Several factors contributed to JPME research  institution growth, including increases in reimbursable funding from  outside offices sponsoring JPME research, the creation of new research  institutions, and the realignment of institutions at some JPME colleges  and universities. Number, Funding, and Size of JPME Research Institutions Grew from 2007 through 2011, Then Declined

JPME research institutions, particularly at NDU, experienced  considerable growth in number, funding, and size in terms of staffing  levels from fiscal year 2007 through fiscal year 2011, but have declined  over the past 2 years. For example, total staffing levels at  Air University’s research institutions increased from 19 to 97. DOD Is Limited in Its Ability to Assess the Performance of JPME Research Institutions

The extent to which DOD can assess the performance of JPME research  institutions is limited by the lack of a comprehensive framework to  systematically assess their performance in meeting PME and other  departmental goals and objectives. However, best  practices state that achieving results in government requires a  comprehensive framework that includes measurable goals and objectives  and metrics for assess progress, consistent with the framework identified  in the Government Performance and Results Act. Further, while there  are mechanisms in place for overseeing JPME colleges and universities,  such as the Joint Staff’s JPME accreditation process, these are focused  on the quality of academic programs and not on the research institutions’  performance. There is no DOD-wide guidance that addresses the  intended role of the research institutions in supporting PME or other  departmental goals or assigns responsibilities for conducting reviews of  them, leaving the department without a basis to assess the institutions’  stated mission and actual performance against planned or expected  results. DOD Does Not Formally Coordinate Studies and Analysis Research Requests Performed by JPME and Other DOD- Funded Research Institutions, Although Some Conduct Work in Similar Topic Areas

DOD does not formally coordinate requests for studies and analysis  research conducted by JPME research institutions and other DOD-funded  research organizations, even though many of these organizations have  missions to conduct work in similar topic areas. However, DOD relies on a variety of separate processes to  manage research requests that can be conducted at either JPME  research institutions or other DOD-funded research organizations. Specifically, offices within the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the  military departments have their own separate internal processes to  request such research. Because there is no requirement for them to do  so, these offices do not have mechanisms in place to participate in one  another’s processes, thereby limiting opportunities to share information  on DOD-wide priorities and collective research efforts, and to identify any  areas of potentially similar research. Recommendations for Executive Action

To enhance the performance of JPME research institutions, we are  recommending that the Secretary of Defense direct the Chairman of the  Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Secretaries of the military departments for  their respective PME and JPME colleges and universities to take the  following three actions: define the role of JPME research institutions to provide a basis for assign responsibilities for conducting performance reviews of JPME establish a framework that includes measurable goals and objectives  linked with metrics to assess the performance of JPME research  institutions. To improve the coordination of requests for studies and analysis research  within the department and to reduce the risk of potential overlap in  research activities, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense  establish and implement a departmental mechanism that requires  leadership from the military services and departmental offices responsible  for managing requests for studies and analysis research to coordinate  their annual research requests and ongoing research efforts. Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix V.

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 mandated  that we review the work performed by joint professional military education  (JPME) research institutions in support of professional military education   In this report,  and the Department of Defense’s (DOD) broader mission.we (1) describe how JPME research institutions have changed in number,  funding, and size, and the factors that contributed to any changes; (2)  evaluate the extent to which DOD is assessing the performance of JPME  research institutions in meeting professional military education and other  departmental goals and objectives; and (3) evaluate the extent to which  DOD coordinates research requests for JPME research institutions and  other DOD-funded research organizations. Specifically, best practices state that organizations  involved in similar missions should coordinate and share information to  avoid unnecessary duplication of work.
Why GAO Did This Study

DOD's colleges and universities that provide JPME, including their research institutions, are intended to develop military personnel throughout their careers by broadening them intellectually and fostering collaboration across the military services. JPME research institutions generally provide studies and analysis research that can support academic programs or inform DOD policymakers.
The National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2013 mandated GAO to review JPME research institutions. GAO's report (1) describes how JPME research institutions have changed in number, funding, and size; (2) evaluates the extent to which DOD assesses JPME research institution performance; and (3) evaluates the extent to which DOD coordinates the research requests of these and other DOD-funded research organizations. GAO identified and examined the 20 JPME research institutions that conduct research as their primary mission and have dedicated personnel. GAO reviewed DOD documents and interviewed officials on changes at the 20 institutions and how they are overseen, as well as the processes to coordinate their research activities and those of 14 other DOD-funded research organizations GAO determined conduct research activities.

What GAO Found

Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) research institutions, particularly at the National Defense University, experienced growth in number, funding, and size in terms of staffing levels from fiscal year (FY) 2007 through FY 2011, but the number of institutions as well as funding and staffing levels declined over the past 2 years. For example, total funding for JPME research institutions increased from $30.8 million in FY 2007 to $47.7 million in FY 2011, but subsequently decreased to $40.6 million in FY 2013. GAO identified several factors that contributed to these institutions' growth, including increases in funding provided by outside organizations for research and the creation of new research institutions. Department of Defense (DOD) officials reported that DOD-wide budget reductions, including the effects of sequestration, contributed to decreases in the number, size, and funding for JPME research institutions.
The extent to which DOD can assess the performance of JPME research institutions is limited by the lack of a comprehensive framework to systematically assess their performance in meeting professional military education and other departmental goals and objectives. JPME colleges and universities have not consistently established measurable goals or objectives linked with performance metrics for their associated research institutions. Best practices state that achieving results in government requires a framework with measurable goals and objectives and metrics to assess progress. Further, oversight mechanisms for the colleges and universities, such as accreditation processes, focus on the quality of JPME academic programs and not on the research institutions' performance. There is no DOD-wide guidance that addresses the intended role of the research institutions in supporting JPME or other departmental goals, or assigns responsibilities for conducting reviews of them, leaving the department without a basis to assess the institutions' stated mission and actual performance against planned or expected results. Therefore, DOD does not have a basis to assess the institutions' missions and performance against expected results, as called for by best practices. Without measurable goals and objectives linked with performance metrics, and clear guidance on their intended roles and assignment of oversight responsibilities, DOD cannot ensure JPME research institutions are effectively accomplishing their missions.
DOD has not established mechanisms to coordinate requests for research conducted by JPME research institutions and other DOD-funded research organizations because there is no requirement to do so. Although many of these organizations have missions to conduct research in similar topic areas, DOD uses a variety of processes to request studies and analysis research. Specifically, offices within the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the military departments each have their own separate internal processes to manage research requests and do not participate in one another's processes. Best practices on managing for results state that organizations involved in similar missions should coordinate and share information to avoid unnecessary duplication of work. At a time of constrained budgets, fragmentation in DOD's approach to managing its research requests across the department exposes DOD to the risk of potential overlap of studies and analysis research.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD take actions to define the role of JPME research institutions, assign responsibilities for assessing performance, and establish a mechanism to coordinate studies and analysis research requests. DOD concurred with the recommendations.