Civilian Workforce- Planning Model’s Data Reliability and Information Technology Structure Are Adequate, but Forecasting Ability Not Fully Established

The Army has taken steps to ensure the reliability of the historical  personnel data used by the model and the adequacy of its information  technology structure used to support the model, but it has not provided  documentation that it has sufficiently tested and reviewed the most critical  aspect of the model—its forecasting capability and the appropriateness of  its assumptions. Information Technology Structure Is Adequate

The Army’s procedures for validating the information technology support  structure (the software and hardware used to interface with and house the  model) were also sufficient. For example, the Army (1) adequately  documented the information technology structure to allow for continuity  of operations, (2) tested its functionality, and (3) provided expertise for  system modification and operation. The Army’s program  manager said this had been done for the original certification of CIVFORS  in 1987. However, without proper documentation of the abilities of the model,  there exists a risk that the forecasts it produces may be inaccurate or  misleading. As a result, DOD has decided to test the  Army’s civilian forecasting model. Conclusions

As DOD continues to transform and downsize its civilian workforce, it is  imperative that the department properly shape and size the workforce. The Army has  taken adequate steps to ensure that the historical personnel data used in  the model are sufficiently reliable and the information technology  structure appropriately supports the model; however, it has not fully  documented that it has taken adequate steps to demonstrate the credibility  of the model’s forecasting capability. Without sufficient documentation to demonstrate that adequate  steps have been taken to ensure the credibility of the model’s forecasting  capabilities, decisions about the Army’s future civilian workforce may be  based on questionable data and other potential users cannot determine  with certainty the model’s suitability for their use. We continue to believe  that without adequate documentation, the Army cannot show that it has  taken sufficient steps to ensure the model’s credibility in terms of its  forecasting capability. To determine the adequacy of the steps the Army has taken to ensure the  credibility of its civilian workforce-forecasting model, we discussed  CIVFORS with the Army’s CIVFORS program manager in the Army G-1  office, Civilian Personnel Policy Directorate, who has overall  responsibility for the workforce analysis and the forecasting system.
Why GAO Did This Study

Between fiscal years 1989 and 2002, the Department of Defense (DOD) reduced its civilian workforce by about 38 percent, with little attention to shaping or specifically sizing this workforce for the future. As a result, the civilian workforce is imbalanced in terms of the shape, skills, and experience needed by the department. DOD is taking steps to transform its civilian workforce. To assist with this transformation, the department is considering adopting an Army workforce-planning model, known as the Civilian Forecasting System (CIVFORS), which the Army uses to forecast its civilian workforce needs. Other federal agencies are also considering adopting this model. GAO was asked to review the adequacy of the steps the Army has taken to ensure the credibility of the model.

What GAO Found

The Army has taken adequate steps to ensure that the historical personnel data used in the model are sufficiently reliable and that the information technology structure adequately and appropriately supports the model. For example, the Army has established adequate control measures (e.g., edit checks, expert review, etc.) to ensure that the historical data that goes into the model are sufficiently reliable. Moreover, it has taken adequate steps to ensure that the information technology support structure (i.e., the software and hardware used to interface with and house the model) would enable continuity of operations, functionality, and system modification and operations. However, the Army has not demonstrated that it has taken adequate steps to ensure that the model's forecasting capability provides the basis for making accurate forecasts of the Army's civilian workforce. The Army's original certification of CIVFORS in 1987 was based on a formal documented verification and validation of the model structure that has not been formally updated since that time even though the Army has undertaken several model improvements. According to the Army's CIVFORS program manager, the Army has taken several steps, to include an independent review, peer reviews, and a comparison of forecasted data to actual data. However, documentation of these steps is incomplete and, therefore, does not provide adequate evidence to demonstrate the credibility of the forecast results. Without adequate documentation, the Army cannot show that it has taken sufficient steps to ensure the model's credibility in terms of its forecasting capability; consequently, there exists a risk that the forecasts it produces may be inaccurate or misleading. Furthermore, without documentation of CIVFORS's forecasting capability, it may be difficult for DOD and other federal organizations to accurately determine its suitability for their use.