DOD Is Continuing to Implement Reform Act Requirements, but Challenges Remain

The new offices of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for  Systems Engineering and Developmental Test and Evaluation have  continued to make progress implementing the Reform Act requirements. In addition to the progress highlighted in the table above, the offices are  also taking actions in areas that they had not acted upon last year— issuing required guidance on the development and tracking of  performance criteria and exercising a Reform Act option of designating  the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Developmental Test and  Evaluation for concurrent service as the Director of the Test Resource  Management Center. The Deputy Assistant Secretary for  Developmental Test and Evaluation indicated that there could be  some limitations on his ability to streamline management and  reporting activities or shift resources between the organizations  because the Test Resource Management Center is designated by  statute to be a field activity and the organizations are funded  separately. For example, they pointed out  that the office’s primary avenue for voicing concerns about weapon  acquisition programs to senior leaders is at overarching integrated  product team meetings that take place in preparation for Defense  Acquisition Board meetings. Former testing officials believe an opportunity exists to both increase  the developmental testing office’s influence and address resource  concerns by merging Test Resource Management Center and  developmental testing office activities. The services planned to increase  their systems engineering and test and evaluation career fields by about  5,000 people (14 percent) and about 300 people (4 percent), respectively,  between fiscal years 2009 and 2015 through hiring actions and by  insourcing contractor positions. The  services have increased the systems engineering career field by about  half of their projections and exceeded their planned growth for the test  and evaluation career field through the end of fiscal year 2010. However,  budget cuts and a clarification in DOD’s insourcing approach may make  hiring civilians more challenging in the future. The services’  developmental test ranges are also experiencing declining budgets, as  the fiscal year 2012 budget includes cuts of nearly $1.2 billion over the  next 5 years to support accounts that pay for overhead costs. Services Have Increased Their Systems Engineering and Test and Evaluation Career Fields

The services planned to increase their acquisition systems engineering  and test and evaluation career fields by 14 percent and 4 percent,  respectively, between fiscal years 2009 and 2015 through hiring and  insourcing actions. This could offset  some of the test and evaluation career field gains already achieved over  the past 2 years. Therefore, we could not  determine the impact funding cuts would have on the ranges’ ability to  meet program office testing needs. Services Lack Common Range Performance Measures to Aid Decision Making

The services have not implemented common range performance  measures that would help them justify funding and assist them in making  workforce decisions, how best to allocate funding, or make difficult  decisions about mothballing, closing, or consolidating test capabilities, if  necessary. To the extent DOD cannot provide adequate  systems engineering and developmental testing support to its weapons  portfolio, the risks of executing the portfolio within cost and schedule are  increased. Recommendations for Executive Action

We recommend that the Secretary of Defense take the following two  actions:    assess the resources and influence needed by the developmental test  and evaluation office to assist and oversee defense acquisition  programs, including    the number of defense acquisition programs that can be  supported by different developmental test and evaluation office  staffing levels, including specifying the total number of personnel,  the mix of government and contractor employees, and the number  of senior executive service personnel needed for each of these  staffing levels;    whether the Test Resource Management Center and the office of  the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Developmental Test and  Evaluation should be combined or resources shifted between  organizations to more effectively support the activities of both  organizations and if so, identify for Congress any statutory  revisions that would be necessary; and  the proper reporting channel, taking into account the decision on  whether or not to combine the organizations, the statutory  oversight requirements, and the level of influence needed to  oversee and assess program office developmental testing and  service budgeting activities.   develop a plan to implement the results of the assessment. DOD  concurred with two recommendations and partially concurred with two  others. Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

This report examines the military services’ systems engineering and  developmental testing workforce capabilities and the Department of  Defense’s (DOD) efforts to implement Weapon Systems Acquisition  Reform Act of 2009 (Reform Act) requirements. Specifically, we  examined (1) the progress DOD has made in implementing the Reform  Act’s systems engineering and developmental testing requirements and  (2) whether there are challenges at the military service level that could  affect their systems engineering and developmental testing activities. We also discussed with these officials the progress DOD  and the services have made in developing metrics that could be used  to make workforce and investment decisions.
Why GAO Did This Study

For the past 2 years, the Department of Defense (DOD) has been implementing the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (Reform Act) requirements for systems engineering and developmental testing. These activities are important to DOD's ability to control acquisition costs, which increased by $135 billion over the past 2 years for 98 major defense acquisition programs. GAO was asked to determine (1) DOD's progress in implementing the Reform Act's requirements and (2) whether there are challenges at the military service level that could affect their systems engineering and developmental testing activities. To do this, GAO analyzed implementation status documents, discussed developmental testing office concerns with current and former DOD officials, and analyzed military service workforce growth plans and test range funding data..

What GAO Found

The new offices for systems engineering and developmental test and evaluation are continuing to make progress implementing Reform Act requirements. Since GAO's 2010 report on this topic, the Deputy Assistant Secretaries for Systems Engineering and Developmental Test and Evaluation have issued additional policies and guidance, assisted more weapons acquisition programs in the development of acquisition plans, and provided input to senior leaders at Defense Acquisition Board meetings. DOD also designated the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Developmental Test and Evaluation for concurrent service as the Director of the Test Resource Management Center. This was an optional Reform Act provision, which places oversight of testing resources and acquisition program developmental testing activities under one official. Despite these steps, the developmental test and evaluation office reports having difficulty covering its portfolio of about 250 defense acquisition programs with its current authorized staff of 63 people. Current and former testing officials believe the office needs more influence and resources to be effective, but they said thorough analysis has not been done to determine the appropriate office size. Further, according to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Developmental Test and Evaluation, a statutory provision that designates the Test Resource Management Center as a field activity may limit his ability to achieve management and reporting efficiencies that could be obtained by combining or shifting resources between the two organizations. GAO has a matter for Congressional consideration to allow shifting resources between the Test Resource Management Center and the developmental test and evaluation office. The military services are facing workforce challenges that could curb systems engineering and developmental testing efforts, if not properly addressed. The services planned to increase their systems engineering and test and evaluation career fields by about 5,000 people (14 percent) and about 300 people (4 percent), respectively, between fiscal years 2009 and 2015 through hiring actions and converting contractor positions to government positions. The services have increased the systems engineering career field by about half of its projections and exceeded its planned growth for the test and evaluation career field through the end of fiscal year 2010. However, future growth may be difficult because of budget cuts and a clarification in DOD's insourcing approach, which may make civilian hiring more difficult. For example, the services now plan to hire about 800 fewer systems engineers by 2015 than they originally projected. Further, cuts to development test ranges' fiscal year 2012 budgets of nearly $1.2 billion (17 percent) over the next 5 years could offset some of the workforce gains already achieved. Currently, the services lack metrics that could be used to justify funding levels, effectively allocate funding cuts, make workforce decisions, or make difficult decisions related to mothballing, closing, or consolidating test capabilities, if future budget cuts are necessary. To the extent DOD cannot provide adequate systems engineering and developmental testing support to its weapon systems portfolio, the risks of executing the portfolio within cost and schedule are increased.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that DOD assess the resources needed by the developmental test and evaluation office, develop a plan to implement the assessment, develop metrics to aid funding decisions, and report the effect budget cuts are having on the services' ability to meet program office needs. GAO also has a matter for congressional consideration. DOD concurred with two recommendations, and offered clarifying language, which GAO incorporated, on the other two recommendations for which DOD partially concurred.