Without a plan to  guide and encourage joint bases to pursue cost savings and efficiencies  and without a method to track joint basing-specific costs, savings, and  efficiencies, DOD will likely miss opportunities for cost savings and  continue to be unaware of the extent to which joint bases have been able  to meet the objectives laid out in the 2005 BRAC recommendation on  joint basing. We have previously reported that successful organizational  transformations—such as merging components and transforming  organizational cultures—in both the public and private sector, involve  several key practices, including ensuring that top leadership drives the  transformation, setting implementation goals and a timeline to show  progress from day one, and establishing a communication strategy to  create shared expectations and report related progress. DOD Has Developed a Method of Identifying Costs and Efficiencies on Joint Bases, but This Method Cannot Yet Accurately Isolate the Effects of Joint Basing

In addition to not having an implementation plan, DOD does not yet have  a fully developed method for accurately gathering information on costs,  estimated savings, and efficiencies achieved specifically as a  consequence of joint basing, and as a result it does not have an estimate  of the extent to which joint basing has realized actual cost savings. Joint Bases Report Meeting Many Common Standards, but the Usefulness of the Standards as a Common Framework to Manage Installation Support Services Is Limited

In fiscal years 2010 and 2011 the joint bases reported meeting the  common standards more than 70 percent of the time. However, the lack  of clarity in some standards, the fact that unclear standards are not  always reviewed and changed in a timely manner, and the fact that the  data collection and reporting on the standards in some cases adhere to  individual service standards rather than the common standard hinders the  effectiveness of the standards as a common framework for managing  installation support services. These common standards provide a common  framework to manage and plan for installation support services. Information technology services and management. Without a consistent interpretation and reported use of the  standards, the joint bases will not have reliable and comparable data with  which to assess their service support levels, and OSD cannot be assured  of receiving reliable and comparable data on the level of support services  the joint bases are providing. OSD and Joint Bases Have Processes to Identify Joint Basing Implementation Challenges, but Lack of Routine Communication Limits Opportunities for Greater Efficiencies

OSD and the joint bases have various mechanisms in place to address  challenges in achieving joint basing goals, but these mechanisms do not  routinely facilitate the identification of common challenges among the joint  bases or the development of common solutions to these challenges. Specifically, we found that the joint bases do not have a formal method of  routinely sharing information among the joint bases on identified  challenges and potential solutions or guidance on developing and  providing training for new joint base personnel on how the joint bases  provide installation support services. The Joint Management Oversight Structure. These challenges cover a wide range of  issues, from differing expectations among the military services about how  particular base support services should be provided to the incompatibility  of information technology systems. It  also states that for an entity to run and control its operations, the entity  must have relevant, reliable, and timely communications relating to  internal events, and that information is needed throughout the agency to   Without a means of identifying common  achieve all of its objectives.challenges and sharing best practices and lessons learned in order to  identify common solutions, DOD is likely to miss opportunities to  efficiently resolve joint base challenges using common methods. However, to date  OSD has not developed and implemented a plan to guide the joint bases  in achieving cost savings and efficiencies. Recommendations for Executive Action

To enable DOD to achieve cost savings and efficiencies and to track its  progress toward achieving these goals, we recommend that the Secretary  of Defense direct the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations  and Environment) to take the following two actions:  Develop and implement a plan that provides measurable goals linked to  achieving savings and efficiencies at the joint bases and provide  guidance to the joint bases that directs them to identify opportunities for  cost savings and efficiencies. DOD partially concurred with the remainder of  our recommendations; however, in most instances, DOD did not identify  what, if any, actions the department plans to take to implement the  recommendations. To evaluate the extent to which joint base common standards have  provided a common framework for defining and reporting installation  support services, we reviewed DOD policy and guidance related to the  common standards; the standards themselves, including both functional  areas and specific standards; and federal internal control standards and  key elements of successful performance measures.reviewed the joint bases’ reporting on the joint base common standards  for fiscal years 2010 and 2011. GAO-12-513T. High-Risk Series: An Update. GAO-08-20. Military Bases: Review of DOD’s 1998 Report on Base Realignment and  Closure.
Why GAO Did This Study

GAO has designated DOD support infrastructure as an area of high risk and included one key related category--installation support--as an area for potential savings. In 2005, DOD recommended to the Base Realignment and Closure Commission combining 26 installations into 12 joint bases to generate efficiencies and cost savings and, in 2010, completed this consolidation. GAO assessed the extent to which (1) DOD developed and implemented a plan to achieve cost savings and efficiencies at the joint bases, (2) joint base common standards provide a common framework to manage and plan for installation support services, and (3) DOD has a process to consistently identify and address any implementation challenges. GAO reviewed DOD policies and guidance on joint basing, visited 3 joint bases and obtained answers to written questions from the other 9, interviewed OSD and military service officials, and analyzed performance data on joint base support services.

What GAO Found

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has not developed or implemented a plan to guide joint bases in achieving cost savings and efficiencies. The Department of Defense (DOD) originally estimated saving $2.3 billion from joint basing over 20 years, but in the absence of a plan to drive savings, that estimate has fallen by almost 90 percent. OSD also does not yet have a fully developed method for accurately collecting information on costs, savings, and efficiencies achieved specifically from joint basing. GAO previously reported that organizational transformations such as merging components and transforming organizational cultures should be driven by top leadership, have implementation goals and a timeline to show progress, and include a communication strategy. Although the joint bases anecdotally reported achieving some savings and efficiencies, without an implementation plan to drive savings and a means to collect reliable information on the specific costs, estimated savings, and efficiencies from joint basing, DOD will not be able to facilitate achievement of the goals of cost savings and efficiencies, track the extent to which these goals have been achieved, or evaluate the continuation or expansion of joint basing.
The joint bases implemented common standards for installation support services developed by OSD, and in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 reported meeting the standards more than 70 percent of the time. However, three factors limited the usefulness of the reported standards as a common tool for managing installation support services: the lack of clarity in some standards, unclear standards that were not reviewed and changed in a timely manner, and data collection and reporting on the standards that in some cases adhered to individual service standards rather than the common standard. DOD guidance states that the purpose of the joint base common standards framework was to provide a common language to serve as a basis for planning and management across the joint bases, and GAO previously reported that performance measures should be clear and follow standard procedures. Without a consistent interpretation and reported use of the standards, OSD and the joint bases will not have reliable or comparable data with which to assess their service support levels.
OSD and the joint bases have various mechanisms in place to address challenges in achieving joint basing goals, such as a joint management oversight structure and annual OSD-joint base review meetings, but none of these routinely facilitates communication among the joint bases to identify solutions to common challenges. The reported challenges cover a wide range of issues, from different expectations among military services as to how base support services should be provided to incompatible information technology networks. However, the absence of a formal method to routinely share information on common challenges and possible solutions, or guidance on developing and providing training for new personnel on how joint bases provide installation support, means DOD is likely to miss opportunities to develop common solutions to common challenges. Federal internal control standards state that for an entity to control its operations, it must have relevant and timely communications, and information is needed throughout the agency to achieve objectives. In addition, without processes to identify common challenges and share information across the joint bases, DOD may miss opportunities for greater efficiencies and be unable to provide uniform policies across the joint bases.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD take six actions, such as developing a plan to achieve cost savings, prioritizing review and revision of unclear common standards, and developing a strategy to share solutions to common challenges. DOD partially agreed with five recommendations and did not concur with the recommendation to develop a plan to achieve cost savings, because it stated that such goals are not appropriate at this time. GAO continues to believe that the recommendations are valid as discussed further in the report.