DOD Identified Existing Guidance As a Framework for Its Policy for Retrograde and Reset, but This Framework Does Not Include Elements of Sound Strategic Planning DOD Identified Existing Guidance Documents Related to Retrograde and Reset Instead of Developing New Policy

In its response to the requirements of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014,  instead of developing new policies for retrograde and reset of operating  forces used to support overseas contingency operations, DOD relied on  three existing guidance documents as its policy for retrograde and reset  activities in support of overseas contingency operations. Our review of the three documents (i.e., the Quadrennial Defense  Review, Guidance for the Employment of the Force, and Defense  Planning Guidance) referenced in DOD’s November 2014 report as  providing the department’s strategic policy and guidance for retrograde  and other activities, including reset, found that they do not contain the  elements to facilitate the strategic management planning of these  efforts. DOD officials stated that they believed the Quadrennial Defense Review  and other strategic-level documents provide the necessary policy and  guidance to inform the department’s efforts. Inconsistent Information and Descriptions of Retrograde and Reset for Budget Reporting Impact DOD’s Strategic Communications About These Efforts

We also found that DOD’s guidance is not consistent in identifying what  information DOD and the services are to use in budget reporting on  retrograde and reset activities. DOD emphasizes the use of consistent  terms across department documents. If DOD does not ensure the use of consistent  information and descriptions in policy and other departmental documents  used to inform budget estimates on retrograde and reset, Congress may  not receive the consistent and accurate information that it needs to make  informed decisions concerning retrograde and reset. One of Four Military Services Has Published an Implementation Plan for the Retrograde and Reset of Equipment

We found that the Marine Corps has published an implementation plan for  the retrograde and reset of equipment, but the Army, Navy and Air Force  have not. According to  DOD officials, the military services are responsible for developing  implementation plans related to retrograde and reset. Some of these elements also generally correspond to several  requirements in section 324 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014. Joint Publication 1-02, Department of  Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, generally defines  retrograde as the process for the movement of non-unit equipment and  materiel from a forward location to a reset program or to another directed  area of operations. If the Army does not develop an implementation plan that, among other  things, articulates goals and strategies for retrograde and reset of  equipment, the Army’s retrograde and reset efforts may not align with  DOD-wide goals and strategies for retrograde and reset, reset-related  maintenance costs may not consistently be included, and resources and  funding for retrograde and reset may not be consistently or effectively  budgeted or distributed within the service. Without a comprehensive  implementation plan for retrograde and reset, the Army, Navy, and Air  Force cannot ensure that their efforts are consistent or comprehensive  within and across the services. Recommendations for Executive Action

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary  of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics to establish a  strategic policy that incorporates key elements of leading practices for  sound strategic management planning, such as a mission statement and  long-term goals, to inform the military services’ plans for retrograde and  reset to support overseas contingency operations and to improve DOD’s  response to section 324 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014. To improve Army, Navy, and Air Force planning, budgeting, and  execution for retrograde and reset efforts, we recommend that the  Secretary of Defense direct the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air  Force to develop service-specific implementation plans for retrograde and  reset that incorporate elements of leading practices for sound strategic  management planning, such as strategies that include how a goal will be  achieved, how an organization will carry out its mission, and the  resources required to meet goals. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

To determine the extent to which DOD developed a strategic policy  consistent with leading practices on sound strategic management  planning for the retrograde and reset of operating forces that support  overseas contingency operations, we reviewed the two reports DOD  developed and provided to the congressional defense committees in  response to the requirements in the National Defense Authorization Act  for Fiscal Year 2014, guidance documents related to retrograde and  reset, and the three documents DOD identified in its November 2014  report as providing strategic policy and guidance for these efforts. In its November 2014 report, DOD pointed to the  specific planning activities undertaken by each service related to  retrograde and reset.
Why GAO Did This Study

Following the end of major combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, DOD is in the process of resetting equipment and materiel to meet mission requirements. Retrograde refers to the movement of non-unit equipment and materiel from one forward area to another area of operation or to a reset program. Reset includes maintenance and supply activities to restore and enhance combat capability to equipment used in combat.
Section 324 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014 included provisions for DOD to establish a policy and implementation plan on retrograde and similar efforts related to forces used to support overseas contingency operations and for GAO to review DOD's policy and plan. This report evaluates the extent to which (1) DOD developed a strategic policy and (2) the services developed implementation plans consistent with leading practices on sound strategic management planning for the retrograde and reset of operating forces. GAO reviewed DOD reports, interviewed officials, and assessed documents against those leading practices, which include elements similar to several of the requirements in section 324.

What GAO Found

In its response to the requirements of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2014, instead of developing new policies for retrograde and reset of operating forces used to support overseas contingency operations, the Department of Defense (DOD) relied on three existing guidance documents as its policy for retrograde and reset activities in support of overseas contingency operations. DOD's November 2014 report to congressional committees—issued in response to requirements in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014—states that three DOD guidance documents address the department's retrograde and reset efforts: the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), Guidance for the Employment of the Force, and the Defense Planning Guidance. DOD officials told GAO that they believe the QDR and other documents provide the policy and guidance needed to inform the department's retrograde and reset efforts. However, GAO found that these documents do not include key elements for sound strategic management planning, such as a mission statement and long-term goals. Without a strategic policy for retrograde and reset that incorporates key elements of sound strategic management planning, DOD cannot ensure that its efforts provide the necessary strategic planning framework to inform the military services' plans for these efforts. Further, DOD emphasizes the use of consistent terms across departmental documents, but GAO found that DOD's guidance is not consistent in identifying what information to use in budget reporting on retrograde and reset activities. If DOD does not ensure the use of consistent information and descriptions in policy and other departmental documents used to inform budget estimates on retrograde and reset costs, Congress may not receive consistent and accurate information to make informed decisions concerning these efforts.
GAO found that the Marine Corps has published an implementation plan for the retrograde and reset of operating forces, but the Army, Navy and Air Force have not. In DOD's November 2014 report to congressional committees, DOD pointed to the specific planning activities undertaken by each service related to retrograde and reset. According to DOD officials, the services are responsible for developing their own implementation plans. The Marine Corps has an implementation plan for retrograde and reset, which is contained in two of its guidance documents, and largely meets all the elements of sound strategic management planning, some of which generally correspond to several of the requirements in section 324 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2014. However, the Army, Navy and Air Force either have not published implementation plans or have provided GAO with published documents or plans that did not include all elements of leading practices for sound strategic planning—such as strategies on how a goal will be achieved, how an organization will carry out its mission, and resources required to meet goals, among others. Without implementation plans that, among other things, articulate goals and strategies for retrograde and reset of equipment, Army, Navy, and Air Force efforts may not align with DOD-wide goals and strategies for retrograde and reset, reset-related maintenance costs may not be consistently included, and resources and funding for retrograde and reset may not be consistently or effectively budgeted or distributed within the services.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD establish a strategic policy that includes key elements of leading practices; use consistent information and descriptions for budget reporting; and that the Army, Navy and Air Force develop implementation plans for their retrograde and reset efforts. DOD generally concurred with all three recommendations.