DOD Personnel
DOD Comments on GAO's Report on DOD's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Planning Gao ID: GAO-03-690R April 18, 2003In response to a Congressional request, we issued a report in March 2003 on the Department of Defense's (DOD) strategic planning efforts for civilian personnel at DOD and selected defense components, including the four military services and two defense agencies. In that report we made recommendations to the Secretary of Defense to strengthen civilian human capital planning, including integration with military personnel and sourcing initiatives. DOD's response to our March 2003 report and recommendations were received too late to be included in that report. To provide our perspective on DOD's comments, we briefly summarize our March 2003 report's objectives, results, and recommendations and DOD's comments, along with our evaluation of the comments. DOD's civilian employees play key roles in such areas as defense policy, intelligence, finance, acquisitions, and weapon systems maintenance. Although downsized 38 percent between fiscal years 1989 and 2002, this workforce has taken on greater roles as a result of DOD's restructuring and transformation. Responding to congressional concerns about the quality and quantity of, and the strategic planning for, the civilian workforce, we determined the following for DOD, the military services, and selected defense agencies (the Defense Contract Management Agency and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service): (1) the extent of top-level leadership involvement in civilian strategic planning; (2) whether elements in civilian strategic plans are aligned to the overall mission, focused on results, and based on current and future civilian workforce data; and (3) whether civilian and military personnel strategic plans or sourcing initiatives were integrated.
We found that generally civilian personnel issues appear to be an emerging priority among top leaders in DOD and the defense components. Although DOD began downsizing its civilian workforce more than a decade ago, it did not take action to strategically address challenges affecting the civilian workforce until it issued its civilian human capital strategic plan in April 2002. Top-level leaders in the Air Force, the Marine Corps, the Defense Contract Management Agency, and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service have initiated planning efforts and are working in partnership with their civilian human capital professionals to develop and implement civilian strategic plans; such leadership, however, was increasing in the Army and not as evident in the Navy. High-level leadership is critical to directing reforms and obtaining resources for successful implementation. Moreover, DOD has not provided guidance on how to align the components' plans with the department-level plan. Without this alignment, DOD's and its components' planning may lack the focus and coordination needed (1) to carry out the Secretary of Defense's transformation initiatives in an effective manner and (2) to mitigate risks of not having human capital ready to respond to national security events at home and abroad. We also found that the human capital strategic plans we reviewed for the most part lacked key elements found in fully developed plans. Most of the civilian human capital goals, objectives, and initiatives were not explicitly aligned with the overarching missions of the organizations. Consequently, DOD and the components cannot be sure that strategic goals are properly focused on mission achievement. Also, none of the plans contained results-oriented performance measures to assess the impact of their civilian human capital initiatives (i.e., programs, policies, and processes). Thus, DOD and the components cannot gauge the extent to which their human capital initiatives contribute to achieving their organizations' mission. Finally, the plans did not contain data on the skills and competencies needed to successfully accomplish future missions; therefore, DOD and the components risk not being able to put the right people, in the right place, and at the right time, which can result in diminished accomplishment of the overall defense mission. Moreover, the civilian strategic plans did not address how the civilian workforce will be integrated with their military counterparts or sourcing initiatives. DOD's three human capital strategic plans--two military and one civilian--were prepared separately and were not integrated to form a seamless and comprehensive strategy and did not address how DOD plans to link its human capital initiatives with its sourcing plans, such as efforts to outsource non-core responsibilities. The components' civilian plans acknowledge a need to integrate planning for civilian and military personnel--taking into consideration contractors--but have not yet done so. Without an integrated strategy, DOD may not effectively and efficiently allocate its scarce resources for optimal readiness.
GAO-03-690R, DOD Personnel: DOD Comments on GAO's Report on DOD's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Planning
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-690R
entitled 'DOD Personnel: DOD Comments on GAO's Report on DOD's Civilian
Human Capital Strategic Planning' which was released on April 18, 2003.
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-03-690R
entitled …DOD Personnel: Comments on GAO‘s Report on DOD‘s Civilian
Human Capital Strategic Planning‘.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products‘ accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
April 18, 2003:
The Honorable Solomon P. Ortiz
Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Readiness
Committee on Armed Services
House of Representatives:
Subject: DOD Personnel: DOD Comments on GAO‘s Report on DOD‘s Civilian
Human Capital Strategic Planning:
Dear Mr. Ortiz:
In response to your request, we issued a report in March 2003 to you on
the Department of Defense‘s (DOD) strategic planning efforts for
civilian personnel at DOD and selected defense components, including
the four military services and two defense agencies.[Footnote 1] In
that report we made recommendations to the Secretary of Defense to
strengthen civilian human capital planning, including integration with
military personnel and sourcing initiatives.[Footnote 2] DOD‘s response
to our March 2003 report and recommendations were received too late to
be included in that report. To provide our perspective on DOD‘s
comments, we briefly summarize our March 2003 report‘s objectives,
results, and recommendations and DOD‘s comments, along with our
evaluation of the comments. DOD‘s comments provided by the Under
Secretary for Personnel and Readiness are included as an enclosure to
this report.
Summary of Objectives, Results, and Recommendations:
DOD‘s civilian employees play key roles in such areas as defense
policy, intelligence, finance, acquisitions, and weapon systems
maintenance. Although downsized 38 percent between fiscal years 1989
and 2002, this workforce has taken on greater roles as a result of
DOD‘s restructuring and transformation. Responding to congressional
concerns about the quality and quantity of, and the strategic planning
for, the civilian workforce, we determined the following for DOD, the
military services, and selected defense agencies (the Defense Contract
Management Agency and the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service):[Footnote 3] (1) the extent of top-level leadership
involvement in civilian strategic planning; (2) whether elements in
civilian strategic plans are aligned to the overall mission, focused on
results, and based on current and future civilian workforce data; and
(3) whether civilian and military personnel strategic plans or sourcing
initiatives were integrated.
We found that generally civilian personnel issues appear to be an
emerging priority among top leaders in DOD and the defense components.
Although DOD began downsizing its civilian workforce more than a decade
ago, it did not take action to strategically address challenges
affecting the civilian workforce until it issued its civilian human
capital strategic plan in April 2002. Top-level leaders in the Air
Force, the Marine Corps, the Defense Contract Management Agency, and
the Defense Finance and Accounting Service have initiated planning
efforts and are working in partnership with their civilian human
capital professionals to develop and implement civilian strategic
plans; such leadership, however, was increasing in the Army and not as
evident in the Navy. High-level leadership is critical to directing
reforms and obtaining resources for successful implementation.
Moreover, DOD has not provided guidance on how to align the components‘
plans with the department-level plan. Without this alignment, DOD‘s and
its components‘ planning may lack the focus and coordination needed (1)
to carry out the Secretary of Defense‘s transformation initiatives in
an effective manner and (2) to mitigate risks of not having human
capital ready to respond to national security events at home and
abroad.
We also found that the human capital strategic plans we reviewed for
the most part lacked key elements found in fully developed plans. Most
of the civilian human capital goals, objectives, and initiatives were
not explicitly aligned with the overarching missions of the
organizations. Consequently, DOD and the components cannot be sure that
strategic goals are properly focused on mission achievement. Also, none
of the plans contained results-oriented performance measures to assess
the impact of their civilian human capital initiatives (i.e., programs,
policies, and processes). Thus, DOD and the components cannot gauge the
extent to which their human capital initiatives contribute to achieving
their organizations‘ mission. Finally, the plans did not contain data
on the skills and competencies needed to successfully accomplish future
missions; therefore, DOD and the components risk not being able to put
the right people, in the right place, and at the right time, which can
result in diminished accomplishment of the overall defense mission.
Moreover, the civilian strategic plans did not address how the civilian
workforce will be integrated with their military counterparts or
sourcing initiatives. DOD‘s three human capital strategic plans--two
military and one civilian--were prepared separately and were not
integrated to form a seamless and comprehensive strategy and did not
address how DOD plans to link its human capital initiatives with its
sourcing plans, such as efforts to outsource non-core responsibilities.
The components‘ civilian plans acknowledge a need to integrate planning
for civilian and military personnel--taking into consideration
contractors--but have not yet done so. Without an integrated strategy,
DOD may not effectively and efficiently allocate its scarce resources
for optimal readiness.
To improve human capital strategic planning for the DOD civilian
workforce, we recommended in our March 2003 report that the Secretary
of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness to undertake the following:
* Improve future revisions and updates to the DOD departmentwide
strategic human capital plan by more explicitly aligning with DOD‘s
overarching mission, including results-oriented performance measures,
and focusing on future workforce needs. To accomplish this, the
revisions and updates should be developed in collaboration with top DOD
and component officials and civilian and military human capital
leaders.
* Direct the military services and the defense agencies to align their
strategic human capital plans with the mission, goals, objectives, and
measures included in the departmentwide strategic human capital plan
and provide guidance to these components on this alignment.
* Define the future civilian workforce, identifying the characteristics
(i.e., the skills and competencies, number, deployment, etc.) of
personnel needed in the context of the total force and determine the
workforce gaps that need to be addressed through human capital
initiatives.
* Assign a high priority to and set a target date for developing a
departmentwide human capital strategic plan that integrates both
military and civilian workforces and takes into account contractor
roles and sourcing initiatives.
Agency Comments And Our Evaluation:
DOD‘s comments on a draft of the March 2003 report are summarized below
and reproduced in enclosure I. DOD stated that it appreciated the
perspectives provided in that report and intended to address the
recommendations. Regarding our four recommendations, however, DOD
concurred with one, partially concurred with another, and nonconcurred
with two. In its comments, DOD pointed out that its strategic planning
activities are in the earliest stages of development. We acknowledge
this and, moreover, note in our March 2003 report that strategic
planning is a continuous process. Our recommendations to the Secretary
of Defense, thus, focus on steps the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness should take to strengthen DOD‘s overall
strategic perspective as DOD continues to develop planning initiatives
for its civilian human capital.
Our evaluation of DOD‘s comments on these recommendations follows:
DOD concurred with our recommendation to direct the military services
and the defense agencies to align their strategic human capital plans
with the departmentwide plan. DOD stated that it is the component‘s
responsibility to ensure that its strategic plan and outcomes dovetail
with the departmentwide plan.
DOD partially concurred with our recommendation to improve future
revisions and updates to the departmentwide strategic human capital
plan by more explicitly aligning its elements (including performance
measures) with DOD‘s overarching mission and by focusing the plan more
directly on future workforce needs. DOD stated the recommendation did
not recognize the involvement in and the impact of DOD‘s Quadrennial
Defense Review (QDR) on the development of the departmentwide plan. As
we note in our March 2003 report, the departmentwide civilian plan was
directed in the QDR and Defense Planning Guidance and by the Under
Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; we also note that
such a plan had been recommended, as well, in the Defense Science Board
2000 report. Our analysis found, however, that the plan did not fully
demonstrate alignment with DOD‘s overall mission in that the plan
lacked explicit information about how the civilian workforce
contributes to accomplishing DOD‘s overall mission and how the
achievement of human capital initiatives will improve DOD‘s performance
in meeting that mission. DOD also noted that the plan contains detailed
performance indicators and measures that are reported quarterly to OMB.
In reviewing these indicators, we found, for the most part, they are
necessary measures relevant to task accomplishment but not oriented to
assessing results. In addition, DOD noted that the plan recognizes the
need for results-oriented performance measures; we believe that our
recommendation highlights the importance of developing such measures.
DOD did not concur with our recommendation to define its future
civilian personnel needs in a total force context, including
identifying the workforce gaps that need to be addressed through human
capital initiatives. DOD stated this action was already being
accomplished through information provided to OMB and the Office of
Personnel Management for the President‘s Management Agenda Scorecard.
We recognize that OMB requires workforce information, however, we
cannot comment on the completeness of the data being supplied because
we were not permitted to review recent DOD submissions to OMB.
Complying with OMB requirements is important but does not fully address
the intent of our recommendation that is to ensure that workforce data,
which identify necessary future skill sets and potential gaps that
might occur in force-shaping, be compiled and analyzed as an integral
part of the strategic planning process and factored into planning for
human capital initiatives. As we note in our March 2003 report, this
information is highly important in targeting the initiatives to address
the gaps and to provide the rationale--that is, the business case--for
obtaining the resources or authorities to carry out initiatives.
Also, DOD did not concur with our recommendation to assign a high
priority to and set a target date for developing an integrated
departmentwide plan for both military and civilian workforces that
takes into account contractor roles and sourcing initiatives. DOD
stated it presently has both a military and civilian plan; the use of
contractors is just another tool to accomplish the mission, not a
separate workforce, with separate needs, to manage. The intent of our
recommendation (and the one above on workforce planning) is that
strategic planning for the civilian workforce be undertaken in the
context of the total force--civilian, military, and contractors--
because the three workforces are expected to perform their
responsibilities in a seamless manner to accomplish DOD‘s mission.
Integrated planning could also facilitate achieving a goal in the QDR
to focus DOD‘s resources (personnel) in those areas that directly
contribute to warfighting and to rely on the private sector for non-
core functions. The need for total force integration has been advocated
in the QDR, DOD‘s response to OMB regarding a restructuring plan, the
Defense Science Board 2000 report, National Academy of Public
Administration (NAPA) studies, and the Commercial Activities Panel
report. We believe strategic planning in a total force context is
especially important because the trend toward greater reliance on
contractors requires a critical mass of civilian and military personnel
with the expertise necessary to protect the government‘s interest and
ensure effective oversight of contractors‘ work. Workforce planning
should be implemented using a coordinated and integrated approach to
determine the proper roles and mix of military, civilian, and
contractor employees within the context of mission objectives that are
essential to national security.
We continue to believe that our recommendations have merit and will
strengthen the department‘s strategic planning efforts for the civilian
as well as the overall workforce; consequently, we are not revising
them. DOD also provided technical comments, which we incorporated, as
appropriate, into our March 2003 report.
Finally, we want to emphasize that we recognize a point made by the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness that DOD is in
the early stages of its strategic planning efforts. We believe that DOD
has made progress in establishing a foundation for strategically
addressing civilian human capital issues by developing its
departmentwide civilian human capital strategic plan. Opportunities
exist, however, to strengthen the planning efforts. Our March 2003
report and its recommendations should be viewed in that light.
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional
committees; the Secretary of Defense; the Secretaries of the Air Force,
Army, and Navy; the Commandant of the Marine Corps; and the Directors
of the Defense Contract Management Agency and the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service. We will also make copies available to others upon
request. In addition, this report will be available at no charge on the
GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov.
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please
contact me at (202) 512-5559 or Christine Fossett at (202) 512-2956.
Sincerely yours,
Derek B. Stewart
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
Signed by Derek B. Stewart
Enclosure:
Enclosure I:
Comments from the Department of Defense:
UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE 4000 DEFENSE PENTAGON WASHINGTON, D.C.
20301-4000:
MAR 24, 2003
PERSONNEL AND READINESS:
Mr. Derek B. Stewart:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management Issues,
U.S. General Accounting Office:
441 G Street N.W. Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Stewart:
This is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the GAO draft
report, ’DOD PERSONNEL: DoD Actions Needed to Strengthen Civilian Human
Capital Strategic Planning,“ dated March 3, 2003 (GAO Code 350198). The
importance of human capital strategic planning was clearly recognized
in the Quadrennial Defense Review. It is the first item on the
President‘s Management Agenda, and is a top priority for the
Department.
While we appreciate the perspectives provided in your report and intend
to address your recommendations, we are obligated to point out that a
significant portion of the review concentrated on strategic planning
activities in the earliest stages of development. At my direction in
August 2001, the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Civilian Personnel Policy arranged a series of meetings of senior
Component human resources leaders to begin the development of the DoD
Civilian Human Resources Strategic Plan. This group worked through the
events of September 11TH and the resulting war on terrorism to produce
the first integrated DoD-wide Civilian Human Resources Strategic Plan
on April 12, 2002. We were notified of the General Accounting Office‘s
intent to review DoD‘s Civilian Human Capital Strategic and Workforce
Planning on May 16, 2002. Work on the review began in June 2002, less
than 60 days after our first DoD Human Resources Strategic Plan was
finalized and during the first cycle of a continuing process.
The Department‘s consolidated comments, including Component specific
comments, are enclosed.
Sincerely,
David S. C. Chu
Signed by David S. C. Chu
Enclosure:
GAO DRAFT REPORT DATED MARCH 3, 2003 (GAO CODE 350198):
’DOD PERSONNEL: DOD ACTIONS NEEDED TO STRENGTHEN CIVILIAN HUMAN CAPITAL
STRATEGIC PLANNING“:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE COMMENTS TO THE GAO RECOMMENDATIONS:
RECOMMENDATION 1: In order to improve human capital strategic planning
for the DoD civilian workforce, the GAO recommended that the Secretary
of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and
Readiness to improve future revisions and updates to the DoD
Department-wide strategic human capital plan by more explicitly
aligning with DoD‘s overarching mission, including results-oriented
performance measures, and focusing on future workforce needs. To
accomplish this, the revisions and updates should be developed in
collaboration with top DoD and component officials and civilian and
military human capital leaders. (p. 27/GAO Draft Report):
DOD RESPONSE: Partially concur. The recommendation does not recognize
that the DoD Civilian Human Resources Strategic Plan imparts the
Department‘s direction, with its vision, values, principles, critical
success goals and objectives, and that it is based on DoD‘s challenges
as defined in the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). The original
version of this strategic plan was explicitly aligned with DoD‘s
overall mission in that it was based on the recommendations of the
Defense Science Board and the QDR. The Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Civilian Personnel Policy) represented the
civilian HR community on the QDR and the Senior Steering Group in the
development of the Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan contains detailed
performance indicators and measures. Our achievements against these
standards are reported quarterly to the Office of Management and
Budget. In addition, the current version of the strategic plan
recognizes the need for results-oriented performance measures and in
particular, Objective 4 requires that measures be developed for
critical indicators of human resources success.
Revisions and updates to the Strategic Plan have been and will continue
to be developed in collaboration with the Components, but must remain
at a level of specificity to allow for the Components‘ varying missions
and workforce needs. However, it is a Component responsibility to
develop its strategic plan and outcomes to dovetail into the
overarching DoD plan.
RECOMMENDATION 2: In order to improve human capital strategic planning
for the DoD civilian workforce, the GAO recommended that the Secretary
of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and
Readiness to direct the military services and:
defense agencies to align their strategic human capital plans with the
mission, goals, objectives, and measures included in the department-
wide strategic human capital plan, and provide guidance to these
components on this alignment.
(p. 27/GAO Draft Report):
DOD RESPONSE: Concur.
RECOMMENDATION 3: In order to improve human capital strategic planning
for the DoD civilian workforce, the GAO recommended that the Secretary
of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and
Readiness to define the future civilian workforce, identifying the
characteristics (i.e., the skills and competencies, number, deployment,
etc.) of personnel needed in the context of the total force, and
determine the workforce gaps that need to be addressed through human
capital initiatives. (p. 27/GAO Draft Report):
DOD RESPONSE: Non-concur. This action is already being accomplished
through the President‘s Management Agenda Scorecard information that is
provided twice a year to the Office of Management and Budget and the
Office of Personnel Management.
RECOMMENDATION 4: In order to improve human capital strategic planning
for the DoD civilian workforce, the GAO recommended that the Secretary
of Defense direct the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and
Readiness to assign a high priority to and set a target date for
developing a department-wide human capital strategic plan that
integrates both military and civilian workforces and takes into account
contractor roles and sourcing initiatives. (p. 27/GAO Draft Report):
DOD RESPONSE: Non-concur. The Department has both a military and
civilian strategic plan. The use of contractors is just another tool to
accomplish the mission, not a separate workforce, with separate needs,
to manage.
(350366):
FOOTNOTES
[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, DOD Personnel: DOD Actions Needed
to Strengthen Civilian Human Capital Strategic Planning and Integration
with Military Personnel and Sourcing Decisions, GAO-03-475 (Washington,
D.C.: Mar. 28, 2003).
[2] Sourcing initiatives, which are undertaken to achieve greater
operating efficiencies, include such efforts as public-private
competitions under the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular
A-76 for commercial activities and functions; direct conversions
(converting positions from one sector to another without public-private
competition); public-private partnerships; and privatization,
divestiture, and reengineering.
[3] Throughout this report, the term ’component“ refers to all services
and agencies in DOD. The term ’service“ refers to the Air Force, the
Army, the Marine Corps, and the Navy. The term ’agency“ refers to the
Defense Contract Management Agency and the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service.
