link to page 1 link to page 1 link to page 2



Updated November 30, 2018
Defense Primer: Planning, Programming, Budgeting and
Execution (PPBE) Process
Introduction
PPBE Phases
Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE)
The first three phases typically produce a specific product
is an annual Department of Defense (DOD) process for
unique to that phase and year. The planning phase produces
allocating resources. It serves as the framework for DOD
the Defense Planning Guidance (DPG), which details force
civilian and military leaders to decide which programs and
development priorities. The programming phase generates a
force structure requirements to fund based on strategic
Program Objective Memorandum (POM), a funding plan
objectives.
for each military service and defense agency covering a
five-year period that adjusts programs in the FYDP. The
The department’s Defense Acquisition University (DAU)
budgeting phase results in a Budget Estimate Submission
defines PPBE in part as “a formal, systematic structure for
(BES), which covers the first year of the POM and converts
making decisions on policy, strategy, and the development
programs into budget terms for submission to Congress.
of forces and capabilities to accomplish anticipated
missions.” DOD Directive 7045.14 states the objective of
Figure 1. DOD Resource Allocation Process
PPBE “is to provide the DOD with the most effective mix
(by month and calendar year, and fiscal year)
of forces, equipment, manpower, and support attainable
within fiscal constraints.”
The process is designed to produce DOD’s portion of the
President’s annual budget request to Congress and updates
to the department’s five-year spending plan known as the
Future Years Defense Program, or FYDP (pronounced
“fiddip”). It is also one leg of a triad of acquisition-related
decision support systems that includes the Joint Capabilities
Integration and Development System (JCIDS) for
developing requirements to address capability gaps and the
Defense Acquisition System (DAS) for managing
acquisition.

Source: CRS graphic based on DOD references.
Background
Notes: CY is calendar year; FY is fiscal year. Execution as shown is
In 1961, then-Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) Robert S.
based on appropriations available for one year.
McNamara created the Planning, Programming, and
Budgeting System (PPBS) to create a framework for
Planning
connecting strategic objectives with resources. In 2003,
The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy leads the
DOD renamed the system PPBE in part to emphasize the
planning phase. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
need to better manage the execution of budget authority
(CJCS) also plays a significant role in the process, in
provided by Congress. The Deputy Secretary of Defense
accordance with responsibilities as the principal military
assists the SECDEF in the overall PPBE leadership role by
advisor to the SECDEF under 10 U.S.C. 151. The CJCS’s
managing the process on a day-to-day basis.
role is, in part, to advocate for solutions to department-wide
requirements. The phase involves reviewing the President’s
PPBE is a calendar-driven process that, for any fiscal year
National Security Strategy (NSS), the SECDEF’s National
cycle, typically begins more than two years before the
Defense Strategy (NDS), and the CJCS’s National Military
expected year of budget execution. PPBE is part of DOD’s
Strategy (NMS) to ensure the resulting Defense Planning
Resource Allocation Process, a timeline intended to show
Guidance (DPG) aligns with the Administration’s policy
when actions associated with a particular fiscal year cycle
goals and takes into account potential threats, force
are supposed to occur during a calendar year (see Figure
structure, readiness posture, and other factors. The DPG,
1). DOD makes a distinction between the execution phase
developed with input from combatant commanders,
of PPBE, also known as execution review, and the
contains specific guidance for the services and helps inform
execution of congressional appropriations in the Resource
their Program Objective Memorandums (POMs).
Allocation Process figure. (For more information, see the
Execution section below.)
Programming
The programming phase is meant to analyze the anticipated
effects of present-day decisions on the future force. The
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Defense Primer: Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) Process
Director of the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation
USD for Personnel and Readiness (P&R) advises on
(CAPE) Office leads this phase. It begins with the heads of
all matters related to total force (active and reserve
each military service and defense agency developing a
military, civilian, and contract support), including
Program Objective Memorandum (POM), which describes
planning, requirements, readiness, workforce mix and
proposed resource requirements (forces, manpower, and
balance, applicable personnel policies, and healthcare
funding) for programs over five years. The POM prioritizes
issues.
and adjusts programs in the FYDP. It can also describe the
risks associated with underfunded or unfunded programs.
Deputy Chief Management Officer provides
Once each service submits a POM, CAPE leads the reviews
administrative and managerial support to the deputy
of the programs, forecasts the resource requirements for the
secretary’s senior governance bodies; helps the Chief
next five years, and updates the FYDP. As a result of this
Management Officer (CMO) to organize the business
program review, the SECDEF can direct the services to
operations of the department.
make changes.
USD for Intelligence (I) advises on all matters related
Budgeting
to intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive
The Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)/Chief
activities, and other intelligence-related matters. The
Financial Officer leads the budgeting phase, in which the
USD(I) is also a key player in the intelligence budget
military services complete a Budget Estimate Submission
process (IPPBE).
(BES) for the first year of the five-year POM. Under
guidance from the Office of Management and Budget
DOD Chief Information Officer (CIO) advises on
(OMB), the Comptroller reviews the budget submissions to
major cyber investments, information technology (IT)
ensure appropriate funding and fiscal controls, phasing of
resource allocations, and investment decisions,
the efforts over the funding period, and feasibility of
including recommending whether to continue, modify,
execution within the budget year. During this phase,
or terminate IT investments.
Comptroller analysts work with service counterparts to
review budget requests and ensure they align with the
Relevant Statutes
unified defense budget. As a result of this budget review,
the SECDEF can direct the services to make changes. The
Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 151 – Joint Chiefs of Staff:
military services update their budgets to comply with the
composition; functions
decision. The final product is intended for submission to
Title 10, U.S. Code, Chapter 9 – Defense Budget Matters
OMB each December for inclusion in the President’s
Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-
annual budget request to Congress, which is usually
23)
submitted in February.

Execution
The final phase, execution, also known as execution review,
is intended to evaluate program results. The execution
CRS Products
review occurs at the same time as the program review (to
CRS In Focus IF10831, Defense Primer: Future Years Defense
prioritize the programs that best meet strategic goals) and
Program (FYDP)
the budget review (to decide how much to spend on each
CRS In Focus IF10428, Intelligence Planning, Programming,
program). Thus, Execution Review is intended to assess a
program’s actual performance compared to its planned
Budgeting and Evaluation Process (IPPBE), by Michael E. DeVine
performance.

Other Key Players
While each phase has a designated leader, that person and
Other Resources
their staff work in concert with many others during all
DOD Directive 7045.14, The Planning, Programming, Budgeting,
phases of the PPBE process. Examples of key players in the
and Execution (PPBE) Process
process include:
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instructions (CJCSI)

3100.01B and 8501.01B
USD for Research and Engineering (R&E) advises
Defense Acquisition University, Acquisition Encyclopedia,
SECDEF on all DOD research, engineering, and
Planning, Programming, Budgeting & Execution Process (PPBE)
technology development activities and programs; serves
as the DOD chief technology officer with the mission of

advancing technology and innovation for the military
Acknowledgment: This primer was originally authored by
services and DOD.
Lynn M. Williams, former CRS Specialist in Defense
Readiness and Infrastructure.
USD for Acquisition and Sustainment (A&S)
establishes policy for all DOD elements relating to
Brendan W. McGarry, Analyst in US Defense Budget
acquisition (including system design, development, and
Heidi M. Peters, Analyst in U.S. Defense Acquisition
production, and procurement of goods and services) and
sustainment.
Policy
IF10429
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Defense Primer: Planning, Programming, Budgeting and Execution (PPBE) Process


Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10429 · VERSION 6 · UPDATED