Authorized Positions at DOD Headquarters Organizations We Reviewed Have Generally Increased since Fiscal Year 2001, and Plans for Future Reductions are Not Finalized

10 U.S.C. In 2013, the Secretary of Defense set a target for reducing  DOD components’ total management headquarters budgets by 20  percent for fiscal years 2014 through 2019, including costs for civilian  personnel and contracted services, while striving for a goal of 20 percent  reductions to authorized military and civilian personnel. However, the  department has not finalized its reduction plans. Number of Authorized Positions at OSD and the Joint Staff Increased since 2001, but Levels Have Begun to Decline or Level Off in Recent Years

OSD experienced an overall increase in its authorized military and civilian  positions from fiscal years 2001 through 2013, representing a net  increase of 20 percent from 2,205 authorized positions in fiscal year 2001  to 2,646 authorized positions in fiscal year 2013. In addition, DOD officials  said converting functions performed by contracted services to civilian  positions, and the transfer of positions from other organizations also  contributed to the increases. As of December 2014, DOD’s  plan had not been issued. DOD Headquarters Organizations in Our Review Do Not Systematically Determine or Periodically Reassess Their Personnel Requirements

The headquarters organizations we reviewed—OSD, the Joint Staff, and  the secretariats and staffs for the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and  Headquarters, Marine Corps—do not determine their personnel  requirements as part of a systematic requirements-determination process,  nor do they have procedures in place to ensure that they periodically  reassess them as outlined in DOD and other guidance. Current personnel  levels for these headquarters organizations are traceable to statutory  limits enacted during the 1980s and 1990s to force efficiencies and  reduce duplication. However, these limits have been waived since fiscal  year 2002 and have little practical utility because of statutory exceptions  to certain categories of personnel and because the limits do not include  personnel in supporting organizations that perform headquarters-related  functions. Without systematic determinations of personnel  requirements and periodic reassessments of them using organizational  and workforce analyses, DOD will not be well-positioned to proactively  identify efficiencies and limit personnel growth within these headquarters  organizations. Moreover, until such requirements are determined,  Congress will not have the information needed to reexamine existing  statutory limits. Some Organizations Are Modifying Their Requirements- Determination Processes, but These Efforts Are Not Complete

All but one of the organizations we reviewed have recognized problems  with requirements determination and some are beginning to take steps to  modify their related processes, but these efforts are not yet complete. Recommendations for Executive Action

To ensure that headquarters organizations are properly sized to meet  their assigned missions and use the most cost-effective mix of personnel,  and to better position DOD to identify opportunities for more efficient use  of resources, we recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the  following three actions:  conduct a systematic determination of personnel requirements for  OSD, the Joint Staff, and the military services’ secretariats and staff,  which should include analysis of mission, functions, and tasks, and  the minimum personnel needed to accomplish those missions,  functions, and tasks;  submit these personnel requirements, including information on the  number of personnel within OSD and the military services’  secretariats and staffs that count against the statutory limits, along  with any applicable adjustments to the statutory limits, in the next  Defense Manpower Requirements Report to Congress or through  separate correspondence, along with any recommendations needed  to modify the existing statutory limits; and establish and implement procedures to conduct periodic  reassessments of personnel requirements within OSD and the military  services’ secretariats and staffs. Matter for Congressional Consideration

Congress should consider using the results of DOD’s review of  headquarters personnel requirements to reexamine the statutory limits. In the letter, the Army also noted  concerns that a statement in our draft report—namely, that the  organizations that support the Army Secretariat and staff are almost three  times as large but are excluded from the statutory limits—may be  misleading and lack appropriate context. This report (1) identifies past trends, if any, in personnel resources  devoted to OSD, the Joint Staff, and the secretariats and staffs of the  military services and any plans for reductions to these headquarters  organizations; and (2) evaluates the extent to which the Department of  Defense (DOD) determines and reassesses personnel requirements for  these headquarters organizations. DOD is still in the  process of compiling complete data on contractor full-time equivalents. This  appendix shows how these resources are distributed in the Army, as well  as the changes in these resources from fiscal year 2001 through fiscal  year 2013. The staff of Headquarters, Marine Corps, comprises military and  civilian personnel and personnel performing contracted services.
Why GAO Did This Study

Facing budget pressures, DOD is seeking to reduce headquarters activities of OSD, the Joint Staff, and the military services' secretariats and staffs, which primarily perform policy and management functions. GAO was mandated to review personnel resources devoted to these headquarters organizations from fiscal years 2001 through 2013. This report (1) identifies past trends in personnel resources for these organizations and any plans for reductions; and (2) evaluates the extent to which DOD determines and reassesses personnel requirements for the organizations. GAO analyzed data on authorized military and civilian positions and contracted services from fiscal years 2001 through 2013. GAO reviewed DOD's headquarters reductions plans and processes for determining and reassessing personnel requirements.

What GAO Found

Over the past decade, authorized military and civilian positions have increased within the Department of Defense (DOD) headquarters organizations GAO reviewed—the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Joint Staff, and the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force secretariats and staffs—but the size of these organizations has recently leveled off or begun to decline, and DOD's plans for future reductions are not finalized. The increases varied by organization, and DOD officials told GAO that the increases were due to increased mission responsibilities, conversion of functions performed by contracted services to civilian positions, and institutional reorganizations. For example, authorized military and civilian positions for the Army Secretariat and Army Staff increased by 60 percent, from 2,272 in fiscal year 2001 to 3,639 in fiscal year 2013, but levels have declined since their peak of 3,712 authorized positions in fiscal year 2011. In addition to civilian and military personnel, DOD also relies on personnel performing contracted services. Since DOD is still in the process of compiling complete data on personnel performing contracted services, trends in these data could not be identified. In 2013, the Secretary of Defense set a target to reduce DOD components' headquarters budgets by 20 percent through fiscal year 2019, including costs for contracted services, while striving for a similar reduction to military and civilian personnel. However, DOD has not finalized plans to achieve these reductions. DOD was required to report to Congress by June 2014 on efforts to streamline management headquarters, but needed an extension until late summer 2014 for the report due to staff turnover. As of December 2014, DOD's plan had not been issued.
GAO found that DOD headquarters organizations it reviewed do not determine their personnel requirements as part of a systematic requirements-determination process, nor do they have procedures in place to ensure that they periodically reassess these requirements as outlined in DOD and other guidance. Current personnel levels for these headquarters organizations are traceable to statutory limits enacted in the 1980s and 1990s to force efficiencies and reduce duplication. However, these limits have been waived since fiscal year 2002. If the limits were in force in fiscal year 2013, the Army and Navy would exceed them by 17 percent and 74 percent, respectively. Moreover, the limits have little practical utility because of statutory exceptions for certain categories of personnel and because the limits exclude personnel in supporting organizations that perform headquarters-related functions. For example, the organizations that support the Army Secretariat and Army Staff are almost three times as large as the Secretariat and Staff, but personnel who perform headquarters-related functions in these organizations are excluded from the limits. All but one of the organizations GAO reviewed have recognized problems in their existing requirements-determination processes. The OSD, the Navy, and the Marine Corps are taking steps to modify their processes, but their efforts are not yet complete. Without a systematic determination of personnel requirements and periodic reassessment of them, DOD will not be well positioned to proactively identify efficiencies and limit personnel growth within these headquarters organizations. Moreover, until DOD determines personnel requirements, Congress will not have critical information needed to reexamine statutory limits enacted decades ago.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD (1) conduct a systematic determination of personnel requirements at these headquarters organizations; (2) submit the requirements to Congress with adjustments and recommended modifications to the statutory limits; and (3) periodically reassess personnel requirements within OSD and the military services' secretariats and staffs. Congress should consider using DOD's review of headquarters personnel requirements to reexamine existing statutory limits. DOD partially concurred, stating it will use its existing processes, but will investigate other methods to improve the determination and reporting of requirements. GAO believes the recommendations are still valid, as discussed in the report.