In 2002, the Navy’s Sea Power 21 vision stated that shore-based capabilities would be transformed to seabased capabilities whenever practical to improve the reach, persistence, and sustainability of systems that are already afloat. The objective for the United States to maintain global freedom of action is a consistent theme throughout the National Defense Strategy and National Military Strategy. DOD’s 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review Report further stated that the future joint force will exploit the operational flexibility of seabasing to counter political antiaccess and irregular warfare challenges. The joint seabasing concept is currently going through the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS), a DOD decision support process for transforming military forces. Figure 1 shows the JCIDS process, including the major elements of a capabilities-based assessment. The purpose of JCIDS is to identify, assess, and prioritize joint military capability needs. Capabilities represent warfighting needs that are studied as part of the system’s capabilities-based assessment process. The process identifies warfighter skills and attributes for a desired capability (Functional Area Analysis), the gaps to achieving this capability (Functional Needs Analysis), and possible solutions for filling these gaps (Functional Solution Analysis). The results of this assessment are used as the basis for identifying approaches for delivering the desired capability. When identifying these approaches, cost is one factor that is considered. One way costs are used to evaluate potential approaches is by developing total ownership cost estimates. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council has overall responsibility for JCIDS and is supported by eight Functional Capabilities Boards (Command and Control, Battlespace Awareness, Focused Logistics, Force Management, Force Protection, Force application, Net-Centric, and Joint Training), which lead the capabilities- based assessment process. DOD’s anticipated timeframe for an operational joint seabasing capability as currently envisioned in the Joint Integrating Concept is 2015–2025. The services are either considering or actively pursuing material solutions to support seabasing. According to service officials and documentation, these solutions will play a critical role in enhancing current seabasing capabilities. For example, the Navy and Marines plan to acquire the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future) along with several supporting connectors needed for it to be able to achieve its mission. As part of the seabase, the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future) will be a squadron of ships to transport and deliver the personnel, combat power, and logistic support of the Marine Expeditionary Brigade. The connectors, which are envisioned to provide both intertheater lift to the seabase and intratheater lift within the seabase, include sealift, such as the Joint High Speed Vessel, Joint High Speed Sealift, and Joint Maritime Assault Connector (this vessel is intended to replace the Landing Craft Assault Connector), and airlift, such as the V-22 Osprey and CH-53K heavy lift helicopter. Figure 2 illustrates and describes several sealift and airlift connectors. The Army is also exploring new capability initiatives for establishing a seabasing capability. In conjunction with the Navy and Marine Corps, the Army is developing the Joint High Speed Vessel and Joint High Speed Sealift ships. Furthermore, the Army is also in the early stages of development of its Afloat Forward Staging Base, which is a ship concept whose mission would be providing aerial maneuver with Army forces from the sea. One option the Army is exploring for the Afloat Forward Staging Base is to add flight decks to a commercial container ship, along with other alterations, as a means to provide aerial maneuver to Army forces. Although DOD has taken action to begin the development of joint seabasing, DOD has not fully established a comprehensive management approach to effectively guide and assess joint seabasing as an option for projecting and sustaining forces in an antiaccess environment and integrate service initiatives. Specifically, DOD has not fully incorporated sound management practices—such as providing leadership, dedicating an implementation team, and establishing a communications strategy—that our prior work has shown are found at the center of successful transformations. DOD has taken action to develop joint seabasing by pursuing it within DOD’s Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS). JCIDS is a key DOD decision support process that uses a capabilities- based approach to assess existing capabilities, identify capability gaps, and develop new warfighting capabilities. Within JCIDS, future capability needs are intended to be developed from top-level strategic guidance such as the National Military Strategy, a “top-down” approach. Under the former process, requirements grew out of the individual services’ unique strategic visions, a “bottom-up” approach. In January 2006 we reported that JCIDS is not yet functioning as envisioned to define gaps and redundancies in existing and future military capabilities across the department and to identify solutions to improve joint capabilities. We reported that requirements continue to be defined largely from the “bottom up”—by the services—although DOD uses the JCIDS framework to assess the services’ proposals and push a joint perspective. According to Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics officials, seabasing is going through the JCIDS process to become more of a joint concept that is developed through input from the services, combatant commands, and other DOD organizations. DOD has produced a Seabasing Joint Integrating Concept that outlines the concept for joint seabasing and identifies essential capabilities. Under JCIDS, the capabilities-based assessment follows a structured, four-step process. The first step in this process, the Functional Area Analysis, dated October 2005, identified the seabasing tasks, conditions, and standards needed to meet military objectives. The Functional Area Analysis identified such critical joint seabasing tasks as providing for maintenance of equipment in the joint operations area, attacking operational targets, and building and maintaining sustainment bases in the joint operations area. The second step of the capabilities-based assessment, the Functional Needs Analysis, dated November 2006, provided a prioritized list of joint seabasing capabilities and capability gaps, and identifies potential mitigation areas from which the identified capability gaps may be addressed. The 17 seabasing capability gaps include at-sea assembly, forcible entry, and conducting operational movement and maneuver. The analyses that are currently being developed are intended to further define and organize the capability gaps identified in the Functional Needs Analysis and recommend potential solutions for consideration in future analyses. Despite pursuing joint seabasing within JCIDS, DOD has not fully incorporated key sound management practices into its approach for managing the development of joint seabasing requirements and integrating service initiatives. In our prior work, we identified several key sound management practices at the center of successful mergers, acquisitions, and transformations. These key sound management practices include (1) ensuring top leadership drives the transformation, (2) dedicating an implementation team to manage the transformation process, and (3) establishing a communication strategy to create shared expectations and report related progress. Without a management approach that contains these elements, DOD may be unable to guide and assess joint seabasing in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Moreover, without central coordination, it is unclear whether DOD will be able to effectively manage billions of dollars of potential service investments in interdependent complex platforms, connectors, and logistics technologies that will need to be coordinated using a common set of standards, requirements, timeframes, and priorities. First, although joint seabasing capability development is underway, DOD has not provided sufficient leadership to integrate service initiatives and guide the development of joint seabasing. While the joint seabasing JCIDS process is still in the early stages of assessing needed capabilities, the services have developed their own concepts and approaches for seabasing, and in some cases systems that will support joint seabasing are further along than the concept in JCIDS development. For example, the Maritime Prepositioning Force (Future) and the Joint High Speed Vessel are approaching their second major milestone, or decision point, within DOD’s acquisition system, which will initiate systems-level development, whereas the joint seabasing concept is still being refined. Preliminary cost estimates for both these systems range from nearly $12 billion to over $15 billion. The 2005 National Research Council Committee’s report, Sea Basing, concluded that developing a system of systems such as seabasing that is comprised of complex platforms, connectors, and logistics technologies will require a common set of standards, requirements, timeframes, and priorities. Various ship, airlift, and sealift connector components of the seabase will need to interface, and the capabilities of some of these components will be interdependent. In addition, joint operations from a seabase will require robust logistics technologies and command and control. Prematurely developing such systems to meet individual service requirements rather than joint requirements may result in initiatives that duplicate each other and systems that are not interoperable and compatible. Moreover, in addition to the billions of dollars being spent to procure these systems, it may be costly to realign or adjust the efforts of the services in the future if they do not meet the joint requirements of seabasing. In addition, DOD leadership has not provided an official, unified vision for joint seabasing to guide the transformation, ensure that focus is maintained on providing a capability that is the best option for projecting and sustaining forces in an antiaccess environment, and ensure that joint seabasing is evaluated against competing options. Joint Staff officials told us that the joint seabasing JCIDS process has been addressing how seabasing can be used to counter the problem of projecting and sustaining forces in an antiaccess environment, rather than examining specific solutions. We reported in 2003 that key practices and implementation steps for successful transformations include ensuring top leadership drives the transformation. We found that leadership must set the direction, pace, and tone for the transformation.