Reviewed by:      Signature
      Date
(Director, Sponsoring Organization)

Reviewed by:      Signature
      Date
(Director, Acquiring Organization)

Contents:

The IAR should be submitted as an Executive Summary with supporting analysis and data as attachments. The following is the content of the Executive Summary:

Signature Page: Include the title "Investment Analysis Report," name of the mission need, and signatures of the approving organizations.

Assumptions, Constraints, and Conditions: Identify and describe briefly all important assumptions, constraints, and conditions having major influence on the analysis and its conclusions. The following must be included as a minimum: the assumed remaining service life of currently fielded capability, the assumed required operational date for any new capability, the assumed service life of any new capability, and the operational framework within which any new capability must function.

Evaluation Matrix: Provide a value or ranking of each evaluation factor for each alternative. The evaluation matrix should typically include the acquisition cost, life-cycle cost, time to field an initial operational capability, benefits, risk, ability to upgrade (e.g., open architecture, modular design), affordability, and performance ranking for each alternative. Explain the content of this matrix to the degree necessary for the JRC to understand the relative rankings and make an informed selection.

Recommendation: Identify the recommended alternative and explain the rationale for the recommendation.

Alternatives Analyzed: List and describe briefly all material and nonmaterial alternatives that were analyzed. These alternatives will vary widely according to the need, but it is imperative that nonmaterial and nondevelopmental solutions be investigated as a first priority in all cases. A developmental alternative should be pursued only when nondevelopmental items (NDI) and nonmaterial solutions are determined to be unfeasible or when a technological opportunity offers great potential for improvements in efficiency and effectiveness.

Evaluation Criteria: Identify the evaluation criteria and their relative weighting used in evaluating the relative attractiveness of each alternative. Life-cycle cost to the FAA and the aviation industry must be used as an evaluation factor in every investment analysis. Such items as payback periods, life-cycle assumed, cost and benefit ratio, risk/sensitivity analysis, and return on investment should be evaluated.

NDI Feasibility: Discuss why the mission need can or cannot be satisfied by an NDI or market-available solution. If NDI is not considered feasible, explain the shortfalls between the required capability and the NDI capability and provide an impact statement of deleting these shortfalls from the Final Requirements Document.

Affordability: Identify the funding source for any new program. If funding is not available in the NAS Architecture, the Capital Investment Plan, and other agency plans and budgets, identify funding offsets in approved lower priority programs sufficient to make up the shortfall. State the priority of the recommended program relative to programs identified for offsets from programs within the same line of business and from all approved agency programs.^{(Revised 8/98)}

Mandatory Attachments

Analytical Summary: For each alternative, explain the score or ranking given to each evaluation factor.

Rankings should be based in major part on the Net Present Value, Cost-Benefit Ratio, Period to Payback investment, affordability, and other economic criteria. Comparisons need to show returns on investment in a marginal format (i.e., for each $25M invested). Factors will vary for different type programs. The JRC needs to establish agency priorities between infrastructure versus new user benefit programs, etc.

Acquisition Program Baseline: Provide the performance, cost, schedule, and benefit baseline for each alternative considered likely to be selected for implementation by the JRC, as derived from the investment analysis.