Major ADP Systems

DOD Does Not Always Comply With Statutory Restriction on Obligations Gao ID: IMTEC-91-16 January 7, 1991

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO assessed the extent to which the Department of Defense (DOD) complied with a restriction against the obligation of funds for major automated information systems that did not successfully complete oversight reviews required by DOD regulations.

GAO found that: (1) although it deferred milestone approval, the DOD Major Automated Information System Review Committee (MAISRC) allowed the Air Force to obligate funds to develop its Depot Maintenance Management Information System (DMMIS) to avoid renegotiating a contract; (2) the Air Force estimated total DMMIS costs at $242 million, and expected full operational capacity by September 1993; (3) MAISRC concurred with the Air Force and DOD decision to obligate funds for the Air Force's Personnel Concept III (PC-III) system prior to successfully completing milestone approval; (4) estimated program costs for PC-III totalled $172 million, and the Air Force estimated life-cycle costs at $527 million; (5) PC-III subsequently completed the milestone review in July 1990; (6) MAISRC believed that it was in the government's best interest to allow the Navy to continue development of its Integrated Disbursing and Accounting Financial Information Processing System (IDAFIPS), even though it had not completed a milestone review, citing the potential for increased costs and further schedule delays from abrupt contract terminations; (7) Congress subsequently cancelled IDAFIPS; and (8) there was no supporting analysis of the conclusions to continue funding the systems.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.