Skip to content
Fiscal Receipts

Operational Test and Evaluation Capability

NavyRDT&EReconciledPE0605865N
What it is
Operational Test and Evaluation Capability (0605865N) is a Navy research & development line funded in the Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Navy account. Its J-book detail breaks the line into 2 projects.
What changed
+$277.0K FY25→26 R-1 TOA · PB2026
Who gets it
No company is linked to this line. Award records do not carry the program element, so the crosswalk is silent here — why.

Budget figures

FY24 Actuals
$28.9MR-1 TOA · PB2026
FY25 Total
$30.6MR-1 TOA · PB2026
FY26 Request
$30.9MR-1 TOA · PB2026
FY25→26 Change
+$277.0KR-1 TOA · PB2026
Data coverage

FY2026 award data is a partial year — USAspending reports awards on a rolling basis, and this corpus runs through 2026-09-04. why partial FY2026 data? →

Budget trajectory

The program's 3 summary figures for FY24 to FY26, plotted in fiscal-year order: this line ends higher than it starts. The points are the summary cards above, not a separate derivation; the table beside the chart carries each figure with its own citation.
The program's 3 summary figures for FY24 to FY26, plotted in fiscal-year order: this line ends higher than it starts. The points are the summary cards above, not a separate derivation; the table beside the chart carries each figure with its own citation.FY24: $28.9MFY25: $30.6MFY26: $30.9MFY24FY25FY26
Budget trajectory: one row per fiscal year, carrying the summary figure the sparkline plots. Every figure opens its own citation.
Fiscal yearAmount
FY24$28.9M
FY25$30.6M
FY26$30.9M

All series figures: R-1 TOA · PB2026

Decade view

P-1/R-1 workbook TOA basis, shown compact in $B/$M (the workbook records USD thousands); each figure cites its own President's Budget edition

12 fiscal years of this program as published (FY2015–FY2026): a line through the actuals (filled dots), with the enacted (hollow circles) and request (diamonds) markers each edition reported. Read it for direction, not for precision — this program's actuals line rises across the span. The grid below is the same data as text, one cited figure per cell.
12 fiscal years of this program as published (FY2015–FY2026): a line through the actuals (filled dots), with the enacted (hollow circles) and request (diamonds) markers each edition reported. Read it for direction, not for precision — this program's actuals line rises across the span. The grid below is the same data as text, one cited figure per cell.FY2015 actuals — PB2017 editionFY2016 actuals — PB2018 editionFY2017 actuals — PB2019 editionFY2018 actuals — PB2020 editionFY2019 actuals — PB2021 editionFY2020 actuals — PB2022 editionFY2021 actuals — PB2023 editionFY2022 actuals — PB2024 editionFY2023 actuals — PB2025 editionFY2024 actuals — PB2026 editionFY2016 enacted — PB2017 editionFY2017 enacted — PB2018 editionFY2018 enacted — PB2019 editionFY2019 enacted — PB2020 editionFY2020 enacted — PB2021 editionFY2021 enacted — PB2022 editionFY2022 enacted — PB2023 editionFY2023 enacted — PB2024 editionFY2024 enacted — PB2025 editionFY2025 enacted — PB2026 editionFY2017 request — PB2017 editionFY2018 request — PB2018 editionFY2019 request — PB2019 editionFY2020 request — PB2020 editionFY2021 request — PB2021 editionFY2022 request — PB2022 editionFY2023 request — PB2023 editionFY2024 request — PB2024 editionFY2025 request — PB2025 editionFY2026 request — PB2026 editionFY15FY18FY20FY22FY24FY26

The vertical scale does not start at zero: the baseline sits just below this program’s smallest year, so a low point on this line is not a small amount. Read the shape for direction and the grid below for the figures.

● actuals (line)  ·  ○ enacted  ·  ◇ request — gaps are editions the program is absent from, never interpolated.

Decade series values by fiscal year and President's Budget edition: one row per series (actuals, enacted, request), one column per fiscal year. Every figure opens its own citation.
SeriesFY15FY16FY17FY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26
Actuals$16.4M$17.8M$18.0M$20.3M$21.2M$24.7M$25.1M$25.3M$27.8M$28.9M
Enacted$18.0M$18.2M$20.3M$21.6M$25.1M$26.1M$24.9M$27.8M$29.4M$30.6M
Request$18.2M$20.3M$21.6M$25.1M$27.2M$24.9M$27.8M$29.4M$30.6M$30.9M

blank = series not published for this year; – = absent from that edition.

Asked vs spent: the PB2021 book requested $27.2M for FY2021; the PB2023 book reported $25.1M as actual total obligation authority — $2.12M below the request. 25.1 − 27.2 = -2.1 USD millions — the compact figures above are rounded for reading.

Program lineage

No predecessor/successor lineage was recorded for this program element — no FY-to-FY transfer into or out of this line was stated in the ingested J-books, and none was inferred from the program structure.

Description

Mission — Operational Test & Eval Capability

This program is funded under RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST and EVALUATION MANAGEMENT SUPPORT because it supports efforts directed toward sustaining or modernizing facilities and conducting operations required for general research, development, test and evaluation. Headquartered in Norfolk, Virginia, OPTEVFOR serves as the Service Operational Test Agency for the Navy and for Marine Corps Aviation. In addition to the headquarters element, OPTEVFOR includes a Fleet-scheduling detachment in San Diego, a detachment supporting the Joint Strike Fighter, and the US Operational Test Team at Nellis, Air Force Base (AFB), NV. There are four Navy and Marine Corps Squadrons that conduct OT&E under the direction of the OPTEVFOR Director. Air Test and Evaluation Squadron ONE (VX-1), located at Patuxent River, MD, is under the administrative control of Commander, Naval Air Forces, Atlantic. Air Test and Evaluation Squadron NINE (VX-9), located at China Lake, CA, is under the administrative control of Commander, Naval Air Forces, Pacific. Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron ONE (VMX-1), located at Yuma, AZ is administratively aligned under the Deputy Commandant for Aviation. Marine Helicopter Squadron ONE (HMX-1), located at Quantico, VA, responsible for OT of aircraft assigned for Presidential transport. OPTEVFOR utilizes a competency- and warfare-aligned organizational structure to apply rigorous scientific and technical methods within mission-based evaluations of complex systems and capabilities being delivered to the Fleet. OPTEVFOR's Warfare Divisions are responsible for delivering test documents ready for the Director's signature and executing adequate operational test and evaluation (OT&E) for Naval systems and reporting defendable conclusions about capabilities potentially being fielded. They are supported by Competency Divisions, who ensure the product meets technical requirements, and DoN and OPTEVFOR standards. There are six warfare divisions: Undersea Warfare (40), Air Warfare (50), Information Warfare (60), Surface Warfare (70), Expeditionary Warfare (80), and Advanced Programs (90). Each warfare division is led by a Navy Captain as the Division Director with a senior civil servant as the Deputy; or led by a senior civil servant with a Navy Captain/Commander as the Deputy. There are four competency divisions: Policy, Operations, and Training (01A); Test Design and Analysis (01B); Test Planning and Evaluation (01C); and Cybersecurity Testing (01D). In addition, the Technical Director (00TD) supports all divisions on technical aspects of the test products. Operations and business support divisions include the Staff Commanding Officer and Administration (10), Chief Information Officer (CIO) (20), Contracts (01K), and the Comptroller (30).

Mission — OPTEVFOR Support

This program element (PE) provides OPTEVFOR general support funding for headquarters annual operating expenses and ensures OPTEVFOR compliance with Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) and Secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) directives during the conduct of independent operational testing and evaluation (OT&E). This funding supports planning, testing, and reporting on the operational effectiveness, suitability, and cyber survivability of new and improved systems and recommending Fleet usage to the Chief of Naval Operations (CNO). Funding also supports initiatives (including the manpower to execute) that improve OPTEVFOR's ability to develop "minimum, adequate" test strategies maximizing efficiencies and minimizing assets/time required to conduct planned operational testing, thereby driving down overall T&E costs for the Navy. The CNO, as well as acquisition executives and managers at all levels, have a continuing need for expeditious and efficient OT&E to make decisions on providing new/upgraded warfighting capabilities to the Fleet. To this end, this funding supports OPTEVFOR's continued pursuit of a variety of initiatives aimed at increasing efficiencies in T&E. These initiatives include the development of organizational level metrics that align with and inform North Star performance; develop IT infrastructure to enable/support planning/testing/analyzing/reporting to address data needs and venues for multiple stakeholders; maximize leverage of operational test data collection opportunities while ensuring OT insight is provided with agility to Fleet and Acquisition decision makers across the DON Enterprise; reduce data collection burden through streamlined development of measures and data requirements during Mission Based Test Design (MBTD). All of these initiatives improve the quality of OT&E, thus ensuring adequate test of combat systems prior to delivery to Fleet units. Issues discovered by OT&E have direct, long-term, Navy-wide implications on the Fleet's readiness and warfighting capability. Rapid advances in technology, changes in fleet tactics, and increased complexity of weapons systems and platforms have increased the need for technical and operational analyses that are sophisticated and timely in order to ensure an optimal return on investment of Navy resources.

Mission — Cyberspace Activities

This project funds the civilian salaries and supports associated maintenance and sustainment of cyber hygiene and resiliency of network infrastructure, as well as enterprise IT services for OPTEVFOR operational support networks. Additionally, these funds ensure the hardware and software required to maintain is in compliance with cybersecurity directives that support command operations as required. The Cyber Pure funding under this project directly supports the Assessment & Authorization (A&A) of OPTEVFOR IT systems and the monthly patching and scanning, and reauthorization required for continuous monitoring.

Justification

Accomplishments & Planned Programs (2)

OPTEVFOR SUPPORT

Funding in this project funds the civilian salaries and operating costs for the Operational Test and Evaluation Force (OPTEVOR). In addition, it supports several initiatives aimed at increasing efficiencies in Test and Evaluation (T&E) to facilitate the Navy's ability to deliver warfighting capability to the fleet at the speed of relevance. These initiatives include IT Network, database and decision-making technology upgrades; implementation of Integrated Testing and Mission Based Test Design across all programs; and improved staffing and expertise in the areas of DON acquisition processes, Modeling and Simulation, Statistical Studies, Information Assurance, and related disciplines. All of these initiatives are aimed at improving the quality of testing and evaluation, thus ensuring delivery to fleet units of appropriately tested and capable combat capabilities.

Cyberspace Activities

Funding will support maintenance of cyber hygiene and resiliency of network infrastructure and enterprise IT services for OPTEVFOR operational support networks, as well as the hardware and software required to maintain compliance with cybersecurity directives. Funding ensures ability of OPTEVFOR network engineers to comply with cybersecurity requirements for the networks used in support of command operations as required. Facilitates the monthly network patching and scanning required to protect networks from cyber-attacks and intrusions.

Budget line items(workbook-cited)

P-1/R-1 workbook Total Obligation Authority basis (USD thousands) · PB2026.

Exhibit R-1

AccountOrgTypeAmount
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY24 Actuals$28.9M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY25 Enacted$30.6M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY25 Total$30.6M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY26 Disc. Request$30.9M
Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, NavyNFY26 Total$30.9M

Budget Details(R-2/P-40 facts)

J-book detail basis (R-2/P-40, USD millions) · PB2026 — a different accounting basis from the P-1/R-1 workbook TOA above; where the two disagree, the reconciliation strip under Budget figures shows both.

Wider than this screen — swipe the table sideways for the remaining fiscal-year columns.

ProjectAll Prior YearsFY24 ActualsFY25 TotalFY26 BaseFY26 Request
Program Element$0$28.9M$30.6M$30.9M$30.9M
0831: OPTEVFOR Support$0$26.7M$28.3M$28.6M$28.6M
2958: Cyberspace Activities$0$2.13M$2.29M$2.30M$2.30M

Follow the dollar

No follow-the-dollar view — this program's awards haven't been crosswalked at high confidence (flows cover 312 of 1,938 programs). why coverage is partial? →

Awards

No awards are linked to this program element at high or medium confidence — the budget→award crosswalk only asserts links it can defend, and this line has none yet.

Lobbying mentions

No Senate LDA lobbying filing in the tracked data mentions this program element by code or alias.

Oversight

Department-level designation (not specific to this program)

GAO lists 5 high-risk areas for DOD as a whole. That designation covers the department, not Operational Test and Evaluation Capability. No program-specific GAO finding for this line is in the ingested data. See the DOD oversight record.

Program dossier

No research dossier for this program — dossiers cover 50 of 1,938 programs, the largest fully J-book-detailed lines by FY2026 requested dollars. why no dossier here? →

Primary sources

Open any budget figure for its exact receipt. Verified line items lead with the highlighted government PDF; original spreadsheets download with their budget edition and exhibit in the filename.

Budget totals · TOA sources

Detailed budget justification

The related TOA spreadsheets above use a different accounting basis from R-2/P-40 detail. Their amounts are not assumed to match these detailed sources.