The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements
Gao ID: GAO-08-439R February 6, 2008
The achievement of the Department of Defense's (DOD) mission is dependent in large part on the skills and expertise of its civilian workforce--which consists of almost 700,000 personnel, who develop policy, provide intelligence, manage finances, and acquire and maintain weapon systems. With more than 50 percent of its civilian personnel becoming eligible to retire in the next few years, DOD may find it difficult to fill certain mission-critical jobs with qualified personnel. Strategic workforce planning, an integral part of human capital management, helps ensure that an organization has staff with the necessary skills and competencies to accomplish its strategic goals. We have previously reported that it is critical that DOD engage in effective strategic workforce planning to ensure that its human capital reforms have maximum effectiveness and value. In 2007, we reported that strategic human capital management remained a high-risk area because the federal government now faces one of the most significant transformations to the civil service in half a century, as momentum grows toward making governmentwide changes to agency pay, classification, and performance management systems. In January 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 20065 directed DOD to develop and submit to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees a strategic plan to shape and improve the DOD civilian employee workforce. Section 1122 (b) of the act provided that the plan address eight requirements. On November 6, 2007--ten months after the due date--DOD submitted to the committees both its plan titled "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010," and its implementation report titled "The Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense, Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation Report." This latter DOD report, however, noted that it responded to section 1122(d) of the act. In addition to the mandate for DOD, the act also required GAO to review and report on the human capital strategic plan DOD submitted to meet its mandate no later than 90 days after DOD's submission. Accordingly, we examined the extent to which DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan addresses the reporting requirements mandated by the act.
Overall, DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan does not meet most statutory requirements. First, the plan partially addresses some but not all aspects of two of the congressional reporting requirements established in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006. Specifically, DOD's plan includes a list of mission-critical occupations needed for the current civilian workforce, but this list does not constitute the required assessment of skills of the existing workforce. Second, and most importantly, the plan does not address the majority--six of eight--of the congressional reporting requirements. For example, the plan does not include an assessment of current mission-critical competencies, future critical skills and competencies needed, gaps between the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and retention goals, even though these elements are required by the 2006 act. DOD officials acknowledged that the plan they submitted to the committees is incomplete. We note that the plan refers, in several places, to information related to DOD's mandate, but indicates that those items may be addressed at a later time. In addition, DOD officials stated that some of these items may be addressed in other documents. For example, DOD officials told us that a recent report may contain information that addresses portions of the mandate. While we reviewed some of the information in this report, it was not submitted to the committees pursuant to the 2006 act; thus, it cannot be considered as meeting the mandate. Moreover, our initial review of the document showed that, while it may address some of the requirements in DOD's mandate, it still may not address other aspects of the mandate because, for example, it does not cover the time frames Congress directed--that is, over the next decade. Without complete information on DOD's civilian human capital plan, to include analyses of gaps between critical skills and competencies needed by the current and future workforce, Congress will not have the information it needs to conduct effective oversight over DOD's efforts to hire, develop, and retain the best possible civilian workforce. Accordingly, we are recommending that DOD submit to Congress a civilian human capital strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory requirements. DOD disagreed with our recommendation noting that its response to the congressional reporting requirements reflected a centralized enterprise-wide strategic perspective--as opposed to providing the information specified by the law, such as recruiting and retention goals. The law required DOD's plan to contain very specific quantitative data and assessments. Since DOD's plan did not address the law's requirements, we continue to believe that our recommendation is valid.
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:
Brenda S. Farrell
Team:
Government Accountability Office: Defense Capabilities and Management
Phone:
(202) 512-3604
GAO-08-439R, The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-08-439R
entitled 'The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic
Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements' which was released on
February 7, 2008.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
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.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
February 6, 2008:
The Honorable Carl Levin:
Chairman:
The Honorable John McCain:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
United States Senate:
The Honorable Ike Skelton:
Chairman:
The Honorable Duncan Hunter:
Ranking Member:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
Subject: The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic
Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements:
The achievement of the Department of Defense's (DOD) mission is
dependent in large part on the skills and expertise of its civilian
workforce--which consists of almost 700,000 personnel, who develop
policy, provide intelligence, manage finances, and acquire and maintain
weapon systems. With more than 50 percent of its civilian personnel
becoming eligible to retire in the next few years, DOD may find it
difficult to fill certain mission-critical jobs with qualified
personnel. Strategic workforce planning, an integral part of human
capital management, helps ensure that an organization has staff with
the necessary skills and competencies[Footnote 1] to accomplish its
strategic goals. We have previously reported that it is critical that
DOD engage in effective strategic workforce planning to ensure that its
human capital reforms have maximum effectiveness and value.
In 2007, we reported that strategic human capital management remained a
high-risk area because the federal government now faces one of the most
significant transformations to the civil service in half a century, as
momentum grows toward making governmentwide changes to agency pay,
classification, and performance management systems.[Footnote 2] In our
prior work examining various aspects of DOD's human capital management
of its civilian workforce, we found that, while DOD has developed and
implemented civilian strategic workforce plans to address future
civilian workforce needs, the plans generally lacked some key elements
essential to successful workforce planning.[Footnote 3] For example,
none of the plans included analyses of the gaps between critical
skills[Footnote 4] and competencies currently needed by the workforce
and those that will be needed in the future. Without such gap analyses,
we noted that DOD and its components may not be able to effectively
design strategies to hire, develop, and retain the best possible
workforce.
In January 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006[Footnote 5] directed DOD to develop and submit to the Senate and
House Armed Services Committees a strategic plan to shape and improve
the DOD civilian employee workforce. Section 1122 (b) of the act
provided that the plan address eight requirements. These included an
assessment of existing and future critical skills and competencies
needed to support national security and manage the department over the
next decade, and an assessment of any existing gaps. In addition, DOD
was to develop and submit a plan of action to address identified gaps,
including specific recruiting and retention goals and strategies on how
to train, compensate, and motivate civilian employees. Furthermore, the
act required the Secretary of Defense to submit the plan not later than
1 year after enactment of the act, which occurred on January 6, 2006.
Accordingly, DOD's plan was due on January 6, 2007. On November 6,
2007--ten months after the due date--DOD submitted to the committees
both its plan titled "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital
Strategic Plan 2006-2010," and its implementation report titled "The
Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic Plan for Civilian
Employees of the Department of Defense, Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation
Report." This latter DOD report, however, noted that it responded to
section 1122(d) of the act.[Footnote 6] In this report, we will
hereafter refer to these two documents collectively as DOD's civilian
human capital strategic plan.
In addition to the mandate for DOD, the act also required GAO to review
and report on the human capital strategic plan DOD submitted to meet
its mandate no later than 90 days after DOD's submission. Accordingly,
we examined the extent to which DOD's civilian human capital strategic
plan addresses the reporting requirements mandated by the act.
To examine the extent to which DOD's civilian human capital strategic
plan addresses congressional reporting requirements, we obtained and
analyzed the "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic
Plan 2006-2010" and "The Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic
Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense, Fiscal Year
2006 Implementation Report," along with other documents. We analyzed
the content of these documents and compared them to the requirements of
the 2006 act. We also discussed the plan with officials within the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness,
the Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Civilian
Personnel Policy, and the Civilian Personnel Management Service. We
conducted this performance audit from November 2007 to February 2008 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our
findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that
the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our audit objectives.
Summary:
Overall, DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan does not meet most
statutory requirements. First, the plan partially addresses some but
not all aspects of two of the congressional reporting requirements
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006. Specifically, DOD's plan includes a list of mission-critical
occupations needed for the current civilian workforce, but this list
does not constitute the required assessment of skills of the existing
workforce. Second, and most importantly, the plan does not address the
majority--six of eight--of the congressional reporting requirements.
For example, the plan does not include an assessment of current mission-
critical competencies, future critical skills and competencies needed,
gaps between the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and
retention goals, even though these elements are required by the 2006
act. DOD officials acknowledged that the plan they submitted to the
committees is incomplete. We note that the plan refers, in several
places, to information related to DOD's mandate, but indicates that
those items may be addressed at a later time. In addition, DOD
officials stated that some of these items may be addressed in other
documents. For example, DOD officials told us that a recent
report[Footnote 7] may contain information that addresses portions of
the mandate. While we reviewed some of the information in this report,
it was not submitted to the committees pursuant to the 2006 act; thus,
it cannot be considered as meeting the mandate. Moreover, our initial
review of the document showed that, while it may address some of the
requirements in DOD's mandate, it still may not address other aspects
of the mandate because, for example, it does not cover the time frames
Congress directed--that is, over the next decade. Without complete
information on DOD's civilian human capital plan, to include analyses
of gaps between critical skills and competencies needed by the current
and future workforce, Congress will not have the information it needs
to conduct effective oversight over DOD's efforts to hire, develop, and
retain the best possible civilian workforce. Accordingly, we are
recommending that DOD submit to Congress a civilian human capital
strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory requirements. DOD
disagreed with our recommendation noting that its response to the
congressional reporting requirements reflected a centralized enterprise-
wide strategic perspective--as opposed to providing the information
specified by the law, such as recruiting and retention goals. The law
required DOD's plan to contain very specific quantitative data and
assessments. Since DOD's plan did not address the law's requirements,
we continue to believe that our recommendation is valid.
Background:
We have previously examined various aspects of DOD's human capital
management of its civilian workforce. For example, in June 2004, we
reported that DOD has developed and implemented civilian strategic
workforce plans to address future civilian workforce needs; however,
DOD's plans generally lacked some key elements essential to successful
workforce planning.[Footnote 8] To improve the comprehensiveness of
strategic workforce planning for the DOD civilian workforce, we
recommended that the department (1) analyze and document critical
skills and competency gaps between its current and future workforces
and (2) develop workforce strategies to address identified workforce
gaps in skills and competencies. DOD partially concurred with both
recommendations and stated, for the first recommendation, that the
value of conducting a global analysis between current competencies and
those needed for the future for over 650,000 jobs was unclear. Our
recommendation did not suggest that DOD conduct a global gap analysis,
but rather that it perform an analysis of the gaps between current
critical skills and competencies. On the second recommendation DOD
stated, among other things, that it uses existing flexibilities such as
recruitment and retention bonuses and relocation allowances. While we
acknowledged that DOD and its components had implemented various
strategies including those for training and recruiting, these
strategies were not derived from analyses of critical skills and
competency gaps. Without such analyses, we reported that DOD may not be
able to design and invest in strategies that will effectively and
efficiently transition it to it the future workforce it desires and
needs. While DOD has said that it is analyzing and documenting critical
skills gaps and that it is actively engaged in developing workforce
strategies to fill identified skills gaps, we continue to believe that
our recommendations have merit and that DOD should take steps to
implement them.
In January 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006[Footnote 9] directed DOD to develop and submit to the Senate and
House Armed Services Committees a strategic plan to shape and improve
the DOD civilian employee workforce. The plan was to include eight
requirements. These included an assessment of:
* the critical skills that will be needed in the future DOD civilian
employee workforce to support national security requirements and
effectively manage the department over the next decade,
* the competencies that will be needed in the future DOD civilian
employee workforce to support national security requirements and
effectively manage the department over the next decade,
* the skills of the existing DOD civilian employee workforce,
* the competencies of the existing DOD civilian employee workforce,
* the projected trends in that workforce based on expected losses due
to retirement and other attrition,
* gaps in the existing or projected DOD civilian employee workforce
that should be addressed to ensure that the department has continued
access to the critical skills and competencies to support national
security requirements and effectively manage the department of the next
decade.
Also, as part of its strategic human capital plan, the act directed DOD
to include a plan of action for developing and shaping the DOD civilian
employee workforce to address identified gaps in critical skills and
competencies including specific:
* recruiting and retention goals, and:
* strategies for development, training, deploying, compensating, and
motivating the DOD civilian employee workforce.
The act further required the Secretary of Defense to submit the plan
not later than 1 year after enactment of the act, which occurred on
January 6, 2006. Accordingly, DOD's plan was due on January 6, 2007.
Thereafter, the act required an annual update of DOD's plan not later
than March 1 of each year from 2007 through 2010.
On November 6, 2007--10 months after the due date--DOD submitted its
plan titled "Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic
Plan 2006-2010." [Footnote 10] The plan consists of 19 pages plus an
additional 13 pages of appendixes that address, among other things, how
DOD (1) aligns human resource actions with the goals and objectives of
the 2006 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)[Footnote 11] report and its
human capital strategy and (2) addresses the criteria for strategic
management of human capital, per the President's Management Agenda. DOD
also submitted its implementation report titled "The Department of
Defense Human Capital Strategic Plan for Civilian Employees of the
Department of Defense, Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation Report," which
is dated July 2007. The report consists of 39 pages that, among other
things, address (1) its enterprise-wide leadership development programs
and (2) its challenges to attract and sustain the right talent, along
with efforts to refresh its identification of mission-critical
occupations.
DOD's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Partially Addresses Some,
but Does Not Address Most, Aspects of the Congressional Reporting
Requirements:
DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan partially addresses some,
but does not address most, aspects of the congressional reporting
requirements established in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006. Specifically, DOD's plan includes a list of the
mission-critical occupations and identifies some workforce strategies.
However, the plan does not address the majority of the congressional
reporting requirements.
DOD's Plan Includes a List of the Current Civilian Workforce Mission-
Critical Occupations and Identifies Some Workforce Strategies:
The act required DOD to include an assessment of the skills of the
current civilian workforce and workforce strategies; instead, DOD's
plan submitted to the committees included a list of the mission-
critical occupations needed for the current workforce and identified
some strategies to address workforce challenges.
* List of mission-critical occupations. DOD's plan included a list of
mission-critical occupations needed for the current civilian workforce
that will be the focus of DOD's future enterprise-wide strategic human
capital planning efforts. Specifically, the plan identified 25 mission-
critical occupations.[Footnote 12] However, this list does not
constitute the required assessment of skills of the existing civilian
workforce.
* Workforce strategies. DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan
also describes various strategies to address workforce challenges. For
example, DOD has established a Hiring Heroes Program and a Web site
especially for disabled veterans to help injured servicemembers return
to productive employment. In fiscal year 2006, DOD hired 37,974
veterans through this program. In addition, DOD used the Pipeline
Reemployment Program, which enables employees with job-related injuries
and illnesses to return to work. According to DOD, by the end of fiscal
year 2006, this program allowed 358 employees to return to productive
positions, for potential lifetime cost avoidance for the department of
approximately $281 million. However, DOD's workforce strategies do not
appear to comprehensively address the requirement for specific
strategies for development, training, deploying, compensating, and
motivating DOD's civilian workforce over the next decade.
DOD's Plan Does Not Address the Majority of the Congressional Reporting
Requirements:
Importantly, DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan also does not
address the majority--six of eight--of the congressional reporting
requirements. Specifically, the plan does not include an assessment of
current mission-critical competencies, projected trends in that
workforce based on expected losses due to retirement and other
attrition, future critical skills and competencies needed, gaps between
the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and retention
goals, even though these elements are required by the 2006 act.
* Assessment of current mission-critical competencies and projected
trends in the current workforce. DOD's plan does not define current
mission-critical competencies and competency proficiency levels needed
for each occupation. In addition, the plan does not include an
assessment of projected trends in the current workforce based on
expected losses due to retirement and other attrition. The plan, for
example, does not include trends in current mission-critical
occupations in terms of current and expected retirement eligibility,
separations, resignations, and transfers. In our June 2004 report on
DOD's efforts to develop and implement strategic workforce
plans,[Footnote 13] we noted that it is essential that organizations
determine what is available--both the current workforce characteristics
and future availability. We also noted that this is accomplished by
assessing the current workforce--defining the number and types of
competencies for employees in each occupational group; determining the
skill levels for each competency; and assessing how they will evolve
over time, factoring in such events as retirements.
* Assessment of future critical skills and competencies. DOD's civilian
human capital strategic plan does not include an assessment of the
critical skills and competencies needed by its future civilian employee
workforce over the next decade. Contrary to the requirement to cover 10
years, the plan covers the 4-year period between 2006 and 2010. In our
June 2004 report, we stated that to build the right workforce to
achieve strategic goals, it is essential that organizations determine
the critical workforce characteristics needed in the future. Our review
of DOD's plan found that the plan recognizes the need to refocus
civilian force capabilities for the future and acknowledges that the
department requires a future civilian employee workforce with the
attributes and capabilities to perform in an environment of uncertainty
and surprise, execute with a wartime sense of urgency, create tailored
solutions to multiple complex challenges, build partnerships, shape
choices, and plan rapidly. The plan, however, does not include
information about these attributes and capabilities and how they would
relate to the act's requirement for an assessment of the critical
skills and competencies needed in the future civilian employee
workforce over the next decade.
* Assessment of gaps between current and future critical skills and
competencies. DOD's civilian human capital strategic plan does not
include an assessment of gaps between the critical skills and
competencies currently needed and those needed in the future DOD
civilian employee workforce. In June 2004, we reported that to build
the right workforce to achieve strategic goals, it is essential that
organizations determine the difference between what will be available
and what will be needed. We noted that this is especially important as
changes in national security, technology, and other factors alter the
environment within which DOD operates. As an example, in 2006, we
reported that the Air Force had identified gaps in its acquisition
workforce and had begun considering ways to address it; however, they
had not addressed the gaps at that time.[Footnote 14]
* Specific recruiting and retention goals. DOD's civilian human capital
strategic plan does not include specific recruiting and retention goals
to address gaps in critical skills and competencies. Although Appendix
D of the plan suggests that DOD does have tracking measures as well as
quarterly and annual reporting requirements that relate to recruitment
and retention, the plan submitted to the committees did not include
specific recruiting and retention goals.
DOD officials acknowledged that the plan submitted to the committees
may be incomplete in addressing the requirements of sections 1122(a)
and (b). Additionally, we note that the plan has information, in
several places, that relate to the requirements in the act but, in
these instances, the plan states that these items may be addressed at a
later time or in other documents. For example, the plan states that the
department will deploy an automated survey tool to identify competency
gaps in the human resource community sometime during fiscal year 2007.
In addition, the plan referred to a separate report[Footnote 15] that
identified competency requirements for DOD's senior executive
leadership. This report, however, does not constitute an assessment of
the existing competencies and those needed in the future and was not
provided to Congress with DOD's plan, so it cannot be considered as
meeting the requirements of the mandate. DOD officials further told us
that other documents not mentioned in the plan may address some of the
act's requirements. For example, they said that Department of Defense
Annual Human Capital Management Report for Fiscal Year 2007[Footnote
16] may also address some of the act's requirements and they provided
us with this report. Our initial review of the report shows that it
does contain information on DOD's efforts to align its civilian human
capital strategy with existing human capital strategies, its mission,
and the National Military Strategy. For instance, the report addresses
DOD's efforts to build a civilian senior executive leadership cadre and
discusses a goal to assess and close current leadership competency
gaps. However, this effort is ongoing and DOD expects to conduct a
comprehensive assessment in 2008, which it says will allow the
department to develop a gap analysis and a subsequent improvement plan.
Furthermore, while our review determined that the report may address
some of the requirements in DOD's mandate, the report did not cover the
time frames Congress directed--that is, the next decade. Moreover,
since this report was not submitted to the committees, it cannot be
considered as meeting the requirements of the mandate in section
1122(a) and (b).
Conclusions:
Although DOD has taken some steps, since we issued our 2004 report, to
develop and implement a civilian human capital strategic plan to
address its future civilian workforce needs, the plan it submitted to
the Armed Services Committees does not meet the majority of the
requirements in the law. This is becoming a long standing issue.
Without a plan that addresses all of the elements essential to a
successful workforce plan, such as what gaps exist in skills and
competencies and what type of recruiting and retention strategies
should be developed, DOD's future workforce may not possess the
critical skills and competencies needed. Additionally, Congress will
not have the information it needs to exercise effective oversight over
DOD's efforts to hire, develop, and retain the best possible civilian
workforce for the 21st century challenges.
Recommendation for Executive Action:
To ensure that Congress has the necessary information to provide
effective oversight over DOD's civilian workforce, we are recommending
that the Secretary of Defense direct the Office of the Under Secretary
of Defense, Personnel and Readiness, to submit to Congress a civilian
human capital strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory
requirements in section 1122 (b) of the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2006. This could be included in DOD's next
submission, which is due in March 2008.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
In commenting on a draft of our report, the Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy disagreed with our
recommendation. (DOD's comments are reprinted in enclosure I.) However,
DOD also noted that the department plans to include more "compressive"
documents in its required March 2008 report to the Armed Services
Committees. DOD's comments further described several ongoing efforts to
conduct workforce planning and analysis and it appears that the
department is planning to take action to improve its management of
civilian human capital planning. However, these ongoing efforts were
not submitted to the Armed Services Committees as part of its human
capital strategic plan and, therefore, do not meet the requirements of
the law. Accordingly, we continue to believe that our recommendation is
valid.
In its written comments, DOD stated that it disagreed with the
presentation of information as portrayed in our findings. Specifically,
the department stated that it disagreed with findings presented in our
draft report. For example, the department noted that it objected to the
title of our report--stating that it does not truly reflect the
findings of the report or ongoing efforts within the department.
Specifically, the department noted that the title seemed inappropriate
as GAO found that DOD's report to Congress "partially addressed, some
but not all aspects of the congressional reporting requirements
established in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006." We acknowledge in the draft report that DOD partially addressed
some (two aspects of the eight) reporting requirements of the law.
Since DOD's plan did not address six of the eight requirements, we
believe that our title, stating that the plan did not address most of
the statutory requirements, is appropriate. We have refined our
language in the report to make it clear that DOD did not meet most
reporting requirements and partially addressed some aspects of two
requirements.
Additionally, DOD's comments refer to a number of ongoing human capital
efforts in the department. Specifically, DOD stated that its response
to the statutory requirements reflected a centralized enterprise-wide
perspective that highlighted overarching DOD policy goals, objectives,
and initiatives--as opposed to providing specific quantitative data
such as "specific recruiting and retention goals." The department
further stated that, while GAO found that its submission to Congress
did not include "an assessment of current mission critical skills and
competencies, future critical skills and competencies needed, gaps
between the current and future needs, or specific recruiting and
retention goals—," evidence of the department's diligent efforts in
conducting workforce planning and analysis can be found in many
documents. The department noted that these "many reports" included, but
were not limited to, its report to the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) and the Office of Management and Budget under the President's
Management Agenda; OPM's Proud-to-Be milestones and benchmarks; DOD's
Human Capital Management Report, and review processes of internal DOD
metrics and workforce demographic data. DOD also provided additional
information regarding some ongoing and planned efforts that the
military departments and defense agencies were pursuing. The act,
however, did not require GAO to review DOD's ongoing human capital
efforts. Instead, the act directed GAO to review the plan submitted to
the Armed Services Committees and assess how it met the statutory
requirements. Since these documents and information on DOD's ongoing
and planned efforts were not submitted to the Committees on Armed
Services to address the requirements for DOD's plan, as stipulated in
law, the documents and additional information were outside the scope of
our review. Moreover, as stated in our report, we did review some of
DOD's documents and additional information--including the Department of
Defense Annual Human Capital Management Report for Fiscal Year 2007.
Our review of this report found that this document did not meet all of
the requirements specified in the law. For example, as stated in our
report regarding the skills and competencies for the future, the
Department of Defense Annual Human Capital Management Report for Fiscal
Year 2007 did not provide information over a 10-year period, as
required by the law. Consequently, since these additional documents
were outside the scope of our review and, in some cases, did not meet
the requirements of the law, we continue to believe that DOD should
submit a civilian human capital strategic plan that addresses all of
the statutory requirements in section 1122 (a) and (b) of the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006.
Furthermore, DOD acknowledged in its comments that its assessment of
the current and future critical skills and competencies were not
reflected in its submission to the Congress. DOD further stated that
the department is working with the military departments and defense
agencies to develop, among other things, common taxonomies, job
analysis methodologies, competency gap assessment methodologies, and
reporting requirement strategies. Additionally, DOD commented that the
department non-concurred with our finding that its workforce strategies
did not address specific strategies for developing, training,
deploying, compensating, and motivating civilian workforce for the next
decade. In our draft report, we acknowledged that DOD included in its
plan some workforce strategies for development and hiring flexibilities
to address workforce challenges. However, DOD's plan to Congress did
not comprehensively discuss these strategies and did not mention the
majority of the education, training, and recruitment strategies that
the department described in their comments. In addition, none of the
workforce strategies discussed in DOD's plans or in DOD's comments
indicated that they were based on an analysis of critical skills and
competency gaps. We previously recommended in our 2004 report that DOD
develop workforce strategies to address identified gaps in skills and
competences in its civilian workforce. DOD partially concurred with
this 2004 recommendation stating, among other things, that it used
existing flexibilities such as retention bonuses and relocation
allowances. In that report, like this one, we acknowledged that DOD and
the components had implemented various strategies; however, we stated,
at that time, these strategies were not derived from analyses of
critical skills and competency gaps. We further noted that, without
such analyses, DOD may not be able to design and invest in strategies
that will effectively and efficiently transition it to the future
workforce it desires and needs.
DOD provided three attachments with its comments. First was a copy of
an internal department memorandum, dated November 16, 2007, regarding
DOD's development of a competency based strategy for its civilian
workforce. Second was an Army document identifying two mission critical
occupations--pharmacists and civil engineers--and current and future
staffing needs and gap information for these two occupations. Third was
an analysis of annual attrition trends, DOD wide and for 10 mission
critical occupation categories. Again, while the information contained
in these attachments might address some of the statutory requirements,
none of this information was submitted to Congress with DOD's civilian
human capital strategic plan.
Scope and Methodology:
To determine the extent to which the DOD civilian human capital
strategic plan addressed the statutory requirements established in
section 1122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006, we obtained and reviewed the "Department of Defense Civilian
Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010" and "DOD's Human Capital
Strategic Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense
Fiscal Year 2006 Implementation Report." We analyzed the content of
these documents and compared it to the requirements of the 2006 act. We
also obtained and reviewed the Department of Defense Annual Human
Capital Management Report for Fiscal Year 2007. In addition, we held
discussions with officials in the Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense for Personnel and Readiness, the Office of the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy, and the Civilian
Personnel Management Service.
We conducted this performance audit from November 2007 through February
2008 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for
our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; and
the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. We will also make
copies available to others on request. In addition, the report will be
available at no charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff has any questions on the matters discussed in this
report, please contact me at (202) 512-3604 or farrellb@gao.gov.
Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public
Affairs may found on the last page of this letter. GAO staff who made
key contributions to this report are listed in enclosure II.
Signed by:
Brenda S. Farrell:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
[End of section]
Enclosure I: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Office Of The Under Secretary Of Defense:
4000 Defense Pentagon:
Washington. D C. 20301-4000:
Personnel And Readiness:
FEB 01 2008:
Ms. Brenda S. Farrell:
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, N.W.:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Ms. Farrell:
This is the Department of Defense (DoD) response to the U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) draft report; "The Department of Defense's
Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Does Not Meet Most Statutory
Requirements," dated January 29, 2008 (GAO Code: GAO-08-439R).
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the draft
report. The Department of Defense disagrees with the recommendation and
presentation of information as portrayed in your findings. Our response
to the Congressional reporting requirement reflected a centralized
enterprise-wide strategic perspective which was called for in the
report. Implementation of the tactical requirements which support
workforce planning and analysis is decentralized and conducted by the
Military Departments and Defense Agencies. In our enclosed response, we
have provided a synopsis of our centralized initiatives and examples of
the tactical implementation of those efforts by the Military
Departments and Defense Agencies. Our plan is to include more
compressive documents in our required March 2008 report.
My point of contact regarding this audit is Mr. F. Michael Sena (Audit
Liaison) who can be reached at (703) 614-9487.
Sincerely,
Signed by:
Patricia S. Bradshaw:
Civilian Personnel Policy:
Enclosures:
As stated:
GAO Draft Report - Dated January 29, 2008:
GAO CODE 351148/GAO-08-439R:
"The Department of Defense's Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan Does
Not Meet Most Statutory Requirements"
Department Of Defense Comments To The Recommendation:
Recommendation 1: The GAO recommends that the Secretary of Defense
direct the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense, Personnel and
Readiness to submit to Congress a revised civilian human capital
strategic plan that addresses all of the statutory requirements in
section 1122 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2006. (p. 8/GAO Draft Report):
DOD Response: The Department of Defense non-concurs with the GAO
findings as presented in their audit. First, we object to the title of
the GAO draft audit report. We believe that this title does not truly
reflect the findings of the GAO or the on-going efforts within the
Department regarding its management of civilian human capital planning.
Specifically, the title seems inappropriate as the GAO found that our
report to Congress "partially addressed, some but not all aspects of
the Congressional reporting requirements established in the National
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006." Furthermore, the
Department is working diligently with the Military Departments and
Defense Agencies to provide them with the overall DoD policy guidance
necessary to optimize workforce planning (covering competency
assessment, skills gap and projected workforce trend analysis), and the
Department and the Component's are conducting ongoing competency
assessment analysis.
Secondly, our response to the reporting requirement reflected a
centralized enterprise-wide perspective and highlighted overarching DoD
policy goals, objectives and initiatives - as opposed to providing
specific quantitative data such as a "specific recruiting and retention
goals." The underlying document to support our centralized policy
enterprise-wide perspective is our Civilian Human Capital Strategic
Plan (CHCSP) 2006-2010. This plan includes our Civilian Human Capital
Goals and objectives from which we have developed policy initiatives
which support those goals. Implementation of those initiatives,
including those which support workforce planning and analysis is
decentralized and conducted by the Military Departments and Defense
Agencies. The CHCSP constitutes the Department's comprehensive and
enterprise-wide plan for ensuring a strong civilian workforce, which is
able to meet the mission challenges of today and the future.
The GAO found that our submission to Congress did not include "an
assessment of current mission critical skills and competencies, future
critical skills and competencies needed, gaps between the current and
future needs, or specific recruiting and retention goals—." Evidence of
the Department's diligent efforts in conducting workforce planning and
analysis can be found in many documents. These documents include
reporting requirements such as, but not limited to, reporting to the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the President's Management Agenda (PMA); OPM Proud-
to-Be milestones and benchmarks; DoD Human Capital Management Report,
and review processes of internal DoD metrics and workforce demographic
data.
Development, Training, Deploying, Compensating, and Motivating
Strategies:
We non-concur with GAO in their finding that our workforce strategies
do not address specific strategies for the development, training, and
deploying, compensating, and motivating DoD's civilian workforce for
the next decade.
The Department is using a plethora of recruitment and compensation
programs to meet its talent needs and develop the skills needed for the
future. These include intern and career development programs, student
employment programs, recruitment at job fairs with diverse candidates,
and establishing liaisons with professional organizations to leverage
their candidate pools. There are numerous Fellowship and Scholarship
Programs in operation throughout the Department, providing us a
pipeline for those positions deemed critical. Two such examples are the
National Security Education Program, through which the Department
grants scholarships for the study of language and cultures, which are
especially important to the Department as it conducts its Stability/
Reconstruction efforts throughout the world; and the SMART Program
(Science, Mathematics and Research for Transformation), through which
the Department assists students with tuition in the Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics arena in return for service,
ensuring we keep our edge in these most vital of career fields.
Pipeline/succession planning efforts also include a wide array of
education and training, and professional development programs, such as:
the Army Fellows Program, Training-With-Industry, Army Comptrollership
Program; Graduate Cost Analysis Program; DoD Professional Enhancement
Program; Logistics and Acquisition Management Program; Logistics
Executive Development Program and the DoD Professional Enhancement
Program. This is not an all inclusive list but provides a flavor of the
type of education and training the Department provides to ensure it has
the current and future talent it needs.
The Department is also exploring new recruitment methodologies, such as
"Boutique Recruiting", which was successfully used to recruit and hire
large numbers of positions in the medical arena, to include
pharmacists, one our mission critical occupations. This is in addition
to the more standard recruitment sources, such as Federal Career
Interns, and veterans.
We are also looking at our compensation systems to ensure all needed
compensation strategies are available to our managers to recruit and
retain the talent needed. We are in process of developing a new
"Hybrid" compensation plan for our Doctors and Dentists that will
leverage the best of Title 5 and Title 38 hiring flexibilities. We also
pursued with the Office of Personnel Management, and recently obtained,
authority to offer retention incentives for moves within the Federal
government for mission critical personnel at BRAC bases. These
flexibilities are in addition to those currently in use, such as
student loan repayment; special salary rates; recruitment, retention
and relocation incentives; and the flexibilities offered by the
National Security Personnel System (NSPS) compensation system.
Employee development strategies are also being undertaken. We have
embarked on a new certificate program for our Human Resources
practitioners, initially focusing on the development of needed
compensation strategies, as we evolve, under NSPS, to a more market-
based system. The Department of the Army has created master training
plans that identify training, education and development requirements
that are linked to competencies and competency proficiency levels,
e.g., intern through professional. The Navy, Air Force and some Defense
Agencies are also embarking on structured development programs to meet
their talent needs.
Assessment of Current/Future Critical Skills and Competencies:
Although not reflected in our submission to the Congress, the
Department is diligently working to create a comprehensive competency
management system methodology that can be used across its enterprise.
Our immediate workforce planning and analysis efforts are focused on
identifying, managing and reporting the competency strengths and needs
of our many components separately via their chain of commands. However,
we have also embarked on a broader effort to establish DoD-wide
standards for comprehensive workforce planning and competency
management. In doing so, we are establishing objectives that can be met
using alternative approaches that are suitable to our components.
Under our enterprise-wide competency management system (CMS) model, we
are working jointly with the Military Departments and Defense Agencies
to develop common taxonomies, job analysis methodologies, workforce
planning strategies/tools, competency gap assessment methodologies and
reporting requirement strategies. Competency assessments, along with
other workforce planning data, will help set priorities and target
occupational areas for strategic direction and/or remediation. We are
building workforce planning data that can be evaluated annually but
extended to 3 year, 5 year and 10 year projections. We will seek to
address unforeseen events by utilizing our capacity to adjust resources
as required and focus on pre-planned events over which we do have
control. This effort has been formalized by a memorandum from the
USD(P&R), which can be found at attachment A.
As we work toward an enterprise-wide approach to competency management,
the Department also is completing competency analysis efforts both at a
corporate level, as well as within the Military Department's and
Defense Agencies. A description of efforts in both these areas follows.
DoD Human Resources Community:
A Human Resources competency assessment was conducted in CY07. 1,722
civilian human resources specialist participated in the assessment. The
assessment uncovered the following:
* Labor Relations and Employee Relations, HR Information Systems,
Legal, Government & Jurisprudence, and Compensation were among the
lowest scoring of the twelve Technical competencies (below a 3.0 on a
5.0 scale):
* Customer Service scored highest among the seven General (soft-skill)
competencies (above a 4.0 on a 5.0 scale):
* Greatest participation rates by grade/payband: (Journeyman Level):
* Greatest participation rates by functional area: Recruitment &
Placement/Staffing. This technical competency scored above a 3.0 on a
5.0 scale Department-wide.
The Department is addressing these competency gaps, beginning with
Compensation. The Department, in conjunction with World at Work, has
developed a Strategic Compensation Certification Program, which is a
future-focused initiative grounded on the critical importance and
linkage of a strategic compensation philosophy with organizational
goals, objectives, initiatives, and Human Capital strategy. In
September 07, DoD graduated its first 100 students in the Compensation
Program. The next class is scheduled February 2008. The course
curriculum includes Compensation Fundamentals, Accounting & Finance for
HR Professionals, Quantitative Methods and Market Pricing-Conducting a
Competitive Analysis.
DoD Acquisition Community:
The Acquisition, Technology and Logistics workforce, which includes
126,000 members in thirteen functional communities, has embarked on a
four-phased approach to addressing acquisition competency management:
* Phase I - Framework Development. In this phase senior experts
evaluate the existing competencies, establish a baseline, and identify
subject matter experts for Phase II.
* Phase II - Model Development. In this phase subject matter experts
identify key work situations and competencies contributing to
successful performance. The resulting model is prepared for test and
evaluation in Phase III.
* Phase III - Test and Evaluation. A beta test is conducted on the
model in preparation for an expanded pilot assessment.
* Phase IV - Assess, Report and Sustain Model. The final model is
deployed for comprehensive assessments in the community. Results are
analyzed and reported to functional leadership and other users. At this
point, information will be available for use in gap analysis, workforce
development, workforce shaping and other human capital applications.
The Acquisition Community competency initiative began in October 2006
and three functional areas have completed Phase III: Contracting, Life
Cycle Logistics and Program Management. These three communities have
validated competency models (Phase III). The contracting community has
started Phase IV. Over 350 subject matter experts participated in the
competency development process. This process resulted in the
identification of 8 core competencies, and to date, over 3,600 Phase IV
individual assessments have been completed. The Phase IV effort is
scheduled to be completed October 2008 and at that point workforce
skill gaps will be identified.
Pharmacists and Civil Engineer:
Pharmacists and civilian engineers, two of our mission critical
occupations, were subject to competency gap analysis is FY2007. The
results of that analysis can be found at attachment B.
Leadership:
The Department of Defense provided the web-based Federal Competency
Assessment Tool - Management (FCAT-M) to members of the Senior
Executive Service and a random sample of GS-14/15/equivalent managers
and supervisors throughout the Department from mid-June through July
2007. FCAT-M consisted of an opportunity for employees to conduct a
self-assessment of current proficiency and supervisors to rate the
current proficiency of the employee and the desired proficiency, for
the position held by the employee. Both employee and supervisor
participation was voluntary. Assessments were entered by 1,685 current
DoD leaders and 499 of their supervisors.
The FCAT-M provides two views of the individual's proficiency (a self
assessment and a supervisor's assessment). Overall, we found the
employee's self-rating to be inconsistent with the supervisor's rating.
This finding is consistent with the recent report by the Merit Systems
Protection Board on self ratings (Issues of Merit, July 2007). The FCAT-
M also provides the supervisor's view of the level of proficiency
needed for the position. The analysis of the results of this assessment
provides us with the first DoD-wide baseline measure of the proficiency
level of the current leadership cadre. On average, over 80 percent of
our current leaders meet or exceed the proficiency levels in leadership
competencies needed for successful performance on the job. The results
also pinpointed a number of competencies in which lower scores
warranted further review and study. Given the significant challenges
faced by DoD leaders in this period of rapid change, the competencies
supporting "Leading Change" are likely among the most critical.
Similarly, as we move more organizations to performance-based
management and compensation under the National Security Personnel
System, "Leading People" is another potential area of concentration.
In addition to providing the first baseline measure of leadership
proficiency across the Department, the 2007 administration of FCAT-M
provided a host of Lessons Learned that will be applied to future
efforts. The Department has gained significant insights into every
aspect of the process, to include design of the assessment tool,
communication, contracting, automation support, and others, which will
lead to a stronger and more viable assessment in 2008.
Military Department and Defense Agencies Competency Gap & Workforce
Trend Analysis:
A significant amount of work is underway within the individual arenas
of Army, Navy, Air Force and 4TH Estate entities. One aspect of
decentralized execution is that we encourage creative approaches to
problem solving and value solutions that address very unique and
specific differences within our organization. In the spirit of
leveraging best practices, we have established a multi-faceted
component work group that links Civilian Personnel Policy and the
Defense Human Capital Strategic (DHCS) Program Evaluation Office (PEO)
more directly to component initiatives. The following is a brief
synopsis of their efforts.
Army:
Army's Competency Management System (CMS) was designed to validate
competency requirements for each position, identify proficiency levels
of employees in the required competencies, conduct gap analysis, and
accommodate updates and re-evaluations. CMS is currently validating
competencies. Army plans on conducting gap assessments in phases for
544 occupations (328 white collar, 216 blue collar). There is a full
competency and gap analysis for 157 occupations that is scheduled for
completion by the end of FY 08. Approximately 75 occupations have
already been surveyed, with mission critical occupations surveyed
first. Once the validation is completed, CMS will be used to identify
competency gaps, share the information through command channels, and
identify the best strategies for closing the gaps. Army is also in the
process of researching a number of aspects of the competency area to
include their potential usage and all of the available tools in the
context of a broad based Human Capital Strategic Plan.
Navy:
To date, 21 Civilian Communities have been established within the Navy
and all job series have been aligned to those communities. Competencies
have been validated through an electronic job task analysis survey tool
(SkillsNet) for nine of the 21 communities with progress being made to
validation for all. Both validated and un-validated competencies have
been packaged into career roadmaps and have been published via the
DONHR website for use in career development. A civilian leadership
competency model has been developed and published including underlying
behaviors. Both 1800 and 3600 assessment tools have been launched via
the website to aid employees in identifying their leadership skill gaps
for aid in the development progress. Additional skill gap analysis
tools are in development. Steps are being taken to develop a strategy
for succession planning utilizing the leadership competency model.
Air Force:
Air Force efforts to date have focused on two types of competencies:
* Institutional - required by all, i.e. leadership, communication,
leading people:
* Occupational - related to career field:
The following is descriptive of their program:
* Initial focus has been from a corporate perspective with development
of the Institutional Competencies List (ICL):
* Eight competencies and 24 sub-competencies have been identified:
* Applies in varying degrees to all segments of the workforce:
* Efforts underway to define institutional competency expectations at
various levels of the workforce:
* Air Force has multiple on-going efforts involving use of occupational
competencies in the functional areas and at the MAJCOM level:
* Ad-hoc efforts and pilot programs are being undertaken:
Competency efforts in Air Force functional areas and MAJCOMs are
directly related to a number of AF Mission Critical Occupations.
The following is a description of program evaluation methodologies that
are planned or in place:
* Performed retirement eligibility analysis evaluating trend/timing of
actual retirements:
* Next step is to perform analysis of data by career field to determine
trend, and identify any remedial actions required:
* A number of career fields (logistics, civil engineers, acquisition,
and human resource) have identified development templates which
evaluate combinations of knowledge, skills, abilities, education, and
experience in order to gauge competency. This is utilized as basis in
such processes as Development Team (DT) vectoring, selection,
development, training, etc.
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS):
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) began focusing its
attention on competencies and skills more than ten years ago. From the
development of Career Development Plans to the current Career
Development Guides (CDGs), DFAS has continually sought to map
competencies, skills, and development. In 2000, the DFAS Director
required all employees to have an Individual Development Plan (IDP). In
2004/2005, DFAS developed an electronic Skills Inventory. Skills were
identified for most of the competencies included in the CDGs. For many
skills, two or more micro-skills were identified. The approach that
DFAS took was to identify all of the skills needed to perform any job
in DFAS (or at least series with more than 20 incumbents). As a result,
more than 2700 skills associated with 200+ competencies were
identified.
DFAS' Learning and Development Division (LDD) recognizes the need to
refine, update, and revitalize the current competency management
content. Objectives include: designing a competency management strategy
that addresses the skills of tomorrow; completing thorough competency
models for DFAS critical occupations, and aligning models with efforts
to support the increase of workforce credentials; updating competency
tools (i.e. CDG, the Skills Inventory, and eIDP); establishing metrics;
and developing a communication plan to inform the DFAS population. DFAS
currently has in place a Skills Inventory that measures over 2700
skills.
Defense Information Systems Agency:
The Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) has established a career
management guide, and a competency-based systematic approach to
professional development. Their guide includes career maps for 95% of
DISA's major career fields. Each career map includes professional,
technical, and leadership competencies, learning objectives and
developmental activities at the entry, intermediate and senior
performance levels. DISA established a forum consisting of senior
leaders who champion each career field. The forum serves as the overall
approval authority for promoting professional and personal development
of the DISA workforce. Additionally, DISA developed training workshops
for managers and supervisors to communicate importance of improving
organizational performance by linking competency gaps, individual
development plans, and performance reviews. Organizational competency
gaps are filled by executing the training and development programs and
human resources polices for retention, recruitment, and promotion.
Defense Logistics Agency (DLA):
The Capability Management Program in DLA identifies and analyzes skills
gaps between the required and the current levels of proficiency for
particular competencies (technical, supervisory or core) associated
with various job occupations. Competency assessment surveys are
developed and distributed via the Competency Assessment Management Tool
in the DLA Learning Management System (DLA LMS).
In October 2006, a competency assessment of the Information Technology
Headquarters employees (series 2210) was successfully completed. This
was a pilot to evaluate the CDP and the Competency Assessment Tool.
This pilot led to DLA Leadership approval for the CDP and the tool for
application to mission critical and Enterprise Business System (EBS)
occupations.
Since February 2007, the DLA Human Resources Strategic Office has
partnered with the DLA Acquisition Management Office, Defense
Acquisition University (DAU) and Director of Defense Procurement and
Acquisition Policy (DPAP) to assess the DLA contracting workforce
focused on the 1101 and 1102 series. This aligns not only with the DLA
Strategic Plan but also with DAU and DPAP efforts to determine what
competency based capabilities exist and identify any skills gaps across
the DoD contracting workforce.
The deployment of the competency assessment survey to the DLA
contracting workforce began on June 25, 2007. Participation in this
assessment is mandatory for all DLA contracting employees (non-
supervisors and supervisors). The assessment survey includes
contracting, professional (leadership ECQs) and the DLA Enterprise
Business System competencies. Results are being analyzed and reported
to the DLA Leadership. The next step is likely to be reviewing training
events and mapping them to the competencies.
The DLA supply workforce (series 2003, 2010 and 1910) is scheduled for
the 1ST and 2ND quarters of FY08. DLA is also looking to assess
employees in positions that are highlighted as "key leadership
positions". This assessment would focus on leadership competencies and
include mapping the development activities to those competencies. Upon
completion, the information would be recorded into Individual
Development Plans (IDPs) in the DLA Learning Management System.
Workforce Trends:
On page 6 of GAO's draft audit report, it stated that the Department
plan did not contain "an assessment of the projected trends in the
current workforce based on expected losses due to retirement and
attrition." Although not reflected in our enterprise-wide perspective
submission to Congress, the Department routinely conducts workforce
analysis and projected trends (see attachment C).
Conclusion:
Although the GAO found we did not provide all the documentation to
support the requirements listed in the NDAA FY06; nevertheless, the
Department is making significant strides in its human capital
management. As such, we non-concur with the GAO draft report for the
reasons provided in our response. We plan to include more compressive
documents in our required March 2008 report.
Attachment A:
Under Secretary Of Defense:
4000 Defense Pentagon:
Washington D.C. 20301-4000:
November 16, 2007:
Personnel And Readiness:
Memorandum For Secretaries Of The Military Departments:
Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff:
Under Secretaries Of Defense:
Commanders Of The Combatant Commands:
Assistant Secretaries Of Defense:
General Counsel Of The Department Of Defense:
Director, Operational Test And Evaluation:
Inspector General Of The Department Of Defense:
Assistants To The Secretary Of Defense:
Director, Administration And Management:
Director, Program Analysis And Evaluation:
Director, Net Assessment:
Directors Of The Defense Agencies:
Directors Of The Dod Field Activities:
Subject: Competency Management and Workforce Planning Information:
This is to update you on the Departments progress toward implementing a
competency based strategy for our civilian workforce. This strategy was
outlined in my Human Capital Strategy (HCS) memorandum of June 6, 2006
attached).
In the past, components have independently worked on the development of
competency based strategies for workforce management purposes. These
initiatives have addressed a number of different objectives and
represent a variety of approaches to problem solving. The time is right
to take the next evolutionary step and focus on establishing a more
consistent and cohesive definition of a DoD-wide strategy. This focus
is important for our workforce, both under the General Schedule system
as well as the National Security Personnel System (NSPS). As we
continue our transition into NSPS. it becomes even more critical to
enhance our ability to maximize the utilization of our workforce
capabilities. Workforce planning and competency based career management
provide the necessary ingredients to manage Human Capital and meet our
mission requirements.
I have designated Ms. Patricia S. Bradshaw. Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy, and Dr. Carl Dahlman, Defense
Human Capital Strategy Program Executive Office. to co-lead the effort
to establish a cohesive DoD-wide direction for workforce planning and
competency based management. In support of this effort, they have
established a competency working group with representatives from the
components to accomplish a number of objectives, including the
establishment of:
* Common competency taxonomies where applicable;
* Job analysis methodologies used for selection, promotion, training
and compensation programs;
* Strategies for workforce planning, competency based career
management, and succession planning;
* Assessment methodology for tracking and closing competency gaps;
* Workforce planning and Competency Management tools;
* Strategies for meeting reporting requirements;
There will be a number of important milestones established this fiscal
year that are associated with this initiative. I encourage you to
coordinate your current competency efforts with the staffs of Defense
Human Capital Strategy PEO and Civilian Personnel Policy to ensure your
efforts align with the Department's direction and that, wherever
possible, best practices can be leveraged.
Signed by:
David S. C. Chu:
Figure: Attachment B: Mission Critical Occupations Data:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
Figure: Attachment C: Annual Attrition Trends: Mission Critical
Occupations:
[See PDF for image]
[End of figure]
[End of section]
Enclosure II: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contact:
Brenda S. Farrell, (202) 512-3604 or farrellb@gao.gov:
Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individual named above, Marion Gatling, Assistant
Director; Renee Brown; Sandra Burrell; William Doherty; Cynthia
Heckmann; Belva Martin; Julia Matta; Brian Pegram; and Terry Richardson
made key contributions to this report.
[End of section]
Related GAO Products:
DOD Civilian Personnel: Comprehensive Strategic Workforce Plans Needed.
GAO-04-753. Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2004.
Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and Development
Efforts in the Federal Government. GAO-04-546G. Washington, D.C.:
March, 2004.
Human Capital: Key Principles for Effective Strategic Workforce
Planning. GAO-04-39. Washington, D.C.: December 11, 2003.
DOD Personnel: Documentation of the Army's Civilian Workforce-Planning
Model Needed to Enhance Credibility. GAO-03- 1046. Washington, D.C.:
August 22, 2003.
Human Capital: A Guide for Assessing Strategic Training and Development
Efforts in the Federal Government. GAO-03- 893G. Washington, D.C.:
July, 2003.
High-Risk Series: Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-03-120.
Washington, D.C.: January 2003.
Acquisition Workforce: Status of Agency Efforts to Address Future
Needs. GAO-03-55W. Washington, D.C.: December 18, 2002.
Military Personnel: Oversight Process Needed to Help Maintain Momentum
of DOD's Strategic Human Capital Planning. GAO-03-237. Washington,
D.C.: December 5, 2002.
Managing for Results: Building on the Momentum for Strategic Human
Capital Reform. GAO-02-528T. Washington, D.C.: March 18, 2002.
A Model of Strategic Human Capital Management. GAO-02-373SP.
Washington, D.C.: March 15, 2002.
Human Capital: Taking Steps to Meet Current and Emerging Human Capital
Challenges. GAO-01-965T. Washington, D.C.: July 17, 2001.
Human Capital: Major Human Capital Challenges at the Departments of
Defense and State. GAO-01-565T. Washington, D.C.: March 29, 2001.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] According to the Office of Personnel Management, competencies are
an observable, measurable set of skills, knowledge, abilities,
behaviors, and other characteristics an individual needs to
successfully perform work roles or occupational functions. Competencies
are typically required at different levels of proficiency depending on
the specific work role or occupational function. Competencies can help
ensure individual and team performance aligns with the organization's
mission and strategic direction.
[2] GAO, High-Risk Series: An Update, GAO-07-310 (January 2007). In
2001, we designated strategic human capital management as a high-risk
area because of the federal government's long-standing lack of a
consistent strategic approach to marshaling, managing, and maintaining
the human capital needed to maximize government performance and ensure
its accountability. GAO, Exposure Draft: Model of Strategic Human
Capital Management, GAO-02-373SP (March 15, 2002).
[3] GAO, DOD Civilian Personnel: Comprehensive Strategic Workforce
Plans Needed, GAO-04-753 (Washington, D.C.: June 30, 2004).
[4] Critical skills are core mission support occupations that are vital
to the accomplishment of an agency's goals and objectives.
[5] Pub. L. No. 109-163, § 1122 (2006).
[6] Section 1122(d) of the act requires an annual report to the
committees, by March 1, 2007, and annually through 2010 on the progress
in implementing DOD's plan--which DOD identified as its "Department of
Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010."
[7] Department of Defense Annual Human Capital Management Report for
Fiscal Year 2007.
[8] GAO-04-753.
[9] Pub. L. No. 109-163, § 1122 (2006).
[10] According to "The Department of Defense Human Capital Strategic
Plan for Civilian Employees of the Department of Defense Fiscal Year
2006 Implementation Report," in September 2005, the Department of
Defense Civilian Human Capital Strategic Plan 2006-2010 was established
pursuant to Section 1122.
[11] According to the Department of Defense Civilian Human Capital
Strategic Plan 2006-2010, the Quadrennial Defense Review Human Capital
Strategy envisions a DOD framework for occupational planning designed
to respond to changes in mission, be based on common definitions of
competencies, and work across all DOD components.
[12] The mission-critical occupations were general engineering, civil
engineering, computer engineering, electronics engineering, physical
scientist, mathematician, computer scientist, physician, nurse,
pharmacist, security administration, police officers, intelligence,
foreign affairs, international relations, language specialist,
financial management, accounting, auditing, budget analysis, logistics
management, contracting, quality assurance, information technology
management, and human resource management.
[13] GAO-04-753.
[14] GAO, Defense Space Activities: Management Actions Are Needed to
Better Identify, Track, and Train Air Force Space Personnel, GAO-06-908
(Washington, D.C.: Sept. 21, 2006).
[15] Developing 21ST Century Department of Defense Senior Executive
Service Leaders: Thought Leader Forum, Washington, D.C., April 10,
2007.
[16] This report was submitted to the Office of Personnel Management to
fulfill the requirements for the Human Capital Standards for Success
under Proud To Be V and the proposed regulations for Subpart B, Title
5, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 250.
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "Subscribe to Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548: