chindea, Daniel Elinoff, Theiline Pigott, and Elliott Brennan, Optimizing Foreign Military Sales Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities, RAND Corporation, RR-A2631-1, 2024. As of September 19, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2631-1.html
Chicago Manual of Style
Saum-Manning, Lisa, Jefferson P. Marquis, Irina A. Chindea, Daniel Elinoff, Theiline Pigott, and Elliott Brennan, Optimizing Foreign Military Sales Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2024. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2631-1.html. Also available in print form.
BibTeX RIS

Research conducted by

This research was sponsored by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency and conducted within the International Security and Defense Policy Program of the RAND National Security Research Division.

This publication is part of the RAND research report series. Research reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND research reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.