Printed from https://fiscalreceipts.com/program/0606017F/ — data as of July 28, 2026. Every figure is citation-backed; see the page online for per-number provenance.
Requirements Analysis and Maturation
Budget Figures
FY2026 award data is a partial year — USASpending awards are reported on a rolling basis and the fiscal year does not close until September 30. why partial FY2026 data? →
- FY24
- $114.6M
- FY25
- $31.4M
- FY26
- $28.2M
● actuals (line) · ○ enacted · ◇ request — gaps are editions the program is absent from, never interpolated.
| Series | FY15 | FY16 | FY17 | FY18 | FY19 | FY20 | FY21 | FY22 | FY23 | FY24 | FY25 | FY26 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Actuals | $18.7M | $21.9M | $45.1M | $106.6M | $46.1M | $81.7M | $66.2M | $88.3M | $106.5M | $114.6M | ||
| Enacted | $22.5M | $129.1M | $35.5M | $48.1M | $86.7M | $68.3M | $90.8M | $109.5M | $90.0M | $31.4M | ||
| Request | $29.1M | $35.5M | $35.3M | $62.7M | $63.4M | $85.8M | $101.8M | $90.0M | $41.5M | $28.2M |
blank = series not published for this year; – = absent from that edition.
Asked vs spent: the PB2018 book requested $35.5M for FY2018; the PB2020 book reports $106.6M actually spent — $71.2M above the request.
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 — Requirements Analysis and Maturation
Capability development provides the analytic, technical, and programmatic rigor necessary to address capability gaps and opportunities to refine and mature future programs of record, prioritizing and accelerating transition of capabilities in collaboration with operational stakeholders. The Capability Development Enterprise is focused on maturing and transitioning high-impact warfighting capabilities aligned to Air Force Future Force Design through robust capability development. The Requirements Analysis and Maturation (RAM) program element funds Modeling, Simulation and Analysis, USAF Science and Technology (S&T) attribute refinement, and trade space studies in support of the Capability Development Enterprise to achieve the force design. Mission Engineering (ME) is the cornerstone for documenting Air Force Future Force Design and prioritizing capability development activities and recommendations. These efforts focus on Development Planning of operationally relevant capabilities, emerging technologies, and disruptive capability applications. Modern integrated digital environments are used in rendering problem decomposition, technology-focused requirements analysis, capability decomposition, trade space characterization, technology-enabled concept development, architecture design for technology integration, cost implications and assessments, model validation, analytical tool development, and focused technology risk characterization. Studies by Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC) and University Affiliated Research Center (UARC) may augment this analysis when specific knowledge areas or technical understanding is required. Engagements with industry and academia may involve contracted analysis or requests for information at appropriate security levels. Outcomes of RAM are capability development characterization data that is used for acquisition planning of technically feasible and operationally relevant system to realize the Air Force Future Force Design. This requirement supports performance of a full financial audit as required by title 10 U.S.C. Chapter 9A, Sec 240-D. This program element may include necessary civilian pay expenses required to manage, execute, and deliver RAM capability. The use of such program funds would be in addition to the civilian pay expenses budgeted in program element 0605829F, 0605831F, 0605833F, 0605898F, 0606398F. This program is in Budget Activity 6, RDT&E Management Support because this budget activity includes research, development, test and evaluation efforts and funds to sustain and/or modernize the installations or operations required for general research, development, test and evaluation.
Mission — Development Planning
Development Planning (DP) funds activities to analyze the Force Design in support of the Capability Development Enterprise. DP conducts coordinated Mission Engineering and Analysis to identify and refine key capability trades, technology needs, and cost and schedule implications. Emphasis is placed on developing options that address force design gaps by analyzing multi-domain capabilities and evaluating Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership and Education, Personnel, and Facilities-Planning (DOTMLPF-P) concepts. This analysis informs trade space of candidate concepts, ensuring required attributes are met. The outcome of this effort will be tradespace attributes and mission engineering artifacts which will underpin Capability Development decisions. These funds may be used for program management support costs, but not limited to hardware, software, travel, contractor support, civilian pay, supplies, facilities, and infrastructure. This program element may include necessary civilian pay expenses required to manage, execute, and deliver RAM capability. The use of such program funds would be in addition to the civilian pay expenses budgeted in program element 0605829F, 0605831F, 0605833F, 0605898F, 0606398F. Projected civilian pay expenses are anticipated to be 5.833 million in FY2025 and 6.416 million in FY2026 for this program element.
Mission — INTEGRATED SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS
The Integrated Simulation and Analysis project funds activities that develop and support integrated analysis and digital engineering tools for the Capability Development Enterprise. In addition, the project develops tools and methodologies to support required analysis and studies; this produces system performance representations/models, environments, architectures, digital artifacts, data, and tools that underpin variable fidelity, stand-alone, interactive, and distributed simulations. The project incorporates Mission Engineering and Digital Engineering enterprise tools and methods (i.e. Model-Based Systems Engineering [MBSE], Modeling Simulation and Analysis [MS&A] ecosystem) as the technical and digital underpinning for the simulation models/ behaviors; it develops and maintains digital records for future analytical needs and serves as a template to identify, road map, and enable the Modeling and Simulation- centric portions of the acquisition life cycle and of operational missions. The project may fund IT and licenses to execute modern Mission Engineering and Digital Engineering. The project initiates and leverages studies performed by industry, academia, FFRDCs and UARCs that may be required to develop and create technology representative models and data.
Justification
Accomplishments & Planned Programs (5)
Modeling, Simulation, Analysis, and Experimentation Ecosystem
Develop enterprise capable, cross-domain system-of-systems modeling, simulation, and analysis capabilities to support development planning, capabilities assessment, and acquisition decisions.
Future Capability Analyses
Builds Capability Development Roadmaps via integrated Mission Threads tied to Air Force Future Force Design and Theory of Victory. Modern digital engineering tools and methodologies (mission engineering and mission integration) are used to provide potential solution sets for further investigation, risk reduction, or more detailed analysis. The entire span of DOTMLPF-P is examined to codify the need for a materiel solution. Conducts gap and solution analyses prioritized by Integrated Capabilities Command (ICC) to understand programs of record and refine attributes of candidate concept capabilities in a multi-level security environment that spans multiple domains. Delivers prioritized demand signal to technology developers and industry stakeholders to align modernization initiatives and guide capability alternative trade space based on mission decomposition and corresponding engagement, mission and campaign analyses. These activities are in alignment with Digital Materiel Management (DMM) strategic guidance and performed in an Integrated Digital Environment where available.
Concept Evaluation
Refine and codify candidate concepts anchored on desired force design attributes, analysis data, available technologies and key assumptions. This includes documentation of military utility with envisioned CONOPS and CONEMPs. Validation of materiel and non-materiel capability attributes through rigorous problem decomposition, engagement with ICC, industry, FFRDC, UARC, industry and non-traditional vendors is captured. The "ilities” of a candidate concept (i.e. lethality, suitability, reliability, maintainability, survivability, sufficiency, capacity and other life cycle management attributes) are captured and used to create the cost basis, cost estimates and identify critical dependencies and interactions among capability concept elements and distinguish developmental capability concept elements from materiel and non-materiel elements currently available. Draft technical performance measures and other metrics to define progress and success of development activities would be created linked to an attribute correlation table, mapping attributes to solution sets. A comprehensive search is conducted across a broad technology base, encompassing commercial industry, the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and other partner Services and Agencies, to identify existing and emerging technologies that can be applied to candidate system concepts.
Joint Simulation Environment (JSE)
Develops a government-owned and operated modeling and simulation capability that enables multi-platform, multi-domain integration and interoperability. This capability is required to support developmental and operational testing, tactics development, and advanced training for 5th-generation platforms and other future capabilities that are critical for force development.
Simulation and Analysis Facility Support
Develops high-fidelity, live-virtual-constructive modeling, simulation, and analysis capability to evaluate warfighting capabilities, strategies, concepts of operation, tactics, emerging technologies, and human system interfaces to support and enable acquisition, test, and training.
Budget Line Items(workbook-cited)
Exhibit R-1
| Account | Org | Type | Amount |
|---|---|---|---|
| Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force | F | FY24 Actuals | $114.6M |
| Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force | F | FY25 Enacted | $31.4M |
| Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force | F | FY25 Total | $31.4M |
| Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force | F | FY26 Disc. Request | $28.2M |
| Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air Force | F | FY26 Total | $28.2M |
Budget Details(R-2/P-40 facts)
| Project | All Prior Years | FY24 Actuals | FY25 Total | FY26 Base | FY26 Request |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Program Element | $0 | $114.6M | $31.4M | $28.2M | $28.2M |
| 666158: INTEGRATED SIMULATION AND ANALYSIS | $0 | $79.1M | $17.0M | $17.1M | $17.1M |
| 666157: Development Planning | $0 | $35.6M | $14.4M | $11.1M | $11.1M |
No follow-the-dollar view — this program's awards haven't been crosswalked at high confidence (flows cover 17 of 1741 programs). why coverage is partial? →
Awards
No awards are linked to this program element at high 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.
No research dossier for this program — dossiers cover 50 of 1741 programs, the largest fully J-book-detailed lines by FY2026 requested dollars. why no dossier here? →