Military Readiness

DOD Needs to Develop a More Comprehensive Measurement System Gao ID: NSIAD-95-29 October 27, 1994

The Defense Department's (DOD) definition and indicators for measuring readiness provide valuable information, but this information is limited and cannot signal an impending change in readiness. Moreover, the Status of Resources and Training System, which measures whether individual service units possess the required resources and are trained to do their wartime missions, was never intended to provide the comprehensive assessment of overall military readiness that has become increasingly important in today's national security environment. To supplement data reported in DOD's system and facilitate readiness assessments at the unit level, the military commands independently monitor many additional indicators. These indicators are generally not reported to higher command levels. GAO visited 39 military commands and other DOD agencies and compiled a list of more than 650 such indicators. Military commanders and outside defense experts said that many of these indicators are not only critical to a comprehensive readiness assessment at the unit level but also have some predictive value. The indicators do require, however, some refinement to improve their usefulness.

GAO found that: (1) the Department of Defense's (DOD) system for measuring readiness, the Status of Resources and Training System (SORTS), has limitations; (2) SORTS was never intended to provide a comprehensive assessment of overall military readiness; (3) SORTS only measures individual service readiness because there are no indicators available to measure joint readiness; (4) SORTS does not assess operating tempo or troop morale; (5) to supplement SORTS data and facilitate readiness assessments at the unit level, the military commands independently monitor additional indicators that are critical to a comprehensive readiness assessment at the unit level and have some degree of predictive value; and (6) DOD can improve its comprehensive readiness assessments by incorporating unit level indicators, but these indicators will require further refinement to improve their usefulness.

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.