Army’s Management Processes Not Effective in Enabling Second Deployment Sites to Achieve LMP Benefits

The Army’s management processes that were established prior to the  second deployment of LMP were not effective in enabling the second  deployment sites to realize the full benefits of LMP. Although the depots were  able to continue to repair items and support the warfighter, LMP users had  to rely on manual work-around processes, which are not part of how LMP  is intended to function and hinder the Army’s ability to realize the benefits  expected from LMP. The depots experienced data quality issues, despite  improvements the Army made to address data quality issues experienced  during the first deployment of LMP at Tobyhanna Army Depot, because  the Army’s testing strategy did not provide reasonable assurance that the  data being used by LMP were accurate and reliable. Additionally, the Army’s training strategy did not effectively provide users  the skills necessary to perform all of their tasks in LMP. Users at the  depots stated that the training they received before LMP became  operational was not conducted in a realistic environment that showed  them how to perform their expected duties. Instead, the metrics used by the LMP program management  office focused on whether the software was working but did not measure  whether the deployment sites were performing their day-to-day operations  using LMP as envisioned. Data Quality Issues Prevented Depots from Realizing the Full Benefits of LMP

The Army was unable to realize the full benefits of LMP at the second  deployment sites because of data quality issues. Officials at Letterkenny  Army Depot noted, however, that they had pre-positioned materials prior  to the transition to LMP to ensure that the depot could perform its repair  mission if difficulties arose, which enabled the depot to perform its day-to- day operations despite the data shortcomings. However, the Army’s testing efforts focused on  determining whether the software worked as designed. Army’s Training Strategy Did Not Fully Meet Needs of LMP Users

Although the Army’s training strategy was designed to provide LMP users  the skills and knowledge to successfully perform their new roles, LMP  users we interviewed at Corpus Christi and Letterkenny Army Depots  stated that the training they received prior to LMP becoming operational  did not fully meet their needs. Army Lacked Comprehensive Metrics to Assess LMP Implementation

The Army was unable to determine whether the second deployment sites  had achieved the envisioned functionality of LMP because the Army  lacked a comprehensive set of metrics to measure the success of LMP  implementation. Our previous work has shown that successful  performance measures should be aligned throughout the organization and  cover the activities that an entity is expected to perform to support the  intent of the program. LMP Has Provided the Army Some Benefits

Although data quality and training issues prevented the second  deployment sites from using the full capabilities of LMP as envisioned, the  use of LMP at the second deployment sites has provided the Army some  benefits that were not available in legacy systems, such as increased  visibility. Additionally, LMP program management officials stated  that they had developed changes to their testing strategy and that tests are  scheduled to begin in May 2010. Accordingly, because these events have yet to occur,  we were unable to determine whether they adequately addressed the  issues we identified during the second deployment related to data testing  and training. Unless the Army addresses these challenges, the third  deployment locations are likely to face the same, or even greater,  problems, since the third deployment of LMP will occur at more locations  and affect more users than the previous deployments. Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD stated that the Army  concurred with our recommendations and highlighted the corrective  actions it is taking to (1) improve testing activities to obtain reasonable  assurance that the data used by LMP can support the LMP processes,   (2) improve training for LMP users, and (3) establish performance metrics  that will enable the Army to assess whether the deployment sites are able  to use LMP as intended. The Army  commented that the expected date of completion for development of these  measures is July 1, 2010.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Logistics Modernization Program (LMP) is an Army business system that is intended to replace the aging Army systems that manage inventory and depot repair operations. Through 2009, the Army obligated more than $1 billion for LMP. LMP was originally scheduled to be completed by 2005, but after the first deployment in July 2003, the Army delayed fielding because of significant problems. The Army has since decided to field the system in two additional deployments: the second deployment occurred in May 2009, and the third deployment is scheduled to occur in October 2010. GAO was asked to evaluate the effectiveness of the Army's management processes in enabling the second deployment sites to realize the full benefits of LMP.

What GAO Found

The Army's management processes that were established prior to the second deployment of LMP were not effective in enabling the second deployment sites to realize the full benefits of LMP. When LMP becomes fully operational at the second deployment locations, the Army expects that it will significantly enhance depot operations. However, the Army was unable to ensure that the data used by LMP were of sufficient quality to enable the depots to perform their day-to-day missions after LMP became operational. As a result of these data quality issues, depot personnel had to develop and use manual work-around processes until they could correct the data in LMP, which prevented the Army from achieving the expected benefits from LMP. Data quality issues occurred despite improvements made by the Army to address data issues experienced during the first deployment of LMP because the Army's testing strategy did not provide reasonable assurance that the data being used by LMP were accurate and reliable. Instead, the Army's testing efforts focused on whether the software was functioning, but did not assess whether the data used by the depots to perform their repair missions were of sufficient quality to work in LMP. According to depot officials, the data problems are being corrected as they are identified. Additionally, the Army's training strategy did not effectively provide LMP users the skills necessary to perform their new tasks. Users at the depots stated that the training they received did not provide a realistic environment that showed them how to perform their expected duties, and did not always match their new responsibilities. However, users at the depots also stated that they had received additional training that resolved the issue. The Army also lacked a comprehensive set of metrics with which to measure the success of LMP implementation. GAO's previous work has shown that successful performance measures should be aligned throughout the organization and cover the activities that an entity is expected to perform. However, the Army did not have common metrics with which to measure success during the second deployment, and the Army's scorecard for measuring LMP implementation focused on the software, but did not assess whether the depots were able to perform their work using LMP as envisioned. Despite these challenges, LMP has provided the Army some benefits, and officials at the second deployment sites provided examples of how LMP had improved their day-to-day operations, for example, through the increased visibility of assets. The third deployment of LMP is scheduled to occur in October 2010, and will involve more commands, occur at locations across the globe, and affect more users than the previous deployments. LMP program management officials stated that they are taking steps to address the issues discussed in this report for the third deployment and are adjusting plans related to data testing and training. However, because these plans are being developed, GAO was unable to verify that the problems have been resolved. Without correcting these issues prior to the third deployment, the Army is likely to face similar, or potentially greater, problems that prevent it from realizing the full benefits of LMP.