Defense Travel System
Implementation Challenges Remain Gao ID: GAO-09-577 June 30, 2009In 1995, the Department of Defense (DOD) began an effort to implement a standard departmentwide travel system--the Defense Travel System (DTS). GAO has made numerous recommendations aimed at improving DOD management, oversight, and implementation of DTS. GAO was asked to (1) assess the actions DOD has taken to implement GAO's prior recommendations; (2) determine the actions DOD has taken to standardize and streamline its travel rules and processes; (3) determine if DOD has identified its legacy travel systems, their operating costs, and which of these systems will be eliminated; and (4) report on DOD's costs to process travel vouchers manually and electronically. To address these objectives, GAO (1) obtained and analyzed relevant travel policies and procedures, and documents related to the operation of DTS and (2) interviewed appropriate DOD and contractor personnel.
While the department has made progress in improving the efficiency of its travel operations by implementing DTS and revising its processes and policies, unresolved operational issues continue to exist. DOD has taken sufficient action to satisfactorily address 6 of the 14 recommendations GAO made in 2006 pertaining to unused airline tickets, restricted airfares, testing of system interfaces, and streamlining of certain travel processes. More effort is needed to address the remaining 8 related to requirements management and system testing, utilization, premium-class travel, and developing an automated approach to reduce the need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel expenses. For example, in the area of requirements management and testing, GAO's analysis found that the display of flight information by DTS is complicated and confusing. This problem continues because DOD has yet to establish DTS flight display requirements that minimize the number of screens DOD travelers must view in selecting a flight. The 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report made 22 recommendations to streamline DOD's travel rules and processes. GAO found that DOD had satisfactorily addressed all 22 recommendations. For example, DOD has mandated the use of commercial travel offices (CTO), established a single entity within DOD--the Defense Travel Management Office--to contract with CTOs for travel services, and has begun modifying CTO contracts as they become subject to renewal to standardize the level of services provided. According to DOD officials, except for locations where DTS has not yet been deployed, DTS is used by the military services and all 44 defense agencies and joint commands to process temporary duty (TDY) travel vouchers. The department uses two legacy systems to process (1) TDY travel vouchers at locations where DTS is not yet deployed and (2) civilian and military permanent duty travel vouchers since DTS currently lacks the functionality to process these vouchers. DOD provided us with fiscal year 2008 expenditure data for one system and budget data for the other system. The expenditure/budget data provided by DOD were comparable to the amounts budgeted for these systems for fiscal year 2008. According to DOD officials, these legacy systems will not be eliminated because they provide the capability to process military and civilian permanent duty travel vouchers. Although DTS is expected to provide the capability to process military permanent duty travel vouchers in fiscal year 2010, DOD has not yet decided if civilian permanent duty travel voucher processing will be added to DTS. DOD cost data indicate that it is about 15 times more expensive to process a travel voucher manually--$36.52 manually versus $2.47 electronically. DOD officials acknowledged that the department continues to lack the data needed to ascertain the complete universe of travel vouchers that should be processed through DTS.
GAO-09-577, Defense Travel System: Implementation Challenges Remain
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-09-577
entitled 'Defense Travel System: Implementation Challenges Remain'
which was released on June 30, 2009.
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.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
June 2009:
Defense Travel System:
Implementation Challenges Remain:
GAO-09-577:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-09-577, a report to congressional requesters.
Why GAO Did This Study:
In 1995, the Department of Defense (DOD) began an effort to implement a
standard departmentwide travel system”the Defense Travel System (DTS).
GAO has made numerous recommendations aimed at improving DOD
management, oversight, and implementation of DTS. GAO was asked to (1)
assess the actions DOD has taken to implement GAO‘s prior
recommendations; (2) determine the actions DOD has taken to standardize
and streamline its travel rules and processes; (3) determine if DOD has
identified its legacy travel systems, their operating costs, and which
of these systems will be eliminated; and (4) report on DOD‘s costs to
process travel vouchers manually and electronically. To address these
objectives, GAO (1) obtained and analyzed relevant travel policies and
procedures, and documents related to the operation of DTS and (2)
interviewed appropriate DOD and contractor personnel.
What GAO Found:
While the department has made progress in improving the efficiency of
its travel operations by implementing DTS and revising its processes
and policies, unresolved operational issues continue to exist. DOD has
taken sufficient action to satisfactorily address 6 of the 14
recommendations GAO made in 2006 pertaining to unused airline tickets,
restricted airfares, testing of system interfaces, and streamlining of
certain travel processes. More effort is needed to address the
remaining 8 related to requirements management and system testing,
utilization, premium-class travel, and developing an automated approach
to reduce the need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel
expenses. For example, in the area of requirements management and
testing, GAO‘s analysis found that the display of flight information by
DTS is complicated and confusing. This problem continues because DOD
has yet to establish DTS flight display requirements that minimize the
number of screens DOD travelers must view in selecting a flight.
The 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report made 22 recommendations to
streamline DOD‘s travel rules and processes. GAO found that DOD had
satisfactorily addressed all 22 recommendations. For example, DOD has
mandated the use of commercial travel offices (CTO), established a
single entity within DOD”the Defense Travel Management Office”to
contract with CTOs for travel services, and has begun modifying CTO
contracts as they become subject to renewal to standardize the level of
services provided.
According to DOD officials, except for locations where DTS has not yet
been deployed, DTS is used by the military services and all 44 defense
agencies and joint commands to process temporary duty (TDY) travel
vouchers. The department uses two legacy systems to process (1) TDY
travel vouchers at locations where DTS is not yet deployed and (2)
civilian and military permanent duty travel vouchers since DTS
currently lacks the functionality to process these vouchers. DOD
provided us with fiscal year 2008 expenditure data for one system and
budget data for the other system. The expenditure/budget data provided
by DOD were comparable to the amounts budgeted for these systems for
fiscal year 2008. According to DOD officials, these legacy systems will
not be eliminated because they provide the capability to process
military and civilian permanent duty travel vouchers. Although DTS is
expected to provide the capability to process military permanent duty
travel vouchers in fiscal year 2010, DOD has not yet decided if
civilian permanent duty travel voucher processing will be added to DTS.
DOD cost data indicate that it is about 15 times more expensive to
process a travel voucher manually”$36.52 manually versus $2.47
electronically. DOD officials acknowledged that the department
continues to lack the data needed to ascertain the complete universe of
travel vouchers that should be processed through DTS.
What GAO Recommends:
Because GAO has existing recommendations regarding the actions needed
to address the weaknesses discussed in this report, GAO reiterates 8 of
its 14 prior recommendations. DOD commented that it has taken
sufficient action to address 12 of the 14 recommendations, including 6
of the 8 GAO is reiterating, and described actions under way or planned
to address the other 2. GAO disagrees. GAO received technical comments,
which were incorporated as appropriate.
View [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-09-577] or key
components. For more information, contact Asif A. Khan at (202) 512-
9095 or khana@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Contents:
Letter:
Background:
DOD Has Implemented 6 of 14 GAO Recommendations:
DOD Has Implemented the 22 Recommendations Made in the 1995 Travel
Reengineering Report:
DOD Entities Use DTS and Legacy Systems to Process Travel Vouchers:
Electronic Processing of Travel Vouchers Is Significantly Less
Expensive Than Manual Processing:
Conclusions:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Appendix III: Status of DOD's Actions on Previous GAO Recommendations
on the Defense Travel System:
Appendix IV: Status of DOD's Actions to Address Recommendations of the
January 1995 Travel Reengineering Report:
Appendix V: List of Defense Agencies and Joint Commands:
Appendix VI: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Legacy Systems Used by the Military Services, Defense
Agencies, and Joint Commands to Process Travel Vouchers:
Table 2: GAO's January 2006 Report Recommendations and Status of DOD
Actions as of June 2009:
Table 3: GAO's September 2006 Report Recommendations and Status of DOD
Actions as of June 2009:
Abbreviations:
AO: authorizing official:
BTA: Business Transformation Agency:
CEFMS: Corps of Engineers Financial Management System:
CTO: commercial travel office:
DFAS: Defense Finance and Accounting Service:
DOD: Department of Defense:
DTMO: Defense Travel Management Office:
DTS: Defense Travel System:
GSA: General Services Administration:
IRS: Internal Revenue Service:
PMO-DTS: Program Management Office--Defense Travel System:
P&R: Personnel and Readiness:
RTS: Reserve Travel System:
TDY: temporary duty:
WINIATS: Windows Integrated Automated Travel System:
[End of section]
United States Government Accountability Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
June 30, 2009:
Congressional Requesters:
In 1995, the Department of Defense (DOD) embarked upon the daunting
challenge of implementing a standard, departmentwide travel system in
response to a report by the DOD Task Force to Reengineer Travel.
[Footnote 1] The report pinpointed three principal causes for the
inefficiency in DOD's travel system: (1) travel policies and programs
were focused on compliance with rigid rules rather than mission
performance, (2) travel practices did not keep pace with travel
management improvements implemented by industry, and (3) the various
existing travel systems were not integrated. To address these concerns,
DOD established the Program Management Office-Defense Travel System
(PMO-DTS) to acquire travel services that would be used departmentwide.
The department launched this program with the goal of replacing
existing travel systems with a single system to more effectively
support travel processes and procedures across its component
organizations. The Defense Travel System (DTS) is envisioned as being
the department's standard end-to-end travel system and in March 2008
mandated its use at all locations where deployed.[Footnote 2] The
department estimates that DTS will be deployed at all 9,800 intended
locations during fiscal year 2009.
We have previously reported and testified on the problems encountered
by DOD in implementing DTS and have made numerous recommendations aimed
at improving DOD management, oversight, and implementation of DTS and
related travel policies to make DTS the standard departmentwide travel
system.[Footnote 3] Following the April 2008 congressional hearing on
DTS, you requested that we (1) assess the actions DOD has taken to
implement our previous recommendations, (2) determine the actions DOD
has taken to standardize and streamline its travel rules and processes
as recommended by the 1995 Travel Reengineering Report, (3) determine
if DOD has identified its legacy systems, their operating costs, and
which legacy travel systems will be eliminated as well as the time
frame for elimination, and (4) report on DOD's costs to process travel
vouchers manually and electronically.
To address the first and second objectives, we obtained and analyzed
relevant documentation, such as travel policies and procedures, and
documents related to DTS requirements management and system testing, to
assess the actions taken by the department to address our prior
recommendations and the recommendations in the 1995 Travel
Reengineering Report. To address the third objective, we reviewed and
compared information provided by the Defense Travel Management Office
(DTMO) and the military services on the legacy systems used to manage
their travel operations, associated costs, and the rationale for
continued use of these systems. To address the fourth objective, we
reviewed the methodology used by the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS) to calculate the rates DFAS charged to other DOD
activities for processing a travel voucher manually versus
electronically. During the course of the audit, we interviewed
officials from DTMO, the PMO-DTS, the DTS prime contractor, the
military services, the Business Transformation Agency (BTA), and DFAS
to obtain explanations for discrepancies and issues identified during
our work.
We conducted this performance audit from July 2008 through June 2009 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. Details on our scope and
methodology are included in appendix I. We requested comments on a
draft of this report from the Secretary of Defense or his designee. We
received written comments from the Deputy Under Secretary (Military
Personnel Policy), which are reprinted in appendix II.
Background:
In September 1993, the National Performance Review recommended an
overhaul of DOD's temporary duty (TDY) travel system. In response, the
department created the DOD Task Force to Reengineer Travel to examine
the travel process. It found that existing processes were expensive to
administer and neither customer nor mission oriented, resulting in a
travel process that was costly, inefficient, fragmented, and did not
support DOD's needs. In December 1995, the Under Secretary of Defense
for Acquisition and Technology and the Under Secretary of Defense
(Comptroller)/Chief Financial Officer issued a memorandum,
"Reengineering Travel Initiative," which established the PMO-DTS and
tasked it with the responsibility to acquire travel services to be used
departmentwide. Currently, the BTA is responsible for the management
oversight of the PMO-DTS. DTMO is the departmentwide entity responsible
for commercial travel policy, management, and oversight within the
department and reports to the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and
Readiness). DTMO's responsibilities include establishing strategic
direction, setting travel policy, managing the commercial travel
program, and defining and providing the functional requirements to the
PMO-DTS.
DOD Has Implemented 6 of 14 GAO Recommendations:
Our January 2006 and September 2006 reports contained 14
recommendations for improving DOD's management oversight and
implementation of DTS and related travel policies.[Footnote 4] On the
basis of our analysis of the documentation provided and discussions
with DTMO and PMO-DTS representatives, the department has taken
sufficient action to implement 6 of the 14 recommendations. While the
department has initiated actions to address the remaining 8, additional
efforts are needed. The 6 closed recommendations pertain to unused
airline tickets, use of restricted airfare, proper testing of system
interfaces, and streamlining of certain travel processes, such as
approving travel vouchers.
The 8 open recommendations relate to requirements management and system
testing, DTS utilization, premium-class travel,[Footnote 5] and
developing an approach that will permit the use of automated methods to
reduce the need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel expenses.
Appendix III offers additional details on DOD's efforts to implement
the 14 recommendations.
Highlighted below are two examples--testing of system interfaces and
use of restricted airfare--where DOD has taken sufficient action to
close our recommendations.
Testing of system interfaces: In our January 2006 report,[Footnote 6]
we noted that while the department had developed and implemented
interfaces with 36 systems, going forward, the testing of system
interfaces would continue to be a challenge. We recommended that the
PMO-DTS test new or modified system interfaces to ensure that the
intended functionality is operating properly. To address our
recommendation, the PMO-DTS engaged the DFAS Enterprise Level Test
Group as an independent verification and validation group in 2006 to
provide an objective perspective of the reliability of the system
interface testing being performed by the contractor. We reviewed the
testing documentation, such as the test plan, test scripts, and test
cases,[Footnote 7] related to the DTS system interface with the Navy
Enterprise Resource Planning system, and found that the documentation
was sufficient for ensuring that interfaces between systems operated as
intended. DOD's use of an independent verification and validation group
meets the intent of our recommendation.
Use of restricted airfares: In our January 2006 report, we recommended
that the PMO-DTS determine the feasibility of using restricted airfares
where cost effective.[Footnote 8] We reported that the system
requirement stipulated that DTS is to display only unrestricted
airfares. As noted in that report, other airfares generally referred to
as restricted airfares may, in some cases, be less expensive than a
given General Services Administration (GSA) city-pair fare[Footnote 9]
and other unrestricted airfares. However, as the name implies,
restricted airfares contain certain limitations.[Footnote 10] We
recommended that the PMO-DTS determine the feasibility of using
restricted airfares where cost effective. To address our
recommendation, DTMO contracted with the Logistics Management Institute
to conduct a study on the use of restricted airfares. The study,
completed in September 2008, determined that the use of restricted
airfares was feasible and presented DOD management with two options for
implementing this functionality into DTS. The department's actions are
fully responsive to our recommendation for the determination of
feasibility. Highlighted below are examples where further actions are
needed to fully address our recommendations.
Requirements management processes: Our January 2006 and September 2006
reports noted that DTS did not display flight information in a manner
that facilitated a traveler's compliance with DOD travel
regulations.[Footnote 11] For example, we found that not all GSA city-
pair flights were included in the display of flights provided to the
traveler. As a result, travelers may not consistently select flights
that are most cost advantageous to the government. We recommended that
DOD consider simplifying the display of flight information in DTS. The
intent of this recommendation was to improve usability by reducing the
amount of user effort required to identify flights that matched the
traveler's schedule in order to meet mission needs. Our current
analysis found that DTS's flight displays have not been simplified.
More specifically, the DOD traveler may have to review at least four of
the five separate flight display screens to identify the flight that is
best suited to his or her needs. DTS's flight displays could be
simplified by grouping the flights into two categories--GSA and
commercial. Displaying all of the GSA flights on one display screen
would facilitate selection of the lowest fare.[Footnote 12] If a GSA
city-pair fare was not available, the traveler could view a single
display screen of commercial flights to identify and select a
commercial flight with the lowest available airfare that meets mission
needs.
DTS testing: In January 2006 and September 2006, we reported that the
system testing performed did not provide reasonable assurance that DTS
was displaying the proper flights and airfares.[Footnote 13] We also
reported that DOD did not adequately document the testing performed to
ensure DTS was functioning properly. We recommended that the PMO-DTS
effectively implement the disciplined processes necessary to provide
reasonable assurance that (1) requirements are properly documented and
(2) requirements are adequately tested. Throughout our review, we have
found that while DOD has stated that it has established processes,
consistent with industry practices, to ensure that (1) DTS requirements
are valid, clearly stated, and properly documented and tested; and (2)
testing is properly documented, those processes have not been
effectively implemented. For example, our January 2009 analysis of
selected DTS requirements related to flight displays and airfares found
that the testing process did not fully address our previously reported
problems.[Footnote 14] The problems we found generally related to
missing documentation to support tests performed or the test performed
focused on limited aspects of the requirement and did not provide
sufficient evidence that the requirement was adequately tested.
Our analysis found that DOD did not adequately test the DTS requirement
that travelers provide a justification for any deviation from DOD
travel policies. For example, DOD policy requires the traveler to
select the lowest cost compact rental car. However, if the traveler
later changes this selection to the lowest cost car within another
model category (mid-size), the justification box will not appear for
the approving official to review. The underlying control weakness is
that the appearance of the justification box is not predicated on
whether the last selected choice meets the department's travel policy
requirements. PMO-DTS officials were not aware of this problem until we
brought it to their attention.
We also found that DOD did not adequately test the DTS requirement to
only display flights that comply with the requirements of the Fly
America Act, which stipulates that travel must be on U.S. carriers when
available. This testing failure places the traveler who purchases a
ticket or the individual authorizing, certifying, or disbursing DOD
ticket payments directly through a centrally billed account, at
unnecessary risk of being personally liable for the cost of the ticket.
Specifically, our analysis of November 2008 flight display data
identified the following instances in which DTS displayed flights that
did not meet the requirements of the Fly America Act:
* 9 out of 25 flights DTS displayed for travel from Washington Dulles
Airport to Harare, Zimbabwe;
* 4 out of 10 flights from Washington Dulles Airport to Islamabad,
Pakistan; and:
* 3 out of 15 flights from Washington Dulles Airport to Sana'a, Yemen.
Our analysis of the same flight origins and destinations in March 2009
found that the problem continues. On April 9, 2009, DTMO's Commercial
Travel Division Chief concurred with our assessment that DTS's display
of flights could result in the traveler selecting a flight that was not
in compliance with the requirements of the Fly America Act. As a
result, the traveler is at unnecessary risk of being held personally
liable for the cost of the airfare.
In addition, one requirement indicated that DTS should not allow a
traveler to select flight departure or arrival dates that were outside
the established itinerary trip dates. Our review of DOD's testing of
this requirement showed that only three of the six boundary conditions
needed to fully test this requirement had been tested. Neither DOD nor
its contractor could provide documentation supporting testing for the
day after the traveler's departure date, the day before the arrival
date, and the day after the arrival date. Based on our analysis, DOD
does not have assurance that this requirement was adequately tested
because of a lack of documentation.
DTS utilization: Our September 2006 report pointed out that the
department did not have the quantitative metrics to measure the extent
to which employees used DTS at locations where the system was deployed.
[Footnote 15] We recommended that the department establish a process by
which the military services develop and use quantitative data from DTS
and their individual legacy systems to clearly identify the total
universe of DTS-eligible transactions on a monthly basis.[Footnote 16]
The department has yet to establish a process to identify the universe
of DTS-eligible transactions, which is needed to effectively measure
DTS usage. Until the department has reasonable quantitative metrics to
measure and reliably report on the extent to which DTS is being used,
the department's ability to ensure compliance with its mandate to use
DTS and to provide consistent and accurate DTS utilization data to the
Congress is diminished.[Footnote 17]
Premium-class travel: We reported in January 2006 that the commercial
travel offices (CTO) were not adhering to the department's policy
restricting the use of premium-class travel and not issuing premium-
class tickets without proper authorization.[Footnote 18] Because a
premium-class ticket can cost the government thousands of dollars more
than a coach-class ticket, unauthorized premium-class travel can result
in millions of dollars in unnecessary travel costs annually. We
recommended that the department take action to ensure that CTOs adhere
to the department's policy on the use of premium-class travel. To
address our recommendation, in October 2007, DTMO started using a Web-
based management tool that generates monthly reports to assess
compliance with DOD's premium-class travel policy. DTMO also receives
and reviews monthly reports from CTOs on premium-class travel. The CTO
reports include a list of the premium-class travel tickets issued and
the information necessary to identify the traveler and the trip taken.
While DTMO has taken steps to identify premium-class travel, its
actions do not address our concerns that such travel be properly
authorized. We requested and reviewed one CTO's December 2008 monthly
premium-class report and determined that 12 premium-class tickets were
issued for the month. Based upon our review of documentation provided
by DTMO to determine whether these tickets complied with DOD's travel
policy on premium-class travel, we found:
* two tickets were properly justified and authorized;
* two tickets were for DOD contractors and therefore should not have
been on the report;
* four tickets were issued without the proper justification and
authorization; the CTO has initiated actions to reimburse DOD for the
cost of the difference between any premium-class airfare and the lowest
applicable airfare; and:
* four tickets were issued without justification and authorization, on
the basis of our review of DOD travel regulations. However, based on
our interpretation of federal travel regulations, they do not meet the
definition of premium-class as defined by federal travel regulations
because they were the lowest available fare and, therefore, would not
require justification and authorization.
Automating hard copy receipts: In January 2006, we reported that DOD
might be able to change its travel policy, and reduce the number of
receipts required, and the associated administrative burden without
adversely affecting its ability to ensure a claim is proper.[Footnote
19] The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has established criteria for
determining whether travel reimbursements are taxable to an employee
and the documentation required to substantiate travel expenses. As a
result, any changes to DOD's travel policies regarding travel
reimbursement--including evaluating methods that meet IRS's receipt
requirements--should be done in consultation with IRS. We recommended
that the department work with IRS in developing an approach that would
permit the use of automated methods to reduce the need for hard-copy
receipts while satisfying the department's and IRS's requirements to
substantiate travel expenses. To its credit, the department has had one
meeting with the IRS to obtain an understanding of IRS revenue rulings
regarding travel receipts and to discuss the possible use of travel
card statements in lieu of travel receipts. However, the department has
not developed or presented to the IRS a conceptual approach for how
travel card data and other information could be used to address IRS
concerns regarding the use of electronic data to substantiate travel
expenses. Since GSA is the lead agency for promulgating travel policy
for the federal government, DOD will need to work with both GSA and IRS
to implement the needed changes.
DOD Has Implemented the 22 Recommendations Made in the 1995 Travel
Reengineering Report:
The 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report included 22 recommendations
for reengineering DOD's TDY travel rules and processes and automating
these processes by implementing an integrated DOD travel system. On the
basis of our analysis of documentation provided and discussions with
DTMO and PMO-DTS representatives, the department has taken sufficient
action to address all of these recommendations.
Appendix IV offers additional details on DOD's efforts to implement the
22 recommendations.
Highlighted below are two examples--mandated use of CTOs in providing
travel services and the availability of 24-hour CTO support to DOD
travelers--where DOD has taken sufficient action to close the
recommendations.
Mandated use of CTOs: The 1995 report noted that DOD's cumbersome,
complex, and fragmented travel operations were not customer or mission
oriented and the report recommended that DOD mandate the use of CTOs
for DOD travel services.[Footnote 20] To address this recommendation,
the department updated its travel regulations to mandate the use of
CTOs for making DOD travel arrangements and identified DTMO as the
department's single travel procurement and contract manager. In
addition, DTMO is modifying CTO contract language, as CTO contracts
become subject to renegotiation and renewal, to standardize the level
of services CTOs provide DOD travelers.
Twenty-four hour CTO support: The 1995 report noted that if travelers
need to change accommodations during nonbusiness hours, they are often
required to make the changes themselves.[Footnote 21] To provide DOD
travelers with travel support consistent with services provided in the
private sector, and to ensure compliance with DOD policy, the report
recommended that all changes in accommodations be made through CTO 24-
hour 800 service phone numbers. To address this recommendation, the
department requires all CTO contracts to include a provision to support
DOD travelers via toll-free numbers or collect call.
DOD Entities Use DTS and Legacy Systems to Process Travel Vouchers:
According to DOD officials, except for locations where DTS has not yet
been deployed, such as the Army Corps of Engineers and some locations
within the military services, DTS is used by the military services and
all 44 defense agencies and joint commands to process TDY travel
vouchers. (Appendix V offers a list of the 44 defense agencies and
joint commands.) The department uses two legacy systems to process (1)
TDY travel vouchers at locations where DTS is not yet deployed and (2)
civilian and military permanent duty travel vouchers since DTS
currently lacks the functionality to process these vouchers (see table
1). According to DOD officials, the department should complete its
efforts to add military permanent duty travel functionality to DTS in
fiscal year 2010. A decision on whether civilian permanent duty travel
will be added to DTS has not yet been made. In response to our request
for operating costs associated with these systems, DOD officials
provided us with fiscal year 2008 expenditure data for one system and
budget data for the other system. The expenditure/budget data provided
by DOD are comparable with the fiscal year 2008 amounts identified in
the department's fiscal year 2008 Information Technology Budget request
for these two systems.[Footnote 22]
Table 1: Legacy Systems Used by the Military Services, Defense
Agencies, and Joint Commands to Process Travel Vouchers:
Legacy system: Windows Integrated Automated Travel System (WINIATS)[A];
Component user: All except the Air Force[A];
Fiscal year 2008 operating costs: Expenditure: $3,300,000;
Fiscal year 2008 operating costs: Budget: [Empty].
Legacy system: Reserve Travel System (RTS)[B];
Component user: Air Force;
Fiscal year 2008 operating costs: Expenditure: [Empty];
Fiscal year 2008 operating costs: Budget: $510,000.
Source: DOD.
[A] WINIATS is used by all DOD components, except for the Air Force, to
process military and civilian permanent duty travel vouchers. At
locations where DTS is not currently deployed WINIATS is also used to
process TDY vouchers.
[B] The Air Force uses RTS to process military and civilian permanent
duty travel vouchers.
[End of table]
According to DOD officials, these legacy systems will not be eliminated
because they provide the capability to process civilian permanent duty
travel vouchers. DOD officials stated that this capability is not
currently within DTS and it is uncertain whether it will be added.
Electronic Processing of Travel Vouchers Is Significantly Less
Expensive Than Manual Processing:
For fiscal year 2009, DFAS estimates it will charge DOD components an
average of $2.47 for travel vouchers processed electronically and
$36.52 for travel vouchers processed manually. It is about 15 times
less expensive to process a travel voucher electronically versus
manually. In our review of DOD's calculation of costs for travel
voucher processing, we found an error in the DFAS rate determination
that resulted in an over allocation of DFAS general and administrative
cost to DFAS's travel voucher processing activities.[Footnote 23] DFAS
personnel, unaware of the error until our review, confirmed that the
computation of the fiscal year 2009 rates was inaccurate and indicated
that the miscalculation occurred as a result of a misinterpretation of
DFAS guidance.[Footnote 24] The DFAS official further stated that
changes would be made to the fiscal year 2010 rate computation to
accurately allocate the general and administrative costs among DFAS's
various accounting and finance operations. The cost figures for fiscal
year 2010 reflect the corrected rates.
DOD officials acknowledged that the department continues to lack the
data needed to ascertain the complete universe of travel vouchers that
should be processed through DTS. This lack of data adversely affects
the reliability of DTS utilization reports and the department's ability
to identify locations where DTS is deployed but not fully utilized.
Given that the Army is DFAS's largest customer of manually processed
travel vouchers, DFAS officials told us that the Army would benefit
most from increased electronic voucher processing. The department
reported that in fiscal year 2008, the Army had processed more than 1.5
million vouchers, about 1.1 million through DTS. However, DOD cannot
determine how many of the remaining 400,000 vouchers were from
locations where DTS was already available but the offices continued
processing the vouchers manually. As a result, the department cannot
ascertain the total universe of travel vouchers that are eligible to be
processed through DTS and the savings that could be realized through
electronic processing of those vouchers. Continued use of manual
processing of TDY travel vouchers through legacy systems is inefficient
because the department is paying for a service that can be provided at
much lower cost. DFAS provides only limited manual travel voucher
processing for the Navy and the Air Force.
Conclusions:
DOD has made progress in addressing our prior recommendations regarding
the implementation of DTS as well as those in the 1995 DOD Travel
Reengineering Report that were intended to streamline DOD's travel
operations. Additional management attention is needed to ensure that
DTS delivers its intended functionality and meets customers' needs.
Accordingly, we reaffirm our prior recommendations related to the
improvements needed to effectively implement DTS so that it can become
the department's standard travel system. Electronic processing of
travel vouchers through DTS is far less expensive than manual
processing through legacy systems. Thus, it is important for the
department to continue its efforts to make DTS its standardized system
for processing travel vouchers.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We received written comments on a draft of this report from the Deputy
Under Secretary (Military Personnel Policy), which are reprinted in
appendix II. In commenting on the report, the Deputy Under Secretary
stated that the DTS program overall is a success story and that system
usage and customer satisfaction have increased since 2006. The
department acknowledges that there is still room for improvement and
stated that DOD is committed to continued progress. The department
commented that reiteration of the 14 previous recommendations creates
an inaccurate impression because it believes it has taken sufficient
action to address all but 2 of our recommendations. However, we clearly
state in the report that the department satisfactorily addressed 6 of
our 14 recommendations; therefore, we were reiterating only the
remaining 8 recommendations that require additional action to address.
For the two recommendations the department acknowledged that it had not
yet addressed, DOD identified specific actions it has under way or
planned to take to address our concerns regarding DTS requirements
management and testing. For example, the department noted that PMO-DTS
is currently reviewing software test processes with the prime
contractor to ensure that proper documentation and test artifacts are
maintained. The department also noted that it intended to correct the
System Problem Reports to address any deficiencies that preclude DOD
from meeting the requirements of the Fly America Act.
Regarding the remaining six open recommendations relating to premium-
class travel, DTS utilization, simplification of flight displays, and
developing an approach that will permit the use of automated methods to
reduce the need for hard-copy receipts to substantiate travel expenses,
DOD stated that it believed it had taken sufficient action to address
these recommendations. Specifically, the department is of the opinion
that the recommendation related to premium-class travel should be
considered closed. DOD noted that it has enacted several measures to
strengthen the control over premium-class travel, such as including a
requirement in CTO contracts that premium-class tickets not be issued
unless there is a properly signed or otherwise properly authenticated
travel authorization. Additionally, DOD noted the use of a Web-based
management tool by the military services and defense agencies to
document and report premium-class approvals. We do not agree that the
department's actions fully addressed our concerns. As noted in the
report, despite the implementation of these measures, we identified
four premium-class tickets, at one location for 1 month, that were
improperly issued by the CTO. The DTMO was not aware of this improper
issuance until we brought it to DTMO's attention. The fact remains that
CTOs continue to issue premium-class tickets that have not been
properly justified and authorized, thereby raising concerns about the
effectiveness of the controls the department has put in place.
Three of the eight open recommendations relate to the department's
actions taken to develop and report metrics on its utilization of DTS.
In its comments, DOD noted that the military services and defense
agencies report actual non-DTS travel voucher counts and that DTMO's
calculations of DTS utilization take into account travel vouchers that
are and are not processed by DTS. DOD acknowledged that these
computations are not completely accurate and stated that the
modifications to legacy systems that would be needed to achieve greater
accuracy would require a significant investment of time and money. The
department stated that given the 70 percent DTS usage rate it has
calculated for DTS through the second quarter of fiscal year 2009, this
additional cost is not justified. We disagree with the department's
assessment that these recommendations should be closed. Our
recommendations in this area were intended to improve the department's
metrics for measuring and reporting DTS usage and to facilitate the
identification of locations that were not fully utilizing DTS. The
department could not ascertain the complete universe of travel vouchers
that should be processed through DTS. Without a process to identify TDY
vouchers by location that are processed outside DTS, DOD is hindered in
its ability to (1) identify the locations responsible for those travel
vouchers and identify and address issues that undermine DTS usage, (2)
reliably measure and report DTS usage, and (3) ensure that DTS is the
departmentwide standard travel system.
With respect to our prior recommendation on requirements management as
it relates to the simplification of the display of flights, the
department believes that sufficient action has been taken to address
this recommendation. DOD noted in its comments that the requirements
were specifically written to display airfare in the five-tab format to
provide flight information in accordance with the order of precedence
contained in the current policy. The department also noted that
travelers do not have access to each of the five tabs, but rather DTS
presents the traveler with only the available flights based on policy.
We do not consider this recommendation closed. We found, on the basis
of our testing of this requirement, the traveler does have access to at
least four of the five tabs and must review each to identify the flight
that is best suited to his or her needs. In addition, the use of
multiple flight display screens can result in the display of flights
occurring within the same travel schedule time period that are
significantly more expensive than the available GSA flights.
Simplifying the flight displays to two tabs or categories--GSA and
commercial--would facilitate the traveler's identification and
selection of flights with the lowest cost airfare by eliminating the
display of higher cost flights within the same travel schedule time
period. The department recognized the merit of our recommendation by
stating in its comments that it intended to review the feasibility of
grouping the flights into two categories or tabs as part of its overall
effort to improve the usability of DTS.
DOD did not assert that sufficient action had been taken in its
entirety to address our recommendation that the department develop an
approach that uses automated methods to reduce the need for hard copy
receipts. Rather, DOD noted that, because this recommendation has
governmentwide impact, GSA--the agency responsible for promulgating
travel policy for the entire federal government--is the more
appropriate agency to lead this effort. We recognize that GSA is the
lead agency for promulgating travel policy for the federal government.
However, the intent of our recommendation was that given the size of
DOD's travel operations and the department's goal to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of its business operations, we believe DOD
should work with GSA and the IRS to identify and implement acceptable
changes. To date, DOD has not developed or presented to the IRS or GSA
a conceptual approach that identifies the information that would be
needed and the extent to which this information is available to address
this recommendation while adhering to the IRS's requirements. DOD needs
to conduct research to understand what data is available, either from
industry providers or its systems (including the travel card data),
that could be used to meet IRS's requirements. This recommendation was
not intended to assess simply the extent to which credit card data
could be used to substantiate travel expenses, but also for DOD to
understand the data and the internal control requirements that should
be included in the functionality of relevant systems, such as DTS, to
ensure compliance with IRS requirements regarding documentation of
actual travel expenses.
DOD also provided technical comments on a draft of this report that we
have incorporated throughout the report, as appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness; the Director,
Defense Business Transformation Agency; the Director, the Defense
Travel Management Office; the Director, Program Management Office-
Defense Travel System; the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial
Management and Comptroller); the Assistant Secretary of the Navy
(Financial Management and Comptroller); the Acting Assistant Secretary
of the Air Force for Financial Management; and the Director, Defense
Finance and Accounting Service. The report also is available at no
charge on the GAO Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
Please contact Asif A. Khan at (202) 512-9095 or khana@gao.gov, or
Nabajyoti Barkakati at (202) 512-4499 or barkakatin@gao.gov, if you or
your staffs have questions on matters discussed in this report. Contact
points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs
may be found on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this
report are listed in appendix VI.
Signed by:
Asif A. Khan:
Director, Financial Management and Assurance:
Signed by:
Nabajyoti Barkakati:
Acting Chief Technologist:
Applied Research and Methods:
Center for Technology and Engineering:
[End of section]
List of Congressional Requesters:
The Honorable Vic Snyder:
Chairman:
The Honorable Robert Wittman:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Solomon Ortiz:
Chairman:
The Honorable Randy Forbes:
Ranking Member:
Subcommittee on Readiness:
Committee on Armed Services:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable W. Todd Akin:
House of Representatives:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
To determine the status of the Department of Defense's (DOD) efforts to
address our 14 recommendations[Footnote 25] and those made in the 1995
Task Force Report[Footnote 26] to streamline the department's travel
rules and processes, we obtained and analyzed relevant documentation,
such as travel policies and procedures, documents related to the
Defense Travel System (DTS) requirements management and system testing,
and monthly premium-class travel reports to assess the actions taken,
under way, or planned by the department to address these
recommendations. To determine the specific actions taken related to our
previous recommendations on requirements management and system testing,
we nonstatistically selected and analyzed 209 requirements by reviewing
relevant documentation to determine whether the requirements had been
adequately tested. The requirements selected for review related
primarily to the display of flight information for travelers--since
that was an area of concern in our prior work.[Footnote 27]
Regarding premium-class travel, we requested and reviewed one
Commercial Travel Office's December 2008 monthly premium-class report
and determined that 12 premium-class tickets were issued for the month.
We requested and reviewed documentation from the Defense Travel
Management Office (DTMO) regarding the justification of these premium-
class tickets to determine whether these tickets complied with DOD's
travel policy regarding premium-class travel. We met with
representatives of DTMO, the Program Management Office-Defense Travel
System, and the prime contractor and travel management representatives
of the military services to obtain clarification and explanations of
actions taken, under way, or planned by the department in response to
our recommendations.
To determine if DOD has identified its legacy systems, their operating
costs, and which legacy travel systems will be eliminated as well as
the time frame for elimination, we reviewed and compared information
provided by DTMO and the military services' regarding the legacy
systems used to manage their travel operations, associated costs, and
the rationale for continued use of these systems. We met with
representatives of DTMO and the military services to (1) discuss
discrepancies or omissions in the information provided identifying the
legacy systems and their operating costs, and (2) obtain the rationale
for why these systems would not be eliminated.
To analyze DOD's costs to process travel vouchers manually and
electronically, we reviewed the methodology used by the Defense Finance
and Accounting Service (DFAS) to calculate the rates it charged other
DOD activities and assessed the reasonableness of DOD's cost estimates.
During the course of the audit, we interviewed DFAS officials to obtain
an understanding of the methodology and an explanation for the error we
identified in the rate calculation.
We conducted this performance audit from July 2008 through June 2009,
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 conducted our work at the offices of the Defense Travel Management
Office, the Business Transformation Agency, the Program Management
Office - Defense Travel System, the Defense Travel System prime
contractor, the military services, and the Defense Finance and
Accounting Service-Indianapolis. We requested comments on a draft of
this report from the Secretary of Defense or his designee. We received
written comments from the Deputy Under Secretary (Military Personnel
Policy), which are reprinted in appendix II.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense:
Office Of The Under Secretary Of Defense:
Personnel And Readiness:
4000 Defense Pentagon:
Washington, D.C. 20301-4000:
June 12, 2009:
Mr. Asif A. Khan:
Director, Financial Management and Assurance:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street, NW:
Washington, DC 20548:
Dear Mr. Khan:
This letter is the Department of Defense's response to the Government
Accountability Office draft report GAO-09-577, "Defense Travel System:
Implementation Challenges Remain," dated May 2009 (GAO Review Code
197074).
The two audits conducted by GAO in 2006 provided valuable independent
oversight and assessments of DTS. The Department took seriously the 14
recommendations from those reports and has worked diligently to address
each. Of those recommendations, the Department believes that all but
two have been adequately addressed. However, we agree there is still
room for improvement and are committed to continued progress. While
this draft report does acknowledge that some progress has been made,
the overall tenor is disappointing and implies by omission that the
progress made is far less than is the case in reality.
The Department also believes the reiteration of the 14 previous GAO
recommendations creates an inaccurate impression to the reader because,
in fact, all but 2 of the original 14 have been addressed. Itemized
comments for each of the previous 14 recommendations are enclosed.
Since 2006, both usage and satisfaction with DTS have continued to
increase. Reservation module usage, vouchers processed, and percent of
TDY travel managed are metrics that indicate increased adoption of the
system. For 2006, DTS processed about 257,000 temporary duty, or TDY,
vouchers during the first quarter of the fiscal year. During the first
quarter of Fiscal Year 2009. DTS processed almost 867,000 vouchers, a
237.4 percent increase. Each voucher processed through DTS saves on the
back-end transaction costs. Costs to arrange travel are also being
reduced on the front-end, as the new contracts with our commercial
travel partners embed lower fees when travel is booked using the DTS
reservation module.
Recent surveys provide another clear indicator that user satisfaction
with the system also continues to improve. Three years ago, there was
no customer satisfaction program associated with DTS, no meaningful
opportunity for users to provide feedback, and no reliable means of
effectively gauging customer opinion. Today, the Department is well on
its way to integrating customer feedback into DTS improvements across
the entire scope of travel. For example, the enhanced reservation
module in DTS, commonly referred to as "Reservation Refresh," is
regarded as a significant improvement for travelers.
As the draft report states, there are internal processes and testing
methods that can be improved, and we will continue to review, adjust
and enhance those areas. However, the program overall is a success
story. As of the second quarter of this fiscal year, DTS processed 70
percent of all temporary duty travel vouchers in the Department, a
dramatic reflection of the exponential growth in usage over the past
few years. DTS is reducing transaction costs, and improving system
usability for the traveler continues to be a primary focus.
The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment. For questions
concerning this report, please contact Rose Weber, Defense Travel
Management Office, at (703) 696-7023 or
rosemarie.weber@dtmo.pentagon.mil.
Sincerely,
Signed by: William J. Carr:
Deputy Under Secretary (Military Personnel Policy):
Enclosure: As stated:
[End of letter]
GAO Draft Report - Dated May 2009:
GAO-09-577 (GAO Code 197074):
"Defense Travel System: Implementation Challenges Remain"
Department Of Defense Comments:
Comments on Appendix III, Table 1: (Now Table 2)
Recommendation 1: Secretary of Defense should direct the Project
Management Office-Defense Travel System (PMO-DTS) to effectively
implement the disciplined processes necessary to provide reasonable
assurance that (1) requirements are properly documented and (2)
requirements are adequately tested.
DoD Response: Concur. While functional requirements and testing are
developed and documented consistent with best practices, challenges
with testing and change implementation still exist. The Defense Travel
Management Office (DTMO) and the Business Transformation Agency (BTA)
are currently taking and/or planning to take the following actions to
address GAO's findings regarding DTS requirements testing:
* The PMO-DTS will work with the prime contractor to review and improve
current processes for requirements and testing to ensure these
processes are consistent with commercial best practices.
- The DTS-PMO is currently reviewing software test processes with the
prime contractor to ensure proper documentation and test artifacts are
maintained.
- The DTS-PMO will contractually notify the prime contractor on the
concerns raised in the GAO report concerning 1) boundary condition
testing; and 2) testing the requirement for justification boxes to
appear in DTS when a traveler selects a travel option that deviates
from DoD travel policies. The DTS-PMO will work with the prime
contractor to determine ways to improve the testing process for these
requirements.
* The DTS-PMO will correct the System Problem Reports to address any
deficiencies in DTS meeting the requirements of the Fly America Act.
GAO's comments regarding the testing of flight displays as they relate
to the Fly America Act, included the statement: "On April 9, 2009,
DTMO's Travel Management Division Chief concurred with our assessment
that DTS's display of flights could result in the traveler selecting a
flight that was not in compliance with the requirements of the Fly
America Act; therefore, the traveler could be held personally liable
for the cost of the airfare." This comment is partially correct, and we
recommend it be revised. The DTMO did agree that it appears there are
instances where DTS wrongly displays foreign carriers; the DTMO did not
state that the traveler could be held personally liable for the cost of
the airfare as a result. There are simply too many variables in every
trip scenario, such as the traveler's experience with DTS, the specific
trip itinerary, the travel mission requirements, etc. to make that
inference. Additionally, there are allowable exceptions to the Fly
America Act. For example, use of a foreign carrier is allowed when it
is determined that it is a matter of necessity, such as for medical
reasons, when there is no U.S. carrier service on a particular leg of
an itinerary, when service on the foreign carrier would save a
substantial amount of time, or when the cost of transportation is being
paid by a third party, such as an international organization.
Recommendation 2: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
properly test new or modified system interfaces so that the intended
functionality is properly operating prior to a software update being
provided to DTS users.
DoD Response: Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and this
recommendation is closed.
Recommendation 3: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
require that all Commercial Travel Offices (CTO) adhere to the
Department's policy on the use of premium-class travel, even in those
instances where it is listed as the only available airfare.
DoD Response: We concur with the objective embodied in this
recommendation; however, the Department has addressed this
recommendation in that CTOs are required to, and do, adhere to the
Department's premium class travel policies. In addition, the Department
has enacted several measures to strengthen the control of premium class
travel policy. To better ensure CTO compliance to Department policy,
requirements are now included in DoD CTO contracts that direct: "The
Contractor shall not issue a premium class (first class or business
class) ticket at Government expense without receiving a signed or
otherwise properly authenticated travel authorization specifically
authorizing that class of service. Travelers are authorized to upgrade
to business class at their personal expense or use frequent travel
benefits. The Contractor shall reimburse the Government for the cost of
the difference between premium class travel (first class of business
class) and the lowest appropriate fare if business or first class
arrangements are used without appropriate approval in accordance with
DoD/Government travel policy."
CTOs are not responsible for the approval of premium class travel. That
authority rests with the travel approving official, who is also
responsible for ensuring approvals adhere to current policy. The
Department has also raised the approval level for all premium class
travel (first and business), issued guidance that, for any ticket
issued without government approval, DoD requires CTOs to reimburse the
Government for costs that exceed a coach class ticket, and developed a
Web-based management tool to assist the Services/Agencies in
documenting and reporting premium class approvals.
Due to the difficulty in matching specific trip data and the complexity
of Premium Class airline coding, which changes frequently and varies
front carrier to carrier, a completely automated approval solution is
more challenging than originally anticipated. The Department is
partnering with GSA to develop a standard reporting process.
The Department also notes that our fiscal year 2008 Premium Class
Travel Report to GSA included 274 first class trips representing less
than 0.01 percent of the total 3,691,242 trips taken by DoD travelers.
Due to the intricacies and variations of airline coding, it was later
discovered that about 81 percent of the 274 trip costs were equal to or
less than what the Government would have normally paid for other than
first class fares, decreasing the percentage of valid premium class
expenditures to be approximately 0.001 percent of the total trips
taken.
In accordance with the CTO contract requirement as stated above,
reimbursement action has been initiated for the four tickets GAO found
that had been issued by the CTO without proper justification.
Recommendation 4: Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of
the Army, Navy, and Air Force, as well as the heads of all DoD
agencies, to reemphasize that travelers are to justify exceptions from
Department policy and the importance of the authorizing officials not
approving any travel authorization in which exceptions are not properly
justified.
DoD Response: Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and this
recommendation is closed.
Recommendation 5: Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretaries of
the Army, Navy, and Air Force, as well as the heads of all DoD
agencies, to routinely monitor, such as on a quarterly basis,
information on the number and cost of processing travel vouchers
outside of DTS and initiate action to eliminate funding for legacy
systems, where applicable.
DoD Response: We concur with the objective embodied in this
recommendation; however, the Department has addressed this
recommendation in that the Services and Agencies do report actual non-
DTS travel voucher counts to the DTMO. Prior to fiscal year 2007, DTS
usage was measured against a DTS Voucher Model of predictive voucher
volume developed and maintained by the PMO-DTS. The DTMO has assumed
responsibility for DTS metrics reporting and does not report DTS
utilization based on the DTS Voucher Model. The DTMO methodology
assesses DTS usage against the "total universe" of TDY travel based on
Service and Agency reports of travel executed in legacy travel
computation systems. The "total universe" includes both TDY travel that
can and cannot currently be processed in DTS. Reporting DTS utilization
in this way provides a more complete assessment of the effectiveness
and efficiency of DTS across the Defense Travel Enterprise. The legacy
travel computation systems do not provide the fidelity of data to
accurately classify TDY travel by all 73 travel types. Accurately
collecting and reporting non-DTS travel by travel type would require
the modification of legacy travel systems at significant cost in both
time and money. The benefit of implementing the remaining part of this
recommendation would not justify the cost, given the extent of DTS
usage...a 70 percent usage rate through the second quarter of fiscal
year 2009. The Department anticipates that DTS will accommodate all but
seven travel types by the end of 2009.
Recommendation 6: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
develop and implement the means to automate the approval of changes to
authorized travel expenses where possible.
DoD Response: Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and this
recommendation is closed.
Recommendation 7: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
consider the viability of using commercial databases to identify unused
airline tickets for which reimbursement should be obtained and help
improve the assurance that the actual travel taken was consistent with
the information shown on the travel voucher.
DoD Response: Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and this
recommendation is closed.
Recommendation 8: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
consider simplifying the display of airfares in DTS.
DoD Response: We concur with the objective embodied in this
recommendation; however, the Department has addressed this. In May
2006, the airfare display was simplified by implementing a change to
retrieve only the lowest contract city pair fares available per flight.
In February 2007, other enhancements were made to increase usability,
including tabulations to separate categories of fares (capacity-
controlled fares, regular contract fares, government fares, and other
available fares), and the capability to search city pairs at an
alternate airport within an 80-mile radius when city pair fares are
unavailable at the primary airport.
Requirements were specifically written to display airfare in the five
tab format to provide flight information in accordance with the order
of precedence contained in current policy. Travelers do not have to
access each of the five tabs to "identify the flight that best suits
their needs." The system automatically presents only the available
flights based on policy. For example, the system does not display GSA
city-pair flights if they are not available and, if a GSA city-pair
flight is available, the traveler would only need to access the non-
city pair flights if they were requesting a policy exception.
The Department continuously strives to improve system usability. The
feasibility of a two tab display will be reviewed as part of the
Department's overall DTS usability effort.
Recommendation 9: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
determine the feasibility of utilizing restricted airfares, where cost
effective.
DoD Response: Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and this
recommendation is closed.
Recommendation 10: Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-DTS to
work with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to develop an approach
that will permit the use of automated methods to reduce the need for
hard copy receipts to satisfy requirements to substantiate travel
expenses.
DoD Response: We concur with the objective embodied in this
recommendation; however, because it has government-wide impact, it is
the Department's opinion that, because GSA promulgates travel policy
for the entire Federal Government, it is the more appropriate agency to
lead this change effort.
The core recommendation of "automating hard copy receipts" cannot be
accomplished solely by working with the IRS to "permit the use of
automated methods." This assumes that only a policy change is required
and ignores the larger issue of access to supporting data in sufficient
detail to meet the requirements to make payment against a receipt.
Assuming the Government Travel Charge Card data is the source of
expense information, a hotel (or other) expense transaction must
contain all itemized expenditures as opposed to bundling items like
movies or valet services. This will require level III data from every
industry provider world-wide.
Additionally, GAO's comments on this recommendation contain factual
errors and omissions. GAO has not commented on the fact that the
Department has made significant progress toward the 2006
recommendation. The Department does in fact use automated methods to
reduce hard copy receipt requirements. DTS policy requires users to
scan their receipts for automated transmission and storage, which is
all done electronically. The Defense Travel System's capability to scan
receipts is a best business practice employed by the Department and
eliminates the necessity to maintain hard copy receipts in a "desk"
file.
Lastly, the statement that "DTMO officials told us they had not yet
contacted the IRS..." is not correct. The DTMO did meet and address
this issue with the IRS on April 21, 2008. The discussion with the IRS
centered on IRS revenue rulings and whether the travel charge card
statement could actually be used in lieu of receipts. The IRS expressed
concern about the travel card statement lacking the required data to
substantiate a receipt and the ability to differentiate between
business and "personal" expenses that may have been charged to the
card, such as in-room movies. This information was discussed with GAO
during this audit review at a September 25, 2008, meeting and was also
provided via e-mail during the audit review.
Comments on Appendix Ill, Table 2: (Now Table 3)
Recommendation 1: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under
Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) (P&R) and the Director,
Business Transformation Agency (BTA) to jointly evaluate the cost
effectiveness of the Navy continuing with the CTO management fee
structure versus adopting the revised CTO fee structure, once the new
contracts have been awarded.
DoD Response: Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and this
recommendation is closed.
Recommendation 2: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under
Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA to jointly develop a
process by which the military services develop and use quantitative
data from DTS and their individual legacy systems to clearly identify
the total universe of DTS-eligible transactions on a monthly basis. At
a minimum, these data should be used to update the DTS Voucher Analysis
Model to report DTS actual utilization rates.
DoD Response: We concur with the objective embodied in this
recommendation; however, the Department believes this recommendation is
no longer relevant and should be closed. As written, it is not
consistent with shutting down legacy systems, nor does it recognize
investments in new functionality scheduled for implementation in Fiscal
Years 2009 and 2010. "The Department is focused on maximizing DTS usage
and increasing its functionality. By taking an enterprise view, the
Department believes the current quantitative metrics reported in the
Defense Travel Enterprise Quarterly Metrics Report provide a reliable
and cost conscious approach to measure DTS utilization.
GAO's current suggestion to "establish a process" will require
modifications to legacy systems. As a result of their congressionally-
mandated study, the Institute for Defense Analyses recommended that the
Department not institute a system to collect and consolidate voucher
data from the legacy voucher processing systems in the Department for
the following reasons:
* It would be costly and difficult to collect complete voucher data
from the legacy systems; those costs could exceed the benefits.
* The Department would he better served by spending its money,
energies, and political capital on increasing DTS usage.
DTS usage continues to grow and, as a result, the Department and the
taxpayers benefit. For example, the Army and Defense Agencies reduced
voucher processing costs more than 40 percent from fiscal year 2007 to
fiscal year 2008. As of the second quarter of this fiscal year, DTS
processed 70 percent of all temporary duty travel vouchers in the
Department. GAO's recommendation to invest in a process to better
characterize the shrinking number of non-DTS TDY vouchers is not cost
effective. The Department sees no benefit in investing resources in the
same legacy systems that we are working to eliminate.
Recommendation 3: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under
Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director. BTA to jointly require the
PMO-DTS to provide a periodic report on the utilization of DTS to the
Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA, once accurate
data are available. The report should continue until the Department has
reasonable assurance that DTS is operating properly at all intended
locations. The report should identify at a minimum (1) the number of
defense locations at which DTS has been deployed, (2) the extent of DTS
utilization at these sites, (3) steps taken or to be taken by the
department to improve DTS utilization, and (4) any continuing problems
in the implementation and utilization of DTS.
DoD Response: We concur with the objective embodied in this
recommendation; however, as written, the Department believes this
recommendation should be closed. As directed by the FY 2007 NDAA, the
Department has provided DTS utilization data to Congress in semi-annual
reports, beginning in May 2007. These reports addressed the number of
installations at which DTS has been deployed, the extent of DTS usage
at these installations, and actions taken or planned to increase such
usage. The final report was submitted to the Congress in December 2008.
Further, investing funds in the capability to capture the required data
to fully understand non-DTS vouchers is not cost effective.
For clarification, GAO's statement that DTS has not been deployed at
Army Reserve and National Guard sites is incorrect. Army Reserve and
National Guard sites do use DTS. Additionally, note c to the legacy
systems table that appears in the draft report misstates the purpose
and functionality of the Corps of Engineers Financial Management System
(CEFMS). CEFMS does not process travel vouchers, it records accounting
transactions related to travel. The Corps of Engineers uses the Windows
Integrated Automated Travel System to compute travel vouchers.
Recommendation 4: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Under
Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA to jointly resolve
inconsistencies in DTS requirements, such as the 25 flight display, by
properly defining the (1) functionality needed and (2) business rules
necessary to properly implement the needed functionality.
DoD Response: Concur. While requirements are valid and consistent with
current regulations, challenges with testing and change implementation
still exist. The DTMO and BTA are currently taking and/or planning to
take the following actions to address GAO's findings regarding DTS
requirements testing:
* The PMO-DTS will work with the prime contractor to review and improve
current processes for requirements and testing to ensure these
processes are consistent with commercial best practices.
- The DTS-PMO is currently reviewing software test processes with the
prime contractor to ensure proper documentation and test artifacts are
maintained.
- The DTS-PMO will contractually notify the prime contractor on the
concerns raised in the GAO report concerning 1) boundary condition
testing; and 2) testing the requirement for justification boxes to
appear in DTS when a traveler selects a travel option that deviates
from DoD travel policies. The DTS-PMO will work with the prime
contractor to determine ways to improve the testing process for these
requirements.
GAO's comments regarding the requirements management process included
the statement, "For example, we found that DoD travelers had to access
5 flight display screens to identify the flight that best suited
his/her needs. As a result, the traveler may not have selected the
flight that was the most advantageous to the government." This comment
is only partially correct, and we recommend it be revised. The
selection of the most "cost advantageous" flight is not mandated by
Department policy. While a GSA city-pair flight may not always be the
most "cost advantageous," it often provides the "best value" to the
Department based on availability, routing, and cancellation cost
avoidance.
Comments on Appendix IV:
Concur. Appropriate action has been taken, and these recommendations
are closed.
[End of section]
Appendix III: Status of DOD's Actions on Previous GAO Recommendations
on the Defense Travel System:
Table 2: GAO's January 2006 Report Recommendations and Status of DOD
Actions as of June 2009:
GAO recommendation[A]: 1. Secretary of Defense should direct the
Project Management Office-Defense Travel System (PMO-DTS) to
effectively implement the disciplined processes necessary to provide
reasonable assurance that (1) requirements are properly documented and
(2) requirements are adequately tested;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: DOD stated that it has
established processes, consistent with best practices, to ensure that
(1) DTS requirements are valid, clearly stated, and properly documented
and tested; and (2) testing is properly documented; however, we found
that those processes have not been effectively implemented. For
example, our January 2009 analysis of selected DTS requirements related
to flight display and airfares found that the DTS testing process still
did not fully address our previously reported problems. The problems we
found generally related to missing documentation or the test performed
focused on limited aspects of the requirement and did not provide
sufficient evidence that the requirement was adequately tested using
best practices. Because of these continuing problems, we found that DTS
was not in compliance with the requirements of the Fly America Act and
as a result, the traveler is at unnecessary risk of being held
personally liable for the cost of the airfare;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
GAO recommendation[A]: 2. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to properly test new or modified system interfaces so that the
intended functionality is properly operating prior to a software update
being provided to DTS users;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: To address our
recommendation, the PMO-DTS engaged the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS) Enterprise Level Test Group as an independent
verification and validation group in 2006 to provide an objective
perspective of the reliability of the contractor-performed system
interface testing. We reviewed the testing documentation, such as the
test plan, test scripts, and test cases, related to the DTS system
interface for the Navy Enterprise Resource Planning system. We found
that the documentation was consistent with best practices and adequate
for ensuring that interfaces between systems operated as intended;
Status of GAO recommendation: Closed.
GAO recommendation[A]: 3. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to require that all Commercial Travel Offices (CTO) adhere to the
department's policy on the use of premium-class travel, even in those
instances where it is listed as the only available airfare;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: In October 2007, the
Defense Travel Management Office (DTMO) started utilizing a Web-based
management tool that generates monthly reports to assess compliance
with DOD's premium-class travel policy. DTMO also receives and reviews
monthly reports from CTOs on premium-class travel. The CTO reports
include the total number of premium-class tickets issued each month for
each military service and defense agency, the identification of the
traveler, authorization numbers, airline and ticket numbers, fare
basis, date of travel, and cost of the original ticket. While DTMO has
taken steps to identify premium-class travel, its actions do not
address our concerns that such travel be properly authorized. Our
analysis of one CTO's December 2008 monthly premium-class report
identified premium-class travel that was not authorized. Specifically,
we identified four premium-class tickets that were issued without the
proper justification and authorization. The CTO has initiated actions
to reimburse DOD for the cost of the difference between the premium-
class airfare and the lowest applicable airfare (total of about
$4,218);
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
GAO recommendation[A]: 4. Secretary of Defense should direct the
Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, as well as the heads of
all DOD agencies, to reemphasize that travelers are to justify
exceptions from department policy and the importance of the authorizing
officials not approving any travel authorization in which exceptions
are not properly justified;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The department has
updated Appendix O--Temporary Duty (TDY) Travel Allowances of the Joint
Travel Regulations that provide specific guidance on the various types
of travel expenses that are authorized and those expenses that are not
authorized. Appendix O identifies the types of exceptions from
department policy for which travelers must provide justification and
obtain approval from the authorizing official (AO). For example,
Appendix O guidance states that the traveler must use coach-class for
all official travel, unless premium-class accommodations are justified
and approved prior to travel by the appropriate AO. There are separate
sections of the appendix that are applicable to the traveler and the
AO. Additionally, DTMO has put on the DTS Web site a document, entitled
"Authorizing Official Checklist and Helpful Tips," which can be used
when reviewing the justification before authorizing an expense or
approving a voucher;
Status of GAO recommendation: Closed.
GAO recommendation[A]: 5. Secretary of Defense should direct the
Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, as well as the heads of
all DOD agencies, to routinely monitor, such as on a quarterly basis,
information on the number and cost of processing travel vouchers
outside of DTS and initiate action to eliminate funding for legacy
systems, where applicable;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: DOD officials
acknowledged that the department does not know the total number of
manual travel vouchers that are processed by DFAS that should be
processed through DTS. As a result, the department cannot ascertain the
total universe of travel vouchers that are eligible to be processed
through DTS or the savings that could be realized through electronic
travel voucher processing;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
GAO recommendation[A]: 6. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to develop and implement the means to automate the approval of
changes to authorized travel expenses where possible;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: Functionality has been
added to DTS to facilitate the automatic approval of changes to
authorized estimated expenses where such changes are consistent with
sound internal controls and DOD policy;
Status of GAO recommendation: Closed.
GAO recommendation[A]: 7. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to consider the viability of using commercial databases to identify
unused airline tickets, for which reimbursement should be obtained and
help improve the assurance that the actual travel taken was consistent
with the information shown on the travel voucher;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to establish a process to identify and obtain
reimbursement for unused airline tickets. Beginning in 2007, as CTO
contracts came up for renewal, DTMO included a requirement in new CTO
contracts that the CTO identify and cancel unused tickets 30 days after
the planned trip date and initiate a refund request for the canceled
unused tickets. DTMO's effort to include this requirement in all CTO
contracts is scheduled to be completed by June 2009;
Status of GAO recommendation: Closed.
GAO recommendation[A]: 8. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to consider simplifying the display of airfares in DTS;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to improve usability by reducing the amount of user
effort required to identify flights that matched the traveler's
schedule in order to meet mission needs. However, we found that a
traveler must access at least four of the five flight display screens.
DTS's flight displays could be simplified by grouping the flights into
two categories--GSA and commercial. Displaying all of the GSA flights
on one display screen would facilitate selection of the lowest fare.[B]
If a GSA city-pair fare was not available, the traveler could view a
single display screen of commercial flights to identify and select a
commercial flight with the lowest available airfare that meets mission
needs;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
GAO recommendation[A]: 9. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to determine the feasibility of utilizing restricted airfares,
where cost effective;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: In 2007, DTMO
contracted with the Logistics Management Institute to conduct a study
on the use of restricted airfares. The study, completed in September
2008, determined that the use of restricted airfares was feasible and
presented DOD management with two options for implementing this
functionality into DTS. The two options recommended by the study were
to either add (1) a restricted airfare screen to DTS's flight display
screen, which would include embedded controls requiring approval of
restricted airfare flights prior to booking the reservation; or (2) a
preapproval option for restricted airfares, and allow instant booking
of restricted airfares in DTS. As of May 2009, DOD had not selected an
option;
Status of GAO recommendation: Closed.
GAO recommendation[A]: 10. Secretary of Defense should direct the PMO-
DTS to work with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to develop an
approach that will permit the use of automated methods to reduce the
need for hard copy receipts to satisfy requirements to substantiate
travel expenses;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: DOD has had one meeting
with the IRS to obtain an understanding of IRS revenue rulings
regarding travel receipts and to discuss the possible use of travel
card statements in lieu of travel receipts. However, the department has
not developed or presented to the IRS a conceptual approach for how
travel card data and other information could be used to address IRS
concerns regarding the use of electronic data to substantiate travel
expenses. Since GSA is the lead agency for promulgating travel policy
for the federal government DOD will need to work with both GSA and IRS
to implement the needed changes;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
Source: GAO.
[A] DOD Business Transformation: Defense Travel System Continues to
Face Implementation Challenges, GAO-06-18 (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 18,
2006).
[B] DTS is required to display the lowest cost GSA airfare first. This
requirement could be modified to include displaying the lowest cost
commercial airfare, if available, that complies with DOD travel policy.
[End of table]
Table 3: GAO's September 2006 Report Recommendations and Status of DOD
Actions as of June 2009:
GAO recommendation[A]: 1. The Secretary of Defense should direct the
Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) (P&R) and the
Director, Business Transformation Agency (BTA), to jointly evaluate the
cost effectiveness of the Navy continuing with the CTO management fee
structure versus adopting the revised CTO fee structure, once the new
contracts have been awarded;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: As DTMO renegotiates
CTO contracts for Navy travel services, DTMO is requiring bid proposals
to include (1) a management fee structure, which is a flat rate
regardless of CTO involvement, and (2) a CTO fee structure, which is
transaction based. According to DTMO officials, the bid proposals will
be evaluated to identify the most cost-effective fee structure. This
meets the intent of our recommendation;
Status of GAO recommendation: Closed.
GAO recommendation[A]: 2. The Secretary of Defense should direct the
Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA, to jointly
develop a process by which the military services develop and use
quantitative data from DTS and their individual legacy systems to
clearly identify the total universe of DTS-eligible transactions on a
monthly basis. At a minimum, these data should be used to update the
DTS Voucher Analysis Model to report DTS actual utilization rates;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: DOD officials
acknowledged that the department does not know the total number of
manual travel vouchers that are processed by DFAS that should be
processed through DTS. As a result, the department cannot ascertain the
total universe of travel vouchers that are eligible for DTS processing
or the savings that could be realized through electronic travel voucher
processing;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
GAO recommendation[A]: 3. The Secretary of Defense should direct the
Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA, to jointly
require the PMO-DTS to provide a periodic report on the utilization of
DTS to the Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA, once
accurate data are available. The report should continue until the
department has reasonable assurance that DTS is operating properly at
all intended locations. The report should identify at a minimum (1) the
number of defense locations at which DTS has been deployed, (2) the
extent of DTS utilization at these sites, (3) steps taken or to be
taken by the department to improve DTS utilization, and (4) any
continuing problems in the implementation and utilization of DTS;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The fiscal year 2007
John Warner National Defense Authorization Act directed DOD to provide
semiannual reports to the Congress for two years starting in 2007. The
requirements of the act are consistent with our recommendations. The
department submitted its first semiannual report to the Congress in
September 2007 and its final semiannual report in December 2008.
However, DOD continues to lack the data needed to ascertain the
complete universe of travel vouchers that should be processed through
DTS. This lack of data adversely affects the reliability of DTS
utilization reports and the department's ability to identify locations
where DTS is deployed but not fully utilized;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
GAO recommendation[A]: 4. The Secretary of Defense should direct the
Under Secretary of Defense (P&R) and the Director, BTA, to jointly
resolve inconsistencies in DTS requirements, such as the 25 flight
display, by properly defining the (1) functionality needed and (2)
business rules necessary to properly implement the needed
functionality[B];
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to ensure that the basis of a requirement was valid
and the resulting functionality would be consistent with DOD travel
regulations. DOD stated that it has established processes, consistent
with best practices, to ensure that (1) DTS requirements are valid,
clearly stated, and properly documented and tested; and (2) testing is
properly documented; however, we found that those processes have not
been effectively implemented. For example, we found that DOD did not
implement the disciplined requirements management processes to achieve
the intent of this recommendation. For example, we found that DOD
travelers had to access at least four of the five flight display
screens to identify the flight that best suited his or her needs. As a
result, the traveler may not have selected the flight that was the most
cost advantageous to the government;
Status of GAO recommendation: Open.
Source: GAO.
[A] Defense Travel System: Reported Savings Questionable and
Implementation Challenges Remain, GAO-06-980 (Washington, D.C.: Sept.
26, 2006).
[B] At the time of our review, one of the stated requirements was that
25 flights would be displayed to the travelers each time they made an
inquiry.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix IV: Status of DOD's Actions to Address Recommendations of the
January 1995 Travel Reengineering Report:
DOD report recommendation: 1. The Task Force recommended creating three
broad categories of mission travel: deployment, training, and
"business";
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The department has
updated the Appendix O--Temporary Duty (TDY) Travel Allowances of the
Joint Travel Regulation--to include these three broad categories of
travel;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 2. The Task Force recommended that
entitlements for subsistence be structured on a lodging-plus per diem
method;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to adopt a "Lodging-Plus" per diem method of
reimbursing travelers for subsistence expenses incurred. Appendix O of
the Joint Federal Travel Regulations and the Joint Travel Regulations
requires that the "Lodgings-Plus" computation method be used to
reimburse TDY living expenses. A traveler is paid the actual lodging
cost up to a limit, plus a set amount for meals and incidental
expenses--commonly referred to as per diem;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 3. The Task Force recommended eliminating
the various types of TDY travel orders and order formats used for TDY
travel, and using a modified version of the itinerary prepared by the
commercial travel office in its place;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to permit single entry of data, so that information
required for both the orders and voucher would not have to be entered
repeatedly on different forms only to satisfy the internal operations
of existing process owners. DTS has been designed to create a single
electronic trip record for all official travel authorizations,
modifications, and payment decisions. The trip record is the single
document that includes the travel authorization and fund cite, cost
estimate, itinerary, and updates to the itinerary made during the trip,
and also serves as the expense report when the traveler returns;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 4. The Task Force recommended that funds
control responsibility must be delegated to the lowest practical level,
with authority to obligate funds given to the commander or supervisor
approving travel consistent with Operation and Maintenance (or other
funding) controls;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to delegate the approval of travel vouchers to the
lowest practical level, (i.e., the traveler's supervisor or authorizing
officer) and reduce the number of approving officials. Appendix O of
the Joint Federal Travel Regulations and the Financial Management
Regulation delegates approval authority to the lowest practical level.
The approval authority is implemented via DTS's "routing list"
functionality. Through DTS, the military service or defense agency can
centrally control the approval authority levels and minimize the number
of approving officials involved;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 5. The Task Force recommended that the
accounting for travel be simplified and made more accurate by funding
all or as much travel as possible at the organizational level and using
one element of expense--TDY;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to reduce the accounting information needed--
commonly referred to as the line of accounting. DOD has had a policy in
place since 1997 requiring the use of a single line of accounting, but
recognizes that in all cases this may not be practical, especially when
travel crosses fiscal years;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 6. The Task Force recommended that use of
government quarters and dining facilities not be mandated;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to allow a DOD civilian the option of using quarters
and dining facilities other than those of the military/government while
on TDY. According to Appendix O of the Joint Federal Travel
Regulations, military personnel are still required to check the
availability of government quarters before using commercial quarters
and dining facilities when assigned to a military installation. If
government quarters and dining facilities are available, or if the
military member chooses to use other lodgings or dining as a personal
choice, reimbursement is limited to the cost of government quarters or
dining on that installation;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 7. The Task Force recommended three major
changes in current arrangement practices: mandate the use of commercial
travel offices, develop a DOD standardized full travel services
contract, and establish a single entity within DOD to perform the
commercial travel offices contracting function;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The department updated
its travel regulations to mandate the use of CTOs for making DOD travel
arrangements and identified DTMO as the department's single travel
procurement and contract manager. In addition, DTMO is standardizing
travel service requirements as individual CTO contracts become subject
to renegotiation and renewal;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 8. The Task Force recommended that DOD
provide incentives for the use of the charge card by both organizations
and individuals. Four aspects of the card program must be improved to
create such incentives: management information, rapid reconciliation
(claims settlement), partial payment, and flexible policies;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of the
recommendation was to realize substantial benefits through the use of
the government charge card. Travel card usage has improved DOD's cash
management by reducing the amount of advances. DOD receives electronic
information from the credit card company that can be used to detect the
use of the credit card for inappropriate purposes. It also reduces to
less than five days the time it takes for a travel voucher to be
reimbursed/reconciled after a voucher is electronically approved. The
split disbursement process, which is mandatory for the military and
civilian DOD employees, allows the traveler to have part or all of the
travel reimbursement paid directly to the charge card account with the
balance paid (through Electronic Funds Transfer) to the traveler's bank
account. A "partial payment option" is available for travelers every 30
days if their TDY is over 45 days long;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 9. The Task Force recommended that
supervisors determine the appropriate status of the mission and direct
the travel arrangements accordingly;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to have the traveler's supervisor ensure that travel
arrangements were based on the needs/status of a mission rather than
the individual traveler. DTS routes a traveler's authorization request
to the appropriate official with the authority to approve, change, or
deny the electronically submitted travel itinerary;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 10. The Task Force recommended that the use
of government facilities should be directed only if it supports the
mission;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to allow a DOD civilian the option of using quarters
and dining facilities other than those of the military/government while
on TDY. According to Appendix O of the Joint Federal Travel
Regulations, military personnel are still required to check the
availability of government quarters before using commercial quarters
and dining facilities when assigned to a military installation. If
government quarters and dining facilities are available, or if the
military member chooses to use other lodgings or dining as a personal
choice, reimbursement is limited to the cost of government quarters or
dining on that installation;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 11. The Task Force recommended that all
changes in accommodations be made through the commercial travel offices
24-hour 800 service;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: To address this
recommendation, the department requires all CTO contracts to provide
support to DOD travelers via toll-free numbers and collect call;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 12. The Task Force recommended that DOD take
measures to reduce no-shows, perhaps through improvements in
contractual arrangements to address options to guarantee reservations
with a charge card with penalties for no-shows, and provide information
to DOD travelers on no-shows;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to mandate that all reservations be made through the
CTO. The department updated its travel regulations to mandate the use
of CTOs for making DOD travel arrangements. Furthermore, DTS notifies
the traveler if an authorization is not approved by the authorizing
officer. After a specified period of time, all reservations and
associated travel reservations are automatically canceled within DTS,
if approval has not been recorded in DTS;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 13. The Task Force recommended that rental
car authorization should remain the decision of travel authorizing or
approving officials;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to ensure that the authorizing official had the
authority to decide on whether or not a traveler should be approved to
use a rental car on a travel mission. Appendix O clearly specifies that
the authorizing official decides whether or not a rental car is
necessary to complete the mission;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 14. The Task Force recommended that the
reimbursement for phone calls to the traveler's family/home should
remain the decision of the travel authorizing or approving official;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The authorizing officer
may determine whether communications to a traveler's family/home are
official. These communications must be only to advise a family of a
traveler's safe arrival, to inquire/inform about a medical condition,
and/or to inform of a trip itinerary change. The authorizing officer
may approve the charges after the TDY when appropriate;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 15. The Task Force recommended that
travelers should be able to receive telephone approval from their
supervisor for changes or, in the absence of a supervisor, to make
common-sense decisions about changes to a traveler's trip itinerary;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to provide the traveler with greater flexibility and
authority to change his or her itinerary to accommodate mission needs.
If a traveler's plans change from the original approved itinerary, the
traveler should call the CTO and the authorizing officer may approve
the changes after the trip is complete;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 16. The Task Force recommended that
arrangements/itinerary should be established upfront for the obligation
of funds the supervisor approves;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: DTS obligates the funds
once the travel authorization has been approved by the authorizing
officer;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 17. The Task Force recommended the use of
single-source data entry starting with the authority to travel as the
basis for reimbursement and automate the process;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to automate the travel authorization and
reimbursement process from the beginning to the end. DTS has been
designed to create a single electronic trip record for all official
travel authorizations, modifications, and payment decisions. The trip
record is the single document that includes the travel authorization
and fund cite, cost estimate, itinerary and updates to the itinerary
made during the trip, and also serves as the expense report when the
traveler returns;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 18. The Task Force recommended that to
achieve a paperless system, the receipt review and retention process
should stop with the supervisor's approval of the voucher;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to minimize and simplify the receipt requirements.
As allowed by IRS, DOD has adopted the recommended receipt threshold of
$75 and provides the ability for the traveler to store required
receipts electronically;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 19. The Task Force recommended that travel
accounting must be simplified and made more accurate by funding all or
as much travel as possible at the organization level and using one
element of expense--TDY;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to reduce the accounting information needed--
commonly referred to as the line of accounting. DOD has had a policy in
place since 1997 requiring the use of a single line of accounting, but
recognizes that in all cases this may not be practical, especially when
travel crosses fiscal years;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 20. The Task Force recommended that the
approved voucher should be transmitted via electronic information to
disbursing offices, as that capability becomes available, and that
audit and review be based on random samples selected by disbursing
office;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was for the approved travel voucher to be electronically
transmitted to DFAS. DTS electronically transmits all approved travel
vouchers to DFAS. Subsequently, DFAS uses DTS information to select
travel vouchers for postaudit reviews;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 21. The Task Force recommended that the
traveler should have the option to elect on the voucher to have the
government pay the card company directly for authorized charges with
residual expenses remitted to the individual;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The split disbursement
process, which is mandatory for military and civilian DOD employees,
directs the traveler to have part or all of their travel reimbursement
paid directly to the charge card account with the balance paid (through
Electronic Funds Transfer) to their personal bank account. A "partial
payment option" is available for travelers every 30 days if their TDY
is over 45 days long;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
DOD report recommendation: 22. The Task Force recommended that an
alternative approach for ensuring appropriate controls is to build as
many considerations into the authorizing and approval processes as
possible and have it done once with the same data flowing through the
steps in the process;
DOD action taken to address the recommendation: The intent of this
recommendation was to implement a system that would automate the
authorization and approval processes to the extent possible. DTS
functionality enables authorization and approval consistent with DOD
travel policy. For example, DOD policy requires the use of GSA city-
pair flights, unless the traveler provides justification for another
type of flight. This justification must be approved by the authorizing
official;
Status of the recommendation: Closed.
Source: GAO.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix V: List of Defense Agencies and Joint Commands:
Number: 1: Business Transformation Agency.
Number: 2: Civilian Personnel Management Service.
Number: 3: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
Number: 4: Defense Acquisition University.
Number: 5: Defense Contract Audit Agency.
Number: 6: Defense Contract Management Agency.
Number: 7: Defense Commissary Agency.
Number: 8: Defense Finance and Accounting Service.
Number: 9: Defense Human Resources Agency.
Number: 10: Defense Information Systems Agency.
Number: 11: Defense Logistics Agency.
Number: 12: Defense Media Activity.
Number: 13: Defense Manpower Data Center East.
Number: 14: Department of Defense Education Agency.
Number: 15: Office of the Inspector General.
Number: 16: Defense Prisoners of War Missing Persons Office-Office of
the Secretary of Defense.
Number: 17: Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
Number: 18: Defense Security Service.
Number: 19: Defense Technical Information Center.
Number: 20: Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
Number: 21: Defense Technology Security Administration.
Number: 22: Inter American Defense Board.
Number: 23: Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Number: 24: Joint Forces Command.
Number: 25: Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization.
Number: 26: Joint Program Executive Office.
Number: 27: Missile Defense Agency.
Number: 28: North American Treaty Organization.
Number: 29: National Defense University.
Number: 30: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.
Number: 31: Pentagon Forces Protection Agency.
Number: 32: TRICARE Management Activity.
Number: 33: United States African Command.
Number: 34: United States Central Command.
Number: 35: United States European Command.
Number: 36: UN Command/U.S. Forces Korea.
Number: 37: U.S. Military Entrance Processing Command.
Number: 38: United States Northern Command.
Number: 39: United States Pacific Command.
Number: 40: United States Special Operations Command.
Number: 41: United States Southern Command.
Number: 42: United States Transportation Command.
Number: 43: Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences.
Number: 44: Washington Headquarters Services.
Source: DOD.
[End of section]
Appendix VI: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Asif A. Khan, (202) 512-9095 or khana@gao.gov:
Nabajyoti Barkakati, (202) 512-4499 or barkakatin@gao.gov:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the above contacts, the following individuals made key
contributions to this report: Darby Smith, Assistant Director; Evelyn
Logue, Assistant Director; J. Christopher Martin, Senior-Level
Technologist; F. Abe Dymond, Assistant General Counsel; Jehan Abdel-
Gawad, Senior Attorney; Beatrice Alff; Maxine Hattery; Jason Kelly; and
John Vicari.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] Department of Defense, Report of the Department of Defense Task
Force to Reengineer Travel (Arlington, Va.: January 1995).
[2] DOD expects DTS to perform all functions related to temporary duty
(TDY) travel or ensure that other systems are provided with adequate
information to provide this functionality. For example, obligating
funds associated with travel is a necessary function, and DTS is
expected to provide (1) verification that adequate funds are available
before allowing for travel authorization either through information
contained in its system or by obtaining the necessary information from
another system, (2) obligation of funds through issuance of approved
travel orders, and (3) DOD's financial management systems with the
necessary information so that those systems can reflect the obligation.
According to DOD officials, the department is in the process of adding
military permanent duty travel functionality to DTS, which it expects
to complete in fiscal year 2010. In addition, the department has not
yet finalized a decision on whether to add civilian permanent duty
travel functionality to DTS.
[3] GAO, DOD Business Transformation: Preliminary Observations on the
Defense Travel System, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-998T] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29,
2005); DOD Business Transformation: Defense Travel System Continues to
Face Implementation Challenges, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18] (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 18,
2006); Defense Travel System: Reported Savings Questionable and
Implementation Challenges Remain, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-980] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 26,
2006); and Defense Travel System: Estimated Savings Are Questionable
and Improvements Are Needed to Ensure Functionality and Increase
Utilization, [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-208T]
(Washington, D.C.: Nov. 16, 2006).
[4] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18] and [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-980].
[5] Federal travel regulations define premium-class travel as any class
of accommodation above coach-class; that is, first or business-class.
Federal and DOD travel regulations state that travelers must use coach-
class accommodations for official business air travel--both domestic
and international--except when a traveler is specifically authorized to
use premium-class. These regulations restrict premium-class travel to
limited circumstances.
[6] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18].
[7] A test plan contains a general description of what testing will
involve, including tolerable limits. A test script contains the
detailed instructions for the set-up, execution, and evaluation of
results for a given test case. The test case provides the test inputs,
execution conditions, and expected results developed for a particular
test plan objective, such as verifying compliance with a specific
requirement.
[8] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18].
[9] GSA awards contracts to airlines to provide flight services between
pairs of cities. This is commonly referred to as the GSA city-pair
program. Under this program (1) no advance ticket purchases are
required, (2) no minimum or maximum length of stay is required, (3)
tickets are fully refundable and no charges are assessed for
cancellations or changes, (4) seating is not capacity controlled (i.e.,
as long as there is a coach-class seat on the plane, the traveler may
purchase it), (5) no blackout dates apply, (6) fare savings average 70
percent over regular walk-up fares, and (7) fares are priced on one-way
routes permitting agencies to plan for multiple destinations.
[10] Restricted air fares generally require advance ticket purchases or
minimum or maximum length of stay. In addition, charges may be assessed
for cancellations or changes, availability of seating at this fare may
be limited, and blackout dates may apply.
[11] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18] and [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-980].
[12] DTS is required to display the lowest cost GSA airfare first. This
requirement could be modified to include displaying the lowest cost
commercial airfare, if available, that complies with DOD travel policy.
[13] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18] and [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-980].
[14] We selected requirements that related to flight displays and
airfares because of the previously reported problems in these areas.
[15] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-980].
[16] The actual DTS utilization rate should be calculated by comparing
actual vouchers being processed in DTS to the total universe of
vouchers that should be processed in DTS.
[17] Senate Report 109-254 (S. Rep. No. 109-254, at 426 (May 9, 2006)),
which accompanied the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2007, directed DOD to provide semi-annual reports to the Congress
for two years starting in 2007 pertaining to the deployment and usage
of DTS.
[18] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18].
[19] [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18].
[20] 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report.
[21] 1995 DOD Travel Reengineering Report.
[22] DOD, Information Technology Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 2008
President's Budget Request (February 2007).
[23] The error resulted in a shortfall in the allocation of general and
administrative costs to other business areas such as vendor payment or
trial balance preparation. The error, however, does not affect the
total amount billed by DFAS to the various DOD components for DFAS
services provided.
[24] DFAS, FY 2010-2015 Program and Budget Submission/Review Schedule
and Budget Guidance (Mar. 31, 2008).
[25] GAO, DOD Business Transformation: Defense Travel System Continues
to Face Implementation Challenges, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-18] (Washington, D.C.: Jan. 18,
2006), and Defense Travel System: Reported Savings Questionable and
Implementation Challenges Remain, [hyperlink,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-06-980] (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 26,
2006).
[26] Department of Defense, Report of the Department of Defense Task
Force to Reengineer Travel (Arlington, Va.: January 1995).
[27] We tested 209 requirements and found that the testing performed by
DOD was adequate for 146 requirements, but not for 39 requirements. We
were unable to determine whether the testing was adequate for the
remaining 24 requirements because (1) they were either no longer active
requirements and therefore did not require testing or (2) we were
unable to test them due to technology constraints or they required the
use of an operational rather than test environment.
[End of section]
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 "E-mail Updates."
Order by Phone:
The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO‘s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO‘s Web site,
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm].
Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537.
Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional
information.
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:
