Warfighter Involvement Process Has Helped the Missile Defense Agency Address Some Capability Needs but the Process Faces Key Limitations

U.S. Strategic Command and the Missile Defense Agency created the  Warfighter Involvement Process in 2005 to identify and address the  combatant commands’ ballistic missile defense capability needs, but the  process has yet to overcome key limitations to its effectiveness. However, even as U.S. Strategic Command and the Missile Defense Agency  move forward with the process, they have not finalized the  implementation guidance needed to clarify their respective roles and  responsibilities; have not yet established effective methodologies for  identifying, prioritizing, and addressing combatant command needs; and  have not involved senior civilian DOD leadership to adjudicate potential  differences among the combatant commands’ priorities and provide a  departmentwide perspective about how to best allocate resources. As a  result, DOD is at risk of not addressing the combatant commands’ missile  defense needs if improvements are not made that establish an effective  and well documented process and provide a DOD-wide perspective when  prioritizing these needs. When the Secretary of Defense created the Missile Defense Agency in  2002, DOD lacked a process for the agency to consider the combatant  commands’ priorities as it developed ballistic missile defenses. Although the Warfighter Involvement Process has not yet fully evolved,  Missile Defense Agency and U.S. Strategic Command officials believe the  agency has generally been responsive to the combatant commands’  capability needs. However, the U.S. Strategic Command and Missile Defense Agency  officials agreed that the lists prepared to date have not provided enough  specific detail to inform the Missile Defense Agency about how to best  address the commands’ needs when developing new capabilities. Lacking the involvement of senior civilian DOD officials in reviewing the  commands’ priorities, the Missile Defense Agency has not benefited from  receiving a broader, departmentwide perspective on which of the  commands’ needs were the most significant. Recommendations for Executive Action

To improve DOD’s process for identifying and addressing combatant  command priorities for ballistic missile defense capabilities, we  recommend the Secretary of Defense direct the Commander, U.S. Strategic  Command, in conjunction with the Director, Missile Defense Agency, to  take the following two actions:  1.  complete and publish the implementation guidance needed to clearly  define each organization’s roles and responsibilities for identifying,  prioritizing, and addressing combatant command capability needs for  ballistic missile defenses, and review and update such guidance, as  needed, as DOD’s process continues to evolve; and  2.  establish effective methodologies for identifying, prioritizing, and  addressing combatant command capability needs for ballistic missile  defenses. Further, to provide the Missile Defense Agency with feedback as to how  well it has addressed the combatant commands’ priorities in preparing  future funding plans, we recommend the Secretary of Defense direct the  Commander, U.S. Strategic Command, in conjunction with the other  combatant commands, to prepare an assessment of the Missile Defense  Agency’s funding plans compared to the commands’ priorities, and provide  the assessment to the Director, Missile Defense Agency. However, it is not clear how DOD intends to implement  these recommendations.
Why GAO Did This Study

In 2002, the Department of Defense (DOD) established the Missile Defense Agency to develop and deploy globally integrated ballistic missile defenses to protect the U.S. homeland, deployed forces, friends, and allies. To deliver an operational capability as quickly as possible, the agency was not subject to traditional DOD requirements and oversight processes. While directed to work closely with the combatant commands, the agency was not required to build missile defenses to meet specific operational requirements. GAO was asked to assess the extent to which DOD has developed a process that identifies, prioritizes, and addresses overall combatant command priorities as the Missile Defense Agency develops ballistic missile defense capabilities. To conduct its work, GAO reviewed relevant documents and visited several combatant commands, the Missile Defense Agency, Joint Staff, and other DOD organizations.

What GAO Found

DOD has taken some steps to address the combatant commands' ballistic missile defense needs, but it has not yet established an effective process to identify, prioritize, and address these needs, or to provide a DOD-wide perspective on which priorities are the most important. U.S. Strategic Command and the Missile Defense Agency created the Warfighter Involvement Process in 2005. Although the process is still evolving, the Missile Defense Agency has addressed some combatant command capability needs. However, even as they move forward with the process, U.S. Strategic Command and the Missile Defense Agency have not yet overcome three interrelated limitations to the process's effectiveness. First, U.S. Strategic Command and the Missile Defense Agency have not put into place the approved and complete guidance needed to implement the Warfighter Involvement Process, which would clearly define each organization's respective roles and responsibilities for identifying, prioritizing, and addressing the combatant commands' capability needs. This has left the combatant commands without an agreed-upon mechanism for influencing agency investments. Second, the Missile Defense Agency has lacked clear information about how to best address the commands' needs, and until recently has not clearly communicated how it has adjusted its investments in response to these needs. Without such information, the commands have not been able to provide feedback to the Missile Defense Agency about how well the agency has addressed their priorities in its funding plans. Third, senior civilian DOD leadership has not been involved in adjudicating potential differences among the commands' priorities. Instead, U.S. Strategic Command has consolidated and submitted the commands' prioritized capability needs to the Missile Defense Agency without first vetting these priorities though senior civilian DOD officials with departmentwide responsibilities for assessing risk and allocating resources. As a result, the Missile Defense Agency has not benefited from receiving a broader, departmentwide perspective on which of the commands' needs were the most significant. DOD has established a new board to advise senior Office of the Secretary of Defense officials on ballistic missile defense priorities; however, whether this board will be involved in reviewing or adjudicating differences among the commands' priorities is unclear. Missile Defense Agency and U.S. Strategic Command officials stated that the Warfighter Involvement Process is evolving. However, unless and until they overcome these interrelated limitations, DOD remains at risk of not effectively providing the combatant commands with the missile defense capabilities they need.