General guidance for the Final Recommendations

- This section of the requirements document identifies one or more paths forward to satisfy the capability requirements and close or mitigate associated capability gaps identified in the document. Ensure recommendations reflect a thorough understanding of the threat considerations, intelligence support requirements, and capabilities for the functional and operational areas.

- Final recommendations for this document include consideration of:

1. DOTmLPF-P Recommendations: Identify DOTmLPF-P Recommendations [Both part of and independent of materiel solutions]

- Although the 2021 JCIDS Manual has been rescinded, consider referencing the DOTmLPF-P guide within that resource (Annex F to Appendix G to Enclosure B). *Note: Reading this section before you begin this would be a good investment of your time.

- It might be helpful to consider these changes sequentially:

- What ‘DOT_LPF-P’ changes, by themselves, fully or partially satisfy validated CR and associated capability gaps? (Enabling)

- What ‘m’ changes, in ADDITION to the above, enhance the solution to the capability gaps? (Enabling)

- What ‘DOT_LPF-P’ changes are then necessary to incorporate the ‘m’ proposals into the formation? (Integrating)

2. Material Approach Recommendations: If the requirement cannot be met by using non-materiel approaches - Specify the preferred type of materiel approach to eliminate or mitigate each capability gap. This information is used by the Milestone Decision Authority (MDA) to guide follow-on analysis conducted during the Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA) phase of the acquisition process. Types of materiel approaches:

- Evolution of a fielded capability solution(s) with significant capability improvement, including development and fielding of improved IS, improved components or subsystems to address high obsolescence rates, or other upgrades and product improvements.

- Replacement or recapitalization of a fielded capability solution(s) with significant capability improvement. Describe plans to retire fielded capability solution(s) as the new capability solution(s) is brought into service and whether quantities in the joint force should be reduced based on increases in capability.

- Introduction of a transformational capability solution(s) that differ significantly in form, function, and/or operation from fielded capability solution(s). This may address gaps associated with a new mission, describe breakout capability solution(s) that offer significant improvement in capability, or transform the ways of accomplishing a mission.

- Increase integration/interoperability to evolve and combine existing and new systems to create a synergistic System of Systems (SoS). Examples include creating joint integrated kill chains for air and missile defense or integrated SoS for creating layered defense designs.

- Leverage S&T to reduce operational risk(s), ensuring technologies are sufficiently mature prior to initiation of a new or enhanced capability solution.

- Identify ongoing or new developmental technologies that have the potential to eliminate or mitigate capability gaps.

- Emphasize technologies that enhance joint warfighting capability against emerging threats and/or increase affordability within the capability requirements portfolio.

3. Acceptance of Operational Risk: Not every identified capability gap needs to be immediately addressed by a capability solution or S&T effort. A relatively low priority of the capability requirement to the overall joint force may not justify the lifecycle costs of taking further action at the present time.