1. DOD and Three of the Four Military Services Cannot Identify the Number of Enlisted Servicemembers Separated for Non- Disability Mental Conditions

DOD and three of the four military services—Army, Navy, and Marine  Corps—cannot identify the number of enlisted servicemembers separated  for non-disability mental conditions because, for most separations, they  do not use available codes to specifically designate the reason why  servicemembers were separated. Instead, they use the broad separation  code, “condition, not a disability,” that mixes non-disability mental  conditions with non-disability physical conditions, making it difficult to  distinguish one from the other without a time-consuming and resource- intensive record review. DOD policy requires a separation code to be used by the military services  so that DOD can track and analyze the reason for separations and  evaluate DOD’s separation policy to determine if changes are needed. Moreover, under the internal control standard for control  activities, all transactions—such as separations of enlisted  servicemembers—need to be clearly and accurately documented so they  can be examined when needed; for example, to monitor trends in the  reasons for servicemembers’ separations. Army officials had a similar concern, stating that they use the broad  separation code for most non-disability mental condition separations to  protect enlisted servicemembers after they leave the service. If DOD and the military services cannot systematically identify or  periodically evaluate the number of enlisted servicemembers separated  for non-disability mental conditions, they cannot assess how well the  separation policy and process is working or respond specifically to key  stakeholders, including the Congress, about trends in or concerns about  separations for non-disability mental conditions. Military Services’ Separation Policies Do Not Address All DOD Requirements for Non-Disability Mental Conditions Separations, and DOD and the Services Lack Oversight of Such Separations

From fiscal years 2008 through 2012, when the services were filing  compliance reports, most services did not report full compliance with  DOD separation requirements for separations for personality disorder. Further, based on a  review of separation policies, we found that none of the services’ policies  address all DOD requirements for non-disability mental condition  separations. Most Services Did Not Report Full Compliance with Requirements for Personality Disorder Separations, the Reports Contained Incomplete and Inconsistent Data, and DOD Conducted Limited Review

			Most of the Military Services Had Not Reported Full Compliance When DOD Discontinued the Compliance Reports

From fiscal years 2008 through 2012, DOD required the military services  to monitor and report to DOD on their compliance with DOD requirements  for separating servicemembers for personality disorders; however, while  the services generally reported improved compliance over the 5 years of  reporting, we found in the 2012 compliance reports that three of the  services had not yet achieved full compliance with all of DOD’s 2008  separation requirements. To discontinue  compliance reporting and not institute any other type of oversight is  inconsistent with the standards for internal control in the federal  government, which states that there should generally be assurance that  ongoing monitoring occurs in the course of normal operations. The Military Services’ Policies Have Not Been Updated to Fully Address DOD Requirements for Separating Servicemembers for All Non-Disability Mental Conditions

In addition to problems we identified with compliance reports focusing on  personality disorder separations, we also found that the Army, the Navy,  the Marine Corps, and components of the Air Force—namely, the  Reserves and National Guard—have been separating servicemembers  for non-disability mental conditions according to policies that are not  consistent with all DOD requirements. DOD and the Military Services Do Not Conduct Oversight for Servicemember Separations for Non- Disability Mental Conditions

Beyond the limited review DOD conducted of the military services’  compliance reports conducted for personality disorder separations, which  was discontinued after fiscal year 2012, DOD and military service officials  stated they do not conduct any oversight of all non-disability mental  condition separations. According to DOD officials, the military services are responsible for  conducting oversight of their separation processes, not DOD. Conclusions

The inability to easily identify the number of enlisted servicemembers  separated for non-disability mental conditions hinders oversight by DOD  and the military services to ensure that servicemembers are being  separated appropriately. Absent an effective process for monitoring and reporting compliance,  DOD and the military services cannot assure that the military services are  complying with DOD requirements for separating servicemembers with  non-disability mental conditions. Meanwhile, these members risk not receiving the  protections intended by DOD’s separation requirements. Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve identification of enlisted servicemembers separated for non- disability mental conditions, and to provide reasonable assurance that  enlisted servicemembers, including Air Force National Guard members,  are separated for non-disability mental conditions as appropriate and in  accordance with DOD requirements, we recommend that the Secretary of  Defense take the following six actions:
Direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness  and the Secretaries of the Army and the Navy and the Commandant  of the Marine Corps to use the separation codes specific to a non- disability mental condition or develop another uniform method to track  servicemembers who have been separated for specific non-disability  mental conditions so that this information can be easily retrieved. DOD generally concurred with our six recommendations.
Why GAO Did This Study

Non-disability mental conditions, such as personality disorders, can render a servicemember unsuitable for military service and can lead to an administrative separation. GAO was mandated to report on non-disability mental condition separations. This report examines the extent to which (1) DOD and the military services are able to identify the number of enlisted servicemembers separated for non-disability mental conditions, and (2) the military services are complying with DOD requirements when separating enlisted servicemembers for non-disability mental conditions, including personality disorders, and how DOD and the military services oversee such separations. GAO analyzed DOD and the military services' separation policies, policies related to tracking separations, reports the military services submitted to DOD regarding compliance with separation requirements, and interviewed DOD and military service officials.

What GAO Found

The Department of Defense (DOD) and three of the four military services—Army, Navy, and Marine Corps—cannot identify the number of enlisted servicemembers separated for non-disability mental conditions—mental conditions that are not considered service-related disabilities. For most non-disability mental condition separations, these services use the broad separation code, “condition, not a disability,” which mixes non-disability mental conditions with non-disability physical conditions, such as obesity, making it difficult to distinguish one type of condition from the other. In contrast, the Air Force is able to identify such servicemembers because it uses all five of the separation codes specific to non-disability mental conditions. DOD policy requires the military services to use a separation code so that DOD can track and analyze separations. Moreover, federal standards for internal control state that all transactions need to be clearly and accurately documented and readily available for examination when needed. The three services had varying reasons as to why they use the broad separation code. For example, Army officials believed that stating in servicemembers' discharge papers that they were discharged for non-disability mental conditions might stigmatize them with future employers. However, DOD stated that there are ways to protect servicemembers in this regard by providing them with discharge papers that are more general and that do not disclose specific reasons for discharge. By not systematically identifying or periodically evaluating the number of separations for non-disability mental conditions, DOD and the services cannot assess how well the separation policy and process are working or inform key stakeholders, including the Congress, about separation frequency, trends, and other data.
The military services lack separation policies that address all of DOD's eight requirements for separating servicemembers with non-disability mental conditions; both DOD and the services also lack oversight over such separations. From fiscal years 2008 through 2012, DOD required the services to report on their compliance with DOD requirements for personality disorder separations, one of the non-disability mental conditions. Most of the services reported by fiscal year 2012 that they were not compliant with all eight requirements and many of the 20 reports contained incomplete and inconsistent information. For example, 19 reports were missing information on reserve members. DOD discontinued these reports and did not institute any other oversight, which is inconsistent with the internal control standard for monitoring. GAO also found, based on a review of the services' separation policies, that the services have not updated their policies to meet all DOD requirements for non-disability mental condition separations. For example, Navy officials stated that they were unaware that DOD separation policies had changed since 2008 until GAO's review. DOD officials stated that the military services are responsible for conducting oversight of their separation processes; however, GAO found that the military services do not have processes to oversee non-disability mental condition separations. Without up-to-date and consistent policies and oversight processes, DOD and the military services cannot ensure that servicemembers separated for non-disability mental conditions have been afforded the protections intended by DOD's separation requirements and that servicemembers have been appropriately separated for such conditions.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD and the military services develop a method to identify the number of servicemembers separated for non-disability mental conditions and take a number of actions to ensure that their policies and processes can ensure that servicemembers are appropriately separated for non-disability mental conditions in accordance with DOD's separation requirements. DOD generally concurred with GAO's recommendations, but did not provide information on how or when it plans to implement the recommendations.