Further, the  commission noted that no single service had been assigned statutory  responsibility to “organize, train, and equip” for space operations. The  commission provided 13 recommendations to DOD intended to improve  the focus and accountability within the national security space  organization and management. As we reported in our June 2002 assessment, the Secretary of Defense  decided to implement 10 of the Space Commission’s 13 recommendations  while opting to take alternative actions for the remaining 3. DOD has now completed action on three more, with actions on the  remaining recommendation still in progress. To address some of the Space Commission’s specific recommendations as  well as additional opportunities that the department identified for  improving the organization and management of its space activities, the  Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum in October 2001 that directed  actions to:    assign the Under Secretary of the Air Force as Director, NRO;    designate the Under Secretary of the Air Force as the Air Force  Acquisition Executive for Space;    delegate program milestone decision authority for DOD space major  defense acquisition programs and designated space programs to the Under  Secretary through the Secretary of the Air Force;  realign the Office of the National Security Space Architect to report to the  Director, NRO (who is also the Under Secretary of the Air Force) and  make the Architect responsible for ensuring that military and intelligence  funding for space is consistent with policy, planning guidance, and  architectural decisions;    designate the Secretary of the Air Force as DOD executive agent for space  with redelegation to the Under Secretary of the Air Force;    assign the Air Force the responsibility for organizing, training, equipping,  and providing forces as necessary for the effective prosecution of  offensive and defensive military operations in space;  realign Air Force headquarters and field commands to more closely  integrate space acquisitions and operations functions; and    assign responsibility for the Air Force Space Command to a four-star  officer other than the Commander of the U.S. Space Command (now  merged with U.S. Strategic Command) and North American Aerospace  Defense Command to provide dedicated leadership to space activities. It is too early to assess the effects of DOD’s organizational changes for its  space programs because new institutional roles, processes, and  procedures are still evolving, and key documents are not yet finalized. Under current plans, DARPA will receive  most of these funds. Space Program Lacks Results-Oriented Management Framework

The Department of Defense has produced some policies and guidance to  implement its space program, but it has not completed a comprehensive  strategy or an implementation plan to guide the program and monitor its  results. Therefore,  we could not determine the extent to which these documents contain all  the key elements of a results-oriented management framework. Conclusions

DOD has charged the Air Force with leadership responsibilities for space  activities and has taken some actions that have the potential to improve its  management ability. Furthermore, the  department does not have a complete results-oriented management  framework to assess the results of the changes in its organization and  processes and gauge its progress toward achieving its long-term goals in  the future. Recommendations for Executive Actions

To improve the management of national security space activities, we  recommend that the Secretary of Defense take the following actions:  require the executive agent for DOD space, in conjunction with the  services, to establish a departmentwide space human capital strategy that  includes goals and time lines to develop and maintain a cadre of military  and civilian space professionals;  require the executive agent for DOD space to develop a comprehensive  management framework for space activities that includes a results- oriented national security space strategy tied to overall department-level  space goals, time lines, and performance measures to assess space  activities’ progress in achieving national security space goals;  include performance goals and measures for space activities in DOD’s next  departmentwide performance report; and    designate an oversight entity in the Office of the Secretary of Defense to  periodically assess the progress of DOD’s executive agent in achieving  goals for space activities. Given time and resource limitations, we focused our work on  three of the many long-term management challenges to DOD’s space  program—investing in science and technology, improving the timeliness  and quality of space acquisitions, and building and maintaining a cadre of  space professionals.
Why GAO Did This Study

In January 2001, the congressionally chartered Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization--known as the Space Commission--reported that the Department of Defense (DOD) lacked the senior-level focus and accountability to provide guidance and oversight for national security space operations. Congress mandated that GAO provide an assessment of DOD's actions to implement the Space Commission's recommendations. Thus, GAO (1) updated its June 2002 assessment of DOD's actions to address the Space Commission's recommendations, (2) ascertained progress in addressing other long- term management concerns, and (3) assessed the extent to which DOD has developed a results-oriented management framework for space activities.

What GAO Found

Since June 2002 when we reported that DOD intended to implement 10 of the Space Commission's 13 recommendations to improve the management and organization of space activities and had completed implementation of 6, DOD has completed action on 3 more recommendations. The only action intended but not completed at the conclusion of our work is designation of the Air Force as the executive agent for DOD space programs. Most of the changes represent organizational actions to improve DOD's ability to manage space. For example, DOD has: (1) created a focal point for integrating DOD space activities by appointing the Under Secretary of the Air Force also as Director, National Reconnaissance Office; (2) realigned Air Force space activities under one command; and (3) created a separate position of Commander, Air Force Space Command, to provide increased attention to the organization, training, and equipping for space operations. It is too early to assess the effects of these organizational changes because new institutional roles, processes, and procedures are still evolving. DOD still faces challenges in addressing long-term management problems, such as increasing its investment in innovative space technologies, improving the timeliness and quality of acquisitions, and developing a cadre of space professionals. DOD has initiated some actions to address these concerns, such as increasing resources for research on space technology and developing a new acquisition process, and the services have begun some plans for developing space professionals. However, most planned actions are not fully developed or implemented. Further, DOD has not developed an overarching human capital strategy for space that would guide service plans to ensure all requirements for space professionals are met. DOD does not have a comprehensive, results-oriented management framework for space activities. The Air Force is developing some policies and guidance that could be part of a management framework for space activities. However, we did not have access to the draft documents to determine whether they will contain results-oriented elements--such as a strategy, performance goals and measures, and timelines--that will enable DOD to better focus its efforts and assess its progress in attaining its space goals. Further, no single department-level entity has been charged with providing oversight of the Air Force's management of its executive agent for space responsibilities to assess its progress in achieving space goals while ensuring that all services' requirements for space capabilities are fairly considered.