§ 129a, and ensure that the savings are not  achieved through unjustified transfers of functions between or among  the military, civilian, and service contractor personnel workforces of  DOD, consistent with authorities available to the department under  sections 129a, 2330a, 2461, and 2463 of Title 10 of the United States  Code; provide status reports describing the implementation of the plan in the  prior year as part of the budget submitted by the President to  Congress for each of fiscal years 2015 through 2018; and  in each status report, provide a summary of savings achieved through  personnel reductions and the number of military, civilian, and  contractor personnel reduced in the prior fiscal year; and in each  status report include an explanation where any savings fall short of  the annual target. See table 2 for a summary of DOD’s  compliance with selected section 955 reporting requirements. Further, officials stated that DOD did not include  full-time equivalents (FTEs) for contracted services in the section 955  report because they were unable to provide an accurate number. Without DOD’s fully  implementing the recommendation to include cost savings information for  the prior fiscal year, as required by section 955, Congress may not know  whether DOD is on track to meet its reduction requirements. DOD Estimates That It Will Meet Civilian Personnel Savings Requirements in Fiscal Year 2017, but That It Will Not Achieve Contracted Services Cost Savings Requirements

DOD estimates that it will meet its statutory requirement to reduce civilian  personnel costs in fiscal year 2017, but that it will not meet its  requirement to reduce contracted services costs. DOD Has Not Developed an Efficiencies Plan as Required by Section 955 of the Fiscal Year 2013 NDAA

		DOD’s Report Does Not Include an Efficiencies Plan for Achieving Reductions

DOD’s February 2016 status report does not include an efficiencies plan  for reducing its civilian and contracted services workforces in fiscal year  2015. We previously recommended that DOD include a comprehensive  description of an efficiencies plan to achieve savings for the civilian  workforce and contracted services workforces for fiscal year 2012 through  2017. DOD  concurred with our recommendation. DOD’s Status Report Did Not Demonstrate How Civilian and Contractor Reductions Are Consistent with Workforce Management Laws

DOD’s February 2016 status report refers to elements present in  workforce management laws, but it does not explain how savings are  being achieved in a manner consistent with workforce management laws. Agency Comments and Our Evaluation

We are not making any new recommendations in this report and believe  that DOD’s fully implementing the previous recommendations is needed  to better inform the Congress. Although DOD has  taken some action in response to our December 2015 report, we disagree  that the recommendations have been fully implemented, as summarized  below. In response to the recommendation in our December 2015 report to  include a comprehensive description of a plan to achieve savings for the  civilian workforce and contracted services workforces for fiscal year (FY)  2012 through 2017, DOD stated in its written comments that it included a  section that describes its plan, guidance, and implementation in its  February 2016 status report. For example,  section 955 requires DOD to submit status reports each fiscal year  through 2018 that describe the implementation of the efficiencies plan to  reduce costs for the civilian and contracted service workforces, and states  that in the development and implementation of the efficiencies plan, DOD  may exclude certain civilian and contractor workforces from reporting  required reductions. DOD did not include such  a description in its February 2016 report and therefore DOD has not yet  fully implemented our recommendation. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of our review were to evaluate the extent to which DOD’s  February 2016 status report demonstrates (1) DOD’s achievement of  savings, as required by section 955 of the Fiscal Year 2013 National  Defense Authorization Act (NDAA); and (2) DOD’s development and  implementation of its efficiencies plan that is consistent with workforce  management laws in fiscal year 2015, as required by section 955 of the  Fiscal Year 2013 NDAA.
Why GAO Did This Study

With long-term fiscal challenges likely to continue, DOD must operate strategically and efficiently, to include cost-effective management of its human capital. Section 955 of the NDAA for FY 2013 requires DOD to, among other things, develop and implement a plan to achieve savings in total funding for civilian and contracted services workforces from FYs 2012 through 2017. Section 955 also includes a provision that GAO review the section 955 status reports DOD submits to Congress to determine whether the required savings are being achieved and the plan is being implemented consistently with workforce-management laws.
This report addresses the extent to which DOD's February 2016 status report demonstrates DOD's (1) achievement of savings and (2) development and implementation of its efficiencies plan that is consistent with workforce management laws in FY 2015. GAO reviewed DOD's report and interviewed DOD officials.

What GAO Found

The Department of Defense (DOD) did not report all required data on military, civilian, and contracted services workforces in its February 2016 report that would demonstrate savings, as required by section 955 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2013, and it estimates that by FY 2017 it will meet savings for the civilian workforce but not for contracted services. Section 955 requires DOD to submit annual reports in FYs 2015—2018 that include the costs of civilian and contracted services workforces from FYs 2012—2017, among other items. See the table for DOD's February 2016 compliance with selected reporting requirements.
Officials stated that DOD interpreted section 955 as requiring DOD to report civilian savings achieved when comparing costs from FY 2012 to FY 2017, and not each year in between. Further, officials stated that DOD did not include full-time equivalents (FTEs) for contracted services in the report as required because they were unable to provide an accurate number. In December 2015 GAO recommended that DOD include costs savings for civilian personnel in its reports, and DOD concurred. Without including these cost data, Congress may not know whether DOD is on track to meet the mandated savings.
DOD has not developed and implemented an efficiencies plan for reducing the civilian and contracted services workforces, and DOD did not demonstrate how its reductions are consistent with workforce management laws in its February 2016 status report. Section 955 requires DOD to develop an efficiencies plan to reduce civilian personnel and costs for FYs 2012—2017, and for each FY through 2018 to submit a report that describes the implementation of the efficiencies plan. Furthermore, section 955 allows for DOD to grant civilian and contractor workforce exclusions from section 955 required reductions for areas identified as critical. For example, DOD reported that it excluded about 538,000 of 776,000 civilian FTEs. However, its reports do not provide a description indicating why these exclusions were chosen. In December 2015 GAO recommended that DOD include a comprehensive description of the efficiencies plan to achieve savings, and DOD concurred. Without an efficiencies plan, including an explanation of its exclusions, DOD has not provided Congress with information on how the department will achieve required savings.

What GAO Recommends

GAO previously recommended that DOD fully address ongoing section 955 requirements, such as including an efficiencies plan, among other things, in its subsequent reports. DOD agreed but has not yet implemented them. GAO is not making any new recommendations, but believes fully implementing the previous ones would better inform Congress. In comments, DOD stated it had implemented GAO's previous recommendations. DOD has taken some action, but GAO disagrees the recommendations have been fully implemented, as discussed in this report.