Army Spending for Cybersecurity Using Other Transaction Agreements, FY 2021-2023

The Department of Defense (DoD) and its military services have used Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) contracts to acquire and develop various information technology (IT) capabilities, including those aimed at meeting cybersecurity requirements. Over the last few weeks, I have been looking at each of the major DoD components’ use of OTAs for cybersecurity – the Department of the Air Force, the Department of the Navy and the Defense Agencies. This week, I will complete the series by looking at the Department of the Army OTA use for cyber.

Army Cybersecurity-Related OTA Spending, FY 2021-2023

The latest OTA spending data covering the most recent three completed fiscal years (FY) – FY 2021 through FY 2023 – reveals a varying degree of OTA usage among the four major DoD components. Compared to the defense-wide agencies and the other military services, the Army remains the predominant user of OTAs for cyber-related efforts, spending an aggregate $602M from FY 2021 through FY 2023.

Breaking down the Army’s OTA use each year over the 3-year period shows a degree of consistency in their yearly cyber OTA spending, although FY 2022 and FY 2023 saw some softening compared to the period-peak in FY 2021. It is common to see variances of growth and moderation from year to year, as program starts, lifecycles and needs progress. After a strong $253M in FY 2021, Army spending on OTAs for cybersecurity efforts declined by $79M (-31%) in FY 2022 to come in at $174M and was effectively flat in FY 2023.

Cybersecurity-Related OTA Spending by Army Organization, FY 2021-2023

The FY 2021-2023 spending data shows that cyber-related work using OTAs at the Army is largely concentrated among two Army organizations – with two additional organizations holding an “honorable mention” position relative to them. All four seek to develop new capabilities and technologies to support soldiers in various capacities as part of their respective missions. Even with this concentrated spending, the Army has the widest spectrum of commands among the DoD components that use OTAs for at least some of their cyber capability development, indicating the attraction and accessibility of using this contracting method.

Between FY 2021 and FY 2023, more than 85% of Army spending on OTAs for cyber was reported by four organizations – Combat Capabilities Development Command (DEVCOM, 49%), Program Executive Office (PEO) Simulation, Training and Instrumentation (PEO STRI, 26%), PEO Soldier (8%) and PEO Enterprise Information Systems (PEO EIS, 4%).

Another 10% of OTA contracts for cyber-related efforts from FY 2021-2023 were shared by seven other Army organizations: PEO Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors (PEO IEW&S) (3%); PEO Command, Control and Communications Tactical (PEO C3T) (2%); PEO Aviation (1.6%); US Military Academy (USMA) (1.5%); Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM) (1.4%); Network Enterprise Technology Command (NETCOM) (0.4%); and the Army Materiel Command (AMC) (0.2%). The remaining 3% in Army OTA contracts from FY 2021-2023 – $18M – provided no additional buying organization on the contract beyond the Army.

Army Cybersecurity-Related Efforts Using OTAs, FY 2021-2023

Provided below are the twelve Army efforts using OTAs that had cyber elements for the past three fiscal years and had spending reported for FY 2023, indicating the most recent activity. The amounts below are aggregate OTA spending from FY 2021 through FY 2023, with FY 2023-specific spending highlighted. Where an Army organization is provided in the data, this is also noted.

• Assault Breacher Vehicle Remote Control System (DEVCOM), $297M total, $54M (18%) in FY 2023
• Persistent Cyber Training Environment Cyber Innovation Challenge Number 4 (PEO STRI), $82M total, $38M (46%) in FY 2023
• Persistent Cyber Training Environment Cyber Innovation Challenge #1 Follow-On (PEO STRI), $49M total, $2.2M (4%) in FY 2023
• Soldier Systems Integration Test Production Technical Services (PEO Soldier and PEO IEW&S), $48M total, $18M (37%) in FY 2023. PEO Soldier accounted for $17.3M in FY 2023, with $398K coming through PEO IEW&S.
• Cloud Service Provider Reseller for Army Enterprise Cloud Management Agency (PEO IEW&S and PEO C3T), $38M total, $25M (66%) in FY 2023. PEO IEW&S and PEO C3T had $15.8M and $9.6M in FY 2023 obligations.
• Consortium Managers for a Modeling and Simulation Other Transaction (PEO STRI), $25M total, $15M (62%) in FY 2023
• Prototype Project(s) in Support of U.S. Army Cyber Command (ARCYBER) (PEO EIS), $13M total, $584K (4%) in FY 2023
• Enhanced Protection of Information Capabilities (PEO Aviation and INSCOM), $12M total, $10M (85%) in FY 2023. PEO Aviation accounted for $8M and INSCOM had $192K of the FY 2023 total. The remaining $2.1M was posted without an identifying organization below the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics and Technology (ASA (ALT)).
• Valiant-Research, Develop, and Deliver Innovative Solutions and Robust Capabilities that Address Real Challenges in the Mission Space of the 16th Air Force and USAF Partnering Combatant Commands. (INSCOM), $8.5M total, all in FY 2023.
• Insider Threat Mitigation and Assessment (AMC and Unreported), $5.3M total, $1.1M (21%) in FY 2023, where AMC accounted for $283K and the remaining $800K was under an unreported organization.
• Tactical Defensive Cyber Operations Infrastructure (TDI) (PEO C3T), $2.5M total, 100% in FY 2023.
• Threat Simulation Systems (TSS) Prototyping (AMC), $155K total, all in FY 2023.

The Army’s OTA contracts for the Persistent Cyber Training Environment are initiatives that are held in common with the Air Force and the Navy, and the Threat Simulation Systems (TSS) Prototyping effort is shared among the Army and the Navy. These commonalities can indicate shared priorities and common requirements that align with a joint warfighting environment.

Final Thoughts

While the Army’s use of OTA contracts for cybersecurity-related efforts dropped from FY 2021 to FY 2022, the spending level remained strong and was sustained through FY 2023. Further, the strong use of OTA contracts by the Army, compared to the rest of the DoD components, indicates the Army’s continued demand for cyber innovation as well as the urgency placed on developing new cybersecurity capabilities to support a wide variety of mission requirements. This ongoing dominance in OTA spending for cyber capabilities by the Army appears likely to continue over the next fiscal year and beyond.

If you are interested in a broader perspective beyond cybersecurity on the Army’s use of OTAs for IT prototypes, see this recent article from my colleague, Alex Rossino.